why does sugar make us fat
Replies
-
stevencloser wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »ok so I've tried a lil experiment on myself a number of times.
I will eat the same cals = 2100
One week with high protein, low carbs...I will be about 1 lb lighter and not hungry at night
One week high carbs and sugar (chocolate for lunch yum)...I will be about 2 lbs heavier and very hungry at night.
Why would this be if I'm eating the same amount of calories?
One week isn't enough data to conclude anything at all. Beyond that, if you're lower carb you are going to hold onto less water and deplete glycogen...increase carbs and you're going to hold onto more water and replenish glycogen..those things have mass and thus weight...
If carbs hindered or caused weight gain, every vegetarian and vegan on the planet would be obese. You can also look at populations like Japan who have one of the lowest if not the lowest obesity rates...high carb diet.
I eat a substantially plant based diet which means I eat a lot of carbs...lots of beans and lentils and potatoes and sweet potatoes and rice and pasta, etc...I do just fine with satiety...
In your post, you're primarily looking at carbs as "junk"...who the frack has chocolate for lunch? That's not lunch, that's a snack treat. I don't know anyone who would be satiated just eating chocolate for lunch...there are numerous sources of highly nutritious carbohydrates...this crap gets really old...
Whatev
Whatev what? Yeah...you're going to be hungry if all you have is chocolate for lunch...your "experiment" is inherently flawed...like big time.
You took my comments out of context. I eat about every two hours the same amt of calories swapping sugar for protein. My comments are very valid.
Eating a snackfood as a meal then wondering why it's not filling is not valid.
Prescribing any importance to a 1 pound difference over one week when weight can fluctuate that much easily from one day to another due to water retention is not valid.
You are reinforcing that sugar is empty calories that don't satiate you, no? That's what I'm trying to convey.
and I know my own body better than you, so I do what's best for me and all I was stating is what doesn't work for me and that's a high sugar diet. I am hungrier and less satisfied.0 -
STLBADGIRL wrote: »So did you all come up with an answer? I see why some people are so lost and confused on losing weight with all the theories floating around.... This thread is all over the place. From fat, to carbs, to sweets,etc., being the culprit. The truth is, we are fat because of lack of discipline and commitment, among a few other things. We blame everything and everyone else...we need to take responsibility.
Essentially, calories makes us fat.
PERFECT! I will stop eating calories then! Wait, how do I do that???0 -
STLBADGIRL wrote: »So did you all come up with an answer? I see why some people are so lost and confused on losing weight with all the theories floating around.... This thread is all over the place. From fat, to carbs, to sweets,etc., being the culprit. The truth is, we are fat because of lack of discipline and commitment, among a few other things. We blame everything and everyone else...we need to take responsibility.
Essentially, calories makes us fat.
PERFECT! I will stop eating calories then! Wait, how do I do that???
You stop eating excess calories
You eat calories to fuel your body minus x amount ...the body still needs the "minus x amount" and will take it from your body
It's not complicated, why try to make it complicated?4 -
STLBADGIRL wrote: »So did you all come up with an answer? I see why some people are so lost and confused on losing weight with all the theories floating around.... This thread is all over the place. From fat, to carbs, to sweets,etc., being the culprit. The truth is, we are fat because of lack of discipline and commitment, among a few other things. We blame everything and everyone else...we need to take responsibility.
Essentially, calories makes us fat.
PERFECT! I will stop eating calories then! Wait, how do I do that???
You determine where the excess calories are coming from that you are most comfortable cutting. For you, that may be from sources of added sugar. That doesn't mean that sugar is to blame for obesity. Others may cut calories in the form of just reducing portion sizes of all the same things they are already eating with no particular focus on a specific type of food or macro. Others may find success with other approaches - low fat, low carb, paleo, etc. Regardless of which method one chooses, it still comes down to an individual's calorie surplus being responsible for obesity, not one demonized ingredient, food, or group of foods.3 -
stevencloser wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »ok so I've tried a lil experiment on myself a number of times.
I will eat the same cals = 2100
One week with high protein, low carbs...I will be about 1 lb lighter and not hungry at night
One week high carbs and sugar (chocolate for lunch yum)...I will be about 2 lbs heavier and very hungry at night.
Why would this be if I'm eating the same amount of calories?
One week isn't enough data to conclude anything at all. Beyond that, if you're lower carb you are going to hold onto less water and deplete glycogen...increase carbs and you're going to hold onto more water and replenish glycogen..those things have mass and thus weight...
If carbs hindered or caused weight gain, every vegetarian and vegan on the planet would be obese. You can also look at populations like Japan who have one of the lowest if not the lowest obesity rates...high carb diet.
I eat a substantially plant based diet which means I eat a lot of carbs...lots of beans and lentils and potatoes and sweet potatoes and rice and pasta, etc...I do just fine with satiety...
In your post, you're primarily looking at carbs as "junk"...who the frack has chocolate for lunch? That's not lunch, that's a snack treat. I don't know anyone who would be satiated just eating chocolate for lunch...there are numerous sources of highly nutritious carbohydrates...this crap gets really old...
Whatev
Whatev what? Yeah...you're going to be hungry if all you have is chocolate for lunch...your "experiment" is inherently flawed...like big time.
You took my comments out of context. I eat about every two hours the same amt of calories swapping sugar for protein. My comments are very valid.
Eating a snackfood as a meal then wondering why it's not filling is not valid.
Prescribing any importance to a 1 pound difference over one week when weight can fluctuate that much easily from one day to another due to water retention is not valid.
You are reinforcing that sugar is empty calories that don't satiate you, no? That's what I'm trying to convey.
and I know my own body better than you, so I do what's best for me and all I was stating is what doesn't work for me and that's a high sugar diet. I am hungrier and less satisfied.
I'm genuinely curious. Did you actually eat a chocolate bar for lunch, and think that would be a filling meal? And why are you stating then that sugar is to blame for your lack of satiety, when a chocolate bar is more than just plain sugar?
Also, I don't see anyone recommending a high sugar diet. Saying that sugar isn't to blame for obesity is not the same as recommending a high sugar diet. Of course an individual should find the approach that works the best for them, which includes finding foods which are satiating, offer a balance of nutrients (macro and micros) and that they enjoy.
I can't see how those recommendations could possibly be construed as suggesting a high sugar diet or that someone eats a chocolate bar instead of a meal at lunchtime, but I guess I shouldn't be surprised anymore as to how these statements are constantly misunderstood/misrepresented.8 -
stevencloser wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »ok so I've tried a lil experiment on myself a number of times.
I will eat the same cals = 2100
One week with high protein, low carbs...I will be about 1 lb lighter and not hungry at night
One week high carbs and sugar (chocolate for lunch yum)...I will be about 2 lbs heavier and very hungry at night.
Why would this be if I'm eating the same amount of calories?
One week isn't enough data to conclude anything at all. Beyond that, if you're lower carb you are going to hold onto less water and deplete glycogen...increase carbs and you're going to hold onto more water and replenish glycogen..those things have mass and thus weight...
If carbs hindered or caused weight gain, every vegetarian and vegan on the planet would be obese. You can also look at populations like Japan who have one of the lowest if not the lowest obesity rates...high carb diet.
I eat a substantially plant based diet which means I eat a lot of carbs...lots of beans and lentils and potatoes and sweet potatoes and rice and pasta, etc...I do just fine with satiety...
In your post, you're primarily looking at carbs as "junk"...who the frack has chocolate for lunch? That's not lunch, that's a snack treat. I don't know anyone who would be satiated just eating chocolate for lunch...there are numerous sources of highly nutritious carbohydrates...this crap gets really old...
Whatev
Whatev what? Yeah...you're going to be hungry if all you have is chocolate for lunch...your "experiment" is inherently flawed...like big time.
You took my comments out of context. I eat about every two hours the same amt of calories swapping sugar for protein. My comments are very valid.
Eating a snackfood as a meal then wondering why it's not filling is not valid.
Prescribing any importance to a 1 pound difference over one week when weight can fluctuate that much easily from one day to another due to water retention is not valid.
You are reinforcing that sugar is empty calories that don't satiate you, no? That's what I'm trying to convey.
and I know my own body better than you, so I do what's best for me and all I was stating is what doesn't work for me and that's a high sugar diet. I am hungrier and less satisfied.
Last I checked, chocolate has gram for gram more calories than plain sugar, why was that again... oh right because half the calories come from fat.6 -
stevencloser wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »ok so I've tried a lil experiment on myself a number of times.
I will eat the same cals = 2100
One week with high protein, low carbs...I will be about 1 lb lighter and not hungry at night
One week high carbs and sugar (chocolate for lunch yum)...I will be about 2 lbs heavier and very hungry at night.
Why would this be if I'm eating the same amount of calories?
One week isn't enough data to conclude anything at all. Beyond that, if you're lower carb you are going to hold onto less water and deplete glycogen...increase carbs and you're going to hold onto more water and replenish glycogen..those things have mass and thus weight...
If carbs hindered or caused weight gain, every vegetarian and vegan on the planet would be obese. You can also look at populations like Japan who have one of the lowest if not the lowest obesity rates...high carb diet.
I eat a substantially plant based diet which means I eat a lot of carbs...lots of beans and lentils and potatoes and sweet potatoes and rice and pasta, etc...I do just fine with satiety...
In your post, you're primarily looking at carbs as "junk"...who the frack has chocolate for lunch? That's not lunch, that's a snack treat. I don't know anyone who would be satiated just eating chocolate for lunch...there are numerous sources of highly nutritious carbohydrates...this crap gets really old...
Whatev
Whatev what? Yeah...you're going to be hungry if all you have is chocolate for lunch...your "experiment" is inherently flawed...like big time.
You took my comments out of context. I eat about every two hours the same amt of calories swapping sugar for protein. My comments are very valid.
Eating a snackfood as a meal then wondering why it's not filling is not valid.
Prescribing any importance to a 1 pound difference over one week when weight can fluctuate that much easily from one day to another due to water retention is not valid.
You are reinforcing that sugar is empty calories that don't satiate you, no? That's what I'm trying to convey.
and I know my own body better than you, so I do what's best for me and all I was stating is what doesn't work for me and that's a high sugar diet. I am hungrier and less satisfied.
Well, you'd get the same result if you eat salami chips, which have no sugar. People don't usually eat "sugar" unless we're talking hard candy (and I have yet to see someone sit down to a main meal made of nothing but hard candy), they eat foods that contain sugar. My oatmeal had sugar today and it was satiating, because oatmeal is usually not a snack food. Yogurt can contain sugar, and is a snack food, but it's satiating to many. Apples are super satiating to me, to the point where I don't mind having them as a meal if I'm feeling lazy, and they're chock full of sugar.
That's my issue with the sugar claims. They look at one ingredient and ignore the food, meal, or even day. Ingredients needs to be seen as a point in a bigger context, not as an isolated entity. My diet today had 120 grams of sugar, and not a single gram of them came in form of candy or something that isn't satiating.4 -
STLBADGIRL wrote: »So did you all come up with an answer? I see why some people are so lost and confused on losing weight with all the theories floating around.... This thread is all over the place. From fat, to carbs, to sweets,etc., being the culprit. The truth is, we are fat because of lack of discipline and commitment, among a few other things. We blame everything and everyone else...we need to take responsibility.
Essentially, calories makes us fat.
PERFECT! I will stop eating calories then! Wait, how do I do that???
reduce your overall quantity of food consumed by 15 to 20%....
this is not rocket science1 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »ok so I've tried a lil experiment on myself a number of times.
I will eat the same cals = 2100
One week with high protein, low carbs...I will be about 1 lb lighter and not hungry at night
One week high carbs and sugar (chocolate for lunch yum)...I will be about 2 lbs heavier and very hungry at night.
Why would this be if I'm eating the same amount of calories?
One week isn't enough data to conclude anything at all. Beyond that, if you're lower carb you are going to hold onto less water and deplete glycogen...increase carbs and you're going to hold onto more water and replenish glycogen..those things have mass and thus weight...
If carbs hindered or caused weight gain, every vegetarian and vegan on the planet would be obese. You can also look at populations like Japan who have one of the lowest if not the lowest obesity rates...high carb diet.
I eat a substantially plant based diet which means I eat a lot of carbs...lots of beans and lentils and potatoes and sweet potatoes and rice and pasta, etc...I do just fine with satiety...
In your post, you're primarily looking at carbs as "junk"...who the frack has chocolate for lunch? That's not lunch, that's a snack treat. I don't know anyone who would be satiated just eating chocolate for lunch...there are numerous sources of highly nutritious carbohydrates...this crap gets really old...
Whatev
Whatev what? Yeah...you're going to be hungry if all you have is chocolate for lunch...your "experiment" is inherently flawed...like big time.
You took my comments out of context. I eat about every two hours the same amt of calories swapping sugar for protein. My comments are very valid.
Eating a snackfood as a meal then wondering why it's not filling is not valid.
Prescribing any importance to a 1 pound difference over one week when weight can fluctuate that much easily from one day to another due to water retention is not valid.
You are reinforcing that sugar is empty calories that don't satiate you, no? That's what I'm trying to convey.
and I know my own body better than you, so I do what's best for me and all I was stating is what doesn't work for me and that's a high sugar diet. I am hungrier and less satisfied.
Well, you'd get the same result if you eat salami chips, which have no sugar. People don't usually eat "sugar" unless we're talking hard candy (and I have yet to see someone sit down to a main meal made of nothing but hard candy), they eat foods that contain sugar. My oatmeal had sugar today and it was satiating, because oatmeal is usually not a snack food. Yogurt can contain sugar, and is a snack food, but it's satiating to many. Apples are super satiating to me, to the point where I don't mind having them as a meal if I'm feeling lazy, and they're chock full of sugar.
That's my issue with the sugar claims. They look at one ingredient and ignore the food, meal, or even day. Ingredients needs to be seen as a point in a bigger context, not as an isolated entity. My diet today had 120 grams of sugar, and not a single gram of them came in form of candy or something that isn't satiating.
how are you still alive?3 -
I literally just ate 4 tootsie pops (40 grams of sugar) and 2 bananas (28 grams of sugar) in the last 1.5 hours while riding 30 miles....what now?3
-
Thanks pps0
-
If you really want to know sugar makes you fat because of the chemical reaction that happens when it is processed by our livers. This process stops the I'm full message getting to our brain. So our brain sends out the message "eat more food and don't do anything we are starving".
Search sweet poison in YouTube. It stooped me in my tracks.1 -
andreakreymborg wrote: »If you really want to know sugar makes you fat because of the chemical reaction that happens when it is processed by our livers. This process stops the I'm full message getting to our brain. So our brain sends out the message "eat more food and don't do anything we are starving".
Search sweet poison in YouTube. It stooped me in my tracks.
You should spend more time searching credible sources of information.
<-- eats lots of sugar and lost 50 lbs.10 -
andreakreymborg wrote: »If you really want to know sugar makes you fat because of the chemical reaction that happens when it is processed by our livers. This process stops the I'm full message getting to our brain. So our brain sends out the message "eat more food and don't do anything we are starving".
Search sweet poison in YouTube. It stooped me in my tracks.
Fear-mongering, baseless propaganda.6 -
andreakreymborg wrote: »If you really want to know sugar makes you fat because of the chemical reaction that happens when it is processed by our livers. This process stops the I'm full message getting to our brain. So our brain sends out the message "eat more food and don't do anything we are starving".
Search sweet poison in YouTube. It stooped me in my tracks.
So you didn't read the thread? That's ok, I have good news for you! What you saw on YouTube isn't actually true (shocking I know), so you can get back to moving don those tracks, enjoying sugar if you like in moderation and in the context of a balanced diet.
8 -
lipogensis. Wikipedia is your friend.0
-
BiomedDent wrote: »lipogensis. Wikipedia is your friend.
Fun fact, did you know anyone can edit Wikipedia and put any nonsense they like out there? It's up to volunteers to police the information for quality and accuracy...
Peer Reviewed Scientific Journal Articles are your friend...11 -
BiomedDent wrote: »lipogensis. Wikipedia is your friend.
If Wikipedia is your friend, don't claim it said things it didn't. It explained the mechanism of storing excess energy from glucose (just like it explains the processes that store excess protein or fat energy), but I have never seen it claim anywhere that these processes cause a positive net storage of fat on a deficit.
Even then, it clearly states on the very top of the page that "his article has multiple issues".6 -
andreakreymborg wrote: »If you really want to know sugar makes you fat because of the chemical reaction that happens when it is processed by our livers. This process stops the I'm full message getting to our brain. So our brain sends out the message "eat more food and don't do anything we are starving".
Search sweet poison in YouTube. It stooped me in my tracks.
YouTube isn't the best place for nutritional information
3 -
crzycatlady1 wrote: »andreakreymborg wrote: »If you really want to know sugar makes you fat because of the chemical reaction that happens when it is processed by our livers. This process stops the I'm full message getting to our brain. So our brain sends out the message "eat more food and don't do anything we are starving".
Search sweet poison in YouTube. It stooped me in my tracks.
YouTube isn't the best place for nutritional information
You think?3 -
andreakreymborg wrote: »If you really want to know sugar makes you fat because of the chemical reaction that happens when it is processed by our livers. This process stops the I'm full message getting to our brain. So our brain sends out the message "eat more food and don't do anything we are starving".
Search sweet poison in YouTube. It stooped me in my tracks.
are you actually serious? I can't tell2 -
andreakreymborg wrote: »If you really want to know sugar makes you fat because of the chemical reaction that happens when it is processed by our livers. This process stops the I'm full message getting to our brain. So our brain sends out the message "eat more food and don't do anything we are starving".
Search sweet poison in YouTube. It stooped me in my tracks.
????????????????????????????????????????????????
3 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »crzycatlady1 wrote: »andreakreymborg wrote: »If you really want to know sugar makes you fat because of the chemical reaction that happens when it is processed by our livers. This process stops the I'm full message getting to our brain. So our brain sends out the message "eat more food and don't do anything we are starving".
Search sweet poison in YouTube. It stooped me in my tracks.
YouTube isn't the best place for nutritional information
You think?
LMAO!2 -
andreakreymborg wrote: »If you really want to know sugar makes you fat because of the chemical reaction that happens when it is processed by our livers. This process stops the I'm full message getting to our brain. So our brain sends out the message "eat more food and don't do anything we are starving".
Search sweet poison in YouTube. It stooped me in my tracks.
You really haven't read this thread have you? There is NO credible evidence to support anything you just posted other than a few discredited quacks who don't even do primary research.4 -
I believe the Earth is flat, YouTube is a great source for the sciencey types like me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CuwjWZV8EA0 5 -
BiomedDent wrote: »lipogensis. Wikipedia is your friend.
The storage of nutrients occurs regardless of the composition of the diet. De novo lipogensis would actually suggest that the conversion of carbohydrates into fatty acids takes a good amount of energy to do so, thus the amount of carbs that get converted are actually very low (~25% or less).3
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
- 426 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