Eating more later in the day?
Replies
-
TravisGM92 wrote: »Wow this thread is full of know-it-alls that don't know. Sugar does make you want to eat more sugar, it's like a drug. Secondly, sugar spikes insulin. Why does insulin matter? It signals your body to not release fat, after all your blood is full of sugar it can readily use as energy -- why would it go for your fat stores with that abundance of fuel circulating?
http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/health/sugar-addictive-cocaine-heroin-studies-suggest-article-1.356819
https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/nih-study-shows-how-insulin-stimulates-fat-cells-take-glucose
Thanks for that
If you're concerned about insulin I'd suggest this piece as there's a number of huge problems with the insulin hypothesis:
http://weightology.net/weightologyweekly/index.php/free-content/free-content/volume-1-issue-7-insulin-and-thinking-better/insulin-an-undeserved-bad-reputation/
Regarding carbohydrate and appetite there's a lot of individual variability at play and I'd suggest Krieger's info on that as well.
Please note these are both well referenced items:
http://weightology.net/weightologyweekly/index.php/free-content/free-content/volume-1-issue-6-body-fat-testing-and-the-metabolic-advantage/increasing-protein-or-decreasing-carbohydrate-which-gives-you-a-metabolic-advantage/
6 -
Wow this thread is full of know-it-alls that don't know. Sugar does make you want to eat more sugar, it's like a drug. Secondly, sugar spikes insulin. Why does insulin matter? It signals your body to not release fat, after all your blood is full of sugar it can readily use as energy -- why would it go for your fat stores with that abundance of fuel circulating?
http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/health/sugar-addictive-cocaine-heroin-studies-suggest-article-1.356819
https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/nih-study-shows-how-insulin-stimulates-fat-cells-take-glucose
But then there's this other thing called a calorie deficit ...2 -
Wow this thread is full of know-it-alls that don't know. Sugar does make you want to eat more sugar, it's like a drug. Secondly, sugar spikes insulin. Why does insulin matter? It signals your body to not release fat, after all your blood is full of sugar it can readily use as energy -- why would it go for your fat stores with that abundance of fuel circulating?
http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/health/sugar-addictive-cocaine-heroin-studies-suggest-article-1.356819
https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/nih-study-shows-how-insulin-stimulates-fat-cells-take-glucose
Because insulin comes back down again between meals and during this time, fat oxidation goes up.
If total calories coming through the door are less than what's expended then fat oxidation will exceed fat storage and you'll lose weight.
Finally, protein is also insulinogenic.7 -
Wow this thread is full of know-it-alls that don't know. Sugar does make you want to eat more sugar, it's like a drug. Secondly, sugar spikes insulin. Why does insulin matter? It signals your body to not release fat, after all your blood is full of sugar it can readily use as energy -- why would it go for your fat stores with that abundance of fuel circulating?
http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/health/sugar-addictive-cocaine-heroin-studies-suggest-article-1.356819
https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/nih-study-shows-how-insulin-stimulates-fat-cells-take-glucose
Nope1 -
I've only been tracking calories for a few days now, but I'm seeing a pattern. I often eat a small breakfast (in a rush, getting kids out of the house), a larger lunch, a little snack in the afternoon, and then a LARGE dinner. I'm sticking to the calorie amounts, but does it matter when you eat the calories? I do make sure to eat breakfast every day, and there's always protein in my breakfast (this morning it was a two egg omelet with a small amount of cheese), but I get really hungry for dinner and it's hard for me to sit at the table with the family and not eat anything (my fam all eats a LOT -- but they don't have my metabolism). Dinner's also the meal of the day I like the best, and it's not as healthy because it's not just for me.
But if the calories add up, does it not matter? I don't usually eat after dinner either...
The biggest obstacle that people tend to have with long term weight loss followed by weight maintenance is the inability to adhere to a reasonable calorie intake over time.
If your approach is working for you, and you're able to stick to your diet, and you feel decent, don't change a damn thing.6 -
Insulin is not bad, no one is making that claim. If you eat high sugar foods constantly, that is when you should worry. Your insulin spikes as opposed to going up steadily when you eat sugary foods, that's where the problem lies and that is where we get the sugar crash because the insulin falls back down relatively quickly. In addition, the sugar crash acts as incentive to have more sugar, after all do you want to stay tired? Clearly not, this is where the drug addiction comparisons lie. You will also become insulin resistant which leads to a whole host of new problems.2
-
queenliz99 wrote: »Wow this thread is full of know-it-alls that don't know. Sugar does make you want to eat more sugar, it's like a drug. Secondly, sugar spikes insulin. Why does insulin matter? It signals your body to not release fat, after all your blood is full of sugar it can readily use as energy -- why would it go for your fat stores with that abundance of fuel circulating?
http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/health/sugar-addictive-cocaine-heroin-studies-suggest-article-1.356819
https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/nih-study-shows-how-insulin-stimulates-fat-cells-take-glucose
Nope
My nutritional instructor must have been wrong, I guess I should tell her to go back to college and re-earn her Masters.0 -
queenliz99 wrote: »Wow this thread is full of know-it-alls that don't know. Sugar does make you want to eat more sugar, it's like a drug. Secondly, sugar spikes insulin. Why does insulin matter? It signals your body to not release fat, after all your blood is full of sugar it can readily use as energy -- why would it go for your fat stores with that abundance of fuel circulating?
http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/health/sugar-addictive-cocaine-heroin-studies-suggest-article-1.356819
https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/nih-study-shows-how-insulin-stimulates-fat-cells-take-glucose
Nope
My nutritional instructor must have been wrong, I guess I should tell her to go back to college and re-earn her Masters.
Where did she go to school?1 -
queenliz99 wrote: »queenliz99 wrote: »Wow this thread is full of know-it-alls that don't know. Sugar does make you want to eat more sugar, it's like a drug. Secondly, sugar spikes insulin. Why does insulin matter? It signals your body to not release fat, after all your blood is full of sugar it can readily use as energy -- why would it go for your fat stores with that abundance of fuel circulating?
http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/health/sugar-addictive-cocaine-heroin-studies-suggest-article-1.356819
https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/nih-study-shows-how-insulin-stimulates-fat-cells-take-glucose
Nope
My nutritional instructor must have been wrong, I guess I should tell her to go back to college and re-earn her Masters.
Where did she go to school?
Here's her Twitter:
https://twitter.com/ShawNutritionS
0 -
How did this turn into a sugar thread???
OP, sorry your thread got derailed. I'm hungry before I eat a meal too, that's kind of what hunger is for, to signal that it's time to eat, right?
I not only eat my biggest meal at dinner, I save calories for a late night snack as well, I'm a rebel like that! Sometimes I don't even eat breakfast - <gasp!>. Meal timing doesn't matter - as long as you are eating the right amount of calories and comfortable with your satiety throughout the day, you will be successful. You can do this, good luck! 4 -
BodyzLanguage wrote: »kickassketo wrote: »TravisGM, I'm with you. I think all the sugar in their diets, correlated with their inability to understand your point, is clear anecdotal evidence that sugar is the devil.
Now sugar makes us stupid? I understand most of his points. I just don't agree with them. I don't believe sugar is evil, nor do I believe carbs make people hungrier.
You're right. But particular carbs increase cravings though, it's no secret. 9 times out of 10 I'm likely to want another cookie if I eat one.
Whenever I order a steak, I want another bite of steak. Once I finish the steak on my plate, I eat the steak on my wife's plate. So far, I have not asked people at the table next to us for their steak. Yet.
Steak must cause cravings. Steak is the devil. Cuz carbs.11 -
PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »TravisGM92 wrote: »PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »AndTravisGM92 wrote: »PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »TravisGM92 wrote: »PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »TravisGM92 wrote: »kickassketo wrote: »TravisGM, I'm with you. I think all the sugar in their diets, correlated with their inability to understand your point, is clear anecdotal evidence that sugar is the devil.
Oh my goodness you are so funny I just can't contain my laughter over here.
On another point; the "sugar is devil" phrase is meant not to be taken literally. I don't think sugar is the devil; I don't think sugar will kill all people or is the worse thing in the world. The point I was making, and am still making, is that sugar is not required in any healthy diet. You could stop eating sugar now and never eat it again for years and be just fine.
IF sugar can cause someone to want to eat more carbs, the OP (if they were eating sugar in the morning) would experience more hunger throughout the day thereby answering their original question/concern of why they have increased hunger in the evening.
Awesome. And this has what to do with the original post?
IF sugar can cause someone to want to eat more carbs, the OP (if they were eating sugar in the morning) would experience more hunger throughout the day thereby answering their original question/concern of why they have increased hunger in the evening.
The OP was posting about a concern of noticing a pattern of eating more in the evening.
No. They said they are hungry at dinnertime. I fail to see how this is a bad thing.
ETA The original post was about meal timing and had nothing to do with carbs or sugar. The whole "breakfast like a king, lunch like a prince, dinner like a pauper" rule is still on blast out in woo woo land. Not sure how you twisted that into an excuse to go on an anti-sugar rant.
? It's not an anti-sugar rant. I'm attempting to give a possible explanation as to why they may be feeling more hungry and eating more in the evening. They talked about why they might be more hungry and eating in the evening so I provided a possible explanation as to why that might be happening. Eating simple carbohydrates in the early day can cause one to have more hunger cravings. http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/early/2013/06/26/ajcn.113.064113.abstract
That could explain why they eat more in the evening. They gave one example of a breakfast.
They are feeling hungry in the evening because they're eating light during the day and there's nothing wrong with that. End of story. No analysis needed.
That isn't science backed what so ever. That is my main issue with this thread. Most people here are making claims with no scientific backing. Perhaps anecdotal, which is nice. But the point is that if one wants to TRY and avoid eating simple carbohydrates to see if their hunger decreases, they could try that. If it doesn't work, then try something else.
What's wrong with adding scientific backing to my advice? Should I just put anecdotal evidence like you?
Why should they avoid hunger when they're supposed to be eating anyway?
Precisely. Maybe someone didn't actually read the OP carefully. Or maybe he just latches on to any weak excuse to go on about sugar. And to think there are 41,000+ sugar threads on MFP currently going unloved while this one is dragged off topic. Sad.9 -
BodyzLanguage wrote: »kickassketo wrote: »TravisGM, I'm with you. I think all the sugar in their diets, correlated with their inability to understand your point, is clear anecdotal evidence that sugar is the devil.
Now sugar makes us stupid? I understand most of his points. I just don't agree with them. I don't believe sugar is evil, nor do I believe carbs make people hungrier.
You're right. But particular carbs increase cravings though, it's no secret. 9 times out of 10 I'm likely to want another cookie if I eat one.
What does that have to do with "carbs"? A cookie is about half fat. Many people have trouble moderating specific highly-palatable trigger foods, especially if they haven't had much practice in doing so and have bad habits or various other food issues built up over time.
Lots of fruits and veg, or even foods like sweet potato or chickpeas are likely a higher percentage carbs than the cookie.7 -
queenliz99 wrote: »Wow this thread is full of know-it-alls that don't know. Sugar does make you want to eat more sugar, it's like a drug. Secondly, sugar spikes insulin. Why does insulin matter? It signals your body to not release fat, after all your blood is full of sugar it can readily use as energy -- why would it go for your fat stores with that abundance of fuel circulating?
http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/health/sugar-addictive-cocaine-heroin-studies-suggest-article-1.356819
https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/nih-study-shows-how-insulin-stimulates-fat-cells-take-glucose
Nope
My nutritional instructor must have been wrong, I guess I should tell her to go back to college and re-earn her Masters.
If she claimed to be able to speak generally about what makes people hungry or said sugar "makes you want to eat more sugar" then she should, as all the credible research indicates that people vary as to what makes them satiated/hungry.
I've been eating high sugar (lots of fruits and veg) smoothies for breakfast lately. I am no hungrier or more tempted to eat sugar or carbs than when I ate a vegetable omelet every morning. I'm usually under my carb goal, and I don't try to be -- I'd prefer to hit it and would be fine with exceeding it. The only breakfasts that cause me to be hungry sooner than usual are those with lots of high fat foods and too little protein or fiber to balance it. I don't think this means everyone should avoid such breakfasts -- just me.4 -
I actually really enjoy cooking. Can't stand baking, though, which means no goodies here! Good way to keep from eating is just not to bake anything...but I love making food that my kids enjoy, especially when it's not typical "kid food." Still, they're big fans of pizza and pasta. Not the best for a mommy who needs to watch what she eats
I really think attitude is important for success, especially in weight management which is heavily reliant on adherence to proper calorie intake. You are making this harder for yourself than it has to be. "No goodies here!" - don't you hear that you are telling yourself "I can't have what I like"? How long do you think that will work? You can have pasta and pizza - you just have to eat the proper portions.
This isn't easy - I've struggled with eating and weight all my life; but I've been maintaining a healthy weight for 22 months now (yes, still counting in months), and today, I realized that I couldn't keep up "healthy eating" for long because "what do I want to eat" wasn't a part of the decision-making process. It has to be part of the decision-making process in order for us to be able to stick to healthy eating for more than a few weeks/months.2 -
TravisGM92 wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »TravisGM92 wrote: »Other than that, it is scientifically known that eating sugar promotes the urge to eat even MORE sugar or carbs. So, I have to ask, what do you eat for breakfast? If it has sugar then that could be your problem. Try eating more complex carbs with a good amount of protein (oatmeal and eggs, scrambled eggs, omelets, low carb milk and high protein cereal, etc.)
Sugar promotes the urge to eat more sugar? This is 'scientifically known?' Please provide us your sources for this claim.
Also sounds like the OP already eats a good, healthy breakfast.
Sugar is not the devil.
Sugar is the devil. We don't need sugar and it's been known to be just as addictive as cocaine: http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2007/08/23/is-sugar-more-addictive-than-cocaine.aspx, also: http://www.forbes.com/sites/jacobsullum/2013/10/16/research-shows-cocaine-and-heroin-are-less-addictive-than-oreos/#2275a5184b7b.
As for the claim that eating sugar promotes the urge to eat more sugar; https://authoritynutrition.com/how-sugar-makes-you-addicted/.
I can provide more citations if needed.
Mercola? Authority (not) nutrition? Nope nope nope nope. Come on now....
Sugar is not evil. Sugar does not prevent weight loss. And BS it is as addictive as cocaine. I've worked with addicts throughout the years and I fond this comparison absolutely appalling, hurtful, disgusting....
My almost 100lbs weight loss proves that sugar does not cause weight gain or addiction to carbs. Who starting that crock of crap anyway? I ate 'clean' vegetarian for years and I was at my worst weight. My blood tests were awful, so yeah....5 -
cerise_noir wrote: »TravisGM92 wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »TravisGM92 wrote: »Other than that, it is scientifically known that eating sugar promotes the urge to eat even MORE sugar or carbs. So, I have to ask, what do you eat for breakfast? If it has sugar then that could be your problem. Try eating more complex carbs with a good amount of protein (oatmeal and eggs, scrambled eggs, omelets, low carb milk and high protein cereal, etc.)
Sugar promotes the urge to eat more sugar? This is 'scientifically known?' Please provide us your sources for this claim.
Also sounds like the OP already eats a good, healthy breakfast.
Sugar is not the devil.
Sugar is the devil. We don't need sugar and it's been known to be just as addictive as cocaine: http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2007/08/23/is-sugar-more-addictive-than-cocaine.aspx, also: http://www.forbes.com/sites/jacobsullum/2013/10/16/research-shows-cocaine-and-heroin-are-less-addictive-than-oreos/#2275a5184b7b.
As for the claim that eating sugar promotes the urge to eat more sugar; https://authoritynutrition.com/how-sugar-makes-you-addicted/.
I can provide more citations if needed.
Mercola? Authority (not) nutrition? Nope nope nope nope. Come on now....
Sugar is not evil. Sugar does not prevent weight loss. And BS it is as addictive as cocaine. I've worked with addicts throughout the years and I fond this comparison absolutely appalling, hurtful, disgusting....
My almost 100lbs weight loss proves that sugar does not cause weight gain or addiction to carbs. Who starting that crock of crap anyway? I ate 'clean' vegetarian for years and I was at my worst weight. My blood tests were awful, so yeah....
1. You are taking it out of context.
2. The point of saying sugar has shown in studies to be addictive (whether or not more than drugs), is an important point.
3. Mercola as an authority? Maybe not. But the study is real.
4. There is another study I cited that showed that eating carbs made people want to eat more carbs. Sugar are carbs...1 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »BodyzLanguage wrote: »kickassketo wrote: »TravisGM, I'm with you. I think all the sugar in their diets, correlated with their inability to understand your point, is clear anecdotal evidence that sugar is the devil.
Now sugar makes us stupid? I understand most of his points. I just don't agree with them. I don't believe sugar is evil, nor do I believe carbs make people hungrier.
You're right. But particular carbs increase cravings though, it's no secret. 9 times out of 10 I'm likely to want another cookie if I eat one.
What does that have to do with "carbs"? A cookie is about half fat. Many people have trouble moderating specific highly-palatable trigger foods, especially if they haven't had much practice in doing so and have bad habits or various other food issues built up over time.
Lots of fruits and veg, or even foods like sweet potato or chickpeas are likely a higher percentage carbs than the cookie.
A cookie is half fat? That's one hell of a generalization. And you're missing the point. They were trying to say that when they eat simple carbs (like the ones in cookies) they want to eat more simple carbs. Show me a study where people ate fat and wanted to eat more fat as a result.
People on here are either blind to science or just don't like people who bring up sugar! haha my goodness!1 -
TravisGM92 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »BodyzLanguage wrote: »kickassketo wrote: »TravisGM, I'm with you. I think all the sugar in their diets, correlated with their inability to understand your point, is clear anecdotal evidence that sugar is the devil.
Now sugar makes us stupid? I understand most of his points. I just don't agree with them. I don't believe sugar is evil, nor do I believe carbs make people hungrier.
You're right. But particular carbs increase cravings though, it's no secret. 9 times out of 10 I'm likely to want another cookie if I eat one.
What does that have to do with "carbs"? A cookie is about half fat. Many people have trouble moderating specific highly-palatable trigger foods, especially if they haven't had much practice in doing so and have bad habits or various other food issues built up over time.
Lots of fruits and veg, or even foods like sweet potato or chickpeas are likely a higher percentage carbs than the cookie.
A cookie is half fat? That's one hell of a generalization. And you're missing the point. They were trying to say that when they eat simple carbs (like the ones in cookies) they want to eat more simple carbs. Show me a study where people ate fat and wanted to eat more fat as a result.
People on here are either blind to science or just don't like people who bring up sugar! haha my goodness!
You say eating carbs makes people eat more carbs. Are these pure carbs, as in nothing else added, ie: no pastries, cookies, desserts? Are you talking about fruit or carbs paired with something else? Are these people eating straight sugar or sugar as an ingredient in a food (such as cookies or breads)? For me, I want to eat more cookies because they taste good, not from some dopamine/addiction high.3 -
TravisGM92 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »BodyzLanguage wrote: »kickassketo wrote: »TravisGM, I'm with you. I think all the sugar in their diets, correlated with their inability to understand your point, is clear anecdotal evidence that sugar is the devil.
Now sugar makes us stupid? I understand most of his points. I just don't agree with them. I don't believe sugar is evil, nor do I believe carbs make people hungrier.
You're right. But particular carbs increase cravings though, it's no secret. 9 times out of 10 I'm likely to want another cookie if I eat one.
What does that have to do with "carbs"? A cookie is about half fat. Many people have trouble moderating specific highly-palatable trigger foods, especially if they haven't had much practice in doing so and have bad habits or various other food issues built up over time.
Lots of fruits and veg, or even foods like sweet potato or chickpeas are likely a higher percentage carbs than the cookie.
A cookie is half fat? That's one hell of a generalization.
Usually around that, yeah. With the exception of soda and hard candy, most so-called "junk food" is about half carbs and half fat (sometimes more one, sometimes more other). Some other high cal hard to resist foods tend to be high fat and then some protein and carbs (like fried chicken). This is why it's a pet peeve that they get classed as "carbs." It's ignorant or at least a misuse of the term.
Most of those who actually buy into the addiction thing in a more credible way focus on "highly palatable foods" and those are typically a mix of fat and carbs (often with salt). That book Fat Sugar Salt talks about how fat affects our brains as strongly as sugar. And of course it's way easier to eat 100 calories of roasted plain potato and feel satisfied than to stop eating fries or chips at 100 calories for most people (both having 50% or more of their calories from fat typically). This is one reason a plain potato scores as extremely satiating, whereas fries do not.
(I love good fries, not knocking them.)And you're missing the point. They were trying to say that when they eat simple carbs (like the ones in cookies) they want to eat more simple carbs.
No, they were using "a cookie" as an example of "a carb" when it is not a good example at all. A carrot would be a better example, or a banana. My breakfast (as noted) was high carb, and has been for a few weeks now. I don't crave carbs -- I often have a relatively low carb lunch (salad and protein) and am perfectly satisfied. I've been trying to add in more carbs, but that's because I'm trying to eat about 50% carbs and sometimes struggle to do so.
Oh, and simple-sugars, complex-starches. Not a meaningful difference, but about half of the carbs in the cookie are likely complex (flour), as are all of the in the chips and fries.
On the other hand, fruit=simple carbs, and yet are much less likely to be a trigger food. It's the combination.Show me a study where people ate fat and wanted to eat more fat as a result.
In the book I referenced above several studies are discussed. In the "addictive food" studies fat+carbs score higher than either alone -- it's about what we perceive as highly palatable.
Personally, there's nothing that's mostly just carbs that I am tempted to overeat. Cheese, yeah--but right, that's fat.People on here are either blind to science or just don't like people who bring up sugar! haha my goodness!
I don't like it when people misuse terms like "carbs." Calling a cookie a "carb" is silly and generalizing about "carbs" in a way that excludes a peach is similarly silly.
Just trying to elevate the discussion, you know, since you don't seem willing to let it get back on topic but keep trying to derail.7 -
TravisGM92 wrote: »cerise_noir wrote: »TravisGM92 wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »TravisGM92 wrote: »Other than that, it is scientifically known that eating sugar promotes the urge to eat even MORE sugar or carbs. So, I have to ask, what do you eat for breakfast? If it has sugar then that could be your problem. Try eating more complex carbs with a good amount of protein (oatmeal and eggs, scrambled eggs, omelets, low carb milk and high protein cereal, etc.)
Sugar promotes the urge to eat more sugar? This is 'scientifically known?' Please provide us your sources for this claim.
Also sounds like the OP already eats a good, healthy breakfast.
Sugar is not the devil.
Sugar is the devil. We don't need sugar and it's been known to be just as addictive as cocaine: http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2007/08/23/is-sugar-more-addictive-than-cocaine.aspx, also: http://www.forbes.com/sites/jacobsullum/2013/10/16/research-shows-cocaine-and-heroin-are-less-addictive-than-oreos/#2275a5184b7b.
As for the claim that eating sugar promotes the urge to eat more sugar; https://authoritynutrition.com/how-sugar-makes-you-addicted/.
I can provide more citations if needed.
Mercola? Authority (not) nutrition? Nope nope nope nope. Come on now....
Sugar is not evil. Sugar does not prevent weight loss. And BS it is as addictive as cocaine. I've worked with addicts throughout the years and I fond this comparison absolutely appalling, hurtful, disgusting....
My almost 100lbs weight loss proves that sugar does not cause weight gain or addiction to carbs. Who starting that crock of crap anyway? I ate 'clean' vegetarian for years and I was at my worst weight. My blood tests were awful, so yeah....
1. You are taking it out of context.
2. The point of saying sugar has shown in studies to be addictive (whether or not more than drugs), is an important point.
3. Mercola as an authority? Maybe not. But the study is real.
4. There is another study I cited that showed that eating carbs made people want to eat more carbs. Sugar are carbs...
The other study you posted matched calorie and macronutrient intake. They were comparing the GI of the entire meal, not the amount of carbohydrate.
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/early/2013/06/26/ajcn.113.064113.abstract
"Design: With the use of a randomized, blinded, crossover design, 12 overweight or obese men aged 18–35 y consumed high- and low-GI meals controlled for calories, macronutrients, and palatability on 2 occasions. The primary outcome was cerebral blood flow as a measure of resting brain activity, which was assessed by using arterial spin-labeling functional magnetic resonance imaging 4 h after test meals. We hypothesized that brain activity would be greater after the high-GI meal in prespecified regions involved in eating behavior, reward, and craving. "
As shown in
Table 1, both test meals were composed
of similar ingredients and had the same macronutrient distri-
bution (ProNutra Software, version 3.3.0.10; Viocare Technol-
ogies Inc).
You cannot claim that the differences in hunger were related to the number of carbohydrates as that wasn't what was tested.7 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »TravisGM92 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »BodyzLanguage wrote: »kickassketo wrote: »TravisGM, I'm with you. I think all the sugar in their diets, correlated with their inability to understand your point, is clear anecdotal evidence that sugar is the devil.
Now sugar makes us stupid? I understand most of his points. I just don't agree with them. I don't believe sugar is evil, nor do I believe carbs make people hungrier.
You're right. But particular carbs increase cravings though, it's no secret. 9 times out of 10 I'm likely to want another cookie if I eat one.
What does that have to do with "carbs"? A cookie is about half fat. Many people have trouble moderating specific highly-palatable trigger foods, especially if they haven't had much practice in doing so and have bad habits or various other food issues built up over time.
Lots of fruits and veg, or even foods like sweet potato or chickpeas are likely a higher percentage carbs than the cookie.
A cookie is half fat? That's one hell of a generalization.
Usually around that, yeah. With the exception of soda and hard candy, most so-called "junk food" is about half carbs and half fat (sometimes more one, sometimes more other). Some other high cal hard to resist foods tend to be high fat and then some protein and carbs (like fried chicken). This is why it's a pet peeve that they get classed as "carbs." It's ignorant or at least a misuse of the term.
Most of those who actually buy into the addiction thing in a more credible way focus on "highly palatable foods" and those are typically a mix of fat and carbs (often with salt). That book Fat Sugar Salt talks about how fat affects our brains as strongly as sugar. And of course it's way easier to eat 100 calories of roasted plain potato and feel satisfied than to stop eating fries or chips at 100 calories for most people (both having 50% or more of their calories from fat typically). This is one reason a plain potato scores as extremely satiating, whereas fries do not.
(I love good fries, not knocking them.)And you're missing the point. They were trying to say that when they eat simple carbs (like the ones in cookies) they want to eat more simple carbs.
No, they were using "a cookie" as an example of "a carb" when it is not a good example at all. A carrot would be a better example, or a banana. My breakfast (as noted) was high carb, and has been for a few weeks now. I don't crave carbs -- I often have a relatively low carb lunch (salad and protein) and am perfectly satisfied. I've been trying to add in more carbs, but that's because I'm trying to eat about 50% carbs and sometimes struggle to do so.
Oh, and simple-sugars, complex-starches. Not a meaningful difference, but about half of the carbs in the cookie are likely complex (flour), as are all of the in the chips and fries.
On the other hand, fruit=simple carbs, and yet are much less likely to be a trigger food. It's the combination.Show me a study where people ate fat and wanted to eat more fat as a result.
In the book I referenced above several studies are discussed. In the "addictive food" studies fat+carbs score higher than either alone -- it's about what we perceive as highly palatable.
Personally, there's nothing that's mostly just carbs that I am tempted to overeat. Cheese, yeah--but right, that's fat.People on here are either blind to science or just don't like people who bring up sugar! haha my goodness!
I don't like it when people misuse terms like "carbs." Calling a cookie a "carb" is silly and generalizing about "carbs" in a way that excludes a peach is similarly silly.
Just trying to elevate the discussion, you know, since you don't seem willing to let it get back on topic but keep trying to derail.
Yes... the fact that I'm replying to other people replying to my posts makes it my fault that the thread "derails".
What more could you add to the OP's question anyways? I can find about 10 different answers on this thread only, I think they've got their answer. If not, this is a thread and thread's don't have specific rules to answering just one question alone.No, they were using "a cookie" as an example of "a carb" when it is not a good example at all. A carrot would be a better example, or a banana. My breakfast (as noted) was high carb, and has been for a few weeks now. I don't crave carbs -- I often have a relatively low carb lunch (salad and protein) and am perfectly satisfied. I've been trying to add in more carbs, but that's because I'm trying to eat about 50% carbs and sometimes struggle to do so.
Oh, and simple-sugars, complex-starches. Not a meaningful difference, but about half of the carbs in the cookie are likely complex (flour), as are all of the in the chips and fries.
On the other hand, fruit=simple carbs, and yet are much less likely to be a trigger food. It's the combination.
Perhaps YOU don't think it's a good example, but that's what THEY were trying to get at.
Carbs don't cause hunger? Then why is it a massively researched topic among obesity researchers?
"For many individuals, the biggest ‘metabolic advantage’ of very-low carbohdyrate diets may be one of food/calorie control. Many people seem to show what might be popularly called ‘carbohydrate addiction’ (a term that is massively debated among obesity researchers) where eating even small amounts of carbs makes them want to eat more. In that case, a full blown removal of carbohydrates from the diet may be the only realistic way to limit caloric intake."
Taken from: http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/research-review/ketogenic-low-carbohydrate-diets-have-no-metabolic-advantage-over-nonketogenic-low-carbohydrate-diets-research-review.html1 -
TravisGM92 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »TravisGM92 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »BodyzLanguage wrote: »kickassketo wrote: »TravisGM, I'm with you. I think all the sugar in their diets, correlated with their inability to understand your point, is clear anecdotal evidence that sugar is the devil.
Now sugar makes us stupid? I understand most of his points. I just don't agree with them. I don't believe sugar is evil, nor do I believe carbs make people hungrier.
You're right. But particular carbs increase cravings though, it's no secret. 9 times out of 10 I'm likely to want another cookie if I eat one.
What does that have to do with "carbs"? A cookie is about half fat. Many people have trouble moderating specific highly-palatable trigger foods, especially if they haven't had much practice in doing so and have bad habits or various other food issues built up over time.
Lots of fruits and veg, or even foods like sweet potato or chickpeas are likely a higher percentage carbs than the cookie.
A cookie is half fat? That's one hell of a generalization.
Usually around that, yeah. With the exception of soda and hard candy, most so-called "junk food" is about half carbs and half fat (sometimes more one, sometimes more other). Some other high cal hard to resist foods tend to be high fat and then some protein and carbs (like fried chicken). This is why it's a pet peeve that they get classed as "carbs." It's ignorant or at least a misuse of the term.
Most of those who actually buy into the addiction thing in a more credible way focus on "highly palatable foods" and those are typically a mix of fat and carbs (often with salt). That book Fat Sugar Salt talks about how fat affects our brains as strongly as sugar. And of course it's way easier to eat 100 calories of roasted plain potato and feel satisfied than to stop eating fries or chips at 100 calories for most people (both having 50% or more of their calories from fat typically). This is one reason a plain potato scores as extremely satiating, whereas fries do not.
(I love good fries, not knocking them.)And you're missing the point. They were trying to say that when they eat simple carbs (like the ones in cookies) they want to eat more simple carbs.
No, they were using "a cookie" as an example of "a carb" when it is not a good example at all. A carrot would be a better example, or a banana. My breakfast (as noted) was high carb, and has been for a few weeks now. I don't crave carbs -- I often have a relatively low carb lunch (salad and protein) and am perfectly satisfied. I've been trying to add in more carbs, but that's because I'm trying to eat about 50% carbs and sometimes struggle to do so.
Oh, and simple-sugars, complex-starches. Not a meaningful difference, but about half of the carbs in the cookie are likely complex (flour), as are all of the in the chips and fries.
On the other hand, fruit=simple carbs, and yet are much less likely to be a trigger food. It's the combination.Show me a study where people ate fat and wanted to eat more fat as a result.
In the book I referenced above several studies are discussed. In the "addictive food" studies fat+carbs score higher than either alone -- it's about what we perceive as highly palatable.
Personally, there's nothing that's mostly just carbs that I am tempted to overeat. Cheese, yeah--but right, that's fat.People on here are either blind to science or just don't like people who bring up sugar! haha my goodness!
I don't like it when people misuse terms like "carbs." Calling a cookie a "carb" is silly and generalizing about "carbs" in a way that excludes a peach is similarly silly.
Just trying to elevate the discussion, you know, since you don't seem willing to let it get back on topic but keep trying to derail.
Yes... the fact that I'm replying to other people replying to my posts makes it my fault that the thread "derails".
What more could you add to the OP's question anyways? I can find about 10 different answers on this thread only, I think they've got their answer. If not, this is a thread and thread's don't have specific rules to answering just one question alone.No, they were using "a cookie" as an example of "a carb" when it is not a good example at all. A carrot would be a better example, or a banana. My breakfast (as noted) was high carb, and has been for a few weeks now. I don't crave carbs -- I often have a relatively low carb lunch (salad and protein) and am perfectly satisfied. I've been trying to add in more carbs, but that's because I'm trying to eat about 50% carbs and sometimes struggle to do so.
Oh, and simple-sugars, complex-starches. Not a meaningful difference, but about half of the carbs in the cookie are likely complex (flour), as are all of the in the chips and fries.
On the other hand, fruit=simple carbs, and yet are much less likely to be a trigger food. It's the combination.
Perhaps YOU don't think it's a good example, but that's what THEY were trying to get at.
Carbs don't cause hunger? Then why is it a massively researched topic among obesity researchers?
"For many individuals, the biggest ‘metabolic advantage’ of very-low carbohdyrate diets may be one of food/calorie control. Many people seem to show what might be popularly called ‘carbohydrate addiction’ (a term that is massively debated among obesity researchers) where eating even small amounts of carbs makes them want to eat more. In that case, a full blown removal of carbohydrates from the diet may be the only realistic way to limit caloric intake."
Taken from: http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/research-review/ketogenic-low-carbohydrate-diets-have-no-metabolic-advantage-over-nonketogenic-low-carbohydrate-diets-research-review.html
I thought derailing a thread (which this clearly is) wasn't allowed?1 -
TravisGM92 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »BodyzLanguage wrote: »kickassketo wrote: »TravisGM, I'm with you. I think all the sugar in their diets, correlated with their inability to understand your point, is clear anecdotal evidence that sugar is the devil.
Now sugar makes us stupid? I understand most of his points. I just don't agree with them. I don't believe sugar is evil, nor do I believe carbs make people hungrier.
You're right. But particular carbs increase cravings though, it's no secret. 9 times out of 10 I'm likely to want another cookie if I eat one.
What does that have to do with "carbs"? A cookie is about half fat. Many people have trouble moderating specific highly-palatable trigger foods, especially if they haven't had much practice in doing so and have bad habits or various other food issues built up over time.
Lots of fruits and veg, or even foods like sweet potato or chickpeas are likely a higher percentage carbs than the cookie.
A cookie is half fat? That's one hell of a generalization. And you're missing the point. They were trying to say that when they eat simple carbs (like the ones in cookies) they want to eat more simple carbs. Show me a study where people ate fat and wanted to eat more fat as a result.
People on here are either blind to science or just don't like people who bring up sugar! haha my goodness!TravisGM92 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »BodyzLanguage wrote: »kickassketo wrote: »TravisGM, I'm with you. I think all the sugar in their diets, correlated with their inability to understand your point, is clear anecdotal evidence that sugar is the devil.
Now sugar makes us stupid? I understand most of his points. I just don't agree with them. I don't believe sugar is evil, nor do I believe carbs make people hungrier.
You're right. But particular carbs increase cravings though, it's no secret. 9 times out of 10 I'm likely to want another cookie if I eat one.
What does that have to do with "carbs"? A cookie is about half fat. Many people have trouble moderating specific highly-palatable trigger foods, especially if they haven't had much practice in doing so and have bad habits or various other food issues built up over time.
Lots of fruits and veg, or even foods like sweet potato or chickpeas are likely a higher percentage carbs than the cookie.
A cookie is half fat? That's one hell of a generalization. And you're missing the point. They were trying to say that when they eat simple carbs (like the ones in cookies) they want to eat more simple carbs. Show me a study where people ate fat and wanted to eat more fat as a result.
People on here are either blind to science or just don't like people who bring up sugar! haha my goodness!
Quit saying people are blind to science. It's exhausting, and you're reaching. It reminds me of a tribe in Africa that says to the women that their brains are smaller and "it's only science!". Because if you say it like that, it must be true! Eye roll.
Following you derail this whole thread is astounding. You have back peddled so much, it's obvious you have a problem being wrong. I followed Atkins for 10 years, because of people like you providing opinions posing them as "science". 10 years! Literally afraid to eat carbs. I never once felt like a normal person that entire time. And it has taken me years to reprogram myself that it's CICO, and I can eat anything that fits into my calories. And I did gain in HFLC. Why? Because it was over my TDEE.
Your links are inconclusive. They don't specifically point to carbs or sugar, and using a food group with other macros doesn't single out carbs or sugar causing you to eat more or become addicted. I eat less now that I have a balanced diet. I feel more satiated because all those needs and wants are met. It's more satiating for me. Not to mention I don't have disordered eating product of some obsession over a gram of carbs or sugar touching my lips. See how that works. I said "for me". So when you want to preach about hunger and "knowing what the culprit is", have the decency to say that's what works for you! Instead of brainwashing people with nonscience/nonsense.
The science is easy without you contorting it. Protein and fat has satiating qualities, to increase your protein/fat reduces the risk of eating more calories than you need. Less calories= deficit= weight loss. Don't tell people not to eat carbs or sugar, or that it will increase their hunger because that is not true. Recommend increasing protein and fat. At least then we could move on from this train wreck.
14 -
msalicia116 wrote: »TravisGM92 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »BodyzLanguage wrote: »kickassketo wrote: »TravisGM, I'm with you. I think all the sugar in their diets, correlated with their inability to understand your point, is clear anecdotal evidence that sugar is the devil.
Now sugar makes us stupid? I understand most of his points. I just don't agree with them. I don't believe sugar is evil, nor do I believe carbs make people hungrier.
You're right. But particular carbs increase cravings though, it's no secret. 9 times out of 10 I'm likely to want another cookie if I eat one.
What does that have to do with "carbs"? A cookie is about half fat. Many people have trouble moderating specific highly-palatable trigger foods, especially if they haven't had much practice in doing so and have bad habits or various other food issues built up over time.
Lots of fruits and veg, or even foods like sweet potato or chickpeas are likely a higher percentage carbs than the cookie.
A cookie is half fat? That's one hell of a generalization. And you're missing the point. They were trying to say that when they eat simple carbs (like the ones in cookies) they want to eat more simple carbs. Show me a study where people ate fat and wanted to eat more fat as a result.
People on here are either blind to science or just don't like people who bring up sugar! haha my goodness!TravisGM92 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »BodyzLanguage wrote: »kickassketo wrote: »TravisGM, I'm with you. I think all the sugar in their diets, correlated with their inability to understand your point, is clear anecdotal evidence that sugar is the devil.
Now sugar makes us stupid? I understand most of his points. I just don't agree with them. I don't believe sugar is evil, nor do I believe carbs make people hungrier.
You're right. But particular carbs increase cravings though, it's no secret. 9 times out of 10 I'm likely to want another cookie if I eat one.
What does that have to do with "carbs"? A cookie is about half fat. Many people have trouble moderating specific highly-palatable trigger foods, especially if they haven't had much practice in doing so and have bad habits or various other food issues built up over time.
Lots of fruits and veg, or even foods like sweet potato or chickpeas are likely a higher percentage carbs than the cookie.
A cookie is half fat? That's one hell of a generalization. And you're missing the point. They were trying to say that when they eat simple carbs (like the ones in cookies) they want to eat more simple carbs. Show me a study where people ate fat and wanted to eat more fat as a result.
People on here are either blind to science or just don't like people who bring up sugar! haha my goodness!
Quit saying people are blind to science. It's exhausting, and you're reaching. It reminds me of a tribe in Africa that says to the women that their brains are smaller and "it's only science!". Because if you say it like that, it must be true! Eye roll.
Following you derail this whole thread is astounding. You have back peddled so much, it's obvious you have a problem being wrong. I followed Atkins for 10 years, because of people like you providing opinions posing them as "science". 10 years! Literally afraid to eat carbs. I never once felt like a normal person that entire time. And it has taken me years to reprogram myself that it's CICO, and I can eat anything that fits into my calories. And I did gain in HFLC. Why? Because it was over my TDEE.
Your links are inconclusive. They don't specifically point to carbs or sugar, and using a food group with other macros doesn't single out carbs or sugar causing you to eat more or become addicted. I eat less now that I have a balanced diet. I feel more satiated because all those needs and wants are met. It's more satiating for me. Not to mention I don't have disordered eating product of some obsession over a gram of carbs or sugar touching my lips. See how that works. I said "for me". So when you want to preach about hunger and "knowing what the culprit is", have the decency to say that's what works for you! Instead of brainwashing people with nonscience/nonsense.
The science is easy without you contorting it. Protein and fat has satiating qualities, to increase your protein/fat reduces the risk of eating more calories than you need. Less calories= deficit= weight loss. Don't tell people not to eat carbs or sugar, or that it will increase their hunger because that is not true. Recommend increasing protein and fat. At least then we could move on from this train wreck.
So you're just gonna disregard my sources and support? Haha alrighty... if you want more techniques to losing fat other than counting calories which seems like most people on this thread are, let me know.
And for the record I didn't tell anyone to not eat sugar or carbs...
And I just have to add.. I think it's funny that I'm providing links and sources to an idea that carbs COULD increase hunger. Lyle McDonald, a very respected, scientific source, knows just as well as I do that it's a heavily debated topic. Meaning, there's currently evidence for both sides. You say "don't tell people that carbs increase hunger cause it's not true" show me the evidence. Show me the science and I'll stop posting on here.
Oh, and by the way, personal experience doesn't count.2 -
TravisGM92 wrote: »msalicia116 wrote: »TravisGM92 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »BodyzLanguage wrote: »kickassketo wrote: »TravisGM, I'm with you. I think all the sugar in their diets, correlated with their inability to understand your point, is clear anecdotal evidence that sugar is the devil.
Now sugar makes us stupid? I understand most of his points. I just don't agree with them. I don't believe sugar is evil, nor do I believe carbs make people hungrier.
You're right. But particular carbs increase cravings though, it's no secret. 9 times out of 10 I'm likely to want another cookie if I eat one.
What does that have to do with "carbs"? A cookie is about half fat. Many people have trouble moderating specific highly-palatable trigger foods, especially if they haven't had much practice in doing so and have bad habits or various other food issues built up over time.
Lots of fruits and veg, or even foods like sweet potato or chickpeas are likely a higher percentage carbs than the cookie.
A cookie is half fat? That's one hell of a generalization. And you're missing the point. They were trying to say that when they eat simple carbs (like the ones in cookies) they want to eat more simple carbs. Show me a study where people ate fat and wanted to eat more fat as a result.
People on here are either blind to science or just don't like people who bring up sugar! haha my goodness!TravisGM92 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »BodyzLanguage wrote: »kickassketo wrote: »TravisGM, I'm with you. I think all the sugar in their diets, correlated with their inability to understand your point, is clear anecdotal evidence that sugar is the devil.
Now sugar makes us stupid? I understand most of his points. I just don't agree with them. I don't believe sugar is evil, nor do I believe carbs make people hungrier.
You're right. But particular carbs increase cravings though, it's no secret. 9 times out of 10 I'm likely to want another cookie if I eat one.
What does that have to do with "carbs"? A cookie is about half fat. Many people have trouble moderating specific highly-palatable trigger foods, especially if they haven't had much practice in doing so and have bad habits or various other food issues built up over time.
Lots of fruits and veg, or even foods like sweet potato or chickpeas are likely a higher percentage carbs than the cookie.
A cookie is half fat? That's one hell of a generalization. And you're missing the point. They were trying to say that when they eat simple carbs (like the ones in cookies) they want to eat more simple carbs. Show me a study where people ate fat and wanted to eat more fat as a result.
People on here are either blind to science or just don't like people who bring up sugar! haha my goodness!
Quit saying people are blind to science. It's exhausting, and you're reaching. It reminds me of a tribe in Africa that says to the women that their brains are smaller and "it's only science!". Because if you say it like that, it must be true! Eye roll.
Following you derail this whole thread is astounding. You have back peddled so much, it's obvious you have a problem being wrong. I followed Atkins for 10 years, because of people like you providing opinions posing them as "science". 10 years! Literally afraid to eat carbs. I never once felt like a normal person that entire time. And it has taken me years to reprogram myself that it's CICO, and I can eat anything that fits into my calories. And I did gain in HFLC. Why? Because it was over my TDEE.
Your links are inconclusive. They don't specifically point to carbs or sugar, and using a food group with other macros doesn't single out carbs or sugar causing you to eat more or become addicted. I eat less now that I have a balanced diet. I feel more satiated because all those needs and wants are met. It's more satiating for me. Not to mention I don't have disordered eating product of some obsession over a gram of carbs or sugar touching my lips. See how that works. I said "for me". So when you want to preach about hunger and "knowing what the culprit is", have the decency to say that's what works for you! Instead of brainwashing people with nonscience/nonsense.
The science is easy without you contorting it. Protein and fat has satiating qualities, to increase your protein/fat reduces the risk of eating more calories than you need. Less calories= deficit= weight loss. Don't tell people not to eat carbs or sugar, or that it will increase their hunger because that is not true. Recommend increasing protein and fat. At least then we could move on from this train wreck.
So you're just gonna disregard my sources and support? Haha alrighty... if you want more techniques to losing fat other than counting calories which seems like most people on this thread are, let me know.
And for the record I didn't tell anyone to not eat sugar or carbs...2 -
TravisGM92 wrote: »cerise_noir wrote: »TravisGM92 wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »TravisGM92 wrote: »Other than that, it is scientifically known that eating sugar promotes the urge to eat even MORE sugar or carbs. So, I have to ask, what do you eat for breakfast? If it has sugar then that could be your problem. Try eating more complex carbs with a good amount of protein (oatmeal and eggs, scrambled eggs, omelets, low carb milk and high protein cereal, etc.)
Sugar promotes the urge to eat more sugar? This is 'scientifically known?' Please provide us your sources for this claim.
Also sounds like the OP already eats a good, healthy breakfast.
Sugar is not the devil.
Sugar is the devil. We don't need sugar and it's been known to be just as addictive as cocaine: http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2007/08/23/is-sugar-more-addictive-than-cocaine.aspx, also: http://www.forbes.com/sites/jacobsullum/2013/10/16/research-shows-cocaine-and-heroin-are-less-addictive-than-oreos/#2275a5184b7b.
As for the claim that eating sugar promotes the urge to eat more sugar; https://authoritynutrition.com/how-sugar-makes-you-addicted/.
I can provide more citations if needed.
Mercola? Authority (not) nutrition? Nope nope nope nope. Come on now....
Sugar is not evil. Sugar does not prevent weight loss. And BS it is as addictive as cocaine. I've worked with addicts throughout the years and I fond this comparison absolutely appalling, hurtful, disgusting....
My almost 100lbs weight loss proves that sugar does not cause weight gain or addiction to carbs. Who starting that crock of crap anyway? I ate 'clean' vegetarian for years and I was at my worst weight. My blood tests were awful, so yeah....
1. You are taking it out of context.
2. The point of saying sugar has shown in studies to be addictive (whether or not more than drugs), is an important point.
3. Mercola as an authority? Maybe not. But the study is real.
4. There is another study I cited that showed that eating carbs made people want to eat more carbs. Sugar are carbs...
The other study you posted matched calorie and macronutrient intake. They were comparing the GI of the entire meal, not the amount of carbohydrate.
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/early/2013/06/26/ajcn.113.064113.abstract
"Design: With the use of a randomized, blinded, crossover design, 12 overweight or obese men aged 18–35 y consumed high- and low-GI meals controlled for calories, macronutrients, and palatability on 2 occasions. The primary outcome was cerebral blood flow as a measure of resting brain activity, which was assessed by using arterial spin-labeling functional magnetic resonance imaging 4 h after test meals. We hypothesized that brain activity would be greater after the high-GI meal in prespecified regions involved in eating behavior, reward, and craving. "
As shown in
Table 1, both test meals were composed
of similar ingredients and had the same macronutrient distri-
bution (ProNutra Software, version 3.3.0.10; Viocare Technol-
ogies Inc).
You cannot claim that the differences in hunger were related to the number of carbohydrates as that wasn't what was tested.
Yes, that's true. Do you know what contributes to high glycemic numbers? High blood sugar numbers. Do you know what increases blood sugar numbers? Carbohydrates.
As the study itself says: Conclusions: Compared with an isocaloric low-GI meal, a high-GI meal decreased plasma glucose, increased hunger, and selectively stimulated brain regions associated with reward and craving in the late postprandial period, which is a time with special significance to eating behavior at the next meal.
Hmmm....0 -
Oh really?TravisGM92 wrote: »And for the record I didn't tell anyone to not eat sugar or carbs...TravisGM92 wrote: »Other than that, it is scientifically known that eating sugar promotes the urge to eat even MORE sugar or carbs. So, I have to ask, what do you eat for breakfast? If it has sugar then that could be your problem. Try eating more complex carbs with a good amount of protein (oatmeal and eggs, scrambled eggs, omelets, low carb milk and high protein cereal, etc.)TravisGM92 wrote: »Sugar is the devil. We don't need sugar and it's been known to be just as addictive as cocaine:
Wanna rephrase anything? Or you just gonna back peddle more or say we were just hallucinating the comments of yours that I just quoted about sugar being evil. So if you say sugar is evil it means eat all you want?8 -
Wynterbourne wrote: »
Oh really?TravisGM92 wrote: »And for the record I didn't tell anyone to not eat sugar or carbs...TravisGM92 wrote: »Other than that, it is scientifically known that eating sugar promotes the urge to eat even MORE sugar or carbs. So, I have to ask, what do you eat for breakfast? If it has sugar then that could be your problem. Try eating more complex carbs with a good amount of protein (oatmeal and eggs, scrambled eggs, omelets, low carb milk and high protein cereal, etc.)TravisGM92 wrote: »Sugar is the devil. We don't need sugar and it's been known to be just as addictive as cocaine:
Wanna rephrase anything? Or you just gonna back peddle more or say we were just hallucinating the comments of yours that I just quoted about sugar being evil. So if you say sugar is evil it means eat all you want?
Again, not telling anyone to NOT eat sugar. What part of that did I advise/tell/command/suggest/whatever the OP to not eat sugar? I said if their breakfast has sugar, that may be their problem. That DOES NOT MEAN DO NOT EAT SUGAR!
And the sugar is devil thing was taken from a response to someone else. Again, not considering context. I explained what I meant by "sugar is the devil" right after: WE DON'T NEED SUGAR AND IT'S BEEN KNOWN TO BE JUST AS ADDICTIVE AS COCAINE. <<0 -
TravisGM92 wrote: »Wynterbourne wrote: »
Oh really?TravisGM92 wrote: »And for the record I didn't tell anyone to not eat sugar or carbs...TravisGM92 wrote: »Other than that, it is scientifically known that eating sugar promotes the urge to eat even MORE sugar or carbs. So, I have to ask, what do you eat for breakfast? If it has sugar then that could be your problem. Try eating more complex carbs with a good amount of protein (oatmeal and eggs, scrambled eggs, omelets, low carb milk and high protein cereal, etc.)TravisGM92 wrote: »Sugar is the devil. We don't need sugar and it's been known to be just as addictive as cocaine:
Wanna rephrase anything? Or you just gonna back peddle more or say we were just hallucinating the comments of yours that I just quoted about sugar being evil. So if you say sugar is evil it means eat all you want?
Again, not telling anyone to NOT eat sugar. What part of that did I advise/tell/command/suggest/whatever the OP to not eat sugar? I said if their breakfast has sugar, that may be their problem. That DOES NOT MEAN DO NOT EAT SUGAR!
And the sugar is devil thing was taken from a response to someone else. Again, not considering context. I explained what I meant by "sugar is the devil" right after: WE DON'T NEED SUGAR AND IT'S BEEN KNOWN TO BE JUST AS ADDICTIVE AS COCAINE. <<
You said, I quoted you not someone else, you saidTravisGM92 wrote: »Sugar is the devil. We don't need sugar.
I'm pretty certain anyone who reads the English language is going to read that exactly as being an "advise/tell/command/suggest/whatever" to not eat sugar. Maybe you weren't aware that's how the English language works.1
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 427 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions