Odd sugar calculation something's not right
Rit1603
Posts: 122 Member
Are sugars all the same? The app gives a flat sugar intake limit although it makes no difference in the type of sugars. If I am not mistaken there is a hell lot of a difference in natural sugar found in fruits which is digested and absorbed in a different way than refined sugars found in processed foods. However app calculate sugar as one only. I used to eat a lot of veg and lots of fruit and fruit smoothies and never gained weight from that but now if i feel like I am missing something here cos the 45 gram of sugars a day is hard to keep considering one apple and half is 24 gms of sugar....i feel something not right here.
0
Replies
-
You are mistaken, the sugars from fruits and other sources are all the same when they hit your blood stream.
The 45 gram arises if you have a 1200 calorie goal and log no exercise, it's 15% of calories and covers all sugars - added, free and intrinsic.
Buy smaller apples ;-)0 -
^^
What he said. They are chemically identical and treated the same by your body. The only difference between the sugar from the apple and the same grams from a spoon of granulated sugar is that the apple also comes packaged with some vits and minerals while the spoon does not. But unless you have a metabolic disorder that requires you to be concerned with sugar, don't be concerned by sugar.0 -
Sugar is sugar, but the fiber in fruit helps prevent blood sugar crashes, from what I hear (and, well, my experience as well).
But sugar won't make you fat. Eating too much will. Unless you're diabetic, just get rid of the sugar option and put fiber instead.0 -
I am still not convinced. Sugars might be all the same but there is a big difference on how the body absorbs glucose and fructose. If you watch the documentary fed up it explain very well that fructose can only be processed by the liver. when the liver is pushed to the max the pancreas come to rescue producing insulin which in excess turns sugar into fat. Now they say that fructose from fruits has a different mechanism because of the fiber and other minerals that are contained into the fruits. Also, app can't put under the same umbrella fructose (natural fructose from fruits or chemical fructose (from sodas/juices/processed foods high fructose corn syrup) and glucose (starch>carbs) as they are absorbed in two different ways . I will research more on this subject as it is the main reason from weight gain and visceral fat gain (the fat around the belly) . I always ate fruits and vegetables and carbs (no meat/no cheeses/very little fish) and i never had belly fat. But again, i might be mistaken. Thank you all for replying!
check this here it might explain better than me
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHEJE6I-Yl4
that is why i think there should be a difference in sugars in the app so we better regulate ourselves. I miss my fruit intake after all and never had problem with it, blood analysis always been perfect.0 -
I am still not convinced. Sugars might be all the same but there is a big difference on how the body absorbs glucose and fructose. If you watch the documentary fed up it explain very well that fructose can only be processed by the liver. when the liver is pushed to the max the pancreas come to rescue producing insulin which in excess turns sugar into fat. Now they say that fructose from fruits has a different mechanism because of the fiber and other minerals that are contained into the fruits. Also, app can't put under the same umbrella fructose (natural fructose from fruits or chemical fructose (from sodas/juices/processed foods high fructose corn syrup) and glucose (starch>carbs) as they are absorbed in two different ways . I will research more on this subject as it is the main reason from weight gain and visceral fat gain (the fat around the belly) . I always ate fruits and vegetables and carbs (no meat/no cheeses/very little fish) and i never had belly fat. But again, i might be mistaken. Thank you all for replying!
Whelp.
If you're getting your information from documentaries and treating it like fact...
@yarwell
This is why I don't think people know exactly what to do.0 -
I am still not convinced. Sugars might be all the same but there is a big difference on how the body absorbs glucose and fructose. If you watch the documentary fed up it explain very well that fructose can only be processed by the liver. when the liver is pushed to the max the pancreas come to rescue producing insulin which in excess turns sugar into fat. Now they say that fructose from fruits has a different mechanism because of the fiber and other minerals that are contained into the fruits. Also, app can't put under the same umbrella fructose (natural fructose from fruits or chemical fructose (from sodas/juices/processed foods high fructose corn syrup) and glucose (starch>carbs) as they are absorbed in two different ways . I will research more on this subject as it is the main reason from weight gain and visceral fat gain (the fat around the belly) . I always ate fruits and vegetables and carbs (no meat/no cheeses/very little fish) and i never had belly fat. But again, i might be mistaken. Thank you all for replying!
check this here it might explain better than mehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHEJE6I-Yl4
that is why i think there should be a difference in sugars in the app so we better regulate ourselves. I miss my fruit intake after all and never had problem with it, blood analysis always been perfect.
I'm quite sure a lot of things said in Fed Up have been debunked...0 -
Documentaries are pretty biased towards. There are different sources of sugar, but they are all broken down to it's simplest component to be absorbed by the body. The body doesn't recognize the source, it just metabolizes it. There's lots of pseudoscience out there that SOUNDS logical, but unfortunately if it were real science, then it would be accepted by the science community. If you're getting belly fat, it's because you're eating more than you need to.I am still not convinced. Sugars might be all the same but there is a big difference on how the body absorbs glucose and fructose. If you watch the documentary fed up it explain very well that fructose can only be processed by the liver. when the liver is pushed to the max the pancreas come to rescue producing insulin which in excess turns sugar into fat. Now they say that fructose from fruits has a different mechanism because of the fiber and other minerals that are contained into the fruits. Also, app can't put under the same umbrella fructose (natural fructose from fruits or chemical fructose (from sodas/juices/processed foods high fructose corn syrup) and glucose (starch>carbs) as they are absorbed in two different ways . I will research more on this subject as it is the main reason from weight gain and visceral fat gain (the fat around the belly) . I always ate fruits and vegetables and carbs (no meat/no cheeses/very little fish) and i never had belly fat. But again, i might be mistaken. Thank you all for replying!
check this here it might explain better than mehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHEJE6I-Yl4
that is why i think there should be a difference in sugars in the app so we better regulate ourselves. I miss my fruit intake after all and never had problem with it, blood analysis always been perfect.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
I am still not convinced. Sugars might be all the same but there is a big difference on how the body absorbs glucose and fructose.
Yes and no. There is a difference in how the body processes glucose and fructose. Fructose is processed by the liver (which might be a problem if you eat enough to lead to fatty liver disease) but does not spike blood sugar. Glucose spikes blood sugar but does not affect the liver. And any sugar consumed with fiber is going to be consumed more slowly (which matters if you have insulin issues).
However, most things aren't simply fructose or glucose. Fruit is a mix of sugars, table sugar (sucrose) is half glucose and half fructose, and even HFCS is 55% fructose and 45% glucose.
All that aside, if you read the reasoning for the WHO or US Dietary Guidelines limit (5-10%), it's for ADDED sugar and is because too much of that correlates with too many calories and poor nutrition. MFP can't set an added sugar limit (so far that's not on labels) so estimates the recommendation plus an average non added sugar amount (and since most people in the US and UK eat too few veg and fruit, it's low). If you eat a lot of veg and fruit and have a low calorie limit it won't work for you. Measuring fiber is a good way to get to the same result (meet or exceed the fiber requirement), plus hitting fat and protein. If you do all that sugar doesn't matter.0 -
Thank you that is what I was saying, i practicallly dont consume much added or refined sugars from processed food (no soda no juices no sauces no processed foods, no sweets, no candy and try to avoid all that includes hfcsyrup) and eat mostly veggie and fruits, some carbs, legumes,and never eat cheeses/dairy except for 1 glass fat free organic milk a day (my cappuccino, I am from Italy can't leave without it) so I should concentrate on fiber/fat/protein limits.0
-
I do not take documentaries as sciense or facts, i cited to explain my concept but you might be right people do not really know about food nutrition and response of the body but if you are all sayin not to trust scientists and dietitians who spoke in front of a camera how are people suppose to know better than them? There must be ONE truth out there, so who should we trust? The science community as you say? Exactly who is the science community? I am open to get to be more informed about this. But the who should I ask?
I was really affirming the opposite, I was saying that all these great amounts of fruits and veggie and superfoods I assumed never gave me belly fat nor gain weight.0 -
Superfoods?0
-
It would go against the whole CICO, IIFYM theory if it did. All this question/statement does is create pointless debates, with no winner. There is really not enough backed science to say it doesn't or say it does, so then it becomes heated opinions, you know what they say about opinions right?0
-
o
Whelp.
If you're getting your information from documentaries and treating it like fact...
@yarwell
This is why I don't think people know exactly what to do.
To be fair, the documentary was quoting a top and endocrinologist, Robert Lustig, who has done years of research on the subject and who is considered the leading expert on sugar digestion. He has books, lectures..etc you can reference. He also has a video with over 8 million views on YouTube called 'sugar the bitter truth'. You may want to check it out. It is a lecture given to medical students, but I think most people can understand his message.
0 -
Dr lustig's ideas about sugar have been long disputed and discredited0
-
Ohhh wow I thought there was actual backed science and that I simply was ignorant about the subject, so now you all saying that those are all opinions
0 -
Thank you karlynketo i will check that video on youtube!
0 -
There must be ONE truth out there, so who should we trust? The science community as you say? Exactly who is the science community?
That's not how science works. Here's the scientific method:
People do experiments or studies (that might be biased) and other people can see if their results are repeatable or not. Some things keep coming up with the same results so everyone agrees that they are true. Some things don't so scientists keep experimenting and testing.
Science is a process, not a single unassailable truth.0 -
Ohhh wow I thought there was actual backed science and that I simply was ignorant about the subject, so now you all saying that those are all opinions
In the medical community he isn't alone with his beliefs, not by a mile. Facts are not opinions, hypothesis' are opinions. Same as correlation and causation are not the same, yet they often get confused. His work is about causation and facts, which are hard to dispute. There are people who really don't want to hear sugar is the root cause of much illness. He's not trying to take sugar away, just inform people of the health risks so we can make smart decisions.
As for your original question about the difference of fructose and glucose, which is a fact that well predates Lustig, that isn't even up for debate anymore. They're metabolically not the same.
And the natural vs added sugars are not listed separately on any food label as the sugar and food industries have lobbied for decades to keep that info mute. (Fact)
0 -
Thank you KarlynKeto i think exactly like you 0
-
KarlynKeto wrote: »Ohhh wow I thought there was actual backed science and that I simply was ignorant about the subject, so now you all saying that those are all opinions
In the medical community he isn't alone with his beliefs, not by a mile. Facts are not opinions, hypothesis' are opinions. Same as correlation and causation are not the same, yet they often get confused. His work is about causation and facts, which are hard to dispute. There are people who really don't want to hear sugar is the root cause of much illness. He's not trying to take sugar away, just inform people of the health risks so we can make smart decisions.
As for your original question about the difference of fructose and glucose, which is a fact that well predates Lustig, that isn't even up for debate anymore. They're metabolically not the same.
And the natural vs added sugars are not listed separately on any food label as the sugar and food industries have lobbied for decades to keep that info mute. (Fact)
What about the fact that there are a lot of scientists and studies that disagree with lustig?0 -
Well at the end i'd rather eat what mother nature gave us,( so fruits veggies legumes seeds nuts) than processed food made by humans with God knows what's inside.0
-
They pretty much list everything on the label so you can see what's in it .0
-
singingflutelady wrote: »KarlynKeto wrote: »Ohhh wow I thought there was actual backed science and that I simply was ignorant about the subject, so now you all saying that those are all opinions
In the medical community he isn't alone with his beliefs, not by a mile. Facts are not opinions, hypothesis' are opinions. Same as correlation and causation are not the same, yet they often get confused. His work is about causation and facts, which are hard to dispute. There are people who really don't want to hear sugar is the root cause of much illness. He's not trying to take sugar away, just inform people of the health risks so we can make smart decisions.
As for your original question about the difference of fructose and glucose, which is a fact that well predates Lustig, that isn't even up for debate anymore. They're metabolically not the same.
And the natural vs added sugars are not listed separately on any food label as the sugar and food industries have lobbied for decades to keep that info mute. (Fact)
What about the fact that there are a lot of scientists and studies that disagree with lustig?
Like who? And on which point? Can you provide a source link or a name of a scientist? He has a plethora of research out there. What you are describing sounds more personal - as in anything he says can't be true - but that is not an objective way to look at scientific research. I am not saying he is 100 right about everything, but the core data that sugar is a key driver to much of our health crisis is dang hard to dispute. I would love to read someone trying, though.0 -
Thank you karlynketo i will check that video on youtube!singingflutelady wrote: »Dr lustig's ideas about sugar have been long disputed and discredited
0 -
I can't cut and paste but here's the title of a systematic review and meta analysis by Canadian researchers : effect of fructose on body weight in controlled feeding trials.
They found that fructose did not contribute to weight gain when substituted for other carbohydrates in diets providing similar calories0 -
I haven't read that study. But based on what you just said, that has nothing to do with Lustigs research. In fact his research would actually confirm that that outcome would actually be true. If a study is swapping one carbohydrate for another, as in a controlled study where fructose is given to one group and another carbohydrate to another group, and all other factors are the same such as calories and exercise, there should be no difference. His research repeatedly notes that all carbohydrates are the same metabolically. Is there a finer point they are trying to make that I'm not seeing?
ETA: his study of research points out that rapidly digestible fructose is a higher proponent of metabolic diseases due to its role in metabolism. I will try to find that study you posted0 -
singingflutelady wrote: »They pretty much list everything on the label so you can see what's in it .
Yes that i noticed, very helpful
0 -
http://www.alanaragonblog.com/2010/01/29/the-bitter-truth-about-fructose-alarmism/
OP, don't listen to Lustig. Problem solved. Guy is out there.
0 -
0
-
http://www.alanaragonblog.com/2010/01/29/the-bitter-truth-about-fructose-alarmism/
OP, don't listen to Lustig. Problem solved. Guy is out there.
Some will believe this, some will believe the other..
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 394.2K Introduce Yourself
- 43.9K Getting Started
- 260.4K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.1K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 440 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.9K MyFitnessPal Information
- 15 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.7K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions