Natural sugars
Options
Replies
-
So basically what you're saying is you gave less then optimal advice because most people aren't smart enough to understand something slightly more complicated (ratio vs simple mathematical equation) and that personal experiences are more important than evidence based guidelines supported by research?In all of the years that I've been training, studying and helping people; I've found that giving out long, exhaustive explanations about how and why certain things shouldn't be done, only serves to intimidate them and does more negative than positive. I'm familiar with the information you've provided, but I can only speak from my own personal experiences. I understand that all experiences are different, and different macro and micro nutrients are going to be required for people depending on goals, weight, gender, body type, genetics, etc. This is the reason I kept the explanation short, and provided a sort-of template information for doing something in the immediate while also answering simply that fruit sugars aren't a negative. This is also the reason I included the qualifier "keep learning," because there many schools of thought on this particular subject, and it's important for everyone to find what works for them.
I'm quite certain the original person who posted this inquiry didn't see my answer in any way as insulting her intelligence. I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion. And yes, I would strongly advise again basing everything someone does on some "study" they see because the information is constantly changing, and what is gospel one day is junk science the next, as you demonstrated by saying the information I gave was "outdated." Everyone is different, and what works for some people may not work for others.1 -
5
-
You specifically stated that "long, exhaustive explanations about how and why certain things shouldn't be done, only serves to intimidate them and does more negative than positive". Basically saying that explaining something in detail is bad because people are intimidated by it. I would argue the opposite, that explaining things in detail both enhances one's knowledge of a subject and reduces the amount of intimidation associated with not understanding something. I would also argue that using ratios is only barely less complicated then using a simple equation.
So basically what you're saying is you gave less then optimal advice because most people aren't smart enough to understand something slightly more complicated (ratio vs simple mathematical equation) and that personal experiences are more important than evidence based guidelines supported by research?In all of the years that I've been training, studying and helping people; I've found that giving out long, exhaustive explanations about how and why certain things shouldn't be done, only serves to intimidate them and does more negative than positive. I'm familiar with the information you've provided, but I can only speak from my own personal experiences. I understand that all experiences are different, and different macro and micro nutrients are going to be required for people depending on goals, weight, gender, body type, genetics, etc. This is the reason I kept the explanation short, and provided a sort-of template information for doing something in the immediate while also answering simply that fruit sugars aren't a negative. This is also the reason I included the qualifier "keep learning," because there many schools of thought on this particular subject, and it's important for everyone to find what works for them.
I'm quite certain the original person who posted this inquiry didn't see my answer in any way as insulting her intelligence. I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion. And yes, I would strongly advise again basing everything someone does on some "study" they see because the information is constantly changing, and what is gospel one day is junk science the next, as you demonstrated by saying the information I gave was "outdated." Everyone is different, and what works for some people may not work for others.
Studies do not constantly change what is gospel and what is junk as you state. What research does is take things like carbohydrate timing, which was never supported by anything other than expert opinion and anecdote and prove that it actually makes little to no difference on results. The same is true of macronutrient ratios. Those were never supported by research. So the research didn't change what was true and what wasn't, it just proved certain long held beliefs were not supported by evidence.
7 -
If you don't have any problems with sugar (ie. diabetes) then I wouldn't worry about it. I would weigh them and log them and as long as they fit into your calorie goal then it is fine. I never worry about natural sugars and I don't really worry about added sugars either.1
-
I do believe sugar is a problem. Simple or complex carbohydrates turn into sugar in the body. In fact, a slice of whole wheat bread causes higher glycemic reaction than white flour bread.
New, and also old research long buried but now revived strongly suggests that sugar is the culprit in the great increase diabetes, heart and cancer issues, etc., because of the inflammation all carbohydrates cause.
As for fructose, including "natural" raw honey and agave that so many health food places use, is one of the worse sugars.
A quote from Maria Emmerich
"The only organ in your body that can take up fructose is your liver. The first thing that eating fructose does is causing an increase in uric acid. Fructose inhibits nitric oxide, which would otherwise reduce our blood pressure.
This is why fructose is famous for causing hypertension (high blood pressure).
Fructose also initiates what’s known as lipogenesis, excess fat production. And the third thing that fructose does in the liver is it initiates an enzyme that inhibits our insulin receptors. That means your insulin levels all over your body have to rise…causing a whole slew of problems, including weight gain.Between 1970 and 2003 our average consumption of fructose increased from less than half a pound per year to 56 pounds per year. We were never designed to take in so much fructose. Even some natural sweeteners have lots of fructose. From 90 to 97 percent of the sugar in agave nectar is fructose. Up to half of the sugar in some varieties of honey is fructose."
You may want to do your own research on sugar, to get an answer that satisfies your concerns.
1 -
I do believe sugar is a problem. Simple or complex carbohydrates turn into sugar in the body. In fact, a slice of whole wheat bread causes higher glycemic reaction than white flour bread.
New, and also old research long buried but now revived strongly suggests that sugar is the culprit in the great increase diabetes, heart and cancer issues, etc., because of the inflammation all carbohydrates cause.
As for fructose, including "natural" raw honey and agave that so many health food places use, is one of the worse sugars.
A quote from Maria Emmerich
"The only organ in your body that can take up fructose is your liver. The first thing that eating fructose does is causing an increase in uric acid. Fructose inhibits nitric oxide, which would otherwise reduce our blood pressure.
This is why fructose is famous for causing hypertension (high blood pressure).
Fructose also initiates what’s known as lipogenesis, excess fat production. And the third thing that fructose does in the liver is it initiates an enzyme that inhibits our insulin receptors. That means your insulin levels all over your body have to rise…causing a whole slew of problems, including weight gain.Between 1970 and 2003 our average consumption of fructose increased from less than half a pound per year to 56 pounds per year. We were never designed to take in so much fructose. Even some natural sweeteners have lots of fructose. From 90 to 97 percent of the sugar in agave nectar is fructose. Up to half of the sugar in some varieties of honey is fructose."
You may want to do your own research on sugar, to get an answer that satisfies your concerns.
Most of what you are stating is not proven by science. Diabetes is not caused by sugar. In fact, most organizations have accredited the causes of getting diabetes are physical inactivity, genetics and obesity.
Lipogenesis occurs any time after you eat a meals. Insulin is released anytime you eat carbohydrates or protein. So you eat a meal, your body starts to break down food, your pancreas will sense glucose and your body will release insulin to regulate blood sugars. So your body increase enzymes to store fat and inhibit the fat burning hormone (HSL - hormone sensitive lipase). So for a given period, your body will store nutrients and stimulate muscle protein synthesis. So yes, your body creates new fat and builds muscle. At some people, your body will regulate itself and will enter lipolysis (fat burning) as insulin is removed from your system. So overall, your body will cycle between lipogenesis and lipolysis. If your have more time of the later (energy deficit) you will lose weight; as shown below.
So people think, lets minimize insulin since insulin causes the suppression of HSL and induces lipogensis. Well, the bad news is, you have several other hormones/enzymes that can suppress HSL. Dietary fat stimulates Ascylation Stimulating Protein (ASP), which will suppress HSL and stimulate insulin. And if that isn't enough, you have one enzyme that will be stimulated by both carbs and fat and will induce lipogenesis; that is glucose-dependent insulinotrophic peptide (GIP).
The thing is, our bodies are designed to store. You can follow low carb, plant-based, paleo, flexible, or whatever diet you want, at the end of the day, the amount of calories will determine weight status and dietary compliance will determine longevity.5 -
That is a conceptual illustration of diurnal insulin action from a blog, not data. Here's some data :-
1 -
Foods that contain natural sugars such as grapes . Are they okay to eat while staying in your calorie limit? Like how much is a bad thing ? Do I need to watch sugar intake as a whole ?
I asked my doctor about sugars as there's so much info and different opinions about how much sugar we can eat and from what sources. He told me sugar is sugar, the body doesn't know what the source is and it all has an effect on the body. And that I should try keep the amount of sugar I eat low no matter where it comes from. Yes it's better for you to eat fruit than say a donut or sweet, but they all still contain sugar. So for me personally I would rather still track sugar and try keep it low. @10ssmith I would say yes keep a track of sugar too, it certainly can't hurt you.0 -
How many daily fruit are recommended by your national food guide? That's your guideline. You can go over or under without hurting anything as long as you stay within your calorie goals.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 393 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K 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
- 935 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions