[watwut]

Baby formulas do have suggested serving amounts, sugar or not.

[cryptonector]

GP's point is that you're not going to significantly reduce the suggested serving size of an essential food on account of having made it sweeter because the other nutrients are still needed.

[watwut]

Calories are pretty important nutritient too, one of the most important ones actually. And what sugar does is that you can get them in cheaper.

[triceratops]

What do you do if you've fed the suggested serving amount, the baby is still hungry, and there's no breast milk?

[Dalewyn]

A person's caloric and nutrient needs will vary from moment to moment, a suggested daily serving is merely an average value for average people used as an objective frame of reference.

And if we're going to argue whether a food has more or too much sugar than other foods, we need to use an objective frame of reference as a point of comparison.

Anyway, the Nestle hate in this overall thread is just as worthless as the Boeing bashing and Musk Derangement Syndrome seen in other threads.

[triceratops]

"An objective frame of reference" sounds like it should be standardized. A suggested serving amount is pretty arbitrary and up to the manufacturer to determine, and is the opposite of "objective".

In https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40087543 I suggested using per 100g or per 100 calories as a reference. Extremely objective and clear.