Sugar Intake?

Options
2»

Replies

  • xarge
    xarge Posts: 484 Member
    Options
    The argument going on here is only one of definition. Glucose IS Glucose. The difference between most fruit sugars and, say, a snickers bar, is based on the other constituents of the food product, probably the most significant of which is fiber content (which slows sugar absorption and reduces post prandial insulin response). Sugar is sugar is sugar... it's what it's packaged with that makes all the difference.

    Basically yes. On MFP most people are very strong and zealous supporters of views on either side and most of the times it may effect the people they advice to. MFP set me on 24 grams of sugar. It's a large apple. If I follow sugar is sugar and if I happen to have dairy, grains, vegetables in my diet, I won't be able to eat that apple. And I'm sorry but I can't understand how that can be a good advice.
  • Acg67
    Acg67 Posts: 12,142 Member
    Options
    How did the meta analysis and study you linked to substantiate your claim, "There are numerous studies that show that a low glycemic diet 'helps' you prevent diabetes", since they dealt with people who already have diabetes?
    But it's safe to hypothesize that if low GI is helping those with diabetes to a healthier life, it's safe to assume that it will have a similar effect on prediabetes and healthy population.

    This is like the silly Paleo argument, if eliminating lactose helps those with lactose intolerance, it's effect will be similar for everyone. If eliminating gluten helps celiacs, it's effect will be similar everyone.


    Here it may help: http://www.ajcn.org/content/76/1/274S.full.pdf+html with all the cited articles.

    Really, Walter Willett?
    IF SUGAR IS SUGAR, please have your average daily sugar intake in glucose tablets only for the next two years. I will mail you the necessary vitamin/mineral and fiber supplements to compensate for the dietary loss. As many sugar is sugar supporters as possible please so that I can have a good amount of subjects.

    Tell me is the below picture of glucose from fruit or from somewhere else?

    glucose-molecule-thumb11063520.jpg
  • xarge
    xarge Posts: 484 Member
    Options
    If you have any further argument than sugar is sugar, I'm ready to listen. I told you that the metabolic pathway which is very time relevant is not the same for one gram of glucose and a piece of bread that has one gram of sugar content.

    And ironically no, yes that is glucose like saying I'm a human but that's not the only form you'll find it in nature and chemical reactions. That's β-D-Glucopyranose. Do you really want to get more biochemical about this?
  • MoveTheMountain
    MoveTheMountain Posts: 764
    Options
    Some people will tell you not to eat fruit because of whatever reason, but in reality fruit is good for you. Eat it. If you are going over your sugar because of fruit, no big deal.

    The only reason you should worry about your sugar intake is if you are eating too many processed sugars, or if a doctor says to (if you have diabetes or something of that sort.) I don't even have sugar on my nutrients to track.

    Try monitoring your sodium instead!

    This exactly! Natural fruit sugar is completely different from processed sugar in brownies and sodas...don't sweat it!

    This is massively untrue - sugar is sugar, and you need to be careful about how much fruit you eat. Eat green veggies instead. Also, I have to say, starches/breads/etc are completely wasted calories that in general do nothing for you.

    But overall, from what I saw of your diary - assuming it's accurate and complete - I don't think you're doing too badly at all, especially if you just started tracking. Feel good about how well you're doing, and just try different tweaks over time.
  • Acg67
    Acg67 Posts: 12,142 Member
    Options
    If you have any further argument than sugar is sugar, I'm ready to listen. I told you that the metabolic pathway which is very time relevant is not the same for one gram of glucose and a piece of bread that has one gram of sugar content.

    You are comparing 2 different things, 1 gram of pure glucose to 1 piece of bread that contains 1 g of sugar
  • xarge
    xarge Posts: 484 Member
    Options
    If you have any further argument than sugar is sugar, I'm ready to listen. I told you that the metabolic pathway which is very time relevant is not the same for one gram of glucose and a piece of bread that has one gram of sugar content.

    You are comparing 2 different things, 1 gram of pure glucose to 1 piece of bread that contains 1 g of sugar

    1 gram of sugar vs 1 gram of sugar. How is that any different than apples vs brownies or sugar is sugar?
  • MoveTheMountain
    MoveTheMountain Posts: 764
    Options
    How did the meta analysis and study you linked to substantiate your claim, "There are numerous studies that show that a low glycemic diet 'helps' you prevent diabetes", since they dealt with people who already have diabetes?
    But it's safe to hypothesize that if low GI is helping those with diabetes to a healthier life, it's safe to assume that it will have a similar effect on prediabetes and healthy population.

    This is like the silly Paleo argument, if eliminating lactose helps those with lactose intolerance, it's effect will be similar for everyone. If eliminating gluten helps celiacs, it's effect will be similar everyone.


    Here it may help: http://www.ajcn.org/content/76/1/274S.full.pdf+html with all the cited articles.

    Really, Walter Willett?
    IF SUGAR IS SUGAR, please have your average daily sugar intake in glucose tablets only for the next two years. I will mail you the necessary vitamin/mineral and fiber supplements to compensate for the dietary loss. As many sugar is sugar supporters as possible please so that I can have a good amount of subjects.

    Tell me is the below picture of glucose from fruit or from somewhere else?

    glucose-molecule-thumb11063520.jpg

    Livestrong just had an article related to this:

    http://www.livestrong.com/article/435162-a-closer-look-at-the-glycemic-index/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=07252012

    And I guess what it boils down to is this... if you eat a crap load of fruit (or bread, or starch), you'll get fat from the sugar and the crappy carbs. Anyone telling you different is selling you something.
  • MoveTheMountain
    MoveTheMountain Posts: 764
    Options
    If you have any further argument than sugar is sugar, I'm ready to listen. I told you that the metabolic pathway which is very time relevant is not the same for one gram of glucose and a piece of bread that has one gram of sugar content.

    You are comparing 2 different things, 1 gram of pure glucose to 1 piece of bread that contains 1 g of sugar

    1 gram of sugar vs 1 gram of sugar. How is that any different than apples vs brownies or sugar is sugar?

    A piece of bread has a lot more in it than just a gram of sugar. Also, metabolic pathways aside, excess carbs and sugar still turns into fat.

    Just to bring the discussion back to something relevant, are you really saying that a person can eat as much fruit as they want without having to worry about having all that extra sugar turn into fat?
  • xarge
    xarge Posts: 484 Member
    Options
    A piece of bread has a lot more in it than just a gram of sugar. Also, metabolic pathways aside, excess carbs and sugar still turns into fat.

    Just to bring the discussion back to something relevant, are you really saying that a person can eat as much fruit as they want without having to worry about having all that extra sugar turn into fat?

    I think you took it completely wrong. I never said one slice of bread. By piece of bread I means x grams of bread that has 1 gram of sugar content. If sugar is sugar, they should be the same according to your argument.

    And I never said that. Please show me where to support your question, the 'really' part.
  • carld256
    carld256 Posts: 855 Member
    Options
    Just cuirious, What do you consider the normal range? You mean the below 7 for Diabetics or the mid 4's for a non diabetic. I was at 5.9 last time my AIC was checked. Would love to hear a Type II who actually could get their numbers to the real normal range.

    My most recent A1C was 4.7. That's well into the normal range for non-diabetics. Fruit is a regular part of my diet, and I don't track sugar.
  • MoveTheMountain
    MoveTheMountain Posts: 764
    Options
    A piece of bread has a lot more in it than just a gram of sugar. Also, metabolic pathways aside, excess carbs and sugar still turns into fat.

    Just to bring the discussion back to something relevant, are you really saying that a person can eat as much fruit as they want without having to worry about having all that extra sugar turn into fat?

    I think you took it completely wrong. I never said one slice of bread. By piece of bread I means x grams of bread that has 1 gram of sugar content. If sugar is sugar, they should be the same according to your argument.

    And I never said that. Please show me where to support your question, the 'really' part.

    Sorry if I misunderstood you earlier, and I definitely don't understand the last line of this post ^^

    My question is, do you believe that a person can eat fruit as a 'free' food, without having to worry about the sugar intake and the calories? E.g., you pretty much can eat green veggies as a free food - 10 cups of spinach would fill up almost anyone and I highly doubt they'd be any worse off for it. You can't say the same for 10 cups of fruit.
  • xarge
    xarge Posts: 484 Member
    Options
    Sorry if I misunderstood you earlier, and I definitely don't understand the last line of this post ^^

    My question is, do you believe that a person can eat fruit as a 'free' food, without having to worry about the sugar intake and the calories? E.g., you pretty much can eat green veggies as a free food - 10 cups of spinach would fill up almost anyone and I highly doubt they'd be any worse off for it. You can't say the same for 10 cups of fruit.

    No, no, no I never say it can be free food. Nothing is free, it's against thermodynamics. Yes, water has no calories for example but too little or too much water has different effects on body. Most fruits have considerable amount of sugar content, hence my apple example above, which means they are moderately high in calories. I'm saying that if you have 100 calories to spare in your diet, it will be more beneficial to get the apple instead of the 100 calorie candy. They have around the same amount of sugar but I don't see how someone can say that "sugar is sugar, it doesn't matter whether you eat the apple or the candy".

    English is not my native language but I hope I made myself clear in a way.
  • MoveTheMountain
    MoveTheMountain Posts: 764
    Options
    Sorry if I misunderstood you earlier, and I definitely don't understand the last line of this post ^^

    My question is, do you believe that a person can eat fruit as a 'free' food, without having to worry about the sugar intake and the calories? E.g., you pretty much can eat green veggies as a free food - 10 cups of spinach would fill up almost anyone and I highly doubt they'd be any worse off for it. You can't say the same for 10 cups of fruit.

    No, no, no I never say it can be free food. Nothing is free, it's against thermodynamics. Yes, water has no calories for example but too little or too much water has different effects on body. Most fruits have considerable amount of sugar content, hence my apple example above, which means they are moderately high in calories. I'm saying that if you have 100 calories to spare in your diet, it will be more beneficial to get the apple instead of the 100 calorie candy. They have around the same amount of sugar but I don't see how someone can say that "sugar is sugar, it doesn't matter whether you eat the apple or the candy".

    English is not my native language but I hope I made myself clear in a way.

    Lol, as the saying goes, we have found ourselves in violent agreement! I fully concur with everything you're saying.

    Yes, it's true that the 'sugar is sugar' battle cry is an over-simplication. But I think the motivation behind it is a good one: instead of worrying what *kind* of sugar you're taking in, try to reduce the *amount* of sugar that you're taking in. So, if you're eating 3 candy snacks a day, instead of switching that out for 3 servings of fruit - which yes, is better than candy - think about having some almonds or lean protein.
  • xarge
    xarge Posts: 484 Member
    Options
    Lol, as the saying goes, we have found ourselves in violent agreement! I fully concur with everything you're saying.

    Yes, it's true that the 'sugar is sugar' battle cry is an over-simplication. But I think the motivation behind it is a good one: instead of worrying what *kind* of sugar you're taking in, try to reduce the *amount* of sugar that you're taking in. So, if you're eating 3 candy snacks a day, instead of switching that out for 3 servings of fruit - which yes, is better than candy - think about having some almonds or lean protein.

    Exactly, thank you. That's what I tried to say but you put it simply and brilliantly :flowerforyou:
  • slim104
    slim104 Posts: 160
    Options
    Well, I'm sorry that is over.
    Brilliant argument. Or discussion should i say.
    Havent got a clue what half of it meant but great reading.

Categories