why does sugar make us fat
Options
Replies
-
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Sugar does not make us fat - excess calories make us fat.
Sugar is easily and readily metabolized into oxidizable energy. the fuel window for that is about 3-4 hours. Chances are (based on 2/3 of the US being overweight), a person has not used the amount of calories they just ate, so when the person's brain is sent signals from the stomach that it needs food again, the person eats again, whereby making the food they just ate be excess because they have not burned the calories off. Alas, weight is gained, and the cycle continues
This is not a compound problem, but an addition one. Among the complexities of the human metabolic system, it comes down to this: did you burn more calories than your last meal before your next one? The more you answer "yes" to this question, the better chance you have of losing weight.
Sugar decreased your chances of having more "yes" answers because of how fast it is metabolized.
That's funny, because I've been losing weight with a calorie deficit while still eating sugar. Sometimes I eat ice cream before bed. Am I a special snowflake?
The answer is no. My body functions in the same way all bodies do.
Overall calorie deficit is what matters. Yes, sugar is great for a burst of energy before a workout. But even if you don't "burn" it right away (i.e., eat ice cream before bed), you're not going to gain weight or store fat if you're in an overall deficit. It all evens out if calories are controlled.4 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Sugar does not make us fat - excess calories make us fat.
Sugar is easily and readily metabolized into oxidizable energy. the fuel window for that is about 3-4 hours. Chances are (based on 2/3 of the US being overweight), a person has not used the amount of calories they just ate, so when the person's brain is sent signals from the stomach that it needs food again, the person eats again, whereby making the food they just ate be excess because they have not burned the calories off. Alas, weight is gained, and the cycle continues
This is not a compound problem, but an addition one. Among the complexities of the human metabolic system, it comes down to this: did you burn more calories than your last meal before your next one? The more you answer "yes" to this question, the better chance you have of losing weight.
Sugar decreased your chances of having more "yes" answers.
So does fatty beef or high levels of oils...so?
Fats have actually been shown to take longer to digest and increase that time between meals due to the non-release of grehlin, if the nutrition is appropriate. When combined with carbs (i.e. hamburgers and hotdogs), the effects are reduced.
Lipids cannot be utilized by the red blood cells for energy. They require glucose. Therefore, the body must do more to convert them into ready energy the cells can use. This process slows the digestive process, which slows down hunger levels.
I can go 8-10 hours on eggs and butter, whereas I couldn't even come close to that eating cereal.
And I go 16 hours fasted every day on 400 grams of carbs per day. A lot of that being sugar. Satiety varies by person.8 -
imajollyroger wrote: »
I don't know you and I want to be clear here, it is awesome that everyone here is doing positive things for their health. I'm not here to argue with anyone. Health, wellness and fitness are a passion and I want everyone to experience it. We should be a positive community that is open to everyone's perspective. I jumped in this discussion a little aggressively. I accept responsibility for that. I had just discovered the community and been on MFP for about 4 yrs. That being said, It doesn't make sense if you cut potato chips, crackers and beer and now you consume more fat and wine that your carb/fat ratio would be the same. I understand the fullness. I can feel the same with high fat foods sometimes but I'm satisfied not full.chocolate_owl wrote: »imajollyroger wrote: »
Hi Owl, but those potato chips, even though low nutrition/high calorie were carbs, the crackers were carbs, and the beer was carbs. Now you are consuming less carbs and more fat. This is what has worked for me also and a lot of research is validating.chocolate_owl wrote: »imajollyroger wrote: »
1st that's wonderful that you've lost 90 lbs! I whole support any means and method that people find that works for themselves to lose weight or become healthy. We all have our personal experiences and perspectives. To answer your question though, I would explain it that by cutting your calories, you actually cut your carbs too. Likewise, when humans consume exces calories, we are most likely consuming excess carbs.cerise_noir wrote: »imajollyroger wrote: »Sugar and carbs absolutely make you fat! What do you think beer belly is? There's no fat in beer. The body converts sugar/carbs into fat if it can't utilize it immediately for fuel. Doesn't matter if excess calories. I can run a calorie deficit and gain weight if I consume too many carbs without using them. Sugar and carbs also make you more hungry like eating Chinese food. Your insulin gets high which blocks your satiety signals to your brain. Your body won't burn fat until the glycogen is depleted. First it uses glycogen, then it uses fat as reserve.
No they don't.
I eat sugar. By your logic I should be gaining weight, not losing it. Please explain how I've lost a little over 90lbs, @imajollyroger? I'm all ears/eyes.
Also, fat does NOT make anyone fat. That's old school weight loss woo.
You know what actually makes all mammals fat?
Excess calories.
When I consume excess calories these days it's usually in fat (cheese, charcuterie) and alcohol (wine). When I was losing 30 lbs, I didn't cut carbs very much - I cut calorie-dense, low-nutrition items like potato chips and cheesy crackers (fat+carbs) and beer (alcohol+carbs), and I reduced how much oil I used in cooking (pure fat). I wasn't eating all that much sugar to begin with. I'm sure I'm not alone in this.
No, I'm not. I cut fat too. My carb:fat ratio has remained about the same, except for the nights where I eat a cheese plate, which is way too easy to overeat on because I don't feel full on high-fat foods. Also, why are you reducing foods that have multiple macronutrients to being carbs??? They are more than just carbs. Using your reasoning, I could just as easily say fat and alcohol are what make people fat, because when I reduced those things I lost weight.
You are now talking about satiety, which is different for everyone.
Not everyone is "satisfied" after eating a high fat, low carb meal.The brain shuts off the feeding signal unlike with high consumption of carbs and sugar. I reduce foods, especially processed foods, to their macro carb content because that is what is being scientifically proven to cause the obesity epidemic, not the fat. "We" took the fat out of foods in the 80s, made everything low fat/high carb and obesity, heart disease, and diabetes have skyrocketed--globally.
I know you say you're not here to argue, but you are making some pretty bold claims in this thread, saying that your statements are "scientifically proven." Where have they been proven? Have you any links to the science to which you're referring? Because the laws of thermodynamics pretty much trump all of what you're saying.6 -
imajollyroger wrote: »
I don't know you and I want to be clear here, it is awesome that everyone here is doing positive things for their health. I'm not here to argue with anyone. Health, wellness and fitness are a passion and I want everyone to experience it. We should be a positive community that is open to everyone's perspective. I jumped in this discussion a little aggressively. I accept responsibility for that. I had just discovered the community and been on MFP for about 4 yrs. That being said, It doesn't make sense if you cut potato chips, crackers and beer and now you consume more fat and wine that your carb/fat ratio would be the same. I understand the fullness. I can feel the same with high fat foods sometimes but I'm satisfied not full. The brain shuts off the feeding signal unlike with high consumption of carbs and sugar. I reduce foods, especially processed foods, to their macro carb content because that is what is being scientifically proven to cause the obesity epidemic, not the fat. "We" took the fat out of foods in the 80s, made everything low fat/high carb and obesity, heart disease, and diabetes have skyrocketed--globally.chocolate_owl wrote: »imajollyroger wrote: »
Hi Owl, but those potato chips, even though low nutrition/high calorie were carbs, the crackers were carbs, and the beer was carbs. Now you are consuming less carbs and more fat. This is what has worked for me also and a lot of research is validating.chocolate_owl wrote: »imajollyroger wrote: »
1st that's wonderful that you've lost 90 lbs! I whole support any means and method that people find that works for themselves to lose weight or become healthy. We all have our personal experiences and perspectives. To answer your question though, I would explain it that by cutting your calories, you actually cut your carbs too. Likewise, when humans consume exces calories, we are most likely consuming excess carbs.cerise_noir wrote: »imajollyroger wrote: »Sugar and carbs absolutely make you fat! What do you think beer belly is? There's no fat in beer. The body converts sugar/carbs into fat if it can't utilize it immediately for fuel. Doesn't matter if excess calories. I can run a calorie deficit and gain weight if I consume too many carbs without using them. Sugar and carbs also make you more hungry like eating Chinese food. Your insulin gets high which blocks your satiety signals to your brain. Your body won't burn fat until the glycogen is depleted. First it uses glycogen, then it uses fat as reserve.
No they don't.
I eat sugar. By your logic I should be gaining weight, not losing it. Please explain how I've lost a little over 90lbs, @imajollyroger? I'm all ears/eyes.
Also, fat does NOT make anyone fat. That's old school weight loss woo.
You know what actually makes all mammals fat?
Excess calories.
When I consume excess calories these days it's usually in fat (cheese, charcuterie) and alcohol (wine). When I was losing 30 lbs, I didn't cut carbs very much - I cut calorie-dense, low-nutrition items like potato chips and cheesy crackers (fat+carbs) and beer (alcohol+carbs), and I reduced how much oil I used in cooking (pure fat). I wasn't eating all that much sugar to begin with. I'm sure I'm not alone in this.
No, I'm not. I cut fat too. My carb:fat ratio has remained about the same, except for the nights where I eat a cheese plate, which is way too easy to overeat on because I don't feel full on high-fat foods. Also, why are you reducing foods that have multiple macronutrients to being carbs??? They are more than just carbs. Using your reasoning, I could just as easily say fat and alcohol are what make people fat, because when I reduced those things I lost weight.
Did you read pages 3-5 of this thread where the "low fat" trend of the 80s was discussed, specifically that taking fat out of foods didn't cause the increase in obesity, heart disease, and diabetes - the primary cause of these is still too many calories total.
Do you have any studies supporting the claim that it has been "scientifically proven" that carbs caused the obesity epidemic, not fat? Again - the only thing that has been scientifically proven again and again to cause obesity is CALORIES. Not a specific macronutrient.
6 -
imajollyroger wrote: »
I don't know you and I want to be clear here, it is awesome that everyone here is doing positive things for their health. I'm not here to argue with anyone. Health, wellness and fitness are a passion and I want everyone to experience it. We should be a positive community that is open to everyone's perspective. I jumped in this discussion a little aggressively. I accept responsibility for that. I had just discovered the community and been on MFP for about 4 yrs. That being said, It doesn't make sense if you cut potato chips, crackers and beer and now you consume more fat and wine that your carb/fat ratio would be the same. I understand the fullness. I can feel the same with high fat foods sometimes but I'm satisfied not full. The brain shuts off the feeding signal unlike with high consumption of carbs and sugar. I reduce foods, especially processed foods, to their macro carb content because that is what is being scientifically proven to cause the obesity epidemic, not the fat. "We" took the fat out of foods in the 80s, made everything low fat/high carb and obesity, heart disease, and diabetes have skyrocketed--globally.chocolate_owl wrote: »imajollyroger wrote: »
Hi Owl, but those potato chips, even though low nutrition/high calorie were carbs, the crackers were carbs, and the beer was carbs. Now you are consuming less carbs and more fat. This is what has worked for me also and a lot of research is validating.chocolate_owl wrote: »imajollyroger wrote: »
1st that's wonderful that you've lost 90 lbs! I whole support any means and method that people find that works for themselves to lose weight or become healthy. We all have our personal experiences and perspectives. To answer your question though, I would explain it that by cutting your calories, you actually cut your carbs too. Likewise, when humans consume exces calories, we are most likely consuming excess carbs.cerise_noir wrote: »imajollyroger wrote: »Sugar and carbs absolutely make you fat! What do you think beer belly is? There's no fat in beer. The body converts sugar/carbs into fat if it can't utilize it immediately for fuel. Doesn't matter if excess calories. I can run a calorie deficit and gain weight if I consume too many carbs without using them. Sugar and carbs also make you more hungry like eating Chinese food. Your insulin gets high which blocks your satiety signals to your brain. Your body won't burn fat until the glycogen is depleted. First it uses glycogen, then it uses fat as reserve.
No they don't.
I eat sugar. By your logic I should be gaining weight, not losing it. Please explain how I've lost a little over 90lbs, @imajollyroger? I'm all ears/eyes.
Also, fat does NOT make anyone fat. That's old school weight loss woo.
You know what actually makes all mammals fat?
Excess calories.
When I consume excess calories these days it's usually in fat (cheese, charcuterie) and alcohol (wine). When I was losing 30 lbs, I didn't cut carbs very much - I cut calorie-dense, low-nutrition items like potato chips and cheesy crackers (fat+carbs) and beer (alcohol+carbs), and I reduced how much oil I used in cooking (pure fat). I wasn't eating all that much sugar to begin with. I'm sure I'm not alone in this.
No, I'm not. I cut fat too. My carb:fat ratio has remained about the same, except for the nights where I eat a cheese plate, which is way too easy to overeat on because I don't feel full on high-fat foods. Also, why are you reducing foods that have multiple macronutrients to being carbs??? They are more than just carbs. Using your reasoning, I could just as easily say fat and alcohol are what make people fat, because when I reduced those things I lost weight.
Yet the potato has one of the highest satiety ratings... Hmm.
As I said earlier, I increased carbs while losing weight.8 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Sugar does not make us fat - excess calories make us fat.
Sugar is easily and readily metabolized into oxidizable energy. the fuel window for that is about 3-4 hours. Chances are (based on 2/3 of the US being overweight), a person has not used the amount of calories they just ate, so when the person's brain is sent signals from the stomach that it needs food again, the person eats again, whereby making the food they just ate be excess because they have not burned the calories off. Alas, weight is gained, and the cycle continues
This is not a compound problem, but an addition one. Among the complexities of the human metabolic system, it comes down to this: did you burn more calories than your last meal before your next one? The more you answer "yes" to this question, the better chance you have of losing weight.
Sugar decreased your chances of having more "yes" answers because of how fast it is metabolized.
That's funny, because I've been losing weight with a calorie deficit while still eating sugar. Sometimes I eat ice cream before bed. Am I a special snowflake?
The answer is no. My body functions in the same way all bodies do.
Overall calorie deficit is what matters. Yes, sugar is great for a burst of energy before a workout. But even if you don't "burn" it right away (i.e., eat ice cream before bed), you're not going to gain weight or store fat if you're in an overall deficit. It all evens out if calories are controlled.
You are missing my point though. Yes, you are in the minority considering most people are overweight and not doing anything about it. If you say "calorie deficit overall," what do you think makes up that "overall"?
In your case, you ate more, and then ate less, and it balanced out into a deficit. That is a sum, and the whole is made up of the sum.
I am not going to defend my claim to people who don't care to understand it yet can just attack it. Think scientifically, please.0 -
For the giggles, I switched sugar on my diary on to see how much I consumed today, apparently I consumed 144 grams of it. Damn them apples!
4 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Sugar does not make us fat - excess calories make us fat.
Sugar is easily and readily metabolized into oxidizable energy. the fuel window for that is about 3-4 hours. Chances are (based on 2/3 of the US being overweight), a person has not used the amount of calories they just ate, so when the person's brain is sent signals from the stomach that it needs food again, the person eats again, whereby making the food they just ate be excess because they have not burned the calories off. Alas, weight is gained, and the cycle continues
This is not a compound problem, but an addition one. Among the complexities of the human metabolic system, it comes down to this: did you burn more calories than your last meal before your next one? The more you answer "yes" to this question, the better chance you have of losing weight.
Sugar decreased your chances of having more "yes" answers.
So does fatty beef or high levels of oils...so?
Fats have actually been shown to take longer to digest and increase that time between meals due to the non-release of grehlin, if the nutrition is appropriate. When combined with carbs (i.e. hamburgers and hotdogs), the effects are reduced.
Lipids cannot be utilized by the red blood cells for energy. They require glucose. Therefore, the body must do more to convert them into ready energy the cells can use. This process slows the digestive process, which slows down hunger levels.
I can go 8-10 hours on eggs and butter, whereas I couldn't even come close to that eating cereal.
And I go 16 hours fasted every day on 400 grams of carbs per day. A lot of that being sugar. Satiety varies by person.
Do you eat one or two meals per day? I am genuinely curious. What do you eat to go 16 hours fasted?0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Sugar does not make us fat - excess calories make us fat.
Sugar is easily and readily metabolized into oxidizable energy. the fuel window for that is about 3-4 hours. Chances are (based on 2/3 of the US being overweight), a person has not used the amount of calories they just ate, so when the person's brain is sent signals from the stomach that it needs food again, the person eats again, whereby making the food they just ate be excess because they have not burned the calories off. Alas, weight is gained, and the cycle continues
This is not a compound problem, but an addition one. Among the complexities of the human metabolic system, it comes down to this: did you burn more calories than your last meal before your next one? The more you answer "yes" to this question, the better chance you have of losing weight.
Sugar decreased your chances of having more "yes" answers.
So does fatty beef or high levels of oils...so?
Fats have actually been shown to take longer to digest and increase that time between meals due to the non-release of grehlin, if the nutrition is appropriate. When combined with carbs (i.e. hamburgers and hotdogs), the effects are reduced.
Lipids cannot be utilized by the red blood cells for energy. They require glucose. Therefore, the body must do more to convert them into ready energy the cells can use. This process slows the digestive process, which slows down hunger levels.
I can go 8-10 hours on eggs and butter, whereas I couldn't even come close to that eating cereal.
And I go 16 hours fasted every day on 400 grams of carbs per day. A lot of that being sugar. Satiety varies by person.
Do you eat one or two meals per day? I am genuinely curious. What do you eat to go 16 hours fasted?
I eat 1 full meal around 7 and dessert after usually. I graze and snack from 12pm till dinner. Roughly 4000 calories at the moment. I try to get around 175-200 grams of protein and 75-100 grams of fat and a minimum of 250 grams of carbs. I fill in the rest with whatever.
0 -
imajollyroger wrote: »chocolate_owl wrote: »imajollyroger wrote: »
Hi Owl, but those potato chips, even though low nutrition/high calorie were carbs, the crackers were carbs, and the beer was carbs. Now you are consuming less carbs and more fat. This is what has worked for me also and a lot of research is validating.chocolate_owl wrote: »imajollyroger wrote: »
1st that's wonderful that you've lost 90 lbs! I whole support any means and method that people find that works for themselves to lose weight or become healthy. We all have our personal experiences and perspectives. To answer your question though, I would explain it that by cutting your calories, you actually cut your carbs too. Likewise, when humans consume exces calories, we are most likely consuming excess carbs.cerise_noir wrote: »imajollyroger wrote: »Sugar and carbs absolutely make you fat! What do you think beer belly is? There's no fat in beer. The body converts sugar/carbs into fat if it can't utilize it immediately for fuel. Doesn't matter if excess calories. I can run a calorie deficit and gain weight if I consume too many carbs without using them. Sugar and carbs also make you more hungry like eating Chinese food. Your insulin gets high which blocks your satiety signals to your brain. Your body won't burn fat until the glycogen is depleted. First it uses glycogen, then it uses fat as reserve.
No they don't.
I eat sugar. By your logic I should be gaining weight, not losing it. Please explain how I've lost a little over 90lbs, @imajollyroger? I'm all ears/eyes.
Also, fat does NOT make anyone fat. That's old school weight loss woo.
You know what actually makes all mammals fat?
Excess calories.
When I consume excess calories these days it's usually in fat (cheese, charcuterie) and alcohol (wine). When I was losing 30 lbs, I didn't cut carbs very much - I cut calorie-dense, low-nutrition items like potato chips and cheesy crackers (fat+carbs) and beer (alcohol+carbs), and I reduced how much oil I used in cooking (pure fat). I wasn't eating all that much sugar to begin with. I'm sure I'm not alone in this.
No, I'm not. I cut fat too. My carb:fat ratio has remained about the same, except for the nights where I eat a cheese plate, which is way too easy to overeat on because I don't feel full on high-fat foods. Also, why are you reducing foods that have multiple macronutrients to being carbs??? They are more than just carbs. Using your reasoning, I could just as easily say fat and alcohol are what make people fat, because when I reduced those things I lost weight.
I don't know you and I want to be clear here, it is awesome that everyone here is doing positive things for their health. I'm not here to argue with anyone. Health, wellness and fitness are a passion and I want everyone to experience it. We should be a positive community that is open to everyone's perspective. I jumped in this discussion a little aggressively. I accept responsibility for that. I had just discovered the community and been on MFP for about 4 yrs. That being said, It doesn't make sense if you cut potato chips, crackers and beer and now you consume more fat and wine that your carb/fat ratio would be the same. I understand the fullness. I can feel the same with high fat foods sometimes but I'm satisfied not full. The brain shuts off the feeding signal unlike with high consumption of carbs and sugar. I reduce foods, especially processed foods, to their macro carb content because that is what is being scientifically proven to cause the obesity epidemic, not the fat. "We" took the fat out of foods in the 80s, made everything low fat/high carb and obesity, heart disease, and diabetes have skyrocketed--globally.
You're not reading what I'm saying. Slow down and listen if you don't want to seem argumentative, because you are most definitely arguing and making unsubstantiated claims.
I cut foods that were mixed macros or pure fat. The result is that now, day-to-day, I eat about the same carb-to-fat ratio as I did before, just fewer calories overall and a bit more protein. When I overindulge - when I eat way more calories than I should - it's usually on moderate protein, high fat foods like cheese and cured meat and alcoholic beverages like wine because neither of those things make me feel full. I don't usually overeat on sweets or pasta or bread, or a meal with balanced macros like a turkey sandwich. Satiety is individual, and I don't find fats satisfying.
Fat is not to blame for obesity. Carbs are not to blame for obesity. Too many calories are, end of story. It's not "scientifically proven" that carbs have caused the obesity epidemic, and if you had read this thread at all you would have seen the data disproving your statement.
ETA: ...I don't mean to be a jerk or overly hard on you. You're new here, and you picked a subject that people 1) feel strongly about and 2) has been argued to death to jump in on. Don't feel like we're chasing you off, but maybe spend some time perusing the information available on this site before you jump in the boxing ring. The debate section is a good resource if you have the patience to do some digging - a good chunk of scientific, peer-reviewed studies get posted in there.8 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Sugar does not make us fat - excess calories make us fat.
Sugar is easily and readily metabolized into oxidizable energy. the fuel window for that is about 3-4 hours. Chances are (based on 2/3 of the US being overweight), a person has not used the amount of calories they just ate, so when the person's brain is sent signals from the stomach that it needs food again, the person eats again, whereby making the food they just ate be excess because they have not burned the calories off. Alas, weight is gained, and the cycle continues
This is not a compound problem, but an addition one. Among the complexities of the human metabolic system, it comes down to this: did you burn more calories than your last meal before your next one? The more you answer "yes" to this question, the better chance you have of losing weight.
Sugar decreased your chances of having more "yes" answers.
So does fatty beef or high levels of oils...so?
Fats have actually been shown to take longer to digest and increase that time between meals due to the non-release of grehlin, if the nutrition is appropriate. When combined with carbs (i.e. hamburgers and hotdogs), the effects are reduced.
Lipids cannot be utilized by the red blood cells for energy. They require glucose. Therefore, the body must do more to convert them into ready energy the cells can use. This process slows the digestive process, which slows down hunger levels.
I can go 8-10 hours on eggs and butter, whereas I couldn't even come close to that eating cereal.
And I go 16 hours fasted every day on 400 grams of carbs per day. A lot of that being sugar. Satiety varies by person.
Do you eat one or two meals per day? I am genuinely curious. What do you eat to go 16 hours fasted?
I eat 1 full meal around 7 and dessert after usually. I graze and snack from 12pm till dinner. Roughly 4000 calories at the moment. I try to get around 175-200 grams of protein and 75-100 grams of fat and a minimum of 250 grams of carbs. I fill in the rest with whatever.
If you are snacking, you are not fasting. I am not sure what you mean by "fasted." Also, you are bulking, correct?0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Sugar does not make us fat - excess calories make us fat.
Sugar is easily and readily metabolized into oxidizable energy. the fuel window for that is about 3-4 hours. Chances are (based on 2/3 of the US being overweight), a person has not used the amount of calories they just ate, so when the person's brain is sent signals from the stomach that it needs food again, the person eats again, whereby making the food they just ate be excess because they have not burned the calories off. Alas, weight is gained, and the cycle continues
This is not a compound problem, but an addition one. Among the complexities of the human metabolic system, it comes down to this: did you burn more calories than your last meal before your next one? The more you answer "yes" to this question, the better chance you have of losing weight.
Sugar decreased your chances of having more "yes" answers because of how fast it is metabolized.
That's funny, because I've been losing weight with a calorie deficit while still eating sugar. Sometimes I eat ice cream before bed. Am I a special snowflake?
The answer is no. My body functions in the same way all bodies do.
Overall calorie deficit is what matters. Yes, sugar is great for a burst of energy before a workout. But even if you don't "burn" it right away (i.e., eat ice cream before bed), you're not going to gain weight or store fat if you're in an overall deficit. It all evens out if calories are controlled.
You are missing my point though. Yes, you are in the minority considering most people are overweight and not doing anything about it. If you say "calorie deficit overall," what do you think makes up that "overall"?
In your case, you ate more, and then ate less, and it balanced out into a deficit. That is a sum, and the whole is made up of the sum.
I am not going to defend my claim to people who don't care to understand it yet can just attack it. Think scientifically, please.
Actually, it is more about thinking mathematically than it is about thinking scientifically. This all comes down to an energy balance which is a mathematical equation summarized and simplified as CICO. In order to maintain your weight, your Calories In must equal your Calories Out. When people gain weight, they are in a calorie surplus, their CI > CO, and when they lose weight, they are in a calorie defict, CI < CO.
There are other factors which can have individual impact on the CICO equation, but it really is a fundamental mathematical equation. Focusing on meal timing and subtle complexities of human metabolism is going to complicate the issue far more than is necessary. If people are not losing weight, the only explanation is that they aren't in a calorie deficit, and focusing on reducing total calories is likely to have a far bigger impact than majoring in the minor details you are introducing...3 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »cmriverside wrote: »Leaky gut isn't a diagnosis, either...it's a symptom of some other medical issue. Why Gale continues to harp on the wrong issue is hard to understand.
webmd.com/digestive-disorders/features/leaky-gut-syndrome#1
It is true MD's may not be trained on the subject but gut permeability is a real health concern. My leaky gut symptoms fully resolved after being off sugar and all forms of all grains for six months and have stayed resolved without failure for even one day for the past 18 months.
I'll see your webmd link and raise you one science based medicine one:
https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/leaky-bowel/
What is it about a site that is into slamming medical professionals that makes you think it is science based other than the words in its name.
Naturopaths simply aren't 'medical professionals' in the sense that MDs are. Are you attempting to suggest they are?
And since there is little to no support of leaky bowel syndrome within the legitimate medical profession (read: Real Doctors) the site I linked to takes issue with it being passed off as something that is recognized within the medical community when it isn't.
6 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Sugar does not make us fat - excess calories make us fat.
Sugar is easily and readily metabolized into oxidizable energy. the fuel window for that is about 3-4 hours. Chances are (based on 2/3 of the US being overweight), a person has not used the amount of calories they just ate, so when the person's brain is sent signals from the stomach that it needs food again, the person eats again, whereby making the food they just ate be excess because they have not burned the calories off. Alas, weight is gained, and the cycle continues
This is not a compound problem, but an addition one. Among the complexities of the human metabolic system, it comes down to this: did you burn more calories than your last meal before your next one? The more you answer "yes" to this question, the better chance you have of losing weight.
Sugar decreased your chances of having more "yes" answers.
So does fatty beef or high levels of oils...so?
Fats have actually been shown to take longer to digest and increase that time between meals due to the non-release of grehlin, if the nutrition is appropriate. When combined with carbs (i.e. hamburgers and hotdogs), the effects are reduced.
Lipids cannot be utilized by the red blood cells for energy. They require glucose. Therefore, the body must do more to convert them into ready energy the cells can use. This process slows the digestive process, which slows down hunger levels.
I can go 8-10 hours on eggs and butter, whereas I couldn't even come close to that eating cereal.
And I go 16 hours fasted every day on 400 grams of carbs per day. A lot of that being sugar. Satiety varies by person.
Do you eat one or two meals per day? I am genuinely curious. What do you eat to go 16 hours fasted?
I eat 1 full meal around 7 and dessert after usually. I graze and snack from 12pm till dinner. Roughly 4000 calories at the moment. I try to get around 175-200 grams of protein and 75-100 grams of fat and a minimum of 250 grams of carbs. I fill in the rest with whatever.
If you are snacking, you are not fasting. I am not sure what you mean by "fasted." Also, you are bulking, correct?
This depends entirely on his fasting window. For example, I fast every day until around 1pm, have lunch, snack and then eat dinner around 7:30 and dessert around 8-9, then nothing until 1pm the next day. 16-17 hours of fasting.5 -
I fast between meals.5
-
Well, today was one of the most satiating days in a long while, but it was also one of the highest carb days. I ate A LOT of food yet didn't hit my goal. Granted I also had my long run today, so my calories are higher than the typical dieting woman for this day, but this kind of macro distribution regardless of calories often happens to be my happy zone for satiety. I will probably have a protein shake later in a bit to hit my protein goal.
When I do intermittent fasting (the very low calorie day kind), one of the first things I make sure of is to hit at least 100 grams of carbs in 2 meals because I would be ravenous if I don't. You can't argue with results or generalize claims just because a certain way of eating works for you. Different people thrive on different foods and macos.
8 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Sugar does not make us fat - excess calories make us fat.
Sugar is easily and readily metabolized into oxidizable energy. the fuel window for that is about 3-4 hours. Chances are (based on 2/3 of the US being overweight), a person has not used the amount of calories they just ate, so when the person's brain is sent signals from the stomach that it needs food again, the person eats again, whereby making the food they just ate be excess because they have not burned the calories off. Alas, weight is gained, and the cycle continues
This is not a compound problem, but an addition one. Among the complexities of the human metabolic system, it comes down to this: did you burn more calories than your last meal before your next one? The more you answer "yes" to this question, the better chance you have of losing weight.
Sugar decreased your chances of having more "yes" answers.
So does fatty beef or high levels of oils...so?
Fats have actually been shown to take longer to digest and increase that time between meals due to the non-release of grehlin, if the nutrition is appropriate. When combined with carbs (i.e. hamburgers and hotdogs), the effects are reduced.
Lipids cannot be utilized by the red blood cells for energy. They require glucose. Therefore, the body must do more to convert them into ready energy the cells can use. This process slows the digestive process, which slows down hunger levels.
I can go 8-10 hours on eggs and butter, whereas I couldn't even come close to that eating cereal.
And I go 16 hours fasted every day on 400 grams of carbs per day. A lot of that being sugar. Satiety varies by person.
Do you eat one or two meals per day? I am genuinely curious. What do you eat to go 16 hours fasted?
I eat 1 full meal around 7 and dessert after usually. I graze and snack from 12pm till dinner. Roughly 4000 calories at the moment. I try to get around 175-200 grams of protein and 75-100 grams of fat and a minimum of 250 grams of carbs. I fill in the rest with whatever.
If you are snacking, you are not fasting. I am not sure what you mean by "fasted." Also, you are bulking, correct?
I eat between 12 and 8pm. That leaves a 16 hour window.
And I'm not really bulking, no. At least not purposefully.6 -
WinoGelato wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Sugar does not make us fat - excess calories make us fat.
Sugar is easily and readily metabolized into oxidizable energy. the fuel window for that is about 3-4 hours. Chances are (based on 2/3 of the US being overweight), a person has not used the amount of calories they just ate, so when the person's brain is sent signals from the stomach that it needs food again, the person eats again, whereby making the food they just ate be excess because they have not burned the calories off. Alas, weight is gained, and the cycle continues
This is not a compound problem, but an addition one. Among the complexities of the human metabolic system, it comes down to this: did you burn more calories than your last meal before your next one? The more you answer "yes" to this question, the better chance you have of losing weight.
Sugar decreased your chances of having more "yes" answers because of how fast it is metabolized.
That's funny, because I've been losing weight with a calorie deficit while still eating sugar. Sometimes I eat ice cream before bed. Am I a special snowflake?
The answer is no. My body functions in the same way all bodies do.
Overall calorie deficit is what matters. Yes, sugar is great for a burst of energy before a workout. But even if you don't "burn" it right away (i.e., eat ice cream before bed), you're not going to gain weight or store fat if you're in an overall deficit. It all evens out if calories are controlled.
You are missing my point though. Yes, you are in the minority considering most people are overweight and not doing anything about it. If you say "calorie deficit overall," what do you think makes up that "overall"?
In your case, you ate more, and then ate less, and it balanced out into a deficit. That is a sum, and the whole is made up of the sum.
I am not going to defend my claim to people who don't care to understand it yet can just attack it. Think scientifically, please.
Actually, it is more about thinking mathematically than it is about thinking scientifically. This all comes down to an energy balance which is a mathematical equation summarized and simplified as CICO. In order to maintain your weight, your Calories In must equal your Calories Out. When people gain weight, they are in a calorie surplus, their CI > CO, and when they lose weight, they are in a calorie defict, CI < CO.
There are other factors which can have individual impact on the CICO equation, but it really is a fundamental mathematical equation. Focusing on meal timing and subtle complexities of human metabolism is going to complicate the issue far more than is necessary. If people are not losing weight, the only explanation is that they aren't in a calorie deficit, and focusing on reducing total calories is likely to have a far bigger impact than majoring in the minor details you are introducing...
Well sure. I do agree with you. What about the person that has a hard time with the meal timing, or feels they want to eat more because they aren't full. A lot of people come across the problem of: oh shoot, its 4pm and I am out of calories...what do I do? This explanation might help them moderate themselves better through energy expenditure estimation. It might also encourage them to become more active throughout the day, to where they can understand that, although MFP says "I only have 200 calories left, I can eat more because I was more active than the calories I ate. I will be okay." or "I will be more active tomorrow to balance out and still be in a deficit."
In a way, it can be more complex, but it can also be beneficial. I believe understanding the microcosms helps understand the big picture.0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Sugar does not make us fat - excess calories make us fat.
Sugar is easily and readily metabolized into oxidizable energy. the fuel window for that is about 3-4 hours. Chances are (based on 2/3 of the US being overweight), a person has not used the amount of calories they just ate, so when the person's brain is sent signals from the stomach that it needs food again, the person eats again, whereby making the food they just ate be excess because they have not burned the calories off. Alas, weight is gained, and the cycle continues
This is not a compound problem, but an addition one. Among the complexities of the human metabolic system, it comes down to this: did you burn more calories than your last meal before your next one? The more you answer "yes" to this question, the better chance you have of losing weight.
Sugar decreased your chances of having more "yes" answers.
So does fatty beef or high levels of oils...so?
Fats have actually been shown to take longer to digest and increase that time between meals due to the non-release of grehlin, if the nutrition is appropriate. When combined with carbs (i.e. hamburgers and hotdogs), the effects are reduced.
Lipids cannot be utilized by the red blood cells for energy. They require glucose. Therefore, the body must do more to convert them into ready energy the cells can use. This process slows the digestive process, which slows down hunger levels.
I can go 8-10 hours on eggs and butter, whereas I couldn't even come close to that eating cereal.
And I go 16 hours fasted every day on 400 grams of carbs per day. A lot of that being sugar. Satiety varies by person.
Do you eat one or two meals per day? I am genuinely curious. What do you eat to go 16 hours fasted?
I eat 1 full meal around 7 and dessert after usually. I graze and snack from 12pm till dinner. Roughly 4000 calories at the moment. I try to get around 175-200 grams of protein and 75-100 grams of fat and a minimum of 250 grams of carbs. I fill in the rest with whatever.
If you are snacking, you are not fasting. I am not sure what you mean by "fasted." Also, you are bulking, correct?
I eat between 12 and 8pm. That leaves a 16 hour window.
And I'm not really bulking, no. At least not purposefully.
Everyone fasts around and within sleep times :-) regardless of diet. I am talking about waking hours. I have breakfast at 8, and I don't have to eat again until 4 or 5. I do not become hungry or get the shakes. No snack, no drink. While I consume about 1000 calories, I burn just as much in that span. The same thing cannot be said for sleeping hours, however 2-3 of the hours before sleep are satiated by dinner, and the 2-3 hours after sleep (adjust for sleep times) are moderated by the fact that the digestive system mostly slows down during sleep, and takes a while to get back started again.
edited: shut down was too extreme. It does slow down though.0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Sugar does not make us fat - excess calories make us fat.
Sugar is easily and readily metabolized into oxidizable energy. the fuel window for that is about 3-4 hours. Chances are (based on 2/3 of the US being overweight), a person has not used the amount of calories they just ate, so when the person's brain is sent signals from the stomach that it needs food again, the person eats again, whereby making the food they just ate be excess because they have not burned the calories off. Alas, weight is gained, and the cycle continues
This is not a compound problem, but an addition one. Among the complexities of the human metabolic system, it comes down to this: did you burn more calories than your last meal before your next one? The more you answer "yes" to this question, the better chance you have of losing weight.
Sugar decreased your chances of having more "yes" answers because of how fast it is metabolized.
That's funny, because I've been losing weight with a calorie deficit while still eating sugar. Sometimes I eat ice cream before bed. Am I a special snowflake?
The answer is no. My body functions in the same way all bodies do.
Overall calorie deficit is what matters. Yes, sugar is great for a burst of energy before a workout. But even if you don't "burn" it right away (i.e., eat ice cream before bed), you're not going to gain weight or store fat if you're in an overall deficit. It all evens out if calories are controlled.
You are missing my point though. Yes, you are in the minority considering most people are overweight and not doing anything about it. If you say "calorie deficit overall," what do you think makes up that "overall"?
In your case, you ate more, and then ate less, and it balanced out into a deficit. That is a sum, and the whole is made up of the sum.
I am not going to defend my claim to people who don't care to understand it yet can just attack it. Think scientifically, please.
Actually, it is more about thinking mathematically than it is about thinking scientifically. This all comes down to an energy balance which is a mathematical equation summarized and simplified as CICO. In order to maintain your weight, your Calories In must equal your Calories Out. When people gain weight, they are in a calorie surplus, their CI > CO, and when they lose weight, they are in a calorie defict, CI < CO.
There are other factors which can have individual impact on the CICO equation, but it really is a fundamental mathematical equation. Focusing on meal timing and subtle complexities of human metabolism is going to complicate the issue far more than is necessary. If people are not losing weight, the only explanation is that they aren't in a calorie deficit, and focusing on reducing total calories is likely to have a far bigger impact than majoring in the minor details you are introducing...
Well sure. I do agree with you. What about the person that has a hard time with the meal timing, or feels they want to eat more because they aren't full. A lot of people come across the problem of: oh shoot, its 4pm and I am out of calories...what do I do? This explanation might help them moderate themselves better through energy expenditure estimation. It might also encourage them to become more active throughout the day, to where they can understand that, although MFP says "I only have 200 calories left, I can eat more because I was more active than the calories I ate. I will be okay." or "I will be more active tomorrow to balance out and still be in a deficit."
In a way, it can be more complex, but it can also be beneficial. I believe understanding the microcosms helps understand the big picture.
We see questions like this all the time on these boards.
Help I'm out of calories by 4pm!?
Most Helpful Answers: take a look at what you are eating, look for more nutrient dense foods that fill you up for less calories, preplan your day, consider doing some exercise to earn more calories, remember that it is the weekly deficit that matters not the individual day that counts
Less Helpful Answer: consider the complexities of the rate in which your body metabolizes certain foods in order to determine why you are eating as often as you are and how you can determine the mathematical adjustments you need in order to calculate an accurate energy expenditure estimation...
9
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 393 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 931 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions