A Question About Sugar

Lourdesong wrote: »

But it's still CICO. I'm not seeing how this principle is being challenged just because the "calories out" part of the equation, assuming for sake of argument, increased to some degree for subjects on a HP diet.

Patttience wrote: »

this is a very good question. First off, my advice is don't bother using the sugar counter at all unless you are a diagnosed diabetic. Nobody else needs to know their sugar count.

What we all need to do is know our carb count. You should aim to keep your carb count low.

The reason why i say the sugar counter is a waste of your interest is a) because there are more important factors and b), unless diabetic the body manages blood sugar levels naturally. If you just eat with your macros in an appropriate balance, you do not need to be concered about the sugar counter.

the sugar counter makes no distinction between refined sugars and natural sugars and it is hte refined sugars only that you need to reduce. You can do this without any sort of counter at all. You need to put significant effort into reducing processed foods because these are the foods that have high levels of added/refined sugar.

Why is refined sugar a problem? Because it intensifies the flavours of foods so that you ar enot happy with normal healthy food and prefer processed foods. Because it causes some people to over eat. And when you over eat refined sugar, it start the ball rolling and keep it rolling endlessly towards weight gain and ill health. Overeating causes imbalances in the hormones signalling systems in teh body. For instance leptin. People who eat a lot tend to develop leptin resistance which means your body can't help you restrict your eating at all because you are always hungry.

Just reducing yoru calories will result in correcting of this problem however, so long as you eat a lot of refined sugar, you will struggle to reduce your calorie intake and maitain it long enough to lose the weight and reprogram yourself into better eating habits.

The other things that you need to be eating more and don't when you eat too much refined/added sguars are vegetables and fruit and high fibre foods. Because meat is a strong flavoured food, people tend not to have any difficult eating eating enough meat and protein when they are also eating a lot of very unhealthy foods but fruit and vegetables tend to be less exciting to the palate becuase they have plainer flavours. To enjoy them, they would need to be eaten with other highly flavoursome foods.

So when you cut out all the procesed foods, you can start to enjoy less intensely flavoured foods, though they still do need ot be prepared in such a way as to be tasty. Hence to be honest, steamed vegies and skinless chicken breast was never going to satisfy anyone in the long term.

There are ways you can cook vegetables and other foods that are tasty adn interesting. Its important the food you eat to replace all the processed foods you may have eaten in teh past is tasty. So that suggests that people need to apply themselves to their cooking. Thsi is probalby one of hte hardest things for most dieters to do in this day and age when a) many can't cook b) most people are very busy and too tired too cook.

But i promise you if you make the effort to prepare your own meals, avoid processed fodos as much as possible and increase your vegetables and fruit you will find losing weight easier. You will also find keeping hte weigh off long term more sustainable.

People need to make a life long commitment to eating better. Its not enough just to do it for long enough to get hte weight off. If you don't commit to ongoing change, you will get fat again.

yarwell wrote: »

Lourdesong wrote: »

But it's still CICO. I'm not seeing how this principle is being challenged just because the "calories out" part of the equation, assuming for sake of argument, increased to some degree for subjects on a HP diet.

I never said it challenged CI=CO, it challenges the notion that CO is independent of the composition of the diet.

Hence my question "are you saying weight loss is independent of diet composition at the same calorie level". So weight loss is not purely a function of calorie input, which you can see by regression analysis of weight loss studies.

As an engineer I would be confident that a properly measured energy balance would hold true in any circumstances. The variable reaction of the human organism to different macronutrients leads me to anticipate potentially different outcomes, to some extent, and this does appear to turn up in several studies.

tedboosalis7 wrote: »

In fact, I was eating more in calories on the switch off simple carb to complex carb and lost the weight. BOOM! Done deal. Have a great day peeps!

Charlottesometimes23 wrote: »

There would be variability due to things such as individual variations in genes for metabolic enzymes and other aspects that can't be controlled for in studies.

tedboosalis7 wrote: »

Sugar does matter - I am shocked at some of comments here.

Please read this: http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/carbohydrates/carbohydrates-and-blood-sugar/

Fact is - if you eat complex carbohydrates then you will not cause blood sugar spikes to the same degree as eating simple carbohydrates. Eating "sugar" can be a simple as eating something that rates as "high" on the glycemic index (baked potato as an example). If you eat simple carbohydrates, your body will store it as fat very quickly. The storage of fat and excess fat is what is called "inflammation". So eating a simple carb is like eating a packet of sugar - and that will cause your body to store more fat than necessary (or the alternative, eating a complex carb will not store as readily as fat).

I know I can go round and round and whatnot, but I hope this helps. Sugar does matter - it's the type of "sugar" you are eating. Eat complex carbs and avoid refined sugars and any foods that are rated "high" in the glycemic index and you will never have to worry about tracking sugar on this site (or in your life for that matter).

tigersword wrote: »

tedboosalis7 wrote: »

Sugar does matter - I am shocked at some of comments here.

Please read this: http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/carbohydrates/carbohydrates-and-blood-sugar/

Fact is - if you eat complex carbohydrates then you will not cause blood sugar spikes to the same degree as eating simple carbohydrates. Eating "sugar" can be a simple as eating something that rates as "high" on the glycemic index (baked potato as an example). If you eat simple carbohydrates, your body will store it as fat very quickly. The storage of fat and excess fat is what is called "inflammation". So eating a simple carb is like eating a packet of sugar - and that will cause your body to store more fat than necessary (or the alternative, eating a complex carb will not store as readily as fat).

I know I can go round and round and whatnot, but I hope this helps. Sugar does matter - it's the type of "sugar" you are eating. Eat complex carbs and avoid refined sugars and any foods that are rated "high" in the glycemic index and you will never have to worry about tracking sugar on this site (or in your life for that matter).

Storing fat is most definitely not called "inflammation." Please, if you don't understand the basic concepts, please stop trying to make things up just to try and sound smart.