Sugar

slowbutsure2
slowbutsure2 Posts: 110
in Health and Weight Loss
Hi

I like sweet stuff. I'm currently using Xylatol as a sugar replacement. Its low cal and low Gi. Not sure if there is anything better?
«13

Replies

  • elphie754
    elphie754 Posts: 7,574 Member
    Why not real sugar and just use less of it?
  • slowbutsure2
    slowbutsure2 Posts: 110
    I don't know to be honest. Aren't these substitutes meant to be a lot better?
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    slowbutsure2 wrote: »
    I don't know to be honest. Aren't these substitutes meant to be a lot better?

    Better in what way?
  • elphie754
    elphie754 Posts: 7,574 Member
    slowbutsure2 wrote: »
    I don't know to be honest. Aren't these substitutes meant to be a lot better?

    Nope. Unless you have a diagnosed medical condition, there is no need to limit sugar provided it fits into you calorie goal.
  • slowbutsure2
    slowbutsure2 Posts: 110
    I don't know to be honest. Aren't these substitutes meant to be a lot better?
    janejellyroll wrote: »
    slowbutsure2 wrote: »
    I don't know to be honest. Aren't these substitutes meant to be a lot better?

    Better in what way?

    The effect it has on your blood sugar and insulin levels. Both affecting the storage of fat. The whole GI thing. Not entirely sure though.
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    slowbutsure2 wrote: »
    I don't know to be honest. Aren't these substitutes meant to be a lot better?
    janejellyroll wrote: »
    slowbutsure2 wrote: »
    I don't know to be honest. Aren't these substitutes meant to be a lot better?

    Better in what way?

    The effect it has on your blood sugar and insulin levels. Both affecting the storage of fat. The whole GI thing. Not entirely sure though.

    Do you have a medical condition that requires you to monitor your blood sugar and insulin levels?
  • slowbutsure2
    slowbutsure2 Posts: 110
    I don't think so. It was more the stuff on fat storage

    http://www.bbcgoodfood.com/howto/guide/spotlight-low-gi
  • jgnatca
    jgnatca Posts: 14,464 Member
    About 10% of the US population is diabetic (about 8 million undiagnosed). Diabetics have to watch their sugar intake.

    Here is a full list of artificial sweeteners.
    http://www.sugar-and-sweetener-guide.com/artificial-sweetener-list.html

    Some work better in baking, others in beverages.

    Sometimes it's all in how you take in your sugar that makes all the difference. If you eat it with a combination of other foods including protein and fiber, you are much less likely to experience an insulin spike.

    Sugar in fruit comes in a lovely fiber sandwich including vitamins.
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    slowbutsure2 wrote: »
    I don't think so. It was more the stuff on fat storage

    http://www.bbcgoodfood.com/howto/guide/spotlight-low-gi

    I don't see how that applies if you are operating at a calorie deficit.
  • Need2Exerc1se
    Need2Exerc1se Posts: 13,575 Member
    It's all about calories. If real sugar is worth the calories to you, then eat real sugar. If you'd rather not use your calories on added sugar, then the substitutes are fine.

    Only you can decide what's better for you.
  • jgnatca
    jgnatca Posts: 14,464 Member
    My big surprise when I was digging in to how fast various macros take to be absorbed by our bodies, is that Whey is absorbed faster than many carbs!
  • slowbutsure2
    slowbutsure2 Posts: 110
    Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
    It's all about calories. If real sugar is worth the calories to you, then eat real sugar. If you'd rather not use your calories on added sugar, then the substitutes are fine.

    Only you can decide what's better for you.

    There seem to be much information out there (like link above) that say that higher GI foods, like sugar, are used instantly for energy instead of using fat that's been stored. So, I think what they are saying is that eating lower GI foods enable you to burn stored fat more. An area I find quite confusing.
  • slowbutsure2
    slowbutsure2 Posts: 110
    jgnatca wrote: »
    My big surprise when I was digging in to how fast various macros take to be absorbed by our bodies, is that Whey is absorbed faster than many carbs!

    That is interesting. I wonder what effect it has on insulin.
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    slowbutsure2 wrote: »
    Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
    It's all about calories. If real sugar is worth the calories to you, then eat real sugar. If you'd rather not use your calories on added sugar, then the substitutes are fine.

    Only you can decide what's better for you.

    There seem to be much information out there (like link above) that say that higher GI foods, like sugar, are used instantly for energy instead of using fat that's been stored. So, I think what they are saying is that eating lower GI foods enable you to burn stored fat more. An area I find quite confusing.

    I'm struggling to understand how, if you're eating at a deficit, it matters whether what you're eating is used instantly or not.

    If you eat 100 calories of sugar and it is used instantly, how does that result in more weight loss than eating 100 calories of, say, almonds that are used later in the day? In both instances, the food is used for energy. And if you are eating at a deficit, then the stored energy in your body will be used as well.
  • Need2Exerc1se
    Need2Exerc1se Posts: 13,575 Member
    edited March 2015
    slowbutsure2 wrote: »
    Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
    It's all about calories. If real sugar is worth the calories to you, then eat real sugar. If you'd rather not use your calories on added sugar, then the substitutes are fine.

    Only you can decide what's better for you.

    There seem to be much information out there (like link above) that say that higher GI foods, like sugar, are used instantly for energy instead of using fat that's been stored. So, I think what they are saying is that eating lower GI foods enable you to burn stored fat more. An area I find quite confusing.

    The problem with insulin and blood sugar spikes is that they are followed by drops in blood sugar. The sharper the rise, the sharper the drop. The sharp drops in blood sugar can trigger hunger as your body looks for more glucose to even out your levels. This can lead to overeating as you get into a cycle of sharp rises and falls. It's why it's sometimes hard to stop eating things with a high GI.

    It's not as much about burning stored fat as it is the hunger triggers. If you ignore the urge to eat more, you will still lose.
  • jgnatca
    jgnatca Posts: 14,464 Member
    Here's a scholarly article about whey absorption and insulin. In this article, the insulin stimulation is regarded as a good thing.

    http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/82/1/69.full
  • slowbutsure2
    slowbutsure2 Posts: 110
    janejellyroll wrote: »
    slowbutsure2 wrote: »
    Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
    It's all about calories. If real sugar is worth the calories to you, then eat real sugar. If you'd rather not use your calories on added sugar, then the substitutes are fine.

    Only you can decide what's better for you.

    There seem to be much information out there (like link above) that say that higher GI foods, like sugar, are used instantly for energy instead of using fat that's been stored. So, I think what they are saying is that eating lower GI foods enable you to burn stored fat more. An area I find quite confusing.

    I'm struggling to understand how, if you're eating at a deficit, it matters whether what you're eating is used instantly or not.

    If you eat 100 calories of sugar and it is used instantly, how does that result in more weight loss than eating 100 calories of, say, almonds that are used later in the day? In both instances, the food is used for energy. And if you are eating at a deficit, then the stored energy in your body will be used as well.

    Yeah its a puzzle. Here is another on that quotes scientific research

    http://www.oprah.com/health/Lose-Weight-with-a-Low-Glycemic-Diet
  • eseeton
    eseeton Posts: 80 Member
    edited March 2015
    Back to the OP: if you are looking for something 'better' than sugar, there are too many opinions on the matter and they are just that. Opinions.

    If you are looking for an alternative to sugar, and would like my opinion: have you tried stevia? I've used to liquid form previously. If you are looking for another option, try limiting how much real sugar you use.
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    slowbutsure2 wrote: »
    janejellyroll wrote: »
    slowbutsure2 wrote: »
    Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
    It's all about calories. If real sugar is worth the calories to you, then eat real sugar. If you'd rather not use your calories on added sugar, then the substitutes are fine.

    Only you can decide what's better for you.

    There seem to be much information out there (like link above) that say that higher GI foods, like sugar, are used instantly for energy instead of using fat that's been stored. So, I think what they are saying is that eating lower GI foods enable you to burn stored fat more. An area I find quite confusing.

    I'm struggling to understand how, if you're eating at a deficit, it matters whether what you're eating is used instantly or not.

    If you eat 100 calories of sugar and it is used instantly, how does that result in more weight loss than eating 100 calories of, say, almonds that are used later in the day? In both instances, the food is used for energy. And if you are eating at a deficit, then the stored energy in your body will be used as well.

    Yeah its a puzzle. Here is another on that quotes scientific research

    http://www.oprah.com/health/Lose-Weight-with-a-Low-Glycemic-Diet

    I don't know if it is a puzzle -- it sounds more like a weight loss red herring.
  • jgnatca
    jgnatca Posts: 14,464 Member
    No one food is responsible for weight gain.

    That should be a poster.

Categories