what do you do to lower your sugar intake?
Options
Replies
-
What's given me the drive to help REDUCE my sugar intake is knowing what it does for ageing. Particularly the skin. See: glycation. That is my biggest driver.0
-
lexylondon wrote: »What's given me the drive to help REDUCE my sugar intake is knowing what it does for ageing. Particularly the skin. See: glycation. That is my biggest driver.
Source?0 -
My simple definition of Glycation from what I remember from Biochem: It is a reaction with sugar with either proteins or lipids. A chemical reaction that happens with non diabetics and diabetics but definitely pathological for diabetics.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17391149
Advanced glycation end products (AGEs) are proteins or lipids that become glycated after exposure to sugars. AGEs are prevalent in the diabetic vasculature and contribute to the development of atherosclerosis. The presence and accumulation of AGEs in many different cell types affect extracellular and intracellular structure and function. AGEs contribute to a variety of microvascular and macrovascular complications through the formation of cross-links between molecules in the basement membrane of the extracellular matrix and by engaging the receptor for advanced glycation end products (RAGE). Activation of RAGE by AGEs causes upregulation of the transcription factor nuclear factor-κB and its target genes. Soluble AGEs activate monocytes, and AGEs in the basement membrane inhibit monocyte migration. AGE-bound RAGE increases endothelial permeability to macromolecules. AGEs block nitric oxide activity in the endothelium and cause the production of reactive oxygen species. Because of the emerging evidence about the adverse effects of AGEs on the vasculature of patients with diabetes, a number of different therapies to inhibit AGEs are under investigation.
Another definition of glycation:
Glycation (sometimes called non-enzymatic glycosylation) is the result of typically covalent bonding of a protein or lipid molecule with a sugar molecule, such as fructose or glucose, without the controlling action of an enzyme. All blood sugars are reducing molecules. Glycation may occur either inside the body (endogenous glycation) or outside the body (exogenous glycation). Enzyme-controlled addition of sugars to protein or lipid molecules is termed glycosylation; glycation is a haphazard process that impairs the functioning of biomolecules, whereas glycosylation occurs at defined sites on the target molecule and is required in order for the molecule to function. Much of the early laboratory research work on fructose glycations used inaccurate assay techniques that led to drastic underestimation of the importance of fructose in glycation.[1]
Note: big difference between glycation and glycosylation...biochem, why i have gray hairs under my hair color.
So....I am guessing what lexylondon might be talking about: "We need a certain amount of glucose in our bloodstream, so to a certain extent glycation is inevitable, and is a normal part of aging. However, dietary choices that load your system with sugar dramatically speed it up, aging you faster in the process."0 -
Activation of RAGE by AGEs causes.....
and here I thought that was menopausal rage caused by age
Love the acronyms......just like the military! 0 -
sheridanlugo wrote: »I actually just kicked my sugar habit, gradually, not all at once. What helped me stop eating sugar was actually doing research on what excess sugar does to the body and how it's as addictive as cocaine. Once I knew more about sugar, it was easier to say no to it. I started by cutting out all non-water beverages except for the occasional unsweetened tea. Then I swapped dessert for fruit. What helped whenever I was craving sugar was making banana ice cream. All it is is frozen bananas blended in a food processor with a splash of almond milk (or milk of choice), along with any flavoring you prefer. I personally like adding a bit of peanut butter, it's delicious! After cutting out desserts I then cut out all the "hidden" sugars of my diet, which includes things like a seemingly healthy can of marinara sauce that actually has 24g of sugar. Lastly, I ate more veggies and less fruit to get rid of even more fruit in my diet.
Good luck, hope this helped!
It isn't. People need to stop saying that.
And how did you kick your sugar habit by switching sugary foods with other sugary foods? A banana has almost 20 grams of sugar.0 -
My simple definition of Glycation from what I remember from Biochem: It is a reaction with sugar with either proteins or lipids. A chemical reaction that happens with non diabetics and diabetics but definitely pathological for diabetics.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17391149
Advanced glycation end products (AGEs) are proteins or lipids that become glycated after exposure to sugars. AGEs are prevalent in the diabetic vasculature and contribute to the development of atherosclerosis. The presence and accumulation of AGEs in many different cell types affect extracellular and intracellular structure and function. AGEs contribute to a variety of microvascular and macrovascular complications through the formation of cross-links between molecules in the basement membrane of the extracellular matrix and by engaging the receptor for advanced glycation end products (RAGE). Activation of RAGE by AGEs causes upregulation of the transcription factor nuclear factor-κB and its target genes. Soluble AGEs activate monocytes, and AGEs in the basement membrane inhibit monocyte migration. AGE-bound RAGE increases endothelial permeability to macromolecules. AGEs block nitric oxide activity in the endothelium and cause the production of reactive oxygen species. Because of the emerging evidence about the adverse effects of AGEs on the vasculature of patients with diabetes, a number of different therapies to inhibit AGEs are under investigation.
Another definition of glycation:
Glycation (sometimes called non-enzymatic glycosylation) is the result of typically covalent bonding of a protein or lipid molecule with a sugar molecule, such as fructose or glucose, without the controlling action of an enzyme. All blood sugars are reducing molecules. Glycation may occur either inside the body (endogenous glycation) or outside the body (exogenous glycation). Enzyme-controlled addition of sugars to protein or lipid molecules is termed glycosylation; glycation is a haphazard process that impairs the functioning of biomolecules, whereas glycosylation occurs at defined sites on the target molecule and is required in order for the molecule to function. Much of the early laboratory research work on fructose glycations used inaccurate assay techniques that led to drastic underestimation of the importance of fructose in glycation.[1]
Note: big difference between glycation and glycosylation...biochem, why i have gray hairs under my hair color.
So....I am guessing what lexylondon might be talking about: "We need a certain amount of glucose in our bloodstream, so to a certain extent glycation is inevitable, and is a normal part of aging. However, dietary choices that load your system with sugar dramatically speed it up, aging you faster in the process."
So this is one of the ways excess blood glucose causes damage in diabetics, but does not affect those whose serum glucose stays in the normal range. Am I reading it right?0 -
I agree that as long as you are eating healthy and exercising and not storing fat, obese, not having high blood glucose levels or triglycerides then you are good. There are a lot of "articles" out there about glycation and aging and there is a lot of research from biochemists and physicians about glycation that you could look at too.
0 -
To answer the original question, what I did was eat less and be more mindful of high cal sweets I was eating. By my fattest I was just eating whatever sweet (or other extra food) showed up at my office, with the idea that I was stressed and deserved it or even "if it's there, I should eat it." (Sugar wasn't really my main issue, but I was still eating too much stuff without thinking about how it added up.) I still eat stuff like ice cream, but now only in a planned way -- a sensible amount after dinner or instead, maybe a bit of high quality chocolate (or some cheese instead) -- and don't eat food I don't even care much about just because it's there. When food shows up at work, I eat it only if I judge it worth the calories and as a trade-off with something else (like the ice cream after dinner).
I am not concerned about sugar from fruit, veg, or dairy. I'd only stress about fruit if I was eating so much I was going over calories or not getting enough protein or vegetables.
Beyond that, I looked at my sugar total and what it came from. Mine is usually fine (based on what I'm looking for), but if it were surprisingly high on a regular basis I'd look at what it was from and lower my consumption of those foods, if I thought the sugar/cals were too high. I usually don't get much so-called hidden sugar, but I know granola bars and the like can have a bunch and sometimes people don't realize it (although they are sweet, so it seems unsurprising).
On the whole, for the question "how to lower X" I think MFP provides an easy way -- see where it's coming from and what you are willing to eat less of or substitute for something else, what's not really worth it or just an unthinking choice.0 -
Conclusion of above article from American Heart Association:
The studies above, taken in total, indicate that high sugar intake should be avoided. Sugar has no nutritional value other than to provide calories. To improve the overall nutrient density of the diet and to help reduce the intake of excess calories, individuals should be sure foods high in added sugar are not displacing foods with essential nutrients or increasing calorie intake.
Exactly it's about excess calories and overweight
Now fair enough if cutting down on sugar means you are hitting your calorie goals and nutritional requirements
But sugar does not cause high blood cholesterol
Unless somebody has info that proves otherwise I'm sticking with the advice to lower trans and sat fats and lose weight
Lowering sugar can lower triglyceride levels, which is part of our total blood cholesterols levels.
http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/high-blood-cholesterol/in-depth/triglycerides/art-20048186?pg=2
Avoid sugary and refined foods. Simple carbohydrates, such as sugar and foods made with white flour, can increase triglycerides.0 -
longlostsea wrote: »Hello just wondering what changes any sugar lovers out there have made to lower their sugar intake?
I have a sweet tooth so to speak and have high chloresterol, and have been reading that it may contribute a bit to that. So as well as a healthier diet and more excersize I want to watch my sugars as well. I'm not sure about lowering the amount of fruit I eat because of nutrient content + I am a vegetarian.
Opinions? Methods?- I replace full sugar items (like when I have a soda) with sugar free.
- I buy plain yogurt and sweeten with Vitafiber, which adds soluble fiber to my diet.
- I stopped drinking my coffee with fancy flavored creamers and just use enough half-and-half to cut the acidity.
- I make most of my own soups and stews in my crockpot so I can control the ingredients.
- I buy single servings of things like a candy bar or cookies when I really want a treat
- I enjoy the cake when I am at a party, I just don't buy any for the home
- I eat my fruit instead of drinking juice
These are great suggestions.0 -
I have been gradually reducing my sugar over a number of years. It began with reducing pre packaged foods, although my goal had zero to do with sugar! Next I cut way back on fast foods and eating out. This was helped because I moved somewhere that is very small town, only fast food is a dq. Then about two years ago I quit drinking Mountain Dew, but I switched it out for sunny d. The sunny d was better than the Mountain Dew, and I drank less of it.
During this time, over the years I cut back big time on candy and sweets. I wasn't trying to, I just think the pop was handling it fine. I drank a lot of pop, it was my biggest source of calories.
Then I quit smoking last spring, and my sugar cravings went through the roof! I gained 25 pounds in two months, the same twenty five I had slowly lost over the past two years! Ugh! But even worse, I started feeling sick, and disconnected from my body, it is hard to explain. So then I began researching sugar, and started paying attention to how it made me feel.
Then I got mfp and it tracks the sugar....this was a great help for me! Something about that just clicked for me and now foods are judged to be worthy or not of my goals for daily sugar.
I drink a little lemonade, and still drink my coffee with sugar(though I am reducing it slowly) and have sweet desserts sometimes. The pop and the sunny d are gone. I do eat fruit, and some have more sugar than others.
I have found that for me I feel so much better with a lower sugar diet. I set my goal for 45 grams a day, but I usually get in the 50s and that is ok. This past weekend I had more sugar, and I don't feel so good today. But this is just my own experience! Once I got below about 60 grams a day I quit needing aspirin or Benadryl. I am chronically ill, and have taken aspirin for years and now I don't even think about it. I never set out to quit taking aspirin, I just don't need it anymore.
For me, awareness is key. Once I started paying close attention the rest fell into place. Also I am in for the long haul to getting better so I don't pressure myself or get too extreme. Just going in the right direction as much as I can.
A few weeks ago I measured out the sugar in a bottle of Mountain Dew, I think it was five tablespoons or 1/4 cup plus one tablespoon. I used to drink at least two of those a day! I measured it out onto a plate, one bottle then two. Wow! That really gave me a hands on understanding of the amount of sugar I used to consume. That was just the pop! It was an eye opener and a motivator.
If I want the sweet I just allot the calories and have it, but I do try to stay within my goal range for the most part. Fruit has replaced sugary drinks, but overall it is less sugar.0 -
Probably not the easiest method but I did a whole 30 where i did not eat any foods with added sugars for 30 days (plus other restrictions.) During that time I ate as much fruit as i wanted. Afterwards my taste buds had completely changed.
I used to prefer Hershey special dark which i believe is 55% sugar and now i prefer 85% chocolate. I find my previous favorite too be sickeningly sweet. I am also more aware of which foods contain added sugar which helps me make better choices... It's surprising once you look for it.
It's been over a year since I did this and my tastes for sweets have not reverted back. Something to consider possibly.0 -
I was pre-diabetic and diabetic for many years and did all the things listed above to reduce added sugars in my diet. I still gained weight, however. I still had high cholesterol (for a diabetic).
Blood sugars, blood pressure, weight, and cholesterol went down when I lost a significant amount of weight, which came about by reducing how much good food I was eating.0 -
abysmalbeauty wrote: »Probably not the easiest method but I did a whole 30 where i did not eat any foods with added sugars for 30 days (plus other restrictions.) During that time I ate as much fruit as i wanted. Afterwards my taste buds had completely changed.
I think there's a lot of variation on this. A lot of people claim to have not liked vegetables or not found fruit adequately sweet until they stopped drinking soda or stopped eating sweets. I always found fruit sweet (some too sweet) and like vegetables and preferred dry wine, etc., and found some sweets too sweet even while eating sweets and drinking some sweet beverages like diet soda.
So I suppose it's no surprise that cutting out added sugar for a while made no difference to my tastes.
Which is all for the good, IMO. I enjoy including some sweets (like homemade pie or ice cream or high-quality chocolate or the rare really good cannoli) in my diet, and would be bummed if I didn't like them anymore. For me, it's all about moderation and not overdoing it. (And that's harder with some savory stuff.)0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Conclusion of above article from American Heart Association:
The studies above, taken in total, indicate that high sugar intake should be avoided. Sugar has no nutritional value other than to provide calories. To improve the overall nutrient density of the diet and to help reduce the intake of excess calories, individuals should be sure foods high in added sugar are not displacing foods with essential nutrients or increasing calorie intake.
Exactly it's about excess calories and overweight
Now fair enough if cutting down on sugar means you are hitting your calorie goals and nutritional requirements
But sugar does not cause high blood cholesterol
Unless somebody has info that proves otherwise I'm sticking with the advice to lower trans and sat fats and lose weight
Lowering sugar can lower triglyceride levels, which is part of our total blood cholesterols levels.
http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/high-blood-cholesterol/in-depth/triglycerides/art-20048186?pg=2
Avoid sugary and refined foods. Simple carbohydrates, such as sugar and foods made with white flour, can increase triglycerides.
Direct causation or through obesity? I think that's an "empty calories" argument and whilst I clearly have no issue with people reducing sugar in order to eat more nutritious diet within a decent calorie goal I do think we shouldn't muddy the water by inferring direct causation from one food to an end result without considering the weight impact
It risks focusing on individual foods rather than overall diet
I'm all for overall diet balance and against specific food demonisation because it is partly the demonisation of food groups / foods in my own personal experience that kept me fat for decades0 -
http://tvo.org/video/documentaries/sugar-coated
this is a documentary about the sugar industry and how powerful a lobby it is in the US (and to a lesser degree, Canada) Its definitely worth watching. Its amazing.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Conclusion of above article from American Heart Association:
The studies above, taken in total, indicate that high sugar intake should be avoided. Sugar has no nutritional value other than to provide calories. To improve the overall nutrient density of the diet and to help reduce the intake of excess calories, individuals should be sure foods high in added sugar are not displacing foods with essential nutrients or increasing calorie intake.
Exactly it's about excess calories and overweight
Now fair enough if cutting down on sugar means you are hitting your calorie goals and nutritional requirements
But sugar does not cause high blood cholesterol
Unless somebody has info that proves otherwise I'm sticking with the advice to lower trans and sat fats and lose weight
Lowering sugar can lower triglyceride levels, which is part of our total blood cholesterols levels.
http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/high-blood-cholesterol/in-depth/triglycerides/art-20048186?pg=2
Avoid sugary and refined foods. Simple carbohydrates, such as sugar and foods made with white flour, can increase triglycerides.
Direct causation or through obesity? I think that's an "empty calories" argument and whilst I clearly have no issue with people reducing sugar in order to eat more nutritious diet within a decent calorie goal I do think we shouldn't muddy the water by inferring direct causation from one food to an end result without considering the weight impact
It risks focusing on individual foods rather than overall diet
I'm all for overall diet balance and against specific food demonisation because it is partly the demonisation of food groups / foods in my own personal experience that kept me fat for decades
I think it's likely a direct cause. Thin people with poor diets often have high cholesterol.
Being aware of how certain foods affect our health is not about "demonizing" foods. It's about learning how to eat for health.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Conclusion of above article from American Heart Association:
The studies above, taken in total, indicate that high sugar intake should be avoided. Sugar has no nutritional value other than to provide calories. To improve the overall nutrient density of the diet and to help reduce the intake of excess calories, individuals should be sure foods high in added sugar are not displacing foods with essential nutrients or increasing calorie intake.
Exactly it's about excess calories and overweight
Now fair enough if cutting down on sugar means you are hitting your calorie goals and nutritional requirements
But sugar does not cause high blood cholesterol
Unless somebody has info that proves otherwise I'm sticking with the advice to lower trans and sat fats and lose weight
Lowering sugar can lower triglyceride levels, which is part of our total blood cholesterols levels.
http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/high-blood-cholesterol/in-depth/triglycerides/art-20048186?pg=2
Avoid sugary and refined foods. Simple carbohydrates, such as sugar and foods made with white flour, can increase triglycerides.
Direct causation or through obesity? I think that's an "empty calories" argument and whilst I clearly have no issue with people reducing sugar in order to eat more nutritious diet within a decent calorie goal I do think we shouldn't muddy the water by inferring direct causation from one food to an end result without considering the weight impact
It risks focusing on individual foods rather than overall diet
I'm all for overall diet balance and against specific food demonisation because it is partly the demonisation of food groups / foods in my own personal experience that kept me fat for decades
I think it's likely a direct cause. Thin people with poor diets often have high cholesterol.
Being aware of how certain foods affect our health is not about "demonizing" foods. It's about learning how to eat for health.
Yes thin people can have high cholesterol and science has provided a link with sat fats and trans fat to high blood cholesterol, also of course the genetic predisposition and other factors. I'm just saying I haven't seen similar research on sugar to blood cholesterol ...so please provide the peer reviewed research so that we can all learn. I would happily read and change my current thinking.
I agree on the importance learning about how to eat for overall nutritional balance, but believe it important to differentiate that from unproven links. There is enough that has valued research and future investment in research
I truly believe that people should go with the best science has to offer us at the present time, keep an eye on how the research is moving ...and avoid all the fads and media exposes for our maximum health
The more we can destroy the multi million health and fitness industry of woo and derp (oh yes I used those words) the better0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Conclusion of above article from American Heart Association:
The studies above, taken in total, indicate that high sugar intake should be avoided. Sugar has no nutritional value other than to provide calories. To improve the overall nutrient density of the diet and to help reduce the intake of excess calories, individuals should be sure foods high in added sugar are not displacing foods with essential nutrients or increasing calorie intake.
Exactly it's about excess calories and overweight
Now fair enough if cutting down on sugar means you are hitting your calorie goals and nutritional requirements
But sugar does not cause high blood cholesterol
Unless somebody has info that proves otherwise I'm sticking with the advice to lower trans and sat fats and lose weight
Lowering sugar can lower triglyceride levels, which is part of our total blood cholesterols levels.
http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/high-blood-cholesterol/in-depth/triglycerides/art-20048186?pg=2
Avoid sugary and refined foods. Simple carbohydrates, such as sugar and foods made with white flour, can increase triglycerides.
Direct causation or through obesity? I think that's an "empty calories" argument and whilst I clearly have no issue with people reducing sugar in order to eat more nutritious diet within a decent calorie goal I do think we shouldn't muddy the water by inferring direct causation from one food to an end result without considering the weight impact
It risks focusing on individual foods rather than overall diet
I'm all for overall diet balance and against specific food demonisation because it is partly the demonisation of food groups / foods in my own personal experience that kept me fat for decades
I think it's likely a direct cause. Thin people with poor diets often have high cholesterol.
Being aware of how certain foods affect our health is not about "demonizing" foods. It's about learning how to eat for health.
Yes thin people can have high cholesterol and science has provided a link with sat fats and trans fat to high blood cholesterol. I'm just saying I haven't seen similar research on sugar to blood cholesterol ...so please provide the peer reviewed research so that we can all learn. I would happily read and change my current thinking.
I agree on the importance learning about how to eat for overall nutritional balance, but believe it important to differentiate that from unproven links. There is enough that has valued research and future investment in research
I truly believe that people should go with the best science has to offer us at the present time, keep an eye on how the research is moving ...and avoid all the fads and media exposes for our maximum health
The more we can destroy the multi million health and fitness industry of woo and derp (oh yes I used those words) the better
You want me to go out and search for ALL the science on how diet affects blood cholesterol levels? Or just cherry pick a few that would be meaningless without considering all those I overlooked? Those are rhetorical questions since neither seems practical or helpful to me as I believe the doctors and researchers at the Mayo Clinic are likely aware of the full body of research.
I do agree that trans fat, saturated fat and obesity also affect it, as was mentioned in the Mayo Clinic link I posted. Many things may affect cholesterol levels.0 -
There is none that I have been able to find
If you bring the concept that there is then prove it. Because it is not a belief held by diabetes UK or the NHS or any other official body
And the Mayo clinic link says
"What's the best way to lower triglycerides?
Healthy lifestyle choices are key:
Lose weight. If you're overweight, losing 5 to 10 pounds can help lower your triglycerides. Motivate yourself by focusing on the benefits of losing weight, such as more energy and improved health.
Cut back on calories. Remember that extra calories are converted to triglycerides and stored as fat. Reducing your calories will reduce triglycerides.
Avoid sugary and refined foods. Simple carbohydrates, such as sugar and foods made with white flour, can increase triglycerides."
You infer a direct causation that should be available from the core body of research. I infer that sugary and refined foods are high calorific items which feeds into the second point and then in turn the first point
Anyway I have to go out in the current gale to the gym which I don't wanna do
But calories count0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 400 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 991 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions