Dating back to the original Dietary Goals for the United States in 1977—

the so-called McGovern Report— leading nutrition scientists

were not only calling for a reduction in meat, and other sources

of saturated fat and cholesterol, like dairy and eggs, but also sugar.

The goal was to reduce America's sugar intake down

to no more than 10% of the daily diet.

“The final conclusions would hang sugar,”

reported the President of the Sugar Association.

“The McGovern Report has to be neutralized….”

Don't worry, though, we have the National Cattlemen's Association

on our side and, like Big Sugar, they appealed to the

Senate Select Committee to withdraw the report.

“The Sugar Industry Empire” striking back appeared to work.

When the official dietary guidelines were released in 1980,

and then again in '85, no specific limit like 10%,

just the vague “avoid too much sugar,” whatever that means.

By '95 it got even vaguer: “Choose a diet moderate in sugars.”

In 2000, they were at least back to “limit,” but even that was too strong.

Under pressure from sugar lobbyists, they went back to

“moderate your intake of sugars,” before the 2005 guideline committee

dropped the s-word completely, encouraging Americans to

“Choose carbohydrates wisely,” whatever that means.

If only there were some kind of dietary guidelines committee

that could give us guidance...

The Sugar Association expressed optimism about that 2005 Committee.

The Sugar Association Incorporated is “committed to the protection

and promotion of [table sugar] consumption,”

and they will not allow for the “disparagement of sugar.”

And, they're not kidding.

In 2003, the World Health Organization released a report

“Diet, nutrition and the prevention of chronic diseases”

which, for the first time since the McGovern Report called for

a reduction in sugar intake to under 10%.

The Sugar Association responded by threatening to get the U.S.

to withdraw all funding from the WHO.

Here it is, in black and white.

The Sugar Association threatening to pressure Congress to withdraw funding

from the World Health Organization - polio vaccinations,

AIDS medications be damned, you just don't mess with the candy man.

The threat was described as tantamount to blackmail

and worse than any pressure they had experienced from Big Tobacco.

But now, 15 years later, and 40 years after the first proposed

McGovern Report, the current 2015 to 2020 Dietary Guidelines

lay out as a key recommendation the 10% limit,

currently exceeded by every age bracket in the United States

starting at age one, with adolescents averaging 87 grams of sugar a day,

meaning the average teen is effectively eating 29 sugar packets a day.

The Sugar Association describes the 10% limit as “extremely low,”

I mean only like up to a dozen spoonfuls a day.

But, of course, there's no dietary requirement for added sugar at all,

and every single calorie we get from added sugar is a wasted opportunity

to get calories from sources that actually provide nutrition

To the American Heart Association's credit, they went further

trying to push added sugar intake down to about 6% of calories,

for which a single can of soda could send you over the limit,

an added sugar limit exceeded by 90% of Americans.

In 2017 the American Heart Association released their guidelines

for children, recommending they get no more than about 6 teaspoons per day,

which means there's nearly a hundred cereals on the U.S. market

for which a single serving exceeded the entire recommended daily limit.

And the heart association recommends no added sugars at all under age 2,

small toddlers are to avoid added sugars altogether,

a recommendation that's violated… in up to 80% of toddlers.

The U.S. is one of at least 65 countries that have implemented

dietary guidelines or policies to curb sugar consumption.

In the UK, the Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition

made new recommendations to reduce added sugars down to 5%,

which is the direction the World Health Organization is headed as well.

They always seem to be ahead of the curve. Why?

Because their policy-making process is at least partially

protected from industry influence.

Unlike governments, which may have competing interests in commerce

and trade, the World Health Organization

is exclusively concerned with health.