Carbs - friend or foe?

katschi

Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please.
Mark Twain (1835 - 1910)

Facts are stupid things.
Ronald Reagan (1911 - 2004)


The trouble with facts is that there are so many of them.
Samuel McChord Crothers, The Gentle Reader

Get the facts, or the facts will get you. And when you get them, get them right, or they will get you wrong.
Dr. Thomas Fuller

The OP left a long time ago, did anyone notice?

abtruse1

The OP left a long time ago, did anyone notice?
[/quote]

can't say I don't blame the OP for leaving. probably got scared to death posting a response without getting there head chopped off


cant everyone just play nice, nice together?

Hearts_2015

I'm currently taking a nutrition class for my degree and have learned a bunch about carbs. You need them. Period. Don't buy into that low-carb, high-protein diet. Its absolutely ridiculous and a fad diet. It only works for so long. This is the deal, you need to eat your recommended amount.

Carbohydrates should contribute 45-65% of your daily kcalorie amounts. Fats should be 20-35% and protein should be 10-35%. I always try to be as close to the middle of all of these as possible, without exceeding 100% of course

Carbohydrates are important because they contribute glucose. Glucose is the ONLY SOURCE of energy your brain and nervous system uses. When you deprive yourself of carbohydrates, your body starts breaking down protein into glucose to fuel the brain. But your body breaks down so much more protein to create glucose than carbohydrates. And think about it, protein has other jobs to do: create genes, make new cells for everything in your body, build and maintain muscles. The last thing you need to do to your body is make it take away the amino acids it needs to do these things, all because you didn't want to eat your RDA of carbohydrates.

And this happens when you don't eat 45% of your diet in carbs. This doesn't happen over a period of time. Your brain uses glucose everyday. And fat is not converted to glucose for your brain to use. It doesn't work that way. Its so important to eat at least 45%.

Hope this helps.

bump for later

katschi

The OP left a long time ago, did anyone notice?

can't say I don't blame the OP for leaving. probably got scared to death posting a response without getting there head chopped off

cant everyone just play nice, nice together?

Exactly.
I noticed she went on to more friendly threads for help.

abtruse1

The OP left a long time ago, did anyone notice?

can't say I don't blame the OP for leaving. probably got scared to death posting a response without getting there head chopped off

cant everyone just play nice, nice together?

Exactly.
I noticed she went on to more friendly threads for help.

thats a shame. Ya gotta love social media! ha!

ladyhawk00

Ok, I've spent a great deal of time cleaning up this thread, as I believe it has some good information/debate. Can we please remember to follow forum rules?

4) Do not attack/slam/insult other users. The forums are here so that members can help support one another. Attacks or insults against each other takes away from the supportive atmosphere and will not be tolerated. You can discuss the message or topic, but not the messenger - NO EXCEPTIONS. If you are attacked by another user, and you reciprocate, YOU will also be subject to the same consequences. Defending yourself, defending a friend, etc. are NOT excuses. Violations of this rule are taken very seriously and may result in being banned without warning! If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all.

There is never a need for insults or belittling another person on the forums. Debate is encouraged, but keep it respectful and on topic at all times.

Thank you for your cooperation.
Ladyhawk00
MyFitnessPal Forum Moderator

turbofiregirl

Its not about the carbohydrates; its more about the glycemic index.
Info taken from http://www.glycemicindex.com/

Not all carbohydrate foods are created equal, in fact they behave quite differently in our bodies. The glycemic index or GI describes this difference by ranking carbohydrates according to their effect on our blood glucose levels. Choosing low GI carbs - the ones that produce only small fluctuations in our blood glucose and insulin levels - is the secret to long-term health reducing your risk of heart disease and diabetes and is the key to sustainable weight loss.

What are the Benefits of the Glycemic Index?
Eating a lot of high GI foods can be detrimental to your health because it pushes your body to extremes. This is especially true if you are overweight and sedentary. Switching to eating mainly low GI carbs that slowly trickle glucose into your blood stream keeps your energy levels balanced and means you will feel fuller for longer between meals.

◦Low GI diets help people lose and manage weight
◦Low GI diets increase the body's sensitivity to insulin
◦Low GI carbs improve diabetes management
◦Low GI carbs reduce the risk of heart disease
◦Low GI carbs improve blood cholesterol levels
◦Low GI carbs can help you manage the symptoms of PCOS
◦Low GI carbs reduce hunger and keep you fuller for longer
◦Low GI carbs prolong physical endurance
◦High GI carbs help re-fuel carbohydrate stores after exercise

How to Switch to a Low GI Diet
The basic technique for eating the low GI way is simply a "this for that" approach - ie, swapping high GI carbs for low GI carbs. You don't need to count numbers or do any sort of mental arithmetic to make sure you are eating a healthy, low GI diet.

◦Use breakfast cereals based on oats, barley and bran
◦Use breads with wholegrains, stone-ground flour, sour dough
◦Reduce the amount of potatoes you eat
◦Enjoy all other types of fruit and vegetables
◦Use Basmati or Doongara rice
◦Enjoy pasta, noodles, quinoa
◦Eat plenty of salad vegetables with a vinaigrette dressing

mynameisuntz

Its not about the carbohydrates; its more about the glycemic index.
Info taken from http://www.glycemicindex.com/

The glycemic index is actually extremely outdated and has been disproven time and time again in terms of its claims and validity.

turbofiregirl

Then how about metabolic syndrome and insulin resistance, all related to obesity? If GI is extremely outdated, how do we explain this biochemical reaction?

mynameisuntz

Then how about metabolic syndrome and insulin resistance, all related to obesity? If GI is extremely outdated, how do we explain this biochemical reaction?

Things like insulin resistance are in their own category given that it's a clinical condition. For some people, like those who are insulin resistant or diabetic, GI may be important. But I'm talking about the general population; people who don't have clinical conditions or metabolic issues.

GI, for your everyday person which comprises the vast majority of society, is irrelevant and unnecessary.

queenbcronen

You do have to find the healthy balance for YOU. I am just recently diagnosed diabetic. I LOVE carbs. I am finding out they are not my friend now. I have ONE bagel and my blood sugar shoots through the roof. So I need to cut those things out unfortunately. Someone who does not have diabetes can handle carbs better. I know complex carbs are better than simple.

DBabbit

I'm SO confused on nutrition in general. But my specific concern today is carbs. Are they good or bad?

Complex carbs are better for you overall than simple carbs. (Think whole grain bread vs. white bread. The second is basically stripped of its nutrition, hence the reason we often see "enriched" in the ingredient list.) The reason being that complex carbs take a little longer to digest and do not spike your blood sugar like simple carbs do.

If you take a potato (carb, starch, and basically good for you), and then load it up with butter, sour cream, or hide it under a fatty gravy, that is when it becomes bad.

Legumes & rice (my favorite meal) are good for you in that they are a complete protein, but only if brown rice is used, because white rice has been stripped of the healthy bran, and also, if it isn't soaked in butter, sour cream, or other fatty toppings.

The same holds true for fruits and vegetables, which are generally seen as healthy. It is the full-fat salad dressings, fatty sauces, and additional sugar that cause the problems.

The closer you eat to the natural state, the better off you are - meaning, leave off the processed foods whenever possible. A whole apple is better than applesauce. Fresh fruit is much healthier than dried.

I have hypoglycemia, but I do not have diabetes. I have to eat some form of carb at least every 4 hours, or I will pass out. M&Ms are my friend. :laugh: Just kidding. I broke my chocolate addiction, so now I keep hard candies on hand, along with chewable glucose pills and only have a piece if I feel shaky. With me, it is usually a lack of food that causes sugar levels to plummet.

Is it a source issue (like fruit sugars aren't as bad as refined sugar)?

Fruits are healthy, but there are some that have a higher sugar content, which is important to know if you're diabetic and on a restricted low-carb diet. That isn't to say that fruits (cherries, grapes, bananas to name a few) should be avoided, but they should be eaten in limited quantities.

How many should I be eating a day?

An average serving of fruit is 2 a day. (1 small apple, 1 small banana, 10 cherries, 15 grapes, 1 cup of strawberries, 1 cup of blueberries)
Whole fruit is better than fruit juice, no matter which fruit you choose. You can get the same nutrients from vegetables that you get from fruit. You can do your own fruit/vegetable comparisons at Nutritiondata.com. They have charts and nutrition labels that tell you the glycemic load, calorie label, fats, proteins, carbs, and amino makeup on over 3000 foods.

Is it one of those things I could/should minimize?

Low-carb diets, when done sensibly, can help you lose weight faster, but you MUST include exercise or you will lose lean muscle mass, and it will show in your body's appearance and skin.

If you don't strength train, you may reach your desired weight, but you will not be healthy, and your skin and body image will show it. Women cannot naturally bulk up like a man, so you need not worry about looking like a bodybuilder. (Unless that's your goal!) What you're after is body tone, which is why weight lifting is important. On that note, you don't need to lift hundreds of pounds either. Five-ten pounds of freeweights is fine. Twenty-five is the max I would do, but you should talk to a trainer at the gym for that.

Does low carb create a carb defienciency and cause medical problems?

Lowering your carbs are necessary to help you lose weight. You do want to eat some, but in the form of low carbs (green leafy vegetables and low-carb fruit) so that you can continue to eat the necessary vitamins and minerals your body needs. If you were to totally avoid carbs, you would first experience headaches, grumpiness, be avoiding important vitamins and minerals, and eventually, wind up with heart disease, high cholesterol, and maybe even colan cancer if all you ate were fruits and meat, because nitrates form in cooked meats - especially red meat and processed meat (bacon, sausage, liverworst, etc.). (M. H.Ward, A. J.Cross, H. Divan, M. Kulldorff, S. Nowell-Kadlubar, F. F.Kadlubar, & R. Sinha, 2007)

"After adjustment for known risk factors and total meat consumption, Nowell et al. (23) found a 2-fold increased risk of colorectal cancer associated with processed meat
consumption above the median intake level. (M. H.Ward, A. J.Cross, H. Divan, M. Kulldorff, S. Nowell-Kadlubar, F. F.Kadlubar, & R. Sinha, Carcinogenesis vol.28 no.6 pp.1210–1216, 2007, doi:10.1093/carcin/bgm009, Advance Access publication February 2, 200, 7para. 1, p. 1213) http://carcin.oxfordjournals.org/content/28/6/1210.full.pdf

Note that this is only one study, but you can find more carcinogen studies here: http://carcin.oxfordjournals.org/

A few links you may find informative include:

http://nutrition.about.com/od/diets/a/lowcarbdianafaq.htm. This article is written by Shereen Jegtvig. She holds a Master's in Nutrition.

http://lowcarbdiets.about.com/od/lowcarb101/a/carblevel.htm This article discusses carb levels, and is reviewed by a board of medical practitioners.

http://lowcarbdiets.about.com/od/nutrition/u/healthnutrition.htm#s3 This article tells you quite a bit about carbs.

Last, but not least, Brigham and Women's Hospital has some advice on low carb diets: http://www.brighamandwomens.org/Patients_Visitors/pcs/nutrition/services/healtheweightforwomen/special_topics/intelihealth0803.aspx


I wish you much success on your journey!

chicorac

Good carbs (Complex Carbs) are your friend expecially if you do strength training. Carbs from whole wheats, fruits, nuts, sweet potatoes, brown rice etc help you recover easierfrom a workout and prevents injuries. The right carbs along with protein also helps build lean muscle mass which helps burn fat and increases your metabolism.

On the other hand Simple Carbs; Carbs from refined products i.e. white bread, white rice, sugar or any carbs already refined has no health benefit. If you'd like to reduce carbs, I'd suggest you reduce this type. They linger in your system longer and have been known to cause health problems including obesity.

mynameisuntz

Sigh, a lot of misinformation in there, BDabbit.

Did you really say that you HAVE to eat low carb to lose weight?

AlsDonkBoxSquat

Carbs aren't the enemy as long as you're eating the right ones. For example, there's a huge difference between wonder bread and brown rice, kwim? The more complex and "whole" (or less processed) your grains are, the better. Now, if you're like me and have intolerences to certain grains that's going to make a huge difference too. I am intolerent to gluten, which means that while it won't kill me I do experience a large amout of discomfort and bloating. My body doesn't break it down as efficiently as gluten free grains, so cutting gluten out of my diet made a huge difference without cutting out all the carbs. Also, you need to make sure that not strictly carb diet, the key is to make sure that your meal plan is balanced.

grimnir

Yeah, well I hesitate to think how my digestion would go with zero fiber in my diet. That stuff is straight up good for you, whether science shows that most people are capable of going without or not. Also, given the current state of the science, you're not even having a meaningful scientific discussion, you're taking turns throwing up conflicting studies and summaries of studies that seem to offer statistically significant results, but are in fact highly inconsistent across the range of individual experience. And that's the difference between you and me. I'm not telling you what you should do, and I don't claim any sort of bull**** expertise. I'm saying *I* feel good. I'm saying *I* am losing weight. I'm saying *I* like what I'm eating and can stick with it indefinitely. How is that less relevant to the OP, exactly?

I get the distinct impression that you are someone who likes to feel important on the internet by consistently mis-representing the appropriate degree of confidence a rational and informed person should have in what you believe to be science's current understanding of nutrition, as if mere statistical significance across a few hundred or a few thousand people could trump the particulars of individual metabolisms and psychological factors when it comes to losing weight over the long haul. Your pointless and damaging reliance on 'scientific' diet optimization does a gross disservice to everyone who takes you seriously, and itself is a twisted and particularly noxious form of eating disorder that is WAY too common on these forums.

Here's something that you should have no trouble agreeing with: for most people, most of the time, if you eat less food than you need to maintain your current weight, you will lose weight over time. Oooh, look how controversial I'm being! I'm just slinging opinions left and right, with no regard to science! Maybe you could follow up with a nice long quasi-scientific screed about how Michael Pollan's dictum 'eat food, not too much, mostly plants' is inaccurate and inadequate, or harmful to whatever 'scientific' nonsense you think is important.

Post what you like, what works for you, makes you feel good, and has been successful for you losing weight/dropping fat, OBVIOUSLY we need all three kinds of food to live, it's just a matter of how much of each we're getting, and it is very much a personal thing.

Wow.

You go on a tirade about this not being an important conversation and then basically bro-science the entire subject matter. What you say in the quoted part is COMPLETELY FALSE. People posting what "works for them" is not a good method of dietary, nutritional or exercise methods. Statistical analysis based of CONTROL GROUPS and scientific data is what matters, not what some chump on the internet (me, you or anyone else) has to say.

When someone quotes an article that has sources from numerous reputable sites, that is a good scientific method of approaching a subject. Random opinions on the internet are NOT a good scientific method of approaching a subject.

And no, you do NOT need all 3 kinds of food to live. Ketosis and gluconeogenesis support my position. This is why people can survive on very very low carb diets.

but isnt the idea in here to share what works? Since every body type is different, it would make sense no?
For example dont some peoples body types work better with higher carbs, and others with proteins then others? If so. Arent they right to share there success for someone else to try?

Everyone is free to share their opinions. That's the point of this website. There are a few problems to this approach though:

1) N = 1. A control group (yourself) of one person isn't an effective way to show what "works" and what doesn't work. Some people can eat 5,000 calories a day and lose weight. If they come on here talking about how everyone should try it, all it will do is slow people down who are confused as it is.

2) Science > opinion. When a group of professionals put together a study with 15 people, 50 people or do a meta-analysis of thousands of people, the data they receive from those studies outweighs opinion.

3) If opinions and sharing what works is the best method, all you're going to have is THOUSANDS of competing opinions talking about what works and then everyone will be confused.

4) Regardless of sharing opinions, posting FALSE information is never good. For instance, if someone says that carbohydrates are essential in a diet, they are posting false information. Are carbohydrates good in a diet? Sure, I like them as much as the next guy but they are not essential and science backs that claim up. (ketosis and gluconeogenesis) Therefore, opinions that are directly contradictory to science are not good.

There are numerous other points I can make but I think I've said enough for now. I do not have a problem with opinions from people, just blatant mis-information.

RangerSteve

It's the internet, if you can't deal with someone debating you then I suggest you turn the computer off. Also, you're using logical fallacies in your post. The main logical fallacy you're using is a false dichotomy. The choices are not A and B. There are many options to choose from.

Your distinct impression of me is completely wrong. I don't feel the need to feel important on the internet or real life. If you have disagree with what I'm posting, I would suggest you post counter-sources that prove what I'm saying is wrong. That's all I've asked for since I've posted in this thread, sources. You know, the same stuff that's required when you write a college essay?

You're right that I am using science and statistics in order to backup my idea of what does and does not work. The reason is because

N = 10,000 > N = 1

If 10,000 people show a statistical significance towards a certain value then that significance is greater than what someone (you, me or anyone else) says on the internet. If you can't handle that fact then I don't know what else to tell you.

I never disagreed that eating less calories than you're using doesn't make you lose weight. How is that controversial? When you have something of substance to post, I'll listen with an open mind and read what you say. Until then, I'm going to call you out if you post mis-information. Thanks.

Yeah, well I hesitate to think how my digestion would go with zero fiber in my diet. That stuff is straight up good for you, whether science shows that most people are capable of going without or not. Also, given the current state of the science, you're not even having a meaningful scientific discussion, you're taking turns throwing up conflicting studies and summaries of studies that seem to offer statistically significant results, but are in fact highly inconsistent across the range of individual experience. And that's the difference between you and me. I'm not telling you what you should do, and I don't claim any sort of bull**** expertise. I'm saying *I* feel good. I'm saying *I* am losing weight. I'm saying *I* like what I'm eating and can stick with it indefinitely. How is that less relevant to the OP, exactly?

I get the distinct impression that you are someone who likes to feel important on the internet by consistently mis-representing the appropriate degree of confidence a rational and informed person should have in what you believe to be science's current understanding of nutrition, as if mere statistical significance across a few hundred or a few thousand people could trump the particulars of individual metabolisms and psychological factors when it comes to losing weight over the long haul. Your pointless and damaging reliance on 'scientific' diet optimization does a gross disservice to everyone who takes you seriously, and itself is a twisted and particularly noxious form of eating disorder that is WAY too common on these forums.

Here's something that you should have no trouble agreeing with: for most people, most of the time, if you eat less food than you need to maintain your current weight, you will lose weight over time. Oooh, look how controversial I'm being! I'm just slinging opinions left and right, with no regard to science! Maybe you could follow up with a nice long quasi-scientific screed about how Michael Pollan's dictum 'eat food, not too much, mostly plants' is inaccurate and inadequate, or harmful to whatever 'scientific' nonsense you think is important.

Post what you like, what works for you, makes you feel good, and has been successful for you losing weight/dropping fat, OBVIOUSLY we need all three kinds of food to live, it's just a matter of how much of each we're getting, and it is very much a personal thing.

Wow.

You go on a tirade about this not being an important conversation and then basically bro-science the entire subject matter. What you say in the quoted part is COMPLETELY FALSE. People posting what "works for them" is not a good method of dietary, nutritional or exercise methods. Statistical analysis based of CONTROL GROUPS and scientific data is what matters, not what some chump on the internet (me, you or anyone else) has to say.

When someone quotes an article that has sources from numerous reputable sites, that is a good scientific method of approaching a subject. Random opinions on the internet are NOT a good scientific method of approaching a subject.

And no, you do NOT need all 3 kinds of food to live. Ketosis and gluconeogenesis support my position. This is why people can survive on very very low carb diets.

but isnt the idea in here to share what works? Since every body type is different, it would make sense no?
For example dont some peoples body types work better with higher carbs, and others with proteins then others? If so. Arent they right to share there success for someone else to try?

Everyone is free to share their opinions. That's the point of this website. There are a few problems to this approach though:

1) N = 1. A control group (yourself) of one person isn't an effective way to show what "works" and what doesn't work. Some people can eat 5,000 calories a day and lose weight. If they come on here talking about how everyone should try it, all it will do is slow people down who are confused as it is.

2) Science > opinion. When a group of professionals put together a study with 15 people, 50 people or do a meta-analysis of thousands of people, the data they receive from those studies outweighs opinion.

3) If opinions and sharing what works is the best method, all you're going to have is THOUSANDS of competing opinions talking about what works and then everyone will be confused.

4) Regardless of sharing opinions, posting FALSE information is never good. For instance, if someone says that carbohydrates are essential in a diet, they are posting false information. Are carbohydrates good in a diet? Sure, I like them as much as the next guy but they are not essential and science backs that claim up. (ketosis and gluconeogenesis) Therefore, opinions that are directly contradictory to science are not good.

There are numerous other points I can make but I think I've said enough for now. I do not have a problem with opinions from people, just blatant mis-information.

RangerSteve

Good carbs (Complex Carbs) are your friend expecially if you do strength training. Carbs from whole wheats, fruits, nuts, sweet potatoes, brown rice etc help you recover easierfrom a workout and prevents injuries. The right carbs along with protein also helps build lean muscle mass which helps burn fat and increases your metabolism.

On the other hand Simple Carbs; Carbs from refined products i.e. white bread, white rice, sugar or any carbs already refined has no health benefit. If you'd like to reduce carbs, I'd suggest you reduce this type. They linger in your system longer and have been known to cause health problems including obesity.

This isn't completely true either.

Simple carbs definitely have a place for many people in their dietary choices. For instance, if you are a very active person and workout more than once a day (glycogen depleting workouts) then it's very important to refill your glycogen levels through quick transport of glucose into the blood stream. This is appropriately covered with simple carbohydrate intake. I'll give an example:

Workout 1: Strength training (intense) for 1 hour

Post workout meal: Simple protein and simple carbohydrate plus fluid replenishment

Workout 2: Trail running (intense) for 1 hour

^----If that post workout meal would have been brown rice and sweet potatoes, the glycogen replenishment would have been much slower, resulting in a possible loss of performance or exhaustion. That's not to say it WOULD happen since the human body can turn glucose over quickly when needed but it's definitely easier from a simple source of carbohydrates.

For most people, and I'm guessing a majority on this site, they don't technically need simple carbs in their diet. However, it's important to remember that they have their place and are a good source of energy for intense activity.

DBabbit

Sigh, a lot of misinformation in there, BDabbit.

Did you really say that you HAVE to eat low carb to lose weight?

Please point out WHAT that misinformation is. "a lot" just doesn't make things clear.

mynameisuntz

Sigh, a lot of misinformation in there, BDabbit.

Did you really say that you HAVE to eat low carb to lose weight?

Please point out WHAT that misinformation is. "a lot" just doesn't make things clear.

Saying you have to lower carbs to lose weight?