People’s blood sugar levels do fluctuate, up and down. My point is that people are not good at judging when their blood sugar is actually low or high. When they told me “OMIGOD, my blood sugar is so low!” it was in fact normal, and the reverse “OMIGOD, I just had a gallon of hot cocoa and it’s shooting through the roof!” and it would still be normal. If people attribute the effects of sugar on even themselves with such poor accuracy, what hope do they have attributing any impact on anyone else?
Is there any correlation between feelings of hunger or lightheadedness and low blood sugar for non-diabetics? (I don’t think I typically hear people comment on having high blood sugar, but I definitely have heard people - including myself - comment on supposed feelings of low blood sugar.)
I know enough about scientific studies at this point in my life that I’ve become extremely skeptical of them. I used to take a study as gospel truth, but I’ve seen too many contradict each other, and too many with flat-out hilariously flawed methods. I wouldn’t believe less than 10 peer-reviewed and meta-studied studies if they told me I post at the SDMB under the username Cisco.
Maybe sugar makes kids hyper, and maybe it doesn’t, but my point is that people around here give way too much weight to studies as cites. Especially lone studies that get media coverage. Those tend to produce results that would envy guessing.
I find it strange that a study would come to the conclusion that sugar has no affect on children given the common experience of sugar crashes I see in adults.
Have you read the other posts in this thread, especially post #61?
That’s one person’s anecdote about how good people are at judging their own blood sugar levels. My question of whether there is any real correlation between blood sugar and mood hasn’t been answered yet, and in any event, no one has posted any scientific data showing that blood sugar doesn’t drop in normal adults causing the so-called “crash” effect.
I think Cisco has a good point. Science is a slow process of consensus building from the gradual accumulation of data. A single study, or even a number of studies that haven’t been statistically analyzed, is nearly worthless. We have very strong reasons to be skeptical at this point of reports of sugar consumption affecting kids, but nothing that definitively rules it out. And nothing whatsoever in this thread on the effect sugar has on adults.
OK, let’s put our card son te table here shall we? What do you mean “haven’t been statistically analyzed”? Are you saying that there was no analysis done on the results of these studies?
And what precisely would rule it out, in your opinion? If everybody that looks for an dragon in my garage fails to find it, at what point are you willing to accept that there is no dragon in my garage?
Do you mean sugar, or blood sugar levels? Because AFAIK nobody has ever suggested that sugar itself has any effect psychological on adults.
No, of course not. I’m saying that unless you are trained in statistical meta-analysis, saying that you’ve read three studies on the internet saying X is hardly definitive. It’s suggestive but nothing more, especially if you aren’t qualified to evaluate the methodology of each of those studies.
A well done, peer reviewed meta-analysis showing that a sizable number of studies have demonstrated reliably that no statistical correlation between sugar consumption and behavior exists would convince me that sugar consumption doesn’t effect behavior. A number (one actually) of reliable reports of reputable trained observers would convince me that no dragon is in your garage. A post by someone who says they read a news report somewhere that somebody they can’t remember said something to the effect that dragons usually don’t like to live near houses wouldn’t convince me of anything.
I’ve heard adults say that sugar makes them jittery. What’s your point? Neither sugar consumption nor blood sugar levels have been shown in this thread to have an effect on adults or children, nor have they been conclusively shown not to.
Nothing I’ve said seems terribly controversial or difficult to understand. I’m not sure exactly what your disagreement is.
Sorry, I missed that psychobunny had in fact linked to the abstract of just such a study, as well as two other studies that, on cursory review of the abstracts, appear to have been done well. Count me as convinced, with a 96% certainty level +/-2.8% 
I’m a newly minted (or at least relatively recent) diabetic (type II) and I’m still trying to figure things out.
Anecdotally, I have a data point to add to your experience. I’m terrible at trying to guess at what my blood sugar will be, even during those days when I’ve been testing my levels all day long. I’ll eat and then feel tired an hour later and figure my sugar level must be low. When I test, it’s still 120 or 130. And sometimes when I’m feeling fine it’s lower, as low as 105. I really can’t reliably predict what my sugar levels will be, even with the help of frequent testing.
And I agree with your point about “the average American”. They are idiots, about most things that require even small critical thinking skills. But I’d expand it to “most people”. I think it’s a world-wide phenomenon. 