good carbs and bad carbs...
raven56706
Posts: 918 Member
i see people put that they only "eat good carbs and not the bad ones". "I stick with the simple carbs and not the complex ones. "
what are some good ones as opposed to the ones that arent good. Curious as i want to change some things that i eat to maybe help with the lifestyle.
what are some good ones as opposed to the ones that arent good. Curious as i want to change some things that i eat to maybe help with the lifestyle.
3
Replies
-
there is no such thing as good carbs and bad carbs - they are all reduced to the same thing (sugar) through digestion. Complex carbs may take longer to break-down giving you a more sustained energy level, vs. simple carbs which are quick digestible9
-
Usually when people use those terms the determining factor is fiber. High fiber carbs (good) vs. low fiber carbs (bad). Micro-nutrients may also be a factor. Fruits and vegetables vs. cookies and candy.3
-
Most likely people are referring to nutritional content of the carb, I would imagine. But for me I don't always see it that way. If anything, too many high fibre carbs can actually be bad for my goals (too filling, cause me to be too bloated, as a result no weight gain and poor workout performance), so the definition isn't always so clear. I eat lots of vegetables, whole grains, but I also have sweets... I have candy before and during my lifting sessions which helps me, so I consider that a good carb.1
-
deannalfisher wrote: »there is no such thing as good carbs and bad carbs - they are all reduced to the same thing (sugar) through digestion. Complex carbs may take longer to break-down giving you a more sustained energy level, vs. simple carbs which are quick digestible
That's not entirely true. Not all fiber is absorbed by the body so the calories absorbed are less than what the food contains. Plus it helps keep things moving through the gut and has heart health benefits. All carbs truly are not equal.0 -
deannalfisher wrote: »there is no such thing as good carbs and bad carbs - they are all reduced to the same thing (sugar) through digestion. Complex carbs may take longer to break-down giving you a more sustained energy level, vs. simple carbs which are quick digestible
There is certainly no scientific definition, if that's what you mean. And, if you limit appropriately, you can control your weight no matter what foods you choose.
However, I would call a cake with frosting made from trans fats and lots of sugar a "bad carb." I would call a banana or other piece of whole fruit a "good carb." Even if you equalized the calories, the fiber in fruit regulates the sugar absorption and it includes a number of other useful nutrients. Given that loose definition, I would rather eat "good carbs" more frequently than "bad carbs."6 -
I don't bother to limit carbohydrates. I focus on meeting my nutritional needs for the day. That can include eating some carbohydrate-containing foods that are commonly stigmatized as "bad" (like cake or candy) because the overall context of my diet is what I consider important, not any one particular food.5
-
raven56706 wrote: »i see people put that they only "eat good carbs and not the bad ones". "I stick with the simple carbs and not the complex ones. "
I don't believe in calling specific foods "good" or "bad," but usually (although people mean all sorts of different things) "good carbs" means "nutrient dense carbs, like fruit and veg and beans and sometimes potatoes and sweet potatoes and whole grains" and "bad carbs" means "junk food" (which is usually carbs + fat, often more calories from fat) like potato chips or cake but also might mean "white bread and pasta" to some or even "all non vegetable carbs" to others. IMO, calling a roasted potato a "bad carb" shows why this language is pretty pointless and used in unhelpful ways. I don't think white pasta has a ton of nutrients on its own, for example, but I find it tasty and filling and a great base for a really healthy and balanced meal with lean meat and vegetables and some olive oil, and same for some white rice with a stir fry of lots of vegetables and tofu.
Simple carb = carb calories primarily from sugar (i.e., fruit, but also candy) and complex carb = carb calories primarily from starch (i.e., beans or oats, but also french fries and white bread). So that one is basically useless as a distinction when it comes to health.
Personally I try to focus on nutrient dense foods as the base of my diet (not just with respect to carbs, but also sources of fat), and include other foods that just taste good or increase my satisfaction/pleasure based on the room that exists for them. At this time of year I will likely fit in some Christmas cookies and some kind of special meal on Christmas, etc.2 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »raven56706 wrote: »i see people put that they only "eat good carbs and not the bad ones". "I stick with the simple carbs and not the complex ones. "
I don't believe in calling specific foods "good" or "bad," but usually (although people mean all sorts of different things) "good carbs" means "nutrient dense carbs, like fruit and veg and beans and sometimes potatoes and sweet potatoes and whole grains" and "bad carbs" means "junk food" (which is usually carbs + fat, often more calories from fat) like potato chips or cake but also might mean "white bread and pasta" to some or even "all non vegetable carbs" to others. IMO, calling a roasted potato a "bad carb" shows why this language is pretty pointless and used in unhelpful ways. I don't think white pasta has a ton of nutrients on its own, for example, but I find it tasty and filling and a great base for a really healthy and balanced meal with lean meat and vegetables and some olive oil, and same for some white rice with a stir fry of lots of vegetables and tofu.
Simple carb = carb calories primarily from sugar (i.e., fruit, but also candy) and complex carb = carb calories primarily from starch (i.e., beans or oats, but also french fries and white bread). So that one is basically useless as a distinction when it comes to health.
Personally I try to focus on nutrient dense foods as the base of my diet (not just with respect to carbs, but also sources of fat), and include other foods that just taste good or increase my satisfaction/pleasure based on the room that exists for them. At this time of year I will likely fit in some Christmas cookies and some kind of special meal on Christmas, etc.
Yep, we have very similar approaches. Would I eat just a bowl of white pasta for dinner? No, because for me that wouldn't be satisfying and it likely would cause me to meet fewer of my nutrient goals than I prefer. Would I have some pasta with tomato sauce, roasted vegetables, and maybe some beans or tofu? I would -- for me that is an enjoyable meal that would probably fit into my goals for the day quite well.
It has nothing to do with pasta being a "bad" carbohydrate -- I'd be just as unsatisfied with a bowl of just brown rice (and a bowl of brown rice by itself would probably leave me short on my nutritional goals for the day).2 -
raven56706 wrote: »i see people put that they only "eat good carbs and not the bad ones". "I stick with the simple carbs and not the complex ones. "
what are some good ones as opposed to the ones that arent good. Curious as i want to change some things that i eat to maybe help with the lifestyle.
I would assume people are talking about things like veg, fruit, whole grains, legumes, lentils, etc as good carbs and things like candy and soda and whatnot as bad carbs.1 -
Good or bad is a ridiculous distinction with no context to the person, the circumstances and the overall diet.
Is a carb gel (syrup basically, in a 2:1 ratio of glucose and fructose) "bad" because someone sits on their backside all day slurping them while in a huge calorie surplus or is it "good" because another person is exercising hard and burning off calories faster than they are taking them in?8 -
Agree with @lemurcat12 and @janejellyroll (even though....I have been known to eat plain pasta with just a small sprinkling of good parm-reg every once in a while
) 1 -
Agree with @lemurcat12 and @janejellyroll (even though....I have been known to eat plain pasta with just a small sprinkling of good parm-reg every once in a while )
Didn't mean to knock anybody who enjoys it! Pasta with a favorite topping -- whatever that is -- is a true joy in life.2 -
I think that there are better and worse choices for carbs based upon your health.
Better choices of carbs are veggies and fruits (lower GI if you have insulin resistance)
Worse (or poorer) choices of carbs are added sugars and refined grains. JMO3 -
This content has been removed.
-
cwolfman13 wrote: »raven56706 wrote: »i see people put that they only "eat good carbs and not the bad ones". "I stick with the simple carbs and not the complex ones. "
what are some good ones as opposed to the ones that arent good. Curious as i want to change some things that i eat to maybe help with the lifestyle.
I would assume people are talking about things like veg, fruit, whole grains, legumes, lentils, etc as good carbs and things like candy and soda and whatnot as bad carbs.
This is how I look at it. In my brain junk=bad carbs.3 -
I eat all the carbs.3
-
nicoleduran81 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »raven56706 wrote: »i see people put that they only "eat good carbs and not the bad ones". "I stick with the simple carbs and not the complex ones. "
what are some good ones as opposed to the ones that arent good. Curious as i want to change some things that i eat to maybe help with the lifestyle.
I would assume people are talking about things like veg, fruit, whole grains, legumes, lentils, etc as good carbs and things like candy and soda and whatnot as bad carbs.
This is how I look at it. In my brain junk=bad carbs.
I don't judge any food as "good" or "bad". IMO, the only "bad" food is spoiled food or food I don't like. Other than that, I look at any foods within the context of the overall diet.
"Junk" is a subjective and poorly-defined term (just as "eating clean" is), and there are times when "junk" is perfectly acceptable (and maybe even beneficial) in the diet, in the appropriate context and dosage.5 -
nicoleduran81 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »raven56706 wrote: »i see people put that they only "eat good carbs and not the bad ones". "I stick with the simple carbs and not the complex ones. "
what are some good ones as opposed to the ones that arent good. Curious as i want to change some things that i eat to maybe help with the lifestyle.
I would assume people are talking about things like veg, fruit, whole grains, legumes, lentils, etc as good carbs and things like candy and soda and whatnot as bad carbs.
This is how I look at it. In my brain junk=bad carbs.
Most so-call junk food is carbs and fat (often half fat or more) and sometimes (depending on what you call junk) protein also. I will never understand why people insist on calling something like potato chips "bad carbs" when half the calories are from oil and the reason it's different (more caloric, maybe less healthful) than roasted plain potatoes is the amount (sometimes type) of added fat and salt, NOT the carbs.
Something like cake at least has refined flour and sugar which are lower nutrient carbs, but again about half the calories are from added fat, so why is this a "carb"?
(I'd say it's not inherently bad anyway, but only bad if you eat it in excess and thus have a bad diet, but this is a separate argument that I'm not even talking about now. I don't understand why foods that are made up significantly of other macros get called "carbs.")5 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »nicoleduran81 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »raven56706 wrote: »i see people put that they only "eat good carbs and not the bad ones". "I stick with the simple carbs and not the complex ones. "
what are some good ones as opposed to the ones that arent good. Curious as i want to change some things that i eat to maybe help with the lifestyle.
I would assume people are talking about things like veg, fruit, whole grains, legumes, lentils, etc as good carbs and things like candy and soda and whatnot as bad carbs.
This is how I look at it. In my brain junk=bad carbs.
Most so-call junk food is carbs and fat (often half fat or more) and sometimes (depending on what you call junk) protein also. I will never understand why people insist on calling something like potato chips "bad carbs" when half the calories are from oil and the reason it's different (more caloric, maybe less healthful) than roasted plain potatoes is the amount (sometimes type) of added fat and salt, NOT the carbs.
Something like cake at least has refined flour and sugar which are lower nutrient carbs, but again about half the calories are from added fat, so why is this a "carb"?
(I'd say it's not inherently bad anyway, but only bad if you eat it in excess and thus have a bad diet, but this is a separate argument that I'm not even talking about now. I don't understand why foods that are made up significantly of other macros get called "carbs.")
i asked a question at the base dining hall one day...normal french fries were a "RED" food (i.e. limit consumption) and yet the sweet potato fries prepared the same way were "GREEN" food - i.e. good for you...it just blew my mind1 -
I think most of my carbs are probably "bad." I eat a lot of white flour tortillas, wheat bread/bagels, protein bars, occasional treats and oatmeal. It hasn't stopped me from progressing and I seem to function better with higher carbs. I'm not very picky about where they come from, as long as I keep my macros close to my goal, which I have tweaked over the last few months to find what works best for me1
-
lemurcat12 wrote: »nicoleduran81 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »raven56706 wrote: »i see people put that they only "eat good carbs and not the bad ones". "I stick with the simple carbs and not the complex ones. "
what are some good ones as opposed to the ones that arent good. Curious as i want to change some things that i eat to maybe help with the lifestyle.
I would assume people are talking about things like veg, fruit, whole grains, legumes, lentils, etc as good carbs and things like candy and soda and whatnot as bad carbs.
This is how I look at it. In my brain junk=bad carbs.
Most so-call junk food is carbs and fat (often half fat or more) and sometimes (depending on what you call junk) protein also. I will never understand why people insist on calling something like potato chips "bad carbs" when half the calories are from oil and the reason it's different (more caloric, maybe less healthful) than roasted plain potatoes is the amount (sometimes type) of added fat and salt, NOT the carbs.
Something like cake at least has refined flour and sugar which are lower nutrient carbs, but again about half the calories are from added fat, so why is this a "carb"?
(I'd say it's not inherently bad anyway, but only bad if you eat it in excess and thus have a bad diet, but this is a separate argument that I'm not even talking about now. I don't understand why foods that are made up significantly of other macros get called "carbs.")
I realize it will vary by recipe but half of the calories in cake are from fat?0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »nicoleduran81 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »raven56706 wrote: »i see people put that they only "eat good carbs and not the bad ones". "I stick with the simple carbs and not the complex ones. "
what are some good ones as opposed to the ones that arent good. Curious as i want to change some things that i eat to maybe help with the lifestyle.
I would assume people are talking about things like veg, fruit, whole grains, legumes, lentils, etc as good carbs and things like candy and soda and whatnot as bad carbs.
This is how I look at it. In my brain junk=bad carbs.
Most so-call junk food is carbs and fat (often half fat or more) and sometimes (depending on what you call junk) protein also. I will never understand why people insist on calling something like potato chips "bad carbs" when half the calories are from oil and the reason it's different (more caloric, maybe less healthful) than roasted plain potatoes is the amount (sometimes type) of added fat and salt, NOT the carbs.
Something like cake at least has refined flour and sugar which are lower nutrient carbs, but again about half the calories are from added fat, so why is this a "carb"?
(I'd say it's not inherently bad anyway, but only bad if you eat it in excess and thus have a bad diet, but this is a separate argument that I'm not even talking about now. I don't understand why foods that are made up significantly of other macros get called "carbs.")
I realize it will vary by recipe but half of the calories in cake are from fat?
i think it depends on how you make it - i looked at the Betty Crocker page - if you look at just the mix, then its higher carb/low fat and protein; but when you make the mix (adding oil, eggs etc) that is going to increase the fat (potentially quite a bit)1 -
deannalfisher wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »nicoleduran81 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »raven56706 wrote: »i see people put that they only "eat good carbs and not the bad ones". "I stick with the simple carbs and not the complex ones. "
what are some good ones as opposed to the ones that arent good. Curious as i want to change some things that i eat to maybe help with the lifestyle.
I would assume people are talking about things like veg, fruit, whole grains, legumes, lentils, etc as good carbs and things like candy and soda and whatnot as bad carbs.
This is how I look at it. In my brain junk=bad carbs.
Most so-call junk food is carbs and fat (often half fat or more) and sometimes (depending on what you call junk) protein also. I will never understand why people insist on calling something like potato chips "bad carbs" when half the calories are from oil and the reason it's different (more caloric, maybe less healthful) than roasted plain potatoes is the amount (sometimes type) of added fat and salt, NOT the carbs.
Something like cake at least has refined flour and sugar which are lower nutrient carbs, but again about half the calories are from added fat, so why is this a "carb"?
(I'd say it's not inherently bad anyway, but only bad if you eat it in excess and thus have a bad diet, but this is a separate argument that I'm not even talking about now. I don't understand why foods that are made up significantly of other macros get called "carbs.")
i asked a question at the base dining hall one day...normal french fries were a "RED" food (i.e. limit consumption) and yet the sweet potato fries prepared the same way were "GREEN" food - i.e. good for you...it just blew my mind
Yeah, that kind of thing is so weird.1 -
deannalfisher wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »nicoleduran81 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »raven56706 wrote: »i see people put that they only "eat good carbs and not the bad ones". "I stick with the simple carbs and not the complex ones. "
what are some good ones as opposed to the ones that arent good. Curious as i want to change some things that i eat to maybe help with the lifestyle.
I would assume people are talking about things like veg, fruit, whole grains, legumes, lentils, etc as good carbs and things like candy and soda and whatnot as bad carbs.
This is how I look at it. In my brain junk=bad carbs.
Most so-call junk food is carbs and fat (often half fat or more) and sometimes (depending on what you call junk) protein also. I will never understand why people insist on calling something like potato chips "bad carbs" when half the calories are from oil and the reason it's different (more caloric, maybe less healthful) than roasted plain potatoes is the amount (sometimes type) of added fat and salt, NOT the carbs.
Something like cake at least has refined flour and sugar which are lower nutrient carbs, but again about half the calories are from added fat, so why is this a "carb"?
(I'd say it's not inherently bad anyway, but only bad if you eat it in excess and thus have a bad diet, but this is a separate argument that I'm not even talking about now. I don't understand why foods that are made up significantly of other macros get called "carbs.")
I realize it will vary by recipe but half of the calories in cake are from fat?
i think it depends on how you make it - i looked at the Betty Crocker page - if you look at just the mix, then its higher carb/low fat and protein; but when you make the mix (adding oil, eggs etc) that is going to increase the fat (potentially quite a bit)
But enough to account for 1/2 the calories? Maybe so, I haven't done the math. Just seems a lot of fat for a basic cake recipe.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »nicoleduran81 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »raven56706 wrote: »i see people put that they only "eat good carbs and not the bad ones". "I stick with the simple carbs and not the complex ones. "
what are some good ones as opposed to the ones that arent good. Curious as i want to change some things that i eat to maybe help with the lifestyle.
I would assume people are talking about things like veg, fruit, whole grains, legumes, lentils, etc as good carbs and things like candy and soda and whatnot as bad carbs.
This is how I look at it. In my brain junk=bad carbs.
Most so-call junk food is carbs and fat (often half fat or more) and sometimes (depending on what you call junk) protein also. I will never understand why people insist on calling something like potato chips "bad carbs" when half the calories are from oil and the reason it's different (more caloric, maybe less healthful) than roasted plain potatoes is the amount (sometimes type) of added fat and salt, NOT the carbs.
Something like cake at least has refined flour and sugar which are lower nutrient carbs, but again about half the calories are from added fat, so why is this a "carb"?
(I'd say it's not inherently bad anyway, but only bad if you eat it in excess and thus have a bad diet, but this is a separate argument that I'm not even talking about now. I don't understand why foods that are made up significantly of other macros get called "carbs.")
I realize it will vary by recipe but half of the calories in cake are from fat?
One local example of a classic chocolate cake with nutrition information in the system is the Portillo's chocolate cake, which is 48% fat and 48% carbs. I rarely make cake so haven't put many recipes in my recipe box (I make pie more often but haven't put those in either). Cookie might have been a better example, or donuts, and we can also look at the potato chips I mentioned or fries (or most of the stuff at a fast food place if that is "junk" as it's got lots of fat, carbs, and protein). Checking my recipe box, I have a cupcake recipe with 34% of calories from fat (64% from carbs) -- still weird to call that food "carbs." I have chocolate chip cookies (very buttery) that are 57% fat and 43% carb (there's a tiny bit of protein, so something off about the rounding).
Anyway, not sure what difference it makes to the overall point whether one particular form of junk food that contains significant fat (in most cases, yes angel food would be different) is exactly half fat.2 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »nicoleduran81 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »raven56706 wrote: »i see people put that they only "eat good carbs and not the bad ones". "I stick with the simple carbs and not the complex ones. "
what are some good ones as opposed to the ones that arent good. Curious as i want to change some things that i eat to maybe help with the lifestyle.
I would assume people are talking about things like veg, fruit, whole grains, legumes, lentils, etc as good carbs and things like candy and soda and whatnot as bad carbs.
This is how I look at it. In my brain junk=bad carbs.
Most so-call junk food is carbs and fat (often half fat or more) and sometimes (depending on what you call junk) protein also. I will never understand why people insist on calling something like potato chips "bad carbs" when half the calories are from oil and the reason it's different (more caloric, maybe less healthful) than roasted plain potatoes is the amount (sometimes type) of added fat and salt, NOT the carbs.
Something like cake at least has refined flour and sugar which are lower nutrient carbs, but again about half the calories are from added fat, so why is this a "carb"?
(I'd say it's not inherently bad anyway, but only bad if you eat it in excess and thus have a bad diet, but this is a separate argument that I'm not even talking about now. I don't understand why foods that are made up significantly of other macros get called "carbs.")
I realize it will vary by recipe but half of the calories in cake are from fat?
One local example of a classic chocolate cake with nutrition information in the system is the Portillo's chocolate cake, which is 48% fat and 48% carbs. I rarely make cake so haven't put many recipes in my recipe box (I make pie more often but haven't put those in either). Cookie might have been a better example, or donuts, and we can also look at the potato chips I mentioned or fries (or most of the stuff at a fast food place if that is "junk" as it's got lots of fat, carbs, and protein). Checking my recipe box, I have a cupcake recipe with 34% of calories from fat (64% from carbs) -- still weird to call that food "carbs." I have chocolate chip cookies (very buttery) that are 57% fat and 43% carb (there's a tiny bit of protein, so something off about the rounding).
Anyway, not sure what difference it makes to the overall point whether one particular form of junk food that contains significant fat (in most cases, yes angel food would be different) is exactly half fat.
It was surprising to me is all.
But I would argue that not all junk food has fat at all. It's a subjective term but I would consider baked potato chips a junk food just like I would regular potato chips. I'd consider skittles and gummy worms junk food.
But still it's the food as a whole that is generally considered junk and the common ingredient in what is commonly considered junk food is usually carbs. Few people consider a well marbled steak junk food, for instance. Typically it's refined flour or sugars that are the deciding junk factor.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »deannalfisher wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »nicoleduran81 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »raven56706 wrote: »i see people put that they only "eat good carbs and not the bad ones". "I stick with the simple carbs and not the complex ones. "
what are some good ones as opposed to the ones that arent good. Curious as i want to change some things that i eat to maybe help with the lifestyle.
I would assume people are talking about things like veg, fruit, whole grains, legumes, lentils, etc as good carbs and things like candy and soda and whatnot as bad carbs.
This is how I look at it. In my brain junk=bad carbs.
Most so-call junk food is carbs and fat (often half fat or more) and sometimes (depending on what you call junk) protein also. I will never understand why people insist on calling something like potato chips "bad carbs" when half the calories are from oil and the reason it's different (more caloric, maybe less healthful) than roasted plain potatoes is the amount (sometimes type) of added fat and salt, NOT the carbs.
Something like cake at least has refined flour and sugar which are lower nutrient carbs, but again about half the calories are from added fat, so why is this a "carb"?
(I'd say it's not inherently bad anyway, but only bad if you eat it in excess and thus have a bad diet, but this is a separate argument that I'm not even talking about now. I don't understand why foods that are made up significantly of other macros get called "carbs.")
I realize it will vary by recipe but half of the calories in cake are from fat?
i think it depends on how you make it - i looked at the Betty Crocker page - if you look at just the mix, then its higher carb/low fat and protein; but when you make the mix (adding oil, eggs etc) that is going to increase the fat (potentially quite a bit)
But enough to account for 1/2 the calories? Maybe so, I haven't done the math. Just seems a lot of fat for a basic cake recipe.
I just looked at a red velvet cake recipe my wife uses...a 4 oz serving of cake has 54 grams of carbohydrates and 23 grams of fat...so pretty close to a 50/50 split in regards to calories from carbs and calories from fat.1 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »deannalfisher wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »nicoleduran81 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »raven56706 wrote: »i see people put that they only "eat good carbs and not the bad ones". "I stick with the simple carbs and not the complex ones. "
what are some good ones as opposed to the ones that arent good. Curious as i want to change some things that i eat to maybe help with the lifestyle.
I would assume people are talking about things like veg, fruit, whole grains, legumes, lentils, etc as good carbs and things like candy and soda and whatnot as bad carbs.
This is how I look at it. In my brain junk=bad carbs.
Most so-call junk food is carbs and fat (often half fat or more) and sometimes (depending on what you call junk) protein also. I will never understand why people insist on calling something like potato chips "bad carbs" when half the calories are from oil and the reason it's different (more caloric, maybe less healthful) than roasted plain potatoes is the amount (sometimes type) of added fat and salt, NOT the carbs.
Something like cake at least has refined flour and sugar which are lower nutrient carbs, but again about half the calories are from added fat, so why is this a "carb"?
(I'd say it's not inherently bad anyway, but only bad if you eat it in excess and thus have a bad diet, but this is a separate argument that I'm not even talking about now. I don't understand why foods that are made up significantly of other macros get called "carbs.")
I realize it will vary by recipe but half of the calories in cake are from fat?
i think it depends on how you make it - i looked at the Betty Crocker page - if you look at just the mix, then its higher carb/low fat and protein; but when you make the mix (adding oil, eggs etc) that is going to increase the fat (potentially quite a bit)
But enough to account for 1/2 the calories? Maybe so, I haven't done the math. Just seems a lot of fat for a basic cake recipe.
I just looked at a red velvet cake recipe my wife uses...a 4 oz serving of cake has 54 grams of carbohydrates and 23 grams of fat...so pretty close to a 50/50 split in regards to calories from carbs and calories from fat.
Yeah, I googled recipes and many were in the 40+% range for basic cakes with icing.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »nicoleduran81 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »raven56706 wrote: »i see people put that they only "eat good carbs and not the bad ones". "I stick with the simple carbs and not the complex ones. "
what are some good ones as opposed to the ones that arent good. Curious as i want to change some things that i eat to maybe help with the lifestyle.
I would assume people are talking about things like veg, fruit, whole grains, legumes, lentils, etc as good carbs and things like candy and soda and whatnot as bad carbs.
This is how I look at it. In my brain junk=bad carbs.
Most so-call junk food is carbs and fat (often half fat or more) and sometimes (depending on what you call junk) protein also. I will never understand why people insist on calling something like potato chips "bad carbs" when half the calories are from oil and the reason it's different (more caloric, maybe less healthful) than roasted plain potatoes is the amount (sometimes type) of added fat and salt, NOT the carbs.
Something like cake at least has refined flour and sugar which are lower nutrient carbs, but again about half the calories are from added fat, so why is this a "carb"?
(I'd say it's not inherently bad anyway, but only bad if you eat it in excess and thus have a bad diet, but this is a separate argument that I'm not even talking about now. I don't understand why foods that are made up significantly of other macros get called "carbs.")
I realize it will vary by recipe but half of the calories in cake are from fat?
One local example of a classic chocolate cake with nutrition information in the system is the Portillo's chocolate cake, which is 48% fat and 48% carbs. I rarely make cake so haven't put many recipes in my recipe box (I make pie more often but haven't put those in either). Cookie might have been a better example, or donuts, and we can also look at the potato chips I mentioned or fries (or most of the stuff at a fast food place if that is "junk" as it's got lots of fat, carbs, and protein). Checking my recipe box, I have a cupcake recipe with 34% of calories from fat (64% from carbs) -- still weird to call that food "carbs." I have chocolate chip cookies (very buttery) that are 57% fat and 43% carb (there's a tiny bit of protein, so something off about the rounding).
Anyway, not sure what difference it makes to the overall point whether one particular form of junk food that contains significant fat (in most cases, yes angel food would be different) is exactly half fat.
I was curious and I just checked my standard cake recipe -- it's 64% carbohydrates and 30% fat. That's before the frosting, so "half" doesn't sound like an unreasonable estimate for a lot of cake/cake-type treats.0 -
deannalfisher wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »nicoleduran81 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »raven56706 wrote: »i see people put that they only "eat good carbs and not the bad ones". "I stick with the simple carbs and not the complex ones. "
what are some good ones as opposed to the ones that arent good. Curious as i want to change some things that i eat to maybe help with the lifestyle.
I would assume people are talking about things like veg, fruit, whole grains, legumes, lentils, etc as good carbs and things like candy and soda and whatnot as bad carbs.
This is how I look at it. In my brain junk=bad carbs.
Most so-call junk food is carbs and fat (often half fat or more) and sometimes (depending on what you call junk) protein also. I will never understand why people insist on calling something like potato chips "bad carbs" when half the calories are from oil and the reason it's different (more caloric, maybe less healthful) than roasted plain potatoes is the amount (sometimes type) of added fat and salt, NOT the carbs.
Something like cake at least has refined flour and sugar which are lower nutrient carbs, but again about half the calories are from added fat, so why is this a "carb"?
(I'd say it's not inherently bad anyway, but only bad if you eat it in excess and thus have a bad diet, but this is a separate argument that I'm not even talking about now. I don't understand why foods that are made up significantly of other macros get called "carbs.")
I realize it will vary by recipe but half of the calories in cake are from fat?
i think it depends on how you make it - i looked at the Betty Crocker page - if you look at just the mix, then its higher carb/low fat and protein; but when you make the mix (adding oil, eggs etc) that is going to increase the fat (potentially quite a bit)
Yeah, I tend to use an old low-fat cookbook for desserts (mostly because the desserts in it are tasty and low-cal; I don't demonize fat). So, for example, the nutritional profile on my molasses oat squares looks like this:
ETA: And here's the stats on my Citrus Surprise Cake (kind of a spice cake with OJ concentrate and grated yellow zucchini):
(And I don't know how the recipe builder gave me 87g sugar in 25g carbs, but when it comes to desserts, I focus on calories and any macros and micros are bonuses.)
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions