Sugar Detox
Replies
-
What you are going through is totally normal, and in the end a good thing. Your body is releasing all the toxins that build up from sugar. Once you get past the initial phase you will feel great. I would suggest eating more good fats to help you get through. They will help you feel satiated and easy the shakiness. While you are detoxing you should consider cutting out all fruit as well...any source of fructose, which is really what your body is detoxing from. Once you get through a number of weeks without any fructose you could add some fruit back in. If you have a serious sugar addiction tread lightly, though, and try lower fructose fruites like grapefruits, blueberries and kiwi. Good luck! We could all use a sugar detox and a lifetime of less of it...we're all sweet enough already :flowerforyou:
Well that is certainly a load of nonsense. What toxins build up from sugar?0 -
Man, I guess I need to give my entire medical history here huh? I never said myself sugar is a toxin. I took that sentence directly out of someone else's post who I quoted and said that I have had doctors tell me similar information such as it would be good for someone like you, with your history to try and abstain from sugar treats until the time comes you feel you can make healthy decisions.
I myself get sugar. I get it in fruits and veggies and carbs like whole grains and peanut butter. For myself, I'm talking about sweet treats.
Well you're the one wanting to argue about it...
You're right. Totally what I'm doing. Arguing. Trying to give a different perspective that perhaps everyone doesn't fit into the same mold as everyone else and telling people they should NOT listen to their doctors and other experts in their lives when trying to make changes, they should just listen to internet forums....shame on me....seriously...shame on me for having a different perspective on things.
If a doctor told me to detox from sugar, I'd find a different doctor. Seriously, you act like doctors are gods or something. Have you ever sought a second opinion on something because what they said didn't sound right?
Once again, I was quoting that directly from someone else. I've never had a doctor, or anyone, tell me sugar is a toxin. I've had doctors tell me to refrain from what some of my trigger foods are....all containing sugar, with chocolate and caramel, and on and on...
But you defended that position like it was your words. I guess I just don't understand what you were trying to accomplish by pulling the whole doctor bit.
Only that I PERSONALLY think that I will follow doctors advice when it comes to trying different things with myself. That's it. That's all I'm trying to say. And that I think it isn't right to tell people to not listen to their doctors. But that's my opinion.
I'm confused. You just got through telling everyone that all of these credential-holding experts told you "something similar" to "sugar is toxic/addictive and will make you obese." So...did these experts tell you that sugar is toxic/addictive, or not?0 -
Man, I guess I need to give my entire medical history here huh? I never said myself sugar is a toxin. I took that sentence directly out of someone else's post who I quoted and said that I have had doctors tell me similar information such as it would be good for someone like you, with your history to try and abstain from sugar treats until the time comes you feel you can make healthy decisions.
I myself get sugar. I get it in fruits and veggies and carbs like whole grains and peanut butter. For myself, I'm talking about sweet treats.
Well you're the one wanting to argue about it...
You're right. Totally what I'm doing. Arguing. Trying to give a different perspective that perhaps everyone doesn't fit into the same mold as everyone else and telling people they should NOT listen to their doctors and other experts in their lives when trying to make changes, they should just listen to internet forums....shame on me....seriously...shame on me for having a different perspective on things.
If a doctor told me to detox from sugar, I'd find a different doctor. Seriously, you act like doctors are gods or something. Have you ever sought a second opinion on something because what they said didn't sound right?
Once again, I was quoting that directly from someone else. I've never had a doctor, or anyone, tell me sugar is a toxin. I've had doctors tell me to refrain from what some of my trigger foods are....all containing sugar, with chocolate and caramel, and on and on...
But you defended that position like it was your words. I guess I just don't understand what you were trying to accomplish by pulling the whole doctor bit.
Only that I PERSONALLY think that I will follow doctors advice when it comes to trying different things with myself. That's it. That's all I'm trying to say. And that I think it isn't right to tell people to not listen to their doctors. But that's my opinion.
I'm confused. You just got through telling everyone that all of these credential-holding experts told you "something similar" to "sugar is toxic/addictive and will make you obese." So...did these experts tell you that sugar is toxic/addictive, or not?
Doubtful0 -
if you were going to take driving lessons would you take them from a) someone with one speeding violation and no accidents or b0 someone with multiple speeding violations and five or six accidents???
I try to look to people that have had long term success in health and fitness and draw from their knowledge and experience. Does that mean that exactly what they did will work for me? No, of course not; it does however mean that they can provide me with more useful information for to add to what I have already found what works for me. And most people that have had success in health, weight loss, fitness etc, are going to have "rocking bodies" or "athletic bodies" or whatever adjective you want to use to describe it..
I love how you somehow turn around long term success and an athletic body and try to make it an insult...interesting...
Your first mistake is using an apples-to-oranges analogy comparing the infinitely complex world of weight loss and health to something as simple and concrete as driving lessons. Weight loss and health don't only involve simple mechanics and skill. There are myriad layers to the human psyche and emotions at play. This is what folks with your attitude don't understand, and this is why you lack the COMPLETE set of skills needed to help people effectively.
There is an ancient passage that is commonly used at weddings and it goes something like this:
"If I speak in the tongues of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. If I give all I possess to the poor and give over my body to hardship that I may boast, but do not have love, I gain nothing."
You can have all the long-term success and athleticism and great looks and "expertise" in the world, but if you don't have empathy, listening skills, an understanding of what people who struggle with eating disorders feel and think, and a heart of compassion, then on these boards.....you're nothing but a Derp-spreader. It's that simple. And that's why you get SO much push-back from people on here.
To the 3-4 people we're all thinking of and speaking to here....please be wise to consider this feedback. You could really be a helpful force to many people. Don't blow that chance.
the sage of MFP advice has spoken and we should all take heed and follow her path < that was sarcasm in case your missed it.
Yea, so you totally missed my point, but I guess I will go with a health and fitness related one so that we are all on the same page.
Would you rather take health and fitness advice from an out of shape obese person, or someone that has obviously met their health and fitness goals? For me, I would rather go with the later as they obviously have accomplished their goals and know what they are doing.
And I love how you somehow seem to know what kind of "advice" that I give. Pray tell, have you reviewed my entire positing history??? If not then maybe you should not be so quick to paint with a broad brush ...
You do not have a clue what I or the "others" that you mention give for advice...
LOL so if we are commenting about juice cleanses, sugar detoxes, master cleanses, water fasts, et al and saying that they are "bad" that makes us "derp spreaders"....ok ...take your holier than thou attitude somewhere else...rolling eyez...
I can't believe this thread is still going
I haven't read the last page in full detail as you can only read the same thing so many times. But I do want to comment on a few things.
I used to be really fat and out of shape. I was almost 300 pounds and I ate a lot - a LOT of food. I would've loved to blame it on an addiction to food or sugar or what have you or even a lack of self control. Rather, I decided to eat my feelings instead of deal with them. Lesson learned - don't eat your feelings - you don't really solve anything that way.
There are SO MANY people on MFP - this thread included - saying "I can't" do this or "I can't" do that. When you started something else in your life did you tell yoruself you couldn't do it and set yourself up for failure? Probably not. So why are you doing it with this?
I quoted the above as I would much rather take fitness advice from someone who is in great shape. My husband is in phenomenal shape - so I get my lifting advice from him. I get my running advice from my sister who is an experienced runner. I'm not going to ask my brother who runs and lifts occasionally about advice on either.
I'm in school to be a Dietitian and have completed another Nutrition related program. I was told by the RD that I did a clinical with that since I had experience with food struggles and weight previously, people would be more inclined to listen to me as I would be able to at least somewhat understand the struggles food can present and how to get to and manage a healthy lifestyle. No, I don't know everything but I do know that unless you have an allergy no food group is inherently bad for you and if any Dietitian tells you to exclude one particular food or food group I'd wonder what their motives are. I know that I love cookies and cake. I do. I would eat them all - if I could. I could probably eat an entire 12" cookie cake doused in frosting in no time. I want to sometimes. But I don't. Because I know I can stop myself and I will regret it later. Yes, food can release feel-good hormones in our brain but that doesn't mean that we can't enjoy the "good" feeling and walk away after having a bite or two.
This is what we need to teach ourselves. Abstaining from any particular food or food group, unless you have an allergy, is not going to solve your problem that is seeded within.
I just wish people in general would stop saying they "can't" do something. It irks me to no end that people are not giving themselves enough credit for what you can do. You CAN lose weight by eating a cookie now and then if you want and believe you can eat one and walk away. For goodness sake I don't care if you have to buy a cookie and then walk far away from where you got the cookie so you don't have a second one. You CAN lose weight by eating Paleo or by eating Twinkies or whatever freaking diet you want.
Give yourself some credit. Most people will say to eat whatever you want in moderation - 80% clean, 20% junk. Because it works. It allows us indulgences. Some people don't like that - fine. Do what you want but believe that you can do it and for the love of God don't demonize any food. Sugar isn't a freaking dangerous substance. Neither are carbs. Almost 50% of your diet should come from carbs unless you have special diet restrictions.
Apparently I should have commented a lot sooner because now I'm so frustrated I just rambled for 90000000 paragraphs.0 -
Man, I guess I need to give my entire medical history here huh? I never said myself sugar is a toxin. I took that sentence directly out of someone else's post who I quoted and said that I have had doctors tell me similar information such as it would be good for someone like you, with your history to try and abstain from sugar treats until the time comes you feel you can make healthy decisions.
I myself get sugar. I get it in fruits and veggies and carbs like whole grains and peanut butter. For myself, I'm talking about sweet treats.
Well you're the one wanting to argue about it...
You're right. Totally what I'm doing. Arguing. Trying to give a different perspective that perhaps everyone doesn't fit into the same mold as everyone else and telling people they should NOT listen to their doctors and other experts in their lives when trying to make changes, they should just listen to internet forums....shame on me....seriously...shame on me for having a different perspective on things.
Look, you gotta find what works for you and do it. And you've found what works for you. And that's great! Way to go! No sarcasm!
That still doesn't make the sentence "sugar is toxic and addictive and will make you obese" true. I don't care if Jesus came to you in a dream and said it; it's not true.
Inability to control oneself around a food is not the same as addiction. And too much food, not sugar itself, will make you obese.
Totally agree!!!! I have a complete inability to control myself with certain foods....and my inablity to have a healthy relationship with certain food is what has led certain doctors, and other such as a therapist who is highly trained in people's issues with food, to perhaps abstain from eating cakes and so forth and see what happens. So to me, it's not the sugar that is addictive, it is the feelings of comfort I get when I do eat these things and my inability to control that that has led to my being obese. There are others like me who have the same issues.0 -
Man, I guess I need to give my entire medical history here huh? I never said myself sugar is a toxin. I took that sentence directly out of someone else's post who I quoted and said that I have had doctors tell me similar information such as it would be good for someone like you, with your history to try and abstain from sugar treats until the time comes you feel you can make healthy decisions.
I myself get sugar. I get it in fruits and veggies and carbs like whole grains and peanut butter. For myself, I'm talking about sweet treats.
Well you're the one wanting to argue about it...
You're right. Totally what I'm doing. Arguing. Trying to give a different perspective that perhaps everyone doesn't fit into the same mold as everyone else and telling people they should NOT listen to their doctors and other experts in their lives when trying to make changes, they should just listen to internet forums....shame on me....seriously...shame on me for having a different perspective on things.
If a doctor told me to detox from sugar, I'd find a different doctor. Seriously, you act like doctors are gods or something. Have you ever sought a second opinion on something because what they said didn't sound right?
Once again, I was quoting that directly from someone else. I've never had a doctor, or anyone, tell me sugar is a toxin. I've had doctors tell me to refrain from what some of my trigger foods are....all containing sugar, with chocolate and caramel, and on and on...
But you defended that position like it was your words. I guess I just don't understand what you were trying to accomplish by pulling the whole doctor bit.
Only that I PERSONALLY think that I will follow doctors advice when it comes to trying different things with myself. That's it. That's all I'm trying to say. And that I think it isn't right to tell people to not listen to their doctors. But that's my opinion.
I'm confused. You just got through telling everyone that all of these credential-holding experts told you "something similar" to "sugar is toxic/addictive and will make you obese." So...did these experts tell you that sugar is toxic/addictive, or not?
She said that to see what our reaction would be.0 -
Man, I guess I need to give my entire medical history here huh? I never said myself sugar is a toxin. I took that sentence directly out of someone else's post who I quoted and said that I have had doctors tell me similar information such as it would be good for someone like you, with your history to try and abstain from sugar treats until the time comes you feel you can make healthy decisions.
I myself get sugar. I get it in fruits and veggies and carbs like whole grains and peanut butter. For myself, I'm talking about sweet treats.
so one form of sugar = good; the sugar from "treats" = bad?0 -
Oh I think we are all clear as to what some peoples' reaction are going to be!0
-
0 -
I think what's important that some folks may be missing is that if it isn't sustainable indefinitely, it may possibly be a waste of time.
There are a lot of ways to go about losing weight, but I do believe we can all agree that what causes weight loss is a calorie deficit.
Energy in<Energy out.
Cutting out a whole food group completely is not going to specifically cause weight loss. The calorie deficit caused by the eliminating of that food group is what is going to cause weight loss (IF you create a deficit).
Cutting out sugar completely is difficult and I would venture to say impossible, but, whatever. You're going to have to learn moderation at some point.
If you believe that cutting it completely out and then slowly adding back in helps, by all means, go for it. But at some point, you WILL have to learn portion control. Or you're going to have a bad time.
I think what the people here are trying to do is prevent you from wasting your time and making yourself miserable by cutting out sugar completely (for those who said they were going to attempt that).
Best of luck learning how to eat it in moderation. However you go about it.0 -
My cat loves cake!!0 -
I did read them. I'm not understanding - at all - what you're thinking you'll accomplish by selectively abstaining from specific foods.
She has said previously that abstaining from particular food will help her from overeating/binging on said food. Which is (I'm assuming) why a lot of people will selectively try to eliminate from a food. Not totally sure why this is a bad thing or something you wouldn't recommend?
I know the risk being said is that "it can't be sustainable and you WILL end up binging". However, a couple posts back I posted an article about how this is not the case for everyone...0 -
Man, I guess I need to give my entire medical history here huh? I never said myself sugar is a toxin. I took that sentence directly out of someone else's post who I quoted and said that I have had doctors tell me similar information such as it would be good for someone like you, with your history to try and abstain from sugar treats until the time comes you feel you can make healthy decisions.
I myself get sugar. I get it in fruits and veggies and carbs like whole grains and peanut butter. For myself, I'm talking about sweet treats.
so one form of sugar = good; the sugar from "treats" = bad?
Why does this keep having to be explained?
People have what they consider a trigger food. Because they may not have a healthy relationship with certain foods, they overeat and have an extremely hard time controlling the way they eat. For me, it's certain foods that I consider treats (ice cream, cakes, etc.). I would LOVE to eat these in moderation. But at this moment, I can't. I'm learning how to have a healthy relationship with food. For MYSELF, refraining from eating these particular foods has helped me to not binge eat. I have understanding mentally and emotionally as to why I have these go to foods and have issues controlling the amounts I eat. While I work on these other issues, I am refraining from certain foods so that I can one day have a healthy relationship with them and not be obese.0 -
I think what's important that some folks may be missing is that if it isn't sustainable indefinitely, it may possibly be a waste of time.
There are a lot of ways to go about losing weight, but I do believe we can all agree that what causes weight loss is a calorie deficit.
Energy in<Energy out.
Cutting out a whole food group completely is not going to specifically cause weight loss. The calorie deficit caused by the eliminating of that food group is what is going to cause weight loss (IF you create a deficit).
Cutting out sugar completely is difficult and I would venture to say impossible, but, whatever. You're going to have to learn moderation at some point.
If you believe that cutting it completely out and then slowly adding back in helps, by all means, go for it. But at some point, you WILL have to learn portion control. Or you're going to have a bad time.
I think what the people here are trying to do is prevent you from wasting your time and making yourself miserable by cutting out sugar completely (for those who said they were going to attempt that).
Best of luck learning how to eat it in moderation. However you go about it.
*Like*0 -
How much sugar are you people eating???
I eat fruit I guess almost daily, but I will go a few days here and there where I don't eat fruit or anything with added sugar and I have never felt poorly from it ...
It seems like you need a complete diet overhaul if you're eating so much sugar every day that you have withdrawal when you stop.0 -
Is it your belief that we should simply nod and 'agree to disagree' when folks insist the world is flat, or claim that the world is run by a secret shadow organization?Man, I guess I need to give my entire medical history here huh? I never said myself sugar is a toxin. I took that sentence directly out of someone else's post who I quoted and said that I have had doctors tell me similar information such as it would be good for someone like you, with your history to try and abstain from sugar treats until the time comes you feel you can make healthy decisions.
I myself get sugar. I get it in fruits and veggies and carbs like whole grains and peanut butter. For myself, I'm talking about sweet treats.
Well you're the one wanting to argue about it...
You're right. Totally what I'm doing. Arguing. Trying to give a different perspective that perhaps everyone doesn't fit into the same mold as everyone else and telling people they should NOT listen to their doctors and other experts in their lives when trying to make changes, they should just listen to internet forums....shame on me....seriously...shame on me for having a different perspective on things.
Not at all. Agree to disagree is a polite way to say: "You know we could go on and on but we aren't going to convince the other that they are right so it's in our best interest to maybe stop now because we aren't getting anything out of it."0 -
[/quote]
look up the twinkie diet…
guy lost like 27 pounds and had better cholesterol markers….
[/quote]
OK so, first off all the people wanting to go "look twinkie diet!" as some kind of "proof" that its harmless, its absurd. All his SHORT TERM diet showed was two things that we already know: 1) if you caloric restrict you will lose weight, and 2) that if you go on a caloric restricted diet of anything and lose weight, your cholesterol blood markers will improve. That's it. Period. Also statisitically insignificant by the way, since one person did this once for a short time, but lets forget that. You could replace this with just about any other substance that wont kill you right away.
And here another crucial part most people also never read and repeat: "Two-thirds of his total intake came from junk food. He also took a multivitamin pill and drank a protein shake daily. And he ate vegetables, typically a can of green beans or three to four celery stalks." Hmm, so really a SHORT TERM, MOSTLY junk food diet, that in the end did nothing unexpected that eating wood shavings, inert plastic pellets, sterilized dog feces or anything really at a controlled calorie intake plus vitamins, protein and vegetables wouldn't do.. this is not a case study on the food taken to add calories to a caloric deficit, but on the caloric deficit.
So, even if you could use this as "proof" of anything, let me say again, its only proof that caloric restriction works, and caloric restriction plus decreasing body fat levels improve cholesterol blood markers. Any extrapolations on long term health from twinkies, benefit or harm are irrelevant, you cant say anything from this either way. Any claims that because he did it means other people may have problems controlling certain food intakes by putting this up are similarly absurd "he ate twinkies and lost weight, so eating lots of __anything__ is fine for everyone to eat because its got sugar in it!" ....um...no. You are just as bad at drawing conclusions as people who like to say "Its got unicorn farts in it, so its good for you!"
Caloric restriction works. Losing weight improves blood markers. But, this "case study" is statistically insignificant, uncontrolled, unsupervised, single case study with no real extrapolative value: these conclusions, even if supported here, are supported so weakly they get no real support from this case study, its not proof above anyone else saying "I ate gravel and vitamins and lost weight so my diet is better".
Next, that his health wasn't/was affected is not explored to any reasonable extent to make any useful conclusions. Blood markers of cholesterol = health? Well we know some people can have "healthy" cholesterol levels and die, and others have "extremely high" levels of bad cholesterol and be very healthy, we also know some people can have the "cholesterol balance" extremely "bad" and be healthy. Hmm, exploring further, we find the new guidelines put forth by the AMA are now not based on LDL/HDL and triglycerides at all! This is all that was measured that now produces claims of "proof" twinkies aren't bad for you. Now, while I definitely have a strong suspicion these new guidelines were strongly influenced by drug companies aiming to increase prescription of statins, they are still showing how uncertain these values are in assessing health. Translated: since this "test" is the only "proof" this study didn't "hurt" the guy, in a short term, supplemented diet, we can't draw any conclusions, we really don't know, so anyone using this as "proof" is just talking with no information.
TLDR: Twinkie study = some guy's caloric restriction diet causes weight loss and improved cholesterol markers. We really don't know how it affected his long term health. But, since it decreased his BMI, from other studies, we can assume this improved health. Affect of consumed foods to achieve caloric restriction is unknown and unexplored, but it didn't kill the one person in the case study, and it didn't tend to throw doubt on the principle of caloric restriction = weight loss and decreased BMI and decreased BMI = improved cholesterol markers.0 -
How much sugar are you people eating???
I eat fruit I guess almost daily, but I will go a few days here and there where I don't eat fruit or anything with added sugar and I have never felt poorly from it ...
It seems like you need a complete diet overhaul if you're eating so much sugar every day that you have withdrawal when you stop.
No kidding.. I have half a banana with 4 strawberries every morning in a post gym smoothie and an apple in the afternoon. I'm type 2 diabetic and have my BG completely in control without medication. Sugar is NOT toxic, as with anything if you eat more than you need you will feel like crap and gain weight. Learn to control what you put in your mouth and problem solved.0 -
I love a good "sugar is toxic and addictive" throw down as much as the next girl, but come on. It's not at all scientifically true that sugar is either "toxic" or "addictive". And unless you have a medically diagnosed reason to shun it, doing so is not necessary for weight loss or health. Here's what is true:
Sugar is not toxic. If it was people would be dropping like flies.
Sugar is not addictive. Yes, some people struggle with controlling themselves around sweets, but typically only around certain sweets. Some love chocolate and yet detest licorice, but both have lots of sugar. People discriminate on sweet treats based on their personal preferences. They are not "addicted", but only reacting to certain trigger foods that they love and tend to overeat. We all have those foods. I can ignore Oreos until the cows come home, but faced with Trader Joe's Triple Ginger Cookies will lose the fight every time. Why would I assume my issue with those cookies is a sugar "addiction" instead of calling it what it is : " MY INABILITY TO CONTROL MYSELF AROUND THAT PARTICULAR TREAT. I do not know anyone who scarfs spoonfuls of pure sugar to feed their "addiction".
If it makes you feel physically (or emotionally) better to not eat sugar, go for it. But, call it what it is. A personal preference, not a reaction to an addiction. And if you can do it, good for you. I truly applaud those who can, not because I'm an anti-sugar person, but because I'm always impressed with that level of commitment to anything.0 -
look up the twinkie diet…
guy lost like 27 pounds and had better cholesterol markers….
OK so, first off all the people wanting to go "look twinkie diet!" as some kind of "proof" that its harmless, its absurd. All his SHORT TERM diet showed was two things that we already know: 1) if you caloric restrict you will lose weight, and 2) that if you go on a caloric restricted diet of anything and lose weight, your cholesterol blood markers will improve. That's it. Period. Also statisitically insignificant by the way, since one person did this once for a short time, but lets forget that. You could replace this with just about any other substance that wont kill you right away.
And here another crucial part most people also never read and repeat: "Two-thirds of his total intake came from junk food. He also took a multivitamin pill and drank a protein shake daily. And he ate vegetables, typically a can of green beans or three to four celery stalks." Hmm, so really a SHORT TERM, MOSTLY junk food diet, that in the end did nothing unexpected that eating wood shavings, inert plastic pellets, sterilized dog feces or anything really at a controlled calorie intake plus vitamins, protein and vegetables wouldn't do.. this is not a case study on the food taken to add calories to a caloric deficit, but on the caloric deficit.
So, even if you could use this as "proof" of anything, let me say again, its only proof that caloric restriction works, and caloric restriction plus decreasing body fat levels improve cholesterol blood markers. Any extrapolations on long term health from twinkies, benefit or harm are irrelevant, you cant say anything from this either way. Any claims that because he did it means other people may have problems controlling certain food intakes by putting this up are similarly absurd "he ate twinkies and lost weight, so eating lots of __anything__ is fine for everyone to eat because its got sugar in it!" ....um...no. You are just as bad at drawing conclusions as people who like to say "Its got unicorn farts in it, so its good for you!"
Caloric restriction works. Losing weight improves blood markers. But, this "case study" is statistically insignificant, uncontrolled, unsupervised, single case study with no real extrapolative value: these conclusions, even if supported here, are supported so weakly they get no real support from this case study, its not proof above anyone else saying "I ate gravel and vitamins and lost weight so my diet is better".
Next, that his health wasn't/was affected is not explored to any reasonable extent to make any useful conclusions. Blood markers of cholesterol = health? Well we know some people can have "healthy" cholesterol levels and die, and others have "extremely high" levels of bad cholesterol and be very healthy, we also know some people can have the "cholesterol balance" extremely "bad" and be healthy. Hmm, exploring further, we find the new guidelines put forth by the AMA are now not based on LDL/HDL and triglycerides at all! This is all that was measured that now produces claims of "proof" twinkies aren't bad for you. Now, while I definitely have a strong suspicion these new guidelines were strongly influenced by drug companies aiming to increase prescription of statins, they are still showing how uncertain these values are in assessing health. Translated: since this "test" is the only "proof" this study didn't "hurt" the guy, in a short term, supplemented diet, we can't draw any conclusions, we really don't know, so anyone using this as "proof" is just talking with no information.
TLDR: Twinkie study = some guy's caloric restriction diet causes weight loss and improved cholesterol markers. We really don't know how it affected his long term health. But, since it decreased his BMI, from other studies, we can assume this improved health. Affect of consumed foods to achieve caloric restriction is unknown and unexplored, but it didn't kill the one person in the case study, and it didn't tend to throw doubt on the principle of caloric restriction = weight loss and decreased BMI and decreased BMI = improved cholesterol markers.
I did not read your entire post..
but you took my quotes way out of context. I was replying to someone that specially said if you ate twinkies all day you would have "poor" health ..I simply pointed out that it was possible to do this, lose weight, and have better health markers..
I never tied it into long term health or anything else. I was simply saying that you can eat a diet comprised mainly of sugar and still lose weight..
but way to blow up for no reason and take what I said totally out of context.0 -
That's too hard, and possibly not necessary. I cut sugar out vof my coffee 2 months ago. I don't love it, but I'm now getting used to it. I am also trying to be mindful of any packgaged goods I eat and how much sugar is in them. This seems to be going ok, and I am not suffering.0
-
This content has been removed.
-
Man, I guess I need to give my entire medical history here huh? I never said myself sugar is a toxin. I took that sentence directly out of someone else's post who I quoted and said that I have had doctors tell me similar information such as it would be good for someone like you, with your history to try and abstain from sugar treats until the time comes you feel you can make healthy decisions.
I myself get sugar. I get it in fruits and veggies and carbs like whole grains and peanut butter. For myself, I'm talking about sweet treats.
so one form of sugar = good; the sugar from "treats" = bad?
Why does this keep having to be explained?
People have what they consider a trigger food. Because they may not have a healthy relationship with certain foods, they overeat and have an extremely hard time controlling the way they eat. For me, it's certain foods that I consider treats (ice cream, cakes, etc.). I would LOVE to eat these in moderation. But at this moment, I can't. I'm learning how to have a healthy relationship with food. For MYSELF, refraining from eating these particular foods has helped me to not binge eat. I have understanding mentally and emotionally as to why I have these go to foods and have issues controlling the amounts I eat. While I work on these other issues, I am refraining from certain foods so that I can one day have a healthy relationship with them and not be obese.
ok so one form of sugar makes your binge - sweet treats; but the other form of sugar - fruit,, honey, etc - does not?0 -
I would really like an explanation of "trigger" food. I've recently seen this word to excuse everything from emotional outbursts to binge eating and for me that makes it a buzzword. Buzzwords are rarely helpful in any capacity.
The bottom line is that if a person can't control him or herself around something, whether a picture or a word or a thought or a deed or even the dreaded sugar, there's something going on that has nothing to do with that picture, word, thought, deed, or food. In lots of cases, that means digging down into psychological connections (healthy mind/healthy body) or into underlying physical conditions that may be creating the symptom. It's like I tell people who throw a Halti on their dogs because they don't walk on a loose leash: you can't fix the problem by treating the symptom. The second you take that Halti off and try to walk on a loose leash that dog is going to be pulling like there's no tomorrow. Fido needs obedience training, yesterday, so that no one gets hurt; that is, the cause of Fido pulling on the leash needs to be identified and given corrective action before the crutch of the Halti can go in the trash (where it belongs).
If a person wants to "detox" from sugar by cutting it out of his or her diet, in my opinion that's just slapping a Halti on the dog. Same thing with a "trigger." If I know that Fido bolts at squirrels and his pulling is an effort to find the tree rat, then what good is it if I just avoid the squirrels? Eventually there will be a squirrel somewhere that we walk and Fido will respond to that "trigger."
What's the point?0 -
I would really like an explanation of "trigger" food. I've recently seen this word to excuse everything from emotional outbursts to binge eating and for me that makes it a buzzword. Buzzwords are rarely helpful in any capacity.
The bottom line is that if a person can't control him or herself around something, whether a picture or a word or a thought or a deed or even the dreaded sugar, there's something going on that has nothing to do with that picture, word, thought, deed, or food. In lots of cases, that means digging down into psychological connections (healthy mind/healthy body) or into underlying physical conditions that may be creating the symptom. It's like I tell people who throw a Halti on their dogs because they don't walk on a loose leash: you can't fix the problem by treating the symptom. The second you take that Halti off and try to walk on a loose leash that dog is going to be pulling like there's no tomorrow. Fido needs obedience training, yesterday, so that no one gets hurt; that is, the cause of Fido pulling on the leash needs to be identified and given corrective action before the crutch of the Halti can go in the trash (where it belongs).
If a person wants to "detox" from sugar by cutting it out of his or her diet, in my opinion that's just slapping a Halti on the dog. Same thing with a "trigger." If I know that Fido bolts at squirrels and his pulling is an effort to find the tree rat, then what good is it if I just avoid the squirrels? Eventually there will be a squirrel somewhere that we walk and Fido will respond to that "trigger."
What's the point?
:flowerforyou:
The example I always give is birthday parties and holidays. You really can't avoid it.0 -
OJ has a ton of sugar, tries some berries with breakfast instead, or melon.Anyone else start with trying to detox your body from sugar? I am starting day three of detox and I am suffering headaches, shaking hands, crankiness and generally want to curl up in a corner and make the world go away.
I did first two days strict, not even fruit or juices but I woke up this morning and couldn't handle it so I drank 8oz of fresh orange juice. I am feeling a little better now, but I was hoping I wouldn't have to do that.
I guess I am just rambling, but I would love to find others in this situation.0 -
I would really like an explanation of "trigger" food. I've recently seen this word to excuse everything from emotional outbursts to binge eating and for me that makes it a buzzword. Buzzwords are rarely helpful in any capacity.
The bottom line is that if a person can't control him or herself around something, whether a picture or a word or a thought or a deed or even the dreaded sugar, there's something going on that has nothing to do with that picture, word, thought, deed, or food. In lots of cases, that means digging down into psychological connections (healthy mind/healthy body) or into underlying physical conditions that may be creating the symptom. It's like I tell people who throw a Halti on their dogs because they don't walk on a loose leash: you can't fix the problem by treating the symptom. The second you take that Halti off and try to walk on a loose leash that dog is going to be pulling like there's no tomorrow. Fido needs obedience training, yesterday, so that no one gets hurt; that is, the cause of Fido pulling on the leash needs to be identified and given corrective action before the crutch of the Halti can go in the trash (where it belongs).
If a person wants to "detox" from sugar by cutting it out of his or her diet, in my opinion that's just slapping a Halti on the dog. Same thing with a "trigger." If I know that Fido bolts at squirrels and his pulling is an effort to find the tree rat, then what good is it if I just avoid the squirrels? Eventually there will be a squirrel somewhere that we walk and Fido will respond to that "trigger."
What's the point?
Uh, no. My love for Trader Joe's Triple Ginger Cookies is not rooted in some deep psychological issue. It's rooted in the fact that they are yummy. No, yummy is not a good enough word. They are the perfect blend of buttery, chewy and crisp. Unlike many other cookies, I can't seem to resist them if they're in my house. I can hear them calling from the cabinet. Oh wait, hearing cookies..... maybe I do have a deep psychological issue.0 -
Man, I guess I need to give my entire medical history here huh? I never said myself sugar is a toxin. I took that sentence directly out of someone else's post who I quoted and said that I have had doctors tell me similar information such as it would be good for someone like you, with your history to try and abstain from sugar treats until the time comes you feel you can make healthy decisions.
I myself get sugar. I get it in fruits and veggies and carbs like whole grains and peanut butter. For myself, I'm talking about sweet treats.
so one form of sugar = good; the sugar from "treats" = bad?
Why does this keep having to be explained?
People have what they consider a trigger food. Because they may not have a healthy relationship with certain foods, they overeat and have an extremely hard time controlling the way they eat. For me, it's certain foods that I consider treats (ice cream, cakes, etc.). I would LOVE to eat these in moderation. But at this moment, I can't. I'm learning how to have a healthy relationship with food. For MYSELF, refraining from eating these particular foods has helped me to not binge eat. I have understanding mentally and emotionally as to why I have these go to foods and have issues controlling the amounts I eat. While I work on these other issues, I am refraining from certain foods so that I can one day have a healthy relationship with them and not be obese.
ok so one form of sugar makes your binge - sweet treats; but the other form of sugar - fruit,, honey, etc - does not?
For me yes. Just like the other poster said she could leave oreos in her cabinet but has no control over another type of cookies. For example, short bread cookies will sit in my pantry for ever. But chocolate chip cookies would be gone in a heart beat. I myself call them triggers because they trigger me to overeat and I lack self control. But there is a reason I have no self control over these certain foods. I have to work on those reasons to be successful in getting a healthy relationship with food. And while I'm working on those reasons, I'm refraining from particular foods such as cakes, cookies, etc.0 -
I would really like an explanation of "trigger" food. I've recently seen this word to excuse everything from emotional outbursts to binge eating and for me that makes it a buzzword. Buzzwords are rarely helpful in any capacity.
The bottom line is that if a person can't control him or herself around something, whether a picture or a word or a thought or a deed or even the dreaded sugar, there's something going on that has nothing to do with that picture, word, thought, deed, or food. In lots of cases, that means digging down into psychological connections (healthy mind/healthy body) or into underlying physical conditions that may be creating the symptom. It's like I tell people who throw a Halti on their dogs because they don't walk on a loose leash: you can't fix the problem by treating the symptom. The second you take that Halti off and try to walk on a loose leash that dog is going to be pulling like there's no tomorrow. Fido needs obedience training, yesterday, so that no one gets hurt; that is, the cause of Fido pulling on the leash needs to be identified and given corrective action before the crutch of the Halti can go in the trash (where it belongs).
If a person wants to "detox" from sugar by cutting it out of his or her diet, in my opinion that's just slapping a Halti on the dog. Same thing with a "trigger." If I know that Fido bolts at squirrels and his pulling is an effort to find the tree rat, then what good is it if I just avoid the squirrels? Eventually there will be a squirrel somewhere that we walk and Fido will respond to that "trigger."
What's the point?
Uh, no. My love for Trader Joe's Triple Ginger Cookies is not rooted in some deep psychological issue. It's rooted in the fact that they are yummy. No, yummy is not a good enough word. They are the perfect blend of buttery, chewy and crisp. Unlike many other cookies, I can't seem to resist them if they're in my house. I can hear them calling from the cabinet. Oh wait, hearing cookies..... maybe I do have a deep psychological issue.
Oh Trader Joe's, you and your delicious treats. I love all of their cookies. And that cookie butter I absolutely cannot have in the house.0 -
Here is another issue people are failing to understand: if xyz food causes an uncontrolled reaction emotionally, you can look at it as "bad" and "toxic" for them in a way, due to the consequences, not necessarily biochemically, unless they can break this link. EVEN if biochemically something breaks down fine. Its unfortunate that the word toxic is being used, because it creates confusion, and creates easy "proof of not toxic" for people who superficially look.
Sugar consumption obviously can throw off basic blood sugar levels if the body is unable to control it adequately, some "pre-diabetics" as well, which can cause all sorts of reactions, including mental. We also don't understand all of how a food breaks down in each particular person's gut, and in the gut different bacteria involved in this process can produce different results in different people. There IS actually a lot of scientific evidence that foods can behave differently in the gut for different people with different bacterial or yeast populations.
If you dig into how the brain works, you start to realize that all our food tastes, desires and preferences...are all creations of the brain, and all brains are wired differently. We get a "reward" transmission in the brain for consumption of certain foods, this drives us to seek them out more. It really is "all in your head".
If someone finds that a food is difficult for them to abstain, and its not for you, why attack them for it? Maybe its just to do with their mind's reaction, and that theirs has associated more release of stimulants in association to that food than yours has, so it really is harder for them? Maybe there is another dis-balance occurring that is being influenced by something in this particular food and throwing the balance even more? You certainly don't know. And if they have determined they feel "it affects them", even if its all "mental", this still has a benefit to abstain does it not? So yes, if a particular food bothers someone, or is hard to resist or control, not eating it can be beneficial to them.
Eliminating processed foods and sugars from your diet in particular can have many positive health effects. Guess what? The beloved twinkie study shows this: if you reduce processed foods and sugars, you reduce caloric intake, which reduces body fat levels and BMI, and this tends to improve blood markers... Yes, reducing processed foods and refined sugars ALMOST ALWAYS is a positive health change on this basis, even if you want to argue that no other health effects are associated with it!
"You must eat all the foods, just count calories" viewpoint is just as supported and just as bogus as "eat only organic blessed wheatgrass from a fairy circle".0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions