Sugar

slowbutsure2
slowbutsure2 Posts: 110
edited November 2024 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?
«1

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.
  • USMCMcG
    USMCMcG Posts: 7 Member
    epawelek wrote: »
    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.
    Well done on both counts. :)

    Agree Stevia works well. I prefer KAL brand which is sometime hard to find but I ordered from Amazon. It seems to be less bitter than other brands.
  • slowbutsure2
    slowbutsure2 Posts: 110
    janejellyroll wrote: »
    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.

    You may well be right. As usual there are studies and claims in both directions. The UK government have recently come out and said fat up isn't the enemy we thought it was, sugar is. Who knows.
  • slowbutsure2
    slowbutsure2 Posts: 110
    jgnatca wrote: »
    No one food is responsible for weight gain.

    That should be a poster.

    Yeah true, though it does effect overall health. I'm not sure how healthy sugar is either.
  • RoxieDawn
    RoxieDawn Posts: 15,488 Member
    edited March 2015
    To the OP, my question is this to you: Are you cutting real sugar out of your diet for a specific reason like health issues or are you wanting to eat less of it for another reason.
    Just curious..

    I started omitting part of the sugar from my diet by baking (some stuff) at home by using Stevia Baking Blend, Stevia Brown Sugar. I use truvia for coffee and tea. For starters I hate drinking my calories and my need at night for a small treat without the calories and carbs does come with specifics in baking.

    Everyone is different and it is a personal choice how you want to moderate any type of "real" sugar or substitute you use. Everything has its side effects whether it is partial sugar substitutes, sugar free or the real stuff!.

    If you want real sugar just eat smaller portions and it does make food "yummier"...
  • jgnatca
    jgnatca Posts: 14,464 Member
    motivatorac1a59c69f03a47f501392f7adabfc9e4f4c85a8.jpg
  • slowbutsure2
    slowbutsure2 Posts: 110
    jgnatca wrote: »
    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

    Thanks, that's really interesting. I never expected that of whey.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 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

    This is often misunderstood. The deal with high GI foods (and what the article is saying) is that lots of people feel less satisfied after eating them or tend to get hungry again quickly, especially (but not only) if they are insulin resistant. But whether or not a meal is high GI depends on the mix of foods. Foods with fiber (like fruit) or lots of fat (like many sweets) or something like potatoes eaten with meat won't have the GI that you see which is based on eating particular items in isolation.

    But more important, they are predicting how you will react to the foods. What's important is how you actually do. (I find eating many refined carbs alone is not all that satiating, so I don't.)

    The thing about fat storage, though, is a misunderstanding--insulin when operating correctly basically is a mechanism for getting glycogen where it needs to go, including to the muscles. One result of this process, when you have more than you need immediately for energy, will be to convert it to fat and store it (super oversimplified), but that doesn't mean you gain fat. At the same time you will be burning fat if eating at a deficit. So it's not like you end up with more fat you otherwise would have or--of course--that you avoid gaining fat when eating more than you use so long as you eat low GI foods. That really makes no difference. What matters is simply if it is harder for you to eat the right amount of food because you end up feeling hungry.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 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

    This is not saying that you gain despite eating at a deficit. It presents a hypothesis that some people who are insulin resistant get hungrier after eating high GI meals and then have a much harder time dieting. The don't lose because they eat more.
  • slowbutsure2
    slowbutsure2 Posts: 110
    gia07 wrote: »
    To the OP, my question is this to you: Are you cutting real sugar out of your diet for a specific reason like health issues or are you wanting to eat less of it for another reason.
    Just curious..

    I started omitting part of the sugar from my diet by baking (some stuff) at home by using Stevia Baking Blend, Stevia Brown Sugar. I use truvia for coffee and tea. For starters I hate drinking my calories and my need at night for a small treat without the calories and carbs does come with specifics in baking.

    Everyone is different and it is a personal choice how you want to moderate any type of "real" sugar or substitute you use. Everything has its side effects whether it is partial sugar substitutes, sugar free or the real stuff!.

    If you want real sugar just eat smaller portions and it does make food "yummier"...

    A few reasons I guess. The less calories in things like sugar the more overall food I get to eat! I understand that sugar is not particularly good for your health, and I'm trying to be healthier. Lastly, there is enough conflicting information on the fat storage issue to not completely ignore it. It's no big deal for me to swap it out for Stevia or Xylatol etc, so nothing lost.
  • jgnatca
    jgnatca Posts: 14,464 Member
    If you like high volume in your meals, also watch the fats. They are even more calorie dense than sugar.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories