So I've got 413 cals left...
SenoraMacias
Posts: 305 Member
But only 2g of sugar left. What can I eat to get closer to my calorie goal without going over my sugar limit?
0
Replies
-
Half a ribeye?0
-
I should clarify I've already logged all my meals. So this would need to be a snack/dessert/addition to dinner. My diary is public btw if that helps.0
-
Why do you have a sugar limit?0
-
Why do you have a sugar limit?
Ummmmm it's one of the nutrients I track on my food diary. I don't think unlimited sugar is good (?)0 -
A tablespoon or two of a natural nutbutter - like cashew - usually only has 1-2g sugar and 90-180 calories. You could have some fruit with it for dipping - yes, that would put your sugars over, but at least naturally occurring ones are better than the added ones!0
-
I would say have another one of those cheese sticks but it will up your protein. I just added sugars to my list today and Iam way over LOL0
-
Why do you have a sugar limit?
Ummmmm it's one of the nutrients I track on my food diary. I don't think unlimited sugar is good (?)
Carbs=sugar. Doesn't matter the source, they will all be stored/burned as glycogen in our system.
Unless you are diabetic or suffer from another metabolic disorder, there is no need to limit sugars. Especially ones from fruit, dairy, etc.0 -
I'm not suggesting popping open a bag of sugar and eating it (because you would be missing out on a lot of vitamins and nutrients doing that, and it's just plain common sense), BUT, if you stayed in a caloric deficit, not limiting sugars will not hinder your weight loss.0
-
Why do you have a sugar limit?
Ummmmm it's one of the nutrients I track on my food diary. I don't think unlimited sugar is good (?)
Carbs=sugar. Doesn't matter the source, they will all be stored/burned as glycogen in our system.
If they are the same then why are they two separate categories on here? Not trying to be argumentative, just genuinely confused. I get that chemically carbs and sugars are different, but if they are stored the same in the body, why differentiate the two in terms of food/weight loss?
Unless you are diabetic or suffer from another metabolic disorder, there is no need to limit sugars. Especially ones from fruit, dairy, etc.
If they are the same then why are they two separate categories on here? Not trying to be argumentative, just genuinely confused. I get that chemically carbs and sugars are different, but if they are stored the same in the body, why differentiate the two in terms of food/weight loss?0 -
Why do you have a sugar limit?
Ummmmm it's one of the nutrients I track on my food diary. I don't think unlimited sugar is good (?)
Carbs=sugar. Doesn't matter the source, they will all be stored/burned as glycogen in our system.
If they are the same then why are they two separate categories on here? Not trying to be argumentative, just genuinely confused. I get that chemically carbs and sugars are different, but if they are stored the same in the body, why differentiate the two in terms of food/weight loss?
Unless you are diabetic or suffer from another metabolic disorder, there is no need to limit sugars. Especially ones from fruit, dairy, etc.
If they are the same then why are they two separate categories on here? Not trying to be argumentative, just genuinely confused. I get that chemically carbs and sugars are different, but if they are stored the same in the body, why differentiate the two in terms of food/weight loss?
Because the person who created this website doesn't have the mental knowledge to know the difference. Why you want to eat those 413 calories, trying to train yourself to over eat to gain weight?0 -
Why do you have a sugar limit?
Ummmmm it's one of the nutrients I track on my food diary. I don't think unlimited sugar is good (?)
Carbs=sugar. Doesn't matter the source, they will all be stored/burned as glycogen in our system.
If they are the same then why are they two separate categories on here? Not trying to be argumentative, just genuinely confused. I get that chemically carbs and sugars are different, but if they are stored the same in the body, why differentiate the two in terms of food/weight loss?
Unless you are diabetic or suffer from another metabolic disorder, there is no need to limit sugars. Especially ones from fruit, dairy, etc.
If they are the same then why are they two separate categories on here? Not trying to be argumentative, just genuinely confused. I get that chemically carbs and sugars are different, but if they are stored the same in the body, why differentiate the two in terms of food/weight loss?
Because the person who created this website doesn't have the mental knowledge to know the difference. Why you want to eat those 413 calories, trying to train yourself to over eat to gain weight?
0 -
"mental knowledge" is the best kind of knowledge.0
-
The only things that I can think of that have this few sugars would be proteins or fats. You could add nuts or have a larger protein with your dinner.
I sometimes have a problem keeping my sugars on check as well but I don't really focus on those numbers in black and white. I more focus on not having added sugars in my food. Dairy and fruits are ok sugar sources on my book BUT I do limit them somewhat because I feel fuller when I have a higher ratio of fats and proteins. I will nibble and snack forever and never feel full if I don't limit my carbs and sugars somewhat.0 -
:laugh:
I second half a ribeye.
Or maybe cheese?
Or 1/4 of a ribeye smothered in cheese. Yum.0 -
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/post/new/264404-so-i-ve-got-413-cals-left?quote=3494772Why do you have a sugar limit?
Ummmmm it's one of the nutrients I track on my food diary. I don't think unlimited sugar is good (?)
Carbs=sugar. Doesn't matter the source, they will all be stored/burned as glycogen in our system.
If they are the same then why are they two separate categories on here? Not trying to be argumentative, just genuinely confused. I get that chemically carbs and sugars are different, but if they are stored the same in the body, why differentiate the two in terms of food/weight loss?
Unless you are diabetic or suffer from another metabolic disorder, there is no need to limit sugars. Especially ones from fruit, dairy, etc.
If they are the same then why are they two separate categories on here? Not trying to be argumentative, just genuinely confused. I get that chemically carbs and sugars are different, but if they are stored the same in the body, why differentiate the two in terms of food/weight loss?
Because the person who created this website doesn't have the mental knowledge to know the difference. Why you want to eat those 413 calories, trying to train yourself to over eat to gain weight?
I know.0 -
i have heard that eating sugars are ok but to stay away from refined sugars...so i now pay attention to the label and try to get things that dont have sucrose in it..there are many articles on this on the web..they say it makes you crave more,,and i believe it
http://www.ehow.com/how_2079526_avoid-refined-sugars.html0 -
If they are the same then why are they two separate categories on here? Not trying to be argumentative, just genuinely confused. I get that chemically carbs and sugars are different, but if they are stored the same in the body, why differentiate the two in terms of food/weight loss?
I'm sorry I'm just responding. Long day...
I don't use the site to track sugar intake so I'm not sure what two categories it puts sugar in, but I can tell you that sugar is sugar in regards to weight loss.0 -
Why do you have a sugar limit?
Ummmmm it's one of the nutrients I track on my food diary. I don't think unlimited sugar is good (?)
Carbs=sugar. Doesn't matter the source, they will all be stored/burned as glycogen in our system.
If they are the same then why are they two separate categories on here? Not trying to be argumentative, just genuinely confused. I get that chemically carbs and sugars are different, but if they are stored the same in the body, why differentiate the two in terms of food/weight loss?
Unless you are diabetic or suffer from another metabolic disorder, there is no need to limit sugars. Especially ones from fruit, dairy, etc.
If they are the same then why are they two separate categories on here? Not trying to be argumentative, just genuinely confused. I get that chemically carbs and sugars are different, but if they are stored the same in the body, why differentiate the two in terms of food/weight loss?
Because the person who created this website doesn't have the mental knowledge to know the difference. Why you want to eat those 413 calories, trying to train yourself to over eat to gain weight?
Oh good grief. Seriously? Maybe she needs to eat them because she's found that eating all her calories helps her lose weight. Just because someone eats all their calories - doesn't mean they are going to "train themselves to over eat to gain weight". I eat my calories everyday. I even *gasp* eat my exercise calories back.
I've lost almost 60lbs. Pretty sure I'm not "training myself to over eat and gain weight" when clearly my body NEEDS those calories. Give me a break.0 -
Protein is a great choice. Lean meats, almonds, etc.0
-
Carbs eventually turn into blood sugar. The difference is pure sugar turns into blood sugar very quickly, while other types of carbs may take much longer, which lets you avoid blood sugar spike... which in turn means less insulin (insulin likes giving you more body fat, as far as I understand it).If they are the same then why are they two separate categories on here? Not trying to be argumentative, just genuinely confused. I get that chemically carbs and sugars are different, but if they are stored the same in the body, why differentiate the two in terms of food/weight loss?0 -
Carbs eventually turn into blood sugar. The difference is pure sugar turns into blood sugar very quickly, while other types of carbs may take much longer, which lets you avoid blood sugar spike... which in turn means less insulin (insulin likes giving you more body fat, as far as I understand it).
Not exactly. Insulin does not give you more body fat. Eating in a caloric surplus gives you stored body fat. In a calorie deficit, the fat that is stored while in the fed state will be oxidized as well. In a deficit you are taking in less energy (food) than you are burning, resulting in stored adipose tissue (body fat) being oxidized.0 -
All I know is that insulin plays a big role in storing fat (and that calorie surplus gives you more body fat, but that's a given). I'm no expert on the subject, obviously, and would like to learn more about insulin/ blood sugar spikes as diabetes runs in my family, but too lazy to figure out a good place to start. :ECarbs eventually turn into blood sugar. The difference is pure sugar turns into blood sugar very quickly, while other types of carbs may take much longer, which lets you avoid blood sugar spike... which in turn means less insulin (insulin likes giving you more body fat, as far as I understand it).
Not exactly. Insulin does not give you more body fat. Eating in a caloric surplus gives you stored body fat. In a calorie deficit, the fat that is stored while in the fed state will be oxidized as well. In a deficit you are taking in less energy (food) than you are burning, resulting in stored adipose tissue (body fat) being oxidized.0 -
Taken from Martin Berkhan's site, leangains.com
"After you eat, insulin and fatty acids are elevated. You are in the fed state and there's zero fat burning going on. Your body is relying completely on glucose oxidation during the hours following the meal."
This doesn't mean that you'll be burning more body fat if you follow a low-carb high fat diet, or that you'll never burn fat on high-carb diets. In energy balance, 24-hour RQ is reflective of the macrocomposition of the diet rather than fat gain or fat loss per se. Dietary fat has insulin-independent storage mechanisms (ASP) and "fat balance" (net storage of dietary fat) is primarily dictated by total calorie intake at the end of the day. The time course and trend in substrate metabolism will be different dependent of the carb:fat-ratio, but not the net effect."0 -
Why do you have a sugar limit?
Ummmmm it's one of the nutrients I track on my food diary. I don't think unlimited sugar is good (?)
Carbs=sugar. Doesn't matter the source, they will all be stored/burned as glycogen in our system.
If they are the same then why are they two separate categories on here? Not trying to be argumentative, just genuinely confused. I get that chemically carbs and sugars are different, but if they are stored the same in the body, why differentiate the two in terms of food/weight loss?
Unless you are diabetic or suffer from another metabolic disorder, there is no need to limit sugars. Especially ones from fruit, dairy, etc.
If they are the same then why are they two separate categories on here? Not trying to be argumentative, just genuinely confused. I get that chemically carbs and sugars are different, but if they are stored the same in the body, why differentiate the two in terms of food/weight loss?
Because the person who created this website doesn't have the mental knowledge to know the difference. Why you want to eat those 413 calories, trying to train yourself to over eat to gain weight?
Oh good grief. Seriously? Maybe she needs to eat them because she's found that eating all her calories helps her lose weight. Just because someone eats all their calories - doesn't mean they are going to "train themselves to over eat to gain weight". I eat my calories everyday. I even *gasp* eat my exercise calories back.
I've lost almost 60lbs. Pretty sure I'm not "training myself to over eat and gain weight" when clearly my body NEEDS those calories. Give me a break.
When you get older and your metabolism slows down, you will regret eating more than you need. The website does have a built in caloric deficit, you will lose weight eating as the website suggest. You will lose more by not eating back your exercise calories. It's common sense the greater the caloric deficit the greater the weight loss.0 -
The website has a built in calorie deficit with diet. If you don't eat the exercise cals back then yes it would give you a greaterdeficit. But if you are losing weight on the smaller deficit then why bother trying to increase it?
You may lose weight quicker if you have a lot to loose, but I believe as you approach goal it can be easy to go under the recommended minimum cals, which is not going to be good for your health in the long run.0 -
Why do you have a sugar limit?
Ummmmm it's one of the nutrients I track on my food diary. I don't think unlimited sugar is good (?)
Carbs=sugar. Doesn't matter the source, they will all be stored/burned as glycogen in our system.
If they are the same then why are they two separate categories on here? Not trying to be argumentative, just genuinely confused. I get that chemically carbs and sugars are different, but if they are stored the same in the body, why differentiate the two in terms of food/weight loss?
Unless you are diabetic or suffer from another metabolic disorder, there is no need to limit sugars. Especially ones from fruit, dairy, etc.
If they are the same then why are they two separate categories on here? Not trying to be argumentative, just genuinely confused. I get that chemically carbs and sugars are different, but if they are stored the same in the body, why differentiate the two in terms of food/weight loss?
Because the person who created this website doesn't have the mental knowledge to know the difference. Why you want to eat those 413 calories, trying to train yourself to over eat to gain weight?
Wow, how rude. Pretty much all information on this site points to eating back a portion of your burned calories. Not really your concern why I want to eat them back. I simply asked for some low sugar options.0 -
Why do you have a sugar limit?
Ummmmm it's one of the nutrients I track on my food diary. I don't think unlimited sugar is good (?)
Carbs=sugar. Doesn't matter the source, they will all be stored/burned as glycogen in our system.
If they are the same then why are they two separate categories on here? Not trying to be argumentative, just genuinely confused. I get that chemically carbs and sugars are different, but if they are stored the same in the body, why differentiate the two in terms of food/weight loss?
Unless you are diabetic or suffer from another metabolic disorder, there is no need to limit sugars. Especially ones from fruit, dairy, etc.
If they are the same then why are they two separate categories on here? Not trying to be argumentative, just genuinely confused. I get that chemically carbs and sugars are different, but if they are stored the same in the body, why differentiate the two in terms of food/weight loss?
Because the person who created this website doesn't have the mental knowledge to know the difference. Why you want to eat those 413 calories, trying to train yourself to over eat to gain weight?
Oh good grief. Seriously? Maybe she needs to eat them because she's found that eating all her calories helps her lose weight. Just because someone eats all their calories - doesn't mean they are going to "train themselves to over eat to gain weight". I eat my calories everyday. I even *gasp* eat my exercise calories back.
I've lost almost 60lbs. Pretty sure I'm not "training myself to over eat and gain weight" when clearly my body NEEDS those calories. Give me a break.
When you get older and your metabolism slows down, you will regret eating more than you need. The website does have a built in caloric deficit, you will lose weight eating as the website suggest. You will lose more by not eating back your exercise calories. It's common sense the greater the caloric deficit the greater the weight loss.
I consistently get the message that I'm not eating enough calories. Why do people assume they know everything about someone rather than simply answering the question that is asked?? No one knows the motives/reasoning behind other people's behaviors and decisions. Thanks to those who actually answered my question.0 -
I know what you're saying and I know to take in to consideration the person situation, no one really knows their situation. By this message you say "i constantly get the message that I'm not eating enough calories." The presupposition is you're trying to meet "your caloric needs." It's obvious that your caloric deficit will be smaller by eating more. But to answer your question directly. One tsp of powder sugar = 2.5grams of carbs, so mix what you need with water, to get your sugar in :-DI consistently get the message that I'm not eating enough calories. Why do people assume they know everything about someone rather than simply answering the question that is asked?? No one knows the motives/reasoning behind other people's behaviors and decisions. Thanks to those who actually answered my question.
Roasted chicken breast is about 114 calories for 58grams, this will satisfy your protein, if you want you can even put the sugar on the chicken.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 395K Introduce Yourself
- 44K Getting Started
- 260.6K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.2K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.7K Fitness and Exercise
- 445 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.2K Motivation and Support
- 8.2K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 4.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 16 News and Announcements
- 1.3K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.9K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions