You can eat whatever you want :)

DavPul

All carbohydrates- every type you can imagine- after being processed in the gut and liver are released from the liver into the bloodstream as 95% glucose, with 2-3% fructose, and the rest galactose. All of these are simple six-carbon molecules.

ALL carbohydrates.

Just FYI.

In Guyton's Textbook of Medical Physiology, of course.

i understand this to a degree, but have a hard time believing that a twinkie's carbs are "the same" as carbs from zucchini

Ok - maybe his post does have a reason.

Why is it hard to understand that twinkie and zucchini carbs are the same?

Let's look at something as simple as water. If you take soup, blood, drinking water, urine or sea water and filter out the gunk, boil it to evaporation and re-condense the vapor back into water it is just water. It is basically undecipherable from the source.
This very basic process led the early Greeks (Democritus and Lucretius are at the heart of this) composed the idea that things around us composed entirely of various elements called atoms - these basic building blocks are interchangeable - a "you" carbon is no different than a "dog" carbon or a "star" carbon.

If I use a chemical process to create a sugar for the Twinkie with carbon, hydrogen and oxygen and I create the the same sugar in a zucchini via photosynthesis - the resulting sugar - if they have the same chemical and structural formulas are truly indistinguishable. The carbs themselves are the same.

What is different is "all the other stuff" that comes along with a Twinkie or a zucchini, the ratio of sugars, etc. But that single molecule and the resulting glucose once the liver gets done with it - indistinguishable at the molecular level. The Twinkie provides more nutritional value than a zucchini - that's right - an ounce of Twinkie provides more carbs than an ounce of zucchini - by a wopping ratio of 20 to 1. But obviously we need more than carbs - the micro-nutrient value of a zucchini is much much better.

It's just that often the term "nutritional value" is misused to describe some sort of nutritional variety.

Eating a twinkie is ok (if you like the taste) it's very rich in energy when compared to a zucchini. There micro-nutrient profiles are worlds apart but the carbs structures once digested are really the same.

(and no I'm not suggesting someone only feed on Twinkies or zucchinis...)

it sounds a bit condescending to me that you would ask me why it's so difficult for me to understand. i was making a more simple point. previous post said all carbs are the same, i personally do not feel that a twinkie and a zucchini are the same, although they both contain carbs. "a carb is a carb" doesn't apply in my life personally. i wasn't looking for a lesson in chemistry or nutrition.

The cool things about facts is that you neither have to look for them note believe in them for them to still be applicable, relevant and true.

DSTMT

All carbohydrates- every type you can imagine- after being processed in the gut and liver are released from the liver into the bloodstream as 95% glucose, with 2-3% fructose, and the rest galactose. All of these are simple six-carbon molecules.

ALL carbohydrates.

Just FYI.

In Guyton's Textbook of Medical Physiology, of course.

No reason to read that book OP or anyone else. It's just a bunch of nonsense that that member posts every post. Basically using mfp as marketing and the site allows it.

THIS!! Steve, where's those qualifications you claim to have?

thin2win777

The cool things about facts is that you neither have to look for them no[r] believe in them for them to still be applicable, relevant and true.

Damn dude! Mind if I steal this and use it for life?! Did you make it up? I love it!!

RHachicho

Is that true about the salt? I don't use a salt shaker often, but some foods have more salt than I expect.

No, it's not true about the salt.

Around here, it is very popular to say that you shouldn't give a thought to the sodium until it causes you to have cardiovascular problems. Once you actually have the problems, then worry about it.

But it is healthier to watch your sodium ad not develop cardiovascular problems.

As far as the rest, cookies and pizza and such can be eaten and still allow weight loss. It isn't the healthiest diet, but if you stay under your calories goal, you can eat absolutely any food and still lose weight.

Sodium would have to be eaten in totally RIDICULOUS quantities to actually be the cause of cardiovascular problems. if you develop these issues you may have to watch sodium. But that does NOT mean it was the sodium that caused the issue in the first place. If you don't have an issue with a bit of water retention and your sodium intake is anywhere near sane then you are fine. And believe me the average persons salt intake is totally sane.

Need2Exerc1se

Like pizza, I'll make one with FF cheese, sugar-free sauce, low-carb tortilla, a protein. Once it's all together, you don't notice a difference between thin pizza crust and a 50-calorie wrap. Chinese: no breading or rice, eat the whole thing. Chocolatey or PB things: Cocoa powder, stevia (I am comfortable with this despite whatever), PB II. Or delicious PB itself in moderation.

These all sound like diet foods that make "diet" a dirty word, and would not be sustainable for me.

Need2Exerc1se

Is that true about the salt? I don't use a salt shaker often, but some foods have more salt than I expect.

You won't find a good answer here, just opinions. There is much disagreement even amongst scientists and nutritionists on the role of sodium in the diet. There is no definitive answer.

But the OP's comment about bananas is good. If you eat a high sodium diet, you should also make sure to get enough potassium. Bananas are high in potassium, as are potatoes, tomatoes and tomato sauce, and many vegetables. The balance of potassium and sodium in the blood is important.

hortensehildegarde

All carbohydrates- every type you can imagine- after being processed in the gut and liver are released from the liver into the bloodstream as 95% glucose, with 2-3% fructose, and the rest galactose. All of these are simple six-carbon molecules.

ALL carbohydrates.

Just FYI.

In Guyton's Textbook of Medical Physiology, of course.

No reason to read that book OP or anyone else. It's just a bunch of nonsense that that member posts every post. Basically using mfp as marketing and the site allows it.

Guyton's is an excellent reference book in General Physiology - It was my go-to in junior year in college. For general medical physiology.
But our poster doesn't need Guyton's as a reference to her nutritional position.

I doubt Guyton's has what our breakfast skipper poster writes above quite like that. For example, fiber is a carbohydrate and not digested - of the dietary carbohydrates that are digested, yes, they all end up primarily as glucose. So no, not ALL carbohydrates. Furthermore, the liver is a very complex organ and it's function with dietary carbs can't be reduced to glucose output - just to mention one process - dietary carbs (and the resulting glucose) are also used up to make a variety of glycoproteins - a simple example is transferrin, synthesized directly in the liver. Some ... Anyway, Guyton's is rather poor source of info on transferrin and other glycoprotein synthesis - barely makes a passing mention on page 46 of my edition.

As good as Guyton's is, I wish he'd stop using it as a call to authority - I loved that text book, he's killing it.

But I don't even know what that has to do with what the OP is writing.

Thank you! I read that and was like "wha?!? what about fiber? that can't be true of fiber" so you saved me having to look it up.

I have this friend where we'd discuss facts and she'd be like "I don't feel that is true" and it used to infuriate me because I'd be like "it's a fact! it is true! your feelings on it are irrelevant!" and she never could understand why her opinion or "feeling" on the matter was pointless to discuss.

English is so inexact for example- "previous post said all carbs are the same, i personally do not feel that a twinkie and a zucchini are the same" is apples and oranges. The two parts of the sentence don't even go together. All carbs are the same and a twinkie and a zucchini are not the same but of course they are also NOT carbs. Duh. They CONTAIN carbs (which ARE all the same). Those are all facts, again feeling has no place in the discussion, so yeah people get weird when you start talking about your "feelings" on facts as if your feeling impact the matter. (as if anyone thinks a twinkie and a zucchini are the same anyway?!?)

And poor OP, had the post been titled differently (accurately) all this backlash might not have happened. Obviously low cal subs are NOT "eating whatever you want". Again, English fail. If it was what you wanted you wouldn't be substituting.

I think OP meant more "You can satisfy your cravings here are some ideas that *might* work for you!" because as has been made very clear in the responses (though you'd think it was patently obvious and not requiring pointing out) not everyone likes to eat the same things.

I personally like to eat a lot and do enjoy new ideas for substitutions for things so the concept of the OP wasn't a horrible idea but the execution was somewhat lacking.

(also Mr. Science person I forget your name I think I love you. A poster who can accurately point out logical fallacies on a message board? Be still my heart. )