Sugarrrrrrr
Replies
-
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
so sugar is bad = angelic?
I would call it benign within the context of the OP's questions.
this is a snippet from her OP ..
"Now, I understand sugar is BAD however…"
she's aid sugar is bad and capitalized it…so how is that benign????
or do you just nit pick to nit pick?
It seems to me that others are nit picking for the sake of nit picking. The post was about which option of yogurt we thought was better to facilitate weight loss.
Yet the usual "don't deomonize sugar" crowd chooses to nit pick that one remark, which really had little to do with her question, just so they could preach their usual sermon.
then why not ask what yogurt is better?
why start with I know sugar is bad...< which is not the case unless OP has a medical condition ...
How would I know why the OP words her posts the way she does? Why respond to a post if you aren't going to actually respond to the questions asked? Why hijack a thread? Surely there are other legimate 'sugar is evil' threads out there on which to preach.
no one hijacked the thread..
they corrected a false statement that "she knows that sugar is bad..." which it is not, barring a medical condition.
why does it bother you so much?
People correcting that statement does not bother me. People posting smart remarks about the OP demonizing sugar does. I don't know why it bothers me, but it does. Probably the same reason someone saying 'sugar is bad' bothers you. It's not true.
Everyone gets bothered by everything, so we debate. That's never going to change. We have the option to ignore the "sugar is bad" posts and you have the option to ignore our posts, but we don't, so here we are.
Yep. That's pretty much the gist.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
No, she just seemed defensive or guilty about the fact that she eats yogurt.
Which, again, suggests that this anti sugar stuff is way out of hand.
Asking for opinions on what others think is best for weight loss = defensive and guilty?? Wow!
No, obviously not that part.
The disclaimer "I know sugar is BAD, but..."
And obviously you knew what I was referring to but chose not to address it for some reason.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
so sugar is bad = angelic?
I would call it benign within the context of the OP's questions.
this is a snippet from her OP ..
"Now, I understand sugar is BAD however…"
she's aid sugar is bad and capitalized it…so how is that benign????
or do you just nit pick to nit pick?
It seems to me that others are nit picking for the sake of nit picking. The post was about which option of yogurt we thought was better to facilitate weight loss.
Yet the usual "don't deomonize sugar" crowd chooses to nit pick that one remark, which really had little to do with her question, just so they could preach their usual sermon.
then why not ask what yogurt is better?
why start with I know sugar is bad...< which is not the case unless OP has a medical condition ...
How would I know why the OP words her posts the way she does? Why respond to a post if you aren't going to actually respond to the questions asked? Why hijack a thread? Surely there are other legimate 'sugar is evil' threads out there on which to preach.
no one hijacked the thread..
they corrected a false statement that "she knows that sugar is bad..." which it is not, barring a medical condition.
why does it bother you so much?
People correcting that statement does not bother me. People posting smart remarks about the OP demonizing sugar does. I don't know why it bothers me, but it does. Probably the same reason someone saying 'sugar is bad' bothers you. It's not true.
doesn't bother me..
I just find it assuming when someone makes a broad statement about sugar that is not correct...0 -
Not had a chance to read all of the posts - what have we decided? Is sugar bad?0
-
The body burns sugar and fat for energy. Fat is a better source because it lasts longer.
Then why do most elite distance athletes use sugar (or the equivalent)?
Also, don't eat low fat because other stuff has lots of sugar (one cup of low fat yogurt has LESS sugar than one cup of full fat, marginally, but you are simply not going to eat as large a portion of the full fat, probably, because it has tons more calories) isn't the best argument IMO. Lots of people don't eat lots of excess or "hidden" sugar, so there's no reason to assume OP does. This is what I mean about the knee jerk anti sugar stuff. She asked about yogurt, and there's nothing wrong with either kind of yogurt, it's a matter of what she finds tastiest, most worth the calories, most filling, etc.0 -
tedboosalis7 wrote: »herrspoons wrote: »Fuchsiagenii wrote: »YES, sugar is BAD for us.
And for those of you that do not know - ALL CARBOHYDRATES are converted into GLUCOSE by the body.
Regarding the composition of fruit - I am not a chemist and I too have read the web link that with regard to herrspoons comments "There are three dietery monosaccharides - glucose, fructose and galactose. Lactose, like maltose and sucrose, is a disaccharide."
What I was trying to put across is that eating a whole fruit, although it contains "sugar" has healthy benefits because of the vitamins, antioxidants and fibre that it contains. And drinking fruit juice is not the same as having a whole fruit.
With regard to the sugar content in the yogurts - I was advised by my dietician to go for the ones that contain 3% of sugar or less. Now 3% of any amount is 3% for those of you that do not know your maths. And of course, if you are counting your calorie intake the more you eat the more calories you will have eaten, but the percentage of sugar will still
be 3% of the total that you ate (the carbohydrate of which are sugars will be different).
There was an advert on UK TV last night, with regard to people cutting down on their intake of sugar! A programme a couple of nights ago on UK TV about the Tudors, showed how their health deteriorated because of eating - SUGAR! The sugar caused dreadful tooth decay and because of that, bacteria entered into the blood stream. Their dentistry was not as advanced as ours and they did not have pain killing relief nor any antibiotics. Any rotten teeth were pulled out with no sedation. Most of them had died because of blood poisoning due to getting the rotten teeth (and infections) which was an entry for bacteria from eating too much SUGAR!
Our modern diet consists of too much sugar and sugar in all sorts of products (hidden sugars).
There was also a programme not long ago on UK TV that talked about that sugar is far worse than fat.
Many years ago we were told that butter was no good for us, now we are told that it is better to eat butter than some of the margarines. We were told that fat was bad for us and now we are told there are good fats and bad fats. The good fats are those in fish, nuts, avocado pears and coconuts.
Eating everything in moderation is the key, but with people who have a glucose intolerance or have diabetes, it is even more important to control sugar intake whether this is from simple or complex carbs.
Eating a snickers bar everyday is fine as long as you are eating other healthy foods and are not glucose intolerant or a diabetic.
Please do not post as an authority when it is clear that you are not.
Look in the mirror. You and some of the other Sugar Bots on here are living paid mouthpieces for the industry. She hit it right on the nose.
LOL! She's arguing that one should not eat plain low-fat or no fat yogurt because SUGAR. How does pointing out that that's a ridiculous position to take make one a "Sugar Bot"?0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »The body burns sugar and fat for energy. Fat is a better source because it lasts longer.
Then why do most elite distance athletes use sugar (or the equivalent)?
Also, don't eat low fat because other stuff has lots of sugar (one cup of low fat yogurt has LESS sugar than one cup of full fat, marginally, but you are simply not going to eat as large a portion of the full fat, probably, because it has tons more calories) isn't the best argument IMO. Lots of people don't eat lots of excess or "hidden" sugar, so there's no reason to assume OP does. This is what I mean about the knee jerk anti sugar stuff. She asked about yogurt, and there's nothing wrong with either kind of yogurt, it's a matter of what she finds tastiest, most worth the calories, most filling, etc.
Because it fuels their training and competitions - but you could argue that in itself is bad for their bodies!
0 -
tennisdude2004 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »The body burns sugar and fat for energy. Fat is a better source because it lasts longer.
Then why do most elite distance athletes use sugar (or the equivalent)?
Also, don't eat low fat because other stuff has lots of sugar (one cup of low fat yogurt has LESS sugar than one cup of full fat, marginally, but you are simply not going to eat as large a portion of the full fat, probably, because it has tons more calories) isn't the best argument IMO. Lots of people don't eat lots of excess or "hidden" sugar, so there's no reason to assume OP does. This is what I mean about the knee jerk anti sugar stuff. She asked about yogurt, and there's nothing wrong with either kind of yogurt, it's a matter of what she finds tastiest, most worth the calories, most filling, etc.
Because it fuels their training and competitions - but you could argue that in itself is bad for their bodies!
But the claim at issue is that fat is a better energy source. Seems not.
For the record, the question for the thread is: "which is better, full fat or low/no fat yogurt."
Here are the positions:
(1) Both are fine, eat what works best for you.
(2) Avoid low fat/no fat because SUGAR.
The problem with (2) -- the position the "sugar bots" are disagreeing with -- is that (a) sugar is fine in moderation, (b) we are talking about lactose, so all the nonsense about natural vs. unnatural sugars is irrelevant anyway, and (c) full fat and low/no fat yogurt have similar amounts of sugar by volume (full fat has more), but low/no fat simply has sugar as a higher percentage of its overall calories because, well, less fat.
Care to tell me how the people taking position (1) are wrong here? Because that's the position I'm arguing for.0 -
Too much sugar (like too much of anything) can be harmful to your health but there's no reason you to eliminate it completely.0
-
lemurcat12 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
No, she just seemed defensive or guilty about the fact that she eats yogurt.
Which, again, suggests that this anti sugar stuff is way out of hand.
Asking for opinions on what others think is best for weight loss = defensive and guilty?? Wow!
No, obviously not that part.
The disclaimer "I know sugar is BAD, but..."
And obviously you knew what I was referring to but chose not to address it for some reason.
How would I know that? You said "No, she just seemed defensive or guilty about the fact that she eats yogurt"
She was asking for opinions on which was better, which suggests that she would be fine with either. Honestly, IDK how that could be interpretted as defensive or guilt or a sugar is the devil debate.
But whatever, you gotta read what you will into a post, and I gotta read what I will. Such is human nature.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
so sugar is bad = angelic?
I would call it benign within the context of the OP's questions.
this is a snippet from her OP ..
"Now, I understand sugar is BAD however…"
she's aid sugar is bad and capitalized it…so how is that benign????
or do you just nit pick to nit pick?
It seems to me that others are nit picking for the sake of nit picking. The post was about which option of yogurt we thought was better to facilitate weight loss.
Yet the usual "don't deomonize sugar" crowd chooses to nit pick that one remark, which really had little to do with her question, just so they could preach their usual sermon.
then why not ask what yogurt is better?
why start with I know sugar is bad...< which is not the case unless OP has a medical condition ...
How would I know why the OP words her posts the way she does? Why respond to a post if you aren't going to actually respond to the questions asked? Why hijack a thread? Surely there are other legimate 'sugar is evil' threads out there on which to preach.
no one hijacked the thread..
they corrected a false statement that "she knows that sugar is bad..." which it is not, barring a medical condition.
why does it bother you so much?
People correcting that statement does not bother me. People posting smart remarks about the OP demonizing sugar does. I don't know why it bothers me, but it does. Probably the same reason someone saying 'sugar is bad' bothers you. It's not true.
Everyone gets bothered by everything, so we debate. That's never going to change. We have the option to ignore the "sugar is bad" posts and you have the option to ignore our posts, but we don't, so here we are.
Yep. That's pretty much the gist.
Then if you understand that you either debate the points you don't like being made or you ignore them but to constantly sit here and complain about members addressing the sugar is bad points makes no sense.
And now we've circled back to 4 posts ago in this same thread.
0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
No, she just seemed defensive or guilty about the fact that she eats yogurt.
Which, again, suggests that this anti sugar stuff is way out of hand.
Asking for opinions on what others think is best for weight loss = defensive and guilty?? Wow!
No, obviously not that part.
The disclaimer "I know sugar is BAD, but..."
And obviously you knew what I was referring to but chose not to address it for some reason.
How would I know that? You said "No, she just seemed defensive or guilty about the fact that she eats yogurt"
She was asking for opinions on which was better, which suggests that she would be fine with either. Honestly, IDK how that could be interpretted as defensive or guilt or a sugar is the devil debate.
But whatever, you gotta read what you will into a post, and I gotta read what I will. Such is human nature.
It's simple. Neither of the types of yogurts are "better". The decision lies solely in the hands of the OP. Before she can make an informed decision, she needed to know that what she previously thought about sugar was wrong. Once she knows that, she can make her own choice on yogurt and not need anyone else to make that decision. So although the question wasn't directly about sugar, the clarification was still needed.
Now, why do they get turned into sugar debates? Well, there were just as many people on the first page spouting of nonsense about sugar, so of course people will rebut. Then it looks like the pro-sugar crowd is on a crusade, but it's simply just a numbers game. More people believe the science rather than the propaganda.
0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »How would I know that?
By reading the thread, which I assumed you were doing, including the other posts I'd made on the topic.She was asking for opinions on which was better, which suggests that she would be fine with either.
Right, and seemed defensive or to be preempting a criticism in that BOTH types of yogurt (obviously) contain sugar. It was more like "given that I'm going to eat this produce with sugar, which is best." Otherwise the sugar comment was irrelevant.
I don't think she should be criticized for it (and I dare you to find a comment where I criticized her, sigh), but I do think she should be told (reassured, whatever) that sugar isn't "BAD." Which doesn't mean it's not reasonable to reduce sugar consumption, of course, or to watch your overall sugar or added sugar or carbs or fiber or calories or however you do it, but certainly means one shouldn't think that she might be criticized for eating yogurt.0 -
Propaganda's force is strong, it doesn't take much thinking and you can hang a bulls eye on the goat and get support all day long, because Barnum and Bailey.Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
No, she just seemed defensive or guilty about the fact that she eats yogurt.
Which, again, suggests that this anti sugar stuff is way out of hand.
Asking for opinions on what others think is best for weight loss = defensive and guilty?? Wow!
No, obviously not that part.
The disclaimer "I know sugar is BAD, but..."
And obviously you knew what I was referring to but chose not to address it for some reason.
How would I know that? You said "No, she just seemed defensive or guilty about the fact that she eats yogurt"
She was asking for opinions on which was better, which suggests that she would be fine with either. Honestly, IDK how that could be interpretted as defensive or guilt or a sugar is the devil debate.
But whatever, you gotta read what you will into a post, and I gotta read what I will. Such is human nature.
It's simple. Neither of the types of yogurts are "better". The decision lies solely in the hands of the OP. Before she can make an informed decision, she needed to know that what she previously thought about sugar was wrong. Once she knows that, she can make her own choice on yogurt and not need anyone else to make that decision. So although the question wasn't directly about sugar, the clarification was still needed.
Now, why do they get turned into sugar debates? Well, there were just as many people on the first page spouting of nonsense about sugar, so of course people will rebut. Then it looks like the pro-sugar crowd is on a crusade, but it's simply just a numbers game. More people believe the science rather than the propaganda.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
so sugar is bad = angelic?
I would call it benign within the context of the OP's questions.
this is a snippet from her OP ..
"Now, I understand sugar is BAD however…"
she's aid sugar is bad and capitalized it…so how is that benign????
or do you just nit pick to nit pick?
It seems to me that others are nit picking for the sake of nit picking. The post was about which option of yogurt we thought was better to facilitate weight loss.
Yet the usual "don't deomonize sugar" crowd chooses to nit pick that one remark, which really had little to do with her question, just so they could preach their usual sermon.
then why not ask what yogurt is better?
why start with I know sugar is bad...< which is not the case unless OP has a medical condition ...
How would I know why the OP words her posts the way she does? Why respond to a post if you aren't going to actually respond to the questions asked? Why hijack a thread? Surely there are other legimate 'sugar is evil' threads out there on which to preach.
no one hijacked the thread..
they corrected a false statement that "she knows that sugar is bad..." which it is not, barring a medical condition.
why does it bother you so much?
Isn't debating about whether the thread got hijacked or not .. um .. hijacking the thread?0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
so sugar is bad = angelic?
I would call it benign within the context of the OP's questions.
this is a snippet from her OP ..
"Now, I understand sugar is BAD however…"
she's aid sugar is bad and capitalized it…so how is that benign????
or do you just nit pick to nit pick?
It seems to me that others are nit picking for the sake of nit picking. The post was about which option of yogurt we thought was better to facilitate weight loss.
Yet the usual "don't deomonize sugar" crowd chooses to nit pick that one remark, which really had little to do with her question, just so they could preach their usual sermon.
then why not ask what yogurt is better?
why start with I know sugar is bad...< which is not the case unless OP has a medical condition ...
How would I know why the OP words her posts the way she does? Why respond to a post if you aren't going to actually respond to the questions asked? Why hijack a thread? Surely there are other legimate 'sugar is evil' threads out there on which to preach.
no one hijacked the thread..
they corrected a false statement that "she knows that sugar is bad..." which it is not, barring a medical condition.
why does it bother you so much?
Isn't debating about whether the thread got hijacked or not .. um .. hijacking the thread?
Kind of like what you just did.
0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
so sugar is bad = angelic?
I would call it benign within the context of the OP's questions.
this is a snippet from her OP ..
"Now, I understand sugar is BAD however…"
she's aid sugar is bad and capitalized it…so how is that benign????
or do you just nit pick to nit pick?
It seems to me that others are nit picking for the sake of nit picking. The post was about which option of yogurt we thought was better to facilitate weight loss.
Yet the usual "don't deomonize sugar" crowd chooses to nit pick that one remark, which really had little to do with her question, just so they could preach their usual sermon.
then why not ask what yogurt is better?
why start with I know sugar is bad...< which is not the case unless OP has a medical condition ...
How would I know why the OP words her posts the way she does? Why respond to a post if you aren't going to actually respond to the questions asked? Why hijack a thread? Surely there are other legimate 'sugar is evil' threads out there on which to preach.
no one hijacked the thread..
they corrected a false statement that "she knows that sugar is bad..." which it is not, barring a medical condition.
why does it bother you so much?
Isn't debating about whether the thread got hijacked or not .. um .. hijacking the thread?
so responding to someone complaining about hijacking, is hijacking????
so by your definition, you just hijacked the thread...
0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
so sugar is bad = angelic?
I would call it benign within the context of the OP's questions.
this is a snippet from her OP ..
"Now, I understand sugar is BAD however…"
she's aid sugar is bad and capitalized it…so how is that benign????
or do you just nit pick to nit pick?
It seems to me that others are nit picking for the sake of nit picking. The post was about which option of yogurt we thought was better to facilitate weight loss.
Yet the usual "don't deomonize sugar" crowd chooses to nit pick that one remark, which really had little to do with her question, just so they could preach their usual sermon.
then why not ask what yogurt is better?
why start with I know sugar is bad...< which is not the case unless OP has a medical condition ...
How would I know why the OP words her posts the way she does? Why respond to a post if you aren't going to actually respond to the questions asked? Why hijack a thread? Surely there are other legimate 'sugar is evil' threads out there on which to preach.
no one hijacked the thread..
they corrected a false statement that "she knows that sugar is bad..." which it is not, barring a medical condition.
why does it bother you so much?
Isn't debating about whether the thread got hijacked or not .. um .. hijacking the thread?
so responding to someone complaining about hijacking, is hijacking????
so by your definition, you just hijacked the thread...
You give me too much credit. We did this together, man.0 -
Better to hijack a thread than to confuse people seeking dietary advice by wrongly telling them a perfectly natural and healthy food substance is poison0
-
hmcbride68 wrote: »Better to hijack a thread than to confuse people seeking dietary advice by wrongly telling them a perfectly natural and healthy food substance is poison
Just curious -- what do you mean by "natural born sugar addict" in your profile?0 -
No food is inherently bad. If you aren't dealing with a medical issue that requires you watch your sugar, and as long as you are fitting it into your calories, you can still have sugar and have weight loss. I cut out most added sugar personally but that is a personal preference because I have never liked the way super sugary foods and beverages make me feel. I still give in to a bit of chocolate once in a while but sugar is a naturally occurring thing in many of our foods. In fact granulated sugar comes from a plant.
As far as which yogurt to enjoy, do whatever makes you happy in the long run and helps you meet your goals efficiently. I prefer non fat Fage Greek yogurt. But I get a big punch of protein for a much smaller amount of calories plus I used Greek yogurt in about 75% of the dishes I make (as substitutes for other ingredients that are calorie heavy). I buy it in bulk at Sams Club so that I almost always have it on hand.
0 -
gosh I feel the same way. People are always telling me to eat greek yogurt, but many of them are loaded with sugar. How am I supposed to know what is good and what is bad?0
-
mandykent111 wrote: »gosh I feel the same way. People are always telling me to eat greek yogurt, but many of them are loaded with sugar. How am I supposed to know what is good and what is bad?
Nice try...
0 -
DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »Just curious -- what do you mean by "natural born sugar addict" in your profile?
It's just a cheeky way of saying I love food0 -
mandykent111 wrote: »gosh I feel the same way. People are always telling me to eat greek yogurt, but many of them are loaded with sugar. How am I supposed to know what is good and what is bad?
The one that tastes good and is satisfying is good. Try several varieties and see which you like best.0 -
hmcbride68 wrote: »DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »Just curious -- what do you mean by "natural born sugar addict" in your profile?
It's just a cheeky way of saying I love food
Ah. Yes, don't we all.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
In terms of mediation both sides must present their cases to a mediation or panel of mediators, pertaining to the matter of discussion based on presentation of due diligence for their side of argument. If the opposing sides lack of due diligence ( actual published or previous cases supporting those facts supporting their claim) can not be presented and substantiated with said factual proof there is no basis for the claim, hense the side with the actual substantiated proof will win the case.
Does that cover it?0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K 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
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions