The Sugar Illusion

Fairy Tale of an Influential Lobby

Sugar - a substance that is hard to imagine our diet without and gives many foods their typical taste, but is also repeatedly at the center of health controversies. What was once considered a luxury is now an integral part of our eating culture, often hidden in products where we would hardly suspect it. But what is actually behind the illustrious career of sugar, which so often ends up on our plates today? Why has sugar been portrayed as harmless or even necessary for decades, even though more and more evidence points to its health risks? A look at the history of the 1960s and the marketing strategies of the sugar industry shows that sugar has long been absolved of its responsibility for health risks - often through targeted influence, concealed research results and clever marketing.

Today, high sugar consumption is increasingly viewed critically. But how did its carefree popularity come about in the first place, and what role did science, politics and advertising play in this success story? This article examines the beginnings, strategies and current developments of the sugar industry and shows how sugar has developed from a harmless luxury item into one of the most controversial foods of our time.

The 1960s: Sugar is freed from the scapegoat

In the 1960s, the Sugar Research Foundation sponsored studies that examined the link between sugar and heart disease. These studies were conducted under the leadership of scientists such as Dr. John Hickson, who worked closely with the sugar industry to present results that portrayed sugar in a positive light. Surprisingly, these studies found that sugar did not play a significant role in causing heart problems. Instead, fat was portrayed as the main culprit in cardiovascular disease.

However, these results were not accidental: The Sugar Research Foundation specifically funded scientists to present results that presented sugar in a positive light. The aim was to absolve sugar of any responsibility for heart disease and to present it as a safe food. This strategy was successful - sugar was given the image of a harmless luxury item, while fat took center stage as the new enemy of health. This approach played a major role in sugar being viewed as innocent in the decades that followed.

Even in advertising, sugar was often presented as part of a healthy diet that gave people energy and happiness. At the same time, the concept of "low-fat" products developed in the 1960s, where fat was reduced while sugar was retained as a flavor carrier. This change had a profound impact on the eating habits of many people, who began to prefer low-fat but often high-sugar foods, believing that these were healthier.

Targeted influence on science: systematic trivialization

The influence of the sugar industry extended far beyond the 1960s. Scientists were regularly paid to influence study results in favor of the sugar industry. Instead of openly presenting the risks of sugar consumption, sugar was trivialized and its health risks were concealed. This deliberate approach led to sugar being viewed as harmless for decades. Many scientific findings proving the link between sugar and health problems such as obesity, diabetes and heart disease only came to light much later. The sugar industry used financial resources and scientific collaborations to protect its interests and influence public opinion in its favor.

This influence not only included funding studies, but also placing industry-friendly experts on panels that made nutritional recommendations. In this context, science was used as a tool to specifically control the perception of sugar. It was a real battle for the right to interpret nutritional issues, in which economic interests were often more important than public health. Only in recent years has the extent of this influence been fully revealed, which has led to increasing skepticism about the food industry and its role in science.

Lobbying in politics: Preventing sugar taxes and regulations

The sugar industry also used intensive lobbying to represent its interests in politics. A well-known example of this is the sugar industry's successful campaign in the USA in the 1970s, in which it managed to shift the focus of dietary guidelines to reducing fat rather than sugar. In many countries, targeted political influence prevented the introduction of sugar taxes or other regulations. Close relationships with politicians and decision-makers helped to block legislative initiatives against sugar and delay regulatory measures. The lobbying aimed to portray sugar as harmless and to avoid legal restrictions that could limit the sale of sugar products.

Even today, sugar taxes are controversial in many countries and are met with resistance from the industry. This lobbying was not limited to national governments, but also to international bodies. Time and again, proposals to regulate sugar consumption were rejected or watered down because representatives of the sugar industry successfully exerted influence. In countries where sugar taxes were introduced, the sugar industry relied on massive advertising campaigns to improve the public image of sugar and to convince consumers of the supposed benefits of sugar. In addition, there was a deliberate attempt to stir up public resistance to such taxes by portraying sugar taxes as an unfair burden that would particularly affect poorer households.

Marketing strategy: The targeted focus on children and schools

To ensure long-term sugar consumption, the sugar industry focused its marketing strategies on young target groups in particular. Studies show that sugar consumption among children increased by up to 30% in the 1980s and 1990s due to targeted advertising, which contributed to a significant increase in childhood obesity. Advertising for sugary products was specifically aimed at children, often accompanied by colorful packaging and popular cartoon characters. Sugar was presented as an energy-rich and necessary ingredient that makes children fit and happy. In addition, sugary products were specifically placed in schools and kindergartens - a strategic step to integrate sugar into the eating habits of the youngest children at an early stage.

The consequences of this targeted marketing are still felt today: sugar consumption is high worldwide, and the taste of children and young people is shaped by early and frequent sugar intake. Marketing for sugar products was so effective that many children's products, from breakfast cereals to fruit drinks, now hardly contain any sugar. These products are often presented as healthy or necessary for children's development, even though they often contain more sugar than recommended daily amounts. The influence of the sugar industry also extends to school education: in some cases, teaching materials have been developed to downplay sugar consumption and emphasize the benefits of sugar. This led to many generations growing up with the idea that sugar was an important part of their diet.

The historical development: From luxury goods to mass products

Sugar was originally a highly valued luxury item that was mainly consumed by the elite in the 16th and 17th centuries. With industrialization and the development of sugar cane and sugar beet plantations, the price fell significantly, so that sugar became a mass product. The close connection between sugar and the transatlantic slave trade also highlights the dark side of its early spread.

This economic and social history has shaped the availability and consumption of sugar to this day. Sugar became a central part of international trade, and the need for labor for the sugar plantations led to an immense increase in the transatlantic slave trade. The high price that many people paid for the sweet treat was ignored for a long time. With the spread of sugar beet production in Europe, sugar took on an even greater role in everyday nutrition, and it became an integral part of the diet of broad sections of the population. The fall in the price of sugar enabled the industry to enrich more and more products with sugar and offer them as affordable sources of energy. This development contributed significantly to sugar becoming not only a luxury item, but also a symbol of prosperity.

Sugar and the Brain's Reward System

Sugar activates the dopamine reward system in the brain, which explains its addictive nature. Studies show that regular sugar consumption can lead to a kind of "tolerance development", whereby ever larger amounts are needed to achieve the same satisfaction. This effect is often compared to that of addictive substances such as nicotine or alcohol and is particularly problematic in children whose brains are still developing. The effect of sugar on the brain is so strong that many people can hardly control their cravings for sugar. The sugar industry has deliberately exploited this knowledge to develop products that are addictive and make consumers feel that they cannot live without sugar. This can lead to a lifelong dependence on sugary foods, especially in children, whose reward systems are still highly malleable. The long-term consequences of this development should not be underestimated, as sugar not only affects weight, but also increases the risk of numerous chronic diseases.

Hidden Sugar in Food

Much of today's sugar consumption does not come from deliberately sweetened foods, but from foods in which sugar is often hidden. These include ready meals, sauces, dressings and even products advertised as healthy, such as cereal bars or yogurts. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that no more than 10% of daily calories come from sugar - ideally less than 5%. However, recent statistics show that sugar consumption in many countries far exceeds these recommendations. The practice of hiding sugar in apparently healthy foods is a deliberate strategy by the industry to increase consumption.

Sugar not only has the function of improving taste, but also serves as a preservative and flavor carrier, which makes it particularly attractive for food production. Consumers are often unaware of how much sugar they actually consume, as it is listed under different names on packaging. Terms such as "glucose syrup," "fructose," or "maltodextrin" often conceal the fact that it is sugar, making it difficult for consumers to keep track of their intake.

The Role of High-Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS)

In the 1970s, high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) was introduced in the USA as a cheap alternative to conventional sugar. HFCS has since been used in countless foods and drinks. Scientists have raised concerns that HFCS, especially in large quantities, could be even more problematic for the metabolism than conventional table sugar, as it can promote the buildup of fat in the liver and encourage insulin resistance. The introduction of HFCS meant that sugar could be used in even larger quantities in the food industry, as costs were significantly reduced. HFCS was widely used in soft drinks and snacks in particular, which further increased sugar consumption.

The health consequences of the increased use of HFCS are still the subject of intensive research, as the effects on metabolism could be much more serious than originally thought. In particular, the connection between HFCS and the development of fatty liver and insulin resistance is repeatedly discussed, and some studies suggest that HFCS increases the risk of metabolic disorders more than other types of sugar.

Health consequences of sugar consumption

Long-term high sugar consumption is associated with numerous health problems:

• Obesity : Sugary drinks and snacks contribute significantly to the global obesity epidemic.

• Type 2 diabetes : Chronic sugar consumption can lead to insulin resistance, a major factor in the development of type 2 diabetes.

• Cardiovascular diseases : Recent research indicates that sugar increases the risk of heart disease not only through indirect effects such as obesity, but also directly through inflammatory processes.

• Tooth decay : Sugar is the main driver of tooth decay because it feeds the bacteria in the mouth and endangers dental health.

In addition, recent studies show that sugar might also increase the risk of some cancers by promoting inflammation and affecting cell growth. For example, studies by Yang et al. (2014) and Johnson et al. (2016) have shown that high sugar consumption rates are associated with an increased risk of certain cancers because sugar can promote inflammatory processes and uncontrolled cell growth. The effects of sugar on mental health are also a topic of growing research, as sugar has been linked to mood disorders such as depression. High consumption of sugar can lead to fluctuations in blood sugar levels, which negatively affect emotional well-being. It is becoming increasingly clear that sugar not only has short-term health effects, but in the long term increases the risk of a variety of chronic diseases.

Global differences in the use of sugar

While countries such as Mexico and the UK have introduced sugar taxes to reduce consumption, other countries still rely on voluntary agreements with the industry. Initial results show that sugar taxes can actually reduce the consumption of sugary drinks. In Germany, for example, legal regulations have so far largely been absent, despite increasing criticism from consumer advocates and health experts. However, the effectiveness of sugar taxes is still controversial, as critics claim that such taxes have only a limited effect on consumer behavior.

At the same time, there are countries that have not only introduced sugar taxes, but have also enforced stricter regulations on advertising and sales practices. In Scandinavian countries, for example, there are programs that promote nutritional education and aim to reduce sugar consumption through awareness campaigns. These programs show that a conscious approach to sugar can also be achieved through education and information, which could lead to a more health-conscious society in the long term.

Sugar Alternatives: Myths and Reality

In recent years, the sugar industry has been busy promoting alternatives such as stevia, erythritol or coconut blossom sugar as “healthier” options. But many of these alternatives are not without problems:

• Stevia : A natural sweetener that contains few calories but is often sold in a highly processed form.

• Erythritol : A sugar alcohol that provides no calories but can cause digestive problems if consumed in excess.

• Coconut sugar : Despite its lower glycemic index, it remains a form of sugar and also contributes calories.

Many consumers believe that these alternatives are healthier because they are often advertised as "natural" or "low calorie." However, the reality is more complex: even these sugar alternatives can cause health problems when consumed in excess. Stevia, for example, is often used in combination with other sweeteners to improve flavor, meaning that the health benefits of stevia alone may be overestimated. Coconut sugar may have a lower glycemic index than traditional sugar, but it remains a sugar that can have similar health effects. The use of sugar alternatives in the food industry often serves more to improve the image of products than to provide real health benefits.

Current developments: criticism and strategies of the industry

In recent years, criticism of high sugar consumption has grown. Scientists and health experts are increasingly warning about the health risks of sugar and calling for legal measures to reduce consumption. The sugar industry is responding to this public and scientific criticism by proposing voluntary measures to circumvent legal regulations. This includes the introduction of supposedly healthier product variants with reduced sugar content or the increased marketing of "natural" sugar alternatives. With these steps, the industry is trying to improve the image of sugar and continue to play a central role in people's diets - despite increasing awareness of its risks.

Another approach taken by the industry is to shift the responsibility onto consumers by encouraging them to make conscious choices and control their sugar consumption. At the same time, the industry is investing in the development of new technologies to reduce the sugar content in products without affecting taste. However, these measures are often more about improving the image than about genuinely changing eating habits.

Future challenges and possible measures

• Education : Educational campaigns could help inform consumers about the risks of sugar and promote demand for healthier alternatives.

• Labelling requirement : Transparent information on packaging could make it easier for consumers to make an informed purchasing decision.

• Regulations : Sugar taxes and advertising bans for children's products could reduce consumption in the long term.

• Innovation in the food industry : The development of new, healthier products could promote the shift towards a more sustainable diet.

An important aspect of future measures could also be the promotion of sustainable agriculture that supports the cultivation of sugar alternatives. In addition, incentives could be created for the food industry to use less sugar while improving the quality of products. Educational campaigns aimed primarily at young people could help raise awareness of the risks of sugar and promote healthier eating habits. Cooperation between politics, science and industry would be necessary to bring about comprehensive change that sustainably improves the health of the population.

Conclusion: Sugar as a health risk and industrial product

The history of sugar is a lesson in how financial interests can influence public opinion and scientific findings. From the first targeted studies in the 1960s to trivialization by scientists and lobbying, to targeted advertising and current reactions to criticism, the sugar industry has always found ways to increase sales and secure its influence. The health risks of sugar - from obesity and diabetes to cardiovascular disease - are now known and well documented. Nevertheless, sugar consumption remains high worldwide.

The current debate shows how important it is to take a critical look at our food industry. For a healthier future and a more conscious approach to sugar, it is crucial that consumers are informed about the risks and background and that measures to limit sugar consumption are seriously considered. In the long term, it will be necessary not only to regulate consumption, but also to raise people's awareness and encourage the food industry to take greater responsibility. This is the only way to achieve a lasting change in the food culture that promotes the health and well-being of the population.