how much carbs is too much carbs? - dietary help
Replies
-
RAD_Fitness wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Why is everyone so negative here? Most of us are not registered dietitians and all of the information we choose to believe is done through personal research. I never claimed to know everything, I posted on my experience and what I know works for me. If whatever you're doing works for you, then keep doing it! Don't change it. But if someone asks for advice, all I can do is speak through my experience. What you believe is your prerogative but the way to influence others is not to put them down.
While I do disagree with many of you, you also don't see me on here slamming each one of you for research papers to back up your claims.
You all got your information from one source or another and repetition is powerful. The point of my first post was to let others know there are other options to explore, not that I am right.
Hope that clears some things up, I never meant to ruffle any feathers here.
Here's the thing (from my point of view): advice from the point of view of your experience is very different than categorical claims of fact (like the ones you have made above).
"Here's how a keto diet helped me . . . " versus "No, you can't lose weight if you're eating too many carbohydrates . . . " . . . do you see the difference between those two?
I, for example, have experience losing weight as a vegan eating a diet that is higher in carbohydrates. If someone is interested, I'm always happy to share my experiences. But I would never translate my success into thinking that everyone has to lose weight as a vegan eating higher carbohydrate or that it's somehow superior to other eating patterns that result in weight loss.
All I recommended was lowering carbs and increasing fats and proteins. I did not once say you can ONLY lose weight restricting carbohydrates. I apologize if it came off that way but it wasn't my intention. better be careful to post my experience here because if the belief isn't popular and widely accepted, it's bound to get backlash.
You didn't get backlash over an unpopular belief. You got backlash specifically over the claim of "glycogen overflow, insulin spike, fat storage". It is just not accurate in any way and has no scientific basis. People do that kind of thing here all the time and those less well read, might buy into it.
Post your personal experience all you want. If you are going to make claims about physiology, or other scientific claims, they will be challenged if not accurate. That is reasonable and it doesn't make anyone negative. It makes them accurate and interested in truth. Take it as a healthy, if uncomfortable, learning experience.
So then what happens when glycogen stores are filled and excess glucose is in your blood? Insulin rises. And then fat is stored... it's not inaccurate
In a calorie deficit? No...not accurate...there is no net fat storage in a calorie deficit...10 -
RAD_Fitness wrote: »Now everyone wants to get back on topic? Haha nice guys. Basic physiology
https://examine.com/nutrition/how-are-carbohydrates-converted-into-fat-deposits/
The topic is helping OP understand what role carbohydrates play in her weight loss.
I'm unclear why this isn't okay with you.6 -
RAD_Fitness wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »RAD_Fitness wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Why is everyone so negative here? Most of us are not registered dietitians and all of the information we choose to believe is done through personal research. I never claimed to know everything, I posted on my experience and what I know works for me. If whatever you're doing works for you, then keep doing it! Don't change it. But if someone asks for advice, all I can do is speak through my experience. What you believe is your prerogative but the way to influence others is not to put them down.
While I do disagree with many of you, you also don't see me on here slamming each one of you for research papers to back up your claims.
You all got your information from one source or another and repetition is powerful. The point of my first post was to let others know there are other options to explore, not that I am right.
Hope that clears some things up, I never meant to ruffle any feathers here.
Here's the thing (from my point of view): advice from the point of view of your experience is very different than categorical claims of fact (like the ones you have made above).
"Here's how a keto diet helped me . . . " versus "No, you can't lose weight if you're eating too many carbohydrates . . . " . . . do you see the difference between those two?
I, for example, have experience losing weight as a vegan eating a diet that is higher in carbohydrates. If someone is interested, I'm always happy to share my experiences. But I would never translate my success into thinking that everyone has to lose weight as a vegan eating higher carbohydrate or that it's somehow superior to other eating patterns that result in weight loss.
All I recommended was lowering carbs and increasing fats and proteins. I did not once say you can ONLY lose weight restricting carbohydrates. I apologize if it came off that way but it wasn't my intention. better be careful to post my experience here because if the belief isn't popular and widely accepted, it's bound to get backlash.
You didn't get backlash over an unpopular belief. You got backlash specifically over the claim of "glycogen overflow, insulin spike, fat storage". It is just not accurate in any way and has no scientific basis. People do that kind of thing here all the time and those less well read, might buy into it.
Post your personal experience all you want. If you are going to make claims about physiology, or other scientific claims, they will be challenged if not accurate. That is reasonable and it doesn't make anyone negative. It makes them accurate and interested in truth. Take it as a healthy, if uncomfortable, learning experience.
So then what happens when glycogen stores are filled and excess glucose is in your blood? Insulin rises. And then fat is stored... it's not inaccurate
And people don't care about this outside of the context of net fat storage, which is entirely dependent on energy balance, and has nothing to do with any of this. You're muddying the waters.
No I am defending the person who has been attacked for putting up "inaccurate information" when it wasn't
Bringing up irrelevant (and incorrect) side arguments just to WK somebody isn't productive or helpful to the OP in any way.9 -
janejellyroll wrote: »RAD_Fitness wrote: »Now everyone wants to get back on topic? Haha nice guys. Basic physiology
https://examine.com/nutrition/how-are-carbohydrates-converted-into-fat-deposits/
The topic is helping OP understand what role carbohydrates play in her weight loss.
I'm unclear why this isn't okay with you.
He likes being outrageous. He recently defended the master cleanse.10 -
Yes, OP is having too much carbohydrates and not enough protein10
-
RAD_Fitness wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »RAD_Fitness wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Why is everyone so negative here? Most of us are not registered dietitians and all of the information we choose to believe is done through personal research. I never claimed to know everything, I posted on my experience and what I know works for me. If whatever you're doing works for you, then keep doing it! Don't change it. But if someone asks for advice, all I can do is speak through my experience. What you believe is your prerogative but the way to influence others is not to put them down.
While I do disagree with many of you, you also don't see me on here slamming each one of you for research papers to back up your claims.
You all got your information from one source or another and repetition is powerful. The point of my first post was to let others know there are other options to explore, not that I am right.
Hope that clears some things up, I never meant to ruffle any feathers here.
Here's the thing (from my point of view): advice from the point of view of your experience is very different than categorical claims of fact (like the ones you have made above).
"Here's how a keto diet helped me . . . " versus "No, you can't lose weight if you're eating too many carbohydrates . . . " . . . do you see the difference between those two?
I, for example, have experience losing weight as a vegan eating a diet that is higher in carbohydrates. If someone is interested, I'm always happy to share my experiences. But I would never translate my success into thinking that everyone has to lose weight as a vegan eating higher carbohydrate or that it's somehow superior to other eating patterns that result in weight loss.
All I recommended was lowering carbs and increasing fats and proteins. I did not once say you can ONLY lose weight restricting carbohydrates. I apologize if it came off that way but it wasn't my intention. better be careful to post my experience here because if the belief isn't popular and widely accepted, it's bound to get backlash.
You didn't get backlash over an unpopular belief. You got backlash specifically over the claim of "glycogen overflow, insulin spike, fat storage". It is just not accurate in any way and has no scientific basis. People do that kind of thing here all the time and those less well read, might buy into it.
Post your personal experience all you want. If you are going to make claims about physiology, or other scientific claims, they will be challenged if not accurate. That is reasonable and it doesn't make anyone negative. It makes them accurate and interested in truth. Take it as a healthy, if uncomfortable, learning experience.
So then what happens when glycogen stores are filled and excess glucose is in your blood? Insulin rises. And then fat is stored... it's not inaccurate
And people don't care about this outside of the context of net fat storage, which is entirely dependent on energy balance, and has nothing to do with any of this. You're muddying the waters.
No I am defending the person who has been attacked for putting up "inaccurate information" when it wasn't
Bringing up irrelevant (and incorrect) side arguments just to WK somebody isn't productive or helpful to the OP in any way.
Please tell me what was incorrect? I've shown the proof6 -
RAD_Fitness wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »RAD_Fitness wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Why is everyone so negative here? Most of us are not registered dietitians and all of the information we choose to believe is done through personal research. I never claimed to know everything, I posted on my experience and what I know works for me. If whatever you're doing works for you, then keep doing it! Don't change it. But if someone asks for advice, all I can do is speak through my experience. What you believe is your prerogative but the way to influence others is not to put them down.
While I do disagree with many of you, you also don't see me on here slamming each one of you for research papers to back up your claims.
You all got your information from one source or another and repetition is powerful. The point of my first post was to let others know there are other options to explore, not that I am right.
Hope that clears some things up, I never meant to ruffle any feathers here.
Here's the thing (from my point of view): advice from the point of view of your experience is very different than categorical claims of fact (like the ones you have made above).
"Here's how a keto diet helped me . . . " versus "No, you can't lose weight if you're eating too many carbohydrates . . . " . . . do you see the difference between those two?
I, for example, have experience losing weight as a vegan eating a diet that is higher in carbohydrates. If someone is interested, I'm always happy to share my experiences. But I would never translate my success into thinking that everyone has to lose weight as a vegan eating higher carbohydrate or that it's somehow superior to other eating patterns that result in weight loss.
All I recommended was lowering carbs and increasing fats and proteins. I did not once say you can ONLY lose weight restricting carbohydrates. I apologize if it came off that way but it wasn't my intention. better be careful to post my experience here because if the belief isn't popular and widely accepted, it's bound to get backlash.
You didn't get backlash over an unpopular belief. You got backlash specifically over the claim of "glycogen overflow, insulin spike, fat storage". It is just not accurate in any way and has no scientific basis. People do that kind of thing here all the time and those less well read, might buy into it.
Post your personal experience all you want. If you are going to make claims about physiology, or other scientific claims, they will be challenged if not accurate. That is reasonable and it doesn't make anyone negative. It makes them accurate and interested in truth. Take it as a healthy, if uncomfortable, learning experience.
So then what happens when glycogen stores are filled and excess glucose is in your blood? Insulin rises. And then fat is stored... it's not inaccurate
And people don't care about this outside of the context of net fat storage, which is entirely dependent on energy balance, and has nothing to do with any of this. You're muddying the waters.
No I am defending the person who has been attacked for putting up "inaccurate information" when it wasn't
Are you aware how people like Gary Taubes and Robert Lustig sell the "science" of low carbing?
They perpetuate the idea of NET fat storage from carbohydrates irrespective of energy balance. Full stop. When someone comes on here and shares what they've learned about the carbohydrate/insulin hypothesis, they are presupposing that assumption, because that's what they think.
Congratulations, you're defending something you think you're not.15 -
RAD_Fitness wrote: »RAD_Fitness wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »RAD_Fitness wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Why is everyone so negative here? Most of us are not registered dietitians and all of the information we choose to believe is done through personal research. I never claimed to know everything, I posted on my experience and what I know works for me. If whatever you're doing works for you, then keep doing it! Don't change it. But if someone asks for advice, all I can do is speak through my experience. What you believe is your prerogative but the way to influence others is not to put them down.
While I do disagree with many of you, you also don't see me on here slamming each one of you for research papers to back up your claims.
You all got your information from one source or another and repetition is powerful. The point of my first post was to let others know there are other options to explore, not that I am right.
Hope that clears some things up, I never meant to ruffle any feathers here.
Here's the thing (from my point of view): advice from the point of view of your experience is very different than categorical claims of fact (like the ones you have made above).
"Here's how a keto diet helped me . . . " versus "No, you can't lose weight if you're eating too many carbohydrates . . . " . . . do you see the difference between those two?
I, for example, have experience losing weight as a vegan eating a diet that is higher in carbohydrates. If someone is interested, I'm always happy to share my experiences. But I would never translate my success into thinking that everyone has to lose weight as a vegan eating higher carbohydrate or that it's somehow superior to other eating patterns that result in weight loss.
All I recommended was lowering carbs and increasing fats and proteins. I did not once say you can ONLY lose weight restricting carbohydrates. I apologize if it came off that way but it wasn't my intention. better be careful to post my experience here because if the belief isn't popular and widely accepted, it's bound to get backlash.
You didn't get backlash over an unpopular belief. You got backlash specifically over the claim of "glycogen overflow, insulin spike, fat storage". It is just not accurate in any way and has no scientific basis. People do that kind of thing here all the time and those less well read, might buy into it.
Post your personal experience all you want. If you are going to make claims about physiology, or other scientific claims, they will be challenged if not accurate. That is reasonable and it doesn't make anyone negative. It makes them accurate and interested in truth. Take it as a healthy, if uncomfortable, learning experience.
So then what happens when glycogen stores are filled and excess glucose is in your blood? Insulin rises. And then fat is stored... it's not inaccurate
And people don't care about this outside of the context of net fat storage, which is entirely dependent on energy balance, and has nothing to do with any of this. You're muddying the waters.
No I am defending the person who has been attacked for putting up "inaccurate information" when it wasn't
Bringing up irrelevant (and incorrect) side arguments just to WK somebody isn't productive or helpful to the OP in any way.
Please tell me what was incorrect? I've shown the proof
Already been addressed. Several times, by several people. No need to belabor the point any further.6 -
RAD_Fitness wrote: »Yes, OP is having too much carbohydrates and not enough protein
Making that determination on the basis of a single day (one that the OP says wasn't "very good," as in possibly not completely representational of how she usually eats) seems hasty.8 -
When I experimented with being vegetarian 4 days per week and eating less meat in general, I was typically around 60-65% carb...I'm surprised I've lived to tell the tale...
Oh...I inadvertently lost weight too because one way or another I put myself into a calorie deficit...12 -
RAD_Fitness wrote: »RAD_Fitness wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »RAD_Fitness wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Why is everyone so negative here? Most of us are not registered dietitians and all of the information we choose to believe is done through personal research. I never claimed to know everything, I posted on my experience and what I know works for me. If whatever you're doing works for you, then keep doing it! Don't change it. But if someone asks for advice, all I can do is speak through my experience. What you believe is your prerogative but the way to influence others is not to put them down.
While I do disagree with many of you, you also don't see me on here slamming each one of you for research papers to back up your claims.
You all got your information from one source or another and repetition is powerful. The point of my first post was to let others know there are other options to explore, not that I am right.
Hope that clears some things up, I never meant to ruffle any feathers here.
Here's the thing (from my point of view): advice from the point of view of your experience is very different than categorical claims of fact (like the ones you have made above).
"Here's how a keto diet helped me . . . " versus "No, you can't lose weight if you're eating too many carbohydrates . . . " . . . do you see the difference between those two?
I, for example, have experience losing weight as a vegan eating a diet that is higher in carbohydrates. If someone is interested, I'm always happy to share my experiences. But I would never translate my success into thinking that everyone has to lose weight as a vegan eating higher carbohydrate or that it's somehow superior to other eating patterns that result in weight loss.
All I recommended was lowering carbs and increasing fats and proteins. I did not once say you can ONLY lose weight restricting carbohydrates. I apologize if it came off that way but it wasn't my intention. better be careful to post my experience here because if the belief isn't popular and widely accepted, it's bound to get backlash.
You didn't get backlash over an unpopular belief. You got backlash specifically over the claim of "glycogen overflow, insulin spike, fat storage". It is just not accurate in any way and has no scientific basis. People do that kind of thing here all the time and those less well read, might buy into it.
Post your personal experience all you want. If you are going to make claims about physiology, or other scientific claims, they will be challenged if not accurate. That is reasonable and it doesn't make anyone negative. It makes them accurate and interested in truth. Take it as a healthy, if uncomfortable, learning experience.
So then what happens when glycogen stores are filled and excess glucose is in your blood? Insulin rises. And then fat is stored... it's not inaccurate
And people don't care about this outside of the context of net fat storage, which is entirely dependent on energy balance, and has nothing to do with any of this. You're muddying the waters.
No I am defending the person who has been attacked for putting up "inaccurate information" when it wasn't
Bringing up irrelevant (and incorrect) side arguments just to WK somebody isn't productive or helpful to the OP in any way.
Please tell me what was incorrect? I've shown the proof
Already been addressed. Several times, by several people. No need to belabor the point any further.
Haha you're running away from it. What did the person saythat was said to be "inaccurate information"? That when glycogen stores are filled and there is excess glucose in the blood that there will be fat storage. Is that incorrect?
I know you didn't say it was inaccurate initially but you began to respond to me when I was responding to him so I assumed you agreed with him. If you do not agree with him then never mind8 -
janejellyroll wrote: »RAD_Fitness wrote: »Yes, OP is having too much carbohydrates and not enough protein
Making that determination on the basis of a single day (one that the OP says wasn't "very good," as in possibly not completely representational of how she usually eats) seems hasty.
I was just thinking this. Also didn't see OP's stats anywhere, so that further blurs his/her needs. Also a few entries were questionable (egg had only calories listed, I think?).3 -
janejellyroll wrote: »RAD_Fitness wrote: »Yes, OP is having too much carbohydrates and not enough protein
Making that determination on the basis of a single day (one that the OP says wasn't "very good," as in possibly not completely representational of how she usually eats) seems hasty.
I was just thinking this. Also didn't see OP's stats anywhere, so that further blurs his/her needs. Also a few entries were questionable (egg had only calories listed, I think?).
Exactly, it's a bum entry for eggs (and who knows -- maybe some other things). Any professional who would base an opinion that someone wasn't eating enough protein based on a single day of faulty logging . . . not somebody I would have a lot of confidence in, even before they began telling me that I need to worry about a bit of temporary fat storage while I'm losing fat overall in a deficit.6 -
janejellyroll wrote: »RAD_Fitness wrote: »Yes, OP is having too much carbohydrates and not enough protein
Making that determination on the basis of a single day (one that the OP says wasn't "very good," as in possibly not completely representational of how she usually eats) seems hasty.
Sure I agree, but that's what she used as an example to determine if she's eating too many carbs, so I responded to that5 -
RAD_Fitness wrote: »RAD_Fitness wrote: »RAD_Fitness wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »RAD_Fitness wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Why is everyone so negative here? Most of us are not registered dietitians and all of the information we choose to believe is done through personal research. I never claimed to know everything, I posted on my experience and what I know works for me. If whatever you're doing works for you, then keep doing it! Don't change it. But if someone asks for advice, all I can do is speak through my experience. What you believe is your prerogative but the way to influence others is not to put them down.
While I do disagree with many of you, you also don't see me on here slamming each one of you for research papers to back up your claims.
You all got your information from one source or another and repetition is powerful. The point of my first post was to let others know there are other options to explore, not that I am right.
Hope that clears some things up, I never meant to ruffle any feathers here.
Here's the thing (from my point of view): advice from the point of view of your experience is very different than categorical claims of fact (like the ones you have made above).
"Here's how a keto diet helped me . . . " versus "No, you can't lose weight if you're eating too many carbohydrates . . . " . . . do you see the difference between those two?
I, for example, have experience losing weight as a vegan eating a diet that is higher in carbohydrates. If someone is interested, I'm always happy to share my experiences. But I would never translate my success into thinking that everyone has to lose weight as a vegan eating higher carbohydrate or that it's somehow superior to other eating patterns that result in weight loss.
All I recommended was lowering carbs and increasing fats and proteins. I did not once say you can ONLY lose weight restricting carbohydrates. I apologize if it came off that way but it wasn't my intention. better be careful to post my experience here because if the belief isn't popular and widely accepted, it's bound to get backlash.
You didn't get backlash over an unpopular belief. You got backlash specifically over the claim of "glycogen overflow, insulin spike, fat storage". It is just not accurate in any way and has no scientific basis. People do that kind of thing here all the time and those less well read, might buy into it.
Post your personal experience all you want. If you are going to make claims about physiology, or other scientific claims, they will be challenged if not accurate. That is reasonable and it doesn't make anyone negative. It makes them accurate and interested in truth. Take it as a healthy, if uncomfortable, learning experience.
So then what happens when glycogen stores are filled and excess glucose is in your blood? Insulin rises. And then fat is stored... it's not inaccurate
And people don't care about this outside of the context of net fat storage, which is entirely dependent on energy balance, and has nothing to do with any of this. You're muddying the waters.
No I am defending the person who has been attacked for putting up "inaccurate information" when it wasn't
Bringing up irrelevant (and incorrect) side arguments just to WK somebody isn't productive or helpful to the OP in any way.
Please tell me what was incorrect? I've shown the proof
Already been addressed. Several times, by several people. No need to belabor the point any further.
Haha you're running away from it. What did the person saythat was said to be "inaccurate information"? That when glycogen stores are filled and there is excess glucose in the blood that there will be fat storage. Is that incorrect?
I know you didn't say it was inaccurate initially but you began to respond to me when I was responding to him so I assumed you agreed with him. If you do not agree with him then never mind
"Fat storage mode" doesn't matter outside of the context of energy balance.
That is what is misinformation, not that there is fat storage happening.
Do you get it now?8 -
Regardless of the carbs it looks like you are not getting enough protein. Various research differs on the exact number but there's good evidence that getting enough protein while in a caloric deficit is protective of your muscle mass. If you eat a larger percentage of protein, your carbs will automatically go down.0
-
Why don't you explain it and cite your sources?
I'm pretty sure this is what this person was getting at. This is an overview, I'm sure we all understand that this isn't a complete text on the human metabolism.
Your body uses three types of molecules for fuel: glucose, alcohol, and ketones. Right? Your body uses them in that order.
The glucose in your blood is used for immediate energy and it is stored in your muscle as glycogen. So, if your glycogen stores are full any glucose in your blood not used immediately as energy is in excess. I think that's what this person meant by "glycogen overflow".
Glucose also happens to be the only of the three molecules to trigger an insulin response by which I mean it causes your pancreas to release the enzyme insulin. Insulin governs many things, one of them is that it triggers your cells to store glucose, including fat cells, "fat storage". "Insulin spike"
Now, most carbohydrates are immediately turned into glucose when digested by people. So, the equation of carbs with blood glucose is not unreasonable. If you don't have carbs in your diet, you won't have a lot of glucose in your blood. You are going to have a hard time acquiring an excess of glucose in your blood without carbs.
Do you think that what I've said is wildly inaccurate? Do you need sources for that?
I wouldn't say this person's claims are "accurate" but calling them "not accurate in any way" isn't reasonable and it is negative.
5 -
RAD_Fitness wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »RAD_Fitness wrote: »Yes, OP is having too much carbohydrates and not enough protein
Making that determination on the basis of a single day (one that the OP says wasn't "very good," as in possibly not completely representational of how she usually eats) seems hasty.
Sure I agree, but that's what she used as an example to determine if she's eating too many carbs, so I responded to that
Here's the thing -- you aren't required to form a "yes" or "no" opinion when someone offers you insufficient information. That you feel somehow required to come to a conclusion when we don't know enough isn't a good sign.
Can you imagine if other professionals did this? What if I asked my doctor if my weird shaped mole was cancer and he didn't know but just said yes because, who knows, it could be? This isn't how professionals (or even caring non-professionals) operate. When you don't have enough information to form a valid conclusion, why not just admit it?6 -
janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »RAD_Fitness wrote: »Yes, OP is having too much carbohydrates and not enough protein
Making that determination on the basis of a single day (one that the OP says wasn't "very good," as in possibly not completely representational of how she usually eats) seems hasty.
I was just thinking this. Also didn't see OP's stats anywhere, so that further blurs his/her needs. Also a few entries were questionable (egg had only calories listed, I think?).
Exactly, it's a bum entry for eggs (and who knows -- maybe some other things). Any professional who would base an opinion that someone wasn't eating enough protein based on a single day of faulty logging . . . not somebody I would have a lot of confidence in, even before they began telling me that I need to worry about a bit of temporary fat storage while I'm losing fat overall in a deficit.
When did I say it was something she should worry about?
Just proving that it's true and that it would be gone by the next day. Some people come on here and give valid true information in the wrong context and everyone decides to attack them and tell them everything they've said is wrong. Everything that person said was true but the context they used made it seem dramatic.6 -
RAD_Fitness wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »RAD_Fitness wrote: »Yes, OP is having too much carbohydrates and not enough protein
Making that determination on the basis of a single day (one that the OP says wasn't "very good," as in possibly not completely representational of how she usually eats) seems hasty.
I was just thinking this. Also didn't see OP's stats anywhere, so that further blurs his/her needs. Also a few entries were questionable (egg had only calories listed, I think?).
Exactly, it's a bum entry for eggs (and who knows -- maybe some other things). Any professional who would base an opinion that someone wasn't eating enough protein based on a single day of faulty logging . . . not somebody I would have a lot of confidence in, even before they began telling me that I need to worry about a bit of temporary fat storage while I'm losing fat overall in a deficit.
When did I say it was something she should worry about?
Just proving that it's true and that it would be gone by the next day. Some people come on here and give valid true information in the wrong context and everyone decides to attack them and tell them everything they've said is wrong. Everything that person said was true but the context they used made it seem dramatic.
So you're saying it's not relevant to the OP? Okay. Again, I'm really unclear what you're trying to accomplish here.5 -
nokanjaijo wrote: »Why don't you explain it and cite your sources?
I'm pretty sure this is what this person was getting at. This is an overview, I'm sure we all understand that this isn't a complete text on the human metabolism.
Your body uses three types of molecules for fuel: glucose, alcohol, and ketones. Right? Your body uses them in that order.
The glucose in your blood is used for immediate energy and it is stored in your muscle as glycogen. So, if your glycogen stores are full any glucose in your blood not used immediately as energy is in excess. I think that's what this person meant by "glycogen overflow".
Glucose also happens to be the only of the three molecules to trigger an insulin response by which I mean it causes your pancreas to release the enzyme insulin. Insulin governs many things, one of them is that it triggers your cells to store glucose, including fat cells, "fat storage". "Insulin spike"
Now, most carbohydrates are immediately turned into glucose when digested by people. So, the equation of carbs with blood glucose is not unreasonable. If you don't have carbs in your diet, you won't have a lot of glucose in your blood. You are going to have a hard time acquiring an excess of glucose in your blood without carbs.
Do you think that what I've said is wildly inaccurate? Do you need sources for that?
I wouldn't say this person's claims are "accurate" but calling them "not accurate in any way" isn't reasonable and it is negative.
This is what I should have posted in the first place.0 -
Incorrect. The body regards alcohol as a poison. It's not used as fuel per se, oxidation of alcohol takes priority over all other macronutrients. Fat is used as fuel also, as is protein (although the conversion of protein is very inefficient).nokanjaijo wrote: »Your body uses three types of molecules for fuel: glucose, alcohol, and ketones. Right? Your body uses them in that order.
Also incorrect. Protein is just as insulogenic as carbohydrates.nokanjaijo wrote: »Glucose also happens to be the only of the three molecules to trigger an insulin response by which I mean it causes your pancreas to release the enzyme insulin. Insulin governs many things, one of them is that it triggers your cells to store glucose, including fat cells, "fat storage". "Insulin spike"
http://weightology.net/insulin-an-undeserved-bad-reputation/
And it still would have been incorrect.This is what I should have posted in the first place.16 -
janejellyroll wrote: »RAD_Fitness wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »RAD_Fitness wrote: »Yes, OP is having too much carbohydrates and not enough protein
Making that determination on the basis of a single day (one that the OP says wasn't "very good," as in possibly not completely representational of how she usually eats) seems hasty.
I was just thinking this. Also didn't see OP's stats anywhere, so that further blurs his/her needs. Also a few entries were questionable (egg had only calories listed, I think?).
Exactly, it's a bum entry for eggs (and who knows -- maybe some other things). Any professional who would base an opinion that someone wasn't eating enough protein based on a single day of faulty logging . . . not somebody I would have a lot of confidence in, even before they began telling me that I need to worry about a bit of temporary fat storage while I'm losing fat overall in a deficit.
When did I say it was something she should worry about?
Just proving that it's true and that it would be gone by the next day. Some people come on here and give valid true information in the wrong context and everyone decides to attack them and tell them everything they've said is wrong. Everything that person said was true but the context they used made it seem dramatic.
So you're saying it's not relevant to the OP? Okay. Again, I'm really unclear what you're trying to accomplish here.
No worries, I was having a back and forth with @mmapags, so I shall wait until he returns1 -
Incorrect. The body regards alcohol as a poison. It's not used as fuel per se, oxidation of alcohol takes priority over all other macronutrients. Fat is used as fuel also, as is protein (although the conversion of protein is very inefficient).nokanjaijo wrote: »Your body uses three types of molecules for fuel: glucose, alcohol, and ketones. Right? Your body uses them in that order.
Also incorrect. Protein is just as insulogenic as carbohydrates.nokanjaijo wrote: »Glucose also happens to be the only of the three molecules to trigger an insulin response by which I mean it causes your pancreas to release the enzyme insulin. Insulin governs many things, one of them is that it triggers your cells to store glucose, including fat cells, "fat storage". "Insulin spike"
And it still would have been incorrect.This is what I should have posted in the first place.
Protein and fat both get converted to glucose... so you guys are in agreement.
Also alcohol is used as a fuel source. Maybe you can cite a source showing it's not haha
ETA: I mean dietary fat, not body fat when I mentioned "fat" above5 -
My4happykids wrote: »@VintageFeline What happens when I eat refined carbs and animal sourced protein? In my observations Bloating and bad digestion. I can't say it would happen for everyone thus the disclaimer and belief statement.
You made an assertion that you believe this to be true for everyone. It's not. I eat starchy carbs of all kinds of colours with every meal pretty much. Nothing in my digestive processes to complain about.7 -
Incorrect. The body regards alcohol as a poison. It's not used as fuel per se, oxidation of alcohol takes priority over all other macronutrients. Fat is used as fuel also, as is protein (although the conversion of protein is very inefficient).nokanjaijo wrote: »Your body uses three types of molecules for fuel: glucose, alcohol, and ketones. Right? Your body uses them in that order.
Also incorrect. Protein is just as insulogenic as carbohydrates.nokanjaijo wrote: »Glucose also happens to be the only of the three molecules to trigger an insulin response by which I mean it causes your pancreas to release the enzyme insulin. Insulin governs many things, one of them is that it triggers your cells to store glucose, including fat cells, "fat storage". "Insulin spike"
And it still would have been incorrect.This is what I should have posted in the first place.
I'm sorry, what are your STATS? Are you healthy? What's your BF? Do you have energy? How's your skin? Your mental health? Should I wake up and eat what you eat and train with you tomorrow?
You find ONE thing wrong with ANY statement and state why it's incorrect. Do you really want to be THAT person?
Isn't it more encouraging to uplift? Aren't there better ways to have a discussion and disagree?
You don't have to agree with EVERYTHING someone says and we can't be 100% accurate at all times. Lighten up--you'll increase your cortisol working yourself up to prove others wrong which WILL damper your weight loss efforts.
Need an article on that too?16 -
Incorrect. The body regards alcohol as a poison. It's not used as fuel per se, oxidation of alcohol takes priority over all other macronutrients. Fat is used as fuel also, as is protein (although the conversion of protein is very inefficient).nokanjaijo wrote: »Your body uses three types of molecules for fuel: glucose, alcohol, and ketones. Right? Your body uses them in that order.
Also incorrect. Protein is just as insulogenic as carbohydrates.nokanjaijo wrote: »Glucose also happens to be the only of the three molecules to trigger an insulin response by which I mean it causes your pancreas to release the enzyme insulin. Insulin governs many things, one of them is that it triggers your cells to store glucose, including fat cells, "fat storage". "Insulin spike"
http://weightology.net/insulin-an-undeserved-bad-reputation/
And it still would have been incorrect.This is what I should have posted in the first place.
This is good information, but it's incomplete and possibly confusing to someone unfamiliar with the subject. It's true that protein raises insulin levels - and in healthy people, fat also raises insulin levels. (In diabetics for some reason the fat response is lost or lessened).
However, protein and fat do not cause spikes in blood glucose. They do raise glucose, but gradually, and generally less than they raise insulin, which means that blood glucose may actually drop after consuming protein.
Insulin keeps blood glucose levels within range for healthy people, even if they consume large amounts of carbs. However, a substantial percentage of Americans have some insulin resistance.
None of this is particularly relevant to the OP, who has not mentioned any health problems.1 -
RAD_Fitness wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »RAD_Fitness wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »RAD_Fitness wrote: »Yes, OP is having too much carbohydrates and not enough protein
Making that determination on the basis of a single day (one that the OP says wasn't "very good," as in possibly not completely representational of how she usually eats) seems hasty.
I was just thinking this. Also didn't see OP's stats anywhere, so that further blurs his/her needs. Also a few entries were questionable (egg had only calories listed, I think?).
Exactly, it's a bum entry for eggs (and who knows -- maybe some other things). Any professional who would base an opinion that someone wasn't eating enough protein based on a single day of faulty logging . . . not somebody I would have a lot of confidence in, even before they began telling me that I need to worry about a bit of temporary fat storage while I'm losing fat overall in a deficit.
When did I say it was something she should worry about?
Just proving that it's true and that it would be gone by the next day. Some people come on here and give valid true information in the wrong context and everyone decides to attack them and tell them everything they've said is wrong. Everything that person said was true but the context they used made it seem dramatic.
So you're saying it's not relevant to the OP? Okay. Again, I'm really unclear what you're trying to accomplish here.
No worries, I was having a back and forth with @mmapags, so I shall wait until he returns
So, you want points because you proved that excess blood glucose gets stored as fat? The OP is in a calorie deficit, as others have pointed out. Net fat storage in a day = 0. Please teach us all exactly how glycogen overflow works and how it triggers insulin. As has been pointed out, the likelihood of glycogen reserves being filled to capacity is pretty much nil. If you've got studies on the physiological mechanism that shows glycogen "overflow" put 'em up.3 -
Not relevant to the thread, but since you asked I'll respond:
6'6", 205 lbs., 55 years old. Lost 65 pounds from my top weight of 270, which was two years ago this month.I'm sorry, what are your STATS?
Very. Good vitals, no illnesses/diseases and I take no meds for anything.Are you healthy?
Around 14-15%.What's your BF?
Tons. I lift weights 3x/week and do cardio 3-4x/week, along with various other activities.Do you have energy?
Tan, clean and awesome.How's your skin?
Perfect. Never had an issue my entire life despite spending over 30 years in a highly stressful career which results in PTSD for many in the field.Your mental health?
It probably wouldn't be a bad idea for you.Should I wake up and eat what you eat and train with you tomorrow?
Thanks for your concern, but I've been at my goal weight for several months and really not worried about anything damping my weight loss efforts.Lighten up--you'll increase your cortisol working yourself up to prove others wrong which WILL damper your weight loss efforts.22 -
just to add that what i showed in my food entry for that day isn't what i planned to eat for all of my weight loss journey. yesterday wasn't a great day in terms of food but it's only day 33
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions