Sugar
avonlady51
Posts: 6 Member
No matter what I eat, at the end of the day, I am usually over in the sugar category. I don't eat sweets, but it seems like my amount of sugar I need for the day is low....45. Like this morning, I had a fiber one bar and a banana. That is already 10 sugars. Does it hurt to go over in the sugar much and be ok in the rest. My calories are always under the amount I need.
0
Replies
-
As long as you're under your calorie goal, you should be ok. I don't even track my sugar intake and I still have lost weight.0
-
As long as you don't have a medical reason to watch sugar intake you're fine.0
-
If you don't have a specific medical reason to stay away from sugar, you really don't need to worry about it. I pretty much never look at my sugar intake and I'm losing weight steadily as expected
0 -
Like @strong_curves , I don't track my sugar intake. I do keep an eye on overall carbohydrates (sugar is a carb) and the other macros, but as long as you are under your calorie goal, you will lose weight.
0 -
It doesn't matter if you go over in your sugars, unless you have a health issue that requires it to be low.
45 grams is not a lot. Most kids juice boxes have about 20 grams of sugar in them....just to give you an idea. Fruit has a lot of sugar in it too, and it's actually good for you.0 -
Unless it's for a medical reason don't worry about it, it won't affect your weight loss so long as your calories are where you want them.0
-
Thanks, it is just listed on my food page and so of course I see sugar total in red. Can I take the sugar off that page.0
-
I figured out how to take sugar off of my page. I just went to settings and changed it to something else. Thanks everyone for the information!0
-
avonlady51 wrote: »No matter what I eat, at the end of the day, I am usually over in the sugar category. I don't eat sweets, but it seems like my amount of sugar I need for the day is low....45. Like this morning, I had a fiber one bar and a banana. That is already 10 sugars. Does it hurt to go over in the sugar much and be ok in the rest. My calories are always under the amount I need.
swap it out for fibre tracking0 -
avonlady51 wrote: »I figured out how to take sugar off of my page. I just went to settings and changed it to something else. Thanks everyone for the information!
I see you did
good-oh 0 -
Too funny! You don't NEED sugar!! Cut it out! Keep carbs under 100/day.
0 -
While sugar might not affect weight loss at a caloric deficit, it will inhibit fat loss. Insulin spikes keep you from achieving fat loss. I don't state this as universal since some are more carbohydrate/sugar tolerant than others. However, personally I have found with my weight fluctuations to be quite sensitive. Once cutting it out and dropping total net carbohydrates to below 30 grams. The experience was a total body recomposition. Check out documentaries such as Fed Up and That Sugar Film. Just my two cents though, I'm not a doctor.0
-
While sugar might not affect weight loss at a caloric deficit, it will inhibit fat loss. Insulin spikes keep you from achieving fat loss. I don't state this as universal since some are more carbohydrate/sugar tolerant than others. However, personally I have found with my weight fluctuations to be quite sensitive. Once cutting it out and dropping total net carbohydrates to below 30 grams. The experience was a total body recomposition. Check out documentaries such as Fed Up and That Sugar Film. Just my two cents though, I'm not a doctor.
Nope on all accounts.0 -
stevencloser wrote: »While sugar might not affect weight loss at a caloric deficit, it will inhibit fat loss. Insulin spikes keep you from achieving fat loss. I don't state this as universal since some are more carbohydrate/sugar tolerant than others. However, personally I have found with my weight fluctuations to be quite sensitive. Once cutting it out and dropping total net carbohydrates to below 30 grams. The experience was a total body recomposition. Check out documentaries such as Fed Up and That Sugar Film. Just my two cents though, I'm not a doctor.
Nope on all accounts.
Nope as in what I stated? Or as in sugar consumption?
0 -
It doesn't inhibit fat loss. And no one should check out those documentaries.0
-
As I stated personally, I was 316 lbs and dropped down to 175lbs consuming it. As I fluctuated I have gone down to 173 lbs on a ketogenic diet. My health and blood markers are better than ever. If you research the science between insulin and fat metabolism, maybe you'd learn otherwise. Obviously, you have to replace the sugar with fat. Your body transitions from utilizing glucose for energy, to fat for energy. Read The Art and Science of Low Carbohydrate Living. Or, you can just keep eating sugar. Like I said, it's just my personal experience. I'm not a doctor. I just like to research everything very extensively. And no one thing is universal, I know many people who can achieve great results consuming carbs/sugar.
0 -
https://bretcontreras.com/sugar-the-sweet-truth/ (thanks wetcoaster! man people are posting lots of good links today)
Relying on documentaries by people trying to sell you their weight loss books is not going to do you any good.
Going keto does absolutely nada to your body composition compared to not doing it.
Insulin is required by your body for storing carbs and protein. Fat though doesn't need it, because it's already fat. Your body can store it just fine without insulin.
Same the other way around. Whether you eat carbs or not, if you're in a deficit your body has no other choice than to use fat for fuel to keep you alive.
Another one for good measure.
http://itarget.com.br/newclients/sbgg.com.br/informativos/14-09-15/1.pdf0 -
As I stated personally, I was 316 lbs and dropped down to 175lbs consuming it. As I fluctuated I have gone down to 173 lbs on a ketogenic diet.
How does this support what you claimed--that sugar (and all carbs) inhibit fat loss?
It's not physically possible; how would that work? The claim is that your body is somehow able to run on no fuel if you eat sugar, even while eating fewer calories than you burn. Your body makes up the deficit with what in this scenario? It makes no sense.
IMO, it's likely a misunderstanding of the fact that your body is always burning and adding fat and that it may store fat without adding net fat. It also ignores that fact that fat you eat will of course be stored as fat (if not burned) and that carbs get stored as fat only if your glycogen stores are full (which is unlikely if you are eating at a deficit). These types of claims also seem to assume that only people in ketosis burn fat for energy, and that is not true, we burn a combination depending on what we are doing (for high intensity energy you will use glycogen, as it is much more efficient a source). But as with the arguments about fasted workouts or staying in the "fat burning zone" (sigh) none of it matters, what matters is whether you are net adding or net burning fat, and that depending on total energy used vs. supplied. Or, in other words, CICO.0 -
Persistently high insulin inhibits fat loss, but that goes away in the absence of food especially carbs.0
-
In its totality, what I meant was that eating sugar and carbs left me at 175 with a skinny fat frame. Same exercise as eating a ketogenic diet. Now however, I am 173 with way lower body fat levels. Like I said, this is NOT universal. Many people handle carbohydrates better than I do. I utilize fat way more efficiently than I do carbs. I'm not here to debate, either. I said it was my two cents and that I wasn't a doctor. I was sharing my experience. No one has to agree with me. It's simply food for thought.0
-
-
In its totality, what I meant was that eating sugar and carbs left me at 175 with a skinny fat frame. Same exercise as eating a ketogenic diet. Now however, I am 173 with way lower body fat levels. Like I said, this is NOT universal. Many people handle carbohydrates better than I do. I utilize fat way more efficiently than I do carbs. I'm not here to debate, either. I said it was my two cents and that I wasn't a doctor. I was sharing my experience. No one has to agree with me. It's simply food for thought.
That's not how that works at all. You were recomping if you reduced your bodyfat more than you lost weight. You can do that however you want.0 -
stevencloser wrote: »In its totality, what I meant was that eating sugar and carbs left me at 175 with a skinny fat frame. Same exercise as eating a ketogenic diet. Now however, I am 173 with way lower body fat levels. Like I said, this is NOT universal. Many people handle carbohydrates better than I do. I utilize fat way more efficiently than I do carbs. I'm not here to debate, either. I said it was my two cents and that I wasn't a doctor. I was sharing my experience. No one has to agree with me. It's simply food for thought.
That's not how that works at all. You were recomping if you reduced your bodyfat more than you lost weight. You can do that however you want.
Sure, since we all handle everything exactly alike. All our metabolisms function identically. Thanks for the heads up.0 -
stevencloser wrote: »In its totality, what I meant was that eating sugar and carbs left me at 175 with a skinny fat frame. Same exercise as eating a ketogenic diet. Now however, I am 173 with way lower body fat levels. Like I said, this is NOT universal. Many people handle carbohydrates better than I do. I utilize fat way more efficiently than I do carbs. I'm not here to debate, either. I said it was my two cents and that I wasn't a doctor. I was sharing my experience. No one has to agree with me. It's simply food for thought.
That's not how that works at all. You were recomping if you reduced your bodyfat more than you lost weight. You can do that however you want.
Sure, since we all handle everything exactly alike. All our metabolisms function identically. Thanks for the heads up.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/you-are-not-different.html/&ved=0ahUKEwiXwPnmzL3KAhXjtYMKHRYTBNMQFggaMAA&usg=AFQjCNF261q7gnHg0OO37UfagEd4lZrUzA&sig2=1dC1q1urZeD3VWdshYasQQ0 -
stevencloser wrote: »In its totality, what I meant was that eating sugar and carbs left me at 175 with a skinny fat frame. Same exercise as eating a ketogenic diet. Now however, I am 173 with way lower body fat levels. Like I said, this is NOT universal. Many people handle carbohydrates better than I do. I utilize fat way more efficiently than I do carbs. I'm not here to debate, either. I said it was my two cents and that I wasn't a doctor. I was sharing my experience. No one has to agree with me. It's simply food for thought.
That's not how that works at all. You were recomping if you reduced your bodyfat more than you lost weight. You can do that however you want.
Sure, since we all handle everything exactly alike. All our metabolisms function identically. Thanks for the heads up.
We're close enough for it to not matter. How do you think there can be equations where you just put in your height, weight etc. and it gives you a really accurate idea of how many calories you're burning?
BTW. you're misusing the term "utilizing more efficiently". If you're losing more on the same intake it would mean your body sucks more at utilizing that, not being better at it.0 -
FunkyTobias wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »In its totality, what I meant was that eating sugar and carbs left me at 175 with a skinny fat frame. Same exercise as eating a ketogenic diet. Now however, I am 173 with way lower body fat levels. Like I said, this is NOT universal. Many people handle carbohydrates better than I do. I utilize fat way more efficiently than I do carbs. I'm not here to debate, either. I said it was my two cents and that I wasn't a doctor. I was sharing my experience. No one has to agree with me. It's simply food for thought.
That's not how that works at all. You were recomping if you reduced your bodyfat more than you lost weight. You can do that however you want.
Sure, since we all handle everything exactly alike. All our metabolisms function identically. Thanks for the heads up.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/you-are-not-different.html/&ved=0ahUKEwiXwPnmzL3KAhXjtYMKHRYTBNMQFggaMAA&usg=AFQjCNF261q7gnHg0OO37UfagEd4lZrUzA&sig2=1dC1q1urZeD3VWdshYasQQ
A whole article on how we can't defeat the law of thermodynamics. However it ends with some people being believed by researchers to be diet resistant. With brains perceiving things differently. Doesn't sound like everyone is alike, does it? I experimented with two trials of the same exercise and ONLY changed my macros to eat way higher fat and way lower carbs. Same caloric amount. I resulted in two completely different outcomes. Post all the articles you want. I'll stick to what worked. At the end that's what we all should do.
0 -
FunkyTobias wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »In its totality, what I meant was that eating sugar and carbs left me at 175 with a skinny fat frame. Same exercise as eating a ketogenic diet. Now however, I am 173 with way lower body fat levels. Like I said, this is NOT universal. Many people handle carbohydrates better than I do. I utilize fat way more efficiently than I do carbs. I'm not here to debate, either. I said it was my two cents and that I wasn't a doctor. I was sharing my experience. No one has to agree with me. It's simply food for thought.
That's not how that works at all. You were recomping if you reduced your bodyfat more than you lost weight. You can do that however you want.
Sure, since we all handle everything exactly alike. All our metabolisms function identically. Thanks for the heads up.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/you-are-not-different.html/&ved=0ahUKEwiXwPnmzL3KAhXjtYMKHRYTBNMQFggaMAA&usg=AFQjCNF261q7gnHg0OO37UfagEd4lZrUzA&sig2=1dC1q1urZeD3VWdshYasQQ
A whole article on how we can't defeat the law of thermodynamics. However it ends with some people being believed by researchers to be diet resistant. With brains perceiving things differently. Doesn't sound like everyone is alike, does it? I experimented with two trials of the same exercise and ONLY changed my macros to eat way higher fat and way lower carbs. Same caloric amount. I resulted in two completely different outcomes. Post all the articles you want. I'll stick to what worked. At the end that's what we all should do.
You are saying that you don't have the exact same metabolism as other people and annoyed when people say you aren't different. Great, you found what works for you. But why are you putting it out there as an absolute and saying that the OP can't incorporate sugar in a healthy way in her diet?
Plenty of people have found that eating moderate amounts of sugar has not impacted their fat loss. I'm glad you've found what works for you, but not everyone has to do the exact same thing.0 -
stevencloser wrote: »
bent to fit your views0 -
FunkyTobias wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »In its totality, what I meant was that eating sugar and carbs left me at 175 with a skinny fat frame. Same exercise as eating a ketogenic diet. Now however, I am 173 with way lower body fat levels. Like I said, this is NOT universal. Many people handle carbohydrates better than I do. I utilize fat way more efficiently than I do carbs. I'm not here to debate, either. I said it was my two cents and that I wasn't a doctor. I was sharing my experience. No one has to agree with me. It's simply food for thought.
That's not how that works at all. You were recomping if you reduced your bodyfat more than you lost weight. You can do that however you want.
Sure, since we all handle everything exactly alike. All our metabolisms function identically. Thanks for the heads up.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/you-are-not-different.html/&ved=0ahUKEwiXwPnmzL3KAhXjtYMKHRYTBNMQFggaMAA&usg=AFQjCNF261q7gnHg0OO37UfagEd4lZrUzA&sig2=1dC1q1urZeD3VWdshYasQQ
A whole article on how we can't defeat the law of thermodynamics. However it ends with some people being believed by researchers to be diet resistant. With brains perceiving things differently. Doesn't sound like everyone is alike, does it? I experimented with two trials of the same exercise and ONLY changed my macros to eat way higher fat and way lower carbs. Same caloric amount. I resulted in two completely different outcomes. Post all the articles you want. I'll stick to what worked. At the end that's what we all should do.
You are saying that you don't have the exact same metabolism as other people and annoyed when people say you aren't different. Great, you found what works for you. But why are you putting it out there as an absolute and saying that the OP can't incorporate sugar in a healthy way in her diet?
Plenty of people have found that eating moderate amounts of sugar has not impacted their fat loss. I'm glad you've found what works for you, but not everyone has to do the exact same thing.
I've made it clear from the start, that it was food for thought. And that I know many people who get great results eating sugar. I never said OP has to stop eating sugar whatsoever. I'm just stating that the same dosent apply to everyone from my experience. I never stated anything as absolute, on the contrary, I stated it wasn't universal.0 -
FunkyTobias wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »In its totality, what I meant was that eating sugar and carbs left me at 175 with a skinny fat frame. Same exercise as eating a ketogenic diet. Now however, I am 173 with way lower body fat levels. Like I said, this is NOT universal. Many people handle carbohydrates better than I do. I utilize fat way more efficiently than I do carbs. I'm not here to debate, either. I said it was my two cents and that I wasn't a doctor. I was sharing my experience. No one has to agree with me. It's simply food for thought.
That's not how that works at all. You were recomping if you reduced your bodyfat more than you lost weight. You can do that however you want.
Sure, since we all handle everything exactly alike. All our metabolisms function identically. Thanks for the heads up.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/you-are-not-different.html/&ved=0ahUKEwiXwPnmzL3KAhXjtYMKHRYTBNMQFggaMAA&usg=AFQjCNF261q7gnHg0OO37UfagEd4lZrUzA&sig2=1dC1q1urZeD3VWdshYasQQ
A whole article on how we can't defeat the law of thermodynamics. However it ends with some people being believed by researchers to be diet resistant. With brains perceiving things differently. Doesn't sound like everyone is alike, does it? I experimented with two trials of the same exercise and ONLY changed my macros to eat way higher fat and way lower carbs. Same caloric amount. I resulted in two completely different outcomes. Post all the articles you want. I'll stick to what worked. At the end that's what we all should do.
You are saying that you don't have the exact same metabolism as other people and annoyed when people say you aren't different. Great, you found what works for you. But why are you putting it out there as an absolute and saying that the OP can't incorporate sugar in a healthy way in her diet?
Plenty of people have found that eating moderate amounts of sugar has not impacted their fat loss. I'm glad you've found what works for you, but not everyone has to do the exact same thing.
I've made it clear from the start, that it was food for thought. And that I know many people who get great results eating sugar. I never said OP has to stop eating sugar whatsoever. I'm just stating that the same dosent apply to everyone from my experience. I never stated anything as absolute, on the contrary, I stated it wasn't universal.
You said "it will inhibit fat loss". Yes, nothing absolute about that statement whatsoever...0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K 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
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions