Just a thought I'm curious about (meat and carbs)

pinggolfer96

i know meat has zero carbs, maybe trace amounts. But if glycogen is stored in muscle, how come meat is carb free? Might sound stupid lol but I'm just curious

Cortelli

Why should the macronutrient make-up of a food (meat) have anything to do with how your body processes the macronutrients you ingest?

ahoy_m8

Well, the question isn't how human bodies process the meat; rather, it's what happens to the glycogen in the meat. It's a good question and now I'm wondering, too. I'm wondering if muscular glycogen retention is something that requires being alive.

Cortelli

Ahhh -- I misunderstood the question, then.

But I'd still answer that glycogen = carbohydrate. You have a macronutrient (carb, or fat, or protein) that is processed into something else, and is stored in a certain manner and in a certain place. It's not as simple as ingesting, and then shuttling to a storage place.

To paraphrase numerous comedians and The Simpsons: a pig eats an apple (and worse) and becomes bacon (among other things) - how is that possible?

nvmomketo

I believe raw meat can have up o 2 or 3% carbohydrates in it. I've heard cooking will lower that but I've never looked into how or why.

Lizarking

glycogen rapidly breaks down after death. Cooking more or less takes care of the rest.

rankinsect

There are some carbs in the form of glycogen - or rater lactate which glycogen decomposes to - but it's small. By weight your muscles are less than 1% glycogen. Even raw, it would mean that a quarter pound of meat would contain less than 5 calories from carbs.

HeidiCooksSupper

Glycogen converts to lactic acid after slaughter. By the time it gets to the grocery store, most of the glycogen has undergone this transformation. There is some evidence that hunting cultures like Inuit are better able to thrive on all-meat diets because their consumption of meat immediately after capture means they get more of the glycogen from the meat than those of us picking up packaged meats do.