Carbs & Sugars :(

Chuckw40

Is it possible to have a healthy percentage of body fat if you are eating 400 grams of sugar a day?

If the only goal is to lose weight then yes, any deficit will do it. In fact if that is your only concern, just stop eating altogether and you will lose loads of weight. Now if you want to lose weight and be healthy, then it's a good idea to limit sugar.

If this is wrong please let me know.

Absolutely. Why wouldn't it be?

The only reason why we limit sugar is to make room for food that has more micronutrients, like veggies, fruits, and whole grains. Other than that, sugar is simply a quick-absorbing carb. When diet, and preferably exercise is in check, it doesn't do any harm for those who don't have some sort of clinical condition.

I'm pretty sure that is not the reason most of us limit sugar...
Google search of "sugar effects on body", this was only the first 4 results.
http://www.healingdaily.com/detoxification-diet/sugar.htm
http://www.naturalnews.com/022692.html
http://www.rheumatic.org/sugar.htm
http://macrobiotics.co.uk/sugar.htm

Seems like you might be wrong this time.

In fact at this point I think you are probably just a troll. In my opinion what you are telling people on here is irresponsible at best.

mynameisuntz

I'm pretty sure that is not the reason most of us limit sugar...
Google search of "sugar effects on body", this was only the first 4 results.
http://www.healingdaily.com/detoxification-diet/sugar.htm
http://www.naturalnews.com/022692.html
http://www.rheumatic.org/sugar.htm
http://macrobiotics.co.uk/sugar.htm

Seems like you might be wrong this time.

In fact at this point I think you are probably just a troll. In my opinion what you are telling people on here is irresponsible at best.

In regards to body composition, sugar does NOT defy the law of thermodynamics.

This is a great article that explains how a PHYSICAL LAW OF NATURE is applicable to our body: http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/the-energy-balance-equation.html

Sugar, HFCS, trans fat, etc. does NOT defy this.

I suggest finding real sources, not websites that aren't founded in scientific literature.

mynameisuntz

"Numerous clinical studies have shown that sugar-containing liquids, when consumed in place of usual meals, can lead to a significant and sustained weight loss."

Adam Drewnowski and France Bellisle. Liquid calories, sugar, and body weight. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 85, No. 3, 651-661, March 2007.

http://www.ajcn.org/content/85/3/651.full

I've provided evidence now. Peer-reviewed, published evidence. But I'm just trolling you by citing research and a physical law of nature. Feel free to present evidence since YOU are making a claim that goes against the null hypothesis, which is sugar has no "specialized" or "unique" role on body composition.

Chuckw40

I'm pretty sure that is not the reason most of us limit sugar...
Google search of "sugar effects on body", this was only the first 4 results.
http://www.healingdaily.com/detoxification-diet/sugar.htm
http://www.naturalnews.com/022692.html
http://www.rheumatic.org/sugar.htm
http://macrobiotics.co.uk/sugar.htm

Seems like you might be wrong this time.

In fact at this point I think you are probably just a troll. In my opinion what you are telling people on here is irresponsible at best.

In regards to body composition, sugar does NOT defy the law of thermodynamics.

This is a great article that explains how a PHYSICAL LAW OF NATURE is applicable to our body: http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/the-energy-balance-equation.html

Sugar, HFCS, trans fat, etc. does NOT defy this.

I suggest finding real sources, not websites that aren't founded in scientific literature.

We aren't talking about losing weight here, we are talking about the damage that high levels of sugar can do to your health.You said that there was no problem with consuming large quantities of sugar daily and that is dead wrong.

All I ask is that people do their own research before listening to anybody on this site. There are more than a few anonymous people on here who's only purpose seems to be starting arguments. They didn't even bother to fill out their profile before jumping in half the threads on here.

Have fun trolling...

mynameisuntz

We aren't talking about losing weight here, we are talking about the damage that high levels of sugar can do to your health.You said that there was no problem with consuming large quantities of sugar daily and that is dead wrong.

All I ask is that people do their own research before listening to anybody on this site. There are more than a few anonymous people on here who's only purpose seems to be starting arguments. They didn't even bother to fill out their profile before jumping in half the threads on here.

Have fun trolling...

Learn to read.

My initial claim: "Energy balance (calories in vs. calories out) determines body weight. Macronutrient (carbs/fat/protein) consumption determines body composition." AND "You can't gain weight when you're at a caloric deficit REGARDLESS of carb/sugar intake. Stop fearing carbs and start fearing a caloric surplus as that is what matters in terms of weight loss." - talking SOLELY about body composition/weight loss.

Oh also: "Right, I'm not suggesting anyone do this. I'm merely illustrating a point."

When did I promote such a diet or say it's remotely okay for general health? We're talking about weight loss on a weight loss forum. Please don't chime in and attack my argument when you don't even know what argument I am representing.

Chuckw40

When did I promote such a diet or say it's remotely okay for general health?

Hmm, let me think, perhaps when you said this a few minutes ago ...

"The only reason why we limit sugar is to make room for food that has more micronutrients, like veggies, fruits, and whole grains. Other than that, sugar is simply a quick-absorbing carb. When diet, and preferably exercise is in check, it doesn't do any harm for those who don't have some sort of clinical condition."

Yeah, that's what you said, remember?

And this is not just a weight loss site, it is also a place for people to get healthier and promotes healthy weight loss. Like I said, you just want to argue and I am done. Goodnight.

mynameisuntz

When did I promote such a diet or say it's remotely okay for general health?

Hmm, let me think, perhaps when you said this a few minutes ago ...

"The only reason why we limit sugar is to make room for food that has more micronutrients, like veggies, fruits, and whole grains. Other than that, sugar is simply a quick-absorbing carb. When diet, and preferably exercise is in check, it doesn't do any harm for those who don't have some sort of clinical condition."

Yeah, that's what you said, remember?

And this is not just a weight loss site, it is also a place for people to get healthier and promotes healthy weight loss. Like I said, you just want to argue and I am done. Goodnight.

AGAIN: "Right, I'm not suggesting anyone do this. I'm merely illustrating a point." - I said this long before the statement of mine you are quoting.

Allow me to rephrase since you can't admit you are wrong and misinterpreted what I am saying: "When diet, and preferably exercise is in check, it doesn't do any harm *from a body compositional standpoint* for those who don't have some sort of clinical condition."

Had you read my INITIAL ARGUMENT, which has been speaking from the basis of body composition and weight loss, and my statement which clearly says I am NOT promoting such a diet, then I wouldn't have to spell this out for you.

Chuckw40

Changed my mind, not worth it.

Oh what the hell.. First of all I know how to read, thanks for your concern.

Second, I don't care if you are promoting it or not the fact is you claimed that consuming large quantities of sugar daily is perfectly fine with no negative effects. Do you admit now that that statement was wrong?

kimmerroze

Changed my mind, not worth it.

Oh what the hell.. First of all I know how to read, thanks for your concern.

Second, I don't care if you are promoting it or not the fact is you claimed that consuming large quantities of sugar daily is perfectly fine with no negative effects. Do you admit now that that statement was wrong?

You cant argue with someone like him. you wont win him over. I would just stop. everyone else has.

shesnotthere

This probably doesn't apply to the original poster, but for those of us who are obese and have been for a while, cutting out carbs, especially simple carbs and sugars can make a huge difference. The truth is that every body is different. Thinner younger people probably don't need to do more than a calorie deficit to lose weight. For me? I am borderline insulin resistant and keeping my carbs below 20g per day has made a huge difference in my success. I am eating 400 calories MORE a day, but under 20g carbs and the weight is coming off at 2-3 lbs per week compared with a month long plateau on a traditional diet. And yes, I am getting my needed vitamins and minerals because I eat a ****load of fresh veggies every single day.

I am so sick of reading calories in/calories out. It is just such a huge simplification of what your body does with food. Yes, calories matter, but what your body does with those calories also matters. And those of you saying that Taubes says calories don't matter haven't read either of his books on diet. You just haven't. It's infuriating when people post as if they know all about something that confounds people with PhD's in the subject ! I mean really!

Also, some people get so nasty. It's really hard to have a rational discussion when it devolves into one liners and sarcasm. You're dismissing something that is really key for many many obese people, why? So you can look smart on the internet?

Chuckw40

Changed my mind, not worth it.

Oh what the hell.. First of all I know how to read, thanks for your concern.

Second, I don't care if you are promoting it or not the fact is you claimed that consuming large quantities of sugar daily is perfectly fine with no negative effects. Do you admit now that that statement was wrong?

You cant argue with someone like him. you wont win him over. I would just stop. everyone else has.

I know this and really am trying to stop myself but I think it's the little jabs he is taking at me that bother me the most.

BeeElMarvin

Eat EVERYTHING in moderation...

Barneystinson

I think the biggest thing to take from all this is none of the above even remotely applies to those with chronic elevated blood glucose levels (i.e. pre-diabetics, T2 diabetics, T1 diabetics, or ANYONE with a metabolic disorder or condition).

Common sense would also dictate eating a diet high in sugar isn't going to do much in terms of satiety and nutrient provision. And not pulling studies, it's generally also not very beneficial to your teeth.

And back to the OP - the "high sugar" consumption for the day was due namely to the consumption of fruit, which again, common sense - eating portions of fruit or lactose-containing dairy will elevate sugar levels, but is not harmful to the average person.

Rhodium1976

I have to disagree. If most of the carbs are simple carbs, it's important to exclude that from our daily diet. I also find it hard to believe that she is getting enough protein if she's this far over on carbs, because it's quite apparent the majority of her calories are coming from carbs.

To original poster: Eat more protein! Eat nuts for snacks, or boiled egg whites, or even switch some of the fruit to veggies, and eat lots of lean meats. Make a tuna salad. Those are some ideas to get you more protein and less carbs.

I have done my research and agree 100% with this post. I'm just too busy today to go into detail. Invest in the books Why We Get Fat and Good Calories, Bad Calories by Gary Taubes. You will be shocked and fascinated and enlightened.

Simple carbs don't defy the law of thermodynamics, sorry. If you are at a caloric deficit, it is impossible to gain weight. Period. If you are at a caloric deficit, it is impossible to not LOSE weight. Law of thermodynamics applied to weight loss is relevant. Sugar does not change that physical law of nature.

If she's eating 1,600 calories and 100g protein, then that leaves 1,200 calories for fat/carbs, meaning she could eat 300g carbs per day. Just to illustrate that you have no idea if she's THAT far over her carbs for the day.

Reading a data cherry-picker like Taubes is not doing research. He bases pretty much all of his claims off correlations and biochemical studies; neither of which look at the practicality of nutrition. Making decisions on what is permitted in a diet or how our bodies function when eating "X" or "Y" is best done by looking at clinical trials - comparing one group to another - controlling all variables except for that which is in question (in this case, sugar consumption), and measuring differences.

Zero clinical trials exist that show hindered weight loss by eating sugar so long as macronutrients are maintained AND the people in question are not insulin resistant/diabetic.

This.

Conservation of Energy: No matter can be created nor destroyed.

Always get lulz from the carbophobes and their insulin fairy who completely ignore the body's state of energy insufficiency (AMP, ADP, etc) where the appropriate enzymes are phosphorylated, specifically ACP, which curtails lipid biosynthesis. Furthermore, malonyl-coa is inhibited which allows the carnitine shuttle to transport long-chain fatty acids into the mitochondria for beta-oxidation.

Moral of story: Calories in versus Calories out. The more complicated an individual makes it, the worse it is for them and they usually end up overweight.

brb enjoying Chipotle for lunch with the white rice, tortilla,and sour cream. Slid perfectly in my macros today

Barneystinson

I have to disagree. If most of the carbs are simple carbs, it's important to exclude that from our daily diet. I also find it hard to believe that she is getting enough protein if she's this far over on carbs, because it's quite apparent the majority of her calories are coming from carbs.

To original poster: Eat more protein! Eat nuts for snacks, or boiled egg whites, or even switch some of the fruit to veggies, and eat lots of lean meats. Make a tuna salad. Those are some ideas to get you more protein and less carbs.

I have done my research and agree 100% with this post. I'm just too busy today to go into detail. Invest in the books Why We Get Fat and Good Calories, Bad Calories by Gary Taubes. You will be shocked and fascinated and enlightened.

Simple carbs don't defy the law of thermodynamics, sorry. If you are at a caloric deficit, it is impossible to gain weight. Period. If you are at a caloric deficit, it is impossible to not LOSE weight. Law of thermodynamics applied to weight loss is relevant. Sugar does not change that physical law of nature.

If she's eating 1,600 calories and 100g protein, then that leaves 1,200 calories for fat/carbs, meaning she could eat 300g carbs per day. Just to illustrate that you have no idea if she's THAT far over her carbs for the day.

Reading a data cherry-picker like Taubes is not doing research. He bases pretty much all of his claims off correlations and biochemical studies; neither of which look at the practicality of nutrition. Making decisions on what is permitted in a diet or how our bodies function when eating "X" or "Y" is best done by looking at clinical trials - comparing one group to another - controlling all variables except for that which is in question (in this case, sugar consumption), and measuring differences.

Zero clinical trials exist that show hindered weight loss by eating sugar so long as macronutrients are maintained AND the people in question are not insulin resistant/diabetic.

This.

Conservation of Energy: No matter can be created nor destroyed.

Always get lulz from the carbophobes and their insulin fairy who completely ignore the body's state of energy insufficiency (AMP, ADP, etc) where the appropriate enzymes are phosphorylated, specifically ACP, which curtails lipid biosynthesis. Furthermore, malonyl-coa is inhibited allowing the carnitine shuttle to transport long-chain fatty acids into the mitochondria for beta-oxidation.

brb enjoying Chipotle for lunch with the white rice, tortilla,and sour cream. Slid perfectly in my macros today

Ah, but whereas my macros are low in carbohydrate, I stay within my suggested caloric deficit and feel full, happy, and content. I do targeted refeeds on weekends. If being full and satisfied from my choice of foods makes me a carbophobe, then I relish the title. But I am at peace knowing what combination of foods enables me to stay within my caloric limits for the day. When I do a targeted re-feed or plan to do a high level of activity, I compensate with eating more fruits and some rice.

Not everyone eating low carb preaches Taubes.

kimmerroze

Changed my mind, not worth it.

Oh what the hell.. First of all I know how to read, thanks for your concern.

Second, I don't care if you are promoting it or not the fact is you claimed that consuming large quantities of sugar daily is perfectly fine with no negative effects. Do you admit now that that statement was wrong?

You cant argue with someone like him. you wont win him over. I would just stop. everyone else has.

I know this and really am trying to stop myself but I think it's the little jabs he is taking at me that bother me the most.

well that is how know it alls get under your skin. He is just trying to "prove a point" so let him. It will boost his self esteem and you can go away the bigger person. lol preaching to the choir I know. But I understand what you mean. lol :bigsmile:

Rhodium1976

I have to disagree. If most of the carbs are simple carbs, it's important to exclude that from our daily diet. I also find it hard to believe that she is getting enough protein if she's this far over on carbs, because it's quite apparent the majority of her calories are coming from carbs.

To original poster: Eat more protein! Eat nuts for snacks, or boiled egg whites, or even switch some of the fruit to veggies, and eat lots of lean meats. Make a tuna salad. Those are some ideas to get you more protein and less carbs.

I have done my research and agree 100% with this post. I'm just too busy today to go into detail. Invest in the books Why We Get Fat and Good Calories, Bad Calories by Gary Taubes. You will be shocked and fascinated and enlightened.

Simple carbs don't defy the law of thermodynamics, sorry. If you are at a caloric deficit, it is impossible to gain weight. Period. If you are at a caloric deficit, it is impossible to not LOSE weight. Law of thermodynamics applied to weight loss is relevant. Sugar does not change that physical law of nature.

If she's eating 1,600 calories and 100g protein, then that leaves 1,200 calories for fat/carbs, meaning she could eat 300g carbs per day. Just to illustrate that you have no idea if she's THAT far over her carbs for the day.

Reading a data cherry-picker like Taubes is not doing research. He bases pretty much all of his claims off correlations and biochemical studies; neither of which look at the practicality of nutrition. Making decisions on what is permitted in a diet or how our bodies function when eating "X" or "Y" is best done by looking at clinical trials - comparing one group to another - controlling all variables except for that which is in question (in this case, sugar consumption), and measuring differences.

Zero clinical trials exist that show hindered weight loss by eating sugar so long as macronutrients are maintained AND the people in question are not insulin resistant/diabetic.

This.

Conservation of Energy: No matter can be created nor destroyed.

Always get lulz from the carbophobes and their insulin fairy who completely ignore the body's state of energy insufficiency (AMP, ADP, etc) where the appropriate enzymes are phosphorylated, specifically ACP, which curtails lipid biosynthesis. Furthermore, malonyl-coa is inhibited allowing the carnitine shuttle to transport long-chain fatty acids into the mitochondria for beta-oxidation.

brb enjoying Chipotle for lunch with the white rice, tortilla,and sour cream. Slid perfectly in my macros today

Ah, but whereas my macros are low in carbohydrate, I stay within my suggested caloric deficit and feel full, happy, and content. I do targeted refeeds on weekends. If being full and satisfied from my choice of foods makes me a carbophobe, then I relish the title. But I am at peace knowing what combination of foods enables me to stay within my caloric limits for the day. When I do a targeted re-feed or plan to do a high level of activity, I compensate with eating more fruits and some rice.

Not everyone eating low carb preaches Taubes.

As long as it works for you, great I say. I lift heavy 4 times per week and jog, and need my carbs. I feel full as long as I get my protein and fats; we are all different and the important thing is you still maintain a calorie deficit. My problem comes is when the carbophobes preach that it is somehow superior or the only thing that will help you lose weight (which I don't think you are doing) - this is simply not the case.

Barneystinson

I have to disagree. If most of the carbs are simple carbs, it's important to exclude that from our daily diet. I also find it hard to believe that she is getting enough protein if she's this far over on carbs, because it's quite apparent the majority of her calories are coming from carbs.

To original poster: Eat more protein! Eat nuts for snacks, or boiled egg whites, or even switch some of the fruit to veggies, and eat lots of lean meats. Make a tuna salad. Those are some ideas to get you more protein and less carbs.

I have done my research and agree 100% with this post. I'm just too busy today to go into detail. Invest in the books Why We Get Fat and Good Calories, Bad Calories by Gary Taubes. You will be shocked and fascinated and enlightened.

Simple carbs don't defy the law of thermodynamics, sorry. If you are at a caloric deficit, it is impossible to gain weight. Period. If you are at a caloric deficit, it is impossible to not LOSE weight. Law of thermodynamics applied to weight loss is relevant. Sugar does not change that physical law of nature.

If she's eating 1,600 calories and 100g protein, then that leaves 1,200 calories for fat/carbs, meaning she could eat 300g carbs per day. Just to illustrate that you have no idea if she's THAT far over her carbs for the day.

Reading a data cherry-picker like Taubes is not doing research. He bases pretty much all of his claims off correlations and biochemical studies; neither of which look at the practicality of nutrition. Making decisions on what is permitted in a diet or how our bodies function when eating "X" or "Y" is best done by looking at clinical trials - comparing one group to another - controlling all variables except for that which is in question (in this case, sugar consumption), and measuring differences.

Zero clinical trials exist that show hindered weight loss by eating sugar so long as macronutrients are maintained AND the people in question are not insulin resistant/diabetic.

This.

Conservation of Energy: No matter can be created nor destroyed.

Always get lulz from the carbophobes and their insulin fairy who completely ignore the body's state of energy insufficiency (AMP, ADP, etc) where the appropriate enzymes are phosphorylated, specifically ACP, which curtails lipid biosynthesis. Furthermore, malonyl-coa is inhibited allowing the carnitine shuttle to transport long-chain fatty acids into the mitochondria for beta-oxidation.

brb enjoying Chipotle for lunch with the white rice, tortilla,and sour cream. Slid perfectly in my macros today

Ah, but whereas my macros are low in carbohydrate, I stay within my suggested caloric deficit and feel full, happy, and content. I do targeted refeeds on weekends. If being full and satisfied from my choice of foods makes me a carbophobe, then I relish the title. But I am at peace knowing what combination of foods enables me to stay within my caloric limits for the day. When I do a targeted re-feed or plan to do a high level of activity, I compensate with eating more fruits and some rice.

Not everyone eating low carb preaches Taubes.

As long as it works for you, great I say. I lift heavy 4 times per week and jog, and need my carbs. I feel full as long as I get my protein and fats; we are all different and the important thing is you still maintain a calorie deficit. My problem comes is when the carbophobes preach that it is somehow superior or the only thing that will help you lose weight (which I don't think you are doing) - this is simply not the case.

Nah, the deficit STILL matters. I lift heavy 3X per week - compound lifts, my cardio is all lo/slo - hiking, walking. I haven't had energy problems but did have them when I tried a foray into half marathon training. Carbed up, felt like crap, hungry all the time, blew my caloric deficit by loading on sugary crap, gained weight. Lesson learned - running is NOT for me. I feel like a champ being in keto with heavy lifting, tho.

I've also lost weight in the past eating higher carb, but again, it was the deficit, not the macros that spurred the weight loss. At that time I wasn't doing any running or training, just very novice fitness - walking, light lifting. I simply found the macros hard to sustain in the long run and felt limited.

mynameisuntz

Changed my mind, not worth it.

Oh what the hell.. First of all I know how to read, thanks for your concern.

Second, I don't care if you are promoting it or not the fact is you claimed that consuming large quantities of sugar daily is perfectly fine with no negative effects. Do you admit now that that statement was wrong?

Still...not...getting it...

I don't know how to make this any more clear. You really are having difficulties understanding what I'm saying when I'm laying it out so clear. Let me reiterate the things I've said.

1) I've only been talking from a body compositional standpoint - NOT a general health standpoint.
2) Based on point 1, I am arguing that there is no negative effect FROM A BODY COMPOSITIONAL STANDPOINT if you eat 400g of pure sugar and remain in a caloric deficit. Note I have NOT mentioned general health or the effects of sugar on your body in any way OUTSIDE OF BODY COMPOSITION.
3) I CLEARLY stated that I would never promote this, and only mentioned such a radical diet for the purpose of illustration.

So I claimed that eating large quantities of sugar was perfectly fine with no negative effects SOLELY FROM A BODY COMPOSITIONAL STANDPOINT, while soon after reminding people that I did NOT promote such a style of eating. THEN you jumped in criticizing me of promoting a diet that is radically high in sugar.

Is any of this making sense yet?

shesnotthere

This.

Conservation of Energy: No matter can be created nor destroyed.

Always get lulz from the carbophobes and their insulin fairy who completely ignore the body's state of energy insufficiency (AMP, ADP, etc) where the appropriate enzymes are phosphorylated, specifically ACP, which curtails lipid biosynthesis. Furthermore, malonyl-coa is inhibited which allows the carnitine shuttle to transport long-chain fatty acids into the mitochondria for beta-oxidation.

Moral of story: Calories in versus Calories out. The more complicated an individual makes it, the worse it is for them and they usually end up overweight.

brb enjoying Chipotle for lunch with the white rice, tortilla,and sour cream. Slid perfectly in my macros today

I have no idea which metabolic pathway you're referring to there but when I took biochemistry my professor hammered home over and over that insulin is the big boy, the bully, the boss of metabolic regulation. We weren't even talking about diets, just in general. Insulin is incredibly important to the way our bodies process what we eat. Our bodies are complicated, it isn't us making them out to be complicated. The pathway you just described only illustrates that. I'll say it again: calories in/calories out is important, but it's not the whole story.

I hope you enjoyed your Chipotle as much as I enjoyed my spicy thai chicken lettuce wraps. Yum.