I have this one on my list of things that you can say if you want to argue with people. I have never shared this fact and been believed by anyone in my life. I only share it when I feel like being a dick.
I’m not American or European, I’ve never heard anything about sugar rushes or something similar, asked couple of friends and they also never heard anything about it
Maybe the “sugar rush” superstition came from the rush of joy and dopamine kids get when eating a sugary snack. The way kids sometimes can express that with jumpy movememts just adds to it
I feel like people heavily misappropriate their kids’ increase in energy to sugar, when it’s actually caffeine
Like as an adult, 40mg of caffeine in a can of soda/trace amounts in a chocolate bar aren’t gonna affect your day too much, but it’s different when you’re 50lbs
> *all children actually received the placebo (aspartame)*
I don’t have access to the actual paper to check if they accounted for this, but saying that “it’s not real because they were all given a placebo and some reacted and other didn’t” is absolutely **not** disproving sugar rushes. All it’s doing is confirming the extremely well-known placebo effect.
Saying that sugar rushes aren’t real because some kids experienced them as a placebo effect is like saying that aspirin doesn’t work because some people experienced a placebo when given a sugar pill.
Edit: Commenters point out that the article also discusses a meta-study that involved 16 other studies that all found the same thing. The same caveat extends to those. I can’t access the studies (subscription/paid-for scientific journals are an outdated relic detrimental to all fields, but that’s another matter), but I am left wondering exactly what a “sugar rush” is defined as, and if it is consistent across the studies.
I have a suspicion that the definition of “sugar rush” may not quite be in line with what people might expect, because the concept of a sugar rush is very basic. [Sugar is metabolized within minutes](https://www.verywellhealth.com/how-long-does-sugar-stay-in-your-system-11772197), and, being relatively calorie-dense at 4 calories per gram, provides rapid access to quite a bit of energy. I think most people colloquially understand a “sugar rush” as being a rapid onset of energy that results in children running around. The article mentions children “going ape” after eating sugar, which is probably where the studies differ. Obviously if the parent gives the child an outlet or direction in terms of energy use, that energy can be harnessed in a way that isn’t “going ape”.
Perhaps a better way to understand the results of the study is to say that children whose energy output is given direction or control do not behave badly, while parents ignoring them or encouraging them (accidentally or otherwise) to act out do so, which is a much more congruent conclusion.
I watched a 2 year old get candy for the first time and then proceeded to watch him sprint around a basement doing front flips on to the carpet for 30 minutes. He had never done anything remotely close to that in his life before.
Edit: when I say “front flips” I don’t mean he was doing perfect flips. He was throwing his body forward and landing on his butt. Really, they were more violent summersaults.
Yes, completely driven by parental expectations within a context. Cake and cookies at parties always cause it and yet orange juice at breakfast never does, despite the same simple carbohydrates (sucrose, glucose, fructose) being abundantly present in both scenarios.
This topic should be the prime example of how correlation and causation are not the same thing. The comments here are a perfect demonstration of it. No one is disputing that kids get excited and hyper when they consume sugar. That being said, the data doesn’t lie. Sugar isn’t the cause of it. Think about what is happening when you give a child sugar. One, a lot of the time it’s because of a special occasion. This excites kids. A lot of the time it’s a treat, which is special, which excites kids. A lot of the time, the parents that believe that sugar rushes are real will actually tell children how they’re supposed to act because they consumed sugar, which makes them behave in that exact manner.
Furthermore, the layperson’s understanding of what they and their children are eating is incredibly lacking. Many people will feed their family food products that are replete with refined white sugar, but they don’t realize it, and neither do their kids. The kids don’t get super hyper from foods that are more sneaky about their refined carbohydrate content, because it isn’t seen as the same kind of treat as something like a pack of candy, but has similar amounts of sugar in it.
Parents, no one is telling you that your kids didn’t get hyper that time you gave them candy. They’re just saying that the colloquial understanding of why it happened is incorrect. The sugar wasn’t the cause, and no amount of denying that will counteract the hard data.
I don’t know if “rush” or “high” or some other word is the best way to describe it, but I definitely 100% feel an unpleasant, grainy, prickly sensation throughout my body and skin for a couple hours any time I load up on sugary junk food (which is why I avoid doing that).
Sugar definitely gives me a sort of “rush” and it’s not really energetic like you wanna get up and do stuff. It just makes me feel weird and tingly for a few moments and then I’m tired as shit. Probably pre-diabetic lmao
It was probably the caffeine and not the sugar, but I drank a regular Coke after not having one in about four years, and I felt like I was traveling through time. I was driving at the time, too.
Yeah, it’s cultural, and I think the notion probably didn’t enter the zeitgeist until the late 80s or 90s. My parents gave us candy on road trips to calm us down. That was in the 70s and early 80s.
I skimmed the article, but what I gathered is that parental perception of a sugar rush is psychological but that doesn’t mean that sugar rushes don’t exist.
Also there are facts presented that sugar in the brain is well regulated, but that doesn’t preclude a two step process: sugar triggers body changes, and then those changes affect the brain through hormones, heart function, who knows.
I remember debating with my therapist (as an adult), when the subject came up somehow. He was talking about sugar being a stimulant using kids with sugar rushes at parties as an example, and I said how it always just made me sleepy. He was adamant about it.
I kind of think hearing the sugar rush myth and realizing it wasn’t true for me is why I was somewhat dismissive when I was younger about sugar contributing to cavities. I remember hearing people say they got a cavity so they were going to cut back on sugar and thinking it sounded sort of like a harmless old wives tale and that cavities had to do with brushing or not brushing your teeth, which obviously it does as well.
Not sure I believe that – I’ve experienced what my mom used to call the “collie-wobbles” from eating something super sweet like cake with obnoxious frosting or even a couple KrispyKremes.
This is a stupid discussion.
Go eat 2 pints of Ben and Jerries ice cream. Or a box of Captain Crunch.
Does your heart race? Do you not feel hyper and like something is off?
I do.
Considering i never felt a ‘sugar rush,’ I’ve always suspected it was made up nonsense. Same for things like you can’t swim until at least 30 minutes after you’ve eaten.
I always attributed sugar rush as just a kids brain going rapid fire on happiness.
Think about it, kids have more taste buds so they taste everything in that candy. Candy is exciting and taste delicious. So their happy little brains can’t cope because…..
挿話
コメント
Sugar rush isn’t real, but sugar crashes afterward are real:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactive_hypoglycemia
I’ve never experienced a sugar rush. Anytime I eat a sugary thing, I just feel tired.
I bring this up pretty often when sugar rushes are mentioned, and pretty close to 0% of people believe me about it.
“using known sugar quantities, and placebos, and with the children, their parents and the researchers blind to the conditions”
A placebo is a sugar pill. Checkmate, Science.
I have this one on my list of things that you can say if you want to argue with people. I have never shared this fact and been believed by anyone in my life. I only share it when I feel like being a dick.
I’m not American or European, I’ve never heard anything about sugar rushes or something similar, asked couple of friends and they also never heard anything about it
Maybe the “sugar rush” superstition came from the rush of joy and dopamine kids get when eating a sugary snack. The way kids sometimes can express that with jumpy movememts just adds to it
I feel like people heavily misappropriate their kids’ increase in energy to sugar, when it’s actually caffeine
Like as an adult, 40mg of caffeine in a can of soda/trace amounts in a chocolate bar aren’t gonna affect your day too much, but it’s different when you’re 50lbs
It might not be sugar vs other food, but consuming calories will give you energy. That is science.
> *all children actually received the placebo (aspartame)*
I don’t have access to the actual paper to check if they accounted for this, but saying that “it’s not real because they were all given a placebo and some reacted and other didn’t” is absolutely **not** disproving sugar rushes. All it’s doing is confirming the extremely well-known placebo effect.
Saying that sugar rushes aren’t real because some kids experienced them as a placebo effect is like saying that aspirin doesn’t work because some people experienced a placebo when given a sugar pill.
Edit: Commenters point out that the article also discusses a meta-study that involved 16 other studies that all found the same thing. The same caveat extends to those. I can’t access the studies (subscription/paid-for scientific journals are an outdated relic detrimental to all fields, but that’s another matter), but I am left wondering exactly what a “sugar rush” is defined as, and if it is consistent across the studies.
I have a suspicion that the definition of “sugar rush” may not quite be in line with what people might expect, because the concept of a sugar rush is very basic. [Sugar is metabolized within minutes](https://www.verywellhealth.com/how-long-does-sugar-stay-in-your-system-11772197), and, being relatively calorie-dense at 4 calories per gram, provides rapid access to quite a bit of energy. I think most people colloquially understand a “sugar rush” as being a rapid onset of energy that results in children running around. The article mentions children “going ape” after eating sugar, which is probably where the studies differ. Obviously if the parent gives the child an outlet or direction in terms of energy use, that energy can be harnessed in a way that isn’t “going ape”.
Perhaps a better way to understand the results of the study is to say that children whose energy output is given direction or control do not behave badly, while parents ignoring them or encouraging them (accidentally or otherwise) to act out do so, which is a much more congruent conclusion.
I don’t understand this.
I watched a 2 year old get candy for the first time and then proceeded to watch him sprint around a basement doing front flips on to the carpet for 30 minutes. He had never done anything remotely close to that in his life before.
Edit: when I say “front flips” I don’t mean he was doing perfect flips. He was throwing his body forward and landing on his butt. Really, they were more violent summersaults.
I’ve enjoyed so much sugar and never found the rush
Yes, completely driven by parental expectations within a context. Cake and cookies at parties always cause it and yet orange juice at breakfast never does, despite the same simple carbohydrates (sucrose, glucose, fructose) being abundantly present in both scenarios.
I’ve only heard about this “sugar rush” on Reddit. The concept doesn’t exist at all in my country
This topic should be the prime example of how correlation and causation are not the same thing. The comments here are a perfect demonstration of it. No one is disputing that kids get excited and hyper when they consume sugar. That being said, the data doesn’t lie. Sugar isn’t the cause of it. Think about what is happening when you give a child sugar. One, a lot of the time it’s because of a special occasion. This excites kids. A lot of the time it’s a treat, which is special, which excites kids. A lot of the time, the parents that believe that sugar rushes are real will actually tell children how they’re supposed to act because they consumed sugar, which makes them behave in that exact manner.
Furthermore, the layperson’s understanding of what they and their children are eating is incredibly lacking. Many people will feed their family food products that are replete with refined white sugar, but they don’t realize it, and neither do their kids. The kids don’t get super hyper from foods that are more sneaky about their refined carbohydrate content, because it isn’t seen as the same kind of treat as something like a pack of candy, but has similar amounts of sugar in it.
Parents, no one is telling you that your kids didn’t get hyper that time you gave them candy. They’re just saying that the colloquial understanding of why it happened is incorrect. The sugar wasn’t the cause, and no amount of denying that will counteract the hard data.
I don’t know if “rush” or “high” or some other word is the best way to describe it, but I definitely 100% feel an unpleasant, grainy, prickly sensation throughout my body and skin for a couple hours any time I load up on sugary junk food (which is why I avoid doing that).
Sugar definitely gives me a sort of “rush” and it’s not really energetic like you wanna get up and do stuff. It just makes me feel weird and tingly for a few moments and then I’m tired as shit. Probably pre-diabetic lmao
Great. A couple of months and people will believe this shit, because ChatGPT said so.
I just can’t with all this bs anymore.
It was probably the caffeine and not the sugar, but I drank a regular Coke after not having one in about four years, and I felt like I was traveling through time. I was driving at the time, too.
88 MILES! PER HOURRRRR!
My anecdotal experience strongly suggests otherwise.
So my daughter just goes fucking nuts after eating sugar for no reason?
Yeah, it’s cultural, and I think the notion probably didn’t enter the zeitgeist until the late 80s or 90s. My parents gave us candy on road trips to calm us down. That was in the 70s and early 80s.
I skimmed the article, but what I gathered is that parental perception of a sugar rush is psychological but that doesn’t mean that sugar rushes don’t exist.
Also there are facts presented that sugar in the brain is well regulated, but that doesn’t preclude a two step process: sugar triggers body changes, and then those changes affect the brain through hormones, heart function, who knows.
I remember debating with my therapist (as an adult), when the subject came up somehow. He was talking about sugar being a stimulant using kids with sugar rushes at parties as an example, and I said how it always just made me sleepy. He was adamant about it.
I kind of think hearing the sugar rush myth and realizing it wasn’t true for me is why I was somewhat dismissive when I was younger about sugar contributing to cavities. I remember hearing people say they got a cavity so they were going to cut back on sugar and thinking it sounded sort of like a harmless old wives tale and that cavities had to do with brushing or not brushing your teeth, which obviously it does as well.
I always assumed people knew it was excitement from receiving a sugary treat, not the sugar itself.
I think this is one of those things that is relatively true, but too many people took it in the literal sense.
I think many of the experiences underlying the concept of the sugar rush comes from the caffeine in your soda or the additives and coloring in candy.
[deleted]
I’ll probably get banned but a lot of stuff in the TIL sub is absolute BS.
Not sure I believe that – I’ve experienced what my mom used to call the “collie-wobbles” from eating something super sweet like cake with obnoxious frosting or even a couple KrispyKremes.
This is a stupid discussion.
Go eat 2 pints of Ben and Jerries ice cream. Or a box of Captain Crunch.
Does your heart race? Do you not feel hyper and like something is off?
I do.
Assume this does not apply to ADHD.
Come and spend a day with my kids. See if that changes.
Being psychosomatic doesn’t mean it isn’t real, at this point it means we don’t know wtf.
Considering i never felt a ‘sugar rush,’ I’ve always suspected it was made up nonsense. Same for things like you can’t swim until at least 30 minutes after you’ve eaten.
Article: there is absolutely no link.
Paper: the range of results is relatively large and we cannot rule out a smaller effect on subsets of children
Keep on sciencing, journalism. Way to go.
I’ve had this bullshit cited to me before. The insanity my kids have gotten when they first started experiencing sugar was beyond the null hypothesis.
Teeth grinding, smiles I’ve never seen before, total attitude shift.
Maybe it stops happening after a couple months/years since first exposure. But to say nothing happens is ridiculous.
Survey says, THAT’S A LIE!!!
I always attributed sugar rush as just a kids brain going rapid fire on happiness.
Think about it, kids have more taste buds so they taste everything in that candy. Candy is exciting and taste delicious. So their happy little brains can’t cope because…..
Big emotions in tiny bodies.