Why the hate on Sugar?
trackercasey76
Posts: 781 Member
For years weight loss "experts" have said to cut the sugar, what is the reason behind this? It is only 16 calories per tsp and tastes great. Why is it the enemy? I can't stand most sugar substitutes and can't pronounce the chemicals in them.
0
Replies
-
Ignorance. I'll take real sugar to the chemicals that make sweeteners. Your body can process the real thing.0
-
I used to hate it because I loved it. Loved loved loved loved it. Loved the taste and loved the effect it had on me. I would eat something sweet if I were having trouble concentrating, were angry, miserable, bored, pmsing, sick or celebrating. I could go days and days eating sweet treats exclusively.
I'm in a pretty good place right now though. I have to give a grudging thank you to the "don't hate sugar" zealots here for that. Took me a while to accept that it was truly okay to have a little while still maintaining a deficit. It seemed "weak willed" to have sugar when I was dieting. Plus I was convinced that it was way too likely that I would go overboard if I had even just a little.
I think these four things have turned around my relationship with sugar:
- more protein in my diet,
- a smaller calorie deficit,
- plenty of exercise,
- no feeling of deprivation because of smallish (okay moderate) amounts of sugar in my daily diet.
In my case, I add a little to tea or coffee (where I haven't had it in years). Feels so decadent, and as you said, is quite low in calories. Even had licorice yesterday and jelly beans a couple days before that. If an extreme sugaraholic like me can do it, I think anyone can.0 -
trackercasey76 wrote: »For years weight loss "experts" have said to cut the sugar, what is the reason behind this? It is only 16 calories per tsp and tastes great. Why is it the enemy? I can't stand most sugar substitutes and can't pronounce the chemicals in them.
Because most people eat too much of it. Because many people have a hard time NOT eating too much of it. Because cutting it rarely makes overall nutrition suffer.0 -
Because the media and this site says so. Whether it's correct is a totally diff story0
-
Ignorance. I'll take real sugar to the chemicals that make sweeteners. Your body can process the real thing.
Haha oh the irony...
http://examine.com/search.php?q=aspartame0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Because most people eat too much of it. Because many people have a hard time NOT eating too much of it. Because cutting it rarely makes overall nutrition suffer.
This. Our brains are wired to get as much sugar as possible, because it's a cheap, easy source of energy.
In terms of evolution (ie: survival), that's a huge win. The food surplus that has existed in the first world is a blink of an eye in terms of how our bodies have evolved over thousands of years.0 -
goldthistime wrote: »I used to hate it because I loved it. Loved loved loved loved it. Loved the taste and loved the effect it had on me. I would eat something sweet if I were having trouble concentrating, were angry, miserable, bored, pmsing, sick or celebrating. I could go days and days eating sweet treats exclusively.
I'm in a pretty good place right now though. I have to give a grudging thank you to the "don't hate sugar" zealots here for that. Took me a while to accept that it was truly okay to have a little while still maintaining a deficit. It seemed "weak willed" to have sugar when I was dieting. Plus I was convinced that it was way too likely that I would go overboard if I had even just a little.
I think these four things have turned around my relationship with sugar:
- more protein in my diet,
- a smaller calorie deficit,
- plenty of exercise,
- no feeling of deprivation because of smallish (okay moderate) amounts of sugar in my daily diet.
In my case, I add a little to tea or coffee (where I haven't had it in years). Feels so decadent, and as you said, is quite low in calories. Even had licorice yesterday and jelly beans a couple days before that. If an extreme sugaraholic like me can do it, I think anyone can.
Grate answer!!!!!0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Because most people eat too much of it. Because many people have a hard time NOT eating too much of it. Because cutting it rarely makes overall nutrition suffer.
This. Our brains are wired to get as much sugar as possible, because it's a cheap, easy source of energy.
In terms of evolution (ie: survival), that's a huge win. The food surplus that has existed in the first world is a blink of an eye in terms of how our bodies have evolved over thousands of years.
Another great answer. Everything in moderation. Obvious to most of us but not all.0 -
It depends on the person. How your body reacts to sugar and how it breaks down (glucose, fructose) is the issue. Some folks see sugar as just the white powder and yes they use very little. But we get sugar intake from so many other ways. If you are active and low carb diet you can be fine but less active and overweight people with high carb intake can be at risk of type II diabetes and other issues. It really goes beyond just the calories.0
-
trackercasey76 wrote: »For years weight loss "experts" have said to cut the sugar, what is the reason behind this? It is only 16 calories per tsp and tastes great. Why is it the enemy? I can't stand most sugar substitutes and can't pronounce the chemicals in them.
According to WHO, because "added sugar" is in lots of foods that have low nutrient density, and lots of calories, so it is believed that overconsumption of such foods contributes to obesity and people not eating enough nutrient dense foods.
Of course, many of the calories in such foods aren't from sugar at all. I analyzed a cookie recipe of mine (just because I'd previously put it in the recipe builder, which made it easy) and few of the calories were from sugar. Most were from butter, with the second most from flour.
I personally would argue that using the WHO rationale to demonize either sugar in fruit/dairy or adding a small amount of sugar (or a measured amount that fits in your calories) to other foods is silly. Same for eating low-nutrient items if you know you get a good, balanced, nutrient-rich diet and aren't overeating.0 -
because it's the devil!! LOL
i don't eat it b/c i think it made me fat.0 -
Ignorance. I'll take real sugar to the chemicals that make sweeteners. Your body can process the real thing.
Processed granulated sugar is not the real thing though. Sugar from fruit is natural and what your body can process, and offers the most health benefit. That's the way to go...cut the processed sugar and leave the natural. IMO
0 -
goldthistime wrote: »I used to hate it because I loved it. Loved loved loved loved it. Loved the taste and loved the effect it had on me. I would eat something sweet if I were having trouble concentrating, were angry, miserable, bored, pmsing, sick or celebrating. I could go days and days eating sweet treats exclusively.
I'm in a pretty good place right now though. I have to give a grudging thank you to the "don't hate sugar" zealots here for that. Took me a while to accept that it was truly okay to have a little while still maintaining a deficit. It seemed "weak willed" to have sugar when I was dieting. Plus I was convinced that it was way too likely that I would go overboard if I had even just a little.
I think these four things have turned around my relationship with sugar:
- more protein in my diet,
- a smaller calorie deficit,
- plenty of exercise,
- no feeling of deprivation because of smallish (okay moderate) amounts of sugar in my daily diet.
In my case, I add a little to tea or coffee (where I haven't had it in years). Feels so decadent, and as you said, is quite low in calories. Even had licorice yesterday and jelly beans a couple days before that. If an extreme sugaraholic like me can do it, I think anyone can.
0 -
Ignorance. I'll take real sugar to the chemicals that make sweeteners. Your body can process the real thing.
Processed granulated sugar is not the real thing though. Sugar from fruit is natural and what your body can process, and offers the most health benefit. That's the way to go...cut the processed sugar and leave the natural. IMO
Granulated sugar, whether from cane or beets, is just as real as the sugar in your fruit. It has just been isolated from the plant fibers. Juicing does the same thing to your fruit sugars. Does that make it less real?
0 -
I'm pretty sure the intention wasn't for people to find sugar alternatives but to reduce consumption of foods that have added sugars, that being the highly refined types, which are also loaded with fat and salt, which makes them even more tasty. Generally they're calorie dense and not very satiating and easily over consumed.0
-
Ignorance. I'll take real sugar to the chemicals that make sweeteners. Your body can process the real thing.
Processed granulated sugar is not the real thing though. Sugar from fruit is natural and what your body can process, and offers the most health benefit. That's the way to go...cut the processed sugar and leave the natural. IMO
Granulated sugar, whether from cane or beets, is just as real as the sugar in your fruit. It has just been isolated from the plant fibers. Juicing does the same thing to your fruit sugars. Does that make it less real?
Yes it does. Processed foods vs whole foods. That's my definition of natural. Granulated sugard is a processed food. I don't juice either by the way not that it matters.0 -
Watch "Fed Up". Sugar is considered a major culprit behind the obesity epidemic. It is also highly inflammatory in the body, and inflammation promotes disease. It isn't an either/or. It is a good idea to avoid both artificial sweeteners and limit added sugar that doesn't come naturally from fruits and vegetables.-1
-
This content has been removed.
-
I don't hate sugar. I do still watch how much I eat of it, and look for options that don't have it where it doesn't need to be, and options where less is better than more.
One little spoon is awesome. 31 grams in an Oprah chai latte is quite a bit. It's all about knowledge. I'll skip that chai latte and use my calories somewhere else.0 -
Ignorance. I'll take real sugar to the chemicals that make sweeteners. Your body can process the real thing.
Processed granulated sugar is not the real thing though. Sugar from fruit is natural and what your body can process, and offers the most health benefit. That's the way to go...cut the processed sugar and leave the natural. IMO
Granulated sugar, whether from cane or beets, is just as real as the sugar in your fruit. It has just been isolated from the plant fibers. Juicing does the same thing to your fruit sugars. Does that make it less real?
Yes it does. Processed foods vs whole foods. That's my definition of natural. Granulated sugard is a processed food. I don't juice either by the way not that it matters.
Not natural is kind of meaningless. Cooking isn't natural. Eating a banana or tuna steak in Illinois isn't natural. Farm-raised chickens aren't natural. Cauliflower in January isn't natural. My 4th-floor condo with a roof-top garden sure isn't natural, and nor is this forum we are communicating on now.
Fruits are overall more nutrient dense than most foods with added sugar (like the cookie I mentioned above, which also has--gasp!--unnatural butter). That's why they are generally more recommended by nutritionists, not because the sugars are different.
In theory, if I add a bit of sugar to make a nutrient dense item (like rhubarb) more tasty, I don't see why that's not essentially like just eating an apple straight.0 -
rcottonrph1 wrote: »Sugar is considered a major culprit behind the obesity epidemic.
At the moment. By Katie Couric and various others.
I'm old enough to remember when fat was the major culprit. There will be others.
The more accurate ones point to lifestyle and convenience and evolution.0 -
Sugar is a powerful dietary substance, and it is wise to respect it. It is unwise, however to deprive one's self of it. It is one of the many little joys in life. Don't deny your joy. It ain't good for the soul0
-
because sugar is evil and is to blame for there reason that people gain weight and cannot lose weight…
and, apparently, it is as addictive as cocaine, heroin, and crack combined..
-2 -
I dont hate on sugar, but I prefer to eat my calories, so I use artificial sweetners in my coffee, and buy sugar free pop. My cookies/cake/other things have some yummy sugar.0
-
rcottonrph1 wrote: »Watch "Fed Up". Sugar is considered a major culprit behind the obesity epidemic. It is also highly inflammatory in the body, and inflammation promotes disease. It isn't an either/or. It is a good idea to avoid both artificial sweeteners and limit added sugar that doesn't come naturally from fruits and vegetables.
Why would anyone flag this comment? It's dead spot-on accurate. So are several others that discuss the issue from a technical perspective.
When I quit eating processed foods and sucrose, I lost 50 pounds. I've said it a number of times (actually now it's 52 pounds as of this morning). I don't miss it at all. No cravings. I have sweets two cubicles away from me and I look at them and laugh. Then I laugh at all the poor saps gravitating to those foods. Then I shake my head when I see their body shapes - all of them are overweight. I was one of them at one time. No more.
There's no use for it. Doesn't mean it should be banned, far from it. Up to people to decide - but fructose with fiber metabolizes much differently than sucrose or anything that's a processed food. I know people who eat processed "diet" foods and they never lose weight. Gotta wonder why? It's not CICO - it's the issue of processed sugar.0 -
trackercasey76 wrote: »For years weight loss "experts" have said to cut the sugar, what is the reason behind this? It is only 16 calories per tsp and tastes great. Why is it the enemy? I can't stand most sugar substitutes and can't pronounce the chemicals in them.
Honestly? Because most people get their so-called nutritional information from magazines with articles written with a slant to sell specific products.0 -
They advise it for weight loss because to lose weight, you need to cut calories and sugar is easily cut without cutting nutrients. They're talking added sugars, not sugar in fruits. It's a nudge in the direction of "eat nutritious foods."
I don't agree with the "Only eat what you can pronounce" philosophy. I can pronounce a lot of things I don't want to eat. What if someone cannot pronounce "raspberry"? Raspberries don't become unhealthy because they can't pronounce it, KWIM?
-1 -
This content has been removed.
-
You guys found a type of sugar with no chemicals in it!?! Dear Lord!0
-
This content has been removed.
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
- 426 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