A Look On The Lighter Side: Exploring That Big Rock Candy Mountain High

Judy Epstein

I read something shocking the other day. According to a story in the New York Times, there is no such thing as kids getting a “sugar high.”

“The theory of the ‘sugar high’ has been debunked,” said the article. It’s been ”thoroughly refuted,” thanks to “an extraordinarily rigorous study.”

Well, pardon me for being skeptical, but I’ve got more than 20 years of data of my own, collected during some “extraordinarily rigorous” field research…with different results.

First of all, I have issues with how the researchers defined the problem. Their studies looked at “the putative connection” between sugar and hyperactivity. That word “putative” is as bad as “allegedly” for making something sound shady, but all it really boils down to is that they have equated a sugar high with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, or ADHD. And in their world, ADHD is something pathological, that needs controlling with “stimulant drugs such as Ritalin and amphetamine.”

So there’s one problem right there: the devil is in their premise. Because you could have kids with a sugar high, and know that you’re in for a challenging hour or two, without thinking you’ve got something that’s literally pathological.

But I’m more curious about what this “extraordinarily rigorous” study of theirs involved, and how they “settled the question in 1994.”

Because right around that time, I was running an experiment of my own. Literally, running. Although you couldn’t exactly call it controlled; it was more of the wildly uncontrolled variety.

My husband and I had taken our two little boys, four and one years old, to a tablecloth-and-napkins place for dinner. Most of that night’s menu has faded from memory, but I will never forget that we each had an amazing chocolate mousse cake for dessert.

And the reason I will never forget is that we couldn’t get that four-year-old back into the car for a solid half hour! He kept running and running around in circles, on a grassy area beside the restaurant, shouting that he couldn’t even slow down because “Mommy, Daddy, I’ve been sugar-tized!”

He was delighted but manic. His father and I were less delighted. We just had to wait, herding him periodically away from the parking lot, until his motor finally ran down and we could put him in his car seat to go home.

Ever since that night, that phrase — “I’ve been sugar-tized!” — has become shorthand in our family for any situation where someone — child or adult — is just too jazzed up to concentrate.

So I already know what I think about those scientists and their studies.

But still, I followed all the available links, and it seems that the “rigorous” study put children and their families on one of three otherwise healthy diets: one with sucrose sugar as the sweetener; one with aspartame; and one with saccharin. Each diet lasted three weeks, and the families apparently rotated through all three options. No one knew who was getting which, when.

So here’s my next question: Why just test different kinds of sweeteners? What if children’s bodies react in a similar way to every kind of sweetener, be it fake or natural? Where is the “control” diet with no sweetener at all? And without that, what, exactly can this procedure be considered to have proven?

According to the article, “Urine was tested to verify compliance with the diets.” Then, “nine different measures of cognitive and behavioral performance were assessed,” with measurements taken at “five-second intervals.”

Five-second intervals? For nine weeks? Even if I read that wrong and it was only for three weeks, total, how did the experimenters stay sane enough, themselves, to tell sane children from crazy?

And what can you test in five-second intervals, anyway, besides whether or not somebody jumps if you pop a balloon behind them? (In which case, I hope they were wearing hazmat suits when collecting those urine samples!)

I propose a little counter-experiment of my own. I would find a classroom of little ones; supply them with fruit juice, candy, and a chocolate-mousse cake; call it a birthday party; then sit back and observe.

I predict it won’t be an hour before those scientists come crawling to the door, begging to be let out.

“You win!” they’ll cry. “You’re absolutely right! There is, indeed, such a thing as a sugar high, and we’ll sign any papers you want. Just for the love of all that is holy, let us out!”

We’ll let them out, eventually. The children, I mean.

We won’t even take any urine samples.

Share this Article