Sugar Problems
Replies
-
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »I could do this all night! But I'm pretty sure I'm about to get scolded for spamming the thread and anyway, the tornado watch is coming to a close. That was a bad storm but no tornados here! I'm tired, and I'm tired of rubbing your noses in your own poop. I'm sure, just like with my dog, it's not going to do any good, and you'll be back on the forums, cracking down on people with your absolute and unshakable belief that anyone with a bad reaction to sugar is a fear-mongering liar troll hysteric.
(On a more serious note, I do want to thank you for giving me something to think about instead of the storm. It really helped me and I had fun instead of being curled up in terror on the bathroom floor.)
No, what you would get scolded for is cherry picking data and then jumping to unsupportable, overgeneralized, and ridiculous conclusions. May I suggest a basic course in science before you go back on such silly tirades?
Or, just Google a phrase, "correlation vs causation" and read all of the links that come up.
0 -
As a diabetic who must control sugar I would suggest keeping your overall carb limit to veggies and dairy (or soy, or whatever you consume for calcium) and some fruit. Personally I can't eat fruit everyday, unless its berries. If you don't have diabetes, though, I would recommend just focusing on the overall calorie intake.0
-
I have 1 name for you as far as Lustig goes............Alan Aragon.
Ohh... Alan does his own research, do you?
He also loves to learn from others, and form his own opinions.
*he also listens quite well.0 -
blog.factor4health.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Why-Diets-Fail-Because-Youre-Nicole-M.-Avena-Ph.D_.pdf
Another example of someone right or wrong depending on one's view.-1 -
This content has been removed.
-
While fruit and refined sugar have the same two components (glucose and fructose = sucrose) whole fruit has a lot of fiber, which actually slows down your body's digestion of glucose, so you don't get the crazy insulin spike (and subsequent crash) that candy causes. That also means your body has more time to use up glucose as fuel before storing it as fat.0
-
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »We are all wearing the poop! We are all rubbing each other's noses in it. My point is that I can post all the links and you can post all the links and we are no closer to understanding each other because I am intractable in my position that sugar in certain forms is really bad for me, and you are intractable in your position that what is true for you must be true for everyone.
So what's the point of you even commenting on posts when people ask for help with sugar? They need help with their struggle with sugar, not snark about what they are going through isn't science.
I will agree wholeheartedly that a great deal of the purported science tossed around on these threads is total bunk. But something is going on with many foods available to us today. There's overeating, which I totally agree with you can be resolved with a bit of will power. But binging isn't a lack of willpower; it's a powerful response to stimulus, and all antecdotal evidence points to sugar as the culprit. If people are having trouble binging on steak and green beans, I haven't seen those posts.
People may not binge on steak but they will binge on cheese burgers and fries. What people tend to binge on is food that is high fat, salt and carbs and those are the ones that all fad diets zone in on in their own way. The high carb/low fat diets tend to say stop eating fat and thus elimnate chips, cookies, cakes, fries, etc while the low carb/high fat tend to say stop eating carbs and eliminate chips, cookies, cakes, fries etc. Hmm, seems that they both tend to arrive at the biggest binge foods in different ways.
Also, notice that no one ever seems to binge on pure sugar or even plain bread or plain pasta -- wonder why that would be if sugar is the only problem rather than say high calorie foods that contain fat, salt and sugar in one big dense caloric ball.
I binge on foods that are soft, don't require a lot of chewing, that I can swallow easily. It mainly is pasta. I can't imagine binging on steak or raw foods. But I only have done it a few times. It isn't a sweet/sugar thing.0 -
dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2838316/Genes-really-hold-key-fitting-jeans-Diets-personalised-genetic-makeup-far-effective-study-finds.html
What if we do not have a sugar problem but a gene problem? I know sugar was a factor in getting fat in my case.-1 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2838316/Genes-really-hold-key-fitting-jeans-Diets-personalised-genetic-makeup-far-effective-study-finds.html
What if we do not have a sugar problem but a gene problem? I know sugar was a factor in getting fat in my case.
Someone is going to make a fortune if people run to those tests like other diet aids.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
GaleHawkins wrote: »dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2838316/Genes-really-hold-key-fitting-jeans-Diets-personalised-genetic-makeup-far-effective-study-finds.html
What if we do not have a sugar problem but a gene problem? I know sugar was a factor in getting fat in my case.
Someone is going to make a fortune if people run to those tests like other diet aids.
Yep, these tests already exist. c2dna.com/ One interesting note is that they really don't stop people from eating what they shouldn't. Oh well.
0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2838316/Genes-really-hold-key-fitting-jeans-Diets-personalised-genetic-makeup-far-effective-study-finds.html
What if we do not have a sugar problem but a gene problem? I know sugar was a factor in getting fat in my case.
I agree that obesity is partly heritable (twin and family studies have shown this) but environment (lifestyle, choices etc) plays a big role too, except in very rare situations such as Prader wili.
I think that there is some interesting nutrigenetic research emerging, and I wonder if down the track, we will be able to eat for our genotype. I know some companies already promise it, but I don't think it's real enough...yet.
0 -
herrspoons wrote: »While fruit and refined sugar have the same two components (glucose and fructose = sucrose) whole fruit has a lot of fiber, which actually slows down your body's digestion of glucose, so you don't get the crazy insulin spike (and subsequent crash) that candy causes. That also means your body has more time to use up glucose as fuel before storing it as fat.
True. But unless you eat any entire box of crispy cremes or four Mars Bars it will make no difference at all.
So not an issue really.
Except that there are a lot of people out there that will eat 4 four mars bars or a whole box of donuts!
On a diet with medium to high sugar content it is likely your body is converting a fair bit of that into stored body fat - granted on a diet in a calorie deficit it will not affect weight gain, but it's still getting stored.
Plus foods high in sugar will affect other health markers.
0 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »herrspoons wrote: »While fruit and refined sugar have the same two components (glucose and fructose = sucrose) whole fruit has a lot of fiber, which actually slows down your body's digestion of glucose, so you don't get the crazy insulin spike (and subsequent crash) that candy causes. That also means your body has more time to use up glucose as fuel before storing it as fat.
True. But unless you eat any entire box of crispy cremes or four Mars Bars it will make no difference at all.
So not an issue really.
Except that there are a lot of people out there that will eat 4 four mars bars or a whole box of donuts!
On a diet with medium to high sugar content it is likely your body is converting a fair bit of that into stored body fat - granted on a diet in a calorie deficit it will not affect weight gain, but it's still getting stored.
Plus foods high in sugar will affect other health markers.
What do you mean by a lot of people will eat that amount of chocolate bars or a whole dozen donuts? Are we talking at one sitting or through out the day and define a lot. Perhaps you could also offer proof of this. I seriously doubt that there are really that many eating a 1k calories of Mars bars or several thousand calories of donuts in a single sitting.0 -
You're joking right??
Jeez, you want proof - pitch yourself up for the day in a donut shop and watch the people as they flock in.
I very much doubt anyone currently active on MFP are eating to those quantities but on both sides of the Atlantic there are plenty of people (who should be on MFP) eating those portions in one sitting.
If you doubt this then I can only say you must walk round each days with blinkers on. I would love to live such a sheltered life, but I have a natural curiosity and tend to observe things!0 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »Jeez, you want proof - pitch yourself up for the day in a donut shop and watch the people as they flock in.
I very much doubt anyone currently active on MFP are eating to those quantities but on both sides of the Atlantic there are plenty of people (who should be on MFP) eating those portions in one sitting.
If you doubt this then I can only say you must walk round each days with blinkers on. I would love to live such a sheltered life, but I have a natural curiosity and tend to observe things!
I very much doubt you nor does your petty attitude advance your argument. You have some serious issues to deal with.0 -
We all have serious issues to deal with (and thank you for making that statement - it was very well.....weird) !! that's why we're here! I'm not looking to advance my argument (well observation) with you! I know closed ears when I see them. enjoy your day dude! -1
-
tennisdude2004 wrote: »We all have serious issues to deal with (and thank you for making that statement - it was very well.....weird) !! that's why we're here! I'm not looking to advance my argument (well observation) with you! I know closed ears when I see them. enjoy your day dude!
You too since I know a sheltered person when I see one, but hey, I've only been overseas in war zones and you've been to coffee shops so I guess I'm the sheltered one. Enjoy your freedom brought to you by vets like me.
ETA and if you want to know the reason for my answer then you should avoid making blanket statements about a persons life as if you are somehow superior since you have made a few different observations than they have. It will get you further and keep you from coming across as obtuse.-1 -
herrspoons wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »Except that there are a lot of people out there that will eat 4 four mars bars or a whole box of donuts!
Define 'a lot'?On a diet with medium to high sugar content it is likely your body is converting a fair bit of that into stored body fat - granted on a diet in a calorie deficit it will not affect weight gain, but it's still getting stored.
If you're on a calorie deficit, given the processes of glycolysis and fructolysis, it absolutely isn't getting stored. It may be temporarily shunted into muscle tissue, but if you use it up quickly enough, that's as far as it goes.Plus foods high in sugar will affect other health markers.
In what way? Specifically.
A lot - more than 2, my mates Dave and Gary for a start!
Yes glucose will be getting converted into body fat - your body on a calorie deficit diet will also be using ketones as fuel and thus will be drawing on body fat, so your overall body fat percentage will still be reducing the the body will not leave excessive glucose in the bloodstream for too long and your body has limited storage space in the muscles and liver to store glycogen!
Foods high in sugar consumed on a regular basis can cause inflammation and oxidation- which in turns causes the body to produce more ldl particles (just one example).
I'm not on the anti sugar wagon dude. I like sugar, some of my best friends eat it. Sugar in moderation has a part to play in a healthy diet.
I'm just not on the sugar is great wagon either!
Also - please define 'quick enough' -- but if you use it up quickly enough, that's as far as it goes.0 -
I would love to see the evidence you have for DNL occurring in a caloric deficit. Or did you just make that up as usual.0
-
Yep, I make everything up - like you guys. This is the internet after all!
But just to be clear - you are saying that (and this applys to everyone in every situation, whether exercising, or not) excessive glucose in the blood stream, will stay in the blood stream (if glycogen stores in the muscles and liver are full) for as long as it takes for the body to use it as fuel????
Just want to get that one clear in my head!0 -
DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »We are all wearing the poop! We are all rubbing each other's noses in it. My point is that I can post all the links and you can post all the links and we are no closer to understanding each other because I am intractable in my position that sugar in certain forms is really bad for me, and you are intractable in your position that what is true for you must be true for everyone.
So what's the point of you even commenting on posts when people ask for help with sugar? They need help with their struggle with sugar, not snark about what they are going through isn't science.
I will agree wholeheartedly that a great deal of the purported science tossed around on these threads is total bunk. But something is going on with many foods available to us today. There's overeating, which I totally agree with you can be resolved with a bit of will power. But binging isn't a lack of willpower; it's a powerful response to stimulus, and all antecdotal evidence points to sugar as the culprit. If people are having trouble binging on steak and green beans, I haven't seen those posts.
I have. Granted, not as many, but in my time here I've seen quite a few posts about people binging on vegetables and other things they've deemed to be "safe" foods, and what are they supposed to do now?
I haven't been in this thread but my position, and the position I see most commonly, is that if a certain food causes binges for you then cut it out at least for awhile. But the food itself is not poison or toxic in reasonable amounts. And in unreasonable amounts everything is poison or toxic.0 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »Yep, I make everything up - like you guys. This is the internet after all!
But just to be clear - you are saying that (and this applys to everyone in every situation, whether exercising, or not) excessive glucose in the blood stream, will stay in the blood stream (if glycogen stores in the muscles and liver are full) for as long as it takes for the body to use it as fuel????
Just want to get that one clear in my head!
How, pray tell, does one have full glycogen stores in a caloric deficit?
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
herrspoons wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »herrspoons wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »Except that there are a lot of people out there that will eat 4 four mars bars or a whole box of donuts!
Define 'a lot'?On a diet with medium to high sugar content it is likely your body is converting a fair bit of that into stored body fat - granted on a diet in a calorie deficit it will not affect weight gain, but it's still getting stored.
If you're on a calorie deficit, given the processes of glycolysis and fructolysis, it absolutely isn't getting stored. It may be temporarily shunted into muscle tissue, but if you use it up quickly enough, that's as far as it goes.Plus foods high in sugar will affect other health markers.
In what way? Specifically.
A lot - more than 2, my mates Dave and Gary for a start!
Yes glucose will be getting converted into body fat - your body on a calorie deficit diet will also be using ketones as fuel and thus will be drawing on body fat, so your overall body fat percentage will still be reducing the the body will not leave excessive glucose in the bloodstream for too long and your body has limited storage space in the muscles and liver to store glycogen!
Foods high in sugar consumed on a regular basis can cause inflammation and oxidation- which in turns causes the body to produce more ldl particles (just one example).
I'm not on the anti sugar wagon dude. I like sugar, some of my best friends eat it. Sugar in moderation has a part to play in a healthy diet.
I'm just not on the sugar is great wagon either!
Also - please define 'quick enough' -- but if you use it up quickly enough, that's as far as it goes.
Anecdotes aren't evidence. I'm not disputing people pig out on donuts and stuff, but people also pig out on nuts and cheese and other foods. Not sure why sugar gets a bad rep just because it's more efficiently processed and stored.
Your point about how energy is stored and used isn't correct, because the body will always use the easiest and most readily available source, which will be free glucose first then other sources metabolised as they are needed. It will never use fat or muscle tissue at the expense of glucose or easily broken down glycol. Ketosis only happens when there is no readily available glucose or glycol, at which point gluconeogenesis kicks in.
Finally, the amount of sugar you can take before it becomes a short or longer term problem will vary by size, weight, blood volume, etc, but a Mars Bar or two isn't going to kick it over.FunkyTobias wrote: »tennisdude2004 wrote: »Yep, I make everything up - like you guys. This is the internet after all!
But just to be clear - you are saying that (and this applys to everyone in every situation, whether exercising, or not) excessive glucose in the blood stream, will stay in the blood stream (if glycogen stores in the muscles and liver are full) for as long as it takes for the body to use it as fuel????
Just want to get that one clear in my head!
How, pray tell, does one have full glycogen stores in a caloric deficit?
So if you are an inactive person your body will always have depleted glycogen stores? and it would not be possible to eat enough sugar (in a deficit) to fill them up, plus some!
Okay if that's the case, fair enough it is impossible for sugar to be converted into body fat whilst in a calorie deficit!
0 -
The average capacity for glycogen storage is 15g/kg, over twice the maintenance calories of the average human.0
-
FunkyTobias wrote: »The average capacity for glycogen storage is 15g/kg, over twice the maintenance calories of the average human.
So in the muscles you can store about 350 - 400g depending on size. If you are inactive and do not do any exercise how is that glycogen that's stored being used each day - Is it from fueling organs or red blood cells through the liver?
0 -
To induce substantial rates of carbohydrate conversion into fat, the body’s total glycogen
stores must be considerably raised, from their usual 4-6 g/kg
body wt to > 8-10 g/kg body wt. This requires deliberate
and sustained ovenconsumption of large amounts of carbohydrates for 2-3 d (13)
Two important conclusions can be deduced from these observations: 1) under usual conditions of unrestricted access to food, glycogen stores are spontaneously maintained
far below their maximal capacity, and 2) the common belief that carbohydrates are readily turned into fat can be dismissed as well as the frequently made argument that the high
metabolic cost of lipogenesis is a cause for greater energy dissipation on high-carbohydrate diets.
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/61/4/952S.full.pdf+html
(Bolded for emphasis)0 -
ILiftHeavyAcrylics wrote: »my position, and the position I see most commonly, is that if a certain food causes binges for you then cut it out at least for awhile. But the food itself is not poison or toxic in reasonable amounts. And in unreasonable amounts everything is poison or toxic.
Yes, I think this is right and it's the advice I usually see. Sometimes eliminating foods contributes to binging issues, however, so a lot of people see the ultimate goal as working on the underlying problems that cause specific foods to be triggers.
I don't binge on food, but I certainly have had issues with overeating, and for me it's extremely easy to overeat steak and other non-carby foods (cheese, for example). It's also easy for me to overeat certain kinds of tasty (to my taste) sweet baked goods, like really
good homemade cookies. I don't find that carbs (or sugar) is the main culprit in the variety of foods I get tempted to overeat (or might indulge in for some stress eating), and therefore I notice when others seem to want to apply their own personal experiences to everyone (sugar or carbs make people lose control or whatever).
0 -
FunkyTobias wrote: »The average capacity for glycogen storage is 15g/kg, over twice the maintenance calories of the average human.
Hmm. Only yesterday I read that the liver doesn't contain enough glycogen to fuel the brain for a day.
Muscle glycogen can only serve the muscle it's in of course, which may explain the discrepancy.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions