To everyone struggling to lose weight
Replies
-
Sorry there are a whole raft of these pseudo-scientific easily digested mockumentaries out there ...it's really easy to buy into them because they tell us what we want to hear
They tell us to believe: it's not my fault, it's too tough, everyone is in the same boat
But it is our fault. It is tough but possible and everyone can do it when they find a way of eating they can commit to which helps them meet their calorie needs
Yep.0 -
and if its right then how come everyone keeps getting fatter and sicker? Is everyone just lazy?
...Actually, yes. Yes they are. In comparison to generations before this, people now eat bigger portions and move less. Fifty years ago, someone may have walked around all day running errands, moved around all day working, cooking, cleaning, doing certain physical jobs that machines do for us now. After work they'd go home, have dinner, watch a little tv, maybe go take a walk, and go to bed at a reasonable hour. Now? A lot of people drive to work, sit at a desk and stare at a computer, go home and stare at a tv or computer, then go to bed late and stare at their smartphone or tv until they fall asleep. So yes, as a whole, society is getting fatter due to habits like these. It's a level of laziness that has become socially acceptable because society has shifted so much. Those of us that exercise, move more in general, eat less, or some combination of the three don't fall victim to the effects of that laziness. Weight loss can be difficult, but it's not as hard as these stupid documentaries want people to believe. Everyone has a miracle cure to sell when the truth is right in front of us. It's not a pill, not fat burning foods, not a special weight loss company, it's the person themselves making changes.0 -
Ofcoarse a calorie is a calorie but hes obviously talking about a calorie of food in terms of effect on the body.
What then is the true science? Which health docs aren't mockumentaries? and if its right then how come everyone keeps getting fatter and sicker? Is everyone just lazy? Does sugar not cause insulin to rise? And does insulin not cause fat storage? How can a calorie of protein be equal to a calorie of sugar in terms of effect on the body when one causes fat storage and the other does not? Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of counting calories I just believe the path of least resistance for weight loss is limiting sugar intake.
The opinion that reducing sugar intake is not looked upon positively on the main boards. Unfortunately any science that supports that is often labelled pseudo science, or the studies are deemed poor. I agree with you but I doubt that you will find any support here.
The Low Carber Daily, eat clean or paleo groups are where like minded people tend to go to.
0 -
Well....I watched all the video and one of the interesting things for me was the little segment about a study linking in stress and obesity. They did an experiment on a group of women who practiced Mindfulness around their eating patterns....logging calories, and feelings prior to and after eating....also I think encouraged stress management etc etc....(it really was very vague on the specifics). Sorry.
For me it wasn't clear whether they actually lost weight overall, however at the end of the experiment they did find that the techniques employed lowered their cortisol levels and re-distributed their belly fat to a more "estrogenic pattern"......(at least I think that is what they were saying) and I'm guessing this is a "safer" distribution of fat on the body.
I found this 'doco'.....confusing and very depressing.
On one hand they stripped people of individual responsibility around their eating patterns and then gave a tiny, poorly explained insight into what many here on MFP have found, including me.....success in weight loss and health management can often come through careful and truthful insight around eating patterns that have lead the person to be overweight in the 1st place.
0 -
Ofcoarse a calorie is a calorie but hes obviously talking about a calorie of food in terms of effect on the body.
What then is the true science? Which health docs aren't mockumentaries? and if its right then how come everyone keeps getting fatter and sicker? Is everyone just lazy? Does sugar not cause insulin to rise? And does insulin not cause fat storage? How can a calorie of protein be equal to a calorie of sugar in terms of effect on the body when one causes fat storage and the other does not? Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of counting calories I just believe the path of least resistance for weight loss is limiting sugar intake.
The opinion that reducing sugar intake is not looked upon positively on the main boards. Unfortunately any science that supports that is often labelled pseudo science, or the studies are deemed poor. I agree with you but I doubt that you will find any support here.
The Low Carber Daily, eat clean or paleo groups are where like minded people tend to go to.
Eliminating sugar is not looked upon positively.0 -
and if its right then how come everyone keeps getting fatter and sicker? Is everyone just lazy? Does sugar not cause insulin to rise? And does insulin not cause fat storage? How can a calorie of protein be equal to a calorie of sugar in terms of effect on the body when one causes fat storage and the other does not? Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of counting calories I just believe the path of least resistance for weight loss is limiting sugar intake.
1. Not everyone is getting fatter and sicker, and yes, compared to previous generations the number of sedentary individuals is significantly higher. People are working longer hours of sedentary jobs, and the average level of physical activity has dropped significantly since WW2.
2. Sugar causes insulin to rise, and yes, insulin stores fat. But you store roughly* the same amount of fat if you eat the same amount of calories of sugar, protein, or fat (protein also causes insulin to rise, and fat doesn't need insulin at all, because it is already fat and can be stored directly in your fat cells at any time). Your body stores fat after every single meal of your life, and burns it in between meals. You only accumulate fat if you gain more fat over the course of the day than you burn.
* You actually immediately store a bit less fat if you ate carbohydrate instead of fat, because carbohydrates have a secondary energy storage molecule - glycogen - while fat can only be stored as fat. However, for long-term energy balance, it doesn't matter, because it also means you burn a little less fat later on when you burn a bit more glycogen instead.0 -
Proponents of the low carb diet say they are less hungry and therefore eat less calories.
In general, the studies I've seen that try to quantify what influences satiety show carbs have very little, if any, direct effect. The most important factors:
Protein strongly increases satiety
Fiber strongly increases satiety
Calorie density strongly decreases satiety
Fat somewhat decreases satiety
Carbs, of course, have an effect in that they can quickly raise calorie density - but so can fats. It's usually the combination of sugars and fats that are the most calorie dense foods.
I find many high-carb foods like pastas to be extremely filling.0 -
blankiefinder wrote: »Ofcoarse a calorie is a calorie but hes obviously talking about a calorie of food in terms of effect on the body.
What then is the true science? Which health docs aren't mockumentaries? and if its right then how come everyone keeps getting fatter and sicker? Is everyone just lazy? Does sugar not cause insulin to rise? And does insulin not cause fat storage? How can a calorie of protein be equal to a calorie of sugar in terms of effect on the body when one causes fat storage and the other does not? Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of counting calories I just believe the path of least resistance for weight loss is limiting sugar intake.
The opinion that reducing sugar intake is not looked upon positively on the main boards. Unfortunately any science that supports that is often labelled pseudo science, or the studies are deemed poor. I agree with you but I doubt that you will find any support here.
The Low Carber Daily, eat clean or paleo groups are where like minded people tend to go to.
Eliminating sugar is not looked upon positively.
^^^^^This sentiment that sugar in any form needs to be eliminated has emerged VERY strongly in recent times on MFP....
This puzzles me, as how or the bigger question Why does one even attempt to remove ALL sources of sugar in their diets....OK added sugars yes if you so desire but the naturally occurring ones in fruits and vegetables and whole grains, beans and legumes.....that is such an enormous nutrient vacuum to fill.
How does one get the necessary vitamins, minerals etc without fruit and vegetables????0 -
I think 100% eliminating sugar would be near impossible..0
-
I have seen entire posts dedicated to the evils of milk after someone realized there was naturally occurring sugar in milk... and fruit... both make me very sad
My summer staple is berries with milk and a teaspoon of sugar, apparently it is the holy trinity of evil. (And if you try to take it from me, you will have to pry it out of my cold, dead fingers!!) 0 -
queenliz99 wrote: »Robert Lustig is a contributor, I'm out!
Same here.0 -
Ofcoarse a calorie is a calorie but hes obviously talking about a calorie of food in terms of effect on the body.
What then is the true science? Which health docs aren't mockumentaries? and if its right then how come everyone keeps getting fatter and sicker? Is everyone just lazy? Does sugar not cause insulin to rise? And does insulin not cause fat storage? How can a calorie of protein be equal to a calorie of sugar in terms of effect on the body when one causes fat storage and the other does not? Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of counting calories I just believe the path of least resistance for weight loss is limiting sugar intake.
100 calories of spinach is the same as 100 calories of a cookie when it comes to weight loss.
However, nutritionally they are not the same.
The reason people keep getting fatter is because they are eating too much food, and the reason they are getting sicker is because obesity causes multiple health problems.
Unless you have a medical issue requiring you to limit sugar, doing so is a personal choice. I understand for you it's the "path of least resistance for you," but it's certainly not the same for everyone.
I lose 44 pounds eating real foods, including sugar, and I have been maintaining for about 2 years.
0 -
Ofcoarse a calorie is a calorie but hes obviously talking about a calorie of food in terms of effect on the body.
What then is the true science? Which health docs aren't mockumentaries? and if its right then how come everyone keeps getting fatter and sicker? Is everyone just lazy? Does sugar not cause insulin to rise? And does insulin not cause fat storage? How can a calorie of protein be equal to a calorie of sugar in terms of effect on the body when one causes fat storage and the other does not? Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of counting calories I just believe the path of least resistance for weight loss is limiting sugar intake.
More the most part yes.
A calorie is a calorie for weight loss, for health they are different.
Who is Robert lustig anyways?0 -
The reason why these ploys work is because, for the most part, people just aren't paying attention.
They buy and eat food according to their emotions and impulses, not according to what they know is healthy and will help them meet their goals. Food companies and advertisers are counting on this.
But here's the thing: We aren't in the helpless grasp of our emotions and impulses, or at least we don't have to be. We are in full of our own faculties, well able to resist temptation, when and if we choose to do so.
They are free to try to tempt us, but to say that we are not free to resist is utter nonsense.0 -
From my reading on this topic, that SO many foods have sugar added to them means we eat hidden sugars much more frequently than we think. Aside from obviously sweetened foods there is sugar added as a flavor enhancement or as a preservative to most store (& many restaurant) bought foods.
I've read more closely labels of foods that are processed that I didn't expect to have sugar. It's shocking.
Like bread, mayonnaise, chips, spaghetti sauce, croutons - these are just some that have sugars added to them that I might have purchased and wouldn't expect as a source of sugar.
We know the usual items like sugared coffee drinks, smoothies, flavored yogurts, etc. and can limit them. And a teaspoon/tablespoon here or there isn't really the problem but sweetened cereals, breads, etc. add up when you don't know how much sugar you're getting.
It does a number on your insulin & other hormones impacting health and energy in complex ways. That's the point of the film from what I take.
Especially important for someone who is doing a lot right and still holding onto weight to investigate these factors and for children to be protected from the commercial food industry.
Thanks for sharing it.0 -
"The whole world" "Pandemic" That's where I stopped. Pretty sure starving pregnant mothers in rural Togo don't appreciate the insinuation that this very first world white people problem is something that has anything to do with them. If I was them, I'd be really offended that he's sitting there saying it's a pandemic while I ate bugs (It's quite effective, please don't mistake this for judgement, I promise it's awe) trying to get enough protein to give birth to a living child. Maybe he corrects this later in the video, to be fair I didn't sit through it, but for real fellow white people, ain't we done enough damage already? We can't step back the rhetoric arrogance for 30 seconds to not project our own issues onto the rest of the planet?0
-
Btw, University of California San Francisco (UCSF) for those who don't know is one of the very best medical centers and hospitals in the U.S. and Dr. Robert Lustig is a doctor of endocrinology at UCSF. The video is a production of the University of California system - UCTV is University of California television. Check em out. Lots of good information based on scientific research.0
-
HippySkoppy wrote: »blankiefinder wrote: »Ofcoarse a calorie is a calorie but hes obviously talking about a calorie of food in terms of effect on the body.
What then is the true science? Which health docs aren't mockumentaries? and if its right then how come everyone keeps getting fatter and sicker? Is everyone just lazy? Does sugar not cause insulin to rise? And does insulin not cause fat storage? How can a calorie of protein be equal to a calorie of sugar in terms of effect on the body when one causes fat storage and the other does not? Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of counting calories I just believe the path of least resistance for weight loss is limiting sugar intake.
The opinion that reducing sugar intake is not looked upon positively on the main boards. Unfortunately any science that supports that is often labelled pseudo science, or the studies are deemed poor. I agree with you but I doubt that you will find any support here.
The Low Carber Daily, eat clean or paleo groups are where like minded people tend to go to.
Eliminating sugar is not looked upon positively.
^^^^^This sentiment that sugar in any form needs to be eliminated has emerged VERY strongly in recent times on MFP....
This puzzles me, as how or the bigger question Why does one even attempt to remove ALL sources of sugar in their diets....OK added sugars yes if you so desire but the naturally occurring ones in fruits and vegetables and whole grains, beans and legumes.....that is such an enormous nutrient vacuum to fill.
How does one get the necessary vitamins, minerals etc without fruit and vegetables????
I couldn't do it. I could live without my cookies at the end of the day, but my yogurt (which is plain)? My veggies? My berries? My lentils? My gluten-free oats?
That's my whole diet.
Interestingly, what is generally regarded as one of the healthiest diets in the world is rich in veggies, whole grains, low-fat dairy, and fruits. It's the Mediterranean Diet.
This fact is ignored by those advocating for the elimination of ALL sugars. It's inconceivable to me.
Eliminate added sugars if you want, but going after the sugar in dairy, fruit and veggies is a step too far to recommend to other people.0 -
rankinsect wrote: »Proponents of the low carb diet say they are less hungry and therefore eat less calories.
In general, the studies I've seen that try to quantify what influences satiety show carbs have very little, if any, direct effect. The most important factors:
Protein strongly increases satiety
Fiber strongly increases satiety
Calorie density strongly decreases satiety
Fat somewhat decreases satiety
Carbs, of course, have an effect in that they can quickly raise calorie density - but so can fats. It's usually the combination of sugars and fats that are the most calorie dense foods.
I find many high-carb foods like pastas to be extremely filling.
There's one study floating around somewhere that found the most satiating food to be the humble potato.
It's certainly true for me. I also find a big bowl of popcorn (air-popped and lightly misted with butter spray) to be very, very filling.0 -
Eliminate all sugars? No one is suggesting that. Well this thread about this video isn't.0
-
blankiefinder wrote: »Ofcoarse a calorie is a calorie but hes obviously talking about a calorie of food in terms of effect on the body.
What then is the true science? Which health docs aren't mockumentaries? and if its right then how come everyone keeps getting fatter and sicker? Is everyone just lazy? Does sugar not cause insulin to rise? And does insulin not cause fat storage? How can a calorie of protein be equal to a calorie of sugar in terms of effect on the body when one causes fat storage and the other does not? Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of counting calories I just believe the path of least resistance for weight loss is limiting sugar intake.
The opinion that reducing sugar intake is not looked upon positively on the main boards. Unfortunately any science that supports that is often labelled pseudo science, or the studies are deemed poor. I agree with you but I doubt that you will find any support here.
The Low Carber Daily, eat clean or paleo groups are where like minded people tend to go to.
Eliminating sugar is not looked upon positively.
That too, but a thread about reducing sugars is often met with arguments. Just look at this thread. Lots of earlier arguments against sugar reduction; you were the one to bring up eliminating sugars.0 -
baroquepop wrote: »Btw, University of California San Francisco (UCSF) for those who don't know is one of the very best medical centers and hospitals in the U.S. and Dr. Robert Lustig is a doctor of endocrinology at UCSF. The video is a production of the University of California system - UCTV is University of California television. Check em out. Lots of good information based on scientific research.
You might be interested in these
http://www.alanaragonblog.com/2010/01/29/the-bitter-truth-about-fructose-alarmism/
https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/does-the-movie-fed-up-make-sense/0 -
blankiefinder wrote: »Ofcoarse a calorie is a calorie but hes obviously talking about a calorie of food in terms of effect on the body.
What then is the true science? Which health docs aren't mockumentaries? and if its right then how come everyone keeps getting fatter and sicker? Is everyone just lazy? Does sugar not cause insulin to rise? And does insulin not cause fat storage? How can a calorie of protein be equal to a calorie of sugar in terms of effect on the body when one causes fat storage and the other does not? Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of counting calories I just believe the path of least resistance for weight loss is limiting sugar intake.
The opinion that reducing sugar intake is not looked upon positively on the main boards. Unfortunately any science that supports that is often labelled pseudo science, or the studies are deemed poor. I agree with you but I doubt that you will find any support here.
The Low Carber Daily, eat clean or paleo groups are where like minded people tend to go to.
Eliminating sugar is not looked upon positively.
That too, but a thread about reducing sugars is often met with arguments. Just look at this thread. Lots of earlier arguments against sugar reduction; you were the one to bring up eliminating sugars.
Nah, the arguments in this thread are that sugar does not make you fat, eating too much food does.
Here's the deal. It's true.
Reduce added sugar if that works for you (you in general, not you personally), but you will only lose weight if you eat less calories than you burn. I would think that reducing added sugar would be for personal health reasons, especially if it does make you hungry more often, or you feel lethargic after eating that pie, or too buzzed eating that double chocolate cake (I suspect that it would be the caffeine in the chocolate that got ya buzzed instead of the sugar).
In fact, the absolute requirement of weight loss is a calorie deficit, but how you get there is either preference or doctor's orders due to a medical issue.0 -
blankiefinder wrote: »I eat carbs and sugar every day also and am losing a pound a week. The problem lies in excess sugar which also causes hunger as well as fat storage. Of coarse a calorie deficit will cause you to lose weight. But for a lot of people limiting sugar will help create a much more sustainable diet because losing weight and keeping it off always comes back to the right amount of calories. And sticking with the right amount of calories is very difficult if your hungry all the time. Proponents of the low carb diet say they are less hungry and therefore eat less calories.
I lost my weight eating a balanced diet of all things and was never overly hungry. I don't do hunger well.
The same here, and it includes both natural and added sugar.0 -
baroquepop wrote: »Btw, University of California San Francisco (UCSF) for those who don't know is one of the very best medical centers and hospitals in the U.S. and Dr. Robert Lustig is a doctor of endocrinology at UCSF. The video is a production of the University of California system - UCTV is University of California television. Check em out. Lots of good information based on scientific research.
You might be interested in these
http://www.alanaragonblog.com/2010/01/29/the-bitter-truth-about-fructose-alarmism/
https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/does-the-movie-fed-up-make-sense/
". I’m sure many would think that his style is annoyingly smug and preachy, but I find it entertaining. "
Ha ha ha! That's the first thing I got out of the video! I'm sure he's a decent human being with good intentions, but yeah, preachy.0 -
"Lustig insufficiently addresses the ‘energy out’ side of the equation. According to the research, it’s possible that over the last couple of decades, we’ve become more sedentary. "
". The thing is, he uses data spanning from 1989-1995"
Ain't Hindsight bias a top?
0 -
-
shelleysykeskeene wrote: »
Couldnt resist
What a cute gif! Now I'm going to make my ginger tea....0 -
Protein when eaten by itself does not cause insulin to rise.
FALSE. This study - http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/66/5/1264.full.pdf - proves you completely wrong. The insulin index on page 8 shows that the Insulin Score on beef (51) is higher than that of white pasta (40). This is the study used as the reference on the wikipedia link - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insulin_index - on insulin index of foods.
Here's a quote from the discussion section of the study:
Hmm, interesting no?.... pasta, oatmeal porridge and All-Bran cereal produced relatively low insulin responses, despite their high carbohydrate contents.
... However, some protein and fat-rich foods (eggs, beef, fish, lentils, cheese, cake and
doughnuts) induced as much insulin secretion as did some carbohydrate-rich foods (eg, beef was equal to brown rice and fish was equal to grain bread)....
Also FALSE. My diet is very high (75%+) in carbs, which all converts to sugar. It's mainly from whole foods like white and sweet potatoes, wheat flour, rice, quinoa, oatmeal, beans, lentils, fruits etc. I also add sugar to fresh juices, smoothies, pancakes, oatmeal, coffee, tea etc. I go through a 4 lb bag of sugar every month, which is a lot. And yet, I've been able to lose nearly 30 lbs this year.The issue is too much sugar causing unwanted weight gain.
I started at 152 and I'm now at 125 (I'm 5'5"). I've lost 6 inches from my waist, 6 from my hips, 6 from my belly, 3 from my thighs and 3 from my arms. I eat foods I enjoy and exercise and create a deficit and lose weight. I'll also add that despite my high sugar/carbs, my fasting blood glucose 2 months ago was 70 (normal range is 65-99), so clearly, my pancreas are functioning perfectly.
The video you posted was full of so much misinformation and flat out rubbish. I stopped when he said 'obesity chooses you, you don't choose it'. No, 99% of the time, WE are choosing to eat more and exercise less=obesity.0 -
Traveler120 wrote: »Protein when eaten by itself does not cause insulin to rise.
FALSE. This study - http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/66/5/1264.full.pdf - proves you completely wrong. The insulin index on page 8 shows that the Insulin Score on beef (51) is higher than that of white pasta (40). This is the study used as the reference on the wikipedia link - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insulin_index - on insulin index of foods.
Here's a quote from the discussion section of the study:
Hmm, interesting no?.... pasta, oatmeal porridge and All-Bran cereal produced relatively low insulin responses, despite their high carbohydrate contents.
... However, some protein and fat-rich foods (eggs, beef, fish, lentils, cheese, cake and
doughnuts) induced as much insulin secretion as did some carbohydrate-rich foods (eg, beef was equal to brown rice and fish was equal to grain bread)....
Also FALSE. My diet is very high (75%+) in carbs, which all converts to sugar. It's mainly from whole foods like white and sweet potatoes, wheat flour, rice, quinoa, oatmeal, beans, lentils, fruits etc. I also add sugar to fresh juices, smoothies, pancakes, oatmeal, coffee, tea etc. I go through a 4 lb bag of sugar every month, which is a lot. And yet, I've been able to lose nearly 30 lbs this year.The issue is too much sugar causing unwanted weight gain.
I started at 152 and I'm now at 125 (I'm 5'5"). I've lost 6 inches from my waist, 6 from my hips, 6 from my belly, 3 from my thighs and 3 from my arms. I eat foods I enjoy and exercise and create a deficit and lose weight. I'll also add that despite my high sugar/carbs, my fasting blood glucose 2 months ago was 70 (normal range is 65-99), so clearly, my pancreas are functioning perfectly.
The video you posted was full of so much misinformation and flat out rubbish. I stopped when he said 'obesity chooses you, you don't choose it'. No, 99% of the time, WE are choosing to eat more and exercise less=obesity.
Yeah...this is cosigned with a solid stamp of approval.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions