Gave up sugar (added sugar) feel great for it
Replies
-
rainbowbow wrote: »rainbowbow wrote: »Also food like cakes and desserts tend not to have so many other nutrients, so if you are on a calorie restricted diet then you could be using a large portion of those calories on something with little nutrition.
so if I take a fiber capsule with my cheesecake it is now "better" because I have added "nutrients"…..
I'm assuming you know that fiber isn't a nutrient and are being argumentative for the Lolz. Unless you didn't know... In which case I assume you'll want to research that further.
In regards to your initial post I'm assuming you meant to say "is op claiming NATURAL sugar is better for you than added sugar". You had it mixed up which is why so much confusion stemmed from that post. As far as I could tell she didn't make such claims, she only shared a behavior that's benefited her.
Anyway, if cutting out "added sugar" helps assist in lowering overall calorie consumption then more power to OP. Generally if OP is getting sugar from "natural" sources it will be found in a low calorie, high micronutrient (vitamins and minerals), and high fiber package. If you're going to opt for something sweet why not get the biggest nutritional bang for your calorie buck?
I personally understand your argument that sugar is sugar, but that doesn't really matter in this context as op is not making fanatical dietary claims about how she's a doctor or such and such study proved naturally occurring sugar is molecularly different from non-natural sources and some fake voodoo magic is behind her feeling better. She never said "I am a reputable source for this information, I have proof, and this is the way it is (fact)".
We understand that she is simply a member of the general public and is providing anectodal evidence. Quite frankly if a new member runs across this topic and takes her advice as proof of the above without researching anything for themselves I'm sad to say their ignorance is their own problem.
I was being facetious…
sarcasm much..?
as for what I bolded, if you think that then you have not been on MFP long enough ...
I've been on MFP since mid 2011.
then I don't know why you would think that...0 -
I've been eating fairly similarly for about13 years. So glad I made the change. It's been much easier to maintain my weight loss all these years.IIGuardian wrote: »DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »I stopped eating sugar 9 and a half years ago. By sugar, I mean desserts of any kind -- cake, pie, cookies, donuts, sweet breads, and anything like that. That includes all the sugar-free varieties of desserts also. I gave them up because I couldn't stop eating them once I started, and I ended up weighing 215 pounds.
Here are the benefits I felt immediately: no period cramps. No crazy mood swings. No massive weight gains (in fact, I lost 20 pounds in about three weeks). No more homicidal rages. No more canker sores. Food like broccoli and fish and water tasted better.
I do eat non-dessert foods with refined sugar (Cheerios, ketchup, pizza) but I try to make sure that refined sugar is at least the fourth or smaller (fifth, sixth, etc.) ingredient in my meal. Sometimes I have a muffin for breakfast, so sugar is about 50 percent of my meal, but I pay for it later in the day because I start to feel moody and angry.
I don't feel nasty or in a bad mood when I eat fruit (yogurt, Cheerios, and applesauce, or cereal with a banana, or an orange in the afternoon, or a fruit salad with lunch). I have learned that chicken with mango salsa and pasta sets me off into a rage -- I don't know why, since ham and pineapple pizza is just fine. Anyhow, my point is that sugar in fruit doesn't mess me up while a Snicker's bar will send me down the rabbit hole.
So my overall point is, for some of us, refined sugar ("added sugar") is the devil while fruit ("natural sugar") is just fine.
I know this is tl;dr so thanks for all of you who stuck with me this far!
Great read. I'm going on almost three weeks in adopting a nearly identical lifestyle change. Nothing I've ever tried has given me such positive results and seemed so completely sustainable. Dare I say these changes are pretty damn easy? I am constantly full before reaching my calorie limit, because I can eat plenty of food when there is no allotment for sugary junk. It's nice to hear from someone who has been doing this for almost 10 years. Cheers.
0 -
I have cut out refined sugar completely, as well as processed food as a result of it making me feel so yuck all the time. Over the years, I have come to understand the way my body responds to certain things.....I have NO tolerance (physically) for HFCS or Sugar made from sugar beet. And I know when I eat something that contains either one ( the lymph nodes in my neck swell)(My Dr. said it's probably due to the chemicals in the GMO's). I also definately notice the instant headache I get if I eat refined sugar.....and subsequent crash in blood sugar.
I always love seeing the "sugar is sugar" argument......I have never gotten sick from fruit and beg to differ. It seems that those in the scientific community would probably agree with me.
Great article in Scientific America about the difference in a short term consumption of fructose and glucose: http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post/not-all-sugars-are-created-equal-2009-04-20/?id=not-all-sugars-are-created-equal-2009-04-20
So OP--way to go!!!
Thank you for the article! It is hard sometimes to explain the differences in sugars to people. HFCS is something I definitely avoid whenever possible, because your body processes it differently as well as the whole GMO craziness. That can take such a toll on a person's body.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
nadiabear1 wrote: »
i did not ask about nutrients…I asked why one form of sugar is superior to another …
0 -
nadiabear1 wrote: »
i did not ask about nutrients…I asked why one form of sugar is superior to another …
WHY does it matter to you? Seriously? You've spent a lot of energy telling everyone they are wrong. Why does it matter what WE like to do? It's such a weird diet phenomenon.
0 -
Paul_Collyer wrote: »I agree that cutting sugar is beneficial. Not 100% necessary if you are on a balanced diet, but certainly helpful.
But we are all different.
Please share why.
To use your words: because of how it makes us feel.0 -
I was 278 pounds, suffering sugar resistance and borderline diabetic.
Mmmmmmm.....
Once I started logging my food intake, I saw how much sugar I was eating.chicacherry666 wrote: »Well I'm not amazing right now coz I'm sick but I gave up things with added sugar entirely about 3 months ago, plus I stopped eating red meat 1 and a half months ago and haven't eaten fast food since primary school coz I hate the taste. I feel more energetic however I allow myself to eat sugar 10 days in the year and I make sure I follow through after awhile you don't even miss it it's the first 2-4 weeks that are hardest now I don't look back!!!
OUCH!
I cut that in half and still eat well. I was killing myself with sugar and did not realize it.
How so?
After moderating sugar, I felt better and my numbers went back to normal. This is how I began my weight loss journey.
People consume way too much sugar in our nation, and this is nothing new.
Jack Lalanne warned us 60 years ago...
0 -
Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »nadiabear1 wrote: »
i did not ask about nutrients…I asked why one form of sugar is superior to another … WHY does it matter to you? Seriously? You've spent a lot of energy telling everyone they are wrong. Why does it matter what WE like to do? It's such a weird diet phenomenon.
because I am curious and want to know why someone would think that…
I am not talking about how it makes YOU feel, I am asking why, when we have already established that added sugar and natural sugar are the same, that one is somehow superior to another.
You are free to stop replying to me whenever you like...0 -
LOL. you're "curious".Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »nadiabear1 wrote: »
i did not ask about nutrients…I asked why one form of sugar is superior to another … WHY does it matter to you? Seriously? You've spent a lot of energy telling everyone they are wrong. Why does it matter what WE like to do? It's such a weird diet phenomenon.
because I am curious and want to know why someone would think that…
I am not talking about how it makes YOU feel, I am asking why, when we have already established that added sugar and natural sugar are the same, that one is somehow superior to another.
You are free to stop replying to me whenever you like...
0 -
Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »
LOL. you're "curious".Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »nadiabear1 wrote: »
i did not ask about nutrients…I asked why one form of sugar is superior to another … WHY does it matter to you? Seriously? You've spent a lot of energy telling everyone they are wrong. Why does it matter what WE like to do? It's such a weird diet phenomenon.
because I am curious and want to know why someone would think that…
I am not talking about how it makes YOU feel, I am asking why, when we have already established that added sugar and natural sugar are the same, that one is somehow superior to another.
You are free to stop replying to me whenever you like...
yes, curious as to why added sugar is the devil and natural sugar is manna from heaven ...0 -
Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »
LOL. you're "curious".Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »nadiabear1 wrote: »
i did not ask about nutrients…I asked why one form of sugar is superior to another … WHY does it matter to you? Seriously? You've spent a lot of energy telling everyone they are wrong. Why does it matter what WE like to do? It's such a weird diet phenomenon.
because I am curious and want to know why someone would think that…
I am not talking about how it makes YOU feel, I am asking why, when we have already established that added sugar and natural sugar are the same, that one is somehow superior to another.
You are free to stop replying to me whenever you like...
yes, curious as to why added sugar is the devil and natural sugar is manna from heaven ...
hyperbole thy name is ndj1979. :drinker: cheers.0 -
For me added sugar brings nothing else to the table. Natural sugar does.Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »
LOL. you're "curious".Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »nadiabear1 wrote: »
i did not ask about nutrients…I asked why one form of sugar is superior to another … WHY does it matter to you? Seriously? You've spent a lot of energy telling everyone they are wrong. Why does it matter what WE like to do? It's such a weird diet phenomenon.
because I am curious and want to know why someone would think that…
I am not talking about how it makes YOU feel, I am asking why, when we have already established that added sugar and natural sugar are the same, that one is somehow superior to another.
You are free to stop replying to me whenever you like...
yes, curious as to why added sugar is the devil and natural sugar is manna from heaven ...
With sugar from fruit I also get fiber, vitamins and minerals.
When I eat candy, I get sugar - way too much sugar and nothing else beyond those empty calories.
I get your point. Sugar is sugar. We can't live without it.
My point is all this demineralized, processed junk with added sugar gives me way too much of a good thing, and for me it was addictive.
No thanks to that!0 -
For me added sugar brings nothing else to the table. Natural sugar does.Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »
LOL. you're "curious".Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »nadiabear1 wrote: »
i did not ask about nutrients…I asked why one form of sugar is superior to another … WHY does it matter to you? Seriously? You've spent a lot of energy telling everyone they are wrong. Why does it matter what WE like to do? It's such a weird diet phenomenon.
because I am curious and want to know why someone would think that…
I am not talking about how it makes YOU feel, I am asking why, when we have already established that added sugar and natural sugar are the same, that one is somehow superior to another.
You are free to stop replying to me whenever you like...
yes, curious as to why added sugar is the devil and natural sugar is manna from heaven ...
With sugar from fruit I also get fiber, vitamins and minerals.
When I eat candy, I get sugar - way too much sugar and nothing else beyond those empty calories.
I get your point. Sugar is sugar. We can't live without it.
My point is all this demineralized, processed junk with added sugar gives me way too much of a good thing, and for me it was addictive.
No thanks to that!
And how it makes us FEEL (for the short term, for the long term) is perfectly germane to the conversation. And I KNOW without a doubt, that my continued conscious limiting of refined sugars and refined foods in general is why I'm part of the very small minority of folks who've kept their weight off for a long long time. No doubt about it.
0 -
What has this conversation to do with the Germans?And how it makes us FEEL (for the short term, for the long term) is perfectly germane to the conversation.
haha - just kidding...
0 -
-
Also food like cakes and desserts tend not to have so many other nutrients, so if you are on a calorie restricted diet then you could be using a large portion of those calories on something with little nutrition.
This is the key. My problem is when people try to suggest that it goes beyond that, that even if the foods fit in your calories or you choose to organize your diet differently to cut other things you see as not especially nutritious to keep some dessert items in, that it's more healthy or virtuous or you will feel better if you cut sugar.
For example, people like to give a litany of symptoms that cutting (added) sugar cured them of, and if it caused me such symptoms I'd probably avoid it, but it does not, certainly not in the amounts I currently consume.
I just don't understand the love for cutting items and announcing it to the world. Cake rarely fits into my diet and so I rarely eat it. But why give up cake? It's possible to almost never eat it if that's what I want without some silly rule, and then I don't feel like I'm cheating if I share a piece of cake at some special dinner out or otherwise choose to have some once in a while and I learn to turn down offered cake without having to claim that added sugar is the devil or something I'm allergic to or being all in your face about not eating it. But maybe I'm reading to much into this from other similar threads.0 -
Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »nadiabear1 wrote: »
i did not ask about nutrients…I asked why one form of sugar is superior to another … WHY does it matter to you? Seriously? You've spent a lot of energy telling everyone they are wrong. Why does it matter what WE like to do? It's such a weird diet phenomenon.
because I am curious and want to know why someone would think that…
I am not talking about how it makes YOU feel, I am asking why, when we have already established that added sugar and natural sugar are the same, that one is somehow superior to another.
You are free to stop replying to me whenever you like...
I'm not in favor of cutting out "added sugar" but the obvious difference is that one typically comes with nutrients and one does not. What most people mean is that they are giving up high calorie low nutrient foods.
Of course, one wonders why this means that you must make adding a bit of sugar to some rhubarb or maybe to some steel cut oats verboten, and why high calorie low nutrition foods without sugar get a pass--it all seems illogical--but I do think that's usually the basic idea.
The other being a claimed inability to eat sugary treats in moderation which is clearly not about sugar itself, or people would be gorging on bananas.
0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »nadiabear1 wrote: »
i did not ask about nutrients…I asked why one form of sugar is superior to another … WHY does it matter to you? Seriously? You've spent a lot of energy telling everyone they are wrong. Why does it matter what WE like to do? It's such a weird diet phenomenon.
because I am curious and want to know why someone would think that…
I am not talking about how it makes YOU feel, I am asking why, when we have already established that added sugar and natural sugar are the same, that one is somehow superior to another.
You are free to stop replying to me whenever you like...
I'm not in favor of cutting out "added sugar" but the obvious difference is that one typically comes with nutrients and one does not. What most people mean is that they are giving up high calorie low nutrient foods.
Of course, one wonders why this means that you must make adding a bit of sugar to some rhubarb or maybe to some steel cut oats verboten, and why high calorie low nutrition foods without sugar get a pass--it all seems illogical--but I do think that's usually the basic idea.
The other being a claimed inability to eat sugary treats in moderation which is clearly not about sugar itself, or people would be gorging on bananas.
I wonder if it's related to how easy it is to eat. I'm guilty of seriously overeating fruits, and I love juice so much it rarely gets a place in my refrigerator, for the same reason that cookies rarely show up in my pantry. (I also limit the higher calorie no sugar foods-I'll eat as much peanut butter without sugar as I will peanut butter with added sugar.)0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »nadiabear1 wrote: »
i did not ask about nutrients…I asked why one form of sugar is superior to another … WHY does it matter to you? Seriously? You've spent a lot of energy telling everyone they are wrong. Why does it matter what WE like to do? It's such a weird diet phenomenon.
because I am curious and want to know why someone would think that…
I am not talking about how it makes YOU feel, I am asking why, when we have already established that added sugar and natural sugar are the same, that one is somehow superior to another.
You are free to stop replying to me whenever you like...
I'm not in favor of cutting out "added sugar" but the obvious difference is that one typically comes with nutrients and one does not. What most people mean is that they are giving up high calorie low nutrient foods.
Of course, one wonders why this means that you must make adding a bit of sugar to some rhubarb or maybe to some steel cut oats verboten, and why high calorie low nutrition foods without sugar get a pass--it all seems illogical--but I do think that's usually the basic idea.
The other being a claimed inability to eat sugary treats in moderation which is clearly not about sugar itself, or people would be gorging on bananas.
I wonder if it's related to how easy it is to eat. I'm guilty of seriously overeating fruits, and I love juice so much it rarely gets a place in my refrigerator, for the same reason that cookies rarely show up in my pantry. (I also limit the higher calorie no sugar foods-I'll eat as much peanut butter without sugar as I will peanut butter with added sugar.)
I think it's mostly just that some find the combination of fat and sugar (butter, flour, sugar, usually) extremely palatable and yet it's carby enough to be less filling or have that sugar spike thing that makes some hungry.
I can generally eat sweet treats in moderation, but I know ice cream is no problem at all, whereas a pie would be more challenging, although I think that's more psychological. The ice cream will be fine In the freezer, whereas with the pie it has to be eaten before it goes bad.
Fruit has fiber which just makes it more filling, but for me the desire to overeat isn't really about hunger anyway, and I don't find that I have some uncontrollable urge with sweets that I don't with cheese or steak, although those two are more filling IMO.
Funny this is all about the rule against sugar and not red meat. I'd rather give up added sugar if I had to choose.
0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Also food like cakes and desserts tend not to have so many other nutrients, so if you are on a calorie restricted diet then you could be using a large portion of those calories on something with little nutrition.
This is the key. My problem is when people try to suggest that it goes beyond that, that even if the foods fit in your calories or you choose to organize your diet differently to cut other things you see as not especially nutritious to keep some dessert items in, that it's more healthy or virtuous or you will feel better if you cut sugar.
For example, people like to give a litany of symptoms that cutting (added) sugar cured them of, and if it caused me such symptoms I'd probably avoid it, but it does not, certainly not in the amounts I currently consume.
I just don't understand the love for cutting items and announcing it to the world. Cake rarely fits into my diet and so I rarely eat it. But why give up cake? It's possible to almost never eat it if that's what I want without some silly rule, and then I don't feel like I'm cheating if I share a piece of cake at some special dinner out or otherwise choose to have some once in a while and I learn to turn down offered cake without having to claim that added sugar is the devil or something I'm allergic to or being all in your face about not eating it. But maybe I'm reading to much into this from other similar threads.Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »nadiabear1 wrote: »
i did not ask about nutrients…I asked why one form of sugar is superior to another … WHY does it matter to you? Seriously? You've spent a lot of energy telling everyone they are wrong. Why does it matter what WE like to do? It's such a weird diet phenomenon.
because I am curious and want to know why someone would think that…
I am not talking about how it makes YOU feel, I am asking why, when we have already established that added sugar and natural sugar are the same, that one is somehow superior to another.
You are free to stop replying to me whenever you like...
"when we have already established that added sugar and natural sugar are the same" not when the GI is different.0 -
Someone has chosen to omit something from their diet, and is proud of what they have achieved, but everyone's turning it into a sugar war!
congrats chicacherry, on choosing what to omit and sticking to it
i've cut alcohol, as the calories just aren't worth it.
Yes congratulations honey, be proud of what you have achieved.
For me, too much sugar is an addiction. It is like a little devil inside me, with huge tentacles forcing me to eat everything in sight which leads to me feeling sick, headachy and generally unwell. (Probably candida).
I limit fruit to two or three pieces a day and try to stay away from as much junky sugar as I can. Works for me and my body thanks me for it.
0 -
nadiabear1 wrote: »
i did not ask about nutrients…I asked why one form of sugar is superior to another …
http://www.bbcgoodfood.com/howto/guide/spotlight-low-gi0 -
I gave up all sugar, best thing I ever did, grinz0
-
lemurcat12 wrote: »Also food like cakes and desserts tend not to have so many other nutrients, so if you are on a calorie restricted diet then you could be using a large portion of those calories on something with little nutrition.
This is the key. My problem is when people try to suggest that it goes beyond that, that even if the foods fit in your calories or you choose to organize your diet differently to cut other things you see as not especially nutritious to keep some dessert items in, that it's more healthy or virtuous or you will feel better if you cut sugar.
For example, people like to give a litany of symptoms that cutting (added) sugar cured them of, and if it caused me such symptoms I'd probably avoid it, but it does not, certainly not in the amounts I currently consume.
I just don't understand the love for cutting items and announcing it to the world. Cake rarely fits into my diet and so I rarely eat it. But why give up cake? It's possible to almost never eat it if that's what I want without some silly rule, and then I don't feel like I'm cheating if I share a piece of cake at some special dinner out or otherwise choose to have some once in a while and I learn to turn down offered cake without having to claim that added sugar is the devil or something I'm allergic to or being all in your face about not eating it. But maybe I'm reading to much into this from other similar threads.
I feel the same with "IIFYM" converts. It's it fits 40/30/30 regardless of what it is, it's superior. RegardLess of what their 40/30/30 is composed of. Rather than what work for them. I'm not talking the whole "you don't get extra credit for eating more vegs. I'm talking about IT IS SUPERIOR AND THE ONLY WAY posts I see often here. I guess all zealots and recent converts seem annoying to others. Again. We've covered this territory before. And you don't see the IIFYM zealots as annoying or even zealots perhaps. But on the other side, I do. Perhaps we should say IIFYM too then Point out our carb goals. Dunno. Cheers
0 -
All of these comments from people not understanding the harm of added sugars is slightly alarming....
I definitely haven't completely given up added sugars (take 5's are just too good) but when I do cut out processed foods (laden with sugar and salt) I feel immensely better. Everyone questioning why the OP would ever give up added sugars should try it before they bash it. I remember how energized I felt every single day this summer when I wouldn't touch most processed foods.
please explain how "added" sugar is more harmful than "natural" sugar….
As an FYI - we have already establish that they are the same in this thread…
Personally, I think it's quite obvious that eating a cookie is less healthy than eating an apple. A tomato sauce made without additional sugar is inherently better for you than one that contains the sugar of the tomatoes plus sugar that is added in. Thank you for that "fyi." Sugar does indeed usually come from sugar cane and sugar beets. Crazy. The seeds of apples have cyanide- Just because it has a "natural" source doesn't mean I want to eat them.
In all due respect, perhaps you should post a thread on why you think that foods that have sugar added to them are beneficial. That way you and all the other posters who are "pro added sugar" can enjoy each other and we can all enjoy the people that think similarly to us.
I think we would all appreciate it if you would stop replying to all of our comments and move on. We all are happy avoiding added sugars and I can't see what else you expect to get out of pestering all of us. Have a good day friend.0 -
Dear Posters,
I wanted to provide a brief explanation for locking this topic.
The forum guidelines include this item:
2. No Hi-Jacking, Trolling, or Flame-baiting
Please stay on-topic in an existing thread, and post new threads in the appropriate forum. Taking a thread off-topic is considered hi-jacking. Please either contribute politely and constructively to a topic, or move on without posting. This includes posts that encourage the drama in a topic to escalate, or posts intended to incite an uproar from the community.
If you would like to review the forum guidelines, please visit the following link:
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/welcome/guidelines
At our discretion, this locked thread may be deleted entirely in the near future.
With respect,
Olivia
MyFitnessPal Community Manager0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9vpPVdewls
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 427 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions