A calorie is not a calorie - proof sugar is the problem.

Barry7879
Barry7879 Posts: 62 Member
in Food and Nutrition
I went from 105kg to 80kg between March - Dec last year. I moved to Chamonix, France to live so I could enjoy the winter season snowboarding on my days off. I figured as I was doing high energy boarding at least 3-4 days a week, I could maintain weight and add back in some 'treats' like chocolate. My weight was pretty stable, but by the end of the season it had crept back up to 85kg and I had re-discovered my sugar addiction - it was time to take action again.

I found I didn't have as much motivation as the first time around and logging every single thing I ate again just felt a bit tedious - I wondered if I'd have to do that for the rest of my life if I wanted to keep the weight off.

For a few weeks I hovered between 85 and 82kg as I continued to treat myself to sweets and chocolate after successes.

I watched a documentary on You Tube called "The Men who Made us Fat" which contains a piece about how the low fat diet came about and how it was based on false assumptions - and how fat was substituted with sugar. I read the book Pure, White and Deadly about the dangers of sugar and I watch Prof Lustig's famous YouTube documentary about how sugar is not just calories - it's actual metabolism is dangerous to us in large quantities - causing diabetes, metabolic syndrome and cardio vascular disease.

I decided that the only thing that made sense to me in terms of what we 'should' be eating is the foods our biology is adapted to eat by evolution - which means going back at least 30,000 years - pretty much just meat and veg. Paleo diet in other words.

All I can say is that the fat is just melting off me now. I"ve lost about 3kg this week and I'm now very confident I will reach my goal BMI of 22 (middle of the green) at 75kg. I'm paying particular attention to eat only foods that used to be alive and make sure I don't eat any sugar at all except what's in an apple or the 1 piece of fruit I eat a day.

I never realised that, not only do we not need sugar to live (we make it ourselves as glucose from food) but that we are consuming in quantities that are killing us.

Seems we got the wrong guy in the 1980s - we should have eliminated the sugar, not the fat.

Some links for more info - good luck :-

http://happysugarhabits.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6nGlLUBkOQ - The Men Who made us Fat
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxG3YiBMMZE - 60 Minutes - is Sugar dangerous?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM - Sugar: The Bitter Truth - Dr Robert Lustig
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0zD1gj0pXk&list=PL39F782316B425249&index=1 - The Skinny On Obesity - Lustig
«134567…10

Replies

  • moonbaby12
    moonbaby12 Posts: 89 Member
    BUMP--- thanks for sharing, something I struggle with is when I start to eat sugar I can't stop. Will look at these links later! :)
  • piratesaregrand
    piratesaregrand Posts: 356 Member
    Meh. I lost 40kg eating cookies and cake. Each to their own.
  • RllyGudTweetr
    RllyGudTweetr Posts: 2,019 Member
    Strong broscience.
  • grimendale
    grimendale Posts: 2,153 Member
    Sugar never slowed my loss down.
  • leilaphoenix
    leilaphoenix Posts: 839 Member
    Good for you for losing weight but this is not "proof" of anything and is bad science.
  • seliinac
    seliinac Posts: 336 Member
    This is an interesting article as well. It talks about the links between serotonin and food (including sugar).

    http://nutritionwonderland.com/2009/06/understanding-bodies-serotonin-connection-between-food-and-mood/
  • neanderthin
    neanderthin Posts: 10,218 Member
    Sorry to burst your bubble, but a calorie is a calorie and sugar is just sugar. The problem is context and dosage........some people eat too much of it in conjunction with too many calories.........the result seems to be that dietary guru's and Dr's they need to do road tours to enlighten the masses for the sake of a few book sales and notoriety, which I'm sure they're struggling with.:smile:
  • meeper123
    meeper123 Posts: 3,347 Member
    Hmm it could be you had a food sensitivity my uncle is allergic to a lot of sugar he not only gained weight but had a rash and swelling what a lot of people dont know is you can develope food allergies over time
  • Pangea250
    Pangea250 Posts: 965 Member
    How do you know it's not the calories since you weren't logging? Your proof isn't proof. A best, it's anecdotal.
  • DancingDreams1234
    DancingDreams1234 Posts: 165
    So basically, sugar in large quantities causes havoc with our body? Well yes of course, ever since we are little kids we are told to limit our candy consumption due to the sugar in it. We are never really told why the sugar is "bad" for us, but we are just told to eat less of it. What about the sugars in fruits though? Our ancestors ate fruit.

    At the end of the day, I do believe a calorie is a calorie, and sugar is just sugar. Having said that, I'm slowly beginning to believe that depending on where the calories are coming from, it will have an impact on our weight. For exampleeeeee, if the calories are coming from candy, that causes our insulin levels to become higher in our blood (from my understanding, don't quote me on this!) so that causes fat to be stored much easier.
  • vjohn04
    vjohn04 Posts: 2,276 Member
    No.
  • TavistockToad
    TavistockToad Posts: 35,719 Member
    not really 'proof', but great that you found what works for you!
  • chasetwins
    chasetwins Posts: 702 Member
    Eating meat and veggies will fill you faster than sugar full foods - in fact sugar filled foods will feed your cravings in turn making you eat more not to mention most sugar filled items (chocolate for one) is not filling at all. (at least not for me) Therefore of course you lost weight..you were consuming less calories. And the ones you did consume were not empty.

    Therefore - while eliminating sugar helped your weight loss..in moderation (like everything else) sugar is fine. In fact..I bet 50 - 60% of MFP members indulge in treats on a regular basis and still lose weight.

    Sugar based foods are generally higher in calories...goes back to a calorie is a calorie :)
  • UpEarly
    UpEarly Posts: 2,555 Member
    Here we go again!

    I don't think I would call this 'proof' - your experience is anecdotal. It's no more proof than my personal experiences. I ate about 2200 calories a day - about 50% carbs, 30% fat and 20% protein. I ate sugar and white flour foods every single day. I lost about 66 pounds (30 kg) and have now kept it off for over a year and a half. On top of that, I'm female, I'm not doing anything high energy 3-4 hours a day, and I'm in my 40s. If sugar is the devil, why was losing so easy and why has maintenance gone so smoothly?

    Furthermore, there are other experts in medicine and dietetics that think Professor Lustig is a bit off base. Yes... too much sugar can be a problem, but really the problem is more likely too much of everything.

    I think it's great that Paleo works for you. Really... I am. But it's not the only way.

    This was a good article: http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/brainwaves/2013/07/15/is-sugar-really-toxic-sifting-through-the-evidence/
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,809 Member
    Read this and you might change your mind about Lustig's assertions....

    http://www.alanaragonblog.com/2010/01/29/the-bitter-truth-about-fructose-alarmism/
  • CrankMeUp
    CrankMeUp Posts: 2,860 Member
    No.

    :angry:
  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,136 Member
    in....for yet another clean eating debate....

    FYI - I have lost about 50 pounds over last six years and I eat sugar in moderation.
  • TheVimFuego
    TheVimFuego Posts: 2,412 Member
    If that hadn't been, broadly,my line of thinking around a year ago I would be laughing at that.

    As it is I am squirming a little uneasily in my seat and wondering what I was ever thinking.

    But hey, we are all learning, right? :)
  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,136 Member
    oh and the fat is melting off because you stopped eating chocolate and what not, which is creating a higher caloric deficit.
  • Chadomaniac
    Chadomaniac Posts: 1,785 Member
    Strong broscience.

    makes Chuck Norris look weak
  • Turnaround2012
    Turnaround2012 Posts: 362 Member
    Bump - Good Post!
  • vjohn04
    vjohn04 Posts: 2,276 Member
    No.

    :angry:

    :flowerforyou:
  • Sproutlady135
    Sproutlady135 Posts: 19
    Thank you for your inspiration. Do you count calories? If so, how do you eat enough calories?
  • eric_sg61
    eric_sg61 Posts: 2,925 Member
    Where is proof?

    I'll keep the sugar...and my abzzz
  • yarwell
    yarwell Posts: 10,477 Member
    People switching to paleo style or low carb diets typically eat less calories than on higher carb / sugar regimes.

    Also individuals that are insulin resistant do better than those who aren't on some regimes of low carb / low GI - horses for courses :-

    F1.medium.gif

    "Participants were randomized for 24 weeks to either a high–glycemic load diet (60% carbohydrate, 20% protein, 20% fat, 15 g fiber/1,000 kcal, mean estimated daily glycemic index of 86, and glycemic load of 116 g/1,000 kcal) or a low–glycemic load diet (40% carbohydrate, 30% protein, 30% fat, 15 g giber/1,000 kcal, mean estimated daily glycemic index of 53, and glycemic load of 45 g/1,000 kcals) at 30% calorie restriction compared with baseline individual energy needs."

    "Participants with high baseline INS-30 lost more weight if randomized to the low–glycemic load diet compared with the high–glycemic load diet (P < 0.05). "

    "The mean target energy intake was 1,966 kcal/day, and the mean reported daily energy intake during the intervention did not differ between the two groups (2,017 kcal in the high–glycemic load diet vs. 1,972 kcal in the low–glycemic load diet, P = 0.70)."

    So a calorie wasn't a calorie here, either.
  • esme1983
    esme1983 Posts: 60
    So how can anyone argue that sugar slows weightloss when so many people have lost weight whilst eating it? I lost a lot of weight whilst eating cakes etc (staying in a calorie deficit) BUT.. Never in all my life have I got lower than a certain weight (and it's not a very low one) until I eliminated sugar. And I have never had any muscle mass.

    So what I would say (although granted it isn't scientific!) is that whether to cut out (or drastically reduce) sugar intake is a case of what your goals are. And how easy you want your loss to be. Now I fill up on "proper" calories I find it much easier to stay in a calrie deficit. Where as When I was eating sugar I was often hungry. And I definitely have less fat and water weight than I ever managed whilst eating sugar.

    What annoys me is people who don't calorie count but eat "healthily" and refuse to accept that sugar IS sugar and that there aren't good and bad sugars. I don't mean that THEY annoy me. It's the food manufacturers claiming hteir product is so damn healthy when it is FULL of sugar and calories. My step daughter guzzles "Naked Juice" on top of a normal diet becuase it is marketed as a health drink even though with 29g of sugar in one small bottle, she might as well be eating donuts. If you're calorie counting it doesn;t matter much as Calories in Vs Out will prevail... but very dangerous if not.
  • Sproutlady135
    Sproutlady135 Posts: 19
    The G.I. Handbook How the Glycemic Index works explains the difference between a simple carb. (sugar/flour) is different from a complex carb (apple) and I find it helpful. My body does not respond to, " a calorie is a calorie method." Probably because my metabolism is shot and my old age has caused changes in everything. I certainly do not have any solutions for someone my age. I never had a weight problem until I got old. I need to find a thread for others in my boat.
  • yarwell
    yarwell Posts: 10,477 Member
    So how can anyone argue that sugar slows weightloss when so many people have lost weight whilst eating it?

    They could argue that with less sugar the weight loss would have been quicker, for example.

    I don't think anyone says sugar prevents weight loss completely, and insulin resistant people may be different to insulin sensitive people, but there's a fair body of evidence that reducing it generally gives a favourable response in obese people.
  • chrisdavey
    chrisdavey Posts: 9,834 Member
    If that hadn't been, broadly,my line of thinking around a year ago I would be laughing at that.

    As it is I am squirming a little uneasily in my seat and wondering what I was ever thinking.

    But hey, we are all learning, right? :)

    live and learn indeed :smile:

    Good work on your success OP but as others have said that is not proof.

    Lustig is a quack BTW.
  • neanderthin
    neanderthin Posts: 10,218 Member
    People switching to paleo style or low carb diets typically eat less calories than on higher carb / sugar regimes.

    Also individuals that are insulin resistant do better than those who aren't on some regimes of low carb / low GI - horses for courses :-

    F1.medium.gif

    "Participants were randomized for 24 weeks to either a high–glycemic load diet (60% carbohydrate, 20% protein, 20% fat, 15 g fiber/1,000 kcal, mean estimated daily glycemic index of 86, and glycemic load of 116 g/1,000 kcal) or a low–glycemic load diet (40% carbohydrate, 30% protein, 30% fat, 15 g giber/1,000 kcal, mean estimated daily glycemic index of 53, and glycemic load of 45 g/1,000 kcals) at 30% calorie restriction compared with baseline individual energy needs."

    "Participants with high baseline INS-30 lost more weight if randomized to the low–glycemic load diet compared with the high–glycemic load diet (P < 0.05). "

    "The mean target energy intake was 1,966 kcal/day, and the mean reported daily energy intake during the intervention did not differ between the two groups (2,017 kcal in the high–glycemic load diet vs. 1,972 kcal in the low–glycemic load diet, P = 0.70)."

    So a calorie wasn't a calorie here, either.
    Can you link that study? If the people has preexisting glucose intolerance's that makes a difference and lower carb will help with cell function...........2 weeks is also that initial time frame for reduced glycogen stores depending on the exercise regime when carbs are reduced...............long term would be interesting, alos there's a plethera of studies that show no difference.

Categories