Carb Question

Jalexander33

I assume carbs are pretty straight forward, "What you see is what you get." I have a bit of a sensitivity to them so I try to eat less of them and substitute either protein or veggies to make up for the cut on the carbs.

Recently I decided to move away from a cup and 1/2 of cereal for breakfast and picked up Oatmeal (Yum) There is far less sugar in the oatmeal vs cereal but the carbs are a bit higher. What I didn't know is there a difference between say oatmeal carbs and a bake Idaho potato carbs?

Unknown

This content has been removed.

nvmomketo

I agree that in terms of life energy, carbs are carbs. If it can from a plant (seeds, grains, veggies, fruit, and even nuts) there are carbs in it. Meat eggs, full fat dairy and fats and oils are almost carb free.

I eat very few carbs, but the ones I do eat tend to be whole foods - meaning I can recognize them for what they came from. I eat veggies and fruits and skip refined flour and sugars. Those have less nutrients and affect my blood glucose more.

Jalexander33

Thank for the quick response. I'm going to do some digging in my free time to get a better idea of the complex carbs vs non-complex.

trigden1991

For the general population, a carb is a carb.

jjpptt2

You say you're sensitive to carbs - what exactly does that mean? That is probably important to know when discussing differences between various carbohydrates.

Jalexander33

jjpptt2 wrote: »

You say you're sensitive to carbs - what exactly does that mean? That is probably important to know when discussing differences between various carbohydrates.

When I setup my original macro's I would eat within my set limits including carbs never going over. For weeks on end (I don't remember how long exactly) My weight stayed in the same place. My trainer is a registered nutritionist suggested the idea of reducing the carbs and see what happens. After a few days of lower carb intake I found my weight lose picking back up again and staying steady.

The being "sensitive to carbs" means my body doesn't do well at breaking it down. At the time the carbs I was enjoying were white rice, baked potatoes, and Low sodium wheat bread oh Peanut butter.
I have begun increasing my carbs back slowly. Of course I realize it's going to be touch and go to find the right balance of carbs that don't halt weight lose.

earlnabby

Jalexander33 wrote: »

jjpptt2 wrote: »

You say you're sensitive to carbs - what exactly does that mean? That is probably important to know when discussing differences between various carbohydrates.

When I setup my original macro's I would eat within my set limits including carbs never going over. For weeks on end (I don't remember how long exactly) My weight stayed in the same place. My trainer is a registered nutritionist suggested the idea of reducing the carbs and see what happens. After a few days of lower carb intake I found my weight lose picking back up again and staying steady.

The being "sensitive to carbs" means my body doesn't do well at breaking it down. At the time the carbs I was enjoying were white rice, baked potatoes, and Low sodium wheat bread oh Peanut butter.
I have begun increasing my carbs back slowly. Of course I realize it's going to be touch and go to find the right balance of carbs that don't halt weight lose.

What were your symptoms that told you your body wasn't processing the carbs properly? Also, how much fiber were you getting? Looking at your list, the thing that jumped out at me was that you aren't getting much whole grain. Did you eat the skin of the potato? That is the most nutritious part.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

psuLemon

Are you using a food scale to measure your amounts? Generally, I'd recommend waiting a month prior to making an assessment. Also, if you decrease carbs, you body will deplete glycogen and decrease water weight. But if you compared the carbs from veggies vs whole grain breads, they will all break down into glucose. One might have more fiber or different vitamins but ultimately, they should be similar. The exception would be if you had IR/Diabetes or something to that standard.


Now from a satiety and/or performance standpoint, you might want to play around with not only the foods but the macronutrients to see what increases compliance/adherence and performance.

caroldavison332

I'm sensitive to carbs and always have been. Even as a little kid cereal wouldn't satiate me and I would be hungry by the time I was on the bus to school. So instead I would have peanut butter or cheese for breakfast. Some carbs are so easily digestible (cheese puffs) that they cause your body to dump insulin in your bloodstream which makes you hungry. Avoid those. Others like sweet potatoes, especially if you eat the skin, are hard to digest and satiating. http://diabetes.org/food-and-fitness/food/what-can-i-eat/understanding-carbohydrates/glycemic-index-and-diabetes.html

Jalexander33

@ earInabby - Yes I was eating the skin of the potato and no I don't recall some whole but more than likely not enough. But either way I reduced carbs and everything got right.
The reason for my question was to get a better understanding of a carb or if there was a better kind of carb. Symptoms - Weight lose stall. It's not like it's an allergy, side effect or that I felt/feel ill in anyway. My body does not break down the carb as fast as it should unlike most people. If it doesn't break it down and I don't burn off the energy it just remains.

@ Look_Its_Kriss - No I am 100% sure it was not water weight. My loses when I first started were water weight. I was losing between 5 to 10 lbs a week or 2 weeks. Then my weight lose changed to a pound or 2 a week. I apologize my timing is way off I know it was a longer period of time with no weight lose and I was keeping calories at a deficit. I just don't remember the exact amount of time I stayed like that a month maybe a month and a half prior to intake changes.

psuLemon

Jalexander33 wrote: »

@ earInabby - Yes I was eating the skin of the potato and no I don't recall some whole but more than likely not enough. But either way I reduced carbs and everything got right.
The reason for my question was to get a better understanding of a carb or if there was a better kind of carb. Symptoms - Weight lose stall. It's not like it's an allergy, side effect or that I felt/feel ill in anyway. My body does not break down the carb as fast as it should unlike most people. If it doesn't break it down and I don't burn off the energy it just remains.

@ Look_Its_Kriss - No I am 100% sure it was not water weight. My loses when I first started were water weight. I was losing between 5 to 10 lbs a week or 2 weeks. Then my weight lose changed to a pound or 2 a week. I apologize my timing is way off I know it was a longer period of time with no weight lose and I was keeping calories at a deficit. I just don't remember the exact amount of time I stayed like that a month maybe a month and a half prior to intake changes.

I would think this is more of an assumption because there are a variety of factors that determine absorption rate. And typically, most people (including diabetics) tend to want slower digestion, so you don't have spikes in BG/Insulin.

cityruss

Jalexander33 wrote: »

@ earInabby - Yes I was eating the skin of the potato and no I don't recall some whole but more than likely not enough. But either way I reduced carbs and everything got right.
The reason for my question was to get a better understanding of a carb or if there was a better kind of carb. Symptoms - Weight lose stall. It's not like it's an allergy, side effect or that I felt/feel ill in anyway. My body does not break down the carb as fast as it should unlike most people. If it doesn't break it down and I don't burn off the energy it just remains.

@ Look_Its_Kriss - No I am 100% sure it was not water weight. My loses when I first started were water weight. I was losing between 5 to 10 lbs a week or 2 weeks. Then my weight lose changed to a pound or 2 a week. I apologize my timing is way off I know it was a longer period of time with no weight lose and I was keeping calories at a deficit. I just don't remember the exact amount of time I stayed like that a month maybe a month and a half prior to intake changes.

What is this condition called, how was it diagnosed?

jjpptt2

I get skeptical any time anyone starts talking about carb sensitivities, so I don't want to get into that part of the conversation because I can't really comment objectively about it.

But I will second what psu said above... that bigger picture, carbs are carbs. Smaller picture, different carbs can have a very different effect/impact on workout performance, overall satiety, and adherence. In that context, it is definitely worth trying different foods as sources of carbohydrates.

DietPrada

Carbs are carbs, protein is protein and fat is fat. 100g carbs in a chocolate bar is no different to 100g carbs in a bowl of pasta. Same/same.

If you are looking at reducing your carbs, probably better to stay away from grain type foods altogether. Still hit your protein target, and make up the rest with extra fat. Dietary fat does not make you fat, and contributes to satiety.

lynn_glenmont

Jalexander33 wrote: »

@ earInabby - Yes I was eating the skin of the potato and no I don't recall some whole but more than likely not enough. But either way I reduced carbs and everything got right.
The reason for my question was to get a better understanding of a carb or if there was a better kind of carb. Symptoms - Weight lose stall. It's not like it's an allergy, side effect or that I felt/feel ill in anyway. My body does not break down the carb as fast as it should unlike most people. If it doesn't break it down and I don't burn off the energy it just remains.

@ Look_Its_Kriss - No I am 100% sure it was not water weight. My loses when I first started were water weight. I was losing between 5 to 10 lbs a week or 2 weeks. Then my weight lose changed to a pound or 2 a week. I apologize my timing is way off I know it was a longer period of time with no weight lose and I was keeping calories at a deficit. I just don't remember the exact amount of time I stayed like that a month maybe a month and a half prior to intake changes.

If your body couldn't break down carbs, the energy would pass out of your body with waste; it wouldn't "remain." Or you'd have large complex carb molecules circulating in your blood stream, or passing into your organs and cells, and that's not happening.

extra_medium

"Carb sensitivity" to me means that it's really easy to consume more calories than you think you are when eating carbs. Because I can eat them all day and not feel it. If you lost weight after cutting carbs and everything else remained the same, it's most likely because you were eating more than, or not burning as much as you thought. But if it's working keep it up.

happysherri

I know a carb is a carb but I can definitely tell a difference in my body when I eat certain carbs. Listen to your body, everyone is different.

Natso29

I get what you mean about carb sensitive in the sense that when you allow yourself more carbs you don't lose weight as easily. Its not a disease or allergy for all those literal Larry's out there, it's just your body processing food slightly differently. Everyone's does, no matter how much everyone wants to deny it (otherwise there wouldn't be those scrawny string beans living off 3000kcal per day in our lives lol).

I used to be super low carb, near keto but I hated it because I hate eating restrictions that are too intense. Now I almost never eat anything processed so bread, pasta, cereal etc which i found easier to stay away from cause they weren't my faves anyways. I set my mfp macros to 30% carbs and get my carbs from whole grains like quinoa, farro, wild rice, oats, fruit and veg that are accompanied by vitamins and fibre.

I've been doing this for years and am really happy with it.

That's just me through trial and error I know people will naysay this but if people don't digest differently no one would ever play with macros and every human being in the planet would have the same body type.

kwtilbury

Is butter a carb?

lemurcat12

extra_medium wrote: »

"Carb sensitivity" to me means that it's really easy to consume more calories than you think you are when eating carbs. Because I can eat them all day and not feel it. If you lost weight after cutting carbs and everything else remained the same, it's most likely because you were eating more than, or not burning as much as you thought. But if it's working keep it up.

This is what I would think too, and from this perspective for many people (not all), carbs are not carbs. Some are more filling than others. Many of the people who claim not to be satiated by carbs (again, not all) seem to have mostly consumed carbs I would consider not that filling (highly processed grains, not whole grains, sugar in various forms without much fiber -- one example is sugary cereal, although I also don't find bread satiating at all). Interestingly, many claim to find "carbs" not satiating because they can easily overeat foods like potato chips, french fries, cookies, cake -- all of which are half fat/half carbs, and IMO not really properly considered just "carbs" at all. Personally I can overeat some of those easily, but am not likely to overeat oatmeal or roasted potato with just a bit of olive oil or even fruit -- all of which are more purely carbs (and delicious).

What I would not think is that one gains weight because one can't break down carbs -- if you can't break down something, you wouldn't gain weight from it, period. That seems like balderdash made up by (or simply not correctly explained by) the trainer.

lemurcat12

Jalexander33 wrote: »

I assume carbs are pretty straight forward, "What you see is what you get."

As I said in my last point, it really depends on for what purpose you are talking about carbs. For the purpose of staying keto, sugars and starches are the same, but fiber (which is considered carbs in the US, but not some other places) is not.

If you mean for weight gain, maybe -- depends why carbs are perceived as not being good for weight gain. If it's satiety (which it usually is), then no, they aren't the same, not for most people.

If you mean for nutrition, absolutely not -- for example vegetables are mostly carbs, and yet they are more important for nutrition than many other carbs, since high in micronutrients. Fiber also matters, and some carbs have more than others.

If you cut "carbs" (whatever you specifically mean by that) and substitute protein (usually filling) and vegetables (low cal), then I'd expect weight loss, plus, depending on how many carbs you were eating and what there's likely water loss too.

Recently I decided to move away from a cup and 1/2 of cereal for breakfast and picked up Oatmeal (Yum) There is far less sugar in the oatmeal vs cereal but the carbs are a bit higher. What I didn't know is there a difference between say oatmeal carbs and a bake Idaho potato carbs?

There is little difference between oatmeal "carbs" and potato "carbs" (the foods may differ if one is more filling for you or depending on what you eat with them -- many people load a lot of fat only potatoes which is fine but makes them high cal compared to a plainer potato). Both are whole foods, are filling for a lot of people but by no means all (go by experience there), made up of complex carbs (starches). The oats likely come with more fiber, but it depends on what kind of oats you are talking about.

Sugar to me is different than carbs from potatoes or oats because I find the latter a lot more filling in a lasting way. But that doesn't mean I avoid sugar (I eat it in limited amounts and in whole foods). I just wouldn't find a breakfast made up of mostly processed carbs and sugar (like a sugary cereal) particularly filling. If you do, that's what should matter to you. If you find the oats more enjoyable/filling, that's what should matter. If the potato is not, for you, that's what should matter. When it comes to satiety people differ and for a lot of people carbs aren't all the same for satiety (and they certainly are not for nutrition).

Rebecca0224

Look_Its_Kriss wrote: »

Kind of sounds to me like the loss was more water loss unless it was several weeks to months you were losing at a lower amount of carbs... peanut butter I thought was more of a protein then a carb tho since the diabetic clinic usually suggests it as a protein option.

Nutritionally peanut butter is a fat.

AnvilHead

Rebecca0224 wrote: »

Look_Its_Kriss wrote: »

Kind of sounds to me like the loss was more water loss unless it was several weeks to months you were losing at a lower amount of carbs... peanut butter I thought was more of a protein then a carb tho since the diabetic clinic usually suggests it as a protein option.

Nutritionally peanut butter is a fat.

Correct. According to Jif's website, their creamy peanut butter has 8g carbs (3 of which are sugars), for a total of 32 calories from carbs (12 cal from sugars). It has 7g protein for 28 calories, and 16g fat for 144 calories. So the vast majority of calories are from fat, with almost negligible sugar content.