People, get to know your CARBS!

Why is everyone getting so angry?

I see a lot of people unclear about what types of food they can or can't eat because of the carb content. I don't think a lot of people really have a grasp of how one's body processes carbohydrates so I aim to clarify. Read on if you want to be an educated fat-eradicator!

Carbohydrates are the first of the two "energy" nutrients. Each gram of carbs provide 4 calories. The main function of carbs in the body is to provide a quick source of fuel for physical and mental work. It can be stored in any of the three main storage units of the body: in the muscle and liver as glycogen but also as body fat.

Carbs are the body's preferred energy source under most circumstances, so if sufficient amounts of carbs are present in the diet, it's hard to "force" the body to use fat for fuel. In other words, if you eat a lot of carbs, your blubber will likely stay right where it is.

Carbs also cause the greatest insulin spike of all three main macronutrients (protein, carbs, fat). In fact, the elevation of blood sugar levels (carbs are sugar) is the main stimulus for insulin release. This is both a pro and a con: insulin can help drive protein and carbs into the muscle (a Good Thing) but it can also stimulate fat storage (a Bad Thing). Furthermore, as long as insulin levels are elevated, it's next to impossible under normal circumstances to stimulate the release of fatty acids from the fat stores. This means that as long as insulin levels are high, fat loss is almost impossible. Remember also that when insulin levels are elevated it puts your body into "storage" mode.

So under certain circumstances elevated insulin is a good thing (when you need to shuttle in nutrients to your muscles ASAP) but most of the time it's not. The only two times you should have a lot of carbs (and thus spike insulin) are at breakfast, and right after a workout.

After you wake up, the breakfast insulin spike will help halt the catabolic (muscle wasting) state brought on by eight or more hours of fasting ("breakfast," of course, means "breaking the fast"). After a workout, the insulin spike will rapidly deliver the nutrients to the muscle. This will initiate the recovery and building process immediately, while countering the actions of cortisol. Keep in mind, however, that the amount of carbs you should have at these times will vary greatly depending on your goal and degree of leanness.

Any other time is not a good time to consume a significant amount of carbs, as the insulin elevation will have a negative impact on body composition. Your insulin level remains elevated for up to 4 or 5 hours after a carb-rich meal, which can bring fat loss to a standstill for this period of time. In other words, a high sugar meal will not only directly add fat to your body, it will also prevent fat use effectively, turning you into a fat storing machine.

Although carbs are your body's preferred fuel source, carbohydrates aren't essential the way many amino acids and fatty acids are essential. This means that you could function properly even on a diet of zero carbs: the body would adapt to other fuel sources and you'd do just fine.

Carbohydrates come in many varieties. Without going into too much detail, every carbohydrate from pure sugar to whole wheat is turned into glucose in the body. The main difference is the speed at which it's turned into glucose. The faster it turns into glucose, the greater the insulin spike will be (because more glucose will enter the blood stream at once). The speed at which a carbohydrate (or any food, for that matter) elevates blood sugar is measured by the glycemic index (GI). Every food is given a specific GI number, and the higher the number is, the faster it elevates blood sugar levels. While not always perfectly accurate, it does give us a clue as to how much a food will affect insulin production.

Items such as whole-grain products have a much lower GI than their refined-flour cousins. This means that the body can effectively manage the insulin response and you won't suffer fat-storage for it. The ugly cousins (white bread, candy, etc.) will provide a rapid insulin spike which will result in that spare tire around your midsection getting bigger.

But no need to be super scientific about it. If your goal is body composition in general, the following rule applies:

Must-have carb sources: green veggies (broccoli, cucumbers, lettuce, spinach, celery, asparagus, etc.)

Can-have carb sources: other veggies (except potatoes), berries (blueberries, raspberries, strawberries, blackberries, etc.)

Occasional carb sources: Other fruits

Rare carb sources: brown rice, whole wheat bread, whole wheat pasta, cream of wheat, potatoes, yams

Should-avoid carb sources: white bread, white pasta, oatmeal

Must-avoid carb source: pastries, cookies, candy and any other junk sugary food

Any suggestions for those of us who like oatmeal in the morning with dried cranberries and raisins? I looked and found the carb level to be so high for oatmeal! Good grief...I thought it was good for you?

Sorry for the confusion. I didn't start this thread. I actually intervened because I didn't agree with what was originally said.

Yea, hunger is a very individual thing. Some people fast all day long only to eat all their calories during the PM hours around their training as this is what gives them the best results in terms of body composition and satiety. Check out all the buzz around intermittent fasting. There's some solid stuff there. Certainly not for everyone. But ideal for others.

On the other hand you have the folks that control hunger best by eating many small meals throughout the day. I'm actually in this camp. I eat 5-6 meals per day.

For those who are interested, I wrote an article about the meal frequency myth that you can find here in my MFP blog:

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/blog/stroutman81/view/meal-frequency-28437

What's funny is this myth almost certainly accompanies the myth of eating many small meals per day to "stoke the metabolic fire" which is utterly ridiculous. Think of it like this: Do you think cavemen ate many small meals throughout the day? Or one giant feast when they happened to kill a saber tooth or deer? Hint: It's most probably the latter.

Hey! I'm just wading into this pool. First, I really don't know the research behind most of this stuff, at least not insofar as actual journal publications of clinical studies and I don't have really have a dog in this fight. This is just honest curiosity here, not trying to stroke an ego, my own or anyone else's. :happy:

That said, I just was wondering what comparisons to caveman ancestors can really tell us? Yeah, they probably just ate when food was available and their bodies were great at using that large, single shot of energy. But wasn't it great at storing that energy in reserve as fat so that the body could make it to the next feast? And isn't that fat storage exactly what we are trying to avoid?

Personally speaking, I don't buy the idea that eating every 2-3 hours is "stoking" the metabolism and I'm sure that I could probably survive on the same number of calories given in just 1 meal a day or even 1 meal every couple of days. I just know that I seem to feel hungry 2-3 hours after a meal no matter WHAT size it was, regardless of how much clean protein and fibrous carbohydrates it contains. So, I have to spread my calories out throughout the day. Not because I think it helps me lose fat, but rather that it keeps me from wanting to gnaw my hand off.

Sorry if this takes the discussion astray. It is an interesting topic to me.

Finally, I have access to all kinds of medical journals, if you need me to try to get an article for you. :happy:

Yea, you're missing the point I was making. No biggy though. Win some you lose some. I never claimed they were healthy. I merely claimed that if the protein limit per feeding was real, based on the dietary patterns of our early ancestors, we would've been lacking in protein to a point where we most likely wouldn't have survived as a species. Nothing more. I try and word things so people won't read into them... but I suppose I dropped the ball on this one.

I read the south beach diet book and it relies on this GI system... Tells you not to eat bananas... Or apples and other fruits... Yet we are told to eat 5 servings a day....
Im confused.

Foods Allowed in Phase 2 (Foods you can reintroduce to your diet)

FRUITS

Apples
Apricots-dried fresh
Blueberries
Cantaloupe
Cherries
Grapefruit
Grapes
Kiwi
Mangoes
Oranges
Peaches
Pears
Plums
Strawberries

DAIRY

Milk-light soy, fat-free or 1%
Yogurt-light, fruit-flavored, plain, low-fat or fat-free


STARCHES (use sparingly)

Bagels, small, whole grain
Bread-multigrain, oat and bran, rye, whole wheat
Cereal-Fiber One, Kellogg's Extra-Fiber All Bran, oatmeal (not instant), other high-fiber, Uncle Sam
Muffins, bran-sugar-free (no raisins)
Pasta, whole wheat
Peas, green
Pita-stone-ground, whole wheat
Popcorn
Potato, small, sweet
Rice-brown, wild

VEGETABLES AND LEGUMES

Barley
Beans, pinto
Black-eyed peas

MISCELLANEOUS

Chocolate (sparingly)-bittersweet, semisweet
Pudding, fat-free/sugar-free
Wine, red

I read the south beach diet book and it relies on this GI system... Tells you not to eat bananas... Or apples and other fruits... Yet we are told to eat 5 servings a day....
Im confused.

I think the 5 a day message is confusing! but I guess they were thinking they would rather get people eating more fruit and veg and trying to change their lifestyles than worry about the calories they might contribute. Also, to be fair if you are replacing other food you eat with fruit, there are very few snack foods that would be lower calorie than a piece of fruit (especially if you compared it per gram of food). In the UK it is also '5 a day'. I personally like the Australian recommendations where we say 'go for 2 and 5' 2 fruit and 5 veg.

I read the south beach diet book and it relies on this GI system... Tells you not to eat bananas... Or apples and other fruits... Yet we are told to eat 5 servings a day....
Im confused.

I think the 5 a day message is confusing! but I guess they were thinking they would rather get people eating more fruit and veg and trying to change their lifestyles than worry about the calories they might contribute. Also, to be fair if you are replacing other food you eat with fruit, there are very few snack foods that would be lower calorie than a piece of fruit (especially if you compared it per gram of food). In the UK it is also '5 a day'. I personally like the Australian recommendations where we say 'go for 2 and 5' 2 fruit and 5 veg.

From what I hear, most of the world governments can take some notes from Australia's government. Seems like when it comes to nutrition and such, they spell it out for people and that is great.

I was just thinking...........a serving is not an entire apple or orange, either. I had no idea how much a serving of anything was before I had gestational diabetes. nothing like the threat of a sick baby to make you aware of your foods (didnt stop me from gaining 40 more pounds after she was born though!)

Anyway, point is a small apple can be 2 servings.......3-4 oz of fresh juice is a serving........not the 12 oz cup they give you in a restaraunt.

I am trying to think more clean............and eat fresher. Hard, because a box of potatoes is so much easier than cleaning, cutting, cooking a idaho......but I am getting back intot he groove.

LOTS of good give and take on this thread. Thanks for all the research and info. I will take from it what I need, and leave the rest!! :flowerforyou:

and Cora........LOVE the Av dear