Can you really eat all the veggies you want?

Your butt won't know the difference. But your arteries will.

Then, how would my arteries know the difference between a potato and a hamburger? (Assuming I meet my macronutrition for the day in both cases)

Isn't sweet potato a superfood? Will that count for something? lol

You have to eat potatoes and sweet potatoes in great moderation. They are a starch along with corn and peas. Our bodies process these starchy veggies differently than say lettuce, broccoli, and cabbage. The starchy vegetables are higher on the glycemic index.

Potatoes are good for you if you eat the skin, but they're not as good as other veggies. And with mashed, you're probably putting butter and salt and other things in them that take away from the veggie goodness.

Anyway, yes, you can eat all the veggies you want, but that doesn't mean you can eat just ONE kind of veggie all day long. You need a variety to get the nutrients you need.

I bake mine then mash them and put smart balance and pecans-that's it. So that's a better way.

Ah, but pecans and Smart Balance aren't veggies, are they? So it goes back to what I said -- you add things in that take away from the veggie goodness.

Huh? That insulin response is saying "store as fat" to drop blood sugar. Spike your insulin response daily and let's see if you still have that rip.

Reducing the dietary glycemic load and the glycemic index was proposed as a novel approach to weight reduction. A parallel-design, randomized 12-wk controlled feeding trial with a 24-wk follow-up phase was conducted to test the hypothesis that a hypocaloric diet designed to reduce the glycemic load and the glycemic index would result in greater sustained weight loss than other hypocaloric diets. Obese subjects (n = 29) were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 diets providing 3138 kJ less than estimated energy needs: high glycemic index (HGI), low glycemic index (LGI), or high fat (HF). For the first 12 wk, all food was provided to subjects (feeding phase). Subjects (n = 22) were instructed to follow the assigned diet for 24 additional weeks (free-living phase). Total body weight was obtained and body composition was assessed by skinfold measurements. Insulin sensitivity was assessed by the homeostasis model (HOMA). At 12 wk, weight changes from baseline were significant in all groups but not different among groups (-9.3 +/- 1.3 kg for the HGI diet, -9.9 +/- 1.4 kg for the LGI diet, and -8.4 +/- 1.5 kg for the HF diet). All groups improved in insulin sensitivity at the end of the feeding phase of the study. During the free-living phase, all groups maintained their initial weight loss and their improved insulin sensitivity. Weight loss and improved insulin sensitivity scores were independent of diet composition. In summary, lowering the glycemic load and glycemic index of weight reduction diets does not provide any added benefit to energy restriction in promoting weight loss in obese subjects.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16177201?ordinalpos=1itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum


I can link a few more articles when I get back from studying if you want.

No, it's not ok. lol Calorie wise.

You can eat what you want but calories add up.

Huh? That insulin response is saying "store as fat" to drop blood sugar. Spike your insulin response daily and let's see if you still have that rip.

Reducing the dietary glycemic load and the glycemic index was proposed as a novel approach to weight reduction. A parallel-design, randomized 12-wk controlled feeding trial with a 24-wk follow-up phase was conducted to test the hypothesis that a hypocaloric diet designed to reduce the glycemic load and the glycemic index would result in greater sustained weight loss than other hypocaloric diets. Obese subjects (n = 29) were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 diets providing 3138 kJ less than estimated energy needs: high glycemic index (HGI), low glycemic index (LGI), or high fat (HF). For the first 12 wk, all food was provided to subjects (feeding phase). Subjects (n = 22) were instructed to follow the assigned diet for 24 additional weeks (free-living phase). Total body weight was obtained and body composition was assessed by skinfold measurements. Insulin sensitivity was assessed by the homeostasis model (HOMA). At 12 wk, weight changes from baseline were significant in all groups but not different among groups (-9.3 +/- 1.3 kg for the HGI diet, -9.9 +/- 1.4 kg for the LGI diet, and -8.4 +/- 1.5 kg for the HF diet). All groups improved in insulin sensitivity at the end of the feeding phase of the study. During the free-living phase, all groups maintained their initial weight loss and their improved insulin sensitivity. Weight loss and improved insulin sensitivity scores were independent of diet composition. In summary, lowering the glycemic load and glycemic index of weight reduction diets does not provide any added benefit to energy restriction in promoting weight loss in obese subjects.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16177201?ordinalpos=1itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum


I can link a few more articles when I get back from studying if you want.

Putting "obese subjects" on ANY "diet" is going to give whatever results that they were looking for. I know that for myself, as I am getting closer to my goal weight I have to watch glycemic index. It would be folly for anybody to follow the theory of what was done on obese subjects.

Huh? That insulin response is saying "store as fat" to drop blood sugar. Spike your insulin response daily and let's see if you still have that rip.

Reducing the dietary glycemic load and the glycemic index was proposed as a novel approach to weight reduction. A parallel-design, randomized 12-wk controlled feeding trial with a 24-wk follow-up phase was conducted to test the hypothesis that a hypocaloric diet designed to reduce the glycemic load and the glycemic index would result in greater sustained weight loss than other hypocaloric diets. Obese subjects (n = 29) were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 diets providing 3138 kJ less than estimated energy needs: high glycemic index (HGI), low glycemic index (LGI), or high fat (HF). For the first 12 wk, all food was provided to subjects (feeding phase). Subjects (n = 22) were instructed to follow the assigned diet for 24 additional weeks (free-living phase). Total body weight was obtained and body composition was assessed by skinfold measurements. Insulin sensitivity was assessed by the homeostasis model (HOMA). At 12 wk, weight changes from baseline were significant in all groups but not different among groups (-9.3 +/- 1.3 kg for the HGI diet, -9.9 +/- 1.4 kg for the LGI diet, and -8.4 +/- 1.5 kg for the HF diet). All groups improved in insulin sensitivity at the end of the feeding phase of the study. During the free-living phase, all groups maintained their initial weight loss and their improved insulin sensitivity. Weight loss and improved insulin sensitivity scores were independent of diet composition. In summary, lowering the glycemic load and glycemic index of weight reduction diets does not provide any added benefit to energy restriction in promoting weight loss in obese subjects.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16177201?ordinalpos=1itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum


I can link a few more articles when I get back from studying if you want.

Put it to the test. Bet you end up where you started.

In general the answer is no,you cannot eat all the vegetables you want. But the average person doesn't eat enough vegetables to do themselves any harm. Assuming you are not adding salt, oils, butter etc and you are keeping to no mor ethan say 10 servings of veggies a day, you are probably pretty safe for genereally ignoring them, but if you add to or change them significantly then count them, things like boiling greatly reduce the benefits of most vegetable versus cooking methods like steaming.

As for the difference between a cheesebuger and a vegetable, we all know about saturated fats and how bad they are, lean protien from meat is good in moderation because the protien is great but it is the fat that often comes with it that is the problem. We need good fats, like those found in olive oil for example but saturated fat is not a good fat and watching your cholesterol intake is also good. Protiens actually take more energy to digest than fats and carbs. And complex carbs (whole wheat and high fibre foods) are digested more slowly than simple carbs which are quickly broken down into sugars and absorbed into the blood stream, causing an insulin spike and storage as fat. Eating a diet where these spike occur constantly is why type 2 diabetes has become such a problem. The main point that I take from the article reference earlier about the glycemis index study, is that dispite obesity and what might have been years of bad eating habits, eating a well balanced diet can help reverse the effects and turn back the clock on the insulin resistence because once our bodies become soo accustom to high insulin levels say hello to type 2 diabetes.

Another note about simple carb and high sugar foods is REBOUND HUNGER, sugary and fatty foods cause the release of chemicals in our body that help elevate mood temporarily but our bodies rapid storage of the calorie overload often takes things a little too far dropping our blood sugar resulting in a feeling of hunger DISPITE having already eaten enough calories. So when you choose veggies over a cupcake you will feel satisifed in half an hour with the veg but be raiding the pantry after the cupcake

Put it to the test. Bet you end up where you started.

I do - daily. Unless you plan on remaining sedentary while consuming a hypercaloric, low-protein/high-carb, low-fiber diet, GI will have minimal effect on your fat storage (and muscle growth), ceteris paribus.

I eat a low protein high carb low fiber diet and can't seem to stop loosing weight. of corse I also manage a restaurant, and work out three times a week.

I eat a low protein high carb low fiber diet and can't seem to stop loosing weight. of corse I also manage a restaurant, and work out three times a week.

You missed the hypercaloric requirement. However, you are a living example that insulin defaults to a diet with calories under maintenance.

Because your body is getting a whole lot more goodness from a sweet potato - fibre, vitamins, minerals etc whereas a cheeseburger contains processed grains and sugars, fat, salt and not too much else that helps your body function well.
You might lose weight if the cals are the same but you won't be as healthy and will probably still be hungry for actual food not junk.

You don't give our bodies enough credit. The only way your example would be valid is if hamburgers were your main source of nutrition every day. Similarly, you'll get a lack of nutrition from a diet if you only ate sweet potatoes every day.

As far as hunger, that varies from person to person. Maybe they would be happier having a hamburger thus it is better?

What exactly is "junk food"? Can you give a list of foods everyone would agree with?