Kevin Smith lost over 85lbs!

2»

Replies

  • drewptenn
    drewptenn Posts: 1 Member
    I constantly read calories in/calories out. Unfortunately, it's not that simple. The people promoting eating natural sugars (such as fruits) and staying away from processed and "added" sugars have it right.

    Here's a good read on what sugar does to the body.

    unifiedlifestyle.com/blog/2014/12/07/insulins-role-turn-off-fat-burning-when-carbohydrates-are-consumed/
  • This content has been removed.
  • hrtchoco
    hrtchoco Posts: 156 Member
    Question: Did they do a test on three groups of people, same weight same amount calories/day, but different processed sugar intake? If so, when is it?

    I watched like the first 1/5th and so far they did not give me any solid evidence. Also, if eating fiber with sugar is ok, then why not add some soluble fiber to our favorite drink? I'm not saying drinking soda is good (I don't even drink any), but I hate when people just make all these claims without any backups.
  • Orphia
    Orphia Posts: 7,097 Member
    Mizz_Mo wrote: »

    I read this article - thank you for providing the link. However, just like the movie - it is very slanted to one side. The movie is not the end all be all - however, it did have some excellent and valid information! If you haven't seen the movie - you should - then you would have both sides.

    As a mother - the points made regarding advertising and schools were very eye-opening and thought provoking.

    I think the article is only biased towards reason.

    Still, I'm glad you read it.

    If you're interested in the causes of obesity, I highly recommend James' Fell's article here:

    http://www.bodyforwife.com/what-is-the-solution-to-obesity/
  • andrikosDE
    andrikosDE Posts: 383 Member
    What I need to see is a documentary of how Kevin Smith gained those extra 85lbs. It might be a bit more interesting.
  • stevencloser
    stevencloser Posts: 8,911 Member
    drewptenn wrote: »
    I constantly read calories in/calories out. Unfortunately, it's not that simple. The people promoting eating natural sugars (such as fruits) and staying away from processed and "added" sugars have it right.

    Here's a good read on what sugar does to the body.

    unifiedlifestyle.com/blog/2014/12/07/insulins-role-turn-off-fat-burning-when-carbohydrates-are-consumed/

    The link won't load for me, but here's the usual things these kinds of articles forget to mention/get wrong.

    Carbohydrates aren't the only thing that makes you produce more insulin. Protein does too.
    All carbohydrates produce insulin, not only added sugars.
    They usually only consider a single food eaten in isolation. Eating whatever has the sugar in it together with other macros reduces the insulin response. And most foods aren't solely or even mostly made out of sugar.
    Insulin doesn't stop fat burning. Your body produces insulin when you've eaten something, when you've eaten something you have available calories, so obviously you aren't burning any bodyfat at that point. That's not insulin's fault and even if you ate only fat (which is the one thing you could eat that would not make you produce insulin), you'd gain fat if you ate too much of it and not burn any.
    Lastly, insulin is important for your body. Very important. It is not evil. You need insulin. It regulates the amount of glucose you have in your blood. Too high AND too low blood sugar both are not good for you.
  • PeachyCarol
    PeachyCarol Posts: 8,029 Member
    tomatoey wrote: »
    Mizz_Mo wrote: »

    I read this article - thank you for providing the link. However, just like the movie - it is very slanted to one side. The movie is not the end all be all - however, it did have some excellent and valid information! If you haven't seen the movie - you should - then you would have both sides.

    As a mother - the points made regarding advertising and schools were very eye-opening and thought provoking.

    I've already shared my thoughts on advertising. I think that it's too easy to see ourselves as helpless victims in these scenarios, because sensationalist words get thrown around like "subliminal", and the idea is nurtured that there's a conspiracy behind everything to manipulate people into doing stuff they don't want to on a deep level they're not really aware of.

    You do know that psychologists work as marketing consultants, to ensure that ads are targeted to be appealing to kids in ways that take advantage of their developmental phase? Down to use of colour, form, narrative, characters - all of that. You can call it a "conspiracy" to derogate people who take issue with this practice if you want. But that actually happens. And some think it's unethical.

    It's ultimately down to parents, yes, but it's not like it's a level playing field.

    Ads have been targeted to kids for years, this is nothing new. Advertising has always been manipulative.

    What's your point?

    Oh, I'm denigrating people by suggesting that there's an alternative to allowing themselves to be seen as helpless victims of big bad bidness since they're obviously incapable of intervening parental authority when it comes to their children, or, when it comes to advertising's influence in their own purchasing situations such as exercising criticial thought.

    Right.

    Well, carry on then.

  • MamaBirdBoss
    MamaBirdBoss Posts: 1,516 Member
    Mizz_Mo wrote: »

    Nope. Only against those evil, evil sugars removed from plants and put into other foods. Unless you have a medical condition, there's nothing about sugar calories specifically that hinders weight loss.

    Did you watch the movie?

    One of the points they really drove home was the fact many people are thinking that the amount of sugar they are ingesting doesn't really affect them - but it does. It showed how the brothers of one overweight kid were also unhealthy even though they were not obese (but pretty much eating the same food). TOFI - thin on the outside, fat on the inside. The thinner boys had over 22% belly fat but would be considered healthy.

    BS. The movie is nonsense. Sugar isn't the magic evil food any more than carbs or fat.
  • MamaBirdBoss
    MamaBirdBoss Posts: 1,516 Member
    edited July 2015
    tomatoey wrote: »
    Mizz_Mo wrote: »

    I read this article - thank you for providing the link. However, just like the movie - it is very slanted to one side. The movie is not the end all be all - however, it did have some excellent and valid information! If you haven't seen the movie - you should - then you would have both sides.

    As a mother - the points made regarding advertising and schools were very eye-opening and thought provoking.

    I've already shared my thoughts on advertising. I think that it's too easy to see ourselves as helpless victims in these scenarios, because sensationalist words get thrown around like "subliminal", and the idea is nurtured that there's a conspiracy behind everything to manipulate people into doing stuff they don't want to on a deep level they're not really aware of.

    You do know that psychologists work as marketing consultants, to ensure that ads are targeted to be appealing to kids in ways that take advantage of their developmental phase? Down to use of colour, form, narrative, characters - all of that. You can call it a "conspiracy" to derogate people who take issue with this practice if you want. But that actually happens. And some think it's unethical.

    It's ultimately down to parents, yes, but it's not like it's a level playing field.

    The kids don't have the pocketbooks.

    I teach my children about media manipulation. They soon begin pointing it out on their own--and not only are they less succeptable to wanting something because there's a character on it, but they're less stupid and gullible as adults, too.

    So are you saying that the parents of fat kids are horrible parents with no control over their children, then? Because that's what I'm hearing.
  • MamaBirdBoss
    MamaBirdBoss Posts: 1,516 Member
    drewptenn wrote: »
    I constantly read calories in/calories out. Unfortunately, it's not that simple. The people promoting eating natural sugars (such as fruits) and staying away from processed and "added" sugars have it right.

    Here's a good read on what sugar does to the body.

    unifiedlifestyle.com/blog/2014/12/07/insulins-role-turn-off-fat-burning-when-carbohydrates-are-consumed/

    Table sugar is the natural sugar from sugar cane. And that is a ridiculous link. It ISSSSS CI < CO. No matter what you eat, burning stored fat occurs when your body runs out of fuel from what you eat. Insulin doesn't change that.
  • fatcity66
    fatcity66 Posts: 1,544 Member
    Not this again...
  • MamaBirdBoss
    MamaBirdBoss Posts: 1,516 Member
    Mizz_Mo wrote: »
    kami3006 wrote: »

    As an interesting counter to the fed up movie, search for fed up fact check and see what you think.

    I'm not arguing anything about the movie itself as I inherently distrust documentaries in general and stopped with tv and movies years ago. But, since you're interested in the topic, I thought you would find this interesting.



    Thank you - this is some of what I was looking for! As I stated, after watching it - I lowered my sugar goal - which will force me to limit my intake from more fruits/veggies/dairy. Not as much room for the processed sugars.

    I don't agree with everything from the movie - but there is quite a bit that is true. For example - our son was the ONLY kid in his Pre-K class that did not recognize the McDonald's symbol. His teacher (she has only been teaching for 3 years) said he was the first student she has had that didn't know it. He's never been there (he's 5 YO). We don't have cable - so he isn't exposed to commercials like other kids (and adults) are. This was one of the points of the movie was trying to get across as well.

    You mention distrusting documentaries - however, did you watch it?

    My 2-y-o knows the McD's symbol. He's probably been there twice in the past year (because it has an indoor playground--perfect for rainy days!). We also don't have cable. But we drive past it. He knows the names of most of the places we drive past.

    He can also read the word "pizza" at pizza places we've never been to (like, he hasn't been to the chain in his entire life or even seen a box from that chain). We have pizza in a box or an upscale restaurant where he sees the word less than once a month. But he just LOVES pizza, and the neighbors have pizza in boxes weekly, so that was the very first word he learned to recognize.

    You shouldn't make assumptions about other people's children.

    The documentary is the worst sort of nonsense. It's as bad as Supersize Me.
  • zyxst
    zyxst Posts: 9,150 Member
    It's not on Canadian Netflix. Should I be thankful?
This discussion has been closed.