The deal on sugar
Options
Replies
-
FunkyTobias wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Psst. Fun Fact. Go ahead and eat ZERO carbs (sugar is a carb) and your magical body will magically produce all the magical sugar your body and brain requires to run effectively. Its magic. Don't tell anyone. It is a secret. Amaze your friends. Thank me later.
By "effectively" you mean "doesn't die".
Essential is not the same as optimal.
Not hardly.
Ketones are an optimal brain fuel.
If ketones were optimal, the brain would be able to run on them exclusively. But it can't.It's been used for decades to preserve brain health in epileptics by preventing seizures and is currently a treatment for many other brain diseases/conditions including cancer. Only a minimal amount of glucose is required on a daily basis and can be provided through gluconeogenesis from consumed protein.
Carbs are a non essential food.
Essential nutrients are those which the body relies on but cannot synthesize itself. Hence the distinction between essential and optimal.
If you think that non-essential nutrients should be avoided, you had better stop eating saturated and monounsaturated fats, since none of them are essential either.It's just as bad to tell people they HAVE to have at least some carbs and sugar to perform at optimal levels as it is to suggest that nobody should ever eat them.
If you eat no carbs at all, then you are eating no vegetables. So yes, you must eat some to perform optimally.
I never said non essential nutrients should be avoided. I've never told anyone they should or shouldn't eat anything. I've never told anyone that a certain this or that must be had in any volume whatsoever.
I simply stated that carbs are a non essential food.
Your statement "Essential nutrients are those which the body relies on but cannot synthesize itself." I agree with. The body CAN synthesize its own glucose. And when it does, it only creates a minimal amount. It could just keep making glucose, but once it has what it needs, any remaining excess protein is also turned into ketones...
And this just doesn't make sense. "If ketones were optimal, the brain would be able to run on them exclusively." Why?0 -
FunkyTobias wrote: »Psst. Fun Fact. Go ahead and eat ZERO carbs (sugar is a carb) and your magical body will magically produce all the magical sugar your body and brain requires to run effectively. Its magic. Don't tell anyone. It is a secret. Amaze your friends. Thank me later.
By "effectively" you mean "doesn't die".
Essential is not the same as optimal.
That is not at all what I mean, don't twist my words, it is obvious that is not my meaning.
The reason I was able to sustain such a large change in my diet is because I do not feel like crap after eating any more. They don't call it a a "carb coma" or "food coma" for nothing. If you don't have a problem like this, just leave those of us who do alone for choosing to minimize carbs.
0 -
DeguelloTex wrote: »I don't cut sugar.
If someone wants to cut sugar, I think it would be ideal if it were done for a cogent reason. Even if it's done because of a derpy Facebook inforgraphic or a laughably bad "documentary," though, that's his call. The issue, imo, is when people start telling others what they should or shouldn't eat.
Funny, you just did. Most in this post are pushing carbs. It's like some weird crusade to control others food choices.0 -
You're going to get this one wrong on your tests!
0 -
Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Psst. Fun Fact. Go ahead and eat ZERO carbs (sugar is a carb) and your magical body will magically produce all the magical sugar your body and brain requires to run effectively. Its magic. Don't tell anyone. It is a secret. Amaze your friends. Thank me later.
By "effectively" you mean "doesn't die".
Essential is not the same as optimal.
Not hardly.
Ketones are an optimal brain fuel.
If ketones were optimal, the brain would be able to run on them exclusively. But it can't.It's been used for decades to preserve brain health in epileptics by preventing seizures and is currently a treatment for many other brain diseases/conditions including cancer. Only a minimal amount of glucose is required on a daily basis and can be provided through gluconeogenesis from consumed protein.
Carbs are a non essential food.
Essential nutrients are those which the body relies on but cannot synthesize itself. Hence the distinction between essential and optimal.
If you think that non-essential nutrients should be avoided, you had better stop eating saturated and monounsaturated fats, since none of them are essential either.It's just as bad to tell people they HAVE to have at least some carbs and sugar to perform at optimal levels as it is to suggest that nobody should ever eat them.
If you eat no carbs at all, then you are eating no vegetables. So yes, you must eat some to perform optimally.
I never said non essential nutrients should be avoided. I've never told anyone they should or shouldn't eat anything. I've never told anyone that a certain this or that must be had in any volume whatsoever.
I simply stated that carbs are a non essential food.
Your statement "Essential nutrients are those which the body relies on but cannot synthesize itself." I agree with. The body CAN synthesize its own glucose. And when it does, it only creates a minimal amount. It could just keep making glucose, but once it has what it needs, any remaining excess protein is also turned into ketones...
LOL. no.And this just doesn't make sense. "If ketones were optimal, the brain would be able to run on them exclusively." Why?
Are ketones necessary for brain function? No.
Are ketones sufficient for brain function? No.
How then, can they be optimal?
0 -
FunkyTobias wrote: »Psst. Fun Fact. Go ahead and eat ZERO carbs (sugar is a carb) and your magical body will magically produce all the magical sugar your body and brain requires to run effectively. Its magic. Don't tell anyone. It is a secret. Amaze your friends. Thank me later.
By "effectively" you mean "doesn't die".
Essential is not the same as optimal.
That is not at all what I mean, don't twist my words, it is obvious that is not my meaning.
The reason I was able to sustain such a large change in my diet is because I do not feel like crap after eating any more. They don't call it a a "carb coma" or "food coma" for nothing. If you don't have a problem like this, just leave those of us who do alone for choosing to minimize carbs.
Nobody is giving anyone flack for minimizing carbs.
It's demonizing carbs that we have a problem with.0 -
How does it not make sense? Clearly some parts of it can't be run on purely ketones, and when given the option, it always uses glucose. Why would it make sense to run on less optimal fuel when available when the evolution of the brain is the biggest part of the evolution of genus homo, and the only real thing to differentiate it?Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Psst. Fun Fact. Go ahead and eat ZERO carbs (sugar is a carb) and your magical body will magically produce all the magical sugar your body and brain requires to run effectively. Its magic. Don't tell anyone. It is a secret. Amaze your friends. Thank me later.
By "effectively" you mean "doesn't die".
Essential is not the same as optimal.
Not hardly.
Ketones are an optimal brain fuel.
If ketones were optimal, the brain would be able to run on them exclusively. But it can't.It's been used for decades to preserve brain health in epileptics by preventing seizures and is currently a treatment for many other brain diseases/conditions including cancer. Only a minimal amount of glucose is required on a daily basis and can be provided through gluconeogenesis from consumed protein.
Carbs are a non essential food.
Essential nutrients are those which the body relies on but cannot synthesize itself. Hence the distinction between essential and optimal.
If you think that non-essential nutrients should be avoided, you had better stop eating saturated and monounsaturated fats, since none of them are essential either.It's just as bad to tell people they HAVE to have at least some carbs and sugar to perform at optimal levels as it is to suggest that nobody should ever eat them.
If you eat no carbs at all, then you are eating no vegetables. So yes, you must eat some to perform optimally.
I never said non essential nutrients should be avoided. I've never told anyone they should or shouldn't eat anything. I've never told anyone that a certain this or that must be had in any volume whatsoever.
I simply stated that carbs are a non essential food.
Your statement "Essential nutrients are those which the body relies on but cannot synthesize itself." I agree with. The body CAN synthesize its own glucose. And when it does, it only creates a minimal amount. It could just keep making glucose, but once it has what it needs, any remaining excess protein is also turned into ketones...
And this just doesn't make sense. "If ketones were optimal, the brain would be able to run on them exclusively." Why?0 -
How does it not make sense? Clearly some parts of it can't be run on purely ketones, and when given the option, it always uses glucose. Why would it make sense to run on less optimal fuel when available when the evolution of the brain is the biggest part of the evolution of genus homo, and the only real thing to differentiate it?Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Psst. Fun Fact. Go ahead and eat ZERO carbs (sugar is a carb) and your magical body will magically produce all the magical sugar your body and brain requires to run effectively. Its magic. Don't tell anyone. It is a secret. Amaze your friends. Thank me later.
By "effectively" you mean "doesn't die".
Essential is not the same as optimal.
Not hardly.
Ketones are an optimal brain fuel.
If ketones were optimal, the brain would be able to run on them exclusively. But it can't.It's been used for decades to preserve brain health in epileptics by preventing seizures and is currently a treatment for many other brain diseases/conditions including cancer. Only a minimal amount of glucose is required on a daily basis and can be provided through gluconeogenesis from consumed protein.
Carbs are a non essential food.
Essential nutrients are those which the body relies on but cannot synthesize itself. Hence the distinction between essential and optimal.
If you think that non-essential nutrients should be avoided, you had better stop eating saturated and monounsaturated fats, since none of them are essential either.It's just as bad to tell people they HAVE to have at least some carbs and sugar to perform at optimal levels as it is to suggest that nobody should ever eat them.
If you eat no carbs at all, then you are eating no vegetables. So yes, you must eat some to perform optimally.
I never said non essential nutrients should be avoided. I've never told anyone they should or shouldn't eat anything. I've never told anyone that a certain this or that must be had in any volume whatsoever.
I simply stated that carbs are a non essential food.
Your statement "Essential nutrients are those which the body relies on but cannot synthesize itself." I agree with. The body CAN synthesize its own glucose. And when it does, it only creates a minimal amount. It could just keep making glucose, but once it has what it needs, any remaining excess protein is also turned into ketones...
And this just doesn't make sense. "If ketones were optimal, the brain would be able to run on them exclusively." Why?
You are saying the body uses glucose first because its the more optimal fuel, what if the body uses glucose first because high blood glucose is a hazardous state for the body? Don't confuse 'uses first' with 'optimal'.0 -
And no one said a thing about the fats being the last thing to go. I am pretty sure that if I eat my protein and do my strength training, my body will take my stored fat before breaking down muscle. Otherwise I would be a weak blob of fat by now.0
-
How does it not make sense? Clearly some parts of it can't be run on purely ketones, and when given the option, it always uses glucose. Why would it make sense to run on less optimal fuel when available when the evolution of the brain is the biggest part of the evolution of genus homo, and the only real thing to differentiate it?Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Psst. Fun Fact. Go ahead and eat ZERO carbs (sugar is a carb) and your magical body will magically produce all the magical sugar your body and brain requires to run effectively. Its magic. Don't tell anyone. It is a secret. Amaze your friends. Thank me later.
By "effectively" you mean "doesn't die".
Essential is not the same as optimal.
Not hardly.
Ketones are an optimal brain fuel.
If ketones were optimal, the brain would be able to run on them exclusively. But it can't.It's been used for decades to preserve brain health in epileptics by preventing seizures and is currently a treatment for many other brain diseases/conditions including cancer. Only a minimal amount of glucose is required on a daily basis and can be provided through gluconeogenesis from consumed protein.
Carbs are a non essential food.
Essential nutrients are those which the body relies on but cannot synthesize itself. Hence the distinction between essential and optimal.
If you think that non-essential nutrients should be avoided, you had better stop eating saturated and monounsaturated fats, since none of them are essential either.It's just as bad to tell people they HAVE to have at least some carbs and sugar to perform at optimal levels as it is to suggest that nobody should ever eat them.
If you eat no carbs at all, then you are eating no vegetables. So yes, you must eat some to perform optimally.
I never said non essential nutrients should be avoided. I've never told anyone they should or shouldn't eat anything. I've never told anyone that a certain this or that must be had in any volume whatsoever.
I simply stated that carbs are a non essential food.
Your statement "Essential nutrients are those which the body relies on but cannot synthesize itself." I agree with. The body CAN synthesize its own glucose. And when it does, it only creates a minimal amount. It could just keep making glucose, but once it has what it needs, any remaining excess protein is also turned into ketones...
And this just doesn't make sense. "If ketones were optimal, the brain would be able to run on them exclusively." Why?
You are saying the body uses glucose first because its the more optimal fuel, what if the body uses glucose first because high blood glucose is a hazardous state for the body? Don't confuse 'uses first' with 'optimal'.
Well, except it is. To utilize triglycerides and and fatty acids your body has to do more chemical reactions than it does for glucose, which is why glucose is a preferred source - it is fast reactant for ATP production.
Seriously, the implication that your brain uses glucose because it is a toxic material and the body needs to dump it asap? If it was such a problem, why would the body waste energy producing glucose just to have to dump it out to keep from toxify itself? Sometimes evolution does some bass ackwards stuff because it has to work with what is there, but I assure the brain's reliance on at least some glucose isn't some klutch play energy sourcing.0 -
How does it not make sense? Clearly some parts of it can't be run on purely ketones, and when given the option, it always uses glucose. Why would it make sense to run on less optimal fuel when available when the evolution of the brain is the biggest part of the evolution of genus homo, and the only real thing to differentiate it?Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Psst. Fun Fact. Go ahead and eat ZERO carbs (sugar is a carb) and your magical body will magically produce all the magical sugar your body and brain requires to run effectively. Its magic. Don't tell anyone. It is a secret. Amaze your friends. Thank me later.
By "effectively" you mean "doesn't die".
Essential is not the same as optimal.
Not hardly.
Ketones are an optimal brain fuel.
If ketones were optimal, the brain would be able to run on them exclusively. But it can't.It's been used for decades to preserve brain health in epileptics by preventing seizures and is currently a treatment for many other brain diseases/conditions including cancer. Only a minimal amount of glucose is required on a daily basis and can be provided through gluconeogenesis from consumed protein.
Carbs are a non essential food.
Essential nutrients are those which the body relies on but cannot synthesize itself. Hence the distinction between essential and optimal.
If you think that non-essential nutrients should be avoided, you had better stop eating saturated and monounsaturated fats, since none of them are essential either.It's just as bad to tell people they HAVE to have at least some carbs and sugar to perform at optimal levels as it is to suggest that nobody should ever eat them.
If you eat no carbs at all, then you are eating no vegetables. So yes, you must eat some to perform optimally.
I never said non essential nutrients should be avoided. I've never told anyone they should or shouldn't eat anything. I've never told anyone that a certain this or that must be had in any volume whatsoever.
I simply stated that carbs are a non essential food.
Your statement "Essential nutrients are those which the body relies on but cannot synthesize itself." I agree with. The body CAN synthesize its own glucose. And when it does, it only creates a minimal amount. It could just keep making glucose, but once it has what it needs, any remaining excess protein is also turned into ketones...
And this just doesn't make sense. "If ketones were optimal, the brain would be able to run on them exclusively." Why?
You are saying the body uses glucose first because its the more optimal fuel, what if the body uses glucose first because high blood glucose is a hazardous state for the body? Don't confuse 'uses first' with 'optimal'.
Well, except it is. To utilize triglycerides and and fatty acids your body has to do more chemical reactions than it does for glucose, which is why glucose is a preferred source - it is fast reactant for ATP production.
Seriously, the implication that your brain uses glucose because it is a toxic material and the body needs to dump it asap? If it was such a problem, why would the body waste energy producing glucose just to have to dump it out to keep from toxify itself? Sometimes evolution does some bass ackwards stuff because it has to work with what is there, but I assure the brain's reliance on at least some glucose isn't some klutch play energy sourcing.
Hey I don't know, but I do know better than claiming something is all-around the best and super-terrific too. Every fuel has strengths and weaknesses. If you don't know the weaknesses, it just means we don't understand, it does not mean the weakness does not exist. First & fast are positives. The negatives matter too.0 -
How does it not make sense? Clearly some parts of it can't be run on purely ketones, and when given the option, it always uses glucose. Why would it make sense to run on less optimal fuel when available when the evolution of the brain is the biggest part of the evolution of genus homo, and the only real thing to differentiate it?Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Psst. Fun Fact. Go ahead and eat ZERO carbs (sugar is a carb) and your magical body will magically produce all the magical sugar your body and brain requires to run effectively. Its magic. Don't tell anyone. It is a secret. Amaze your friends. Thank me later.
By "effectively" you mean "doesn't die".
Essential is not the same as optimal.
Not hardly.
Ketones are an optimal brain fuel.
If ketones were optimal, the brain would be able to run on them exclusively. But it can't.It's been used for decades to preserve brain health in epileptics by preventing seizures and is currently a treatment for many other brain diseases/conditions including cancer. Only a minimal amount of glucose is required on a daily basis and can be provided through gluconeogenesis from consumed protein.
Carbs are a non essential food.
Essential nutrients are those which the body relies on but cannot synthesize itself. Hence the distinction between essential and optimal.
If you think that non-essential nutrients should be avoided, you had better stop eating saturated and monounsaturated fats, since none of them are essential either.It's just as bad to tell people they HAVE to have at least some carbs and sugar to perform at optimal levels as it is to suggest that nobody should ever eat them.
If you eat no carbs at all, then you are eating no vegetables. So yes, you must eat some to perform optimally.
I never said non essential nutrients should be avoided. I've never told anyone they should or shouldn't eat anything. I've never told anyone that a certain this or that must be had in any volume whatsoever.
I simply stated that carbs are a non essential food.
Your statement "Essential nutrients are those which the body relies on but cannot synthesize itself." I agree with. The body CAN synthesize its own glucose. And when it does, it only creates a minimal amount. It could just keep making glucose, but once it has what it needs, any remaining excess protein is also turned into ketones...
And this just doesn't make sense. "If ketones were optimal, the brain would be able to run on them exclusively." Why?
You are saying the body uses glucose first because its the more optimal fuel, what if the body uses glucose first because high blood glucose is a hazardous state for the body? Don't confuse 'uses first' with 'optimal'.
Well, except it is. To utilize triglycerides and and fatty acids your body has to do more chemical reactions than it does for glucose, which is why glucose is a preferred source - it is fast reactant for ATP production.
Seriously, the implication that your brain uses glucose because it is a toxic material and the body needs to dump it asap? If it was such a problem, why would the body waste energy producing glucose just to have to dump it out to keep from toxify itself? Sometimes evolution does some bass ackwards stuff because it has to work with what is there, but I assure the brain's reliance on at least some glucose isn't some klutch play energy sourcing.
oh ya, almost missed this - everything has a level at which it becomes toxic to humans. I think the body only produces glucose to the level needed and not to excess. It is only when we eat that an excess happens. Or so I seem to have understood from what I've read.0 -
I'm just going to leave this here
The Importance of Dietary Carbohydrate in Human Evolution
Karen Hardy, Jennie Brand-Miller, Katherine D. Brown, Mark G. Thomas, and Les Copeland
ICREA (Catalan Institution for Research and Advanced Studies), Departament de Prehistòria, Facultat de Filosofia i Lletres, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona 08193 Bellaterra, Barcelona, Spain khardy@icrea.cat
School of Molecular Bioscience and Charles Perkins Centre, University of Sydney Sydney, New South Wales 2006 Australia jennie.brandmiller@sydney.edu.au
Research Department of Genetics, Environment and Evolution, University College London London, WC1E 6BT United Kingdom katherine.brown.11@ucl.ac.uk
Research Department of Genetics, Environment and Evolution, University College London London, WC1E 6BT United Kingdom m.thomas@ucl.ac.uk
Faculty of Agriculture and Environment, University of Sydney Sydney, New South Wales 2006 Australia les.copeland@sydney.edu.au
Abstract
We propose that plant foods containing high quantities of starch were essential for the evolution of the human phenotype during the Pleistocene. Although previous studies have highlighted a stone tool-mediated shift from primarily plant-based to primarily meat-based diets as critical in the development of the brain and other human traits, we argue that digestible carbohydrates were also necessary to accommodate the increased metabolic demands of a growing brain. Furthermore, we acknowledge the adaptive role cooking played in improving the digestibility and palatability of key carbohydrates. We provide evidence that cooked starch, a source of preformed glucose, greatly increased energy availability to human tissues with high glucose demands, such as the brain, red blood cells, and the developing fetus. We also highlight the auxiliary role copy number variation in the salivary amylase genes may have played in increasing the importance of starch in human evolution following the origins of cooking. Salivary amylases are largely ineffective on raw crystalline starch, but cooking substantially increases both their energy-yielding potential and glycemia. Although uncertainties remain regarding the antiquity of cooking and the origins of salivary amylase gene copy number variation, the hypothesis we present makes a testable prediction that these events are correlated.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/682587
0 -
How does it not make sense? Clearly some parts of it can't be run on purely ketones, and when given the option, it always uses glucose. Why would it make sense to run on less optimal fuel when available when the evolution of the brain is the biggest part of the evolution of genus homo, and the only real thing to differentiate it?Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Psst. Fun Fact. Go ahead and eat ZERO carbs (sugar is a carb) and your magical body will magically produce all the magical sugar your body and brain requires to run effectively. Its magic. Don't tell anyone. It is a secret. Amaze your friends. Thank me later.
By "effectively" you mean "doesn't die".
Essential is not the same as optimal.
Not hardly.
Ketones are an optimal brain fuel.
If ketones were optimal, the brain would be able to run on them exclusively. But it can't.It's been used for decades to preserve brain health in epileptics by preventing seizures and is currently a treatment for many other brain diseases/conditions including cancer. Only a minimal amount of glucose is required on a daily basis and can be provided through gluconeogenesis from consumed protein.
Carbs are a non essential food.
Essential nutrients are those which the body relies on but cannot synthesize itself. Hence the distinction between essential and optimal.
If you think that non-essential nutrients should be avoided, you had better stop eating saturated and monounsaturated fats, since none of them are essential either.It's just as bad to tell people they HAVE to have at least some carbs and sugar to perform at optimal levels as it is to suggest that nobody should ever eat them.
If you eat no carbs at all, then you are eating no vegetables. So yes, you must eat some to perform optimally.
I never said non essential nutrients should be avoided. I've never told anyone they should or shouldn't eat anything. I've never told anyone that a certain this or that must be had in any volume whatsoever.
I simply stated that carbs are a non essential food.
Your statement "Essential nutrients are those which the body relies on but cannot synthesize itself." I agree with. The body CAN synthesize its own glucose. And when it does, it only creates a minimal amount. It could just keep making glucose, but once it has what it needs, any remaining excess protein is also turned into ketones...
And this just doesn't make sense. "If ketones were optimal, the brain would be able to run on them exclusively." Why?
You are saying the body uses glucose first because its the more optimal fuel, what if the body uses glucose first because high blood glucose is a hazardous state for the body? Don't confuse 'uses first' with 'optimal'.
Well, except it is. To utilize triglycerides and and fatty acids your body has to do more chemical reactions than it does for glucose, which is why glucose is a preferred source - it is fast reactant for ATP production.
Seriously, the implication that your brain uses glucose because it is a toxic material and the body needs to dump it asap? If it was such a problem, why would the body waste energy producing glucose just to have to dump it out to keep from toxify itself? Sometimes evolution does some bass ackwards stuff because it has to work with what is there, but I assure the brain's reliance on at least some glucose isn't some klutch play energy sourcing.
oh ya, almost missed this - everything has a level at which it becomes toxic to humans. I think the body only produces glucose to the level needed and not to excess. It is only when we eat that an excess happens. Or so I seem to have understood from what I've read.
What is excess?
What is your source from which you read the above?0 -
More FTA
There is debate on whether dietary carbohydrates are actually essential for human nutrition. In the absence of dietary carbohydrate, or during starvation, gluconeogenesis alone is usually not sufficient and the brain begins to utilize ketones, a byproduct of high levels of fat oxidation (Westman 2002). Under these conditions, about 80% of the brain’s energy needs can be met from ketones but to maintain normal brain function in individuals adapted to an essentially carbohydrate-free diet there remains an absolute requirement for 30–50 g (Institute of Medicine 2006) of dietary glycemic carbohydrate per day to fill the gap between gluconeogenic capacity and the brain’s requirement for glucose (Macdonald 1988). A daily carbohydrate intake of about 50–100 g is considered essential to prevent ketosis in adults (Institute of Medicine 2006), and is consistent with a more realistic recommendation for the practical minimal requirement of 150 g/day of glycemic carbohydrate intake beyond the ages of 3 to 4 years (Bier et al. 1999). Up to the age of 3, while brain size increases rapidly, the recommendation is that at least one-third of dietary energy should be supplied from carbohydrates (Bier et al. 1999). The additional need for pregnancy and lactation was not considered.0 -
How does it not make sense? Clearly some parts of it can't be run on purely ketones, and when given the option, it always uses glucose. Why would it make sense to run on less optimal fuel when available when the evolution of the brain is the biggest part of the evolution of genus homo, and the only real thing to differentiate it?Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Psst. Fun Fact. Go ahead and eat ZERO carbs (sugar is a carb) and your magical body will magically produce all the magical sugar your body and brain requires to run effectively. Its magic. Don't tell anyone. It is a secret. Amaze your friends. Thank me later.
By "effectively" you mean "doesn't die".
Essential is not the same as optimal.
Not hardly.
Ketones are an optimal brain fuel.
If ketones were optimal, the brain would be able to run on them exclusively. But it can't.It's been used for decades to preserve brain health in epileptics by preventing seizures and is currently a treatment for many other brain diseases/conditions including cancer. Only a minimal amount of glucose is required on a daily basis and can be provided through gluconeogenesis from consumed protein.
Carbs are a non essential food.
Essential nutrients are those which the body relies on but cannot synthesize itself. Hence the distinction between essential and optimal.
If you think that non-essential nutrients should be avoided, you had better stop eating saturated and monounsaturated fats, since none of them are essential either.It's just as bad to tell people they HAVE to have at least some carbs and sugar to perform at optimal levels as it is to suggest that nobody should ever eat them.
If you eat no carbs at all, then you are eating no vegetables. So yes, you must eat some to perform optimally.
I never said non essential nutrients should be avoided. I've never told anyone they should or shouldn't eat anything. I've never told anyone that a certain this or that must be had in any volume whatsoever.
I simply stated that carbs are a non essential food.
Your statement "Essential nutrients are those which the body relies on but cannot synthesize itself." I agree with. The body CAN synthesize its own glucose. And when it does, it only creates a minimal amount. It could just keep making glucose, but once it has what it needs, any remaining excess protein is also turned into ketones...
And this just doesn't make sense. "If ketones were optimal, the brain would be able to run on them exclusively." Why?
You are saying the body uses glucose first because its the more optimal fuel, what if the body uses glucose first because high blood glucose is a hazardous state for the body? Don't confuse 'uses first' with 'optimal'.
Exactly!
You all do realize that glucose, if not used or stored as glycogen, is then stored as fat, right?
So, doesn't it make sense for the body to use as much of that as possible before resorting to storage as fat?
Also, it's a quick burn fuel. It's like the lighter fluid you use to start a fire... You wouldn't skip the wood in preference for the quick burning lighter fluid.FunkyTobias wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Psst. Fun Fact. Go ahead and eat ZERO carbs (sugar is a carb) and your magical body will magically produce all the magical sugar your body and brain requires to run effectively. Its magic. Don't tell anyone. It is a secret. Amaze your friends. Thank me later.
By "effectively" you mean "doesn't die".
Essential is not the same as optimal.
Not hardly.
Ketones are an optimal brain fuel.
If ketones were optimal, the brain would be able to run on them exclusively. But it can't.It's been used for decades to preserve brain health in epileptics by preventing seizures and is currently a treatment for many other brain diseases/conditions including cancer. Only a minimal amount of glucose is required on a daily basis and can be provided through gluconeogenesis from consumed protein.
Carbs are a non essential food.
Essential nutrients are those which the body relies on but cannot synthesize itself. Hence the distinction between essential and optimal.
If you think that non-essential nutrients should be avoided, you had better stop eating saturated and monounsaturated fats, since none of them are essential either.It's just as bad to tell people they HAVE to have at least some carbs and sugar to perform at optimal levels as it is to suggest that nobody should ever eat them.
If you eat no carbs at all, then you are eating no vegetables. So yes, you must eat some to perform optimally.
I never said non essential nutrients should be avoided. I've never told anyone they should or shouldn't eat anything. I've never told anyone that a certain this or that must be had in any volume whatsoever.
I simply stated that carbs are a non essential food.
Your statement "Essential nutrients are those which the body relies on but cannot synthesize itself." I agree with. The body CAN synthesize its own glucose. And when it does, it only creates a minimal amount. It could just keep making glucose, but once it has what it needs, any remaining excess protein is also turned into ketones...
LOL. no.And this just doesn't make sense. "If ketones were optimal, the brain would be able to run on them exclusively." Why?
Are ketones necessary for brain function? No.
Are ketones sufficient for brain function? No.
How then, can they be optimal?
They are absolutely sufficient.
We are all born burning ketones. Every single one of us. Until our parents start feeding us processed foods and grains, our very delicate brains are growing on a decent dosage of ketones every day.
How many conditions do you know of that are caused by the body breaking down in its ability to metabolize ketones? What about glucose?
You're gonna have to do your own research.
But again, I've never said a word that could be construed as demonizing carbs. I've never told anyone they need anything specific in any quantities in the diet. I am only wanting to correct the misinformation being given by others stating that carbs are necessary, because it's completely false and horrifically outdated information.
I never said don't eat carbs. As a matter of fact it's entirely possible to attain some of the ketone benefits while eating a typical carb diet by simply doing some intermittent fasting and/or adding some MCT oil into your diet. Im just saying ketones are a good thing. I've never said anything was a bad thing.
The information about how the brain uses ketones and the benefits they provide are readily available to anyone that wishes to understand the science of all of the energy sources of the body.
The low carbers are simply pointing out the misinformation that carbs are necessary.
Not one of us has stated that everyone else should cut back or stop eating them.
We just said that we did.
Is that ok?0 -
How does it not make sense? Clearly some parts of it can't be run on purely ketones, and when given the option, it always uses glucose. Why would it make sense to run on less optimal fuel when available when the evolution of the brain is the biggest part of the evolution of genus homo, and the only real thing to differentiate it?Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Psst. Fun Fact. Go ahead and eat ZERO carbs (sugar is a carb) and your magical body will magically produce all the magical sugar your body and brain requires to run effectively. Its magic. Don't tell anyone. It is a secret. Amaze your friends. Thank me later.
By "effectively" you mean "doesn't die".
Essential is not the same as optimal.
Not hardly.
Ketones are an optimal brain fuel.
If ketones were optimal, the brain would be able to run on them exclusively. But it can't.It's been used for decades to preserve brain health in epileptics by preventing seizures and is currently a treatment for many other brain diseases/conditions including cancer. Only a minimal amount of glucose is required on a daily basis and can be provided through gluconeogenesis from consumed protein.
Carbs are a non essential food.
Essential nutrients are those which the body relies on but cannot synthesize itself. Hence the distinction between essential and optimal.
If you think that non-essential nutrients should be avoided, you had better stop eating saturated and monounsaturated fats, since none of them are essential either.It's just as bad to tell people they HAVE to have at least some carbs and sugar to perform at optimal levels as it is to suggest that nobody should ever eat them.
If you eat no carbs at all, then you are eating no vegetables. So yes, you must eat some to perform optimally.
I never said non essential nutrients should be avoided. I've never told anyone they should or shouldn't eat anything. I've never told anyone that a certain this or that must be had in any volume whatsoever.
I simply stated that carbs are a non essential food.
Your statement "Essential nutrients are those which the body relies on but cannot synthesize itself." I agree with. The body CAN synthesize its own glucose. And when it does, it only creates a minimal amount. It could just keep making glucose, but once it has what it needs, any remaining excess protein is also turned into ketones...
And this just doesn't make sense. "If ketones were optimal, the brain would be able to run on them exclusively." Why?
You are saying the body uses glucose first because its the more optimal fuel, what if the body uses glucose first because high blood glucose is a hazardous state for the body? Don't confuse 'uses first' with 'optimal'.
Well, except it is. To utilize triglycerides and and fatty acids your body has to do more chemical reactions than it does for glucose, which is why glucose is a preferred source - it is fast reactant for ATP production.
Seriously, the implication that your brain uses glucose because it is a toxic material and the body needs to dump it asap? If it was such a problem, why would the body waste energy producing glucose just to have to dump it out to keep from toxify itself? Sometimes evolution does some bass ackwards stuff because it has to work with what is there, but I assure the brain's reliance on at least some glucose isn't some klutch play energy sourcing.
Hey I don't know, but I do know better than claiming something is all-around the best and super-terrific too. Every fuel has strengths and weaknesses. If you don't know the weaknesses, it just means we don't understand, it does not mean the weakness does not exist. First & fast are positives. The negatives matter too.
False balance fallacy.0 -
Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »
How does it not make sense? Clearly some parts of it can't be run on purely ketones, and when given the option, it always uses glucose. Why would it make sense to run on less optimal fuel when available when the evolution of the brain is the biggest part of the evolution of genus homo, and the only real thing to differentiate it?Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Psst. Fun Fact. Go ahead and eat ZERO carbs (sugar is a carb) and your magical body will magically produce all the magical sugar your body and brain requires to run effectively. Its magic. Don't tell anyone. It is a secret. Amaze your friends. Thank me later.
By "effectively" you mean "doesn't die".
Essential is not the same as optimal.
Not hardly.
Ketones are an optimal brain fuel.
If ketones were optimal, the brain would be able to run on them exclusively. But it can't.It's been used for decades to preserve brain health in epileptics by preventing seizures and is currently a treatment for many other brain diseases/conditions including cancer. Only a minimal amount of glucose is required on a daily basis and can be provided through gluconeogenesis from consumed protein.
Carbs are a non essential food.
Essential nutrients are those which the body relies on but cannot synthesize itself. Hence the distinction between essential and optimal.
If you think that non-essential nutrients should be avoided, you had better stop eating saturated and monounsaturated fats, since none of them are essential either.It's just as bad to tell people they HAVE to have at least some carbs and sugar to perform at optimal levels as it is to suggest that nobody should ever eat them.
If you eat no carbs at all, then you are eating no vegetables. So yes, you must eat some to perform optimally.
I never said non essential nutrients should be avoided. I've never told anyone they should or shouldn't eat anything. I've never told anyone that a certain this or that must be had in any volume whatsoever.
I simply stated that carbs are a non essential food.
Your statement "Essential nutrients are those which the body relies on but cannot synthesize itself." I agree with. The body CAN synthesize its own glucose. And when it does, it only creates a minimal amount. It could just keep making glucose, but once it has what it needs, any remaining excess protein is also turned into ketones...
And this just doesn't make sense. "If ketones were optimal, the brain would be able to run on them exclusively." Why?
You are saying the body uses glucose first because its the more optimal fuel, what if the body uses glucose first because high blood glucose is a hazardous state for the body? Don't confuse 'uses first' with 'optimal'.
Exactly!
You all do realize that glucose, if not used or stored as glycogen, is then stored as fat, right?
So, doesn't it make sense for the body to use as much of that as possible before resorting to storage as fat?
What do you think it does with dietary fat?Also, it's a quick burn fuel. It's like the lighter fluid you use to start a fire... You wouldn't skip the wood in preference for the quick burning lighter fluid.
And ketone bodies aren't?FunkyTobias wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »FunkyTobias wrote: »Psst. Fun Fact. Go ahead and eat ZERO carbs (sugar is a carb) and your magical body will magically produce all the magical sugar your body and brain requires to run effectively. Its magic. Don't tell anyone. It is a secret. Amaze your friends. Thank me later.
By "effectively" you mean "doesn't die".
Essential is not the same as optimal.
Not hardly.
Ketones are an optimal brain fuel.
If ketones were optimal, the brain would be able to run on them exclusively. But it can't.It's been used for decades to preserve brain health in epileptics by preventing seizures and is currently a treatment for many other brain diseases/conditions including cancer. Only a minimal amount of glucose is required on a daily basis and can be provided through gluconeogenesis from consumed protein.
Carbs are a non essential food.
Essential nutrients are those which the body relies on but cannot synthesize itself. Hence the distinction between essential and optimal.
If you think that non-essential nutrients should be avoided, you had better stop eating saturated and monounsaturated fats, since none of them are essential either.It's just as bad to tell people they HAVE to have at least some carbs and sugar to perform at optimal levels as it is to suggest that nobody should ever eat them.
If you eat no carbs at all, then you are eating no vegetables. So yes, you must eat some to perform optimally.
I never said non essential nutrients should be avoided. I've never told anyone they should or shouldn't eat anything. I've never told anyone that a certain this or that must be had in any volume whatsoever.
I simply stated that carbs are a non essential food.
Your statement "Essential nutrients are those which the body relies on but cannot synthesize itself." I agree with. The body CAN synthesize its own glucose. And when it does, it only creates a minimal amount. It could just keep making glucose, but once it has what it needs, any remaining excess protein is also turned into ketones...
LOL. no.And this just doesn't make sense. "If ketones were optimal, the brain would be able to run on them exclusively." Why?
Are ketones necessary for brain function? No.
Are ketones sufficient for brain function? No.
How then, can they be optimal?
They are absolutely sufficient.
ORLY? So you're saying the brain can run exclusively on ketones? (Cuz that's what "sufficient" means donchaknow)
0 -
FunkyTobias wrote: »Psst. Fun Fact. Go ahead and eat ZERO carbs (sugar is a carb) and your magical body will magically produce all the magical sugar your body and brain requires to run effectively. Its magic. Don't tell anyone. It is a secret. Amaze your friends. Thank me later.
By "effectively" you mean "doesn't die".
Essential is not the same as optimal.
Precisely. So -- to umayster -- why do no human cultures have a ketogenic diet?0 -
christinev297 wrote: »What do the nay sayers say to keto dieters and those on Low carb or NO carb diets?
That eating no carbs (i.e., no vegetables) is quite unhealthy.
If it works for you, fine, none of my business and lots of people do fine on unhealthy diets, witness the SAD. Just don't pretend no carbs is meaningfully different in terms of health (or not, in fact, often worse).0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 388 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 918 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions