Here is my Amazon review of The Blood Sugar Solution by Mark Hyman.
This is a difficult book to review as, in my opinion, it hovers between three and four stars.
If this is your first foray into the "eating bad carbs will kill you" school of dietary advice, then I do recommend it. There is a lot of truth in that school and this book is a reasonable presentation of that theory.
I have wondered for some time about the value of various artificial sweeteners. Am I setting myself up for failure? I want to thank Hyman for the best presentation I have yet seen about the problems associated with these products—even sugar alcohols promoted by many. He has convinced me to dramatically reduce these products in my diet.
Here is a quote from his book:
In another alarming study, rats offered the choice of cocaine or artificial sweeteners always picked the artificial sweetener, even if the rats were previously programmed to be cocaine addicts. The author of the study said that, “[t]he absolute preference for taste sweetness may lead to a re-ordering in the hierarchy of potentially addictive stimuli, with sweetened diets… taking precedence over cocaine and possibly other drugs of abuse.”
This is really thought provoking.
Why then so I only with reluctance give this book 4 stars? There are three reasons.
I do use some supplements. But most are a waste of money. If eating the diet he recommends is so good, why do we need to buy his expensive supplements? I suppose if one believes in the diet, yet for some reason does not follow it, then these supplements might be needed. I suppose that our food infrastructure is so messed up we need supplements. I suppose that his expensive products are better than everyone else's. I suppose. (I have used some of his products.)
I also felt that some of his statistics seemed a little suspect. He said that the average TV viewership was 9 hours a day. A quick google showed that a BLS government estimate is 2.8 a day. I have seen higher estimates of 4 hours. But when you see such an overestimate that fits the narrative the author is promoting you have to wonder what other "facts" he is massaging.
He begins one section by talking about the distortions in the food business caused by government subsidies and interference in the food marketplace. He is quite correct in this. It should be abolished. He then points out the marketing power of the food giants, as well he should. His solution is to increase government interference in the market. It made me wonder if he had actually read the earlier information he wrote in that same chapter.
So while I so modestly recommend this book, I suggest reading it with caution-but then again isn't that true of any book?