Sugar in my Diet
Options
Replies
-
dmfitness324 wrote: »sugar has the same effect on your body as cocaine, so please try to stay under your daily amount. Sugar is also linked to obesity and heart disease. I challenge you all to 2 weeks free from processed sugar and limit yourself to only 1-2 fruits per day. I did this and you may find that you have more energy throughout the day, less cravings for sugar (remember it's addictive!) helps with weight loss
So eating a plus and an apricot and maybe some melon over the course of the day = snorting coke.
Fascinating. I don't think there are any credible sources supporting that rather dramatic claim, however.
For the record, I have cut out all added sugar (better word than processed, since the processing just makes it available without the attached plant source and doesn't change what it is) a couple of times, for about a month each, and I tried extremely low carb for a while (so low all my sugars were from vegetables, nuts, and dairy, other than de minimis amounts), and while I enjoyed both of those experiments well enough I didn't feel better than when I eat much higher sugar (as I often do in the summer due to lots of fruit) or even if I occasionally have chocolate or ice cream.
There's nothing credible suggesting that OP should be concerned if she's getting enough protein and fat and vegetables, feels good and is not hungry, and simply enjoys eating fruit with her extra calories. Indeed, many people find that eating more fruit tends to be filling for them and results in them eating a more healthful diet overall. (And some don't, and that's fine too, but I think it's wrong to preach what you like as what others should do or tell OP that her diet is like being a cocaine addict, LOL.)13 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »I liked tracking sugar because it showed me that there was a decent correlation between the amount of sugar I consumed and how hungry I felt on the same number of calories.
One benefit of tracking is you find out if this is true.
I increased carbs (mostly by adding back in fruit for summer, plus corn and potatoes and so on, all things I get in abundance in my farm box), and because of all the fruit my sugar is much higher than it had been, and so far absolutely no effect on my hunger level.
However, from tracking I have noticed other things that affect it.
OP doesn't suggest that eating fruit or having higher sugar is a problem for her hunger (and I suspect that at least a high portion of those who correlate sugar with hunger are not choosing higher fiber things, like fruit can be, as fiber also often helps with hunger). These is a reason I join those who advise tracking fiber (I do track sugar too since I don't care about sodium--and don't log salt I use in cooking so it's inaccurate anyway--and find sugar interesting).
Spot on as usual. In my case I wasn't eating more fruit/fibre on the days I was eating more sugar. I had been consuming a lot of sugar prior to logging and kept gravitating back to it in my food choices (sweetened yogurt, various bars etc).2 -
GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Do we really have to white knight people who fear monger?
This.
I admit that I often (as just now) respond as I'm reading so don't know or take into account how many responses the person has gotten, but if I have something to say in response I don't see why I should not say it just because someone else has responded also (unless they are the exact same points).
And I really think that if you are making an extreme claim like that the OP (also probably somewhat new) in eating 3 pieces of fruit in a day is doing the equivalent of snorting coke, well, there ought to be a high burden of accuracy.7 -
Most of the time if someone has already responded the way I would have wanted to, I simply mark their post as Insightful or Awesome rather than post pretty much the same thing myself.
However, sometimes between the time I decide to respond, am composing the post and actually get to hit the "Post Reply" button, I then see that, in the interim, multiple other members may have chimed in as well with responses that are similar to mine.
That's just life on the forums. 11 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »Do we really have to white knight people who fear monger?
This.
I admit that I often (as just now) respond as I'm reading so don't know or take into account how many responses the person has gotten, but if I have something to say in response I don't see why I should not say it just because someone else has responded also (unless they are the exact same points).
And I really think that if you are making an extreme claim like that the OP (also probably somewhat new) in eating 3 pieces of fruit in a day is doing the equivalent of snorting coke, well, there ought to be a high burden of accuracy.
Especially since, as you point out, some people find fruit to be very filling.
I'm another person for whom this is true.
I can give it up any time, honest.
6 -
Carlos_421 wrote: »dmfitness324 wrote: »sugar has the same effect on your body as cocaine, so please try to stay under your daily amount. Sugar is also linked to obesity and heart disease. I challenge you all to 2 weeks free from processed sugar and limit yourself to only 1-2 fruits per day. I did this and you may find that you have more energy throughout the day, less cravings for sugar (remember it's addictive!) helps with weight loss
This is among the most disgustingly ignorant claims I have ever heard/read.
If sugar has the same effect on your body as cocaine, you couldn't just quit eating it. Also, if sugar has the same effect on your body as cocaine, the sugar in fruit would as well (sugar in fruit is glucose, fructose and sucrose just like what is added to candy and other foods).
There is literally no evidence at all from any peer reviewed scientific studies that demonstrate that sugar is (or is even likely to be) addictive in humans. There are studies that show that starved mice would rather eat sugar than narcotics but that just shows that mice value survival more than a good trip.
When people say that sugar activates the same "pleasure center" of the brain as cocaine, they do so either not realizing (or deceptively omitting) that literally everything that is pleasurable does this. That includes kissing, petting puppies, running and taking a good pee.
The thing with cocaine is that it not only "activates" the same receptors, it hijacks them entirely so that they no longer work properly, thus pleasure becomes harder and harder to experience without it.
Sugar does not do this!
Have you ever been around an addict? Seen one? Talked to one?
I have. It's not pretty.
Comparing the devastation cocaine inflicts on a person to what happens when a person eats sugar (it's readily metabolized in a healthy manner and provides energy for physical and mental activity) is quite frankly offensive.
Agreed, and thank you @Carlos_4211 -
JustSomeEm wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »I am very careful with the amount of sugar I take in but the majority of my sugar comes from the apple and grapes I eat. Do I need to count this for the amount I am sugar I am allowed to take in?
Only if you are into counting what you eat. Counting is a good thing at least until intutive eating become a way of life for you after you count for a while and learn what foods fatten you up and what foods leads to natural weight loss/maintenance.
@krishnip best of success. Remember it is the Way Of Eating that works for you that is right for you. We are all different and do well often eating very different diets from another person that is being successful.
Specific foods don't fatten people up or lead to natural (whatever that means) weight loss/maintenance. The total amount of calories consumed is what is responsible for weight management.
OP you will find that without a medical reason to specifically limit sugars, the natural sugars in things like apples and grapes have no bearing on your actual results. MFP doesn't differentiate between natural and added sugars so while there are important guidelines to keep an eye on the total consumption of calories from added sugars, it often is a red herring to chase for weight loss. Many seasoned posters with no medical reason to restrict sugars ignore that metric in their diary or replace it with something more meaningful for them like fiber.
Not sure after all of this time why you do not grasp weight management is far more than calories consumed.
Not sure after all this time, why you do not have the most fundamental understanding of energy balance. It's honestly the most basic science out there.
I am also unsure why you make these arguments with people far more fit than you. And while fit =/= knowledge, it would suggest they are following basic principles to enable them to achieve those goals.
OP, it all comes down to energy balance for weight loss. What is important is eating foods to allow you to achieve you goals, improve satiety to help it become a sustainable diet, and address any medical needs. The current dogma of the need to cut sugar/carbs is just that.. dogma. It's no different than the old dogma that fats where bad. Fruits are fantastic for you. They are low in calories, high in fiber, vitamins and minerals and have antioxidants. That increases the amount of volume you can eat, provides sustainable energy and will help keep you body health.
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/95/4/989
Sure it is about energy balance. Normally in the animal kingdom energy balance is controlled by hormones not manual math if food choices are not limited.
Your link is not currently working on my computer.
100% the deadlier version of one of my past cats, Dave. My fault, I fed him too much. And he was a piggy.
To confirm. Animals get fat too. In fact, along with a human obesity epidemic, there is a pet one too.
My parents have an overweight diabetic cat... and he didn't eat sugar... true story.
The amount of carbohydrates in cat food can (for some brands, especially dry foods) be pretty high. If the cat was over-eating all those carbs, then color me not shocked to learn about the kitty-diabetes.
OP - if you have a reason for limiting sugars (medical or diet choice such as keto), then all sugars should be counted. If you're only worried about weight loss and maintenance, then I wouldn't worry about sugar from fruits. Weight loss and weight maintenance is just a numbers game.
And that's why we should feed our pets a varied diet instead of just kibble/pellet/flake foods.5 -
dmfitness324 wrote: »sugar has the same effect on your body as cocaine, so please try to stay under your daily amount. Sugar is also linked to obesity and heart disease. I challenge you all to 2 weeks free from processed sugar and limit yourself to only 1-2 fruits per day. I did this and you may find that you have more energy throughout the day, less cravings for sugar (remember it's addictive!) helps with weight loss
Whoa whoa whoa. NO!! Sugar is NOT like cocaine. One is just sugar, and the other a stimulant. You cannot place both in the same boat, ever.2 -
cerise_noir wrote: »JustSomeEm wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »I am very careful with the amount of sugar I take in but the majority of my sugar comes from the apple and grapes I eat. Do I need to count this for the amount I am sugar I am allowed to take in?
Only if you are into counting what you eat. Counting is a good thing at least until intutive eating become a way of life for you after you count for a while and learn what foods fatten you up and what foods leads to natural weight loss/maintenance.
@krishnip best of success. Remember it is the Way Of Eating that works for you that is right for you. We are all different and do well often eating very different diets from another person that is being successful.
Specific foods don't fatten people up or lead to natural (whatever that means) weight loss/maintenance. The total amount of calories consumed is what is responsible for weight management.
OP you will find that without a medical reason to specifically limit sugars, the natural sugars in things like apples and grapes have no bearing on your actual results. MFP doesn't differentiate between natural and added sugars so while there are important guidelines to keep an eye on the total consumption of calories from added sugars, it often is a red herring to chase for weight loss. Many seasoned posters with no medical reason to restrict sugars ignore that metric in their diary or replace it with something more meaningful for them like fiber.
Not sure after all of this time why you do not grasp weight management is far more than calories consumed.
Not sure after all this time, why you do not have the most fundamental understanding of energy balance. It's honestly the most basic science out there.
I am also unsure why you make these arguments with people far more fit than you. And while fit =/= knowledge, it would suggest they are following basic principles to enable them to achieve those goals.
OP, it all comes down to energy balance for weight loss. What is important is eating foods to allow you to achieve you goals, improve satiety to help it become a sustainable diet, and address any medical needs. The current dogma of the need to cut sugar/carbs is just that.. dogma. It's no different than the old dogma that fats where bad. Fruits are fantastic for you. They are low in calories, high in fiber, vitamins and minerals and have antioxidants. That increases the amount of volume you can eat, provides sustainable energy and will help keep you body health.
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/95/4/989
Sure it is about energy balance. Normally in the animal kingdom energy balance is controlled by hormones not manual math if food choices are not limited.
Your link is not currently working on my computer.
100% the deadlier version of one of my past cats, Dave. My fault, I fed him too much. And he was a piggy.
To confirm. Animals get fat too. In fact, along with a human obesity epidemic, there is a pet one too.
My parents have an overweight diabetic cat... and he didn't eat sugar... true story.
The amount of carbohydrates in cat food can (for some brands, especially dry foods) be pretty high. If the cat was over-eating all those carbs, then color me not shocked to learn about the kitty-diabetes.
OP - if you have a reason for limiting sugars (medical or diet choice such as keto), then all sugars should be counted. If you're only worried about weight loss and maintenance, then I wouldn't worry about sugar from fruits. Weight loss and weight maintenance is just a numbers game.
And that's why we should feed our pets a varied diet instead of just kibble/pellet/flake foods.
I follow a "species appropriate" diet with my pets. My cat gets no grains at all, her diet is predominantly meat/bones/offal, being as cats are obligate carnivores. She gets dry food occasionally which is a premium meat based grain free brand.
Same thing with my dog, except she gets left overs from us which contain grains such as rice/pasta, and the odd pizza crust every now and then
2 -
Christine_72 wrote: »cerise_noir wrote: »JustSomeEm wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »I am very careful with the amount of sugar I take in but the majority of my sugar comes from the apple and grapes I eat. Do I need to count this for the amount I am sugar I am allowed to take in?
Only if you are into counting what you eat. Counting is a good thing at least until intutive eating become a way of life for you after you count for a while and learn what foods fatten you up and what foods leads to natural weight loss/maintenance.
@krishnip best of success. Remember it is the Way Of Eating that works for you that is right for you. We are all different and do well often eating very different diets from another person that is being successful.
Specific foods don't fatten people up or lead to natural (whatever that means) weight loss/maintenance. The total amount of calories consumed is what is responsible for weight management.
OP you will find that without a medical reason to specifically limit sugars, the natural sugars in things like apples and grapes have no bearing on your actual results. MFP doesn't differentiate between natural and added sugars so while there are important guidelines to keep an eye on the total consumption of calories from added sugars, it often is a red herring to chase for weight loss. Many seasoned posters with no medical reason to restrict sugars ignore that metric in their diary or replace it with something more meaningful for them like fiber.
Not sure after all of this time why you do not grasp weight management is far more than calories consumed.
Not sure after all this time, why you do not have the most fundamental understanding of energy balance. It's honestly the most basic science out there.
I am also unsure why you make these arguments with people far more fit than you. And while fit =/= knowledge, it would suggest they are following basic principles to enable them to achieve those goals.
OP, it all comes down to energy balance for weight loss. What is important is eating foods to allow you to achieve you goals, improve satiety to help it become a sustainable diet, and address any medical needs. The current dogma of the need to cut sugar/carbs is just that.. dogma. It's no different than the old dogma that fats where bad. Fruits are fantastic for you. They are low in calories, high in fiber, vitamins and minerals and have antioxidants. That increases the amount of volume you can eat, provides sustainable energy and will help keep you body health.
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/95/4/989
Sure it is about energy balance. Normally in the animal kingdom energy balance is controlled by hormones not manual math if food choices are not limited.
Your link is not currently working on my computer.
100% the deadlier version of one of my past cats, Dave. My fault, I fed him too much. And he was a piggy.
To confirm. Animals get fat too. In fact, along with a human obesity epidemic, there is a pet one too.
My parents have an overweight diabetic cat... and he didn't eat sugar... true story.
The amount of carbohydrates in cat food can (for some brands, especially dry foods) be pretty high. If the cat was over-eating all those carbs, then color me not shocked to learn about the kitty-diabetes.
OP - if you have a reason for limiting sugars (medical or diet choice such as keto), then all sugars should be counted. If you're only worried about weight loss and maintenance, then I wouldn't worry about sugar from fruits. Weight loss and weight maintenance is just a numbers game.
And that's why we should feed our pets a varied diet instead of just kibble/pellet/flake foods.
I follow a "species appropriate" diet with my pets. My cat gets no grains at all, her diet is predominantly meat/bones/offal, being as cats are obligate carnivores. She gets dry food occasionally which is a premium meat based grain free brand.
Same thing with my dog, except she gets left overs from us which contain grains such as rice/pasta, and the odd pizza crust every now and then
Me too. They are getting a bit of raw now too, would like to go totally raw just trying to find a supplier that works for me.
But 95% wet food only grain free fed cats here.1 -
VintageFeline wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »cerise_noir wrote: »JustSomeEm wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »I am very careful with the amount of sugar I take in but the majority of my sugar comes from the apple and grapes I eat. Do I need to count this for the amount I am sugar I am allowed to take in?
Only if you are into counting what you eat. Counting is a good thing at least until intutive eating become a way of life for you after you count for a while and learn what foods fatten you up and what foods leads to natural weight loss/maintenance.
@krishnip best of success. Remember it is the Way Of Eating that works for you that is right for you. We are all different and do well often eating very different diets from another person that is being successful.
Specific foods don't fatten people up or lead to natural (whatever that means) weight loss/maintenance. The total amount of calories consumed is what is responsible for weight management.
OP you will find that without a medical reason to specifically limit sugars, the natural sugars in things like apples and grapes have no bearing on your actual results. MFP doesn't differentiate between natural and added sugars so while there are important guidelines to keep an eye on the total consumption of calories from added sugars, it often is a red herring to chase for weight loss. Many seasoned posters with no medical reason to restrict sugars ignore that metric in their diary or replace it with something more meaningful for them like fiber.
Not sure after all of this time why you do not grasp weight management is far more than calories consumed.
Not sure after all this time, why you do not have the most fundamental understanding of energy balance. It's honestly the most basic science out there.
I am also unsure why you make these arguments with people far more fit than you. And while fit =/= knowledge, it would suggest they are following basic principles to enable them to achieve those goals.
OP, it all comes down to energy balance for weight loss. What is important is eating foods to allow you to achieve you goals, improve satiety to help it become a sustainable diet, and address any medical needs. The current dogma of the need to cut sugar/carbs is just that.. dogma. It's no different than the old dogma that fats where bad. Fruits are fantastic for you. They are low in calories, high in fiber, vitamins and minerals and have antioxidants. That increases the amount of volume you can eat, provides sustainable energy and will help keep you body health.
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/95/4/989
Sure it is about energy balance. Normally in the animal kingdom energy balance is controlled by hormones not manual math if food choices are not limited.
Your link is not currently working on my computer.
100% the deadlier version of one of my past cats, Dave. My fault, I fed him too much. And he was a piggy.
To confirm. Animals get fat too. In fact, along with a human obesity epidemic, there is a pet one too.
My parents have an overweight diabetic cat... and he didn't eat sugar... true story.
The amount of carbohydrates in cat food can (for some brands, especially dry foods) be pretty high. If the cat was over-eating all those carbs, then color me not shocked to learn about the kitty-diabetes.
OP - if you have a reason for limiting sugars (medical or diet choice such as keto), then all sugars should be counted. If you're only worried about weight loss and maintenance, then I wouldn't worry about sugar from fruits. Weight loss and weight maintenance is just a numbers game.
And that's why we should feed our pets a varied diet instead of just kibble/pellet/flake foods.
I follow a "species appropriate" diet with my pets. My cat gets no grains at all, her diet is predominantly meat/bones/offal, being as cats are obligate carnivores. She gets dry food occasionally which is a premium meat based grain free brand.
Same thing with my dog, except she gets left overs from us which contain grains such as rice/pasta, and the odd pizza crust every now and then
Me too. They are getting a bit of raw now too, would like to go totally raw just trying to find a supplier that works for me.
But 95% wet food only grain free fed cats here.
It truly warms my heart when i read of pet owners doing this
0 -
VintageFeline wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »cerise_noir wrote: »JustSomeEm wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »I am very careful with the amount of sugar I take in but the majority of my sugar comes from the apple and grapes I eat. Do I need to count this for the amount I am sugar I am allowed to take in?
Only if you are into counting what you eat. Counting is a good thing at least until intutive eating become a way of life for you after you count for a while and learn what foods fatten you up and what foods leads to natural weight loss/maintenance.
@krishnip best of success. Remember it is the Way Of Eating that works for you that is right for you. We are all different and do well often eating very different diets from another person that is being successful.
Specific foods don't fatten people up or lead to natural (whatever that means) weight loss/maintenance. The total amount of calories consumed is what is responsible for weight management.
OP you will find that without a medical reason to specifically limit sugars, the natural sugars in things like apples and grapes have no bearing on your actual results. MFP doesn't differentiate between natural and added sugars so while there are important guidelines to keep an eye on the total consumption of calories from added sugars, it often is a red herring to chase for weight loss. Many seasoned posters with no medical reason to restrict sugars ignore that metric in their diary or replace it with something more meaningful for them like fiber.
Not sure after all of this time why you do not grasp weight management is far more than calories consumed.
Not sure after all this time, why you do not have the most fundamental understanding of energy balance. It's honestly the most basic science out there.
I am also unsure why you make these arguments with people far more fit than you. And while fit =/= knowledge, it would suggest they are following basic principles to enable them to achieve those goals.
OP, it all comes down to energy balance for weight loss. What is important is eating foods to allow you to achieve you goals, improve satiety to help it become a sustainable diet, and address any medical needs. The current dogma of the need to cut sugar/carbs is just that.. dogma. It's no different than the old dogma that fats where bad. Fruits are fantastic for you. They are low in calories, high in fiber, vitamins and minerals and have antioxidants. That increases the amount of volume you can eat, provides sustainable energy and will help keep you body health.
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/95/4/989
Sure it is about energy balance. Normally in the animal kingdom energy balance is controlled by hormones not manual math if food choices are not limited.
Your link is not currently working on my computer.
100% the deadlier version of one of my past cats, Dave. My fault, I fed him too much. And he was a piggy.
To confirm. Animals get fat too. In fact, along with a human obesity epidemic, there is a pet one too.
My parents have an overweight diabetic cat... and he didn't eat sugar... true story.
The amount of carbohydrates in cat food can (for some brands, especially dry foods) be pretty high. If the cat was over-eating all those carbs, then color me not shocked to learn about the kitty-diabetes.
OP - if you have a reason for limiting sugars (medical or diet choice such as keto), then all sugars should be counted. If you're only worried about weight loss and maintenance, then I wouldn't worry about sugar from fruits. Weight loss and weight maintenance is just a numbers game.
And that's why we should feed our pets a varied diet instead of just kibble/pellet/flake foods.
I follow a "species appropriate" diet with my pets. My cat gets no grains at all, her diet is predominantly meat/bones/offal, being as cats are obligate carnivores. She gets dry food occasionally which is a premium meat based grain free brand.
Same thing with my dog, except she gets left overs from us which contain grains such as rice/pasta, and the odd pizza crust every now and then
Me too. They are getting a bit of raw now too, would like to go totally raw just trying to find a supplier that works for me.
But 95% wet food only grain free fed cats here.
Yes, this is basically what I do. I still have one who is a perfect weight no matter what and one who tends to overeating (and I swear he runs to the bowl to beg for food (he gets fed at feeding times but will make an effort) every time anything upsetting happens, like I trip on him in the dark or the bell rings or there are fireworks).
Cats are funny.0 -
dmfitness324 wrote: »sugar has the same effect on your body as cocaine, so please try to stay under your daily amount. Sugar is also linked to obesity and heart disease. I challenge you all to 2 weeks free from processed sugar and limit yourself to only 1-2 fruits per day. I did this and you may find that you have more energy throughout the day, less cravings for sugar (remember it's addictive!) helps with weight loss
If this was true no one would need to illegally smuggle cocaine. Bye bye drug cartel hello sugar corporations. Pass the pixie sticks.2 -
zachbonner_ wrote: »idk about you but we used to snort pixie sticks
I feared children like you0 -
cerise_noir wrote: »Carlos_421 wrote: »dmfitness324 wrote: »sugar has the same effect on your body as cocaine, so please try to stay under your daily amount. Sugar is also linked to obesity and heart disease. I challenge you all to 2 weeks free from processed sugar and limit yourself to only 1-2 fruits per day. I did this and you may find that you have more energy throughout the day, less cravings for sugar (remember it's addictive!) helps with weight loss
This is among the most disgustingly ignorant claims I have ever heard/read.
If sugar has the same effect on your body as cocaine, you couldn't just quit eating it. Also, if sugar has the same effect on your body as cocaine, the sugar in fruit would as well (sugar in fruit is glucose, fructose and sucrose just like what is added to candy and other foods).
There is literally no evidence at all from any peer reviewed scientific studies that demonstrate that sugar is (or is even likely to be) addictive in humans. There are studies that show that starved mice would rather eat sugar than narcotics but that just shows that mice value survival more than a good trip.
When people say that sugar activates the same "pleasure center" of the brain as cocaine, they do so either not realizing (or deceptively omitting) that literally everything that is pleasurable does this. That includes kissing, petting puppies, running and taking a good pee.
The thing with cocaine is that it not only "activates" the same receptors, it hijacks them entirely so that they no longer work properly, thus pleasure becomes harder and harder to experience without it.
Sugar does not do this!
Have you ever been around an addict? Seen one? Talked to one?
I have. It's not pretty.
Comparing the devastation cocaine inflicts on a person to what happens when a person eats sugar (it's readily metabolized in a healthy manner and provides energy for physical and mental activity) is quite frankly offensive.
Agreed, and thank you @Carlos_421
1 -
cerise_noir wrote: »JustSomeEm wrote: »VintageFeline wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »I am very careful with the amount of sugar I take in but the majority of my sugar comes from the apple and grapes I eat. Do I need to count this for the amount I am sugar I am allowed to take in?
Only if you are into counting what you eat. Counting is a good thing at least until intutive eating become a way of life for you after you count for a while and learn what foods fatten you up and what foods leads to natural weight loss/maintenance.
@krishnip best of success. Remember it is the Way Of Eating that works for you that is right for you. We are all different and do well often eating very different diets from another person that is being successful.
Specific foods don't fatten people up or lead to natural (whatever that means) weight loss/maintenance. The total amount of calories consumed is what is responsible for weight management.
OP you will find that without a medical reason to specifically limit sugars, the natural sugars in things like apples and grapes have no bearing on your actual results. MFP doesn't differentiate between natural and added sugars so while there are important guidelines to keep an eye on the total consumption of calories from added sugars, it often is a red herring to chase for weight loss. Many seasoned posters with no medical reason to restrict sugars ignore that metric in their diary or replace it with something more meaningful for them like fiber.
Not sure after all of this time why you do not grasp weight management is far more than calories consumed.
Not sure after all this time, why you do not have the most fundamental understanding of energy balance. It's honestly the most basic science out there.
I am also unsure why you make these arguments with people far more fit than you. And while fit =/= knowledge, it would suggest they are following basic principles to enable them to achieve those goals.
OP, it all comes down to energy balance for weight loss. What is important is eating foods to allow you to achieve you goals, improve satiety to help it become a sustainable diet, and address any medical needs. The current dogma of the need to cut sugar/carbs is just that.. dogma. It's no different than the old dogma that fats where bad. Fruits are fantastic for you. They are low in calories, high in fiber, vitamins and minerals and have antioxidants. That increases the amount of volume you can eat, provides sustainable energy and will help keep you body health.
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/95/4/989
Sure it is about energy balance. Normally in the animal kingdom energy balance is controlled by hormones not manual math if food choices are not limited.
Your link is not currently working on my computer.
100% the deadlier version of one of my past cats, Dave. My fault, I fed him too much. And he was a piggy.
To confirm. Animals get fat too. In fact, along with a human obesity epidemic, there is a pet one too.
My parents have an overweight diabetic cat... and he didn't eat sugar... true story.
The amount of carbohydrates in cat food can (for some brands, especially dry foods) be pretty high. If the cat was over-eating all those carbs, then color me not shocked to learn about the kitty-diabetes.
OP - if you have a reason for limiting sugars (medical or diet choice such as keto), then all sugars should be counted. If you're only worried about weight loss and maintenance, then I wouldn't worry about sugar from fruits. Weight loss and weight maintenance is just a numbers game.
And that's why we should feed our pets a varied diet instead of just kibble/pellet/flake foods.
Shiloh The Wondermutt was on a raw diet for about a year and a half. He did great on it. Lost a bunch of extra weight (due to being able to feed fewer calories but with more bulk than kibble allows).
Unfortunately, managing all his meals and the food prep just got to be too much when life got crazy and he's back on a high quality, grain free kibble diet (70% of ingredients being meat).
Taking him on more runs to keep the weight off and he's still doing great but always considering going back to feeding raw...1 -
This reminds me of my much missed Thomas the Cat (original name huh?).
When he was old, fat, diabetic and on twice daily insulin injections he got a little bit of sugar in his diet once in a while - when he had a hypo smearing a little honey on his tongue and gums brought him "back in in the room". Poor old fella.
0 -
Very interesting discussion!1
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.4K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 983 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions