SUGAR !!!

13»

Replies

  • Need2Exerc1se
    Need2Exerc1se Posts: 13,575 Member
    senecarr wrote: »
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    Geekymonkey99 wrote: »
    My best month of weight loss was one where 75%+ of my diet was cookies (biscuits). I'd have 1200 calories worth of them for breakfast alone. And I've lost a total of 25 pounds while eating sugar well beyond moderation. You're fine as long as you're under your goal and don't have a medical condition where you need to limit sugar.

    No way that can be healthy.
    Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
    Geekymonkey99 wrote: »
    My best month of weight loss was one where 75%+ of my diet was cookies (biscuits). I'd have 1200 calories worth of them for breakfast alone. And I've lost a total of 25 pounds while eating sugar well beyond moderation. You're fine as long as you're under your goal and don't have a medical condition where you need to limit sugar.

    Losing weight is not necessarily a sign that "You're fine"

    You're both being assumptive. Generally speaking, losing weight, even with what looks like poor nutrition, can still cause improvements in health markers.
    cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/
    For a class project, Haub limited himself to less than 1,800 calories a day. A man of Haub's pre-dieting size usually consumes about 2,600 calories daily. So he followed a basic principle of weight loss: He consumed significantly fewer calories than he burned.
    His body mass index went from 28.8, considered overweight, to 24.9, which is normal. He now weighs 174 pounds.
    But you might expect other indicators of health would have suffered. Not so.
    Haub's "bad" cholesterol, or LDL, dropped 20 percent and his "good" cholesterol, or HDL, increased by 20 percent. He reduced the level of triglycerides, which are a form of fat, by 39 percent.

    I assumed nothing, I merely made a true statement. While an overweight/obese person would likely improve health with weight loss, weight loss alone is not proof of being "fine".
  • mistikal13
    mistikal13 Posts: 1,457 Member
    If you want sugar, have some! You said you are staying within your calories, so there is nothing wrong with having the sweet treats you enjoy
  • Packerjohn
    Packerjohn Posts: 4,855 Member
    senecarr wrote: »
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    Geekymonkey99 wrote: »
    My best month of weight loss was one where 75%+ of my diet was cookies (biscuits). I'd have 1200 calories worth of them for breakfast alone. And I've lost a total of 25 pounds while eating sugar well beyond moderation. You're fine as long as you're under your goal and don't have a medical condition where you need to limit sugar.

    No way that can be healthy.
    Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
    Geekymonkey99 wrote: »
    My best month of weight loss was one where 75%+ of my diet was cookies (biscuits). I'd have 1200 calories worth of them for breakfast alone. And I've lost a total of 25 pounds while eating sugar well beyond moderation. You're fine as long as you're under your goal and don't have a medical condition where you need to limit sugar.

    Losing weight is not necessarily a sign that "You're fine"

    You're both being assumptive. Generally speaking, losing weight, even with what looks like poor nutrition, can still cause improvements in health markers.
    cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/
    For a class project, Haub limited himself to less than 1,800 calories a day. A man of Haub's pre-dieting size usually consumes about 2,600 calories daily. So he followed a basic principle of weight loss: He consumed significantly fewer calories than he burned.
    His body mass index went from 28.8, considered overweight, to 24.9, which is normal. He now weighs 174 pounds.
    But you might expect other indicators of health would have suffered. Not so.
    Haub's "bad" cholesterol, or LDL, dropped 20 percent and his "good" cholesterol, or HDL, increased by 20 percent. He reduced the level of triglycerides, which are a form of fat, by 39 percent.

    I'm not being assumptive, I'm stating a fact. You can still lose weight while eating a balanced diet. Best of both worlds.
  • senecarr
    senecarr Posts: 5,377 Member
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    senecarr wrote: »
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    Geekymonkey99 wrote: »
    My best month of weight loss was one where 75%+ of my diet was cookies (biscuits). I'd have 1200 calories worth of them for breakfast alone. And I've lost a total of 25 pounds while eating sugar well beyond moderation. You're fine as long as you're under your goal and don't have a medical condition where you need to limit sugar.

    No way that can be healthy.
    Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
    Geekymonkey99 wrote: »
    My best month of weight loss was one where 75%+ of my diet was cookies (biscuits). I'd have 1200 calories worth of them for breakfast alone. And I've lost a total of 25 pounds while eating sugar well beyond moderation. You're fine as long as you're under your goal and don't have a medical condition where you need to limit sugar.

    Losing weight is not necessarily a sign that "You're fine"

    You're both being assumptive. Generally speaking, losing weight, even with what looks like poor nutrition, can still cause improvements in health markers.
    cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/
    For a class project, Haub limited himself to less than 1,800 calories a day. A man of Haub's pre-dieting size usually consumes about 2,600 calories daily. So he followed a basic principle of weight loss: He consumed significantly fewer calories than he burned.
    His body mass index went from 28.8, considered overweight, to 24.9, which is normal. He now weighs 174 pounds.
    But you might expect other indicators of health would have suffered. Not so.
    Haub's "bad" cholesterol, or LDL, dropped 20 percent and his "good" cholesterol, or HDL, increased by 20 percent. He reduced the level of triglycerides, which are a form of fat, by 39 percent.

    I'm not being assumptive, I'm stating a fact. You can still lose weight while eating a balanced diet. Best of both worlds.

    You said "no way that can be healthy". Well, in fact, eating junk food for pretty much all calories and losing weight improves a number of health markers.
    Would it probably be healthier to have a more varied diet? Probably. That doesn't mean it what GeekyMonkey did was not healthy.
  • Packerjohn
    Packerjohn Posts: 4,855 Member
    senecarr wrote: »
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    senecarr wrote: »
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    Geekymonkey99 wrote: »
    My best month of weight loss was one where 75%+ of my diet was cookies (biscuits). I'd have 1200 calories worth of them for breakfast alone. And I've lost a total of 25 pounds while eating sugar well beyond moderation. You're fine as long as you're under your goal and don't have a medical condition where you need to limit sugar.

    No way that can be healthy.
    Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
    Geekymonkey99 wrote: »
    My best month of weight loss was one where 75%+ of my diet was cookies (biscuits). I'd have 1200 calories worth of them for breakfast alone. And I've lost a total of 25 pounds while eating sugar well beyond moderation. You're fine as long as you're under your goal and don't have a medical condition where you need to limit sugar.

    Losing weight is not necessarily a sign that "You're fine"

    You're both being assumptive. Generally speaking, losing weight, even with what looks like poor nutrition, can still cause improvements in health markers.
    cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/
    For a class project, Haub limited himself to less than 1,800 calories a day. A man of Haub's pre-dieting size usually consumes about 2,600 calories daily. So he followed a basic principle of weight loss: He consumed significantly fewer calories than he burned.
    His body mass index went from 28.8, considered overweight, to 24.9, which is normal. He now weighs 174 pounds.
    But you might expect other indicators of health would have suffered. Not so.
    Haub's "bad" cholesterol, or LDL, dropped 20 percent and his "good" cholesterol, or HDL, increased by 20 percent. He reduced the level of triglycerides, which are a form of fat, by 39 percent.

    I'm not being assumptive, I'm stating a fact. You can still lose weight while eating a balanced diet. Best of both worlds.

    You said "no way that can be healthy". Well, in fact, eating junk food for pretty much all calories and losing weight improves a number of health markers.
    Would it probably be healthier to have a more varied diet? Probably. That doesn't mean it what GeekyMonkey did was not healthy.


    "My best month of weight loss was one where 75%+ of my diet was cookies (biscuits). I'd have 1200 calories worth of them for breakfast alone." GeekyMonkey's quote.

    Maybe in a land where unicorns prance under rainbows, but not in the real world Ask any medical professional if this is healthy.
  • pineapple_jojo
    pineapple_jojo Posts: 440 Member
    I'm really bad if I have sugar - the more I have the more I want! I feel your pain!!
  • Need2Exerc1se
    Need2Exerc1se Posts: 13,575 Member
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    senecarr wrote: »
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    senecarr wrote: »
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    Geekymonkey99 wrote: »
    My best month of weight loss was one where 75%+ of my diet was cookies (biscuits). I'd have 1200 calories worth of them for breakfast alone. And I've lost a total of 25 pounds while eating sugar well beyond moderation. You're fine as long as you're under your goal and don't have a medical condition where you need to limit sugar.

    No way that can be healthy.
    Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
    Geekymonkey99 wrote: »
    My best month of weight loss was one where 75%+ of my diet was cookies (biscuits). I'd have 1200 calories worth of them for breakfast alone. And I've lost a total of 25 pounds while eating sugar well beyond moderation. You're fine as long as you're under your goal and don't have a medical condition where you need to limit sugar.

    Losing weight is not necessarily a sign that "You're fine"

    You're both being assumptive. Generally speaking, losing weight, even with what looks like poor nutrition, can still cause improvements in health markers.
    cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/
    For a class project, Haub limited himself to less than 1,800 calories a day. A man of Haub's pre-dieting size usually consumes about 2,600 calories daily. So he followed a basic principle of weight loss: He consumed significantly fewer calories than he burned.
    His body mass index went from 28.8, considered overweight, to 24.9, which is normal. He now weighs 174 pounds.
    But you might expect other indicators of health would have suffered. Not so.
    Haub's "bad" cholesterol, or LDL, dropped 20 percent and his "good" cholesterol, or HDL, increased by 20 percent. He reduced the level of triglycerides, which are a form of fat, by 39 percent.

    I'm not being assumptive, I'm stating a fact. You can still lose weight while eating a balanced diet. Best of both worlds.

    You said "no way that can be healthy". Well, in fact, eating junk food for pretty much all calories and losing weight improves a number of health markers.
    Would it probably be healthier to have a more varied diet? Probably. That doesn't mean it what GeekyMonkey did was not healthy.


    "My best month of weight loss was one where 75%+ of my diet was cookies (biscuits). I'd have 1200 calories worth of them for breakfast alone." GeekyMonkey's quote.

    Maybe in a land where unicorns prance under rainbows, but not in the real world Ask any medical professional if this is healthy.

    It is highly unlikely that a long term diet of 75% cookies could be healthy, though it would depend on what was in the cookies. Peanut butter oatmeal cookies with raisins and protein powder vs. Thin Mints, for example.

    But for only one month, it's also unlikely to matter in the grand scheme of things if you are getting enough calories to livesurvive.
  • auddii
    auddii Posts: 15,357 Member
    Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    senecarr wrote: »
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    senecarr wrote: »
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    Geekymonkey99 wrote: »
    My best month of weight loss was one where 75%+ of my diet was cookies (biscuits). I'd have 1200 calories worth of them for breakfast alone. And I've lost a total of 25 pounds while eating sugar well beyond moderation. You're fine as long as you're under your goal and don't have a medical condition where you need to limit sugar.

    No way that can be healthy.
    Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
    Geekymonkey99 wrote: »
    My best month of weight loss was one where 75%+ of my diet was cookies (biscuits). I'd have 1200 calories worth of them for breakfast alone. And I've lost a total of 25 pounds while eating sugar well beyond moderation. You're fine as long as you're under your goal and don't have a medical condition where you need to limit sugar.

    Losing weight is not necessarily a sign that "You're fine"

    You're both being assumptive. Generally speaking, losing weight, even with what looks like poor nutrition, can still cause improvements in health markers.
    cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/
    For a class project, Haub limited himself to less than 1,800 calories a day. A man of Haub's pre-dieting size usually consumes about 2,600 calories daily. So he followed a basic principle of weight loss: He consumed significantly fewer calories than he burned.
    His body mass index went from 28.8, considered overweight, to 24.9, which is normal. He now weighs 174 pounds.
    But you might expect other indicators of health would have suffered. Not so.
    Haub's "bad" cholesterol, or LDL, dropped 20 percent and his "good" cholesterol, or HDL, increased by 20 percent. He reduced the level of triglycerides, which are a form of fat, by 39 percent.

    I'm not being assumptive, I'm stating a fact. You can still lose weight while eating a balanced diet. Best of both worlds.

    You said "no way that can be healthy". Well, in fact, eating junk food for pretty much all calories and losing weight improves a number of health markers.
    Would it probably be healthier to have a more varied diet? Probably. That doesn't mean it what GeekyMonkey did was not healthy.


    "My best month of weight loss was one where 75%+ of my diet was cookies (biscuits). I'd have 1200 calories worth of them for breakfast alone." GeekyMonkey's quote.

    Maybe in a land where unicorns prance under rainbows, but not in the real world Ask any medical professional if this is healthy.

    It is highly unlikely that a long term diet of 75% cookies could be healthy, though it would depend on what was in the cookies. Peanut butter oatmeal cookies with raisins and protein powder vs. Thin Mints, for example.

    But for only one month, it's also unlikely to matter in the grand scheme of things if you are getting enough calories to livesurvive.

    Um, do you have a recipe for said peanut butter oatmeal cookies with raisins and protein powder? Because those sound awesome...
  • Need2Exerc1se
    Need2Exerc1se Posts: 13,575 Member
    auddii wrote: »
    Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    senecarr wrote: »
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    senecarr wrote: »
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    Geekymonkey99 wrote: »
    My best month of weight loss was one where 75%+ of my diet was cookies (biscuits). I'd have 1200 calories worth of them for breakfast alone. And I've lost a total of 25 pounds while eating sugar well beyond moderation. You're fine as long as you're under your goal and don't have a medical condition where you need to limit sugar.

    No way that can be healthy.
    Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
    Geekymonkey99 wrote: »
    My best month of weight loss was one where 75%+ of my diet was cookies (biscuits). I'd have 1200 calories worth of them for breakfast alone. And I've lost a total of 25 pounds while eating sugar well beyond moderation. You're fine as long as you're under your goal and don't have a medical condition where you need to limit sugar.

    Losing weight is not necessarily a sign that "You're fine"

    You're both being assumptive. Generally speaking, losing weight, even with what looks like poor nutrition, can still cause improvements in health markers.
    cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/
    For a class project, Haub limited himself to less than 1,800 calories a day. A man of Haub's pre-dieting size usually consumes about 2,600 calories daily. So he followed a basic principle of weight loss: He consumed significantly fewer calories than he burned.
    His body mass index went from 28.8, considered overweight, to 24.9, which is normal. He now weighs 174 pounds.
    But you might expect other indicators of health would have suffered. Not so.
    Haub's "bad" cholesterol, or LDL, dropped 20 percent and his "good" cholesterol, or HDL, increased by 20 percent. He reduced the level of triglycerides, which are a form of fat, by 39 percent.

    I'm not being assumptive, I'm stating a fact. You can still lose weight while eating a balanced diet. Best of both worlds.

    You said "no way that can be healthy". Well, in fact, eating junk food for pretty much all calories and losing weight improves a number of health markers.
    Would it probably be healthier to have a more varied diet? Probably. That doesn't mean it what GeekyMonkey did was not healthy.


    "My best month of weight loss was one where 75%+ of my diet was cookies (biscuits). I'd have 1200 calories worth of them for breakfast alone." GeekyMonkey's quote.

    Maybe in a land where unicorns prance under rainbows, but not in the real world Ask any medical professional if this is healthy.

    It is highly unlikely that a long term diet of 75% cookies could be healthy, though it would depend on what was in the cookies. Peanut butter oatmeal cookies with raisins and protein powder vs. Thin Mints, for example.

    But for only one month, it's also unlikely to matter in the grand scheme of things if you are getting enough calories to livesurvive.

    Um, do you have a recipe for said peanut butter oatmeal cookies with raisins and protein powder? Because those sound awesome...

    Sorry, no. I don't like raisins in cookies and have never tried putting protein powder in cookies. I'm sure the internet has one somewhere, though.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    senecarr wrote: »
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    senecarr wrote: »
    Packerjohn wrote: »
    Geekymonkey99 wrote: »
    My best month of weight loss was one where 75%+ of my diet was cookies (biscuits). I'd have 1200 calories worth of them for breakfast alone. And I've lost a total of 25 pounds while eating sugar well beyond moderation. You're fine as long as you're under your goal and don't have a medical condition where you need to limit sugar.

    No way that can be healthy.
    Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
    Geekymonkey99 wrote: »
    My best month of weight loss was one where 75%+ of my diet was cookies (biscuits). I'd have 1200 calories worth of them for breakfast alone. And I've lost a total of 25 pounds while eating sugar well beyond moderation. You're fine as long as you're under your goal and don't have a medical condition where you need to limit sugar.

    Losing weight is not necessarily a sign that "You're fine"

    You're both being assumptive. Generally speaking, losing weight, even with what looks like poor nutrition, can still cause improvements in health markers.
    cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/
    For a class project, Haub limited himself to less than 1,800 calories a day. A man of Haub's pre-dieting size usually consumes about 2,600 calories daily. So he followed a basic principle of weight loss: He consumed significantly fewer calories than he burned.
    His body mass index went from 28.8, considered overweight, to 24.9, which is normal. He now weighs 174 pounds.
    But you might expect other indicators of health would have suffered. Not so.
    Haub's "bad" cholesterol, or LDL, dropped 20 percent and his "good" cholesterol, or HDL, increased by 20 percent. He reduced the level of triglycerides, which are a form of fat, by 39 percent.

    I'm not being assumptive, I'm stating a fact. You can still lose weight while eating a balanced diet. Best of both worlds.

    You said "no way that can be healthy". Well, in fact, eating junk food for pretty much all calories and losing weight improves a number of health markers.
    Would it probably be healthier to have a more varied diet? Probably. That doesn't mean it what GeekyMonkey did was not healthy.


    "My best month of weight loss was one where 75%+ of my diet was cookies (biscuits). I'd have 1200 calories worth of them for breakfast alone." GeekyMonkey's quote.

    Maybe in a land where unicorns prance under rainbows, but not in the real world Ask any medical professional if this is healthy.

    It is highly unlikely that a long term diet of 75% cookies could be healthy, though it would depend on what was in the cookies. Peanut butter oatmeal cookies with raisins and protein powder vs. Thin Mints, for example.

    But for only one month, it's also unlikely to matter in the grand scheme of things if you are getting enough calories to livesurvive.

    I think this is right.

    I also think that if someone needs to lose significant weight, often just losing the weight is the absolute best thing they can do for their health (followed by getting active if they are not). I'd put both of those above the benefits of eating a nutritionally ideal diet, at least in the short term. Thus, IMO, what is more important than obsessing about whether you are eating too much sugar (barring a specific health issue) or too much sodium or too much saturated fat, etc. is what will allow you to stick to a deficit in a sustainable way.

    For many of us this means focusing on nutrition, and in the longer term I think keeping a deficit will necessarily result in most people gravitating toward a more nutritionally-focused diet (whether they specifically think of it that way or not), because that's the food most likely to keep you full on lowered calories as well as helping you feel good, energetic, etc., on same, at least on average. (This does not mean that anything needs to be eliminated or a day or week of more indulgence-focused eating won't happen.)

    However, often when people start it means figuring out what allows them to cut calories without feeling like they are punishing themselves or cutting out the foods they love or changing too drastically. I've told the story before of a friend of mine who lost 100 lbs and started at first by not changing her primarily fast-food based diet (she's one of the few people I know who actually did eat mostly fast food, and she didn't think it was a great choice, but she also knew herself and that she wasn't ready to change that but needed to lose weight). She lost about 50 lbs or so and then started gradually changing to a different sort of diet meal by meal--something about losing the weight and eating less/making better choices at that restaurant got her ready to change more.

    In this case, I'd be hesitant to poo-poo the changes she made by just eating less, or suggest that if she subsequently decided a week back on the mostly fast food diet was something she needed to fit in to stick to her overall vastly improved eating plan (and weight loss) that that would be unhealthy. Everything must be looked at in context.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories