The Case Against Sugar

If The Case Against Sugar were a criminal case, it would be a case for the prosecution, Taubes writes. Like a skilled attorney, he puts on the stand a litany of expert witnesses, including doctors and scientists and their centuries of research on the relationship between sugar consumption and chronic Western diseases, such as diabetes, insulin resistance, and even gout. Taubes also debunks the arguments that sugar is harmless, by carefully laying out the history behind sugar and how it evolved, thanks to technology, marketing, and (bad) science. But he acknowledges there's still reasonable doubt on whether the evidence "would stand up in a court of law and allow governments to regulate sugar, as they already do tobacco and alcohol." Taubes argues that the lack of scientific research on the effects of sugar fuels that uncertainty. Although Taubes is unable to build an airtight case against sugar as a culprit that warrants government regulation, he presents a convincing argument that makes one think seriously about limiting the amount of sugar we consume.