Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
which is the best diet for overall health and weight loss
Replies
-
estherdragonbat wrote: »if 33 was it for the day you'ld be right - but throughout the day the average person consumes almost 3 pound 1/3 of a pound of refined sugar daily
Really? So, at 454 grams to the pound, I think that comes in at around 1500 grams of refined sugar daily. The average person consumes that much, on top of protein, fats, naturally occurring/unrefined sugars, starches, etc?
Somehow, when I look at the calories involved in 1500 grams of sugar...
I have to question your information. Just a bit.
100 pounds a year/365 = 1/3 pound on avearage
But you said 'daily' in the previous post. So now it's annually?4 -
if 33 was it for the day you'ld be right - but throughout the day the average person consumes almost 3 pound 1/3 of a pound of refined sugar daily
33 x 3 meals = 99. But you haven't show that even a much larger number (let's say 200 g on a 2000 cal diet) is a problem, and the cereal would easily fit in. We also don't know what else the person eating this cereal is eating.
I would agree that the average person in the US (and probably wherever you are) consumes too much added sugar (and added fat, however, and refined carbs other than sugar), AND -- more important -- too many calories and inadequate veg and fruit.
I have not checked your 3.33 lb of refined sugar claim (seems nuts to me, and I am way skeptical). However, you have consistent CONFLATED all carbs, so can't credibly shift to complaining about added sugar now. No one recommends unlimited added sugar, clearly, so why on earth go on about it as if we were doing so?
If the 3.33 lb figure is correct, that's over 1500 g, so the 5.8 g in the cereal is hardly a big thing or the problem.5 -
-
This content has been removed.
-
jessiferrrb wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »I wonder why I'm not fat? I mean I'd guestimate that about 40% of my diet is carbohydrates...when I was heavily plant based it was more like 50-60%...still not fat. And if carbs were the devil I'd imagine that every vegan on the planet would be morbidly obese...
I'm going to go eat my coconut curry potato and lentil stew now...with some evil cumin roasted cauliflower...probably gonna get keel over after that...though I hope not as I'm supposed to lead a 30 mile group ride tomorrow if the weather holds...people are counting on me...
recipe? *drool*
One of my faves...
http://wholeheartedlylaura.com/2015/10/tasty-potatoes-potato-and-lentil-curry-recipe.html10 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »singingflutelady wrote: »singingflutelady wrote: »singingflutelady wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »what i am saying is that they are already getting the sugar from the F&V then they buy fat free stuff thinking it health only to be eating massive amount of Sugar - 20% carbs a day are more than enough 40% Fat needed for endocrine system and CNS function, 40% protein needed for muscle retention , blood production, enzyme production....
Sugar needed for ATP production but you can produce ATP with fats and not have all the ancillary issue associate with Sugar consumption
Who is doing this? Given the current trends (paleo, low carb, keto, "clean eating"), who exactly is buying this fat free stuff? Who is even making it anymore? I don't think my grocery store even sells Snackwells anymore and they were like the poster child for low fat snacks. The trendy snacks are higher fat things like coconut chips or things that are higher in fiber like roasted chickpeas.
All I posted was a 40-40-20 rule where carbs are 20 - people started blowing me up over it and i was left having to call up medical journals substantiating my opinion
That wasn't all you did. You also claimed that the food pyramid was still current, that people following it would be "pounding down pasta all day long," and that someone who was following the current food recommendations would be consuming "massive" amounts of sugar.
You also claimed that recommendations for fruit and vegetable consumption were the work of sugar companies so that they could more easily sell fat-free products to people (although how this connection is supposed to work still isn't exactly clear to me).
You've made a lot of claims here and they aren't backed up by studies in reputable medical journals (or any type of journal).
"You also claimed that recommendations for fruit and vegetable consumption were the work of sugar companies" - NOPE never did that - I did respond to a question about it
"You've made a lot of claims here and they aren't backed up by studies in reputable medical journals" - yes i did
NIH
MAYO
JAP
you pic - reading is fun
When asked whether sugar companies benefit from people eating fruit, you responded: "of course it does - keep them eating sugar(fruit- sugar - basically the same) keep them fat - and watch us justify a low/no fat diet and we'll be able to load the products with sugar."
So you think the sugar companies had nothing to do with the recommendation to eat fruits and vegetables, they're just benefiting passively from recommendations made for other reasons? If I misunderstood you, then I apologize.
In the scenario you're writing about, who wants to "keep them fat" and why? If it isn't the sugar companies behind it, then who is doing it?
Sugar producers and corn producers love a fat USA - they get the tout a fat free diet knowing full well they are going to be throwing massive amounts of sugar into the product to make it taste good the whole time the package will say "FAT FREE" it so healthy for you
what products specifically?
the only low fat products I buy are 1% milk and non-fat Fage...neither of those products has added sugar at all...let alone "massive amounts"...I get plenty of dietary fat elsewhere from nuts, avocados, good cooking oils, etc...
It's 2018, not 1990...I don't really see "low fat" products produced and marketed like they were in 1990...
So what products specifically are marketed as "low fat" but have massive amounts of sugar added...
Perfect Example Special K - hey a HEALTHY cereal - almost no fat but hey please don;t look at the
33 grams of Sugar - CRAP for you - but touted as healthy and people buy it by the truck loads but hey ITS A GRAIN
5.8 grams of sugar...the rest of the carbohydrates are starch and fiber
Carbohydrate is a sugar ---- fiber content is 2.6 gramds the rest????? SUGAR - oh wait don;t you get it from the milk too
oh yeah FAT FREE milk though so its "healthy"
You know the sugar in milk is naturally occuring though... lactose.
and?????? who cares - its sugar - then you through the sugar in from you HEALTHY Special K and you fat free Faje yogurt with 8 more grams of Sugar - 100 pounds of year of processed sugar is what the average person eats - the average bag of sugar is 8 pounds - so that mean the average person literally consume 12-13 bag a year
Well you are the one claiming that there is tons of added sugar in fat free products....
Look fat free - so it MUST be healthy for you aside form the 33 grams of sugar - but hey its FATFREE
When you have nothing of importance to say keep repeating faulty info... yup 5.8=33
Has a hard time reading labels - must suck
Even if you are going to count all the carbs as "sugar"...which they aren't...the 5.8 is part of the 26.6 grams of carbohydrates...as is the 2.6 grams of fiber...they aren't on top of the 26.6...learn to read labels..
Amazing how the sugar industry managed to get 5.8grams per box put into a HEALTHY cereal that already has 26 grams of Carbs
First of all, Special K is more promoted as low cal than healthy.
Second, "the sugar industry" did nothing. Consumer taste and Kellogg's decided to make a cereal with added sugar. You can buy cereal without it too.
And if you are concerned about added sugar, why rant about 33 g, most of which is obviously NOT added sugar. You seem to think all carbs are bad for people (see also posts complaining about the promotion of fruits and veg). Absurd.
you need CARBS but not at the 40% of your diet level
Not an issue in the least for me...I eat far less carbs than most of my cycling peeps...
again the OP said AVERAGE - last time i check the AVERAGE person doe not bike centuries
No more than a 1/2 for me...full requires too much training time and the protocol is too rigid.
ETA: I'll do a full someday...likely have to wait until the kids (7 & 5) are out of the house and/or I am retired.3 -
This content has been removed.
-
-
singingflutelady wrote: »Still hasn't posted the labels of skim milk vs whole milk sugar content...
Personally, I hope he doesn't. I've had that absurd argument on other threads, and don't really need to have it again with anyone devoid of math and logic skills.
Skim milk does have "more" sugar than whole milk - not added, inherent.
You have a 100g serving of whole milk, and it's 4% fat. Simplifying, it's therefore 96% (protein + carbs), or 96g. Take out the fat.
A 100g serving of the skim milk will now have more (protein + carbs), 100g vs 96, so a higher amount as well as a higher percent. It has to have more, unless you add water or something. That's why skim milk has more sugar per same-sized serving than whole milk.
I've argued this with people who insist skim milk has added sugar because it has more sugar per serving than whole milk. It does have more inherent sugar per serving, but it was put there by the cow. It's just math.
Let's not have that argument with someone who demonstrably can't do math.15 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »jessiferrrb wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »I wonder why I'm not fat? I mean I'd guestimate that about 40% of my diet is carbohydrates...when I was heavily plant based it was more like 50-60%...still not fat. And if carbs were the devil I'd imagine that every vegan on the planet would be morbidly obese...
I'm going to go eat my coconut curry potato and lentil stew now...with some evil cumin roasted cauliflower...probably gonna get keel over after that...though I hope not as I'm supposed to lead a 30 mile group ride tomorrow if the weather holds...people are counting on me...
recipe? *drool*
One of my faves...
http://wholeheartedlylaura.com/2015/10/tasty-potatoes-potato-and-lentil-curry-recipe.html
thank you sir, that looks delicious!2 -
BTW, not sure why we are talking about how much sugar the average person consumes, as no one is recommending the SAD as the best one for health or saying added sugar should be consumed in any amount.
However, I checked the numbers, and what I see is that the average American consumes 82 g of added sugar per day. (http://sugarscience.ucsf.edu/the-growing-concern-of-overconsumption/#.Wn3i1a6nHcs)
That would be .18 lb per day. And that includes outliers who consume a huge amount, so itself is not reflective of, say, even the median US diet.
I'd personally agree that 328 cal from added sugar is excessive, but that doesn't mean that 33 g carbs (including 5.8 g added sugar) at breakfast is inherently terrible. Wouldn't be my personal choice, but so what.
(And I usually do have more than, gasp!, 33 g of carbs at breakfast these days.)6 -
This content has been removed.
-
This content has been removed.
-
singingflutelady wrote: »Still hasn't posted the labels of skim milk vs whole milk sugar content...
Personally, I hope he doesn't. I've had that absurd argument on other threads, and don't really need to have it again with anyone devoid of math and logic dkills.
Skim milk does have "more" sugar than whole milk - not added, inherent.
You have a 100g serving of whole milk, and it's 4% fat. Simplifying, it's therefore 96% (protein + carbs), or 96g. Take out the fat.
A 100g serving of the skim milk will now have more (protein + carbs), 100g vs 96, so a higher amount as well as a higher percent. It has to have more, unless you add water or something. That's why skim milk has more sugar per same-sized serving than whole milk.
I've argued this with people who insist skim milk has added sugar because it has more sugar per serving than whole milk. It does have more inherent sugar per serving, but it was put there by the cow. It's just math.
Let's not have that argument with someone who demonstrably can't do math.
this is a discussion of total sugar consumed both refined and naturally occurring - and we consume to much of it - the 40% carbs is completely off base
No you were talking about added sugar.3 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »singingflutelady wrote: »singingflutelady wrote: »singingflutelady wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »what i am saying is that they are already getting the sugar from the F&V then they buy fat free stuff thinking it health only to be eating massive amount of Sugar - 20% carbs a day are more than enough 40% Fat needed for endocrine system and CNS function, 40% protein needed for muscle retention , blood production, enzyme production....
Sugar needed for ATP production but you can produce ATP with fats and not have all the ancillary issue associate with Sugar consumption
Who is doing this? Given the current trends (paleo, low carb, keto, "clean eating"), who exactly is buying this fat free stuff? Who is even making it anymore? I don't think my grocery store even sells Snackwells anymore and they were like the poster child for low fat snacks. The trendy snacks are higher fat things like coconut chips or things that are higher in fiber like roasted chickpeas.
All I posted was a 40-40-20 rule where carbs are 20 - people started blowing me up over it and i was left having to call up medical journals substantiating my opinion
That wasn't all you did. You also claimed that the food pyramid was still current, that people following it would be "pounding down pasta all day long," and that someone who was following the current food recommendations would be consuming "massive" amounts of sugar.
You also claimed that recommendations for fruit and vegetable consumption were the work of sugar companies so that they could more easily sell fat-free products to people (although how this connection is supposed to work still isn't exactly clear to me).
You've made a lot of claims here and they aren't backed up by studies in reputable medical journals (or any type of journal).
"You also claimed that recommendations for fruit and vegetable consumption were the work of sugar companies" - NOPE never did that - I did respond to a question about it
"You've made a lot of claims here and they aren't backed up by studies in reputable medical journals" - yes i did
NIH
MAYO
JAP
you pic - reading is fun
When asked whether sugar companies benefit from people eating fruit, you responded: "of course it does - keep them eating sugar(fruit- sugar - basically the same) keep them fat - and watch us justify a low/no fat diet and we'll be able to load the products with sugar."
So you think the sugar companies had nothing to do with the recommendation to eat fruits and vegetables, they're just benefiting passively from recommendations made for other reasons? If I misunderstood you, then I apologize.
In the scenario you're writing about, who wants to "keep them fat" and why? If it isn't the sugar companies behind it, then who is doing it?
Sugar producers and corn producers love a fat USA - they get the tout a fat free diet knowing full well they are going to be throwing massive amounts of sugar into the product to make it taste good the whole time the package will say "FAT FREE" it so healthy for you
what products specifically?
the only low fat products I buy are 1% milk and non-fat Fage...neither of those products has added sugar at all...let alone "massive amounts"...I get plenty of dietary fat elsewhere from nuts, avocados, good cooking oils, etc...
It's 2018, not 1990...I don't really see "low fat" products produced and marketed like they were in 1990...
So what products specifically are marketed as "low fat" but have massive amounts of sugar added...
Perfect Example Special K - hey a HEALTHY cereal - almost no fat but hey please don;t look at the
33 grams of Sugar - CRAP for you - but touted as healthy and people buy it by the truck loads but hey ITS A GRAIN
5.8 grams of sugar...the rest of the carbohydrates are starch and fiber
Carbohydrate is a sugar ---- fiber content is 2.6 gramds the rest????? SUGAR - oh wait don;t you get it from the milk too
oh yeah FAT FREE milk though so its "healthy"
You know the sugar in milk is naturally occuring though... lactose.
and?????? who cares - its sugar - then you through the sugar in from you HEALTHY Special K and you fat free Faje yogurt with 8 more grams of Sugar - 100 pounds of year of processed sugar is what the average person eats - the average bag of sugar is 8 pounds - so that mean the average person literally consume 12-13 bag a year
Well you are the one claiming that there is tons of added sugar in fat free products....
Look fat free - so it MUST be healthy for you aside form the 33 grams of sugar - but hey its FATFREE
When you have nothing of importance to say keep repeating faulty info... yup 5.8=33
Has a hard time reading labels - must suck
Even if you are going to count all the carbs as "sugar"...which they aren't...the 5.8 is part of the 26.6 grams of carbohydrates...as is the 2.6 grams of fiber...they aren't on top of the 26.6...learn to read labels..
Amazing how the sugar industry managed to get 5.8grams per box put into a HEALTHY cereal that already has 26 grams of Carbs
First of all, Special K is more promoted as low cal than healthy.
Second, "the sugar industry" did nothing. Consumer taste and Kellogg's decided to make a cereal with added sugar. You can buy cereal without it too.
And if you are concerned about added sugar, why rant about 33 g, most of which is obviously NOT added sugar. You seem to think all carbs are bad for people (see also posts complaining about the promotion of fruits and veg). Absurd.
you need CARBS but not at the 40% of your diet level
Not an issue in the least for me...I eat far less carbs than most of my cycling peeps...
again the OP said AVERAGE - last time i check the AVERAGE person doe not bike centuries
No more than a 1/2 for me...full requires too much training time and the protocol is too rigid.
back in the day when I had knees I used to ride them - still occasionally I will ride Kailua Kona to the Kuala coast
The only full I've done so far was on the Big Island, oddly enough (it was part of a bike trip, so I'd need a map to say where). Fun one around here (Apple Cider Century) I plan to finally do this year. Last time I did it the friend I went with only wanted to do the 75 mile route.1 -
Calliope610 wrote: »
Very carefully.2 -
This content has been removed.
-
lemurcat12 wrote: »BTW, not sure why we are talking about how much sugar the average person consumes, as no one is recommending the SAD as the best one for health or saying added sugar should be consumed in any amount.
However, I checked the numbers, and what I see is that the average American consumes 82 g of added sugar per day. (http://sugarscience.ucsf.edu/the-growing-concern-of-overconsumption/#.Wn3i1a6nHcs)
That would be .18 lb per day. And that includes outliers who consume a huge amount, so itself is not reflective of, say, even the median US diet.
I'd personally agree that 328 cal from added sugar is excessive, but that doesn't mean that 33 g carbs (including 5.8 g added sugar) at breakfast is inherently terrible. Wouldn't be my personal choice, but so what.
(And I usually do have more than, gasp!, 33 g of carbs at breakfast these days.)
Yeah, I don't understand dry cereal...have never understood dry cereal...
Savory oats on the other hand...
http://www.sprinkleofgreen.com/game-changing-savoury-oatmeal
I don't use rolled oats though...that texture is weird...4 -
This content has been removed.
-
singingflutelady wrote: »singingflutelady wrote: »Still hasn't posted the labels of skim milk vs whole milk sugar content...
Personally, I hope he doesn't. I've had that absurd argument on other threads, and don't really need to have it again with anyone devoid of math and logic dkills.
Skim milk does have "more" sugar than whole milk - not added, inherent.
You have a 100g serving of whole milk, and it's 4% fat. Simplifying, it's therefore 96% (protein + carbs), or 96g. Take out the fat.
A 100g serving of the skim milk will now have more (protein + carbs), 100g vs 96, so a higher amount as well as a higher percent. It has to have more, unless you add water or something. That's why skim milk has more sugar per same-sized serving than whole milk.
I've argued this with people who insist skim milk has added sugar because it has more sugar per serving than whole milk. It does have more inherent sugar per serving, but it was put there by the cow. It's just math.
Let's not have that argument with someone who demonstrably can't do math.
this is a discussion of total sugar consumed both refined and naturally occurring - and we consume to much of it - the 40% carbs is completely off base
No you were talking about added sugar.
no - part of the discussion was about added sugar the OP asked for what is a reasonable diet for the average person
I said
40P
40F
20C
You were going on about how fat free products have tons of ADDED sugar.4 -
This content has been removed.
-
singingflutelady wrote: »singingflutelady wrote: »singingflutelady wrote: »Still hasn't posted the labels of skim milk vs whole milk sugar content...
Personally, I hope he doesn't. I've had that absurd argument on other threads, and don't really need to have it again with anyone devoid of math and logic dkills.
Skim milk does have "more" sugar than whole milk - not added, inherent.
You have a 100g serving of whole milk, and it's 4% fat. Simplifying, it's therefore 96% (protein + carbs), or 96g. Take out the fat.
A 100g serving of the skim milk will now have more (protein + carbs), 100g vs 96, so a higher amount as well as a higher percent. It has to have more, unless you add water or something. That's why skim milk has more sugar per same-sized serving than whole milk.
I've argued this with people who insist skim milk has added sugar because it has more sugar per serving than whole milk. It does have more inherent sugar per serving, but it was put there by the cow. It's just math.
Let's not have that argument with someone who demonstrably can't do math.
this is a discussion of total sugar consumed both refined and naturally occurring - and we consume to much of it - the 40% carbs is completely off base
No you were talking about added sugar.
no - part of the discussion was about added sugar the OP asked for what is a reasonable diet for the average person
I said
40P
40F
20C
You were going on about how fat free products have tons of ADDED sugar.
they do - next time look at all the fat free stuff and then look at the sugar content - in the 60's the sugar industry got food manufacture to go with a fat free is healthy for you ---- so they could put in sugar - the nation bought it and became fat because of it
So you didn't read the post Ann wrote that about milk that you replied to?6 -
singingflutelady wrote: »singingflutelady wrote: »Still hasn't posted the labels of skim milk vs whole milk sugar content...
Personally, I hope he doesn't. I've had that absurd argument on other threads, and don't really need to have it again with anyone devoid of math and logic dkills.
Skim milk does have "more" sugar than whole milk - not added, inherent.
You have a 100g serving of whole milk, and it's 4% fat. Simplifying, it's therefore 96% (protein + carbs), or 96g. Take out the fat.
A 100g serving of the skim milk will now have more (protein + carbs), 100g vs 96, so a higher amount as well as a higher percent. It has to have more, unless you add water or something. That's why skim milk has more sugar per same-sized serving than whole milk.
I've argued this with people who insist skim milk has added sugar because it has more sugar per serving than whole milk. It does have more inherent sugar per serving, but it was put there by the cow. It's just math.
Let's not have that argument with someone who demonstrably can't do math.
this is a discussion of total sugar consumed both refined and naturally occurring - and we consume to much of it - the 40% carbs is completely off base
No you were talking about added sugar.
no - part of the discussion was about added sugar the OP asked for what is a reasonable diet for the average person
I said
40P
40F
20C
Going back to the average person...I'd think 40% protein for the average person would likely result in a lot of protein being converted to glucose...which seems to be your issue with carbohydrates, so I don't really understand...7 -
singingflutelady wrote: »singingflutelady wrote: »singingflutelady wrote: »Still hasn't posted the labels of skim milk vs whole milk sugar content...
Personally, I hope he doesn't. I've had that absurd argument on other threads, and don't really need to have it again with anyone devoid of math and logic dkills.
Skim milk does have "more" sugar than whole milk - not added, inherent.
You have a 100g serving of whole milk, and it's 4% fat. Simplifying, it's therefore 96% (protein + carbs), or 96g. Take out the fat.
A 100g serving of the skim milk will now have more (protein + carbs), 100g vs 96, so a higher amount as well as a higher percent. It has to have more, unless you add water or something. That's why skim milk has more sugar per same-sized serving than whole milk.
I've argued this with people who insist skim milk has added sugar because it has more sugar per serving than whole milk. It does have more inherent sugar per serving, but it was put there by the cow. It's just math.
Let's not have that argument with someone who demonstrably can't do math.
this is a discussion of total sugar consumed both refined and naturally occurring - and we consume to much of it - the 40% carbs is completely off base
No you were talking about added sugar.
no - part of the discussion was about added sugar the OP asked for what is a reasonable diet for the average person
I said
40P
40F
20C
You were going on about how fat free products have tons of ADDED sugar.
they do - next time look at all the fat free stuff and then look at the sugar content - in the 60's the sugar industry got food manufacture to go with a fat free is healthy for you ---- so they could put in sugar - the nation bought it and became fat because of it
for instance why does special K need 5.6 grams of refined sugar?
For taste? Otherwise it would taste exactly like cardboard.5 -
This content has been removed.
-
jessiferrrb wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »I wonder why I'm not fat? I mean I'd guestimate that about 40% of my diet is carbohydrates...when I was heavily plant based it was more like 50-60%...still not fat. And if carbs were the devil I'd imagine that every vegan on the planet would be morbidly obese...
I'm going to go eat my coconut curry potato and lentil stew now...with some evil cumin roasted cauliflower...probably gonna get keel over after that...though I hope not as I'm supposed to lead a 30 mile group ride tomorrow if the weather holds...people are counting on me...
recipe? *drool*
In for the curry recipe
I'll just be over here with a spoon and a bowl full of sugar in the meantime...estherdragonbat wrote: »But they do eat 3.33 lbs of sugar/day?
if I said 3.33 I apologize it should have .33
How Much Sugar?
Two hundred years ago, the average American ate only 2 pounds of sugar a year.
In 1970, we ate 123 pounds of sugar per year. Today, the average American
consumes almost 152 pounds of sugar in one year. This is equal to 3 pounds (or 6
cups) of sugar consumed in one week!
do you have a source for the bolded?
i just went back in my diary for the past few months and i get about 20 - 40 grams of sugars a day. most days about 25, and rarely above 35, but to be fair, i used the median of 30 grams per day because i'm sure there are high days with cake or coquito around the holidays. i multiplied the 30 grams per day by 365 days and then divided by 453 to determine the pounds of sugar i consume in a year. it's 24.17. and that's not distinguishing between added sugar and naturally occurring.
granted, i'm mindful most of the time about what i eat, but i'm overweight, and it seems unlikely that i come in 128 POUNDS of sugar under the "average american"8 -
singingflutelady wrote: »singingflutelady wrote: »singingflutelady wrote: »singingflutelady wrote: »Still hasn't posted the labels of skim milk vs whole milk sugar content...
Personally, I hope he doesn't. I've had that absurd argument on other threads, and don't really need to have it again with anyone devoid of math and logic dkills.
Skim milk does have "more" sugar than whole milk - not added, inherent.
You have a 100g serving of whole milk, and it's 4% fat. Simplifying, it's therefore 96% (protein + carbs), or 96g. Take out the fat.
A 100g serving of the skim milk will now have more (protein + carbs), 100g vs 96, so a higher amount as well as a higher percent. It has to have more, unless you add water or something. That's why skim milk has more sugar per same-sized serving than whole milk.
I've argued this with people who insist skim milk has added sugar because it has more sugar per serving than whole milk. It does have more inherent sugar per serving, but it was put there by the cow. It's just math.
Let's not have that argument with someone who demonstrably can't do math.
this is a discussion of total sugar consumed both refined and naturally occurring - and we consume to much of it - the 40% carbs is completely off base
No you were talking about added sugar.
no - part of the discussion was about added sugar the OP asked for what is a reasonable diet for the average person
I said
40P
40F
20C
You were going on about how fat free products have tons of ADDED sugar.
they do - next time look at all the fat free stuff and then look at the sugar content - in the 60's the sugar industry got food manufacture to go with a fat free is healthy for you ---- so they could put in sugar - the nation bought it and became fat because of it
So you didn't read the post Ann wrote that about milk that you replied to?
sure I did - my point is that we already get enough sugar and don;t need the high carb load like the FDA say we do
really 40% of our diet?
She was pointing out there is no added sugar in fat free milk buthey i guess that doesn't fit your narrative5 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »BTW, not sure why we are talking about how much sugar the average person consumes, as no one is recommending the SAD as the best one for health or saying added sugar should be consumed in any amount.
However, I checked the numbers, and what I see is that the average American consumes 82 g of added sugar per day. (http://sugarscience.ucsf.edu/the-growing-concern-of-overconsumption/#.Wn3i1a6nHcs)
That would be .18 lb per day. And that includes outliers who consume a huge amount, so itself is not reflective of, say, even the median US diet.
I'd personally agree that 328 cal from added sugar is excessive, but that doesn't mean that 33 g carbs (including 5.8 g added sugar) at breakfast is inherently terrible. Wouldn't be my personal choice, but so what.
(And I usually do have more than, gasp!, 33 g of carbs at breakfast these days.)
Yeah, I don't understand dry cereal...have never understood dry cereal...
Savory oats on the other hand...
http://www.sprinkleofgreen.com/game-changing-savoury-oatmeal
I don't use rolled oats though...that texture is weird...
That looks delicious (although agreed about the texture of rolled oats -- steel cut is my preference)!0 -
This content has been removed.
-
cwolfman13 wrote: »jessiferrrb wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »I wonder why I'm not fat? I mean I'd guestimate that about 40% of my diet is carbohydrates...when I was heavily plant based it was more like 50-60%...still not fat. And if carbs were the devil I'd imagine that every vegan on the planet would be morbidly obese...
I'm going to go eat my coconut curry potato and lentil stew now...with some evil cumin roasted cauliflower...probably gonna get keel over after that...though I hope not as I'm supposed to lead a 30 mile group ride tomorrow if the weather holds...people are counting on me...
recipe? *drool*
One of my faves...
http://wholeheartedlylaura.com/2015/10/tasty-potatoes-potato-and-lentil-curry-recipe.html
Worth reading for this, thank you kindly!1
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 394.2K Introduce Yourself
- 43.9K Getting Started
- 260.4K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.1K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 440 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.9K MyFitnessPal Information
- 15 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.7K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions