Calorie Deficits and Sugar

ffitnesspal23

Can anyone explain to me how a cup of tea with low fat milk [no sugar] has been allocated 3 under sugar on my food diary, while a coffee, with low fat milk and one sugar, attracts nothing under sugar?

Sarauk2sf

Can anyone explain to me how a cup of tea with low fat milk [no sugar] has been allocated 3 under sugar on my food diary, while a coffee, with low fat milk and one sugar, attracts nothing under sugar?

Because users make a lot of the database entries - and they are inaccurate much of the time.

Try to find the ones without the asterisks at the beginning - and you will have to enter the coffee (if you want to) and the milk and the sugar separately if you want greater accuracy.

keegan2149

You can't be serious.. Even slow cycling will burn about 1000 calories per hour.

Ah, no.

Not even close.

That's what most apps give me for gross burn. What is close? Why does that matter? I thought the point was whether or not you're storing fat during a 6 hour cycling session?

And would he be storing fat during a 6 hour cycle?

Of course not. However, stating that no fat is created during 6 hours of continuous exercise proves nothing about sugar intake in general. It's like examining dry skin while swimming.

keegan2149

Can anyone explain to me how a cup of tea with low fat milk [no sugar] has been allocated 3 under sugar on my food diary, while a coffee, with low fat milk and one sugar, attracts nothing under sugar?

Because users make a lot of the database entries - and they are inaccurate much of the time.

Try to find the ones without the asterisks at the beginning - and you will have to enter the coffee (if you want to) and the milk and the sugar separately if you want greater accuracy.

Yea the food db here needs some love. I try to correct or at least mark the bad entries. I think the ones marked generic come from the USDA. Either way they seem to be accurate when applicable.

keegan2149

You can't be serious.. Even slow cycling will burn about 1000 calories per hour.

Ah, no.

Not even close.

That's what most apps give me for gross burn. What is close? Why does that matter? I thought the point was whether or not you're storing fat during a 6 hour cycling session?

Because essentially all I am doing by eating the sugar is creating a deficit while I eat it. So if sugar is still stored as fat automatically, what is the difference if I am burning an immense amount of calories while eating an abnormal amount of sugar compared to someone who eats a moderate amount yet burns it off during the day?

You didn't read everything I wrote. Sugar is stored when the body can't process it. Otherwise the blood would become too dense and you'd die. Triggering this process too often leads to health problems. Obviously eating sugar while exercising heavily would not create this conditions.

sweetpea03b

It really comes down to ADDED sugar. You're not supposed to consume more than 32g of added sugar/day. This means your coffee, yogurt and other things that they add sugar to. Of course, there is natural sugar in fruit, veggies, etc. I think a lot of it is genetic. I have diabetics in my family and I seem to be VERY sensitive to extra sugar because when I really watch my added sugar intake I lose much easier. That being said, the more you have to lose the less little things like this matter because you can make small changes with big results... but once you get down to that last 20-30lbs it will matter more. Good luck!

lemonsnowdrop

It really comes down to ADDED sugar. You're not supposed to consume more than 32g of added sugar/day. This means your coffee, yogurt and other things that they add sugar to. Of course, there is natural sugar in fruit, veggies, etc. I think a lot of it is genetic. I have diabetics in my family and I seem to be VERY sensitive to extra sugar because when I really watch my added sugar intake I lose much easier. That being said, the more you have to lose the less little things like this matter because you can make small changes with big results... but once you get down to that last 20-30lbs it will matter more. Good luck!

I lost the last 10 or so pounds without tracking sugar and I'm certain I went every every day. It didn't seem to matter at all.

tennisdude2004

I'm having a hard time getting a straight answer in regards to calorie deficits and sugar consumption.

I've seen many people, including on this site, claim that sugar doesn't matter so long as you hit your macros (mainly protein and fat) and stay at your caloric deficit.

Others claim that the spike in your insulin levels from the sugar causes your body to store fat, and even if you're in a deficit, you will not be able to lose fat because of this. Some claim that even heavy weight training and a caloric deficit will not over-rule sugar consumption that is above 40-50gs.

So which one is it?

Excessive glucose in the blood stream will spike your insulin levels, as processing the glucose and removing it as quick as possible from the bloodstream is one of the many things insulin does.

If the glucose in the blood cannot be used as instant fuel it will be stored in the muscles and liver as glycogen, The bodies ability to store glycogen is very limited and once stores are full the glucose is converted into adipose tissue and stored as body fat.

This is not an issue when eating in a calorie deficit, as your body will be using body fat to some degree throughout the day to fuel itself.

So does glucose get stored as body fat whilst eating in a calorie deficit (depending on the quantities you are eating it in and how active you are at that particular time) then yes.

Does it make you fat whilst eating in a calorie deficit - absolutely not, as your body will utilizing stored body fat for fuel throughout the day.

IMO it's not so much about burning more calories than you consume, its more about burning more body fat than you store!

keegan2149

It really comes down to ADDED sugar. You're not supposed to consume more than 32g of added sugar/day. This means your coffee, yogurt and other things that they add sugar to. Of course, there is natural sugar in fruit, veggies, etc. I think a lot of it is genetic. I have diabetics in my family and I seem to be VERY sensitive to extra sugar because when I really watch my added sugar intake I lose much easier. That being said, the more you have to lose the less little things like this matter because you can make small changes with big results... but once you get down to that last 20-30lbs it will matter more. Good luck!

Why are we not supposed to eat more than 32g of added sugar? Who said that? What happens if we do?

Why have so many of us continued to eat sugar, have hit our weight goal and even surpassed it?

Keep in mind I'm not diabetic so please don't respond with some diabetes stuff.

It's not exactly 32g since everyone's limits are different. The generally accepted standard is the one released by the American Heart Association. Obviously those involved in endurance sports will have much higher limits.

http://www.webmd.com/diet/news/20090824/heart-group-limit-added-sugars-diet

keegan2149

It really comes down to ADDED sugar. You're not supposed to consume more than 32g of added sugar/day. This means your coffee, yogurt and other things that they add sugar to. Of course, there is natural sugar in fruit, veggies, etc. I think a lot of it is genetic. I have diabetics in my family and I seem to be VERY sensitive to extra sugar because when I really watch my added sugar intake I lose much easier. That being said, the more you have to lose the less little things like this matter because you can make small changes with big results... but once you get down to that last 20-30lbs it will matter more. Good luck!

Why are we not supposed to eat more than 32g of added sugar? Who said that? What happens if we do?

Why have so many of us continued to eat sugar, have hit our weight goal and even surpassed it?

Keep in mind I'm not diabetic so please don't respond with some diabetes stuff.

It's not exactly 32g since everyone's limits are different. The generally accepted standard is the one released by the American Heart Association. Obviously those involved in endurance sports will have much higher limits.

http://www.webmd.com/diet/news/20090824/heart-group-limit-added-sugars-diet

Go back and answer the questions you were asked instead of trolling every post.

I'm tired of arguing and this isn't trolling. You asked for info and I gave it to you.

keegan2149

I'm having a hard time getting a straight answer in regards to calorie deficits and sugar consumption.

I've seen many people, including on this site, claim that sugar doesn't matter so long as you hit your macros (mainly protein and fat) and stay at your caloric deficit.

Others claim that the spike in your insulin levels from the sugar causes your body to store fat, and even if you're in a deficit, you will not be able to lose fat because of this. Some claim that even heavy weight training and a caloric deficit will not over-rule sugar consumption that is above 40-50gs.

So which one is it?

Excessive glucose in the blood stream will spike your insulin levels, as processing the glucose and removing it as quick as possible from the bloodstream is one of the many things insulin does.

If the glucose in the blood cannot be used as instant fuel it will be stored in the muscles and liver as glycogen, The bodies ability to store glycogen is very limited and once stores are full the glucose is converted into adipose tissue and stored as body fat.

This is not an issue when eating in a calorie deficit, as your body will be using body fat to some degree throughout the day to fuel itself.

So does glucose get stored as body fat whilst eating in a calorie deficit (depending on the quantities you are eating it in and how active you are at that particular time) then yes.

Does it make you fat whilst eating in a calorie deficit - absolutely not, as your body will utilizing stored body fat for fuel throughout the day.

IMO it's not so much about burning more calories than you consume, its more about burning more body fat than you store!

well said!

keegan2149

I'm having a hard time getting a straight answer in regards to calorie deficits and sugar consumption.

I've seen many people, including on this site, claim that sugar doesn't matter so long as you hit your macros (mainly protein and fat) and stay at your caloric deficit.

Others claim that the spike in your insulin levels from the sugar causes your body to store fat, and even if you're in a deficit, you will not be able to lose fat because of this. Some claim that even heavy weight training and a caloric deficit will not over-rule sugar consumption that is above 40-50gs.

So which one is it?

Excessive glucose in the blood stream will spike your insulin levels, as processing the glucose and removing it as quick as possible from the bloodstream is one of the many things insulin does.

If the glucose in the blood cannot be used as instant fuel it will be stored in the muscles and liver as glycogen, The bodies ability to store glycogen is very limited and once stores are full the glucose is converted into adipose tissue and stored as body fat.

This is not an issue when eating in a calorie deficit, as your body will be using body fat to some degree throughout the day to fuel itself.

So does glucose get stored as body fat whilst eating in a calorie deficit (depending on the quantities you are eating it in and how active you are at that particular time) then yes.

Does it make you fat whilst eating in a calorie deficit - absolutely not, as your body will utilizing stored body fat for fuel throughout the day.

IMO it's not so much about burning more calories than you consume, its more about burning more body fat than you store!

well said!

Lol. You just agreed with a post that contradicted everything you've been spewing.

Trolling fail.

No you didn't read anything I wrote. Which one of us is trolling again?

Michifan

I know there is a lot of people here with absolutely no license giving medical advice - but all calories are not equal, all carbohydrates are not equal. Same with fats and proteins. They are general groupings and the science is so much more complicated that it's getting laughable when people make it so generic.

Sugar does have an effect on virtually all people regardless of the caloric intake. Find a medical journal that would say differently. No sugar or too much sugar is a very broad band. But between the two there are differences with the exact same number of calories on the human body.

I think that sugar is the easiest thing to cut out of a diet. I'm pretty much on a diabetic diet, even though I don't have diabetes - but have found that keeping my sugar below 10-15g per day has not effect on my cognitive abilities nor my appetite.

Evolutionary speaking, the amount of sugar Americans eat (I know this is a global site) is significantly more than 100 years ago and the farther back you go in time, the less sugars we had the opportunity to eat on a regular basis.

Keeping sugar down has been very efficient and effective in lowering my caloric intake. And because I don't have much of a sweet tooth, its no big deal. I can give up sugar easier than meat (fish, fowl, beef...). Others may be different.

Which is nice for you - but all it does is give you less calories.


the answer is A) unless you have a medical condition sugar has zero affect on weight loss when consumed in a deficit.