Cutting Sugar From my Diet entirely
Options
Replies
-
lemurcat12 wrote: »There are enough sugar calories in fruit to make it potentially harder for those on lower calorie diets to meet desired macros, in which case someone not into bro-science might also opt to limit it.
Depends on macros, depends on whether you prefer getting carbs from starches, fruit, or some combination.
I'm not at all saying that anyone should eat fruit if they don't want to, but objecting to the claim that it's BETTER in general to cut it entirely out (OP did not say that, of course, but another poster has).
True, but that's if macros really matter to that person. Obviously someone on keto isn't that concerned about meeting carb macros.There are enough sugar calories in fruit to make it potentially harder for those on lower calorie diets to meet desired macros, in which case someone not into bro-science might also opt to limit it.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I was referring to it possibly crowding out protein and/or fat on e.g. a sub-1300 calorie day.
But it doesn't necessarily do that (depending on overall macro goals). I could cut out a few slices of bread and have a cup of strawberries and a medium apple instead. I could even dip that apple in peanut butter and have protein as well
And if I chose 2 eggs for breakfast with 1 slice of toast and butter, and a glass of 1% milk (~400 calories). Greek yogurt, apple, 1TB peanut butter, 1 cup strawberries for lunch (~350) and grilled chicken covered in salsa and a bit of mozzerella, steamed broccoli, and 1/2 cup rice for dinner (~500 calories, depending on size of chicken) I'm hitting 1250 calories and still meeting protein and fat needs. Remember, someone small enough to need a 1200 calorie diet doesn't necessarily need as much protein as someone eating 2000 calories.
Ah. Of course. I didn't mention that the default protein macro on MFP is significantly lower than what is typically recommended, especially if you lift.
.. And personally I'd rather spend those 120 extra calories on a glass of wine than a banana if I have them. ;p0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »robertw486 wrote: »GlassslippersAndFairyDust wrote: »I find when I cut refined sugar out of my diet my cravings completely disappear. I never cut out fruits. I don't eat ketchup (before anyone jumps on that wagon). So IMHO it does make a difference. Don't know the science.....don't care. Just know it works for me. Also, I have an easier time shedding belly fat without refined sugar. Don't know the science, don't care....works for me. Do you and if it makes you crave less, lose more....whatever....just do you.
If only more people here took the approach of suggesting and OP make their own decisions and give their views a try, me might have less "but why cut out (whatever) threads"!
Especially if one, like the poster you quoted, misreads the OP to be about exactly what one has decided is helpful for oneself!
I didn't notice anyone telling OP that he absolutely must not cut out sugars from vegetables, but simply reminding him that it's not just cutting out fruit and sweets and lattes, that sugar is in a LOT of whole foods. Personally, if he wants to, whatever.As for all the comments from other posters about hidden sugars, logging and label reading is a great way to find them.
Gosh, just like all the people saying it's not hidden, it's on the label were recommending -- reading labels is always a good idea, and if you log it's impossible to claim hidden sugar (and then check out the various sources if one wishes -- that is what I do if surprised, but so far it's rare, the most surprising things to me have been some whole foods like leeks and blueberries (amount, not that they had it), nothing with added sugar, but then I've pretty much always read labels).BBQ sauce is one thing in particular where I wish there were more options lower in sugar.
You can make your own, although w/o sugar of any sort it might not count as real BBQ sauce under any of the standard styles (I am not savvy enough about BBQ to know if that's so). But again I think most people would expect a BBQ sauce to have some sugar, and the amount of sugar added varies quite a bit (I know this, because recently I was wondering if any might fit into my current macros and I looked through a bunch of different ones at Plum Market -- some weren't all that high, but as I expected none would work for me currently, bought some salsa for lazy nights when I don't want to make my own sauce, instead--one of the Frontera ones, 2 TBSP and 2 g carbs, <1 g sugar).
I'm the one he quoted and the one you seem to take issue with. If YOU read the OP's post, he stated that he wanted to know the effects of people being sugar free and that's what I shared with him. Don't know why that offended you so....but that's your issue not mine.1 -
peckchris3267 wrote: »"Weight loss is a huge benefit of ketogenic diets due to lowered insulin levels and the body’s ability to burn stored fat. I’ve personally found that the classic ketogenic diet is quite possibly the best diet for weight loss, especially considering how quickly it usually works.
Your body burns stored fat when you eat at a deficit. Which macros your intake calories come from has NOTHING to do with fat loss. It may affect satiety or general health.Following a ketogenic diet may also help prevent and even kill cancer cells. There are several medical studies — such as two conducted by the Department of Radiation Oncology at the Holden Comprehensive Cancer Center for the University of Iowa, and the National Institutes of Health’s National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, for example— that show the ketogenic diet is an effective treatment for cancer and other serious health problems.
(emphasis added)
This literally makes me feel nauseated. Perpetuating these ideas HELPS KILL PEOPLE. I take only minor issues with a qualified statement like the first one, but that last bit? No. It's just not been effectively proven. It hasn't. I'm a former cancer patient, and I thoroughly support continued research and new developments and treatments. But I got better thanks to surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation. And I have a friend who decided to use diet-based treatment for her cancer, and it didn't work, and now her chemo is even harder on her and there's a good chance she won't make it.
I have no problems with ketogenic diets. And normally I would merely roll my eyes at bad science. But when it involves life-threatening illnesses, you should be ashamed of yourself.18 -
clicketykeys wrote: »peckchris3267 wrote: »"Weight loss is a huge benefit of ketogenic diets due to lowered insulin levels and the body’s ability to burn stored fat. I’ve personally found that the classic ketogenic diet is quite possibly the best diet for weight loss, especially considering how quickly it usually works.
Your body burns stored fat when you eat at a deficit. Which macros your intake calories come from has NOTHING to do with fat loss. It may affect satiety or general health.Following a ketogenic diet may also help prevent and even kill cancer cells. There are several medical studies — such as two conducted by the Department of Radiation Oncology at the Holden Comprehensive Cancer Center for the University of Iowa, and the National Institutes of Health’s National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, for example— that show the ketogenic diet is an effective treatment for cancer and other serious health problems.
(emphasis added)
This literally makes me feel nauseated. Perpetuating these ideas HELPS KILL PEOPLE. I take only minor issues with a qualified statement like the first one, but that last bit? No. It's just not been effectively proven. It hasn't. I'm a former cancer patient, and I thoroughly support continued research and new developments and treatments. But I got better thanks to surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation. And I have a friend who decided to use diet-based treatment for her cancer, and it didn't work, and now her chemo is even harder on her and there's a good chance she won't make it.
I have no problems with ketogenic diets. And normally I would merely roll my eyes at bad science. But when it involves life-threatening illnesses, you should be ashamed of yourself.
sorry you had to go through with this and have overcome it. my sons friend also was told change in diet would help his very aggressive type of cancer(Ewings sarcoma). he didnt want chemo or radiation and he didnt make it. he was only 15 yrs old when he passed.0 -
IMO Trying to cure cancer with non traditional, aka nutrition , once you've already got cancer is like trying to unring a bell, it's just too late then.4
-
I know there are anecdotal accounts of people who have gotten their cancer under control through natural means. But that doesn't mean the average person (without an extensive understanding of the factors that affect cancer spread and eradication) can just try to follow a general diet (like keto) and expect a cure.
Also, another thing to keep in mind is that in a lot of cases doctors are not only going to recommend chemo over natural means because it's more effective. For one thing, there's nothing to be gained for them if the patient does the latter, and also their nutritional knowledge may not be very extensive.0 -
I've lost weight with bits of candy in my diet.peckchris3267 wrote: »
If you are trying to lose weight any form of sugar is a bad idea. It will give you a crash which will leave you craving more. It also puts you on an energy roller coaster. Sugar also burn off quickly and leave you hungry. Protein and fat keep you full for much longer with a consistent energy level.janejellyroll wrote: »peckchris3267 wrote: »
Cutting fruit is a good idea. Fruit is loaded with fructose which is essentially sugar. No real need to eliminate vegetables. I try to keep my carbs below 20grams per day and get all of my carbs from vegetables.cwolfman13 wrote: »I'm considering cutting sugar completely out from my diet. For the past three weeks that I've been dieting, I've cut down a ton because I'm no longer drinking fraps and other junk *kitten* every day and it hasn't felt like that much of a burden. Has anyone else gone sugar-free entirely? What effects have you noticed? The only thing now I feel like would affect me is the fact that I would have to cut fruits out which is rather disappointing.
Eliminating fruit and vegetables seems like a rather bad idea...
So what's wrong with something being "essentially sugar"?
And yet I lost weight easily and quickly while still eating about 2 pieces of fruit a day ... plus things like nutalla and honey on toast.
0 -
I think if i had cancer, i would try non traditional methods alongside chemo. But i wouldn't take the risk and completely avoid chemo in favour of natural remedies.
I'm a great believer in going the natural/nutritional route for non life threatening ailments over taking pharmaceuticals when possible. But when it comes to deadly cancer, my confidence in it isn't quite so high...1 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »I know there are anecdotal accounts of people who have gotten their cancer under control through natural means. But that doesn't mean the average person (without an extensive understanding of the factors that affect cancer spread and eradication) can just try to follow a general diet (like keto) and expect a cure.
Also, another thing to keep in mind is that in a lot of cases doctors are not only going to recommend chemo over natural means because it's more effective. For one thing, there's nothing to be gained for them if the patient does the latter, and also their nutritional knowledge may not be very extensive.
There are also anecdotal accounts of spontaneous remission of cancer, for no apparent reason at all. And of faith healings, for that matter. I think I'll stick with evidence-based medicine.
One of my oncologists, spoke as part of a panel discussion, and - with tears in his eyes - listed all of the people dear to him (friends, immediate family members) who'd died of cancer, then said something like "Some people think we're hiding the truth about cancer treatment, in order to profit. Don't you think that for those people in my life, if that were true, I would've brought out those secret cures? Don't you think I researched every option? But there is no hidden secret, and we treated them just as we treat all our patients, with the best medical knowledge we have. Despite that, they died." Trust me, he was sincere - he's not that good an actor.
"Big Medicine" isn't perfect - far from it. And yes, oncologists don't know everything about nutrition . . . maybe that's why cancer centers have cancer-specialist registered dieticians? (I consulted one as part of my cancer treatment.)
This post is way off topic for this thread - apologies, OP. I just can't sit back and let this kind of facile nonsense slide.
+! to @clicketykeys' post above, too, about the potentially-deadly implications of spreading . . . manure . . . about diet as an effective cancer treatment. Diet isn't irrelevant to prognosis for some, but it's far from sufficient to cure for most.15 -
Dietary changes for cancer treatment would be an interesting topic for the debate section...1
-
-
livingleanlivingclean wrote: »
Agreed.6 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »There are enough sugar calories in fruit to make it potentially harder for those on lower calorie diets to meet desired macros, in which case someone not into bro-science might also opt to limit it.
Depends on macros, depends on whether you prefer getting carbs from starches, fruit, or some combination.
I'm not at all saying that anyone should eat fruit if they don't want to, but objecting to the claim that it's BETTER in general to cut it entirely out (OP did not say that, of course, but another poster has).
True, but that's if macros really matter to that person. Obviously someone on keto isn't that concerned about meeting carb macros.There are enough sugar calories in fruit to make it potentially harder for those on lower calorie diets to meet desired macros, in which case someone not into bro-science might also opt to limit it.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I was referring to it possibly crowding out protein and/or fat on e.g. a sub-1300 calorie day.
But it doesn't necessarily do that (depending on overall macro goals). I could cut out a few slices of bread and have a cup of strawberries and a medium apple instead. I could even dip that apple in peanut butter and have protein as well And if I chose 2 eggs for breakfast with 1 slice of toast and butter, and a glass of 1% milk (~400 calories). Greek yogurt, apple, 1TB peanut butter, 1 cup strawberries for lunch (~350) and grilled chicken covered in salsa and a bit of mozzerella, steamed broccoli, and 1/2 cup rice for dinner (~500 calories, depending on size of chicken) I'm hitting 1250 calories and still meeting protein and fat needs. Remember, someone small enough to need a 1200 calorie diet doesn't necessarily need as much protein as someone eating 2000 calories.
Ah. Of course. I didn't mention that the default protein macro on MFP is significantly lower than what is typically recommended, especially if you lift.
Did you see the sample day I posted? (I know, the formatting was bad). 1093 calories and 78 g of protein. Not everybody needs 100g or more, especially if they are small enough to require a 1200 calorie diet. (I'm only 5' tall and I generally can lose on 1600 calories or more). If you lift, chances are 1200 calories are too low. So you can have your fruit and still get your fat and protein.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »There are enough sugar calories in fruit to make it potentially harder for those on lower calorie diets to meet desired macros, in which case someone not into bro-science might also opt to limit it.
Depends on macros, depends on whether you prefer getting carbs from starches, fruit, or some combination.
I'm not at all saying that anyone should eat fruit if they don't want to, but objecting to the claim that it's BETTER in general to cut it entirely out (OP did not say that, of course, but another poster has).
True, but that's if macros really matter to that person. Obviously someone on keto isn't that concerned about meeting carb macros.There are enough sugar calories in fruit to make it potentially harder for those on lower calorie diets to meet desired macros, in which case someone not into bro-science might also opt to limit it.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I was referring to it possibly crowding out protein and/or fat on e.g. a sub-1300 calorie day.
But it doesn't necessarily do that (depending on overall macro goals). I could cut out a few slices of bread and have a cup of strawberries and a medium apple instead. I could even dip that apple in peanut butter and have protein as well And if I chose 2 eggs for breakfast with 1 slice of toast and butter, and a glass of 1% milk (~400 calories). Greek yogurt, apple, 1TB peanut butter, 1 cup strawberries for lunch (~350) and grilled chicken covered in salsa and a bit of mozzerella, steamed broccoli, and 1/2 cup rice for dinner (~500 calories, depending on size of chicken) I'm hitting 1250 calories and still meeting protein and fat needs. Remember, someone small enough to need a 1200 calorie diet doesn't necessarily need as much protein as someone eating 2000 calories.
Ah. Of course. I didn't mention that the default protein macro on MFP is significantly lower than what is typically recommended, especially if you lift.
.. And personally I'd rather spend those 120 extra calories on a glass of wine than a banana if I have them. ;p
Why not? My example already had 2 servings of fruit. If you want a glass of wine instead of a banana, that's fine. Nobody is saying that you HAVE to put more fruit in when there's calories left (at least not on this thread...) Just that fruit, and the sugar that comes from fruit, is okay in a weight loss diet. It doesn't have to displace protein or fat macros.1 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »ETA:
"Dr. Josh Axe, DNM, DC, CNS is a certified doctor of natural medicine, doctor of chiropractic and clinical nutritionist with a passion to help people get healthy by using food as medicine."
https://draxe.com/about-dr-josh-axe/
In other words, another quack with books/products to sell. A naturopath isn't an MD, and a clinical nutritionist isn't a registered dietician. And anybody who claims that a ketogenic diet can cure cancer is a quack of the highest order IMO.
I wouldn't go to a podiatrist for a vasectomy, and I wouldn't go to a chiropractor for diet advice. Especially a chiropractor who's also a naturopath making unsubstantiated claims about how diets relate to your health.
ETA: Here's a bit of what actual, real science (not naturopathic/chiropractic woo) has to say about the role of keto diets in cancer treatment:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28353094?dopt=Abstract
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/283668109 -
Dietary changes for cancer treatment would be an interesting topic for the debate section...
No, it really wouldn't. Actually, any "food as medicine" subject is best left between someone and their doctor. Any other discussion devolves into something that has overtones caught between the fervency of belief on one hand and the ugliness of victim blaming on the other and is best left never having happened.9 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »There are enough sugar calories in fruit to make it potentially harder for those on lower calorie diets to meet desired macros, in which case someone not into bro-science might also opt to limit it.
Depends on macros, depends on whether you prefer getting carbs from starches, fruit, or some combination.
I'm not at all saying that anyone should eat fruit if they don't want to, but objecting to the claim that it's BETTER in general to cut it entirely out (OP did not say that, of course, but another poster has).
True, but that's if macros really matter to that person. Obviously someone on keto isn't that concerned about meeting carb macros.There are enough sugar calories in fruit to make it potentially harder for those on lower calorie diets to meet desired macros, in which case someone not into bro-science might also opt to limit it.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I was referring to it possibly crowding out protein and/or fat on e.g. a sub-1300 calorie day.
But it doesn't necessarily do that (depending on overall macro goals). I could cut out a few slices of bread and have a cup of strawberries and a medium apple instead. I could even dip that apple in peanut butter and have protein as well And if I chose 2 eggs for breakfast with 1 slice of toast and butter, and a glass of 1% milk (~400 calories). Greek yogurt, apple, 1TB peanut butter, 1 cup strawberries for lunch (~350) and grilled chicken covered in salsa and a bit of mozzerella, steamed broccoli, and 1/2 cup rice for dinner (~500 calories, depending on size of chicken) I'm hitting 1250 calories and still meeting protein and fat needs. Remember, someone small enough to need a 1200 calorie diet doesn't necessarily need as much protein as someone eating 2000 calories.
Ah. Of course. I didn't mention that the default protein macro on MFP is significantly lower than what is typically recommended, especially if you lift.
I aimed for 100 g when I was doing 1250 (which is more than 1 g per lb of LBM for me, so I think plenty of protein) and it was EASY to hit that and eat fruit (and I was lowish carb). Again, as I noted before, you just substitute fruit for other carbs, like starches. I see no reason why eating potatoes or rice or oats instead of apples would be inherently better in a diet, so if one LIKES fruit better (as I usually do), eating it in place of at least some of the starches you'd otherwise eat is fine. Or if one is more carb-centric than me, you can eat plenty of fat (the amount of fat most need is not hard to get so long as one is focusing on sources of the essential fats), cut some of the extras that come with cheese or higher fat cuts of meat (for example, I mostly ate chicken with skin on, you could cut that) and fit it more starches and fruit. It's just all about what one wants to make room for -- fruit is not especially high calorie so that it's tough to do.1 -
GlassslippersAndFairyDust wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »robertw486 wrote: »GlassslippersAndFairyDust wrote: »I find when I cut refined sugar out of my diet my cravings completely disappear. I never cut out fruits. I don't eat ketchup (before anyone jumps on that wagon). So IMHO it does make a difference. Don't know the science.....don't care. Just know it works for me. Also, I have an easier time shedding belly fat without refined sugar. Don't know the science, don't care....works for me. Do you and if it makes you crave less, lose more....whatever....just do you.
If only more people here took the approach of suggesting and OP make their own decisions and give their views a try, me might have less "but why cut out (whatever) threads"!
Especially if one, like the poster you quoted, misreads the OP to be about exactly what one has decided is helpful for oneself!
I didn't notice anyone telling OP that he absolutely must not cut out sugars from vegetables, but simply reminding him that it's not just cutting out fruit and sweets and lattes, that sugar is in a LOT of whole foods. Personally, if he wants to, whatever.As for all the comments from other posters about hidden sugars, logging and label reading is a great way to find them.
Gosh, just like all the people saying it's not hidden, it's on the label were recommending -- reading labels is always a good idea, and if you log it's impossible to claim hidden sugar (and then check out the various sources if one wishes -- that is what I do if surprised, but so far it's rare, the most surprising things to me have been some whole foods like leeks and blueberries (amount, not that they had it), nothing with added sugar, but then I've pretty much always read labels).BBQ sauce is one thing in particular where I wish there were more options lower in sugar.
You can make your own, although w/o sugar of any sort it might not count as real BBQ sauce under any of the standard styles (I am not savvy enough about BBQ to know if that's so). But again I think most people would expect a BBQ sauce to have some sugar, and the amount of sugar added varies quite a bit (I know this, because recently I was wondering if any might fit into my current macros and I looked through a bunch of different ones at Plum Market -- some weren't all that high, but as I expected none would work for me currently, bought some salsa for lazy nights when I don't want to make my own sauce, instead--one of the Frontera ones, 2 TBSP and 2 g carbs, <1 g sugar).
I'm the one he quoted and the one you seem to take issue with. If YOU read the OP's post, he stated that he wanted to know the effects of people being sugar free and that's what I shared with him. Don't know why that offended you so....but that's your issue not mine.
You did not share that with him. You missed that he was not talking about cutting out only added sugar, but all sugar, and that he did not speak of issues with cravings.
You then suggested -- inaccurately -- that others were telling him that he should not cut out added sugar, which was false and had nothing to do with anything. It was the misrepresentation of what others had been saying and the false suggestion that we were telling him what to do that annoyed me, in case you are interested.1 -
The fact that people will even mention cancer and food as treatment concerns me.
Unless you're an oncologist with that persons file in front of you, you should not be providing "advice"
Every case in very different and not eating fruit is never the treatment.12
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
- 934 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions