No more added or artificial sugar: who's with me?

stumblinthrulife

Or perhaps cutting sugar also leads to a caloric deficit and a significant reduction in weight - which is what actually improves your health.

In my experience when people who fail to cut sugar get unhealthy, it's because they cannot moderate it at all. They eat thousands of calories at single sittings, without adequate exercise to offset it. They get obese and unhealthy again, and blame it on the sugar.

Personally I eat nutrient rich whole foods most of the day, and then have a couple hundred calories of something I enjoy in the evening.

If you can't constrain yourself to a moderate amount of sugar, it's not the sugar's fault. It's your lack of willpower.

yes exactly.
and if you read more about, pretty much the more that is said,
but with the emerging evidence that fructose effects the bodys abilitys to create the hormones that effect appitite. so when people get obese its looking pretty bloody likely it is the sugar doing it!
look this is all new. i was first told about it 6 weeks ago by my Australian dental hygenist. within the last week alone there has been 5 newspaper articles and one tv program about it in the UK.
so again
all Wackadoodle or the glimmer of truth?

Or just two correlating factors, and the wrong one being pinpointed as causal?

Fructose increasing appetite is not the same as fructose making you fat. I was actually saying just the other day that if I eat a Clif bar I actually get hungrier for about half an hour. So long as I avoid acting on that hunger - knowing that it is fake - it does not have an adverse impact on my weight.

It's the increased eating that makes you fat. If you can learn to moderate sugar, and learn that the short term hunger spike is false, and not act on it, then there is no reason to completely and totally remove all sugar from your diet.

brevislux

I'm with you! That's what I've been doing as well.

stumblinthrulife

Or perhaps cutting sugar also leads to a caloric deficit and a significant reduction in weight - which is what actually improves your health.

In my experience when people who fail to cut sugar get unhealthy, it's because they cannot moderate it at all. They eat thousands of calories at single sittings, without adequate exercise to offset it. They get obese and unhealthy again, and blame it on the sugar.

Personally I eat nutrient rich whole foods most of the day, and then have a couple hundred calories of something I enjoy in the evening.

If you can't constrain yourself to a moderate amount of sugar, it's not the sugar's fault. It's your lack of willpower.

yes exactly.
and if you read more about, pretty much the more that is said,
but with the emerging evidence that fructose effects the bodys abilitys to create the hormones that effect appitite. so when people get obese its looking pretty bloody likely it is the sugar doing it!
look this is all new. i was first told about it 6 weeks ago by my Australian dental hygenist. within the last week alone there has been 5 newspaper articles and one tv program about it in the UK.
so again
all Wackadoodle or the glimmer of truth?

Or just two correlating factors, and the wrong one being pinpointed as causal?

Fructose increasing appetite is not the same as fructose making you fat. I was actually saying just the other day that if I eat a Clif bar I actually get hungrier for about half an hour. So long as I avoid acting on that hunger - knowing that it is fake - it does not have an adverse impact on my weight.

It's the increased eating that makes you fat. If you can learn to moderate sugar, and learn that the short term hunger spike is false, and not act on it, then there is no reason to completely and totally remove all sugar from your diet.

Further more, the wholesale cutting of sugar from the diet is often very detrimental in the long term. When you convince someone that something very, very difficult like removing all sugar from the diet is necessary for success, you are setting them up for failure. When they fail to remove all sugar from the diet, they feel they have failed altogether and may as well not bother.

Rather than learning to moderate it, and understanding their body's reaction to it, they just give up altogether and go back to their previous bad eating habits.

The perfect is the enemy of the good.

RhonndaJ

Or perhaps cutting sugar also leads to a caloric deficit and a significant reduction in weight - which is what actually improves your health.

In my experience when people who fail to cut sugar get unhealthy, it's because they cannot moderate it at all. They eat thousands of calories at single sittings, without adequate exercise to offset it. They get obese and unhealthy again, and blame it on the sugar.

Personally I eat nutrient rich whole foods most of the day, and then have a couple hundred calories of something I enjoy in the evening.

If you can't constrain yourself to a moderate amount of sugar, it's not the sugar's fault. It's your lack of willpower.

yes exactly.
and if you read more about, pretty much the more that is said,
but with the emerging evidence that fructose effects the bodys abilitys to create the hormones that effect appitite. so when people get obese its looking pretty bloody likely it is the sugar doing it!
look this is all new. i was first told about it 6 weeks ago by my Australian dental hygenist. within the last week alone there has been 5 newspaper articles and one tv program about it in the UK.
so again
all Wackadoodle or the glimmer of truth?

Not that I care one way or another about the whole sugar thing, but the number of articles and tv program in the last week alone only means that the media is catering to the New Years resolutionists and nothing more.

And what you're saying isn't new, this belief has been around for quite some time just pretty much ignore due to lack of interest, it's just being resurrected by some faction for whatever reason.

Also, my dental hygienist talks to me about going gluten free, doesn't mean I'm going to take it as something I think is remotely necessary.

CyberEd312

Or perhaps cutting sugar also leads to a caloric deficit and a significant reduction in weight - which is what actually improves your health.

In my experience when people who fail to cut sugar get unhealthy, it's because they cannot moderate it at all. They eat thousands of calories at single sittings, without adequate exercise to offset it. They get obese and unhealthy again, and blame it on the sugar.

Personally I eat nutrient rich whole foods most of the day, and then have a couple hundred calories of something I enjoy in the evening.

If you can't constrain yourself to a moderate amount of sugar, it's not the sugar's fault. It's your lack of willpower.

yes exactly.
and if you read more about, pretty much the more that is said,
but with the emerging evidence that fructose effects the bodys abilitys to create the hormones that effect appitite. so when people get obese its looking pretty bloody likely it is the sugar doing it!
look this is all new. i was first told about it 6 weeks ago by my Australian dental hygenist. within the last week alone there has been 5 newspaper articles and one tv program about it in the UK.
so again
all Wackadoodle or the glimmer of truth?

It is No different than anything else, sugar is just the new whipping boy to blame for people's inability to control their over consumption of food which is leading to the obesity epidemic.... No one source (sugar or fats or whatever) is to blame, when you over consume you gain weight.... period....

GW1970

You put it back on because you chronically ate over maintenance,

so why can't the western world regulate calorie control , when many indeginous people (or those without access to refined sugar)in the world can?

not because of sugar or fructose...

lets be clear, sugar is a refined product obtained from pulping sugar cane or sugar beet down to a clear liquid which is then crystalised by soaking up the excess liquid in alcohol. thus leaving a refined product containing 50% glucose (which the body needs, you'd be dead without it) and 50% fructose which the body doesn't need! and none of the other parts of the cane or beet that soak up the fructose, as previously mentioned fibre!
so glucose good, fructose bad . get it?:happy:

twixlepennie

give up sugar , keep the alternativly sourced sweetners to help wean you off sugar, soon you won't want those either! eventually your natural appitite will return and you won't over eat.
but lets get it straight its not "sugar" its fructose you need to avoid!
as for what everyone else has said. well this is all new and i guess their response is no differant to smokers reaction when it became clear that was dangerous.
so i'm bookmarking this so i can come back and say "told you so":laugh: :laugh: :happy:

I have never tracked a gram of sugar (like ever), only concern myself with Carbs, Proteins, and Fats, and the whole calorie in calorie out thing.... Pretty sure it has worked well for me so far..... OP Sugar is a subset of Carbs and not the devil it is being made out to be... If you are eating a diet filled with lean meats, veggies, fruits, and whole grains and have the calories for some discretionary foods from time to time, there is no need to fear sugar..... Best of Luck

+1 You are such an inspiration :flowerforyou:

Greytfish

Best part of this discussion? The assertion that removing all added processed sugars from one's dietary intake is "very, very difficult." :laugh:

I guess that's a tempting view if you've been raised on a diet very high in processed sugars, but it's a very oversimplistic view.

Sugar consumption by the masses is anthropoligically a quite recent development, and not one that has brought about great things. That doesn't mean processed, added sugar is evil, but that the impossibility of imaginging life and food without it says more about holders of that view than it does about sugar itself.

jonnythan

so why can't the western world regulate calorie control , when many indeginous people (or those without access to refined sugar)in the world can?

Because indigenous people, and people in third world nations, don't have essentially limitless resources.

For an American, calories are so cheap as to be almost negligible. They are also extremely convenient. Indigenous people can't, on a whim and with virtually no financial outlay, consume 1200 calories of delicious food.

That's why Americans are fat. It isn't because they eat fructose. It's because they're constantly surrounded by delicious, calorie-dense, cheap food they can acquire and consume on a moment's notice.

The key to maintaining weight is to moderate your calorie intake. Period, end of story. If you can't do that without saying "no more added sugar" then by all means go ahead and do that. But don't pretend sugar is some evil nasty thing that all people must avoid because it's not.

And if you want to argue that point, take a deep breath and realize that you're surrounded by people who have been by every possible measure far more successful than you, over a far longer period of time, who have not felt the need to give up sugar.

GW1970

Fructose increasing appetite

spot on :flowerforyou:

is not the same as fructose making you fat. I was actually saying just the other day that if I eat a Clif bar I actually get hungrier for about half an hour. So long as I avoid acting on that hunger - knowing that it is fake - it does not have an adverse impact on my weight.

then there is my point proven.
are you sir able to smoke a death stick while with friends and maybe a pint of fine real ale. without then buying a pack the next day?
then if you are sir you are a very lucky person indeed. not sure there are many in the world who can say the same!
i rest my case ladies and gentlemen of the jury. just before you pass the death sentence, i'd urge you to be 100% sure , it might just be the biggest miscarriage of justice in recent human history if your wrong!:noway:

GW1970

And if you want to argue that point, take a deep breath and realize that you're surrounded by people who have been by every possible measure far more successful than you, over a far longer period of time, who have not felt the need to give up sugar.

and until i started eating food with sugar again after splitting with the first wife. i didn't need to diet! as i wasn't overweight and hadn't been for 33 years of my life! thats 3/4 of my life! just in case deep enough breath for you?:bigsmile: :explode:

jonnythan

And if you want to argue that point, take a deep breath and realize that you're surrounded by people who have been by every possible measure far more successful than you, over a far longer period of time, who have not felt the need to give up sugar.

and until i started eating food with sugar again after splitting with the first wife. i didn't need to diet! as i wasn't overweight and hadn't been for 33 years of my life! thats 3/4 of my life! just in case deep enough breath for you?:bigsmile: :explode:

Uh, yeah. That's because by eating a "no sugar" diet you are automatically limiting your calorie intake.

If you stop eating your "no sugar diet" and double your calorie intake because you're finally not on a restrictive diet anymore, then you will gain weight.

There's no mystery there. There's nothing magical about sugar. You gained weight because you started eating too much.

Again: you are surrounded by people in this thread who have been far more successful than you while eating sugar.

J72FIT

Or just two correlating factors, and the wrong one being pinpointed as causal?

This would IMO be an example of the consequence not necessarily follow from the premise...

GW1970

so why can't the western world regulate calorie control , when many indeginous people (or those without access to refined sugar)in the world can?

Because indigenous people, and people in third world nations, don't have essentially limitless resources.

For an American, calories are so cheap as to be almost negligible. They are also extremely convenient. Indigenous people can't, on a whim and with virtually no financial outlay, consume 1200 calories of delicious food.

that is because most of their land is tied up growing useless crops, like coffee,(for caffiene) rape(for petrol additives) and suger cane or beet(for shock sugar) for consumption by us fat westerners, leaving little land left to grow proper food for themselfs. differant argument but supports my argument somewhat

That's why Americans are fat. It isn't because they eat fructose. It's because they're constantly surrounded by delicious, calorie-dense, cheap food they can acquire and consume on a moment's notice.

yes i know, i lived in America for a year after my first divorce, i'm blaming you guys for the problem i'm sorting out now!:flowerforyou:

stumblinthrulife

Fructose increasing appetite

spot on :flowerforyou:

is not the same as fructose making you fat. I was actually saying just the other day that if I eat a Clif bar I actually get hungrier for about half an hour. So long as I avoid acting on that hunger - knowing that it is fake - it does not have an adverse impact on my weight.

then there is my point proven.
are you sir able to smoke a death stick while with friends and maybe a pint of fine real ale. without then buying a pack the next day?
then if you are sir you are a very lucky person indeed. not sure there are many in the world who can say the same!
i rest my case ladies and gentlemen of the jury. just before you pass the death sentence, i'd urge you to be 100% sure , it might just be the biggest miscarriage of justice in recent human history if your wrong!:noway:

You keep coming back to this false analogy with smoking. Smoking is not essential for life. Eating is. That makes these things very, very different beasts.

Sugar is a commonplace, harmless (in moderation) ingredient in many foods. Yes, it can cause a temporary appetite spike (I say 'can' because it doesn't always happen). But all that is needed to overcome this is knowledge + a little willpower. It does not need to be removed completely from the diet unless you are not willing to gain and exercise these two things.

If you cannot learn to moderate sugar consumption, then the logical next step is indeed to remove it from your diet. However, hundreds of people on MFP have been able to moderate sugar consumption, and gone on to see massive amounts of success.

By telling people to remove sugar altogether from the outset, and that this is the only manner by which they will succeed, you are putting the cart before the horse, and dooming many to failure.

What I would like to see people do is to learn how to control their diet while still partaking of food they enjoy in moderate quantities. If they absolutely cannot do this, then, and only then, should they begin to remove the foods that are triggering their overeating from their diet.

J72FIT

so glucose good, fructose bad . get it?:happy:

Did you know that fructose is probably one of the best nutrients for topping of liver glycogen for hard training athletes?

GW1970

You gained weight because you started eating too much.

nothing gets past you does it!:happy: and why did i start eating too much after 33 years of being able to know when i was full. did divorce suddenly make me forget that? or perhaps it had something to do with the high sugar content found in all the foods i could suddenly eat ? which my (overweight) 2nd wife introduced me too .she was american oh yes:brokenheart:

Again: you are surrounded by people in this thread who have been far more successful than you while eating sugar.

so i'll carry on piling on the pounds then live like a matyr for 5 or 6 years after i've nurtured all the health problems that come with being overweight, then stop sugar , be able to regulate myself again, lose maybe 100lb instead of 40lb and that will make my argument more valid?
cause if i'd been eating badly for 40 years instead of 10 thats likely to have been where i am.
btw when with wife no1 i reckon i was eating nearly 3000 a day! easy . mind i'll expect that was the 40mile a week running habit that kept that off eh?:yawn:

GW1970

Did you know that fructose is probably one of the best nutrients for topping of liver glycogen for hard training athletes?

have you seen how many athletes that have severe health problems in later life?
they also use , steriods, betablockers, and an awful lot of other unhealthy drugs . should i start using them too?

jonnythan

Again: you are surrounded by people in this thread who have been far more successful than you while eating sugar.

so i'll carry on piling on the pounds then live like a matyr for 5 or 6 years after i've nurtured all the health problems that come with being overweight, then stop sugar , be able to regulate myself again, lose maybe 100lb instead of 40lb and that will make my argument more valid?
cause if i'd been eating badly for 40 years instead of 10 thats likely to have been where i am.
btw when with wife no1 i reckon i was eating nearly 3000 a day! easy . mind i'll expect that was the 40mile a week running habit that kept that off eh?:yawn:

It's great that you've been able to lose weight. We're all happy for you.

Your mistake is thinking that it's sugar that made you overweight and eliminating sugar is what made you lose weight. It's calories that made you gain weight, and reducing calories made you lose weight.

Many of us have been perfectly successful losing weight by reducing calories without eliminating sugar.

Your argument appears to be that sugar makes people fat, but you are surrounded by people who prove that is not the case.

J72FIT

have you seen how many athletes that have severe health problems in later life?
they also use , steriods, betablockers, and an awful lot of other unhealthy drugs . should i start using them too?

Really, which ones have you seen? Name me an athlete with severe health problems due to fructose ingestion...