How can people be so disconnected that they believe some paper on the internet over their own bodies? Try drinking a big glass of fruit juice and observing that:
- there's a near-immediate "up" effect
- that's stronger the less sugar/carbs you've ingested recently
- consuming a lot of refined sugar traps you in a up/crash cycle that looks a lot like (a milder version of) drug dependence
There's also the secondary layer - people are social creatures, and adjust our behavior to match what is allowed or expected.
The scientific system is designed for inanimate objects that function the same way every time. Why is it so hard to believe that the test is flawed, not the experience?
It's multiple tests performed multiple ways by different people thinking about how to adapt to the issues that trying to measure people poses. That's far more convincing to me than adhoc non rigorous common knowledge. We're so beset by failures in our ability to draw good conclusions from non rigorous anecdata, confirmation bias, selection bias, hidden factors, faulty recall, etc, that I'm really hard pressed to believe anecdotal data when it contradicts multiple studies.
As someone who runs distance, yes yes yes.
Here is a better question:
Does higher blood sugar make someone feel higher energy? If we can solve that problem, we can likely answer the question about children using logic rather than subjectives.
Arguing against that principle is arguing for pseudo-science: “Acupuncture works, I tried it!,” “Crystal-healing works, I tried it! Don’t trust a paper over your own body!”
I presume it's because I never had that cultural expectation. I never heard of any of this "sugar rush" nonsense before I had access to the Internet, which wasn't until my late teens.