No, sugar doesn’t make your kids hyperactive

10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

It’s a Saturday afternoon at a kids’ birthday party. Hordes of children are swarming between the spread of birthday treats and party games. Half-eaten cupcakes, biscuits and lollies litter the floor, and the kids seem to have gained superhuman speed and bounce-off-the-wall energy. But is sugar to blame?

The belief that eating sugary foods and drinks leads to hyperactivity has steadfastly persisted for decades. And parents have curtailed their children’s intake accordingly.

Balanced nutrition is critical during childhood. As a neuroscientist who has studied the negative effects of high sugar “junk food” diets on brain function, I can confidently say excessive sugar consumption does not have benefits to the young mind. In fact, neuroimaging studies show the brains of children who eat more processed snack foods are smaller in volume, particularly in the frontal cortices, than those of children who eat a more healthful diet.

But today’s scientific evidence does not support the claim sugar makes kids hyperactive.

Sharomka/Shutterstock

The hyperactivity myth

Sugar is a rapid source of fuel for the body. The myth of sugar-induced hyperactivity can be traced to a handful of studies conducted in the 1970s and early 1980s. These were focused on the Feingold Diet as a treatment for what we now call Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), a neurodivergent profile where problems with inattention and/or hyperactivity and impulsivity can negatively affect school, work or relationships.

Devised by American paediatric allergist Benjamin Feingold, the diet is extremely restrictive. Artificial colours, sweeteners (including sugar) and flavourings, salicylates including aspirin, and three preservatives (butylated hydroxyanisole, butylated hydroxytoluene, and tert-Butrylhdryquinone) are eliminated.

Salicylates occur naturally in many healthy foods, including apples, berries, tomatoes, broccoli, cucumbers, capsicums, nuts, seeds, spices and some grains. So, as well as eliminating processed foods containing artificial colours, flavours, preservatives and sweeteners, the Feingold diet eliminates many nutritious foods helpful for healthy development.

However, Feingold believed avoiding these ingredients improved focus and behaviour. He conducted some small studies, which he claimed showed a large proportion of hyperactive children responded favourably to his diet.

bowls of lollies on table
Even it doesn’t make kids hyperactive, they shouldn’t have too much sugar. DenisMArt/Shutterstock

Flawed by design

The methods used in the studies were flawed, particularly with respect to adequate control groups (who did not restrict foods) and failed to establish a causal link between sugar consumption and hyperactive behaviour.

Subsequent studies suggested less than 2% responded to restrictions rather than Feingold’s claimed 75%. But the idea still took hold in the public consciousness and was perpetuated by anecdotal experiences.

Fast forward to the present day. The scientific landscape looks vastly different. Rigorous research conducted by experts has consistently failed to find a connection between sugar and hyperactivity. Numerous placebo-controlled studies have demonstrated sugar does not significantly impact children’s behaviour or attention span.

One landmark meta-analysis study, published almost 20 years ago, compared the effects of sugar versus a placebo on children’s behaviour across multiple studies. The results were clear: in the vast majority of studies, sugar consumption did not lead to increased hyperactivity or disruptive behaviour.

Subsequent research has reinforced these findings, providing further evidence sugar does not cause hyperactivity in children, even in those diagnosed with ADHD.

While Feingold’s original claims were overstated, a small proportion of children do experience allergies to artificial food flavourings and dyes.

Pre-school aged children may be more sensitive to food additives than older children. This is potentially due to their smaller body size, or their still-developing brain and body.

Hooked on dopamine?

Although the link between sugar and hyperactivity is murky at best, there is a proven link between the neurotransmitter dopamine and increased activity.

The brain releases dopamine when a reward is encountered – such as an unexpected sweet treat. A surge of dopamine also invigorates movement – we see this increased activity after taking psychostimulant drugs like amphetamine. The excited behaviour of children towards sugary foods may be attributed to a burst of dopamine released in expectation of a reward, although the level of dopamine release is much less than that of a psychostimulant drug.

Dopamine function is also critically linked to ADHD, which is thought to be due to diminished dopamine receptor function in the brain. Some ADHD treatments such as methylphenidate (labelled Ritalin or Concerta) and lisdexamfetamine (sold as Vyvanse) are also psychostimulants. But in the ADHD brain the increased dopamine from these drugs recalibrates brain function to aid focus and behavioural control.

girl in yellow top licks large lollipop while holding a pink icecream
Maybe it’s less of a sugar rush and more of a dopamine rush? Anastasiya Tsiasemnikava/Shutterstock

Why does the myth persist?

The complex interplay between diet, behaviour and societal beliefs endures. Expecting sugar to change your child’s behaviour can influence how you interpret what you see. In a study where parents were told their child had either received a sugary drink, or a placebo drink (with a non-sugar sweetener), those parents who expected their child to be hyperactive after having sugar perceived this effect, even when they’d only had the sugar-free placebo.

The allure of a simple explanation – blaming sugar for hyperactivity – can also be appealing in a world filled with many choices and conflicting voices.

Healthy foods, healthy brains

Sugar itself may not make your child hyperactive, but it can affect your child’s mental and physical health. Rather than demonising sugar, we should encourage moderation and balanced nutrition, teaching children healthy eating habits and fostering a positive relationship with food.

In both children and adults, the World Health Organization (WHO) recommends limiting free sugar consumption to less than 10% of energy intake, and a reduction to 5% for further health benefits. Free sugars include sugars added to foods during manufacturing, and naturally present sugars in honey, syrups, fruit juices and fruit juice concentrates.

Treating sugary foods as rewards can result in them becoming highly valued by children. Non-sugar rewards also have this effect, so it’s a good idea to use stickers, toys or a fun activity as incentives for positive behaviour instead.

While sugar may provide a temporary energy boost, it does not turn children into hyperactive whirlwinds.

Amy Reichelt, Senior Lecturer (Adjunct), Nutritional neuroscientist, University of Adelaide

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Don’t Forget…

Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

Recommended

    • Dancing vs Parkinson’s Depression
      Dance to Beat Parkinson’s: A study reveals dancing significantly eases depression in Parkinson’s sufferers, highlighting the therapeutic power of movement and social interaction.

    Learn to Age Gracefully

    Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

    • The Path to Longevity – by Dr. Luigi Fontana

      10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

      We’ve reviewed other “expand your healthspan” books, and while they’re good (or else we wouldn’t include them), this is top-tier, up there with Dr. Greger’s books while being more accessible (more on this later).

      This book is far more informational than opinionated, and while some reviewers have described the book as motivating them, that’s not at all the tone, and it’s clear that (beyond hoping for the reader to have to information to promote a long healthy life), the author has no particular agenda to push.

      One example: while he gives a whole-foods, plant-based diet a “A+” rating, he puts the (often meat/fish-heavy) paleo diet at a close “A-“, depending on the animal products chosen (which can swing it a lot, and he discusses this in some detail).

      In the category of criticism… This reviewer has none. Sometimes it seemed something was going unaddressed, but it would be addressed later.

      Stylistically, the text is easy-reading and/but has a lot of references to hard science, complete with charts, diagrams, and so forth. The impression that this reviewer got is that Dr. Fontana took pains to convey as much science as possible, with (unlike Dr. Greger) as little jargon as possible. And that goes a long way.

      Bottom line: if you’re looking for a “healthy aging” book that has a lot more science than “copy the Blue Zone supercentenarians and hope” without being so scientifically dense as “How Not To Die” or “How Not To Age“, then this is the book for you.

      Click here to check out The Path to Longevity, and optimize the path you take!

      Share This Post

    • A Therapeutic Journey – by Alain de Botton

      10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

      We’ve often featured The School of Life’s videos here on 10almonds, and most of those are written by (and often voiced by) Alain de Botton.

      This book lays out the case for mental health being also just health, that no person is perfectly healthy all the time, and sometimes we all need a little help. While he does suggest seeking help from reliable outside sources, he also tells a lot about how we can improve things for ourselves along the way, whether by what we can control in our environment, or just what’s between our ears.

      In the category of limitations, the book is written with the assumption that you are in a position to have access to a therapist of your choice, and in a sufficiently safe and stable life situation that there is a limit to how bad things can get.

      The style is… Alain de Botton’s usual style. Well-written, clear, decisive, instructive, compassionate, insightful, thought-provoking.

      Bottom line: this isn’t a book for absolutely everyone, but if your problems are moderate and your resources are comfortable, then this book has a lot of insights that can make your life more easy-going and joyful, without dropping the seriousness when appropriate.

      Click here to check out A Therapeutic Journey, and perhaps begin one of your own!

      Share This Post

    • We looked at genetic clues to depression in more than 14,000 people. What we found may surprise you

      10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

      The core experiences of depression – changes in energy, activity, thinking and mood – have been described for more than 10,000 years. The word “depression” has been used for about 350 years.

      Given this long history, it may surprise you that experts don’t agree about what depression is, how to define it or what causes it.

      But many experts do agree that depression is not one thing. It’s a large family of illnesses with different causes and mechanisms. This makes choosing the best treatment for each person challenging.

      Reactive vs endogenous depression

      One strategy is to search for sub-types of depression and see whether they might do better with different kinds of treatments. One example is contrasting “reactive” depression with “endogenous” depression.

      Reactive depression (also thought of as social or psychological depression) is presented as being triggered by exposure to stressful life events. These might be being assaulted or losing a loved one – an understandable reaction to an outside trigger.

      Endogenous depression (also thought of as biological or genetic depression) is proposed to be caused by something inside, such as genes or brain chemistry.

      Many people working clinically in mental health accept this sub-typing. You might have read about this online.

      But we think this approach is way too simple.

      While stressful life events and genes may, individually, contribute to causing depression, they also interact to increase the risk of someone developing depression. And evidence shows that there is a genetic component to being exposed to stressors. Some genes affect things such as personality. Some affect how we interact with our environments.

      What we did and what we found

      Our team set out to look at the role of genes and stressors to see if classifying depression as reactive or endogenous was valid.

      In the Australian Genetics of Depression Study, people with depression answered surveys about exposure to stressful life events. We analysed DNA from their saliva samples to calculate their genetic risk for mental disorders.

      Our question was simple. Does genetic risk for depression, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, ADHD, anxiety and neuroticism (a personality trait) influence people’s reported exposure to stressful life events?

      Girl or teenager leaning against wall, hand across face, looking down
      We looked at the genetic risk of mental illness to see how that was linked to stressful life events, such as childhood abuse and neglect. Kamira/Shutterstock

      You may be wondering why we bothered calculating the genetic risk for mental disorders in people who already have depression. Every person has genetic variants linked to mental disorders. Some people have more, some less. Even people who already have depression might have a low genetic risk for it. These people may have developed their particular depression from some other constellation of causes.

      We looked at the genetic risk of conditions other than depression for a couple of reasons. First, genetic variants linked to depression overlap with those linked to other mental disorders. Second, two people with depression may have completely different genetic variants. So we wanted to cast a wide net to look at a wider spectrum of genetic variants linked to mental disorders.

      If reactive and endogenous depression sub-types are valid, we’d expect people with a lower genetic component to their depression (the reactive group) would report more stressful life events. And we’d expect those with a higher genetic component (the endogenous group) would report fewer stressful life events.

      But after studying more than 14,000 people with depression we found the opposite.

      We found people at higher genetic risk for depression, anxiety, ADHD or schizophrenia say they’ve been exposed to more stressors.

      Assault with a weapon, sexual assault, accidents, legal and financial troubles, and childhood abuse and neglect, were all more common in people with a higher genetic risk of depression, anxiety, ADHD or schizophrenia.

      These associations were not strongly influenced by people’s age, sex or relationships with family. We didn’t look at other factors that may influence these associations, such as socioeconomic status. We also relied on people’s memory of past events, which may not be accurate.

      How do genes play a role?

      Genetic risk for mental disorders changes people’s sensitivity to the environment.

      Imagine two people, one with a high genetic risk for depression, one with a low risk. They both lose their jobs. The genetically vulnerable person experiences the job loss as a threat to their self-worth and social status. There is a sense of shame and despair. They can’t bring themselves to look for another job for fear of losing it too. For the other, the job loss feels less about them and more about the company. These two people internalise the event differently and remember it differently.

      Genetic risk for mental disorders also might make it more likely people find themselves in environments where bad things happen. For example, a higher genetic risk for depression might affect self-worth, making people more likely to get into dysfunctional relationships which then go badly.

      Middle aged man looking sad, leaning on sofa, staring into distance
      If two people lose their jobs, one with a high genetic risk of depression the other at low risk, both will experience and remember the event differently. Inside Creative House/Shutterstock

      What does our study mean for depression?

      First, it confirms genes and environments are not independent. Genes influence the environments we end up in, and what then happens. Genes also influence how we react to those events.

      Second, our study doesn’t support a distinction between reactive and endogenous depression. Genes and environments have a complex interplay. Most cases of depression are a mix of genetics, biology and stressors.

      Third, people with depression who appear to have a stronger genetic component to their depression report their lives are punctuated by more serious stressors.

      So clinically, people with higher genetic vulnerability might benefit from learning specific techniques to manage their stress. This might help some people reduce their chance of developing depression in the first place. It might also help some people with depression reduce their ongoing exposure to stressors.

      If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, call Lifeline on 13 11 14.

      Jacob Crouse, Research Fellow in Youth Mental Health, Brain and Mind Centre, University of Sydney and Ian Hickie, Co-Director, Health and Policy, Brain and Mind Centre, University of Sydney

      This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

      Share This Post

    Related Posts

      • In Praise of Slowness – by Carl Honoré

        10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

        This isn’t just about “taking the time to smell the roses” although yes, that too. Rather, it’s mostly about looking at what drives us to speed everything up in the first place, and correcting where appropriate.

        If your ancestors had time to eat fruit and lie in the sun, then why, with all of modern technology now available, are you harangued 16+ hours a day by the pressures of universally synchronized timepieces?

        Honoré places a lot of the blame squarely on the industrial revolution; whereas previously our work would be limited by craftsmen who take a year to complete something, or the pace of animals in a field, now humans had to keep up with the very machines that were supposed to serve us—and it’s only got worse from there.

        This book takes a tour of many areas affected by this artificial “need for speed”, and how it harms not just our work-life balance, but also our eating habits, the medical attention we get, and even our love lives.

        The prescription is deceptively simple, “slow down”. But Honoré dedicates the final three chapters of the book to the “how” of this, when of course there’s a lot the outside world will not accommodate—but where we can slow down, there’s good to be gained.

        Bottom line: if you’ve ever felt that you could get all of your life into order if you could just pause the outside world for a week or two, this is the book for you.

        Click here to check out In Praise of Slowness, and make time for what matters most!

        Don’t Forget…

        Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

        Learn to Age Gracefully

        Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

      • The “Love Drug”

        10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

        Get PEA-Brained!

        Today we’ll be looking at phenylethylamine, or PEA, to its friends.

        Not to be mistaken for the related amino acid phenylalanine! Both ultimately have effects on the dopaminergic system, but the process and benefits are mostly quite different.

        We thought we’d do this one in the week of Valentine’s Day, because of its popular association with love:

        ❝Phenylethylamine (PEA), an amphetamine-like substance that has been alluringly labeled the “chemical of love,” makes the best case for the love-chocolate connection since it has been shown that people in love may actually have higher levels of PEA in their brain, as surmised from the fact that their urine is richer in a metabolite of this compound. In other words, people thrashing around in the throes of love pee differently from others.❞

        Source: Office for Science and Society | The Chemical of Love

        What is it?

        It’s an amino acid. Because we are mammals, we can synthesize it inside our bodies, so it’s not considered an “essential amino acid”, i.e. one that we need to get from our diet. It is found in some foods, though, including:

        • Other animals, especially other mammals
        • Various beans, legumes, nuts, seeds. In particular almonds, soybeans, lentils, and chickpeas score highly
        • Fermented foods
        • Chocolate (popular lore holds this to be a good source of PEA; science finds it to be a fair option, but not in the same ballpark as the other items)

        Fun fact: the reason Marvel’s Venom has a penchant for eating humans and chocolate is (according to the comics) because phenylethylamine is an essential amino acid for it.

        What does it do for us?

        It’s a Central Nervous System (CNS) stimulant, and also helps us synthesize critical neurotransmitters such as dopamine, norepinephrine (adrenaline) and serotonin:

        β-Phenylethylamine Alters Monoamine Transporter Function via Trace Amine-Associated Receptor 1: Implication for Modulatory Roles of Trace Amines in Brain

        It works similarly, but not identically, to amphetamines:

        Amphetamine potentiates the effects of β-phenylethylamine through activation of an amine-gated chloride channel

        Is it safe?

        We normally do this after the benefits, but “it works similarly to amphetamines” may raise an eyebrow or two, so let’s do it here:

        • It is recommended to take no more than 500mg/day, with 100mg–500mg being typical doses
        • It is not recommended to take it at all if you have, or have a predisposition to, any kind of psychotic disorder (especially schizophrenia, or bipolar disorder wherein you sometimes experience mania)
          • This isn’t a risk for most people, but if you fall into the above category, the elevated dopamine levels could nudge you into a psychotic/manic episode that you probably don’t want.

        See for example: Does phenylethylamine cause schizophrenia?

        There are other contraindications too, so speak with your doctor/pharmacist before trying it.

        On the other hand, if you are considering ADHD medication, then phenylethylamine could be a safer thing to try first, to see if it helps, before going to the heavy guns of actual amphetamines (as are commonly prescribed for ADHD). Same goes for depression and antidepressants.

        What can I expect from PEA?

        More dopamine, norepinephrine, and serotonin. Mostly the former two. Which means, you can expect stimulation.

        For focus and attention, it’s so effective that it has been suggested (as we mentioned above) as a safer alternative to ADHD meds:

        β-phenylethylamine, a small molecule with a large impact

        …and may give similar benefits to people without ADHD, namely improved focus, attention, and mental stamina:

        Integrative Psychiatry | The Many Health Benefits of Phenylethylamine (PEA) – The Brain’s Natural Stimulant

        It also improves mood:

        ❝Phenylethylamine (PEA), an endogenous neuroamine, increases attention and activity in animals and has been shown to relieve depression in 60% of depressed patients. It has been proposed that PEA deficit may be the cause of a common form of depressive illness.

        Effective dosage did not change with time. There were no apparent side effects. PEA produces sustained relief of depression in a significant number of patients, including some unresponsive to the standard treatments. PEA improves mood as rapidly as amphetamine but does not produce tolerance.

        ~ Dr. Sabelli et al.

        Source: Sustained antidepressant effect of PEA replacement

        Where can I get it?

        We don’t sell it, but here is an example product on Amazon for your convenience 😎

        Enjoy!

        Don’t Forget…

        Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

        Learn to Age Gracefully

        Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

      • Thai-Style Kale Chips

        10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

        …that are actually crispy, tasty, and packed with nutrients! Lots of magnesium and calcium, and array of health-giving spices too.

        You will need

        • 7 oz raw curly kale, stalks removed
        • extra virgin olive oil, for drizzling
        • 3 cloves garlic, crushed
        • 2 tsp red chili flakes (or crushed dried red chilis)
        • 2 tsp light soy sauce
        • 2 tsp water
        • 1 tbsp crunchy peanut butter (pick one with no added sugar, salt, etc)
        • 1 tsp honey
        • 1 tsp Thai seven-spice powder
        • 1 tsp black pepper
        • 1 tsp MSG or 1 tsp low-sodium salt

        Method

        (we suggest you read everything at least once before doing anything)

        1) Pre-heat the oven to 180℃ / 350℉ / Gas mark 4.

        2) Put the kale in a bowl and drizzle a little olive oil over it. Work the oil in gently with your fingertips so that the kale is coated; the leaves will also soften while you do this; that’s expected, so don’t worry.

        3) Mix the rest of the ingredients to make a sauce; coat the kale leaves with the sauce.

        4) Place on a baking tray, as spread-out as there’s room for, and bake on a middle shelf for 15–20 minutes. If your oven has a fierce heat source at the top, it can be good to place an empty baking tray on a shelf above the kale chips, to baffle the heat and prevent them from cooking unevenly—especially if it’s not a fan oven.

        5) Remove and let cool, and then serve! They can also be stored in an airtight container if desired.

        Enjoy!

        Want to learn more?

        For those interested in some of the science of what we have going on today:

        Take care!

        Don’t Forget…

        Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

        Learn to Age Gracefully

        Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails: