Why Carbs Make Us Fat...
Replies
-
So basically people can’t control themselves when eating carbs, therefore eating too many, which also means eating too many calories. So it isn’t really carbs, but calories that make is fat.
But, we already knew this.
Carbs have been vilified for too long.
I like carbs. Carbs are good.7 -
paperpudding wrote: »"Make no mistake, I want you to eat carbs, and I want you to enjoy your carbs, I just don’t want you to overeat carbs, because I don’t want you to overeat, period..."
–Brad Pilon
But you could substitute anything in there - I want you to eat fats and i want you to enjoy fats.......
and most foods are a combination of macros anyway
no need to demonise carbs.
He is not demonizing carbs...1 -
So basically people can’t control themselves when eating carbs, therefore eating too many, which also means eating too many calories. So it isn’t really carbs, but calories that make is fat.
But, we already knew this.
Carbs have been vilified for too long.
I like carbs. Carbs are good.
He is not demonizing carbs...2 -
SarahAnne3958 wrote: »Good piece.
One of the reasons I've transitioned to a carnivore way if eating is because it is so much harder to overeat meat. By removing the delicious, easy to overeat carbs it has simplified my maintenance plan and for the first time in years I'm not struggling.
Eating meat and fats like butter/ghee are boring. It's not fun, it's not exciting. I don't look forward to meal time anymore, I don't look forward to snacking. Social events no longer revolve around food. I no longer get the emotional 'high' from eating, I don't make recipes or bake anymore. But for me it's worth the trade off for what I've gained in return. We each need to find our own way
Each to their own but I find this post sad because I find that a diet that is not enjoyable is not sustainable. A diet that is not sustainable will result in a regain of weight as I will find it all too hard and will merely go back to what I was eating and enjoying. In saying that I am very much a moderator rather than an abstainer so come from this viewpoint.
80% of people that lose weight, regain it within a couple of years so to be one of the 20% you are most successful with finding a way of eating you can happily and easily stick with for life.10 -
It is also interesting to note that one of the first questions my psychologist asked me when trying to determine whether I had an eating disorder or not was whether I enjoyed the food I was eating. Psst I wouldn't eat food that I don't like and I don't have an eating disorder. It is just that my TDEE is a reasonable amount higher than MFP allots me so I was losing weight quicker than expected and kept losing when I was trying to maintain. Certainly not complaining about the extra 200 calories a day I eat now.
I am not suggesting that someone that goes down this path has a disordered relationship with food, but it is definitely a red flag for health professionals.2 -
So basically people can’t control themselves when eating carbs, therefore eating too many, which also means eating too many calories. So it isn’t really carbs, but calories that make is fat.
But, we already knew this.
Carbs have been vilified for too long.
I like carbs. Carbs are good.
He is not demonizing carbs...
I know the OP wasn’t, but I meant some people in general have jumped on this *carbs are bad* bandwagon.
3 -
So basically people can’t control themselves when eating carbs, therefore eating too many, which also means eating too many calories. So it isn’t really carbs, but calories that make is fat.
But, we already knew this.
Carbs have been vilified for too long.
I like carbs. Carbs are good.
He is not demonizing carbs...
I know the OP wasn’t, but I meant some people in general have jumped on this *carbs are bad* bandwagon.
I've seen this in the thread too. Not saying that was the point of the linked article.2 -
paperpudding wrote: »"Make no mistake, I want you to eat carbs, and I want you to enjoy your carbs, I just don’t want you to overeat carbs, because I don’t want you to overeat, period..."
–Brad Pilon
But you could substitute anything in there - I want you to eat fats and i want you to enjoy fats.......
and most foods are a combination of macros anyway
no need to demonise carbs.
He is not demonizing carbs...
Well in your opinion he is not.
I think he is singly out and demonising carbs when same thing about over eating could be said about any macro or any food.
8 -
I feel guilty *hides bag of popcorn*
I'll see myself out
0 -
Reading food diaries of the obese is not for the fainthearted. Instead of "bag of potato crisps" "Tim Horton donut" or "Fast food french fries" (the tasty high carb items) one is more likely to see:
Breakfast, "pint of Greek yogurt and baby spinach with soy hot dogs," or
Lunch, "mashed Brussels sprouts with a pint of low calorie pizza sauce"
One could conclude from this type of observation that it is revolting diet concoctions and not tasty carbs that make people fat.
I'm sure I would not find these types of culinary inventions in the food diaries of the fit.
1 -
paperpudding wrote: »paperpudding wrote: »"Make no mistake, I want you to eat carbs, and I want you to enjoy your carbs, I just don’t want you to overeat carbs, because I don’t want you to overeat, period..."
–Brad Pilon
But you could substitute anything in there - I want you to eat fats and i want you to enjoy fats.......
and most foods are a combination of macros anyway
no need to demonise carbs.
He is not demonizing carbs...
Well in your opinion he is not.
I think he is singly out and demonising carbs when same thing about over eating could be said about any macro or any food.
Which is how he ended the article by stating he does not want us to overeat period. Maybe if it was 3 sentences instead of 2 you would have a different opinion...1 -
Lillymoo01 wrote: »SarahAnne3958 wrote: »Good piece.
One of the reasons I've transitioned to a carnivore way if eating is because it is so much harder to overeat meat. By removing the delicious, easy to overeat carbs it has simplified my maintenance plan and for the first time in years I'm not struggling.
Eating meat and fats like butter/ghee are boring. It's not fun, it's not exciting. I don't look forward to meal time anymore, I don't look forward to snacking. Social events no longer revolve around food. I no longer get the emotional 'high' from eating, I don't make recipes or bake anymore. But for me it's worth the trade off for what I've gained in return. We each need to find our own way
Each to their own but I find this post sad because I find that a diet that is not enjoyable is not sustainable. A diet that is not sustainable will result in a regain of weight as I will find it all too hard and will merely go back to what I was eating and enjoying. In saying that I am very much a moderator rather than an abstainer so come from this viewpoint.
80% of people that lose weight, regain it within a couple of years so to be one of the 20% you are most successful with finding a way of eating you can happily and easily stick with for life.
This will be my last response to this thread, but to reiterate-I'm already many years into maintenance. I maintained for YEARS doing to whole 'eat what you like in moderation' thing, along with counting and tracking calories and weighing out my food.
And it worked-until it didn't anymore. More and more I struggled with the tracking, the counting, the weight creeps that happened regularly even though I was doing all the numbers 'right'. More and more I had to restrict calories to try and get the weight to settle down into my maintenance range again.
I came into this year over 10lbs above my maintenance range. I really buckled down and lost a few pounds, and then it started creeping back up again-at this point I was tracking my calories on two sites and I was using my food scale on everything. This is when I started realizing that this whole process had become distorted and unhealthy for me. I was exhausted. Frustrated. Seeing years and years of work and progress slip away.
This is also the time when I started having perimenopause symptoms, which caused issues with my sleep etc. The physical changes that were starting, coupled with the mental exhaustion from the years of tracking and counting calories, hit me really hard and I knew I was at a point where I needed to reevaluate and make significant changes to my maintenance plan.
What I'm doing now is working well for me, for this time of my life. I'm now maintaining successfully again and I've corrected the weight creep that I struggled with, without having to constantly think about the darn numbers
My doctor is aware of what I'm doing and I had a check-in and some blood-work done recently and everything is good. I'll have more blood work done in a few months because I want to keep an eye on my numbers, and if needed I'll adjust things as I go along.
OP-sorry my response ended up hi-jacking your thread, I read the article and thought it was really good
5 -
So basically people can’t control themselves when eating carbs, therefore eating too many, which also means eating too many calories. So it isn’t really carbs, but calories that make is fat.
But, we already knew this.
Carbs have been vilified for too long.
I like carbs. Carbs are good.
He is not demonizing carbs...
He is saying that carbs are so wonderful that we can't help but overeat them which is what's making us fat. So he's saying carbs are making us fat, but not because they are evil but because they are wonderful and easy to overeat.
So yeah, if you want to play semantics, he's not demonizing carbs, but he's still saying carbs are the problem. Some other sentences from the blog post:
"That’s why carbs make you fat. Forget the rest of the scientific theorizing and posturing… Some is right and some is wrong, but none of it is as important as the fact that carbs are awesome."
"This is also the exact reason why watching your carbohydrate intake will most likely make you lose weight."
"This is why watching your carb intake makes sense."
"Learn to occasionally say no to carbs-rich foods. "
And this last sentence "Make no mistake, I want you to eat carbs, and I want you to enjoy your carbs, I just don’t want you to overeat carbs, because I don’t want you to overeat, period." Taken out of context, it sounds like what we typically say here, that the problem isn't one food group, but over eating in general. But taken as part of the rest of his post, it kind of sounds like he's saying carbs make you over-eat.
What I think a typical dieter who isn't a regular on the MFP forum would take away from his post - "I need to eat lower carb to lose weight." I suppose I could just be reading it with my own bias, as someone who is tired to death of being told that the rice, oats, pasta, and bread that keeps me full is gonna make me fat, but that's how I read it.10 -
quiksylver296 wrote: »
Wow. Did the "disagrees" even read the article?!?
I didn't disagree and I did read the article, but I don't disagree with most of the articles conclusions (besides that carbs are in fact awesome). I still think plays into a lot of anti-carb myths. I don't think it's that easy to overeat "carbs", in eating foods that are high in carbohydrates. Eating a 73 ounce steak for 3500 calories is certainly difficult. But so is eating 5 pounds of cooked pasta, or 35 slices of bread, or 25 medium potatoes, or 15 pounds of Pineapple. While everyone is different, and for some people these could be problem/trigger foods, when most people talk about "carbs", they are usually talking about things like sweets, chocolate, cookies, chips, fast food, etc. And all those things are not really "carbs" in the traditional sense, which I would define as foods with 70% or more in carb content. Most of those items could better be described as "fats" because they usually derive most of their calories from fats rather than carbs. The truth is it's that moderate carb, high fat mix that are a lot of these items that make them delicious and easy to overeat for a lot of people. But somehow fat gets to escape by Scott free while carbs take all the blame.
If you look at the nutritional menus of any restaurant, most of their meals that are 1000 calories or more will derive most of their calories from fats, not carbs. The carbs may help make it tasty, but the fat is there to do most of the work.
I think why a lot of people feel the need to "cut carbs" is because they don't really understand which foods are carbs, and which are not. I don't think this article helps much in that regard, as it still makes carbs out to be this evil driver of weight gain (a delicious evil, but still), when I don't believe that it is really the case.
He also mentions...
"Carbs are everywhere. They taste great, they can be crunchy or soft, thick or airy, chocolate or vanilla. They’re convenient, they’re easy to carry, they don’t need to be refrigerated but can taste great hot or frozen, They have a great shelf-life… really, they’re awesome. Heck, carbs can even make protein and fat taste better, and protein and fat make carbs taste better..."
He takes into account the combo factor.
As a one line throwaway but still places the blame on the carbs. The truth is that fats are used to make bland carbs taste good as much as the other way around. Have you ever tried to overeat Boiled potatoes or plain pasta? It's hard. But throw the potatoes in a frier with oil, or bake/mash them and add butter/sourcream/bacon and you've got yourself something worth eating. Take that pasta and slather it with butter or add a bunch of cheese or a cream sauce and some meat and then you have something you can scarf through. There's a reason why most dressings are primarily fat. Because fat tastes super good too.
Not on it's own...
I'd take plain cheese (mostly fat) over plain rice (mostly carbs) any day.
I would argue it's the added salt that makes cheese so good. Kinda like salted and unsalted butter. But again, that's just me...0 -
So basically people can’t control themselves when eating carbs, therefore eating too many, which also means eating too many calories. So it isn’t really carbs, but calories that make is fat.
But, we already knew this.
Carbs have been vilified for too long.
I like carbs. Carbs are good.
He is not demonizing carbs...
He is saying that carbs are so wonderful that we can't help but overeat them which is what's making us fat. So he's saying carbs are making us fat, but not because they are evil but because they are wonderful and easy to overeat.
So yeah, if you want to play semantics, he's not demonizing carbs, but he's still saying carbs are the problem. Some other sentences from the blog post:
"That’s why carbs make you fat. Forget the rest of the scientific theorizing and posturing… Some is right and some is wrong, but none of it is as important as the fact that carbs are awesome."
"This is also the exact reason why watching your carbohydrate intake will most likely make you lose weight."
"This is why watching your carb intake makes sense."
"Learn to occasionally say no to carbs-rich foods. "
And this last sentence "Make no mistake, I want you to eat carbs, and I want you to enjoy your carbs, I just don’t want you to overeat carbs, because I don’t want you to overeat, period." Taken out of context, it sounds like what we typically say here, that the problem isn't one food group, but over eating in general. But taken as part of the rest of his post, it kind of sounds like he's saying carbs make you over-eat.
What I think a typical dieter who isn't a regular on the MFP forum would take away from his post - "I need to eat lower carb to lose weight." I suppose I could just be reading it with my own bias, as someone who is tired to death of being told that the rice, oats, pasta, and bread that keeps me full is gonna make me fat, but that's how I read it.
We are all guilty of that at times...1 -
Executive summary....
- Eating too much makes you fat.
- Eating tasty foods makes it harder to moderate your intake.
- What people find tasty is very varied.
Don't suppose that would generate many website hits?
TBH I find the whole this macro or that macro makes it harder to stay at a good weight vastly overblown - often just another diversion from the biggest issue (over-consumption). When you look at lists of highly satiating foods you find foods that are (predominantly) carbs, protein and fat all represented - plus of course various and varied combinations.
Personally I could very easily overeat on meat/fish (protein), pasta (starchy carbs) or nuts (fat). That's being driven by my personal taste preferences and not the predominant macro composition of those foods.
Some of those would be regarded as highly satiating to others.
Yeah, but you’d have to spend a lot more money to overeat on fat and protein than carbs. I can buy a box of Little Debbie cakes for a dollar, or a pound of salmon or nuts for many times that. Carbs are not only delicious, in our culture they tend to be cheap, and they are easily made in a form which keeps well, which means they are often convenient. You need snacks to stash in your drawer at work, you can pick from nuts, jerky, or... almost any carbs you like. You can buy Coke from a vending machine, you can’t buy milk from a machine (in America, anyway.)
I thought it was a smart article. As a diabetic who needs access to low carb foods, I have become aware of how much easier our culture makes it to eat an excess of carbs than of other foods. Free Continental breakfast at hotel? Carbs, pay for your own if you want protein. Coworkers bring in treats at work? Carbs. Side dishes at any fast food place? Carbs, fatty carbs, and more carbs. I know of a bbq joint which has deviled eggs as a side, but apart from that, all sides are primarily carbs, usually including beans because fast food joints like to cook beans in sugar sauce.
I have to plan ahead and spend my own money and cook for myself to have non-carbs available. To eat carbs all I have to do is not say no to the carbs being forced on me.1 -
I think the article would have been better titled, "Why Convenience Food Makes Us Fat". Would have been clearer. Still no cause and effect because food alone without the context of diet is meaningless, but still, all the food he mentions are not carbs alone...2
-
quiksylver296 wrote: »
Wow. Did the "disagrees" even read the article?!?
I didn't disagree and I did read the article, but I don't disagree with most of the articles conclusions (besides that carbs are in fact awesome). I still think plays into a lot of anti-carb myths. I don't think it's that easy to overeat "carbs", in eating foods that are high in carbohydrates. Eating a 73 ounce steak for 3500 calories is certainly difficult. But so is eating 5 pounds of cooked pasta, or 35 slices of bread, or 25 medium potatoes, or 15 pounds of Pineapple. While everyone is different, and for some people these could be problem/trigger foods, when most people talk about "carbs", they are usually talking about things like sweets, chocolate, cookies, chips, fast food, etc. And all those things are not really "carbs" in the traditional sense, which I would define as foods with 70% or more in carb content. Most of those items could better be described as "fats" because they usually derive most of their calories from fats rather than carbs. The truth is it's that moderate carb, high fat mix that are a lot of these items that make them delicious and easy to overeat for a lot of people. But somehow fat gets to escape by Scott free while carbs take all the blame.
If you look at the nutritional menus of any restaurant, most of their meals that are 1000 calories or more will derive most of their calories from fats, not carbs. The carbs may help make it tasty, but the fat is there to do most of the work.
I think why a lot of people feel the need to "cut carbs" is because they don't really understand which foods are carbs, and which are not. I don't think this article helps much in that regard, as it still makes carbs out to be this evil driver of weight gain (a delicious evil, but still), when I don't believe that it is really the case.
He also mentions...
"Carbs are everywhere. They taste great, they can be crunchy or soft, thick or airy, chocolate or vanilla. They’re convenient, they’re easy to carry, they don’t need to be refrigerated but can taste great hot or frozen, They have a great shelf-life… really, they’re awesome. Heck, carbs can even make protein and fat taste better, and protein and fat make carbs taste better..."
He takes into account the combo factor.
As a one line throwaway but still places the blame on the carbs. The truth is that fats are used to make bland carbs taste good as much as the other way around. Have you ever tried to overeat Boiled potatoes or plain pasta? It's hard. But throw the potatoes in a frier with oil, or bake/mash them and add butter/sourcream/bacon and you've got yourself something worth eating. Take that pasta and slather it with butter or add a bunch of cheese or a cream sauce and some meat and then you have something you can scarf through. There's a reason why most dressings are primarily fat. Because fat tastes super good too.
Not on it's own...
I'd take plain cheese (mostly fat) over plain rice (mostly carbs) any day.
I would argue it's the added salt that makes cheese so good. Kinda like salted and unsalted butter. But again, that's just me...
I never use salted butter, but then I also never could eat butter plain.
I'd also agree that the salt plus fat plays a role in why cheese is tasty, just as salted nuts are usually harder to stop eating than unsalted (although I could overconsume both easily if not paying attention).
My point is that it's absurd to suggest that carbs alone are inherently harder to control than any other macro, as for the most part the foods hard to control are a combination.
I get that some claim that plain rice or plain pasta or the like are hard for them to not overeat, but I bet a diet made up primarily of those foods, plus veg and some form of protein and essential fats for nutrition would be very hard to overeat -- indeed, it's why doing something low fat and mostly plant based like the Fuhrman plan or Ornish or Forks Over Knives tends to cause quick weight loss without counting too. That starch solution diet strikes me as nutritionally unbalanced (same with carnivore and not more so, indeed the all potato hack is pretty much the vegan version of carnivore), but I suspect that for many you get quick weight loss even on a very high carb diet based on foods often considered the hardest "carbs" to limit.
IMO, this is because a very restrictive diet tends to be boring no matter what macro is predominant, and limiting combos that tend to light up taste buds the most (fat/carbs, anything/salt, protein/fat/carb) makes overeating hard.
None of this supports the idea that carbs are uniquely tasty or uniquely hard to control.4 -
rheddmobile wrote: »Executive summary....
- Eating too much makes you fat.
- Eating tasty foods makes it harder to moderate your intake.
- What people find tasty is very varied.
Don't suppose that would generate many website hits?
TBH I find the whole this macro or that macro makes it harder to stay at a good weight vastly overblown - often just another diversion from the biggest issue (over-consumption). When you look at lists of highly satiating foods you find foods that are (predominantly) carbs, protein and fat all represented - plus of course various and varied combinations.
Personally I could very easily overeat on meat/fish (protein), pasta (starchy carbs) or nuts (fat). That's being driven by my personal taste preferences and not the predominant macro composition of those foods.
Some of those would be regarded as highly satiating to others.
Yeah, but you’d have to spend a lot more money to overeat on fat and protein than carbs. I can buy a box of Little Debbie cakes for a dollar, or a pound of salmon or nuts for many times that. Carbs are not only delicious, in our culture they tend to be cheap, and they are easily made in a form which keeps well, which means they are often convenient. You need snacks to stash in your drawer at work, you can pick from nuts, jerky, or... almost any carbs you like. You can buy Coke from a vending machine, you can’t buy milk from a machine (in America, anyway.)
I thought it was a smart article. As a diabetic who needs access to low carb foods, I have become aware of how much easier our culture makes it to eat an excess of carbs than of other foods. Free Continental breakfast at hotel? Carbs, pay for your own if you want protein. Coworkers bring in treats at work? Carbs. Side dishes at any fast food place? Carbs, fatty carbs, and more carbs. I know of a bbq joint which has deviled eggs as a side, but apart from that, all sides are primarily carbs, usually including beans because fast food joints like to cook beans in sugar sauce.
I have to plan ahead and spend my own money and cook for myself to have non-carbs available. To eat carbs all I have to do is not say no to the carbs being forced on me.
Most of the snacky "carbs" are carbs + fat (and I would disagree about how tasty they are, I think most pre-packaged snack foods aren't very good at all).
You can eat probably just about as cheaply doing a healthy keto as a healthy omnivore, depending on cuts of meat chosen. Both would involve vegetables. Not buying snack foods is cheaper than buying them, no matter how cheap they are, also, and same with eating out vs. cooking at home.4 -
rheddmobile wrote: »Executive summary....
- Eating too much makes you fat.
- Eating tasty foods makes it harder to moderate your intake.
- What people find tasty is very varied.
Don't suppose that would generate many website hits?
TBH I find the whole this macro or that macro makes it harder to stay at a good weight vastly overblown - often just another diversion from the biggest issue (over-consumption). When you look at lists of highly satiating foods you find foods that are (predominantly) carbs, protein and fat all represented - plus of course various and varied combinations.
Personally I could very easily overeat on meat/fish (protein), pasta (starchy carbs) or nuts (fat). That's being driven by my personal taste preferences and not the predominant macro composition of those foods.
Some of those would be regarded as highly satiating to others.
Yeah, but you’d have to spend a lot more money to overeat on fat and protein than carbs. I can buy a box of Little Debbie cakes for a dollar, or a pound of salmon or nuts for many times that. Carbs are not only delicious, in our culture they tend to be cheap, and they are easily made in a form which keeps well, which means they are often convenient. You need snacks to stash in your drawer at work, you can pick from nuts, jerky, or... almost any carbs you like. You can buy Coke from a vending machine, you can’t buy milk from a machine (in America, anyway.)
I thought it was a smart article. As a diabetic who needs access to low carb foods, I have become aware of how much easier our culture makes it to eat an excess of carbs than of other foods. Free Continental breakfast at hotel? Carbs, pay for your own if you want protein. Coworkers bring in treats at work? Carbs. Side dishes at any fast food place? Carbs, fatty carbs, and more carbs. I know of a bbq joint which has deviled eggs as a side, but apart from that, all sides are primarily carbs, usually including beans because fast food joints like to cook beans in sugar sauce.
I have to plan ahead and spend my own money and cook for myself to have non-carbs available. To eat carbs all I have to do is not say no to the carbs being forced on me.
Most of the snacky "carbs" are carbs + fat (and I would disagree about how tasty they are, I think most pre-packaged snack foods aren't very good at all).
You can eat probably just about as cheaply doing a healthy keto as a healthy omnivore, depending on cuts of meat chosen. Both would involve vegetables. Not buying snack foods is cheaper than buying them, no matter how cheap they are, also, and same with eating out vs. cooking at home.
I think it’s valid that you can probably eat as cheaply doing healthy omnivore as healthy keto, but that’s not what’s being discussed here. What’s under discussion is the availablity of cheap, inexpensive foods, which in America tend to be carbs drenched in saturated fat. Avoid carbs (or conversely avoid saturated fat) and you will almost inevitably lose weight, if you have been accustomed to a standard American diet. Of course that doesn’t apply to all people, it only applies to people who have been eating a standard American diet. That you and I can happily become obese eating salmon and veggies drenched in olive oil is not the point of the article. People eating those things are not driving the increase in obesity rates in America today.1 -
rheddmobile wrote: »rheddmobile wrote: »Executive summary....
- Eating too much makes you fat.
- Eating tasty foods makes it harder to moderate your intake.
- What people find tasty is very varied.
Don't suppose that would generate many website hits?
TBH I find the whole this macro or that macro makes it harder to stay at a good weight vastly overblown - often just another diversion from the biggest issue (over-consumption). When you look at lists of highly satiating foods you find foods that are (predominantly) carbs, protein and fat all represented - plus of course various and varied combinations.
Personally I could very easily overeat on meat/fish (protein), pasta (starchy carbs) or nuts (fat). That's being driven by my personal taste preferences and not the predominant macro composition of those foods.
Some of those would be regarded as highly satiating to others.
Yeah, but you’d have to spend a lot more money to overeat on fat and protein than carbs. I can buy a box of Little Debbie cakes for a dollar, or a pound of salmon or nuts for many times that. Carbs are not only delicious, in our culture they tend to be cheap, and they are easily made in a form which keeps well, which means they are often convenient. You need snacks to stash in your drawer at work, you can pick from nuts, jerky, or... almost any carbs you like. You can buy Coke from a vending machine, you can’t buy milk from a machine (in America, anyway.)
I thought it was a smart article. As a diabetic who needs access to low carb foods, I have become aware of how much easier our culture makes it to eat an excess of carbs than of other foods. Free Continental breakfast at hotel? Carbs, pay for your own if you want protein. Coworkers bring in treats at work? Carbs. Side dishes at any fast food place? Carbs, fatty carbs, and more carbs. I know of a bbq joint which has deviled eggs as a side, but apart from that, all sides are primarily carbs, usually including beans because fast food joints like to cook beans in sugar sauce.
I have to plan ahead and spend my own money and cook for myself to have non-carbs available. To eat carbs all I have to do is not say no to the carbs being forced on me.
Most of the snacky "carbs" are carbs + fat (and I would disagree about how tasty they are, I think most pre-packaged snack foods aren't very good at all).
You can eat probably just about as cheaply doing a healthy keto as a healthy omnivore, depending on cuts of meat chosen. Both would involve vegetables. Not buying snack foods is cheaper than buying them, no matter how cheap they are, also, and same with eating out vs. cooking at home.
I think it’s valid that you can probably eat as cheaply doing healthy omnivore as healthy keto, but that’s not what’s being discussed here. What’s under discussion is the availablity of cheap, inexpensive foods, which in America tend to be carbs drenched in saturated fat. Avoid carbs (or conversely avoid saturated fat) and you will almost inevitably lose weight, if you have been accustomed to a standard American diet. Of course that doesn’t apply to all people, it only applies to people who have been eating a standard American diet. That you and I can happily become obese eating salmon and veggies drenched in olive oil is not the point of the article. People eating those things are not driving the increase in obesity rates in America today.
I think that the bolded is at best included in this discussion parenthetically, if mentioned at all, is what those of us arguing against the article are trying to say. It's NOT carbs. It's convenience foods that are typically carb/fat/salt combinations or straight up sugary treats. But we are living in the "fat is good" period of the wellness industry, so we are just going to lazily say "carbs".6 -
rheddmobile wrote: »rheddmobile wrote: »Executive summary....
- Eating too much makes you fat.
- Eating tasty foods makes it harder to moderate your intake.
- What people find tasty is very varied.
Don't suppose that would generate many website hits?
TBH I find the whole this macro or that macro makes it harder to stay at a good weight vastly overblown - often just another diversion from the biggest issue (over-consumption). When you look at lists of highly satiating foods you find foods that are (predominantly) carbs, protein and fat all represented - plus of course various and varied combinations.
Personally I could very easily overeat on meat/fish (protein), pasta (starchy carbs) or nuts (fat). That's being driven by my personal taste preferences and not the predominant macro composition of those foods.
Some of those would be regarded as highly satiating to others.
Yeah, but you’d have to spend a lot more money to overeat on fat and protein than carbs. I can buy a box of Little Debbie cakes for a dollar, or a pound of salmon or nuts for many times that. Carbs are not only delicious, in our culture they tend to be cheap, and they are easily made in a form which keeps well, which means they are often convenient. You need snacks to stash in your drawer at work, you can pick from nuts, jerky, or... almost any carbs you like. You can buy Coke from a vending machine, you can’t buy milk from a machine (in America, anyway.)
I thought it was a smart article. As a diabetic who needs access to low carb foods, I have become aware of how much easier our culture makes it to eat an excess of carbs than of other foods. Free Continental breakfast at hotel? Carbs, pay for your own if you want protein. Coworkers bring in treats at work? Carbs. Side dishes at any fast food place? Carbs, fatty carbs, and more carbs. I know of a bbq joint which has deviled eggs as a side, but apart from that, all sides are primarily carbs, usually including beans because fast food joints like to cook beans in sugar sauce.
I have to plan ahead and spend my own money and cook for myself to have non-carbs available. To eat carbs all I have to do is not say no to the carbs being forced on me.
Most of the snacky "carbs" are carbs + fat (and I would disagree about how tasty they are, I think most pre-packaged snack foods aren't very good at all).
You can eat probably just about as cheaply doing a healthy keto as a healthy omnivore, depending on cuts of meat chosen. Both would involve vegetables. Not buying snack foods is cheaper than buying them, no matter how cheap they are, also, and same with eating out vs. cooking at home.
I think it’s valid that you can probably eat as cheaply doing healthy omnivore as healthy keto, but that’s not what’s being discussed here. What’s under discussion is the availablity of cheap, inexpensive foods, which in America tend to be carbs drenched in saturated fat. Avoid carbs (or conversely avoid saturated fat) and you will almost inevitably lose weight, if you have been accustomed to a standard American diet. Of course that doesn’t apply to all people, it only applies to people who have been eating a standard American diet. That you and I can happily become obese eating salmon and veggies drenched in olive oil is not the point of the article. People eating those things are not driving the increase in obesity rates in America today.
I think that the bolded is at best included in this discussion parenthetically, if mentioned at all, is what those of us arguing against the article are trying to say. It's NOT carbs. It's convenience foods that are typically carb/fat/salt combinations or straight up sugary treats. But we are living in the "fat is good" period of the wellness industry, so we are just going to lazily say "carbs".
I think there are probably more snack foods which are straight up carbs than ones which are straight up fat. Many candies are pure carbs, and apart from deep fried butter, it’s hard to find snack foods which are fats without a substantial amount of carbs for the fat to cling to. Therefore if you want to tell people to avoid convenience foods, telling them to avoid carbs is a reasonable shorthand.
I understand that it’s hard to be smart and watch other people say dumb things without wanting to correct them with the subtleties. But it’s practically impossible to overrate how dumb many people are when it comes to nutrition. Dumbing it down is helpful for many people.1 -
rheddmobile wrote: »rheddmobile wrote: »Executive summary....
- Eating too much makes you fat.
- Eating tasty foods makes it harder to moderate your intake.
- What people find tasty is very varied.
Don't suppose that would generate many website hits?
TBH I find the whole this macro or that macro makes it harder to stay at a good weight vastly overblown - often just another diversion from the biggest issue (over-consumption). When you look at lists of highly satiating foods you find foods that are (predominantly) carbs, protein and fat all represented - plus of course various and varied combinations.
Personally I could very easily overeat on meat/fish (protein), pasta (starchy carbs) or nuts (fat). That's being driven by my personal taste preferences and not the predominant macro composition of those foods.
Some of those would be regarded as highly satiating to others.
Yeah, but you’d have to spend a lot more money to overeat on fat and protein than carbs. I can buy a box of Little Debbie cakes for a dollar, or a pound of salmon or nuts for many times that. Carbs are not only delicious, in our culture they tend to be cheap, and they are easily made in a form which keeps well, which means they are often convenient. You need snacks to stash in your drawer at work, you can pick from nuts, jerky, or... almost any carbs you like. You can buy Coke from a vending machine, you can’t buy milk from a machine (in America, anyway.)
I thought it was a smart article. As a diabetic who needs access to low carb foods, I have become aware of how much easier our culture makes it to eat an excess of carbs than of other foods. Free Continental breakfast at hotel? Carbs, pay for your own if you want protein. Coworkers bring in treats at work? Carbs. Side dishes at any fast food place? Carbs, fatty carbs, and more carbs. I know of a bbq joint which has deviled eggs as a side, but apart from that, all sides are primarily carbs, usually including beans because fast food joints like to cook beans in sugar sauce.
I have to plan ahead and spend my own money and cook for myself to have non-carbs available. To eat carbs all I have to do is not say no to the carbs being forced on me.
Most of the snacky "carbs" are carbs + fat (and I would disagree about how tasty they are, I think most pre-packaged snack foods aren't very good at all).
You can eat probably just about as cheaply doing a healthy keto as a healthy omnivore, depending on cuts of meat chosen. Both would involve vegetables. Not buying snack foods is cheaper than buying them, no matter how cheap they are, also, and same with eating out vs. cooking at home.
I think it’s valid that you can probably eat as cheaply doing healthy omnivore as healthy keto, but that’s not what’s being discussed here. What’s under discussion is the availablity of cheap, inexpensive foods, which in America tend to be carbs drenched in saturated fat. Avoid carbs (or conversely avoid saturated fat) and you will almost inevitably lose weight, if you have been accustomed to a standard American diet. Of course that doesn’t apply to all people, it only applies to people who have been eating a standard American diet. That you and I can happily become obese eating salmon and veggies drenched in olive oil is not the point of the article. People eating those things are not driving the increase in obesity rates in America today.
I don't think we can generalize about who is becoming obese and who is not. Enough people are obese that I bet there are people who eat all kinds of diets, and plenty of people eat poorly (such as the so-called SAD) and don't become obese.
One of my points, however, is that calling overeating junk foods "overeating carbs" or blaming carbs or the cheapness of carbs is wrong when they are largely carbs + fat (plus protein if we mean fast food).
Fast foods and junk foods such as snack foods aren't really the cheapest way to eat (or, IMO, especially tasty). The cheapest carb options are things like rice, beans, potatoes, whole grains. Those, plus some veg (which everyone should eat and which are also carbs) and cheaper cuts of meat = a very healthy way to eat and probably not too hard not to overeat on for most.
Once one is buying lots of pre-made foods and snacky foods, one is choosing to spend money they can avoid spending, so complaining that those are cheap vs., say, Alaskan salmon is kind of beside the point, IMO.8 -
rheddmobile wrote: »rheddmobile wrote: »rheddmobile wrote: »Executive summary....
- Eating too much makes you fat.
- Eating tasty foods makes it harder to moderate your intake.
- What people find tasty is very varied.
Don't suppose that would generate many website hits?
TBH I find the whole this macro or that macro makes it harder to stay at a good weight vastly overblown - often just another diversion from the biggest issue (over-consumption). When you look at lists of highly satiating foods you find foods that are (predominantly) carbs, protein and fat all represented - plus of course various and varied combinations.
Personally I could very easily overeat on meat/fish (protein), pasta (starchy carbs) or nuts (fat). That's being driven by my personal taste preferences and not the predominant macro composition of those foods.
Some of those would be regarded as highly satiating to others.
Yeah, but you’d have to spend a lot more money to overeat on fat and protein than carbs. I can buy a box of Little Debbie cakes for a dollar, or a pound of salmon or nuts for many times that. Carbs are not only delicious, in our culture they tend to be cheap, and they are easily made in a form which keeps well, which means they are often convenient. You need snacks to stash in your drawer at work, you can pick from nuts, jerky, or... almost any carbs you like. You can buy Coke from a vending machine, you can’t buy milk from a machine (in America, anyway.)
I thought it was a smart article. As a diabetic who needs access to low carb foods, I have become aware of how much easier our culture makes it to eat an excess of carbs than of other foods. Free Continental breakfast at hotel? Carbs, pay for your own if you want protein. Coworkers bring in treats at work? Carbs. Side dishes at any fast food place? Carbs, fatty carbs, and more carbs. I know of a bbq joint which has deviled eggs as a side, but apart from that, all sides are primarily carbs, usually including beans because fast food joints like to cook beans in sugar sauce.
I have to plan ahead and spend my own money and cook for myself to have non-carbs available. To eat carbs all I have to do is not say no to the carbs being forced on me.
Most of the snacky "carbs" are carbs + fat (and I would disagree about how tasty they are, I think most pre-packaged snack foods aren't very good at all).
You can eat probably just about as cheaply doing a healthy keto as a healthy omnivore, depending on cuts of meat chosen. Both would involve vegetables. Not buying snack foods is cheaper than buying them, no matter how cheap they are, also, and same with eating out vs. cooking at home.
I think it’s valid that you can probably eat as cheaply doing healthy omnivore as healthy keto, but that’s not what’s being discussed here. What’s under discussion is the availablity of cheap, inexpensive foods, which in America tend to be carbs drenched in saturated fat. Avoid carbs (or conversely avoid saturated fat) and you will almost inevitably lose weight, if you have been accustomed to a standard American diet. Of course that doesn’t apply to all people, it only applies to people who have been eating a standard American diet. That you and I can happily become obese eating salmon and veggies drenched in olive oil is not the point of the article. People eating those things are not driving the increase in obesity rates in America today.
I think that the bolded is at best included in this discussion parenthetically, if mentioned at all, is what those of us arguing against the article are trying to say. It's NOT carbs. It's convenience foods that are typically carb/fat/salt combinations or straight up sugary treats. But we are living in the "fat is good" period of the wellness industry, so we are just going to lazily say "carbs".
I think there are probably more snack foods which are straight up carbs than ones which are straight up fat. Many candies are pure carbs, and apart from deep fried butter, it’s hard to find snack foods which are fats without a substantial amount of carbs for the fat to cling to. Therefore if you want to tell people to avoid convenience foods, telling them to avoid carbs is a reasonable shorthand.
I understand that it’s hard to be smart and watch other people say dumb things without wanting to correct them with the subtleties. But it’s practically impossible to overrate how dumb many people are when it comes to nutrition. Dumbing it down is helpful for many people.
No, it's combinations. Why dumb it down by pretending like its carbs when the foods people should be eating more of in many cases (veg, fruit, even foods like whole grains and beans/lentils) are often more carb by percentage than the desserts and chips and what not.
I admit I don't really like any plain sugary things without fat, but I am extremely skeptical that hard candies or what not (which aren't very high cal) play a big role in people becoming fat. Soda for the small percentage of people who drink huge amounts of it and who drink the sugary kinds, I think it the only real "just carb" food that plays a role (and plenty of people drink occasional sugary soda without getting fat).
Claiming it's all carbs is just wrong.
And even if you are right about dumbing it down being helpful (I think treating others as if they are dumb is part of the problem and we ought to try to encourage people to actually think), saying "oh, it's carbs" leads to nutty stuff like eating a stick of butter is great or an egg fast or carnivorism or -- especially -- people making excuses for cutting out fruits and veg because "carbs are bad." Why not just say "watch the high cal restaurant food, convenience foods, snacky and dessert foods" and admit that we all know what a good diet is, no one is fat because they think a Little Debbie and some Doritos is the nutritional equivalent of some chicken, broccoli, and roasted potatoes or a stirfry with tofu and veg or a pasta dish with vegetables and ground beef in a tomato sauce or a pork chop with corn and green beans or on and on.6 -
rheddmobile wrote: »rheddmobile wrote: »rheddmobile wrote: »Executive summary....
- Eating too much makes you fat.
- Eating tasty foods makes it harder to moderate your intake.
- What people find tasty is very varied.
Don't suppose that would generate many website hits?
TBH I find the whole this macro or that macro makes it harder to stay at a good weight vastly overblown - often just another diversion from the biggest issue (over-consumption). When you look at lists of highly satiating foods you find foods that are (predominantly) carbs, protein and fat all represented - plus of course various and varied combinations.
Personally I could very easily overeat on meat/fish (protein), pasta (starchy carbs) or nuts (fat). That's being driven by my personal taste preferences and not the predominant macro composition of those foods.
Some of those would be regarded as highly satiating to others.
Yeah, but you’d have to spend a lot more money to overeat on fat and protein than carbs. I can buy a box of Little Debbie cakes for a dollar, or a pound of salmon or nuts for many times that. Carbs are not only delicious, in our culture they tend to be cheap, and they are easily made in a form which keeps well, which means they are often convenient. You need snacks to stash in your drawer at work, you can pick from nuts, jerky, or... almost any carbs you like. You can buy Coke from a vending machine, you can’t buy milk from a machine (in America, anyway.)
I thought it was a smart article. As a diabetic who needs access to low carb foods, I have become aware of how much easier our culture makes it to eat an excess of carbs than of other foods. Free Continental breakfast at hotel? Carbs, pay for your own if you want protein. Coworkers bring in treats at work? Carbs. Side dishes at any fast food place? Carbs, fatty carbs, and more carbs. I know of a bbq joint which has deviled eggs as a side, but apart from that, all sides are primarily carbs, usually including beans because fast food joints like to cook beans in sugar sauce.
I have to plan ahead and spend my own money and cook for myself to have non-carbs available. To eat carbs all I have to do is not say no to the carbs being forced on me.
Most of the snacky "carbs" are carbs + fat (and I would disagree about how tasty they are, I think most pre-packaged snack foods aren't very good at all).
You can eat probably just about as cheaply doing a healthy keto as a healthy omnivore, depending on cuts of meat chosen. Both would involve vegetables. Not buying snack foods is cheaper than buying them, no matter how cheap they are, also, and same with eating out vs. cooking at home.
I think it’s valid that you can probably eat as cheaply doing healthy omnivore as healthy keto, but that’s not what’s being discussed here. What’s under discussion is the availablity of cheap, inexpensive foods, which in America tend to be carbs drenched in saturated fat. Avoid carbs (or conversely avoid saturated fat) and you will almost inevitably lose weight, if you have been accustomed to a standard American diet. Of course that doesn’t apply to all people, it only applies to people who have been eating a standard American diet. That you and I can happily become obese eating salmon and veggies drenched in olive oil is not the point of the article. People eating those things are not driving the increase in obesity rates in America today.
I think that the bolded is at best included in this discussion parenthetically, if mentioned at all, is what those of us arguing against the article are trying to say. It's NOT carbs. It's convenience foods that are typically carb/fat/salt combinations or straight up sugary treats. But we are living in the "fat is good" period of the wellness industry, so we are just going to lazily say "carbs".
I think there are probably more snack foods which are straight up carbs than ones which are straight up fat. Many candies are pure carbs, and apart from deep fried butter, it’s hard to find snack foods which are fats without a substantial amount of carbs for the fat to cling to. Therefore if you want to tell people to avoid convenience foods, telling them to avoid carbs is a reasonable shorthand.
I understand that it’s hard to be smart and watch other people say dumb things without wanting to correct them with the subtleties. But it’s practically impossible to overrate how dumb many people are when it comes to nutrition. Dumbing it down is helpful for many people.
I'd rather just call it "junk." Yeah, there are candies and whatnot that are just sugar, but most commercially baked goods...cookies, cupcakes, etc are as much or more fat than carbs as a % of calories in the item.
Telling people to avoid carbs, and then all of a sudden they're also thinking fruit is bad for them...beans are bad for them, oats are bad for them, etc.9 -
rheddmobile wrote: »rheddmobile wrote: »rheddmobile wrote: »Executive summary....
- Eating too much makes you fat.
- Eating tasty foods makes it harder to moderate your intake.
- What people find tasty is very varied.
Don't suppose that would generate many website hits?
TBH I find the whole this macro or that macro makes it harder to stay at a good weight vastly overblown - often just another diversion from the biggest issue (over-consumption). When you look at lists of highly satiating foods you find foods that are (predominantly) carbs, protein and fat all represented - plus of course various and varied combinations.
Personally I could very easily overeat on meat/fish (protein), pasta (starchy carbs) or nuts (fat). That's being driven by my personal taste preferences and not the predominant macro composition of those foods.
Some of those would be regarded as highly satiating to others.
Yeah, but you’d have to spend a lot more money to overeat on fat and protein than carbs. I can buy a box of Little Debbie cakes for a dollar, or a pound of salmon or nuts for many times that. Carbs are not only delicious, in our culture they tend to be cheap, and they are easily made in a form which keeps well, which means they are often convenient. You need snacks to stash in your drawer at work, you can pick from nuts, jerky, or... almost any carbs you like. You can buy Coke from a vending machine, you can’t buy milk from a machine (in America, anyway.)
I thought it was a smart article. As a diabetic who needs access to low carb foods, I have become aware of how much easier our culture makes it to eat an excess of carbs than of other foods. Free Continental breakfast at hotel? Carbs, pay for your own if you want protein. Coworkers bring in treats at work? Carbs. Side dishes at any fast food place? Carbs, fatty carbs, and more carbs. I know of a bbq joint which has deviled eggs as a side, but apart from that, all sides are primarily carbs, usually including beans because fast food joints like to cook beans in sugar sauce.
I have to plan ahead and spend my own money and cook for myself to have non-carbs available. To eat carbs all I have to do is not say no to the carbs being forced on me.
Most of the snacky "carbs" are carbs + fat (and I would disagree about how tasty they are, I think most pre-packaged snack foods aren't very good at all).
You can eat probably just about as cheaply doing a healthy keto as a healthy omnivore, depending on cuts of meat chosen. Both would involve vegetables. Not buying snack foods is cheaper than buying them, no matter how cheap they are, also, and same with eating out vs. cooking at home.
I think it’s valid that you can probably eat as cheaply doing healthy omnivore as healthy keto, but that’s not what’s being discussed here. What’s under discussion is the availablity of cheap, inexpensive foods, which in America tend to be carbs drenched in saturated fat. Avoid carbs (or conversely avoid saturated fat) and you will almost inevitably lose weight, if you have been accustomed to a standard American diet. Of course that doesn’t apply to all people, it only applies to people who have been eating a standard American diet. That you and I can happily become obese eating salmon and veggies drenched in olive oil is not the point of the article. People eating those things are not driving the increase in obesity rates in America today.
I think that the bolded is at best included in this discussion parenthetically, if mentioned at all, is what those of us arguing against the article are trying to say. It's NOT carbs. It's convenience foods that are typically carb/fat/salt combinations or straight up sugary treats. But we are living in the "fat is good" period of the wellness industry, so we are just going to lazily say "carbs".
I think there are probably more snack foods which are straight up carbs than ones which are straight up fat. Many candies are pure carbs, and apart from deep fried butter, it’s hard to find snack foods which are fats without a substantial amount of carbs for the fat to cling to. Therefore if you want to tell people to avoid convenience foods, telling them to avoid carbs is a reasonable shorthand.
I understand that it’s hard to be smart and watch other people say dumb things without wanting to correct them with the subtleties. But it’s practically impossible to overrate how dumb many people are when it comes to nutrition. Dumbing it down is helpful for many people.
Considering how many people come here confused about why they aren't losing weight when they cut out most "carbs" and are worried the banana they are putting in their smoothie is the reason they can't lose weight, I personally think maybe we should stop assuming everyone is dumb and actually educate them about how it works. It's not rocket surgery, but it's sure better for the industry if they keep handing people dumbed down strategies that leave people largely ignorant. I'm not yet seeing the obvious success of the low-carb craze in society around me, people are still overweight/obese.8 -
rheddmobile wrote: »rheddmobile wrote: »Executive summary....
- Eating too much makes you fat.
- Eating tasty foods makes it harder to moderate your intake.
- What people find tasty is very varied.
Don't suppose that would generate many website hits?
TBH I find the whole this macro or that macro makes it harder to stay at a good weight vastly overblown - often just another diversion from the biggest issue (over-consumption). When you look at lists of highly satiating foods you find foods that are (predominantly) carbs, protein and fat all represented - plus of course various and varied combinations.
Personally I could very easily overeat on meat/fish (protein), pasta (starchy carbs) or nuts (fat). That's being driven by my personal taste preferences and not the predominant macro composition of those foods.
Some of those would be regarded as highly satiating to others.
Yeah, but you’d have to spend a lot more money to overeat on fat and protein than carbs. I can buy a box of Little Debbie cakes for a dollar, or a pound of salmon or nuts for many times that. Carbs are not only delicious, in our culture they tend to be cheap, and they are easily made in a form which keeps well, which means they are often convenient. You need snacks to stash in your drawer at work, you can pick from nuts, jerky, or... almost any carbs you like. You can buy Coke from a vending machine, you can’t buy milk from a machine (in America, anyway.)
I thought it was a smart article. As a diabetic who needs access to low carb foods, I have become aware of how much easier our culture makes it to eat an excess of carbs than of other foods. Free Continental breakfast at hotel? Carbs, pay for your own if you want protein. Coworkers bring in treats at work? Carbs. Side dishes at any fast food place? Carbs, fatty carbs, and more carbs. I know of a bbq joint which has deviled eggs as a side, but apart from that, all sides are primarily carbs, usually including beans because fast food joints like to cook beans in sugar sauce.
I have to plan ahead and spend my own money and cook for myself to have non-carbs available. To eat carbs all I have to do is not say no to the carbs being forced on me.
Most of the snacky "carbs" are carbs + fat (and I would disagree about how tasty they are, I think most pre-packaged snack foods aren't very good at all).
You can eat probably just about as cheaply doing a healthy keto as a healthy omnivore, depending on cuts of meat chosen. Both would involve vegetables. Not buying snack foods is cheaper than buying them, no matter how cheap they are, also, and same with eating out vs. cooking at home.
I think it’s valid that you can probably eat as cheaply doing healthy omnivore as healthy keto, but that’s not what’s being discussed here. What’s under discussion is the availablity of cheap, inexpensive foods, which in America tend to be carbs drenched in saturated fat. Avoid carbs (or conversely avoid saturated fat) and you will almost inevitably lose weight, if you have been accustomed to a standard American diet. Of course that doesn’t apply to all people, it only applies to people who have been eating a standard American diet. That you and I can happily become obese eating salmon and veggies drenched in olive oil is not the point of the article. People eating those things are not driving the increase in obesity rates in America today.
I don't think we can generalize about who is becoming obese and who is not. Enough people are obese that I bet there are people who eat all kinds of diets, and plenty of people eat poorly (such as the so-called SAD) and don't become obese.
One of my points, however, is that calling overeating junk foods "overeating carbs" or blaming carbs or the cheapness of carbs is wrong when they are largely carbs + fat (plus protein if we mean fast food).
Fast foods and junk foods such as snack foods aren't really the cheapest way to eat (or, IMO, especially tasty). The cheapest carb options are things like rice, beans, potatoes, whole grains. Those, plus some veg (which everyone should eat and which are also carbs) and cheaper cuts of meat = a very healthy way to eat and probably not too hard not to overeat on for most.
Once one is buying lots of pre-made foods and snacky foods, one is choosing to spend money they can avoid spending, so complaining that those are cheap vs., say, Alaskan salmon is kind of beside the point, IMO.
I don’t agree with literally anything you’ve said here.
Time is money. It’s not valid to argue that dried beans are less expensive than a bag of chips when one requires cooking space, cooking gear, and time and the other requires picking up a bag of chips. Not everyone, and especially not all poor people, have the leisure and energy to want to cook every day. Could most people figure out how to find time? Probably. But it is a real cost which shouldn’t be ignored. And it’s a particular kind of snobbishness which labels the choices made by poor people “lazy” without being in those shoes.
Also, we can indeed generalize about who’s becoming obese - there’s abundant research connecting poverty and obesity. As well as abundant research about which specific foods are strongly correlated with obesity.0 -
rheddmobile wrote: »rheddmobile wrote: »rheddmobile wrote: »Executive summary....
- Eating too much makes you fat.
- Eating tasty foods makes it harder to moderate your intake.
- What people find tasty is very varied.
Don't suppose that would generate many website hits?
TBH I find the whole this macro or that macro makes it harder to stay at a good weight vastly overblown - often just another diversion from the biggest issue (over-consumption). When you look at lists of highly satiating foods you find foods that are (predominantly) carbs, protein and fat all represented - plus of course various and varied combinations.
Personally I could very easily overeat on meat/fish (protein), pasta (starchy carbs) or nuts (fat). That's being driven by my personal taste preferences and not the predominant macro composition of those foods.
Some of those would be regarded as highly satiating to others.
Yeah, but you’d have to spend a lot more money to overeat on fat and protein than carbs. I can buy a box of Little Debbie cakes for a dollar, or a pound of salmon or nuts for many times that. Carbs are not only delicious, in our culture they tend to be cheap, and they are easily made in a form which keeps well, which means they are often convenient. You need snacks to stash in your drawer at work, you can pick from nuts, jerky, or... almost any carbs you like. You can buy Coke from a vending machine, you can’t buy milk from a machine (in America, anyway.)
I thought it was a smart article. As a diabetic who needs access to low carb foods, I have become aware of how much easier our culture makes it to eat an excess of carbs than of other foods. Free Continental breakfast at hotel? Carbs, pay for your own if you want protein. Coworkers bring in treats at work? Carbs. Side dishes at any fast food place? Carbs, fatty carbs, and more carbs. I know of a bbq joint which has deviled eggs as a side, but apart from that, all sides are primarily carbs, usually including beans because fast food joints like to cook beans in sugar sauce.
I have to plan ahead and spend my own money and cook for myself to have non-carbs available. To eat carbs all I have to do is not say no to the carbs being forced on me.
Most of the snacky "carbs" are carbs + fat (and I would disagree about how tasty they are, I think most pre-packaged snack foods aren't very good at all).
You can eat probably just about as cheaply doing a healthy keto as a healthy omnivore, depending on cuts of meat chosen. Both would involve vegetables. Not buying snack foods is cheaper than buying them, no matter how cheap they are, also, and same with eating out vs. cooking at home.
I think it’s valid that you can probably eat as cheaply doing healthy omnivore as healthy keto, but that’s not what’s being discussed here. What’s under discussion is the availablity of cheap, inexpensive foods, which in America tend to be carbs drenched in saturated fat. Avoid carbs (or conversely avoid saturated fat) and you will almost inevitably lose weight, if you have been accustomed to a standard American diet. Of course that doesn’t apply to all people, it only applies to people who have been eating a standard American diet. That you and I can happily become obese eating salmon and veggies drenched in olive oil is not the point of the article. People eating those things are not driving the increase in obesity rates in America today.
I think that the bolded is at best included in this discussion parenthetically, if mentioned at all, is what those of us arguing against the article are trying to say. It's NOT carbs. It's convenience foods that are typically carb/fat/salt combinations or straight up sugary treats. But we are living in the "fat is good" period of the wellness industry, so we are just going to lazily say "carbs".
I think there are probably more snack foods which are straight up carbs than ones which are straight up fat. Many candies are pure carbs, and apart from deep fried butter, it’s hard to find snack foods which are fats without a substantial amount of carbs for the fat to cling to. Therefore if you want to tell people to avoid convenience foods, telling them to avoid carbs is a reasonable shorthand.
I understand that it’s hard to be smart and watch other people say dumb things without wanting to correct them with the subtleties. But it’s practically impossible to overrate how dumb many people are when it comes to nutrition. Dumbing it down is helpful for many people.
Considering how many people come here confused about why they aren't losing weight when they cut out most "carbs" and are worried the banana they are putting in their smoothie is the reason they can't lose weight, I personally think maybe we should stop assuming everyone is dumb and actually educate them about how it works. It's not rocket surgery, but it's sure better for the industry if they keep handing people dumbed down strategies that leave people largely ignorant. I'm not yet seeing the obvious success of the low-carb craze in society around me, people are still overweight/obese.
I tend to agree with you, with reservations. However, I keep being distracted by the idea of rocket surgery.
When a large number of people all make the same change at the same moment, the problem is environmental, not personal. It’s reasonable to look at environmental solutions.1 -
rheddmobile wrote: »rheddmobile wrote: »rheddmobile wrote: »Executive summary....
- Eating too much makes you fat.
- Eating tasty foods makes it harder to moderate your intake.
- What people find tasty is very varied.
Don't suppose that would generate many website hits?
TBH I find the whole this macro or that macro makes it harder to stay at a good weight vastly overblown - often just another diversion from the biggest issue (over-consumption). When you look at lists of highly satiating foods you find foods that are (predominantly) carbs, protein and fat all represented - plus of course various and varied combinations.
Personally I could very easily overeat on meat/fish (protein), pasta (starchy carbs) or nuts (fat). That's being driven by my personal taste preferences and not the predominant macro composition of those foods.
Some of those would be regarded as highly satiating to others.
Yeah, but you’d have to spend a lot more money to overeat on fat and protein than carbs. I can buy a box of Little Debbie cakes for a dollar, or a pound of salmon or nuts for many times that. Carbs are not only delicious, in our culture they tend to be cheap, and they are easily made in a form which keeps well, which means they are often convenient. You need snacks to stash in your drawer at work, you can pick from nuts, jerky, or... almost any carbs you like. You can buy Coke from a vending machine, you can’t buy milk from a machine (in America, anyway.)
I thought it was a smart article. As a diabetic who needs access to low carb foods, I have become aware of how much easier our culture makes it to eat an excess of carbs than of other foods. Free Continental breakfast at hotel? Carbs, pay for your own if you want protein. Coworkers bring in treats at work? Carbs. Side dishes at any fast food place? Carbs, fatty carbs, and more carbs. I know of a bbq joint which has deviled eggs as a side, but apart from that, all sides are primarily carbs, usually including beans because fast food joints like to cook beans in sugar sauce.
I have to plan ahead and spend my own money and cook for myself to have non-carbs available. To eat carbs all I have to do is not say no to the carbs being forced on me.
Most of the snacky "carbs" are carbs + fat (and I would disagree about how tasty they are, I think most pre-packaged snack foods aren't very good at all).
You can eat probably just about as cheaply doing a healthy keto as a healthy omnivore, depending on cuts of meat chosen. Both would involve vegetables. Not buying snack foods is cheaper than buying them, no matter how cheap they are, also, and same with eating out vs. cooking at home.
I think it’s valid that you can probably eat as cheaply doing healthy omnivore as healthy keto, but that’s not what’s being discussed here. What’s under discussion is the availablity of cheap, inexpensive foods, which in America tend to be carbs drenched in saturated fat. Avoid carbs (or conversely avoid saturated fat) and you will almost inevitably lose weight, if you have been accustomed to a standard American diet. Of course that doesn’t apply to all people, it only applies to people who have been eating a standard American diet. That you and I can happily become obese eating salmon and veggies drenched in olive oil is not the point of the article. People eating those things are not driving the increase in obesity rates in America today.
I don't think we can generalize about who is becoming obese and who is not. Enough people are obese that I bet there are people who eat all kinds of diets, and plenty of people eat poorly (such as the so-called SAD) and don't become obese.
One of my points, however, is that calling overeating junk foods "overeating carbs" or blaming carbs or the cheapness of carbs is wrong when they are largely carbs + fat (plus protein if we mean fast food).
Fast foods and junk foods such as snack foods aren't really the cheapest way to eat (or, IMO, especially tasty). The cheapest carb options are things like rice, beans, potatoes, whole grains. Those, plus some veg (which everyone should eat and which are also carbs) and cheaper cuts of meat = a very healthy way to eat and probably not too hard not to overeat on for most.
Once one is buying lots of pre-made foods and snacky foods, one is choosing to spend money they can avoid spending, so complaining that those are cheap vs., say, Alaskan salmon is kind of beside the point, IMO.
I don’t agree with literally anything you’ve said here.
Time is money. It’s not valid to argue that dried beans are less expensive than a bag of chips when one requires cooking space, cooking gear, and time and the other requires picking up a bag of chips. Not everyone, and especially not all poor people, have the leisure and energy to want to cook every day. Could most people figure out how to find time? Probably. But it is a real cost which shouldn’t be ignored. And it’s a particular kind of snobbishness which labels the choices made by poor people “lazy” without being in those shoes.
Also, we can indeed generalize about who’s becoming obese - there’s abundant research connecting poverty and obesity. As well as abundant research about which specific foods are strongly correlated with obesity.
Canned beans are also cheap. In lieu of chips, potatoes are cheap, store well, and don't take a lot of cooking time or skill.
More to the point, I have not said anything about poor people or being lazy. My own struggle when I first lost weight (when I had a job that had crazy hours and when I thought I had no time) was learning that cooking can be easy and fast. But it is flat out not true that people eat high cal junk food because (1) they have no other options, (2) because "carbs" of that sort (i.e., not really "carbs" but mixed macros) are cheaper than other options, or (3) that they are too stupid or uneducated to have the common sense to know what the healthful dinner is and that most junk foods don't have a lot in the way of necessary nutrients (depending on what "junk foods" we are talking about).
And back to the topic of this thread -- carbs -- I think you are bending over backwards to try to argue (1) that carbs are the problem with the foods you are talking about when as you have admitted they are typically high fat (chips vs. potatoes), and (2) that people are forced to buy high cal foods as opposed to doing so because they want to, like those foods, not because they have no other option or think chips is a nutrient-dense dinner. Neither of those is true.5 -
rheddmobile wrote: »rheddmobile wrote: »rheddmobile wrote: »rheddmobile wrote: »Executive summary....
- Eating too much makes you fat.
- Eating tasty foods makes it harder to moderate your intake.
- What people find tasty is very varied.
Don't suppose that would generate many website hits?
TBH I find the whole this macro or that macro makes it harder to stay at a good weight vastly overblown - often just another diversion from the biggest issue (over-consumption). When you look at lists of highly satiating foods you find foods that are (predominantly) carbs, protein and fat all represented - plus of course various and varied combinations.
Personally I could very easily overeat on meat/fish (protein), pasta (starchy carbs) or nuts (fat). That's being driven by my personal taste preferences and not the predominant macro composition of those foods.
Some of those would be regarded as highly satiating to others.
Yeah, but you’d have to spend a lot more money to overeat on fat and protein than carbs. I can buy a box of Little Debbie cakes for a dollar, or a pound of salmon or nuts for many times that. Carbs are not only delicious, in our culture they tend to be cheap, and they are easily made in a form which keeps well, which means they are often convenient. You need snacks to stash in your drawer at work, you can pick from nuts, jerky, or... almost any carbs you like. You can buy Coke from a vending machine, you can’t buy milk from a machine (in America, anyway.)
I thought it was a smart article. As a diabetic who needs access to low carb foods, I have become aware of how much easier our culture makes it to eat an excess of carbs than of other foods. Free Continental breakfast at hotel? Carbs, pay for your own if you want protein. Coworkers bring in treats at work? Carbs. Side dishes at any fast food place? Carbs, fatty carbs, and more carbs. I know of a bbq joint which has deviled eggs as a side, but apart from that, all sides are primarily carbs, usually including beans because fast food joints like to cook beans in sugar sauce.
I have to plan ahead and spend my own money and cook for myself to have non-carbs available. To eat carbs all I have to do is not say no to the carbs being forced on me.
Most of the snacky "carbs" are carbs + fat (and I would disagree about how tasty they are, I think most pre-packaged snack foods aren't very good at all).
You can eat probably just about as cheaply doing a healthy keto as a healthy omnivore, depending on cuts of meat chosen. Both would involve vegetables. Not buying snack foods is cheaper than buying them, no matter how cheap they are, also, and same with eating out vs. cooking at home.
I think it’s valid that you can probably eat as cheaply doing healthy omnivore as healthy keto, but that’s not what’s being discussed here. What’s under discussion is the availablity of cheap, inexpensive foods, which in America tend to be carbs drenched in saturated fat. Avoid carbs (or conversely avoid saturated fat) and you will almost inevitably lose weight, if you have been accustomed to a standard American diet. Of course that doesn’t apply to all people, it only applies to people who have been eating a standard American diet. That you and I can happily become obese eating salmon and veggies drenched in olive oil is not the point of the article. People eating those things are not driving the increase in obesity rates in America today.
I think that the bolded is at best included in this discussion parenthetically, if mentioned at all, is what those of us arguing against the article are trying to say. It's NOT carbs. It's convenience foods that are typically carb/fat/salt combinations or straight up sugary treats. But we are living in the "fat is good" period of the wellness industry, so we are just going to lazily say "carbs".
I think there are probably more snack foods which are straight up carbs than ones which are straight up fat. Many candies are pure carbs, and apart from deep fried butter, it’s hard to find snack foods which are fats without a substantial amount of carbs for the fat to cling to. Therefore if you want to tell people to avoid convenience foods, telling them to avoid carbs is a reasonable shorthand.
I understand that it’s hard to be smart and watch other people say dumb things without wanting to correct them with the subtleties. But it’s practically impossible to overrate how dumb many people are when it comes to nutrition. Dumbing it down is helpful for many people.
Considering how many people come here confused about why they aren't losing weight when they cut out most "carbs" and are worried the banana they are putting in their smoothie is the reason they can't lose weight, I personally think maybe we should stop assuming everyone is dumb and actually educate them about how it works. It's not rocket surgery, but it's sure better for the industry if they keep handing people dumbed down strategies that leave people largely ignorant. I'm not yet seeing the obvious success of the low-carb craze in society around me, people are still overweight/obese.
I tend to agree with you, with reservations. However, I keep being distracted by the idea of rocket surgery.
When a large number of people all make the same change at the same moment, the problem is environmental, not personal. It’s reasonable to look at environmental solutions.
I would agree that part of the issue is environmental in that our food environments changed in ways that are both very good (food availability and food choice are good things, and we actually can have more nutrient dense diets now for many of the same reasons, since vegetables and fruits are much more available throughout the year, at least up north where I live, food in general is cheaper) and somewhat bad (there are fewer cultural restrictions on food choice and eating such that many people find it very easy to mindlessly overeat, we are less active, there are more ways to eat excessive cals).
But that it is environmental doesn't mean we have no choice. It just means we have to exercise the choice more than we did before. As a tradeoff for the good that came as part of that, I don't think that's all that bad.
Wrt "looking at environmental solutions," what do you think is possible? (I'm reading this as you demanding a social change, such as taxing or banning certain food items, and not what I would suggest -- people taking charge of their own environments and more education/information available.3
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
- 430 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K 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