Sugar?

2

Replies

  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,420 MFP Moderator
    spvlat wrote: »
    I'm not really asking in hopes of changing anything in my diet just out of curiosity really. I read about the 25grams and I thought that there must be a number for natural sugars as a guide or suggestion since the overconsumption of fruits seems unhealthy to me even if it falls within the appropriate amount of one's calories. Eating 1800 calories worth in bananas and nothing else in a day can't be good for you right?

    Well that problem with that diet is it doesn't bring in fats and proteins which are essential. But of all the nutrients, I would put the least amount of emphasis on sugar. There are much more important nutrients, such as proteins and fiber. The reason one may reduce the amount of sugar you consume is it can crowd other sources and if you eat a lot of ultra processed foods (which include high amounts of fats and sugar), then it can be very easy add a lot of calories.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Carlos_421 wrote: »
    aprisar wrote: »
    If you're interested in learning more about sugar misinformation, you might want to watch the documentary mockumentary, Fed Up. It's available on Netflix, as well as on YouTube.

    Fixed it for you.

    OK, but can we all stop misusing the word "mockumentary"? A mockumentary is a film like "Spinal Tap" or "Best in Show," which intends to be funny by "mocking" documentaries or the specific subject of the mockumenary, or both. I don't think films like "Fed Up" intend to be funny. They want you to believe the misinformation they're peddling. "Propaganda" might be a better term, if you want to differentiate them from some idealized, Platonic documentary that is perfectly even-handed.

    This is a good point.

    A mockumentary is self-aware and expects its audience to get the joke.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    How are you defining excess sugar? And how is that different from excess starches or excess fat?
  • fuzzylop72
    fuzzylop72 Posts: 651 Member
    edited January 2018
    haleyrhart wrote: »
    I dont like to debate on the way difderent sugars are processed i go by one rule only. That all excess sugar gets processed the same way no matter where it comes from. Your body will store it in fat cells for later.

    only in a caloric surplus, otherwise it's stored as glycogen in your muscles (unless needed for immediate energy).
  • Cleosweetie
    Cleosweetie Posts: 71 Member
    edited January 2018
    @spvlat : I appreciate your question. I tried to research this very question and could not find a satisfactory answer.

    I gave up all sugar a few years ago and in so doing, lost my taste for fruit. It all just tastes too sweet. I make up for this with vegetables (I eat 6-7 servings) on typical days.

    Giving up sugar helped me curb carb cravings, which has been critical to my weight loss success. For me, carbs (Simple) are a serious trigger food. All that happens when I eat them is that I want more carbs. No matter what my fullness level actually is.
  • fuzzylop72
    fuzzylop72 Posts: 651 Member
    @lemurcat12 while obviously true, it's not unique to this documentary, or even documentaries on nutrition. It's pretty common across all documentaries -- they're not to find the truth, they're to present their viewpoint in the best light.

    If you're going to netflix to get a summary of the current science on any topic, you're probably going to have a bad time.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    fuzzylop72 wrote: »
    @lemurcat12 while obviously true, it's not unique to this documentary, or even documentaries on nutrition. It's pretty common across all documentaries -- they're not to find the truth, they're to present their viewpoint in the best light.

    If you're going to netflix to get a summary of the current science on any topic, you're probably going to have a bad time.

    Yeah, I agree. Why'd you call me out on that?
  • AnvilHead
    AnvilHead Posts: 18,343 Member
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    Carlos_421 wrote: »
    aprisar wrote: »
    If you're interested in learning more about sugar misinformation, you might want to watch the documentary mockumentary, Fed Up. It's available on Netflix, as well as on YouTube.

    Fixed it for you.

    OK, but can we all stop misusing the word "mockumentary"? A mockumentary is a film like "Spinal Tap" or "Best in Show," which intends to be funny by "mocking" documentaries or the specific subject of the mockumenary, or both. I don't think films like "Fed Up" intend to be funny. They want you to believe the misinformation they're peddling. "Propaganda" might be a better term, if you want to differentiate them from some idealized, Platonic documentary that is perfectly even-handed.

    I don't find it entirely inappropriate though, because films like "Fed Up", "What the Health", "That Sugar Film", etc. make a complete mockery of truthfulness, honesty, science, basic physiology and nutrition. They're biased, pseudoscientific, propaganda hack jobs. I do agree that there's nothing funny about them, though - they're completely disgusting.

    Wow, I agree in theory about the need to be a critical thinker and demand sources, but this seems like such an over generalization. Do you really fact check/source check every single food/nutrition film that gets released such that you know for sure they are all "propaganda hack jobs"?

    Very often if you are familiar with the topics being discussed it's obvious where they are distorting things or cherry picking or taking things out of context.

    ^ This, exactly. Also, as you learn how to properly vet your sources, you learn who the junk science/snake oil peddlers are and what their agendas/biases are. If their name is attached to something, you already know what they'll be demonizing.
  • Carlos_421
    Carlos_421 Posts: 5,132 Member
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    Carlos_421 wrote: »
    aprisar wrote: »
    If you're interested in learning more about sugar misinformation, you might want to watch the documentary mockumentary, Fed Up. It's available on Netflix, as well as on YouTube.

    Fixed it for you.

    OK, but can we all stop misusing the word "mockumentary"? A mockumentary is a film like "Spinal Tap" or "Best in Show," which intends to be funny by "mocking" documentaries or the specific subject of the mockumenary, or both. I don't think films like "Fed Up" intend to be funny. They want you to believe the misinformation they're peddling. "Propaganda" might be a better term, if you want to differentiate them from some idealized, Platonic documentary that is perfectly even-handed.

    I don't find it entirely inappropriate though, because films like "Fed Up", "What the Health", "That Sugar Film", etc. make a complete mockery of truthfulness, honesty, science, basic physiology and nutrition. They're biased, pseudoscientific, propaganda hack jobs. I do agree that there's nothing funny about them, though - they're completely disgusting.

    Exactly. They’re as factually accurate as The Office.
  • AnvilHead
    AnvilHead Posts: 18,343 Member
    edited January 2018
    Carlos_421 wrote: »
    AnvilHead wrote: »
    Carlos_421 wrote: »
    aprisar wrote: »
    If you're interested in learning more about sugar misinformation, you might want to watch the documentary mockumentary, Fed Up. It's available on Netflix, as well as on YouTube.

    Fixed it for you.

    OK, but can we all stop misusing the word "mockumentary"? A mockumentary is a film like "Spinal Tap" or "Best in Show," which intends to be funny by "mocking" documentaries or the specific subject of the mockumenary, or both. I don't think films like "Fed Up" intend to be funny. They want you to believe the misinformation they're peddling. "Propaganda" might be a better term, if you want to differentiate them from some idealized, Platonic documentary that is perfectly even-handed.

    I don't find it entirely inappropriate though, because films like "Fed Up", "What the Health", "That Sugar Film", etc. make a complete mockery of truthfulness, honesty, science, basic physiology and nutrition. They're biased, pseudoscientific, propaganda hack jobs. I do agree that there's nothing funny about them, though - they're completely disgusting.

    Exactly. They’re as factually accurate as The Office.

    As factually accurate as Die Hard, and as scientifically accurate as The Matrix. :D

    Oh, and equally fictitious as either of them.