Have you Quit Sugar?
Replies
-
Nope. I just focused on meeting my protein, fat, and fiber goals, and a reduction in sugar naturally followed. I still eat chocolate, ice cream, candy, cake, indulgent restaurant desserts... I just do so with my calorie and nutrient goals in mind. Most days I'm under the sugar goal MFP sets, but this isn't intentional on my part. It just comes with having a balanced diet.0
-
This post made me salty.0
-
I also think it is very difficult, and indeed unnecessary to cut all sugar. I am glad the WHO included natural honey to their "free sugars" list. It's not the naturalness of a product that harms, but perhaps over-consumption of an easy calorie source (sugar) at the expense of nutritious alternatives.
I think we will continue to see confusion of MFP members, conscientiously watching their sugars, and not understanding how they can go over on a few pieces of fruit. I am sure MFP, and the WHO, did not intend for calorie watchers to cut fruit from their diet to meet the deadlines.
There has to be an adjustment to the nutrition labeling in order to meet the WHO guidelines.
Also, the composition if Honey is about the same as High Fructose Corn Syrup - about 40% fructose, 40% glucose, with the rest being other sugars and water. Its just not a good sugar choice.0 -
mmmmm.... pudding. Yum. Still not fat. Or addicted.0
-
I also think it is very difficult, and indeed unnecessary to cut all sugar. I am glad the WHO included natural honey to their "free sugars" list. It's not the naturalness of a product that harms, but perhaps over-consumption of an easy calorie source (sugar) at the expense of nutritious alternatives.
I think we will continue to see confusion of MFP members, conscientiously watching their sugars, and not understanding how they can go over on a few pieces of fruit. I am sure MFP, and the WHO, did not intend for calorie watchers to cut fruit from their diet to meet the deadlines.
There has to be an adjustment to the nutrition labeling in order to meet the WHO guidelines.
Also, the composition if Honey is about the same as High Fructose Corn Syrup - about 40% fructose, 40% glucose, with the rest being other sugars and water. Its just not a good sugar choice.
It's delicious. That makes it a good sugar choice by definition.0 -
stevencloser wrote: »I also think it is very difficult, and indeed unnecessary to cut all sugar. I am glad the WHO included natural honey to their "free sugars" list. It's not the naturalness of a product that harms, but perhaps over-consumption of an easy calorie source (sugar) at the expense of nutritious alternatives.
I think we will continue to see confusion of MFP members, conscientiously watching their sugars, and not understanding how they can go over on a few pieces of fruit. I am sure MFP, and the WHO, did not intend for calorie watchers to cut fruit from their diet to meet the deadlines.
There has to be an adjustment to the nutrition labeling in order to meet the WHO guidelines.
Also, the composition if Honey is about the same as High Fructose Corn Syrup - about 40% fructose, 40% glucose, with the rest being other sugars and water. Its just not a good sugar choice.
It's delicious. That makes it a good sugar choice by definition.
That, and it's easy to mix into my oatmeal.0 -
I personally don't let any organization dictate my eating habits...
hit you calorie/micro/macro targets and you will be fine...
0 -
Funny you should mention this sugar thing. I saw my Gastroenterologist just yesterday and he told me to avoid all sugar even fruit. I joked with him and ask what happen to a apple a day. He said no apples and no wheat products. I have been putting on weight and I am slow to lose weight. He wants me to eat meat and vegetables to get the weight off then I can slowly add back the fruit in moderation. I am having surgery on my stomach later this year and he wants me to drop about 50-60 lbs before my surgery. No sugar for me that means reading all the labels for added sugar. Besides I am a sugar junkie this is a good thing for me this is day one sugarfree.
0 -
twistygirl wrote: »Funny you should mention this sugar thing. I saw my Gastroenterologist just yesterday and he told me to avoid all sugar even fruit. I joked with him and ask what happen to a apple a day. He said no apples and no wheat products. I have been putting on weight and I am slow to lose weight. He wants me to eat meat and vegetables to get the weight off then I can slowly add back the fruit in moderation. I am having surgery on my stomach later this year and he wants me to drop about 50-60 lbs before my surgery. No sugar for me that means reading all the labels for added sugar. Besides I am a sugar junkie this is a good thing for me this is day one sugarfree.
I would suggest finding a new doctor as that is ridiculous...
you can lose weight and still eat sugar...
just eat less food...
unless you have a medical condition that you have not referenced...0 -
"There has to be an adjustment to the nutrition labeling in order to meet the WHO guidelines"....Difficult? Try NOT POSSIBLE. Sugar occurs naturally in almost all food. Moderation is the key to being sensible about sugar...
The WHO guideline provides direction on what is considered "free sugars". That certainly can be calculated by manufacturers and separated out from what naturally occurs in a food product.
I tend to think it's not that necessary if people actually understand what they are eating (probably asking too much, yes). But it would be particularly relevant for things like flavored yogurt (although you could just compare the numbers to the same brand of plain yogurt) or pasta sauce (not that I want to encourage the purchase of jarred pasta sauce, sigh, but gets slammed with the "sugar" figures when at least some of the sugar is from tomatoes and the like). I suspect the change in labeling will come, also.
Now, the broader question is whether it matters, really. For example, the WHO rationale is that foods with added (free) sugars tend to be high in calories and low in nutrients. But if I make a rhubarb sauce and add sugar or add sugar to my steel cut oats (I actually don't--I don't like things like that too sweet and just fruit is sufficient), that doesn't change the fact that those are nutritious dishes and the total calories added by the sugar isn't much.
Indeed, one interesting thing I've noticed is that with many high calorie foods that are sweet the majority of the calories aren't from sugar at all, but from fat. My cookie recipe (yes, I've mentioned this before) that I analyzed in MFP has a majority of calories from butter and the second most from flour, with sugar not contributing much at all. Yet clearly they are a food that should be eaten in moderation (or limited if one prefers), since they are high calorie and low nutrient.
IMO, anyone with an ounce of sense can look at a food and decide if it's contributing more calories than acceptable given the nutrients (and pleasure provided). For example, I can see that many flavored yogurts either have fake sugar or have more calories than yogurts that have the same amount of fat but are plain. I can decide if the added calories are worth it to me, and the other nutrients in the yogurt remain.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
@acg67 how do you know that's what the WHO is basing their decision on? I mean, such an agency is naturally conservative. What if they are looking at world trends?
http://www.who.int/nutrition/nlis/en/
"Assessment of dietary intake of sugars, whether by some method of recall as used in the trials, or by food frequency questionnaires as in cohort studies, was associated with a considerable degree of measurement error even when using validated methods"
From the main meta analysis that they referenced in their presentation of their recommendation0 -
TheBeachgod wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »Avoid the wrong kind of sugar-the unnatural/processed kind. Sugar through sourced like fruits and vegetables is perfectly okay. And it's not just the sugar that's the problem it's the processed foods that are, processed foods lose nutrition and are usually packed with additives of all sort. Sugar is the least of your problems compared to all the other sh** they put in "food".
Just balance your diet with natural foods from their original sources and you will do yourself a lot of good than just by cutting out sugar.
Especially when that is Pink Floyd
Nice catch!
0 -
@acg67 how do you know that's what the WHO is basing their decision on? I mean, such an agency is naturally conservative. What if they are looking at world trends?
http://www.who.int/nutrition/nlis/en/
"Assessment of dietary intake of sugars, whether by some method of recall as used in the trials, or by food frequency questionnaires as in cohort studies, was associated with a considerable degree of measurement error even when using validated methods"
From the main meta analysis that they referenced in their presentation of their recommendation
Where is your quote from? Can link the reference?0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »@acg67 how do you know that's what the WHO is basing their decision on? I mean, such an agency is naturally conservative. What if they are looking at world trends?
http://www.who.int/nutrition/nlis/en/
"Assessment of dietary intake of sugars, whether by some method of recall as used in the trials, or by food frequency questionnaires as in cohort studies, was associated with a considerable degree of measurement error even when using validated methods"
From the main meta analysis that they referenced in their presentation of their recommendation
Where is your quote from? Can link the reference?
http://www.bmj.com/content/346/bmj.e74920 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »@acg67 how do you know that's what the WHO is basing their decision on? I mean, such an agency is naturally conservative. What if they are looking at world trends?
http://www.who.int/nutrition/nlis/en/
"Assessment of dietary intake of sugars, whether by some method of recall as used in the trials, or by food frequency questionnaires as in cohort studies, was associated with a considerable degree of measurement error even when using validated methods"
From the main meta analysis that they referenced in their presentation of their recommendation
Where is your quote from? Can link the reference?
http://www.bmj.com/content/346/bmj.e7492
I was hoping they'd say how they know the degree of error. If all the information they have is recall, how could they know the recall was incorrect? What is there to compare?0 -
Also in the summary from that same report:
"... in relation to intakes of sugar sweetened beverages after one year follow-up in prospective studies, the odds ratio for being overweight or obese increased was 1.55 (1.32 to 1.82) among groups with the highest intake compared with those with the lowest intake."
"...sensitivity analyses showed that the trends were consistent and associations remained ..."
"intake of free sugars or sugar sweetened beverages is a determinant of body weight."
This must be part of the "solid evidence" that the WHO used to make these recommendations.
Now for the connoisseurs of calories, we don't have to worry, because, "isoenergetic exchange of sugars with other carbohydrates was not associated with weight change." In other words, a calorie is a calorie is a calorie. Go ahead and pack that gummy bear for a long run.
It seems to me the WHO has advised the reduction of "free sugars" to the broader population as a potential easy fix to the obesity problem. People can spot the free sugar and reduce their consumption. Manufacturers obliged to list their "free sugars" will no doubt reduce them.0 -
Also in the summary from that same report:
"... in relation to intakes of sugar sweetened beverages after one year follow-up in prospective studies, the odds ratio for being overweight or obese increased was 1.55 (1.32 to 1.82) among groups with the highest intake compared with those with the lowest intake."
"...sensitivity analyses showed that the trends were consistent and associations remained ..."
"intake of free sugars or sugar sweetened beverages is a determinant of body weight."
This must be part of the "solid evidence" that the WHO used to make these recommendations.
Now for the connoisseurs of calories, we don't have to worry, because, "isoenergetic exchange of sugars with other carbohydrates was not associated with weight change." In other words, a calorie is a calorie is a calorie. Go ahead and pack that gummy bear for a long run.
It seems to me the WHO has advised the reduction of "free sugars" to the broader population as a potential easy fix to the obesity problem. People can spot the free sugar and reduce their consumption. Manufacturers obliged to list their "free sugars" will no doubt reduce them.
so eat less calorie dense food...genius...0 -
It is not possible to quit sugar. It is in everything and your body needs it. Cut back, or totally cut sweets and/or sugary drinks if you want, but even in moderation and within your calorie allotment it is perfectly fine.0
-
Also in the summary from that same report:
"... in relation to intakes of sugar sweetened beverages after one year follow-up in prospective studies, the odds ratio for being overweight or obese increased was 1.55 (1.32 to 1.82) among groups with the highest intake compared with those with the lowest intake."
"...sensitivity analyses showed that the trends were consistent and associations remained ..."
"intake of free sugars or sugar sweetened beverages is a determinant of body weight."
This must be part of the "solid evidence" that the WHO used to make these recommendations.
Now for the connoisseurs of calories, we don't have to worry, because, "isoenergetic exchange of sugars with other carbohydrates was not associated with weight change." In other words, a calorie is a calorie is a calorie. Go ahead and pack that gummy bear for a long run.
It seems to me the WHO has advised the reduction of "free sugars" to the broader population as a potential easy fix to the obesity problem. People can spot the free sugar and reduce their consumption. Manufacturers obliged to list their "free sugars" will no doubt reduce them.
Except none of it is "solid evidence" and when you look at the references for their recommendations, it's crappy data. The data it is based on matters.0 -
It seems to me the WHO has advised the reduction of "free sugars" to the broader population as a potential easy fix to the obesity problem. People can spot the free sugar and reduce their consumption. Manufacturers obliged to list their "free sugars" will no doubt reduce them.
I think this is right. Tracking calories carefully and subbing some extra gummi bears instead of white rice probably doesn't matter for the selected population who tracks everything, but for people wanting to generally improve their diets/lower calories without doing that, reducing the cookie consumption (and maybe adding more fruits and veggies, despite the sugar) is probably not a bad approach. Some will end up compensating by also eating more of other things with lots of calories, but others won't.
For me what works better, though, is just reducing snacking. In theory I could make up the calories, but because I snack for reasons other than hunger (if I eat well I am not hungry between meals), I don't. (And since I'm far more likely to snack on something sugary than include it as a significant part of a meal, it also serves to reduce sugar.)
0 -
Also in the summary from that same report:
"... in relation to intakes of sugar sweetened beverages after one year follow-up in prospective studies, the odds ratio for being overweight or obese increased was 1.55 (1.32 to 1.82) among groups with the highest intake compared with those with the lowest intake."
"...sensitivity analyses showed that the trends were consistent and associations remained ..."
"intake of free sugars or sugar sweetened beverages is a determinant of body weight."
This must be part of the "solid evidence" that the WHO used to make these recommendations.
Now for the connoisseurs of calories, we don't have to worry, because, "isoenergetic exchange of sugars with other carbohydrates was not associated with weight change." In other words, a calorie is a calorie is a calorie. Go ahead and pack that gummy bear for a long run.
It seems to me the WHO has advised the reduction of "free sugars" to the broader population as a potential easy fix to the obesity problem. People can spot the free sugar and reduce their consumption. Manufacturers obliged to list their "free sugars" will no doubt reduce them.
Which is the reason people said this is pretty much useless as an argument against sugar and doesn't look past it. The ones who drink the most sugar sweetened beverages would also most likely be in the group that eats the most, end of sentence.
Just saying "Stop eating so much sugar" and expecting obesity to disappear is silly when the average calorie intake in the US (and it never ceases to amaze me, no matter how many times I say that) is almost 4000 calories. (Seriously, I hope that number is exaggerated.) 10% of that would still be 100g of sugar.
And eating that many calories would still leave them obese regardless of if they are within those guidelines or not because they're not adhering to a more important guideline for weight management already.0 -
I understand you mean added sugars, and I did cut it off when I was at my healthiest point. Not completely, I mean sometimes I would even forget I ate a bit. And for ME...in my own personal experience, that's when I had the highest weight loss rate of all and I think I even gained a little bit of muscle. And ultimately, I felt really, really happy inside. I felt so in control. I had never had the discipline to say "no" prior to that, but the more I said, "Hm, nah, no thanks", the easier it became and I became really happy being able to have control of food instead of vice-versa.
That was a few years ago, currently, I'm consuming so much more sugar than my happier days, and I really am not as energetic and I feel disappointed, sad often. I notice the weeks that I just happen to consume less sugars, the lighter I end up feeling. Why don't you give it a go for 3 months and see how you feel? If you don't like it, then drop it and adopt a moderate-regulated sugar approach.
For me, drastically cutting out sugar was really pivotal. I became happier with myself, craved to move around more and focused on my studies. Placebo affect or not, it made me feel happier.0 -
I suspect this is right, and would add: they probably feel it would improve overall health and reduce mortality as well.Also in the summary from that same report:
It seems to me the WHO has advised the reduction of "free sugars" to the broader population as a potential easy fix to the obesity problem. People can spot the free sugar and reduce their consumption. Manufacturers obliged to list their "free sugars" will no doubt reduce them.
0 -
Can someone please explain to me the difference between natural sugar and processed or refined sugar? To my understanding sugar is sugar regardless the source.0
-
No, I have not.0
-
After watching a documentary about sugar I am really considering quitting altogether.
Has anyone else done this and what was your experience??
No. I have not quit anything.
Have I cut down on sugar? Yes but not because of the sugar. I am eating fewer carbs in general because of a medical condition. I have never been a big sweets eater. Put a doughnut and a bagel in front of me and I will choose the bagel every time because doughnuts are just to sweet for me. Same thing with fruit, I would much rather eat a grapefruit than an orange because oranges are too sweet.
0 -
MrCoolGrim wrote: »Can someone please explain to me the difference between natural sugar and processed or refined sugar? To my understanding sugar is sugar regardless the source.
The actual sugar, whether it is sucrose, glucose, maltose, lactose, fructose, etc. is used by the body in the exact same way.
Some will come up with the argument that "fruit is packed with fiber and nutrients along with the sugar". That is true, but does not affect the actual sugar your body is using and what it does with it once it enters the bloodstream. It may affect how long it takes to get there, but not what it does.
0 -
MrCoolGrim wrote: »Can someone please explain to me the difference between natural sugar and processed or refined sugar? To my understanding sugar is sugar regardless the source.
The actual sugar, whether it is sucrose, glucose, maltose, lactose, fructose, etc. is used by the body in the exact same way.
Some will come up with the argument that "fruit is packed with fiber and nutrients along with the sugar". That is true, but does not affect the actual sugar your body is using and what it does with it once it enters the bloodstream. It may affect how long it takes to get there, but not what it does.
So chemically, it is the same thing any which way you look at it?0 -
This thread is still going... Got to love a good sugar thread...
This is still not going to end well, when it finally decides to end...LOL0
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
- 426 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