) In the article, Taubes correlates the increase in sugar in the American diet with an increase in weight gain. In 1986, according to United States Department of Agriculture analysts, every American consumed on average 75 pounds of sugar. In the early 2000s, consumption had increased to more than 90 pounds per person per year (Taubes 3). However, Taubes neglects to note that consumption of total calories have also been increasing -- of all kinds of food, of fat as well as sugar. Physical activity has also been decreasing. Furthermore, while Taubes dismisses the additional negative effects of the addition of high-fructose corn syrup to foods and the burgeoning obesity epidemic, he also admits that the addition of HFCS to foods during the 1970s is correlated with an increase in the body mass index of Americans. In short, when statistics suit his argument -- increased sugar consumption in general as associated with an increase in Americans' weight -- he cites this as evidence. However, while he denies that new forms of sugar have a worse effect upon insulin resistance and other factors causing obesity, he...

This selective application of causality is a form of the non-causa pro-causa argument. Increased sugar consumption may have an impact upon the rise of obesity and diabetes, but it is not necessarily the only cause.
Most of the comparative evidence cited by Taubes in his article notes how populations with low sugar consumption have comparatively lower lifestyle disease rates than the United States. However, these populations also tend to have lower caloric consumption and higher rates of physical activity across the lifespan than contemporary Americans (Taubes 5). While sugar may indeed be an 'empty' source of calories, and reducing sugar is an important part of weight control, to focus upon sugar alone and to ignore excess fat, calories, and a lack of exercise seems like a hasty generalization, based upon the evidence Taubes presents.

Works Cited

Taubes, Gary. "Is sugar toxic?" The New York Times. April 17, 2011. [May 3, 2011].

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/17/magazine/mag-17Sugar-t.html?pagewanted=1