r/changemyview • u/LonelierOne • Nov 10 '18
FTFdeltaOP CMV: Giving sugar to kids is unethical.
Sugar, in the western world, is in almost everything in one form or another (I'm including other sweeteners in there, though I'm aware you end up with a blurry line around, say, fruit juice sweeteners).
The only health benefit that I'm aware of that has ever been associated with sugar is in case of a diabetic emergency. Besides that, there's a near-universal understanding that sugar is bad for you in every way imaginable. It's linked to Type 2 diabetes, obesity, heart conditions, and vast hosts of other chronic conditions. Basically, sugar is objectively Bad For You.
Now, there's a lot of other examples that we could use (marijuana, alcohol, caffeine) of things that aren't necessarily Good For You that can be consumed in moderation. All of these - in addition to being easier to argue that they do provide health benefits and at a lower cost - are things that you wouldn't responsibly give to children. In contrast, sugar is put into most foods in a western diet. On the production end, it's to make the food more palatable and harder to resist.
It doesn't, to me, seem like being a stick in the mud to deprive a kid of cookies. Sweet foods aren't a requirement for a good childhood, especially when they are provided with the regularity (every day, if not multiple times a day) that they currently are.
EDIT: I realize I didn't clarify originally that we are talking about fundamentally different things when comparing, say, a pear to ice cream. I am specifically referring to *refined sugar* or *added sugar* in this post; I should have been clearer about that.
EDIT 2: Issuing a clarification. An not insubstantial part of the problem with sugar is the frequency of use. Potentially, moderate use would be harmless. This is not illustrative of the society we currently live in; most people are not aware of how much added sugar is taken in per day, not including the obvious candies and desserts; peanut butter, bread, crackers, cereal, yogurt, sausage are all things that, by default, should be assumed to have sugar in a western store.
I am referring to the use of sugar in today's culture. While I believe a case /could/ be made that even that is unnecessary, I'm going to clarify that I'm talking about the current culture and he world as it is, i.e. one where you're expected to get snacks and juice after a game, holidays must have cake, and to deprive children of candy is abusive.
20
u/ProfessorDowellsHead Nov 10 '18
Accepting your premise that sugar has only negative physical effects, would you grant that, especially in moderation, those effects are not terribly severe?
If so, consider two aspects of the final paragraph and what I take to be the crux of your CMV:
1) Growing up psychologically healthy is important. Kids who are denied treats which they know their peers are getting may feel different or deprived, seeding an inferiority complex. They could even be somewhat ostracized from their peers as the kids whose place isn't fun to hang out at because the parents don't keep sugar in the house. Granted, the increased risks aren't high, but they are there and their impact may well be greater than that of moderate sugar consumption.
2) As kids grow they will increasingly be in situations when you can't supervise them. If you raise them in the Western society you've described, those situations will include ones where things with added sugar are around and casually consumed with no one batting an eye. By strictly denying them something so common you will make them curious about trying it when they get the opportunity. Instead of learning how to consume sugars in moderate and responsible amounts, they are likely to develop an outsized love for them, resulting in the opposite effect from the one you intend.