Sugar from fruits
Options
Replies
-
There was no question there. You wonder why I nitpick. I don't. I almost never say Boo about it. The OP brought up that someone said that all sugars are "processed" the same. Not me.DeguelloTex wrote: »
Let's say you brought it up only once. Same questions apply.
Good Lord in Heaven, I hardly bring it up every time sugar comes up, lol. I almost never bring it up and let those "All sugar is processed the same" comments go by with nary a peep a LOT. The OP brought it up.DeguelloTex wrote: »
Except they don't have different components and are essentially C(n)H(2n)O(n) molecules.kshama2001 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »
I suspect that we have studied different things. Why don't you educate me? Compare the digestion of milk, peaches and cake frosting in detail. Don't single out just sugars, but do make sure to explain how all the sugars are identical and broken down in the same way.
I didn't read it, but a lot of people think that all sugars are digested in exactly the same way. They say it all the time. They don't understand the digestive system at all. Of course different sugars are digested differently. Because they're different, lol.Yeah MFP has me at a lot higher sugar. Fruit has fiber (typically) and other vitamins and is processed by the body differently than say High Frutose Corn Syrup. The body metabolizes these different sugars differently. Of course anything in abundance is bad. Fiber delays the delivery of Frutose to the liver. This is why I stopped drinking juice. The juice alone doesn't have the fiber. I think processed foods with sugar like Cola are far worse for you, simply keep eating fruit - just in moderation.
According to this post, all sugars are processed the same
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10197460/sugar-faq-june-2015/p1
They have different components and will, of course, be broken down differently.
Digestion really doesn't make a ton of difference. The effect on your weight isn't about how it's digested. It's about how much sugar you take in. It's about the calories.
When you're losing weight, you want all the nutrition you can get for as few calories as you can. Keeps you healthy, let's you stay full. So, it makes some sense to take your sugar from fruit, which gives you nutrients you need.
If you don't want to eat any sugar, that's your choice and I won't argue it. Everyone has to do what works for them.
But you can eat your fruit if you want to. For an otherwise healthy person, fruit won't hurt.
yea, no.
sugar = sugar
sorry..
just because you want to believe that does not make it so.
I do love it when you educate us all.
Way to move the goal posts there.
Why do you do this?
No goal post moving. Perhaps you thought she meant sucrose, fructose and glucose here but she didn't specify that and could have just as easily meant the sugar in peaches vs the sugar in cake frosting.a lot of people think that all sugars are digested in exactly the same way. They say it all the time. They don't understand the digestive system at all. Of course different sugars are digested differently. Because they're different, lol.
They have different components and will, of course, be broken down differently.
The different types of sugar are converted to glucose by different enzymes, but they end up as glucose and then the body uses that glucose, regardless of source, exactly the same.
If her position is merely that different sugars are broken down by different enzymes before the resultant glucose is used by the body, I'm wondering why that's a sufficiently relevant nit to pick every time sugar comes up, given that they all end up as glucose before being used.
I don't know why people are always saying it, I have no idea. I don't generally care because it's really not important.
0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »Where'd that 21 g come from? MFP gives me 77. If it came from your doctor, discuss with him/her.
You're right the limit is not 21, it's 45... but I pass it everyday...
Not sure why your limit is so much smaller than mine, but letting it go.
It's 15% of calories.
It's 45 grams for people on 1200.
As for why a young guy like OP seems to be is on 1200, beats me.
What does age have to do with it? I'm not quite 21 and I'm on 1200... it's about losing weight... since my start was only 20 lbs from my goal I need a larger deficit.
No...the closer to goal you are, the smaller your deficit should be, and the more accurate your logging should be. It makes it easier to transition to maintenance.
As for age - the younger you are, the more calories you burn, generally speaking. Our metabolisms slow as we age.
The closer you get to your goal the harder it is to lose weight... so it would make sense to me to need a bigger calorie deficit.
Yeah, no. This isn't really relevant to OP's thread, so I'm not going to argue with you. If you're confused about deficits then you would do well to start your own thread.Yes, your metabolism slows as you age, however after you've gone through puberty there's not much difference between people's metobolic rates, only about 1000 kcal/day, which includes both men and women meaning that within gender there's probably only about a 600 kcal/day difference which is more dependent on lean body mass than age
Not really sure what you're saying here, but 600 kcal per day can make a huge difference when it comes weight loss/gain, especially if you don't have a lot to lose in the first place. This is why accuracy is so important.
I think you missed the point. 600 kcal is a somewhat significant amount, yes, but it has VERY little to do with age. Someone with the same lbm and activity level at 21 as they have at 50 (which is unusual because of other factors like time restraints, job style, family, illness, etc.) will MAYBE have a 100 kcal difference at the most.
Metabolism is more about lbm, activity, and individual biological pre-sets.0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »Where'd that 21 g come from? MFP gives me 77. If it came from your doctor, discuss with him/her.
You're right the limit is not 21, it's 45... but I pass it everyday...
Not sure why your limit is so much smaller than mine, but letting it go.
It's 15% of calories.
It's 45 grams for people on 1200.
As for why a young guy like OP seems to be is on 1200, beats me.
What does age have to do with it? I'm not quite 21 and I'm on 1200... it's about losing weight... since my start was only 20 lbs from my goal I need a larger deficit.
No...the closer to goal you are, the smaller your deficit should be, and the more accurate your logging should be. It makes it easier to transition to maintenance.
As for age - the younger you are, the more calories you burn, generally speaking. Our metabolisms slow as we age.
The closer you get to your goal the harder it is to lose weight... so it would make sense to me to need a bigger calorie deficit.
Yeah, no. This isn't really relevant to OP's thread, so I'm not going to argue with you. If you're confused about deficits then you would do well to start your own thread.Yes, your metabolism slows as you age, however after you've gone through puberty there's not much difference between people's metobolic rates, only about 1000 kcal/day, which includes both men and women meaning that within gender there's probably only about a 600 kcal/day difference which is more dependent on lean body mass than age
Not really sure what you're saying here, but 600 kcal per day can make a huge difference when it comes weight loss/gain, especially if you don't have a lot to lose in the first place. This is why accuracy is so important.
I think you missed the point. 600 kcal is a somewhat significant amount, yes, but it has VERY little to do with age. Someone with the same lbm and activity level at 21 as they have at 50 (which is unusual because of other factors like time restraints, job style, family, illness, etc.) will MAYBE have a 100 kcal difference at the most.
Metabolism is more about lbm, activity, and individual biological pre-sets.
Oh, no, that's not true, dear. Everyone's metabolism slows as they age. Because science.0 -
These are the questions:
There was no question there. You wonder why I nitpick. I don't. I almost never say Boo about it. The OP brought up that someone said that all sugars are "processed" the same. Not me.DeguelloTex wrote: »
Let's say you brought it up only once. Same questions apply.
Good Lord in Heaven, I hardly bring it up every time sugar comes up, lol. I almost never bring it up and let those "All sugar is processed the same" comments go by with nary a peep a LOT. The OP brought it up.DeguelloTex wrote: »
Except they don't have different components and are essentially C(n)H(2n)O(n) molecules.kshama2001 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »
I suspect that we have studied different things. Why don't you educate me? Compare the digestion of milk, peaches and cake frosting in detail. Don't single out just sugars, but do make sure to explain how all the sugars are identical and broken down in the same way.
I didn't read it, but a lot of people think that all sugars are digested in exactly the same way. They say it all the time. They don't understand the digestive system at all. Of course different sugars are digested differently. Because they're different, lol.Yeah MFP has me at a lot higher sugar. Fruit has fiber (typically) and other vitamins and is processed by the body differently than say High Frutose Corn Syrup. The body metabolizes these different sugars differently. Of course anything in abundance is bad. Fiber delays the delivery of Frutose to the liver. This is why I stopped drinking juice. The juice alone doesn't have the fiber. I think processed foods with sugar like Cola are far worse for you, simply keep eating fruit - just in moderation.
According to this post, all sugars are processed the same
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10197460/sugar-faq-june-2015/p1
They have different components and will, of course, be broken down differently.
Digestion really doesn't make a ton of difference. The effect on your weight isn't about how it's digested. It's about how much sugar you take in. It's about the calories.
When you're losing weight, you want all the nutrition you can get for as few calories as you can. Keeps you healthy, let's you stay full. So, it makes some sense to take your sugar from fruit, which gives you nutrients you need.
If you don't want to eat any sugar, that's your choice and I won't argue it. Everyone has to do what works for them.
But you can eat your fruit if you want to. For an otherwise healthy person, fruit won't hurt.
yea, no.
sugar = sugar
sorry..
just because you want to believe that does not make it so.
I do love it when you educate us all.
Way to move the goal posts there.
Why do you do this?
No goal post moving. Perhaps you thought she meant sucrose, fructose and glucose here but she didn't specify that and could have just as easily meant the sugar in peaches vs the sugar in cake frosting.a lot of people think that all sugars are digested in exactly the same way. They say it all the time. They don't understand the digestive system at all. Of course different sugars are digested differently. Because they're different, lol.
They have different components and will, of course, be broken down differently.
The different types of sugar are converted to glucose by different enzymes, but they end up as glucose and then the body uses that glucose, regardless of source, exactly the same.
If her position is merely that different sugars are broken down by different enzymes before the resultant glucose is used by the body, I'm wondering why that's a sufficiently relevant nit to pick every time sugar comes up, given that they all end up as glucose before being used.
I don't know why people are always saying it, I have no idea. I don't generally care because it's really not important.
Is the whole of your position on the digestion of sugars to make the point that fructose, sucrose, lactose, etc are broken down by different enzymes by the digestion process during which all of them are converted to glucose, which glucose the body then uses exactly the same regardless of source? If not, what differences do you mean?
0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »Where'd that 21 g come from? MFP gives me 77. If it came from your doctor, discuss with him/her.
You're right the limit is not 21, it's 45... but I pass it everyday...
Not sure why your limit is so much smaller than mine, but letting it go.
It's 15% of calories.
It's 45 grams for people on 1200.
As for why a young guy like OP seems to be is on 1200, beats me.
What does age have to do with it? I'm not quite 21 and I'm on 1200... it's about losing weight... since my start was only 20 lbs from my goal I need a larger deficit.
No...the closer to goal you are, the smaller your deficit should be, and the more accurate your logging should be. It makes it easier to transition to maintenance.
As for age - the younger you are, the more calories you burn, generally speaking. Our metabolisms slow as we age.
The closer you get to your goal the harder it is to lose weight... so it would make sense to me to need a bigger calorie deficit.
Yeah, no. This isn't really relevant to OP's thread, so I'm not going to argue with you. If you're confused about deficits then you would do well to start your own thread.Yes, your metabolism slows as you age, however after you've gone through puberty there's not much difference between people's metobolic rates, only about 1000 kcal/day, which includes both men and women meaning that within gender there's probably only about a 600 kcal/day difference which is more dependent on lean body mass than age
Not really sure what you're saying here, but 600 kcal per day can make a huge difference when it comes weight loss/gain, especially if you don't have a lot to lose in the first place. This is why accuracy is so important.
I think you missed the point. 600 kcal is a somewhat significant amount, yes, but it has VERY little to do with age. Someone with the same lbm and activity level at 21 as they have at 50 (which is unusual because of other factors like time restraints, job style, family, illness, etc.) will MAYBE have a 100 kcal difference at the most.
Metabolism is more about lbm, activity, and individual biological pre-sets.
Oh, no, that's not true, dear. Everyone's metabolism slows as they age. Because science.
Yeah...I'm just going to back away slowly.0 -
3 fruits and 1 yogurt are perfectly fine and certainly not bad. You need some sugar, and fruit is full of lots of goodness just like others have said. Sometimes over-analyzing the numbers makes you forget about common sense. 3 fruits and a yogurt, perfectly reasonable without looking at any numbers.
0 -
No, I don't consider digestion a thing on which I take a position, lol. Yes, the point of saying that different sugars are digested differently is because they are. There is no "If not."DeguelloTex wrote: »
These are the questions:
There was no question there. You wonder why I nitpick. I don't. I almost never say Boo about it. The OP brought up that someone said that all sugars are "processed" the same. Not me.DeguelloTex wrote: »
Let's say you brought it up only once. Same questions apply.
Good Lord in Heaven, I hardly bring it up every time sugar comes up, lol. I almost never bring it up and let those "All sugar is processed the same" comments go by with nary a peep a LOT. The OP brought it up.DeguelloTex wrote: »
Except they don't have different components and are essentially C(n)H(2n)O(n) molecules.kshama2001 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »
I suspect that we have studied different things. Why don't you educate me? Compare the digestion of milk, peaches and cake frosting in detail. Don't single out just sugars, but do make sure to explain how all the sugars are identical and broken down in the same way.
I didn't read it, but a lot of people think that all sugars are digested in exactly the same way. They say it all the time. They don't understand the digestive system at all. Of course different sugars are digested differently. Because they're different, lol.Yeah MFP has me at a lot higher sugar. Fruit has fiber (typically) and other vitamins and is processed by the body differently than say High Frutose Corn Syrup. The body metabolizes these different sugars differently. Of course anything in abundance is bad. Fiber delays the delivery of Frutose to the liver. This is why I stopped drinking juice. The juice alone doesn't have the fiber. I think processed foods with sugar like Cola are far worse for you, simply keep eating fruit - just in moderation.
According to this post, all sugars are processed the same
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10197460/sugar-faq-june-2015/p1
They have different components and will, of course, be broken down differently.
Digestion really doesn't make a ton of difference. The effect on your weight isn't about how it's digested. It's about how much sugar you take in. It's about the calories.
When you're losing weight, you want all the nutrition you can get for as few calories as you can. Keeps you healthy, let's you stay full. So, it makes some sense to take your sugar from fruit, which gives you nutrients you need.
If you don't want to eat any sugar, that's your choice and I won't argue it. Everyone has to do what works for them.
But you can eat your fruit if you want to. For an otherwise healthy person, fruit won't hurt.
yea, no.
sugar = sugar
sorry..
just because you want to believe that does not make it so.
I do love it when you educate us all.
Way to move the goal posts there.
Why do you do this?
No goal post moving. Perhaps you thought she meant sucrose, fructose and glucose here but she didn't specify that and could have just as easily meant the sugar in peaches vs the sugar in cake frosting.a lot of people think that all sugars are digested in exactly the same way. They say it all the time. They don't understand the digestive system at all. Of course different sugars are digested differently. Because they're different, lol.
They have different components and will, of course, be broken down differently.
The different types of sugar are converted to glucose by different enzymes, but they end up as glucose and then the body uses that glucose, regardless of source, exactly the same.
If her position is merely that different sugars are broken down by different enzymes before the resultant glucose is used by the body, I'm wondering why that's a sufficiently relevant nit to pick every time sugar comes up, given that they all end up as glucose before being used.
I don't know why people are always saying it, I have no idea. I don't generally care because it's really not important.
Is the whole of your position on the digestion of sugars to make the point that fructose, sucrose, lactose, etc are broken down by different enzymes by the digestion process during which all of them are converted to glucose, which glucose the body then uses exactly the same regardless of source? If not, what differences do you mean?
Then, njd disagreed. I am still waiting to hear how "sugar=sugar" and how I am wrong. "No" is how it was phrased, I think.
0 -
No, I don't consider digestion a thing on which I take a position, lol. Yes, the point of saying that different sugars are digested differently is because they are. There is no "If not."DeguelloTex wrote: »
These are the questions:
There was no question there. You wonder why I nitpick. I don't. I almost never say Boo about it. The OP brought up that someone said that all sugars are "processed" the same. Not me.DeguelloTex wrote: »
Let's say you brought it up only once. Same questions apply.
Good Lord in Heaven, I hardly bring it up every time sugar comes up, lol. I almost never bring it up and let those "All sugar is processed the same" comments go by with nary a peep a LOT. The OP brought it up.DeguelloTex wrote: »
Except they don't have different components and are essentially C(n)H(2n)O(n) molecules.kshama2001 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »
I suspect that we have studied different things. Why don't you educate me? Compare the digestion of milk, peaches and cake frosting in detail. Don't single out just sugars, but do make sure to explain how all the sugars are identical and broken down in the same way.
I didn't read it, but a lot of people think that all sugars are digested in exactly the same way. They say it all the time. They don't understand the digestive system at all. Of course different sugars are digested differently. Because they're different, lol.Yeah MFP has me at a lot higher sugar. Fruit has fiber (typically) and other vitamins and is processed by the body differently than say High Frutose Corn Syrup. The body metabolizes these different sugars differently. Of course anything in abundance is bad. Fiber delays the delivery of Frutose to the liver. This is why I stopped drinking juice. The juice alone doesn't have the fiber. I think processed foods with sugar like Cola are far worse for you, simply keep eating fruit - just in moderation.
According to this post, all sugars are processed the same
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10197460/sugar-faq-june-2015/p1
They have different components and will, of course, be broken down differently.
Digestion really doesn't make a ton of difference. The effect on your weight isn't about how it's digested. It's about how much sugar you take in. It's about the calories.
When you're losing weight, you want all the nutrition you can get for as few calories as you can. Keeps you healthy, let's you stay full. So, it makes some sense to take your sugar from fruit, which gives you nutrients you need.
If you don't want to eat any sugar, that's your choice and I won't argue it. Everyone has to do what works for them.
But you can eat your fruit if you want to. For an otherwise healthy person, fruit won't hurt.
yea, no.
sugar = sugar
sorry..
just because you want to believe that does not make it so.
I do love it when you educate us all.
Way to move the goal posts there.
Why do you do this?
No goal post moving. Perhaps you thought she meant sucrose, fructose and glucose here but she didn't specify that and could have just as easily meant the sugar in peaches vs the sugar in cake frosting.a lot of people think that all sugars are digested in exactly the same way. They say it all the time. They don't understand the digestive system at all. Of course different sugars are digested differently. Because they're different, lol.
They have different components and will, of course, be broken down differently.
The different types of sugar are converted to glucose by different enzymes, but they end up as glucose and then the body uses that glucose, regardless of source, exactly the same.
If her position is merely that different sugars are broken down by different enzymes before the resultant glucose is used by the body, I'm wondering why that's a sufficiently relevant nit to pick every time sugar comes up, given that they all end up as glucose before being used.
I don't know why people are always saying it, I have no idea. I don't generally care because it's really not important.
Is the whole of your position on the digestion of sugars to make the point that fructose, sucrose, lactose, etc are broken down by different enzymes by the digestion process during which all of them are converted to glucose, which glucose the body then uses exactly the same regardless of source? If not, what differences do you mean?
Then, njd disagreed. I am still waiting to hear how "sugar=sugar" and how I am wrong. "No" is how it was phrased, I think.
Why would you take such a strong stand on the digestion of said sugars, if the end result of that digestion is glucose, being used the same way by the body, no matter what? Ultimately, sugar=sugar when it is digested.0 -
It's not really a strong stand. It just is.
No, I don't consider digestion a thing on which I take a position, lol. Yes, the point of saying that different sugars are digested differently is because they are. There is no "If not."DeguelloTex wrote: »
These are the questions:
There was no question there. You wonder why I nitpick. I don't. I almost never say Boo about it. The OP brought up that someone said that all sugars are "processed" the same. Not me.DeguelloTex wrote: »
Let's say you brought it up only once. Same questions apply.
Good Lord in Heaven, I hardly bring it up every time sugar comes up, lol. I almost never bring it up and let those "All sugar is processed the same" comments go by with nary a peep a LOT. The OP brought it up.DeguelloTex wrote: »
Except they don't have different components and are essentially C(n)H(2n)O(n) molecules.kshama2001 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »
I suspect that we have studied different things. Why don't you educate me? Compare the digestion of milk, peaches and cake frosting in detail. Don't single out just sugars, but do make sure to explain how all the sugars are identical and broken down in the same way.
I didn't read it, but a lot of people think that all sugars are digested in exactly the same way. They say it all the time. They don't understand the digestive system at all. Of course different sugars are digested differently. Because they're different, lol.Yeah MFP has me at a lot higher sugar. Fruit has fiber (typically) and other vitamins and is processed by the body differently than say High Frutose Corn Syrup. The body metabolizes these different sugars differently. Of course anything in abundance is bad. Fiber delays the delivery of Frutose to the liver. This is why I stopped drinking juice. The juice alone doesn't have the fiber. I think processed foods with sugar like Cola are far worse for you, simply keep eating fruit - just in moderation.
According to this post, all sugars are processed the same
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10197460/sugar-faq-june-2015/p1
They have different components and will, of course, be broken down differently.
Digestion really doesn't make a ton of difference. The effect on your weight isn't about how it's digested. It's about how much sugar you take in. It's about the calories.
When you're losing weight, you want all the nutrition you can get for as few calories as you can. Keeps you healthy, let's you stay full. So, it makes some sense to take your sugar from fruit, which gives you nutrients you need.
If you don't want to eat any sugar, that's your choice and I won't argue it. Everyone has to do what works for them.
But you can eat your fruit if you want to. For an otherwise healthy person, fruit won't hurt.
yea, no.
sugar = sugar
sorry..
just because you want to believe that does not make it so.
I do love it when you educate us all.
Way to move the goal posts there.
Why do you do this?
No goal post moving. Perhaps you thought she meant sucrose, fructose and glucose here but she didn't specify that and could have just as easily meant the sugar in peaches vs the sugar in cake frosting.a lot of people think that all sugars are digested in exactly the same way. They say it all the time. They don't understand the digestive system at all. Of course different sugars are digested differently. Because they're different, lol.
They have different components and will, of course, be broken down differently.
The different types of sugar are converted to glucose by different enzymes, but they end up as glucose and then the body uses that glucose, regardless of source, exactly the same.
If her position is merely that different sugars are broken down by different enzymes before the resultant glucose is used by the body, I'm wondering why that's a sufficiently relevant nit to pick every time sugar comes up, given that they all end up as glucose before being used.
I don't know why people are always saying it, I have no idea. I don't generally care because it's really not important.
Is the whole of your position on the digestion of sugars to make the point that fructose, sucrose, lactose, etc are broken down by different enzymes by the digestion process during which all of them are converted to glucose, which glucose the body then uses exactly the same regardless of source? If not, what differences do you mean?
Then, njd disagreed. I am still waiting to hear how "sugar=sugar" and how I am wrong. "No" is how it was phrased, I think.
Why would you take such a strong stand on the digestion of said sugars, if the end result of that digestion is glucose, being used the same way by the body, no matter what? Ultimately, sugar=sugar when it is digested.
Njd thinks that it is not, this is something I have believed that is not true. I think he is likely very wrong, but there is some teeny, tiny, itty-bitty, minuscule chance that he knows more than I do. It is, as they say, "possible." So, I'm willing to listen. If he has studied and learned something I haven't, I will happily admit to having been wrong and will be glad to have learned something new.
0 -
Then you get that the sugars are converted to glucose before use by the body and that, after that conversion, the glucose is used by the body exactly the same regardless of the source? Right?
No, I don't consider digestion a thing on which I take a position, lol. Yes, the point of saying that different sugars are digested differently is because they are. There is no "If not."DeguelloTex wrote: »
These are the questions:
There was no question there. You wonder why I nitpick. I don't. I almost never say Boo about it. The OP brought up that someone said that all sugars are "processed" the same. Not me.DeguelloTex wrote: »
Let's say you brought it up only once. Same questions apply.
Good Lord in Heaven, I hardly bring it up every time sugar comes up, lol. I almost never bring it up and let those "All sugar is processed the same" comments go by with nary a peep a LOT. The OP brought it up.DeguelloTex wrote: »
Except they don't have different components and are essentially C(n)H(2n)O(n) molecules.kshama2001 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »
I suspect that we have studied different things. Why don't you educate me? Compare the digestion of milk, peaches and cake frosting in detail. Don't single out just sugars, but do make sure to explain how all the sugars are identical and broken down in the same way.
I didn't read it, but a lot of people think that all sugars are digested in exactly the same way. They say it all the time. They don't understand the digestive system at all. Of course different sugars are digested differently. Because they're different, lol.Yeah MFP has me at a lot higher sugar. Fruit has fiber (typically) and other vitamins and is processed by the body differently than say High Frutose Corn Syrup. The body metabolizes these different sugars differently. Of course anything in abundance is bad. Fiber delays the delivery of Frutose to the liver. This is why I stopped drinking juice. The juice alone doesn't have the fiber. I think processed foods with sugar like Cola are far worse for you, simply keep eating fruit - just in moderation.
According to this post, all sugars are processed the same
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10197460/sugar-faq-june-2015/p1
They have different components and will, of course, be broken down differently.
Digestion really doesn't make a ton of difference. The effect on your weight isn't about how it's digested. It's about how much sugar you take in. It's about the calories.
When you're losing weight, you want all the nutrition you can get for as few calories as you can. Keeps you healthy, let's you stay full. So, it makes some sense to take your sugar from fruit, which gives you nutrients you need.
If you don't want to eat any sugar, that's your choice and I won't argue it. Everyone has to do what works for them.
But you can eat your fruit if you want to. For an otherwise healthy person, fruit won't hurt.
yea, no.
sugar = sugar
sorry..
just because you want to believe that does not make it so.
I do love it when you educate us all.
Way to move the goal posts there.
Why do you do this?
No goal post moving. Perhaps you thought she meant sucrose, fructose and glucose here but she didn't specify that and could have just as easily meant the sugar in peaches vs the sugar in cake frosting.a lot of people think that all sugars are digested in exactly the same way. They say it all the time. They don't understand the digestive system at all. Of course different sugars are digested differently. Because they're different, lol.
They have different components and will, of course, be broken down differently.
The different types of sugar are converted to glucose by different enzymes, but they end up as glucose and then the body uses that glucose, regardless of source, exactly the same.
If her position is merely that different sugars are broken down by different enzymes before the resultant glucose is used by the body, I'm wondering why that's a sufficiently relevant nit to pick every time sugar comes up, given that they all end up as glucose before being used.
I don't know why people are always saying it, I have no idea. I don't generally care because it's really not important.
Is the whole of your position on the digestion of sugars to make the point that fructose, sucrose, lactose, etc are broken down by different enzymes by the digestion process during which all of them are converted to glucose, which glucose the body then uses exactly the same regardless of source? If not, what differences do you mean?
Then, njd disagreed. I am still waiting to hear how "sugar=sugar" and how I am wrong. "No" is how it was phrased, I think.
Sugar == sugar because they end up as glucose before being used by the body. If you want to press the point that different types of sugar are converted to glucose differently, even though the resultant glucose is exactly the same and used exactly the same, that's certainly one approach. I'm not sure how it's ultimately helpful, but I can say that about a lot of stuff that gets posted here.
0 -
That the OP doesn't have to worry about the fruit coming from sugar.DeguelloTex wrote: »
So is your position supposed to be based on the fact that different enzymes, etc. are involved in forming the glucose? If so, why does that matter since it's the glucose that the body uses? If not, what is your position, exactly?
I am not making an argument. There is no hidden point, no agenda. The OP says someone else said that all sugar is the same and processed identically. I can't say, "That's true" because I know better. I don't normally point it out or bring it up because there is no point and, like I said, it doesn't matter as far as weight loss goes.DeguelloTex wrote: »
So is your argument supposed to be based on the fact that different enzymes, etc. are involved in forming the glucose? If so, why does that matter since it's the glucose that the body uses? If not, what is your argument, exactly?
Some of the work of digestion is subcontracted to other parts of the body, but in the end, you have a bunch of glucose, yes.DeguelloTex wrote: »
Do you disagree with this: "All carbohydrates, whether sugars or starches, are digested in the intestine to form glucose, which is transported around the body via the blood and taken into cells to be converted into energy"?brianpperkins wrote: »
I suspect that we have studied different things. Why don't you educate me? Compare the digestion of milk, peaches and cake frosting in detail. Don't single out just sugars, but do make sure to explain how all the sugars are identical and broken down in the same way.
I didn't read it, but a lot of people think that all sugars are digested in exactly the same way. They say it all the time. They don't understand the digestive system at all. Of course different sugars are digested differently. Because they're different, lol.Yeah MFP has me at a lot higher sugar. Fruit has fiber (typically) and other vitamins and is processed by the body differently than say High Frutose Corn Syrup. The body metabolizes these different sugars differently. Of course anything in abundance is bad. Fiber delays the delivery of Frutose to the liver. This is why I stopped drinking juice. The juice alone doesn't have the fiber. I think processed foods with sugar like Cola are far worse for you, simply keep eating fruit - just in moderation.
According to this post, all sugars are processed the same
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10197460/sugar-faq-june-2015/p1
They have different components and will, of course, be broken down differently.
Digestion really doesn't make a ton of difference. The effect on your weight isn't about how it's digested. It's about how much sugar you take in. It's about the calories.
When you're losing weight, you want all the nutrition you can get for as few calories as you can. Keeps you healthy, let's you stay full. So, it makes some sense to take your sugar from fruit, which gives you nutrients you need.
If you don't want to eat any sugar, that's your choice and I won't argue it. Everyone has to do what works for them.
But you can eat your fruit if you want to. For an otherwise healthy person, fruit won't hurt.
yea, no.
sugar = sugar
sorry..
just because you want to believe that does not make it so.
I do love it when you educate us all.
So you start with a diatribe about the digestion of sugars in a vacuum, then when countered on your point change your position and now want a lesson on the digestion of complex foods. This encapsulates what makes having an informed, intelligent conversation with you an impossibility.
Glucose is processed the same by the body no matter where it comes from. Fructose is processed the same by the body no matter where it comes from. Sucrose is processed the same by the body no matter where it comes from. Dextrose is processed the same by the body no matter where it comes from. By now, you should notice a trend.
I suspect that he will now think that different sugars might be different.
It wasn't a diatribe. I just know that people are forever saying that all sugars are identical and processed in exactly the same way. I admit that it's said. I don't generally say, "Well, no, different sugars are actually different" because it doesn't matter. But on the flip side, I cannot agree that they're all identical when they aren't.
The OP doesn't have to worry about sugar coming from anywhere.0 -
0 -
flyingtanuki wrote: »DeguelloTex wrote: »
Then you get that the sugars are converted to glucose before use by the body and that, after that conversion, the glucose is used by the body exactly the same regardless of the source? Right?
No, I don't consider digestion a thing on which I take a position, lol. Yes, the point of saying that different sugars are digested differently is because they are. There is no "If not."DeguelloTex wrote: »
These are the questions:
There was no question there. You wonder why I nitpick. I don't. I almost never say Boo about it. The OP brought up that someone said that all sugars are "processed" the same. Not me.DeguelloTex wrote: »
Let's say you brought it up only once. Same questions apply.
Good Lord in Heaven, I hardly bring it up every time sugar comes up, lol. I almost never bring it up and let those "All sugar is processed the same" comments go by with nary a peep a LOT. The OP brought it up.DeguelloTex wrote: »
Except they don't have different components and are essentially C(n)H(2n)O(n) molecules.kshama2001 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »
I suspect that we have studied different things. Why don't you educate me? Compare the digestion of milk, peaches and cake frosting in detail. Don't single out just sugars, but do make sure to explain how all the sugars are identical and broken down in the same way.
I didn't read it, but a lot of people think that all sugars are digested in exactly the same way. They say it all the time. They don't understand the digestive system at all. Of course different sugars are digested differently. Because they're different, lol.Yeah MFP has me at a lot higher sugar. Fruit has fiber (typically) and other vitamins and is processed by the body differently than say High Frutose Corn Syrup. The body metabolizes these different sugars differently. Of course anything in abundance is bad. Fiber delays the delivery of Frutose to the liver. This is why I stopped drinking juice. The juice alone doesn't have the fiber. I think processed foods with sugar like Cola are far worse for you, simply keep eating fruit - just in moderation.
According to this post, all sugars are processed the same
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10197460/sugar-faq-june-2015/p1
They have different components and will, of course, be broken down differently.
Digestion really doesn't make a ton of difference. The effect on your weight isn't about how it's digested. It's about how much sugar you take in. It's about the calories.
When you're losing weight, you want all the nutrition you can get for as few calories as you can. Keeps you healthy, let's you stay full. So, it makes some sense to take your sugar from fruit, which gives you nutrients you need.
If you don't want to eat any sugar, that's your choice and I won't argue it. Everyone has to do what works for them.
But you can eat your fruit if you want to. For an otherwise healthy person, fruit won't hurt.
yea, no.
sugar = sugar
sorry..
just because you want to believe that does not make it so.
I do love it when you educate us all.
Way to move the goal posts there.
Why do you do this?
No goal post moving. Perhaps you thought she meant sucrose, fructose and glucose here but she didn't specify that and could have just as easily meant the sugar in peaches vs the sugar in cake frosting.a lot of people think that all sugars are digested in exactly the same way. They say it all the time. They don't understand the digestive system at all. Of course different sugars are digested differently. Because they're different, lol.
They have different components and will, of course, be broken down differently.
The different types of sugar are converted to glucose by different enzymes, but they end up as glucose and then the body uses that glucose, regardless of source, exactly the same.
If her position is merely that different sugars are broken down by different enzymes before the resultant glucose is used by the body, I'm wondering why that's a sufficiently relevant nit to pick every time sugar comes up, given that they all end up as glucose before being used.
I don't know why people are always saying it, I have no idea. I don't generally care because it's really not important.
Is the whole of your position on the digestion of sugars to make the point that fructose, sucrose, lactose, etc are broken down by different enzymes by the digestion process during which all of them are converted to glucose, which glucose the body then uses exactly the same regardless of source? If not, what differences do you mean?
Then, njd disagreed. I am still waiting to hear how "sugar=sugar" and how I am wrong. "No" is how it was phrased, I think.
Sugar == sugar because they end up as glucose before being used by the body. If you want to press the point that different types of sugar are converted to glucose differently, even though the resultant glucose is exactly the same and used exactly the same, that's certainly one approach. I'm not sure how it's ultimately helpful, but I can say that about a lot of stuff that gets posted here.
QFT. Also, per Guyton and Hall, Textbook of Medical Physiology, 11th ed. pg. 830-831:[A]ppropriate enzymes are available to promote interconversions among the monosaccharides - glucose, fructose, and galactose - as shown in Figure 67-3. Further more, the dynamics of the reactions are such that when the liver releases the monosaccharides back into the blood, the final product is almost entirely glucose.
Thanks for that. But I'm not suggesting that anyone needs to learn it. I'm not even suggesting that anyone has to stop saying, "All sugar is processed the same way."
I just asked njd to clarify since he thinks it's just something I "want to believe."
It really isn't as important as people seem to make it out to be,0 -
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »Where'd that 21 g come from? MFP gives me 77. If it came from your doctor, discuss with him/her.
You're right the limit is not 21, it's 45... but I pass it everyday...
Not sure why your limit is so much smaller than mine, but letting it go.
It's 15% of calories.
It's 45 grams for people on 1200.
As for why a young guy like OP seems to be is on 1200, beats me.
What does age have to do with it? I'm not quite 21 and I'm on 1200... it's about losing weight... since my start was only 20 lbs from my goal I need a larger deficit.
No...the closer to goal you are, the smaller your deficit should be, and the more accurate your logging should be. It makes it easier to transition to maintenance.
As for age - the younger you are, the more calories you burn, generally speaking. Our metabolisms slow as we age.
The closer you get to your goal the harder it is to lose weight... so it would make sense to me to need a bigger calorie deficit.
Yeah, no. This isn't really relevant to OP's thread, so I'm not going to argue with you. If you're confused about deficits then you would do well to start your own thread.Yes, your metabolism slows as you age, however after you've gone through puberty there's not much difference between people's metobolic rates, only about 1000 kcal/day, which includes both men and women meaning that within gender there's probably only about a 600 kcal/day difference which is more dependent on lean body mass than age
Not really sure what you're saying here, but 600 kcal per day can make a huge difference when it comes weight loss/gain, especially if you don't have a lot to lose in the first place. This is why accuracy is so important.
I think you missed the point. 600 kcal is a somewhat significant amount, yes, but it has VERY little to do with age. Someone with the same lbm and activity level at 21 as they have at 50 (which is unusual because of other factors like time restraints, job style, family, illness, etc.) will MAYBE have a 100 kcal difference at the most.
Metabolism is more about lbm, activity, and individual biological pre-sets.
This is really a derailing, but in response to your original question I mentioned that he seemed young because I can imagine more likely reasons why an elderly man might need lower calories.
And no, you don't need a higher deficit when closer to goal. One reason losing is harder when you are close to goal is that you can't so easily (and sometimes simply can't at all) achieve such a high deficit as when you have more to lose.0 -
He specifically asked about fruit.lemonsnowdrop wrote: »
That the OP doesn't have to worry about the fruit coming from sugar.DeguelloTex wrote: »
So is your position supposed to be based on the fact that different enzymes, etc. are involved in forming the glucose? If so, why does that matter since it's the glucose that the body uses? If not, what is your position, exactly?
I am not making an argument. There is no hidden point, no agenda. The OP says someone else said that all sugar is the same and processed identically. I can't say, "That's true" because I know better. I don't normally point it out or bring it up because there is no point and, like I said, it doesn't matter as far as weight loss goes.DeguelloTex wrote: »
So is your argument supposed to be based on the fact that different enzymes, etc. are involved in forming the glucose? If so, why does that matter since it's the glucose that the body uses? If not, what is your argument, exactly?
Some of the work of digestion is subcontracted to other parts of the body, but in the end, you have a bunch of glucose, yes.DeguelloTex wrote: »
Do you disagree with this: "All carbohydrates, whether sugars or starches, are digested in the intestine to form glucose, which is transported around the body via the blood and taken into cells to be converted into energy"?brianpperkins wrote: »
I suspect that we have studied different things. Why don't you educate me? Compare the digestion of milk, peaches and cake frosting in detail. Don't single out just sugars, but do make sure to explain how all the sugars are identical and broken down in the same way.
I didn't read it, but a lot of people think that all sugars are digested in exactly the same way. They say it all the time. They don't understand the digestive system at all. Of course different sugars are digested differently. Because they're different, lol.Yeah MFP has me at a lot higher sugar. Fruit has fiber (typically) and other vitamins and is processed by the body differently than say High Frutose Corn Syrup. The body metabolizes these different sugars differently. Of course anything in abundance is bad. Fiber delays the delivery of Frutose to the liver. This is why I stopped drinking juice. The juice alone doesn't have the fiber. I think processed foods with sugar like Cola are far worse for you, simply keep eating fruit - just in moderation.
According to this post, all sugars are processed the same
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10197460/sugar-faq-june-2015/p1
They have different components and will, of course, be broken down differently.
Digestion really doesn't make a ton of difference. The effect on your weight isn't about how it's digested. It's about how much sugar you take in. It's about the calories.
When you're losing weight, you want all the nutrition you can get for as few calories as you can. Keeps you healthy, let's you stay full. So, it makes some sense to take your sugar from fruit, which gives you nutrients you need.
If you don't want to eat any sugar, that's your choice and I won't argue it. Everyone has to do what works for them.
But you can eat your fruit if you want to. For an otherwise healthy person, fruit won't hurt.
yea, no.
sugar = sugar
sorry..
just because you want to believe that does not make it so.
I do love it when you educate us all.
So you start with a diatribe about the digestion of sugars in a vacuum, then when countered on your point change your position and now want a lesson on the digestion of complex foods. This encapsulates what makes having an informed, intelligent conversation with you an impossibility.
Glucose is processed the same by the body no matter where it comes from. Fructose is processed the same by the body no matter where it comes from. Sucrose is processed the same by the body no matter where it comes from. Dextrose is processed the same by the body no matter where it comes from. By now, you should notice a trend.
I suspect that he will now think that different sugars might be different.
It wasn't a diatribe. I just know that people are forever saying that all sugars are identical and processed in exactly the same way. I admit that it's said. I don't generally say, "Well, no, different sugars are actually different" because it doesn't matter. But on the flip side, I cannot agree that they're all identical when they aren't.
The OP doesn't have to worry about sugar coming from anywhere.
0 -
Glucose is a sugar, so it's kind of like saying "sugars are converted to sugar." Carbs are broken down and in the end, you end up up with a bunch of glucose. I already agreed with that.DeguelloTex wrote: »
Then you get that the sugars are converted to glucose before use by the body and that, after that conversion, the glucose is used by the body exactly the same regardless of the source? Right?
No, I don't consider digestion a thing on which I take a position, lol. Yes, the point of saying that different sugars are digested differently is because they are. There is no "If not."DeguelloTex wrote: »
These are the questions:
There was no question there. You wonder why I nitpick. I don't. I almost never say Boo about it. The OP brought up that someone said that all sugars are "processed" the same. Not me.DeguelloTex wrote: »
Let's say you brought it up only once. Same questions apply.
Good Lord in Heaven, I hardly bring it up every time sugar comes up, lol. I almost never bring it up and let those "All sugar is processed the same" comments go by with nary a peep a LOT. The OP brought it up.DeguelloTex wrote: »
Except they don't have different components and are essentially C(n)H(2n)O(n) molecules.kshama2001 wrote: »Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »
I suspect that we have studied different things. Why don't you educate me? Compare the digestion of milk, peaches and cake frosting in detail. Don't single out just sugars, but do make sure to explain how all the sugars are identical and broken down in the same way.
I didn't read it, but a lot of people think that all sugars are digested in exactly the same way. They say it all the time. They don't understand the digestive system at all. Of course different sugars are digested differently. Because they're different, lol.Yeah MFP has me at a lot higher sugar. Fruit has fiber (typically) and other vitamins and is processed by the body differently than say High Frutose Corn Syrup. The body metabolizes these different sugars differently. Of course anything in abundance is bad. Fiber delays the delivery of Frutose to the liver. This is why I stopped drinking juice. The juice alone doesn't have the fiber. I think processed foods with sugar like Cola are far worse for you, simply keep eating fruit - just in moderation.
According to this post, all sugars are processed the same
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10197460/sugar-faq-june-2015/p1
They have different components and will, of course, be broken down differently.
Digestion really doesn't make a ton of difference. The effect on your weight isn't about how it's digested. It's about how much sugar you take in. It's about the calories.
When you're losing weight, you want all the nutrition you can get for as few calories as you can. Keeps you healthy, let's you stay full. So, it makes some sense to take your sugar from fruit, which gives you nutrients you need.
If you don't want to eat any sugar, that's your choice and I won't argue it. Everyone has to do what works for them.
But you can eat your fruit if you want to. For an otherwise healthy person, fruit won't hurt.
yea, no.
sugar = sugar
sorry..
just because you want to believe that does not make it so.
I do love it when you educate us all.
Way to move the goal posts there.
Why do you do this?
No goal post moving. Perhaps you thought she meant sucrose, fructose and glucose here but she didn't specify that and could have just as easily meant the sugar in peaches vs the sugar in cake frosting.a lot of people think that all sugars are digested in exactly the same way. They say it all the time. They don't understand the digestive system at all. Of course different sugars are digested differently. Because they're different, lol.
They have different components and will, of course, be broken down differently.
The different types of sugar are converted to glucose by different enzymes, but they end up as glucose and then the body uses that glucose, regardless of source, exactly the same.
If her position is merely that different sugars are broken down by different enzymes before the resultant glucose is used by the body, I'm wondering why that's a sufficiently relevant nit to pick every time sugar comes up, given that they all end up as glucose before being used.
I don't know why people are always saying it, I have no idea. I don't generally care because it's really not important.
Is the whole of your position on the digestion of sugars to make the point that fructose, sucrose, lactose, etc are broken down by different enzymes by the digestion process during which all of them are converted to glucose, which glucose the body then uses exactly the same regardless of source? If not, what differences do you mean?
Then, njd disagreed. I am still waiting to hear how "sugar=sugar" and how I am wrong. "No" is how it was phrased, I think.
Sugar == sugar because they end up as glucose before being used by the body. If you want to press the point that different types of sugar are converted to glucose differently, even though the resultant glucose is exactly the same and used exactly the same, that's certainly one approach. I'm not sure how it's ultimately helpful, but I can say that about a lot of stuff that gets posted here.
I agree that it's not very important and said so immediately. It's every bit as helpful as saying, "All sugars are processed the same" when they aren't, though.
This does not mean I'm going to be running around telling people not to say it. I generally don't and won't.
But if njd or anyone else would like to describe how all sugars are processed the same, I'm all ears.0 -
I didn't read it, but a lot of people think that all sugars are digested in exactly the same way. They say it all the time. They don't understand the digestive system at all. Of course different sugars are digested differently. Because they're different, lol.Yeah MFP has me at a lot higher sugar. Fruit has fiber (typically) and other vitamins and is processed by the body differently than say High Frutose Corn Syrup. The body metabolizes these different sugars differently. Of course anything in abundance is bad. Fiber delays the delivery of Frutose to the liver. This is why I stopped drinking juice. The juice alone doesn't have the fiber. I think processed foods with sugar like Cola are far worse for you, simply keep eating fruit - just in moderation.
According to this post, all sugars are processed the same
https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10197460/sugar-faq-june-2015/p1
They have different components and will, of course, be broken down differently.
Digestion really doesn't make a ton of difference. The effect on your weight isn't about how it's digested. It's about how much sugar you take in. It's about the calories.
When you're losing weight, you want all the nutrition you can get for as few calories as you can. Keeps you healthy, let's you stay full. So, it makes some sense to take your sugar from fruit, which gives you nutrients you need.
If you don't want to eat any sugar, that's your choice and I won't argue it. Everyone has to do what works for them.
But you can eat your fruit if you want to. For an otherwise healthy person, fruit won't hurt.
yea, no.
sugar = sugar
sorry..
just because you want to believe that does not make it so.
This.
0 -
I have a 45g/day limit on sugar. I eat most of my sugar from fruits and/or non fat greek yogurt.
Almost everyday I pass the sugar limit, eating 3 fruits a day and one yogurt.
Is that really bad? Aren't sugars from fruits a good thing?
OP - unless you have a medical condition there is no reason to avoid sugar.
Just make sure that you maintain your deficit, hit macros, and micros, and you will be fine.
And this.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.8K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 396 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 967 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions