Cited by 884Diet, Metabolism, and DiseaseObesity, Physical Activity, DietNutritional Studies and Diet

Resolved: there is sufficient scientific evidence that decreasing sugar-sweetened beverage consumption will reduce the prevalence of obesity and obesity-related diseases

Open access
Hu, F. B.·2013·Obesity Reviews

Abstract

Summary: Sugar‐sweetened beverages (SSB s) are the single largest source of added sugar and the top source of energy intake in the U.S. diet. In this review, we evaluate whether there is sufficient scientific evidence that decreasing SSB consumption will reduce the prevalence of obesity and its related diseases. Because prospective cohort studies address dietary determinants of long‐term weight gain and chronic diseases, whereas randomized clinical trials (RCT s) typically evaluate short‐term effects of specific interventions on weight change, both types of evidence are critical in evaluating causality. Findings from well‐powered prospective cohorts have consistently shown a significant association, established temporality and demonstrated a direct dose–response relationship between SSB consumption and long‐term weight gain and risk of type 2 diabetes (T 2 D). A recently published meta‐analysis of RCT s commissioned by the W orld H ealth O rganization found that decreased intake of added sugars significantly reduced body weight (0.80 kg, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.39–1.21; P < 0.001), whereas increased sugar intake led to a comparable weight increase (0.75 kg, 0.30–1.19; P = 0.001). A parallel meta‐analysis of cohort studies also found that higher intake of SSB s among children was associated with 55% (95% CI 32–82%) higher risk of being overweight or obese compared with those with lower intake. Another meta‐analysis of eight prospective cohort studies found that one to two servings per day of SSB intake was associated with a 26% (95% CI 12–41%) greater risk of developing T 2 D compared with occasional intake (less than one serving per month). Recently, two large RCT s with a high degree of compliance provided convincing data that reducing consumption of SSB s significantly decreases weight gain and adiposity in children and adolescents. Taken together, the evidence that decreasing SSB s will decrease the risk of obesity and related diseases such as T 2 D is compelling. Several additional issues warrant further discussion. First, prevention of long‐term weight gain through dietary changes such as limiting consumption of SSB s is more important than short‐term weight loss in reducing the prevalence of obesity in the population. This is due to the fact that once an individual becomes obese, it is difficult to lose weight and keep it off. Second, we should consider the totality of evidence rather than selective pieces of evidence (e.g. from short‐term RCT s only). Finally, while recognizing that the evidence of harm on health against SSB s is strong, we should avoid the trap of waiting for absolute proof before allowing public health action to be taken.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/obr.12040

Cites

83 of 83 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [62]Institute of Medicine of the National Academies Local Government Actions to Prevent Childhood Obesity 2009 Washington DC 5 25032346
  2. [75]D’andrade R Dart J The interpretation of r versus r2 or why percent of variance accounted for is a poor measure of size of effect Journal of Quantitative Anthropology 1990 2 47 59

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hu, F. B.
Affiliations
Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
Corresponding author
Hu, F. B.
Venue
Obesity Reviews
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-06-13
Volume
14
Issue
8
Pages
606-619
ISSN
  • 1467-7881 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-789X
OpenAlex
W2161969524
Cited by
884
References
83
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 45 · 2024: 35 · 2023: 38 · 2022: 67 · 2021: 89 · 2020: 88 · 2019: 95 · 2018: 88 · 2017: 88 · 2016: 75 · 2015: 88 · 2014: 57 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 1
FWCI
11.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Obesity Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Agriculture
  • American Heart Association
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (HL60712, R01HL060712)
  • National Cancer Institute (U54CA155626)
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (R01DK058845, P30DK046200, P30 DK-46200, DK58845)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diet, Metabolism, and Disease
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Nutritional Studies and Diet
Keywords
sugar-sweetened beverages, obesity, type 2 diabetes, added sugars, weight gain, children and adolescents, obesity prevention, dose-response relationship, causal inference, dietary intervention, body weight, adiposity
MeSH terms
Beverages, Energy Intake, Chronic Disease, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Humans, Obesity, Weight Gain, Prevalence, Evidence-Based Medicine, Dietary Sucrose

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review