Too much sugar = Prison?
With Halloween and the holidays looming right ahead of us I happened to notice this bit of news around candy consumption with children. “Willy Wonka would be horrified. Children who eat too much candy may be more likely to be arrested for violent behavior as adults, new research suggests.” The study was published in the October issue of the British Journal of Psychiatry and paid for by Britain's Economic and Social Research Council.
Now that’s a pretty bold statement but when you think about it I believe there really could be a lot of merit in continuing on with these types of studies. Blood sugar disturbances (especially hypoglycemia) can alter mood chemistry dramatically and probably even more so with children. This is definitely worth taking a more serious look at. (Note that a person can have hypoglycemia for years and it may go completely undetected.)
Readers what do you think? How do you or your children act when they consume too much sugar?
 older posts |
home | newer posts  |
| Healthy Exercise Tips (part 3) | | Diet & Weight Loss Blog | | Don't Get Tricked On Halloween |
Posted by: Aaron | Oct 27, 2009 1:25:59 PM
Wealth, or socioeconomics as you all are labeling it does not have anything to do with it. Read the article:
"Even after Moore and colleagues controlled for other variables like different parenting skills and varying social and economic backgrounds, they found a significant link between childhood consumption of sweets and violent behavior in adulthood."
It is just as likely for a wealthy family to be able to afford a candy bribe for their children as a poor family. Wealthy people raise criminals too, they just happen to be able to afford private attorneys who can get cases dismissed at a better (higher) rate than public defenders. The Columbine killers were not from poor families.
Greed can lead to poor decisions as much as despair.
The study should have looked into the alcohol link to crime brought on buy a conditioned appetite for sugar.
I'm siding with Rejoice.
Posted by: Rejoice | Oct 25, 2009 1:02:08 PM
I raised my daughter on my own at the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder, and I was very involved at home and very concerned about nutrition. My daughter was never given candy, and was fed a diet of whole grains and lots of fruits and vegetables. I made bread and cooked beans from scratch which is a lot less expensive than junk food. My daughter has grown up to be a healthy, beautiful, smart, volunteering, non-violent, law-abiding and fully-employed member of society. Nowhere in Elaine's blog or in the original article does it say that poor people are more likely to feed their children the excess of candy that leads to the violent behavior. I resent the implication by the commenters that poor=junk food and crime. Wealthy people can eat too much sugar and be violent, too.
Posted by: Casey | Oct 25, 2009 12:27:31 PM
I agree with Michelle - sugar should be limited, but correlation does not equal causation! Isn't it generally thought that parents who are more concerned with nutrition are higher up on the socioeconomic ladder and/or more involved at home, so are less likely to have kids who get arrested anyway? Of course, I haven't read the actual article though.
Posted by: Michelle Reinke | Oct 24, 2009 12:23:53 PM
Although I agree that sugars should be limited in the diet, couldn't this study just be correlational? Children who eat an excess of candy may do so for socioeconomic reasons - thus excess sugar consumption could be a symptom of an environment that leads to more violent behavior.
