Why you should cut out/lower sodium, sugar or carbs

self control > pretending sugars and carbs and sodiums are teh debil

I exercise self control every time I don't put something in my mouth that is going to make me crave more of it.

no that's denial not self control ....

Self control is being able to eat what you want/love/crave in moderation (moderation=self control)

By what twisted definition of self control is abstaining from something not control of one's self? If I were to fast for the next 7 days, would that require absolutely no self control simply because that involves the denial of food? No willpower whatsoever required simply because it involves abstaining? That simply makes no sense.

If you think self control means "moderation", you should consult a dictionary.

I did...

self denial per websters = a restraint or limitation of one's own desires or interests
self control = Satiation

The decrease in liking of and desire for a substance following repeated consumption is known as satiation. Satiation rates when eating depend on interactions of trait self-control and healthiness of the food. ... those with low self-control satiated at the same rate regardless of health condition. Perceived unhealthiness of the food alone, regardless of actual health level, relates to faster satiation, but only for people with high trait self-control.

I have read your post numerous times advocating eat whatever and you jump right in if someone disagrees. Fair Enough.

But I have also seen this same profile picture of yours for sometime now.

Jus' curious when are you updating us with your new picture. That would help me understand and convince me - Yes you are correct.

Why should anyone have to appease you with a new picture? Wth does that have to do with anything? The fact still remains. Eat what you want in a deficit, lose weight. Perhaps you should check the success stories thread and find iifym - goers and the like to convince you through visual imagery

Her picture is fabulous btw. I wouldn't change it either

Agreed her profile pic is fabulous. Nothing wrong with it. But it's not latest. That's my point.

If you have a medical condition which requires you to do so. Otherwise, please stop obsessing over and wasting precious time worrying about things that won't harm you. As I always try to reiterate, life is too short.

ETA: I'm not saying that individuals shouldn't be able to reduce the amount of x they consume, if that's what is keeping them from achieving weight loss. The intention of this post was to point out that demonizing any particular food group is unnecessary. "I went over my sodium intake, that is horrible!" and "Added sugars are horrible" statements are far too frequent, and that way of thinking really isn't healthy or needed.

I don't understand. You tell me and quite a few others not to obsess, yet you obsess over what I do or don't do. Why do you care if I prefer not to add extra sugar to my diet, or eat low sodium for reasons I don't have to explain to anyone. You complain about people demonizing food groups, yet you demonize a group of people.
Why don't we agree that everyone takes care of themselves and their respective health...... and leave it at that ?

No, you missed the point of my post. I don't care if people don't eat whatever, but I don't want those same people to run around saying that those things are harmful and should be avoided. Many people who are new to the idea of weight loss are pressured to give up things they love for no reason. If you want to cut out sugar, that's okay, but don't go saying that it's necessary or better than moderation.

If I think that it is necessary or better to cut out certain things from the average diet, no one is going to tell me that I shouldn't or that someone does not want me to share my opinion. It is up to them to listen or believe me. It's called " free speech ".
Just because a group of people on MFP say that high sugar intake does not matter as long as it fits into one's calories is ok does not make it so.
Right now all Latin American governments from Mexico down to Chile, have government lead campaigns to cut down on processed sugar ( especially in soft drinks, factory baked goods, candy etc ). I assume they are all wrong according to that MFP group ?
And no I am not going to cite studies......because those who forever do nothing but challenge people also have not shown a study that proves that above average sugar intake ( as one example ) is healthy.
And as far as newbies in MFP are concerned, I believe it is much better for them to do their own research and figure out what works for them.

I'm a southern boy, and I love me some bread and potatoes. But for some reason, I feel like crashing after eating high carb/sugar/starch items (high carb/fiber veggies don't have this effect on me). That's why I try to really limit my carbohydrate intake outside of veggies (no breads, flour based sauces, pre-shredded cheeses, etc...). I do envy those who don't have to cut out anything to be able to feel energized. Bugs me to death.

But I will post a study. Because I didn't have cake for breakfast, and therefore I have plenty of energy and focus to spare for things besides wanting more cake.:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195666305000425

Abstract
According to the theory of J.A. Gray, a strongly reactive approach system is highly sensitive to reward or to cues that signal reward. This implies that intake driven by the rewarding properties of food should be affected by individual differences in reactivity of the approach system. The present study examined whether reward sensitivity is associated with food craving and relative body weight in a sample of female college students. Participants completed the Sensitivity to Punishment and Sensitivity to Reward Questionnaire and the trait version of the Food Craving Questionnaire and also reported their weight and height in order to compute Body Mass Index (BMI). Sensitivity to reward was significantly related to food craving and BMI. Furthermore, the correlation between reward sensitivity and BMI was not attenuated when the influence of food craving was partialled out, indicating that the relation between sensitivity to reward and BMI was not mediated by food craving. This is the first study demonstrating a relation between the personality trait of sensitivity to reward and BMI. These findings are discussed in the context of the involvement of dopaminergic reward circuitry in overeating.




But is it nature or nurture or both? I don't think anyone knows. But what does seem to be showing up in studies is that it isn't even just one part of the brain affecting whether someone is going in for that second helping or not. It seems to involve several factors, only one of which is commonly known as 'self control'. And if I'm reading this correctly, that may include the body's reaction to weight loss. Emphasis mine:


http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364661310002470

The ability to resist the urge to eat requires the proper functioning of neuronal circuits involved in top-down control to oppose the conditioned responses that predict reward from eating the food and the desire to eat the food. Imaging studies show that obese subjects might have impairments in dopaminergic pathways that regulate neuronal systems associated with reward sensitivity, conditioning and control. It is known that the neuropeptides that regulate energy balance (homeostatic processes) through the hypothalamus also modulate the activity of dopamine cells and their projections into regions involved in the rewarding processes underlying food intake. It is postulated that this could also be a mechanism by which overeating and the resultant resistance to homoeostatic signals impairs the function of circuits involved in reward sensitivity, conditioning and cognitive control.

You should not consume excess sodium, OP. Not going to run on with the sugar or carbs but excessive sodium consumption is very problematic.

I have read your post numerous times advocating eat whatever and you jump right in if someone disagrees. Fair Enough.

But I have also seen this same profile picture of yours for sometime now.

Jus' curious when are you updating us with your new picture. That would help me understand and convince me - Yes you are correct.

wow really ...interesting...:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

you want an updated pic when I was in my profile pic 6lbs from goal and now 1lb...you go right to my profile and my 30 week lifting pics are right there...I was 158lbs at that time...and eat all the foodz and have since upped my calories by 200 a day...eating 1800...which includes chocolate everyday and even toaster strudel...cinibon flavor.

I like my profile pic...it's got my sexy younger husband in it...on our vacation down south.

ETA: I think I was suppose to be insulted but nope I just think it's too funny someone would "stoop down there"

This content has been removed.

I am sorry but I completely disagree with OP.

Different food sources trigger different responses in the body. There is a wealth of information out there that will explain this much better that I am willing to try.

To say it doesn't matter whether you eat 500 calories of a Mars bars is the same as eating 500 cal of spinach is only correct in 500 cal are 500 cal, but it neglecting the fact that both food items trigger different responses in our bodies,

Stef.

Requesting that you please try and explain those responses.

Read The calorie myth by Jonathan Bailor. Just look at Harvard medical papers, tons of information that it DOES matter what you put in your body and yes sugar is not good. Can not even believe that this needs to be discussed.
Stef.

Damn you this is the second time TODAY I saw this topic on recent posts and both times I thought "oh great here we go again".

Fool me once...

I'm not in favor of demonizing food and I certainly make no specific effort to cut down on my intake of any of the things listed, but I'll pass on being told what I should and shouldn't eat. I'll also pass on being given a list of reasons why it's okay or not okay to eat certain things. It is not wrong for me to not eat sugar, even if I don't have a medical condition that necessitates such a restriction. It may be unnecessary for my goals, but it is not wrong.

How about I'll eat or not eat whatever the hell I want, for whatever reasons I deem appropriate? For the love of all that is sacred, can we please stop making it our business what other people do with their lives?

I am sorry but I completely disagree with OP.

Different food sources trigger different responses in the body. There is a wealth of information out there that will explain this much better that I am willing to try.

To say it doesn't matter whether you eat 500 calories of a Mars bars is the same as eating 500 cal of spinach is only correct in 500 cal are 500 cal, but it neglecting the fact that both food items trigger different responses in our bodies,

Stef.

Requesting that you please try and explain those responses.

Read The calorie myth by Jonathan Bailor. Just look at Harvard medical papers, tons of information that it DOES matter what you put in your body and yes sugar is not good. Can not even believe that this needs to be discussed.
Stef.

You should believe it can be discussed because there is a lot more to it than just 1 website and 1 book.

O.K. fair enough...there are hundreds of articles out there showing/ proofing that sugar is a very bad choice and that what you eat REALLY matters.

Here are some starters...

http://hms.harvard.edu/news/simpler-guide-healthy-meals-10-17-11
“One of the most important fields of medical science over the past 50 years is the research that shows just how powerfully our health is affected by what we eat,” said Anthony Komaroff, the Steven P. Simcox, Patrick A. Clifford and James H. Higby Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School and editor-in-chief at Harvard Health Publications, the consumer information division of HMS. “Knowing what foods to eat, and in what proportions, is crucial for health.In contrast, science underlying the Healthy Eating Plate shows that a plant-based diet rich in vegetables, whole grains, and healthy fats and proteins lowers the risk of both weight gain and chronic disease. Helping Americans get the best possible nutrition advice is critically important as the country grapples with an obesity epidemic. In the United States today, two in three adults and one in three children are overweight or obese.”

http://hms.harvard.edu/news/fatty-foods-addictive-cocaine-growing-body-scientific-research-11-2-11

"Research is increasingly suggesting that processed foods and sugary drinks can take control of the brain in ways that resemble addictions to cocaine, nicotine and other drugs. David Ludwig, HMS professor of pediatrics at Children's Hospital Boston, is quoted."

Or here:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-02/fatty-foods-addictive-as-cocaine-in-growing-body-of-science.html

"... processed foods and sugary drinks ...can hijack the brain in ways that resemble addictions to cocaine, nicotine and other drugs....Lab studies have found sugary drinks and fatty foods can produce addictive behavior in animals. Brain scans of obese people and compulsive eaters, meanwhile, reveal disturbances in brain reward circuits similar to those experienced by drug abusers.

Twenty-eight scientific studies and papers on food addiction have been published this year, according to a National Library of Medicine database. As the evidence expands, the science of addiction could become a game changer for the $1 trillion food and beverage industries...."

or here:
http://hms.harvard.edu/news/childhood-obesity-confronting-big-food-9-24-12
"There’s no question that junk food, most of which is highly processed, and sugar-sweetened beverages are major contributors to the U.S. childhood obesity epidemic."

or here:
http://www.childrenshospital.org/researchers/david-ludwig
" Fast food consumption is associated with factors that increase risk of childhood obesity. Consumption of dairy products may offer protection against insulin resistance in overweight adults. "

or here:
http://hms.harvard.edu/news/harvard-medicine/plate-shifts
"Research in the 1950s and '60s first suggested a connection between food and the development of chronic conditions such as heart disease," says Walter Willett, an HMS professor of medicine and chair of the Harvard School of Public Health's Department of Nutrition. "Today, we're continuing to discover that many illnesses may be linked to modifiable risk factors like diet.... While caloric intake still governs weight gain and loss,

what we eat may matter just as much as how much we eat.


Ludwig and his colleagues share some responsibility for this shift in thinking. In 1999, curious to better determine how dietary composition affected body-weight regulation, Ludwig's research team gave 12 obese teenage boys a meal that ranked low, medium, or high on the glycemic index. Each of the meals had the same number of calories, only the foods varied. The meal that registered high on the glycemic-index scale consisted of instant oatmeal, a refined carbohydrate; the medium-indexed meal featured steel-cut oatmeal, a more complex carbohydrate, and the meal low on the glycemic-index scale included an omelet, rich in protein and fat....Although it may seem clear that we should all try to avoid white bread, candy bars, and other carbohydrate culprits that top the glycemic index, troublesome carbohydrates can lurk in less-expected places. Potatoes, especially their baked and mashed forms, Ding notes, rate quite high on the glycemic index—they've been shown to raise blood sugar levels as quickly as pure table sugar does—yet their inclusion in the produce food group can cause people to think of French fries as a vegetable rather than a starch....Even if produce doesn't protect against cancer, it does appear to promote cardiovascular health: Consumption of at least five daily servings of fruits and vegetables is associated with a 30-percent lower risk of coronary heart disease and stroke. Research also hints at a relationship between fruits and vegetables and a reduced risk of diabetes.

on healthy eating and disease prevention:
http://healthyeating.sfgate.com/eating-healthy-important-7166.html

on why processed food is bad for you:
http://answers.webmd.com/answers/1190049/why-is-processed-food-unhealthy
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2014/02/12/9-dangers-processed-foods.aspx

what happens when you introduce people who are not used to processed food to processed food:

Pacific Islanders Pay Heavy Price for Abandoning Traditional Diet: Replacing Traditional Foods with Imported, Processed Food Has Contributed to the High Prevalence of Obesity and Related Health Problems in the Pacific Islands. Contributors: Parry, Jane - Author. Journal title: Bulletin of the World Health Organization. Volume: 88. Issue: 7 Publication date: July 2010. Page number: 484+.

"Pacific Islanders Pay Heavy Price for Abandoning Traditional Diet: Replacing Traditional Foods with Imported, Processed Food Has Contributed to the High Prevalence of Obesity and Related Health Problems in the Pacific Islands"

There is a gazillion research out there telling you that diet does matter and that it is important not only how much you eat but WHAT you eat.

The obesity problem and diabets problem we are facing today is rising and it is directly linked to fast food, processed food, sugar and pop.
Stef.

Why don't you show us the links to articles that show that nutrition, e.g. Sugar does NOT matter? You are using ONE of my posted articles against me...what about the others? Every book that I read clearly stated how much diet actually does matter. So far I have not seen one article from a reputable source that says something to the contrary. Please enlighten me.
Stef.

Why don't you show us the links to articles that show that nutrition, e.g. Sugar does NOT matter? You are using ONE of my posted articles against me...what about the others? Every book that I read clearly stated how much diet actually does matter. So far I have not seen one article from a reputable source that says something to the contrary. Please enlighten me.
Stef.

Are we talking weight loss or nutrition here?

This content has been removed.