Sugar Intake?

MoveTheMountain

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

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

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

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

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.