We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Sugared foods are delicious treats. Cheap and abundant carbs (converted to sugars during digestion) are a blessing for mankind. Historically, only the rich and royalty could be fat. Now, the poor are wealthy enough to get fat while it is the prosperous who tend to be physically fit and trim. The social part has flipped: plebians are fatter, patricians trimmer. It is sociologically interesting.
It is also medically interesting that carbs, including sugars, alter your insulin metabolism. Of course they do, but these issues are only of academic interest unless you have a desire to lose fat.
It seems that almost everyone who writes about or studies diet cannot help themselves from going off the deep end. Either it's sugar is bad or refined carbs are bad or fat is bad or meat is bad or just red meat is bad, yadda, yadda, yadda. And of course given the variance between individuals, races, genders, and age of humans there is always someone, som case, to prove the point. Surely someone has gotten diabetes because they consumed too much sugar so therefore it is bad for everyone. Surely someone who ate red meat died of a heart attack at age 60 so therefore no one should ever eat red meat. Surely there is someone who grew an extra arm from consuming GMOs so therefore no one should eat GMOs.
The simple fact is that there are so many variables that can be measured and so many that can be ignored that you can produce any result you want by choosing what to measure and what to ignore.
The wise person focuses on the "you" part of "X is bad for you".
So much depends on inherited biochemical sensitivities.
One with a family history of diabetes and vascular disease will approach this data differently than one without such history.
I get a headache and stomachache after eating soy products. Others cannot tolerate dairy products at my age, while I have no such problem. And we all know folks who eat bread, pasta, cake, and other carbs while remaining thin.
All scientific data reports a range of values/responses - and the determination of what is "normal" may be of little significance.
It's good to remember this in other areas where the authority of science is invoked to prove things.
I work in a medical field that deals with the results of diabetes.
It is a scourge that devastates people's lives. The average diabetic has a shorter life span that the average smoker. Type II diabetes, what used to be called adult onset, is caused diet. It isn't called adult onset anymore because the age of suffers is steadily decreasing. In effect one burns out ones pancreas by requiring more and more insulin until it can't keep up.
Diabetes rates have soared along with the changes in diet as recommended by our government in reducing fat and increasing carbs. BTW 1 in 5 diabetics we see are not obese but thin. Obesity does not cause diabetes, it's the other way around. With the right diet anyone can get this disease, though certain ethnic groups are more prone to it. Native Americans rank number one.
Trivialize it if you like, after all my job depends on a steady stream of diabetics needing our treatments. I work in the dialysis end of nephrology and over 50% of our patients have kidney failure due to diabetes.