Eek! Sugar!?

jnhu72

[/quote]

The point being people have singled out sugar as some mystical and evil thing that can single handily prevent weight loss when dieting, when it really is about the calories
[/quote]

^^
This!

andrejjorje

I agree on this one. Sugar is just a carb maybe worse than other carbs but nevertheless a carb. What is bad about it (same for sweeteners) is the addiction side of it.
In the other hand I agree with Acg67 that obesity is a calorie problem and not per say a carb problem but yes in 99% of the cases that bigger no. of calories is coming from high carbs. It's a fact.

A 6 week study tells me nothing. The fructose alone will destroy the liver over decades (NAFLD).

I'll be reading this study thoroughly. I've already read quite a bit in the Intro and I'm already seeing some interesting info.

Sugar is an addictive poison. But it poisons your body over long-term - not within 6 weeks. And I'll have to check into the health of the subjects at the start of the study.

Even the major medical establishments are starting to use "addiction" when is comes to sugar. Sugar travels the same brain pathways as opiate drugs (like heroin). Grains contain exorphins which are morphine-like compounds. Also addictive.


Obesity is the body trying to stave off diabetes from the high-carb (i.e. high-sugar) diet that is considered healthy. Some of us have pancreas that will grow new beta cells and pump out more insulin to keep the blood sugar levels under control. Some of us have pancreas that will just burn out. One in every five diabetics is thin (I'm thin IGT). There are probably many more out there but most doctors assume the obesity caused the diabetes so they not going to check the bs of a thin person.

shydaisi

I have a pet unicorn. It farts glitter.

If you're arguing against Acg67 and Sidesteal, know that you are on the side of WRONG.

:laugh:

Interesting conversation as a whole. I was talking this morning about sugar and how I believe (I would love to find a study that substantiates this) the the body metabolizes fructose differently than other glucose/sucrose compounds. I have a hard time believing that a non-manmade sugar (fructose) would be as bad for the human body as a manmade chemical. I attempt to watch my sucrose intake (not always successfully) because I think a diet saturated with these types of sugars is not healthy, but I refuse to limit my fruit consumption as long as it is part of a balanced diet.

PaleoPath4Lyfe

I have a pet unicorn. It farts glitter.

If you're arguing against Acg67 and Sidesteal, know that you are on the side of WRONG.

Wow, way to be a follower. I prefer to question EVERYTHING and lead my own path.

andrejjorje

Do a search on PGC-1 gene and you will find out.
But again everything is related to high-fructose diet. High means a lot. 1-2 fruits/day doesn't mean HIGH.

I have a pet unicorn. It farts glitter.

If you're arguing against Acg67 and Sidesteal, know that you are on the side of WRONG.

:laugh:

Interesting conversation as a whole. I was talking this morning about sugar and how I believe (I would love to find a study that substantiates this) the the body metabolizes fructose differently than other glucose/sucrose compounds. I have a hard time believing that a non-manmade sugar (fructose) would be as bad for the human body as a manmade chemical. I attempt to watch my sucrose intake (not always successfully) because I think a diet saturated with these types of sugars is not healthy, but I refuse to limit my fruit consumption as long as it is part of a balanced diet.

Acg67

I have a pet unicorn. It farts glitter.

If you're arguing against Acg67 and Sidesteal, know that you are on the side of WRONG.

:laugh:

Interesting conversation as a whole. I was talking this morning about sugar and how I believe (I would love to find a study that substantiates this) the the body metabolizes fructose differently than other glucose/sucrose compounds. I have a hard time believing that a non-manmade sugar (fructose) would be as bad for the human body as a manmade chemical. I attempt to watch my sucrose intake (not always successfully) because I think a diet saturated with these types of sugars is not healthy, but I refuse to limit my fruit consumption as long as it is part of a balanced diet.

Fructose is a natural sugar, but it has been found to be quite lipogenic compared to other sugars

katiew00t

I have a pet unicorn. It farts glitter.

If you're arguing against Acg67 and Sidesteal, know that you are on the side of WRONG.

excellent.

Sidesteal

I prefer to question EVERYTHING and lead my own path.

As you should, at least to a large extent.

DL121004

Fructose is a natural sugar, but it has been found to be quite lipogenic compared to other sugars

Correct.

Plus, if I am correct, fructose, via the Maillard reaction, can lead to a higher level of advanced glycation endproducts.

Acg67

Here's a good writeup from Lyle McDonald on the subject of insulin and fat loss

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/insulin-levels-and-fat-loss-qa.html

PaleoPath4Lyfe

I agree on this one. Sugar is just a carb maybe worse than other carbs but nevertheless a carb. What is bad about it (same for sweeteners) is the addiction side of it.
In the other hand I agree with Acg67 that obesity is a calorie problem and not per say a carb problem but yes in 99% of the cases that bigger no. of calories is coming from high carbs. It's a fact.

A 6 week study tells me nothing. The fructose alone will destroy the liver over decades (NAFLD).

I'll be reading this study thoroughly. I've already read quite a bit in the Intro and I'm already seeing some interesting info.

Sugar is an addictive poison. But it poisons your body over long-term - not within 6 weeks. And I'll have to check into the health of the subjects at the start of the study.

Even the major medical establishments are starting to use "addiction" when is comes to sugar. Sugar travels the same brain pathways as opiate drugs (like heroin). Grains contain exorphins which are morphine-like compounds. Also addictive.


Obesity is the body trying to stave off diabetes from the high-carb (i.e. high-sugar) diet that is considered healthy. Some of us have pancreas that will grow new beta cells and pump out more insulin to keep the blood sugar levels under control. Some of us have pancreas that will just burn out. One in every five diabetics is thin (I'm thin IGT). There are probably many more out there but most doctors assume the obesity caused the diabetes so they not going to check the bs of a thin person.

Obesity is not a calorie problem, it is a malnourishment problem. Most (not all) obese people are malnourished and don't eat as many calories as one thinks they do.............

Sidesteal

Obesity is not a calorie problem, it is a malnourishment problem. Most (not all) obese people are malnourished and don't eat as many calories as one thinks they do.............

Do you have any source information on this that doesn't come from Gary Taubes?

Acg67

I agree on this one. Sugar is just a carb maybe worse than other carbs but nevertheless a carb. What is bad about it (same for sweeteners) is the addiction side of it.
In the other hand I agree with Acg67 that obesity is a calorie problem and not per say a carb problem but yes in 99% of the cases that bigger no. of calories is coming from high carbs. It's a fact.

A 6 week study tells me nothing. The fructose alone will destroy the liver over decades (NAFLD).

I'll be reading this study thoroughly. I've already read quite a bit in the Intro and I'm already seeing some interesting info.

Sugar is an addictive poison. But it poisons your body over long-term - not within 6 weeks. And I'll have to check into the health of the subjects at the start of the study.

Even the major medical establishments are starting to use "addiction" when is comes to sugar. Sugar travels the same brain pathways as opiate drugs (like heroin). Grains contain exorphins which are morphine-like compounds. Also addictive.


Obesity is the body trying to stave off diabetes from the high-carb (i.e. high-sugar) diet that is considered healthy. Some of us have pancreas that will grow new beta cells and pump out more insulin to keep the blood sugar levels under control. Some of us have pancreas that will just burn out. One in every five diabetics is thin (I'm thin IGT). There are probably many more out there but most doctors assume the obesity caused the diabetes so they not going to check the bs of a thin person.

Obesity is not a calorie problem, it is a malnourishment problem. Most (not all) obese people are malnourished and don't eat as many calories as one thinks they do.............

Actually they tend to underestimate caloric intake and overestimate energy expenditure but since you made the claim the burden of proof is on you, so got anything to back up your claim?

carrie_eggo

I have a pet unicorn. It farts glitter.

If you're arguing against Acg67 and Sidesteal, know that you are on the side of WRONG.

BOO YAH!

andrejjorje

I'd like to see it myself.
Yes malnutrition can lead to obesity but that case is really isolated. Not a good example.

I agree on this one. Sugar is just a carb maybe worse than other carbs but nevertheless a carb. What is bad about it (same for sweeteners) is the addiction side of it.
In the other hand I agree with Acg67 that obesity is a calorie problem and not per say a carb problem but yes in 99% of the cases that bigger no. of calories is coming from high carbs. It's a fact.

A 6 week study tells me nothing. The fructose alone will destroy the liver over decades (NAFLD).

I'll be reading this study thoroughly. I've already read quite a bit in the Intro and I'm already seeing some interesting info.

Sugar is an addictive poison. But it poisons your body over long-term - not within 6 weeks. And I'll have to check into the health of the subjects at the start of the study.

Even the major medical establishments are starting to use "addiction" when is comes to sugar. Sugar travels the same brain pathways as opiate drugs (like heroin). Grains contain exorphins which are morphine-like compounds. Also addictive.


Obesity is the body trying to stave off diabetes from the high-carb (i.e. high-sugar) diet that is considered healthy. Some of us have pancreas that will grow new beta cells and pump out more insulin to keep the blood sugar levels under control. Some of us have pancreas that will just burn out. One in every five diabetics is thin (I'm thin IGT). There are probably many more out there but most doctors assume the obesity caused the diabetes so they not going to check the bs of a thin person.

Obesity is not a calorie problem, it is a malnourishment problem. Most (not all) obese people are malnourished and don't eat as many calories as one thinks they do.............

Actually they tend to underestimate caloric intake and overestimate energy expenditure but since you made the claim the burden of proof is on you, so got anything to back up your claim?

UponThisRock

I can eat more than I burn of protein/fat and still not gain.

BRB, getting ripped on 7,500 cals/day of steak and peanut butter

Acg67

I can eat more than I burn of protein/fat and still not gain.

BRB, getting ripped on 7,500 cals/day of steak and peanut butter

Wouldn't work cause pb contains the carbs which spike the insulinz

Sidesteal

I can eat more than I burn of protein/fat and still not gain.

BRB, getting ripped on 7,500 cals/day of steak and peanut butter

Wouldn't work cause pb contains the carbs which spike the insulinz

I am LOLing.

RonSwanson66

Obesity is not a calorie problem, it is a malnourishment problem. Most (not all) obese people are malnourished and don't eat as many calories as one thinks they do.............

I love how you make things up.

shedoos

Ah yes- this is about to get very good...

Acg67

Obesity is not a calorie problem, it is a malnourishment problem. Most (not all) obese people are malnourished and don't eat as many calories as one thinks they do.............

I love how you make things up.

not true!

Taubes G. et al. Obesity in Haiti and Unicorns, a Connection? Obes Rev. 2006 May
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/001101010

DL121004

Obesity is not a calorie problem, it is a malnourishment problem. Most (not all) obese people are malnourished and don't eat as many calories as one thinks they do.............

Do you have any source information on this that doesn't come from Gary Taubes?

What is your definition of "malnourishment"?

cgrout78

Was the sugar cane sugar or beet sugar? Because if it was beet sugar, beets are vegetables and clearly don't actually count as sugar, that's why I eat as much of it as I can.

Just sayin...

jnhu72

Obesity is not a calorie problem, it is a malnourishment problem. Most (not all) obese people are malnourished and don't eat as many calories as one thinks they do.............

When articles and studies say that malnutrition plays a part in obesity they are not referring to a lack of calories. They are referring to a lack of nutrients.

http://www.inch-aweigh.com/malnourished.htm
http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/interactive/news/theme_news_detail.php?id=17071612&tab_id=17

dennydifferent

The likelihood of you eating in a surplus and not gaining is as likely as you owning a pet unicorn.

And if obesity is your body's inability to burn fat, how did you get fat in the first place? From just eating carbs? How do you explain societies that have extremely high carb intake yet aren't obese?

You know this one Acg, you must do. The theory du jour is that sustained high levels of fructose damage the metabolism. Non-obese societies with high carb intake generally get their carbs from starch. Transplant any one of them into the West with access to candy and soda, they get obese.

I make no claim that this is correct, but this is a popular theory doing the rounds.

Acg67

The likelihood of you eating in a surplus and not gaining is as likely as you owning a pet unicorn.

And if obesity is your body's inability to burn fat, how did you get fat in the first place? From just eating carbs? How do you explain societies that have extremely high carb intake yet aren't obese?

You know this one Acg, you must do. The theory du jour is that sustained high levels of fructose damage the metabolism. Non-obese societies with high carb intake generally get their carbs from starch. Transplant any one of them into the West with access to candy and soda, they get obese.

I make no claim that this is correct, but this is a popular theory doing the rounds.

Do they get obese because of the candy and soda or do they get obese from consuming a surplus of calories? Or let's rephrase that, if they had the exact same maconutrient composition and calorie intake, but subbed out let's say sweet potatoes for pixi sticks, they would get fat?

Sublog

I agree on this one. Sugar is just a carb maybe worse than other carbs but nevertheless a carb. What is bad about it (same for sweeteners) is the addiction side of it.
In the other hand I agree with Acg67 that obesity is a calorie problem and not per say a carb problem but yes in 99% of the cases that bigger no. of calories is coming from high carbs. It's a fact.

A 6 week study tells me nothing. The fructose alone will destroy the liver over decades (NAFLD).

I'll be reading this study thoroughly. I've already read quite a bit in the Intro and I'm already seeing some interesting info.

Sugar is an addictive poison. But it poisons your body over long-term - not within 6 weeks. And I'll have to check into the health of the subjects at the start of the study.

Even the major medical establishments are starting to use "addiction" when is comes to sugar. Sugar travels the same brain pathways as opiate drugs (like heroin). Grains contain exorphins which are morphine-like compounds. Also addictive.


Obesity is the body trying to stave off diabetes from the high-carb (i.e. high-sugar) diet that is considered healthy. Some of us have pancreas that will grow new beta cells and pump out more insulin to keep the blood sugar levels under control. Some of us have pancreas that will just burn out. One in every five diabetics is thin (I'm thin IGT). There are probably many more out there but most doctors assume the obesity caused the diabetes so they not going to check the bs of a thin person.

Obesity is not a calorie problem, it is a malnourishment problem. Most (not all) obese people are malnourished and don't eat as many calories as one thinks they do.............

WUT?? Actually, every study done shows that skinny people don't eat as much as fat people. Fat people assume their metabolisms are slow, when in all actuality, they are fast because it takes a LOT of calories to carry around 50 lbs of extra fat.

DL121004

Do they get obese because of the candy and soda or do they get obese from consuming a surplus of calories? Or let's rephrase that, if they had the exact same maconutrient composition and calorie intake, but subbed out let's say sweet potatoes for pixi sticks, they would get fat?

And is there anything unique about Western diets that compels them to not feel satiated like they did before they came here?

I think this whole "if we keep Calories the same constant" is a bit off the mark. The better question to be asked is "are there metabolic/hormonal/etc. reasons for people eating more for their output/exercising less for their input?".

PaleoPath4Lyfe

Obesity is not a calorie problem, it is a malnourishment problem. Most (not all) obese people are malnourished and don't eat as many calories as one thinks they do.............

When articles and studies say that malnutrition plays a part in obesity they are not referring to a lack of calories. They are referring to a lack of nutrients.

http://www.inch-aweigh.com/malnourished.htm
http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/interactive/news/theme_news_detail.php?id=17071612&tab_id=17

Yes, I understand that, however there is plenty of documentation that shows most (NOT ALL) obese people actually do not consume as many calories as most people think they do just because they are fat.

When I was at my heaviest, I was barely eating. My doctor had put me on 1,000 calorie LOW FAT, HIGH CARB eating plan and I steadily gained weight.

It is not about the calories. It is all about the quality of food you eat. I eat more than double now of what I was eating when I was near 300 pounds.

The difference is I replaced the carbs, starch and sugar with Fat.

r1ghtpath

i didn't read the entire thread. and i didn't really read the article that was originally posted. i'm in the school of thought that moderation is key to things like sugar ( and i'm talking like white, processed sugar, not naturally OCCURING sugar).

most of the people that i know that have issues with sugar are those that are very sensitive to the changes in behavior it can create. again, talking white processed sugar, not naturally occurring. i also know of people that are addicted to processed foods. and those are often higher in white sugar. i have friends that claim to be vegetarians, because they don't eat meats, but their diet is mainly white carbs, NOT veggies.

so, for me and my family we do "everything in moderation." our focus is to keep processed sugars low and naturally occurring higher. and balance out with healthy fats and proteins. once in awhile the kids end up on a sugar high, and it's just not pleasant. that's the MAIN reason for my not letting our house be a sugar free for all state......... none of my kids are over weight. infact they are ALL ( i have 5 of them) average or under average. my 10.5 yr old is the size of a 9 yr old. my 3 yr old son, is the size of a 2 yr old. so........