Andrew Huberman· PhD
So if you're eating 30, 40, 50, 60 grams of fiber a day, but your sugar is, 80, 90 grams, I would not be that worried about it, especially, if you're controlling calories as well.
Loading…
The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
So if you're eating 30, 40, 50, 60 grams of fiber a day, but your sugar is, 80, 90 grams, I would not be that worried about it, especially, if you're controlling calories as well.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
The only difference was-- so all their biomarkers improved in both groups. The only real difference was a small difference in LDL. So the group eating low sugar had a better improvement slightly in LDL. But that's probably because they were eating more fiber. And we know fiber can bind to cholesterol and lower LDL cholesterol.
and that is probably a function of the fact that the low sugar group had more fiber we know fiber canbin to L to to cholesterol and lower LDL cholesterol in the blood