Why Carbs Make Us Fat...

1235

Replies

  • rheddmobile
    rheddmobile Posts: 6,841 Member
    kimny72 wrote: »
    lemurcat2 wrote: »
    sijomial wrote: »
    Executive summary....
    • Eating too much makes you fat.
    • Eating tasty foods makes it harder to moderate your intake.
    • What people find tasty is very varied.

    Don't suppose that would generate many website hits?

    TBH I find the whole this macro or that macro makes it harder to stay at a good weight vastly overblown - often just another diversion from the biggest issue (over-consumption). When you look at lists of highly satiating foods you find foods that are (predominantly) carbs, protein and fat all represented - plus of course various and varied combinations.

    Personally I could very easily overeat on meat/fish (protein), pasta (starchy carbs) or nuts (fat). That's being driven by my personal taste preferences and not the predominant macro composition of those foods.
    Some of those would be regarded as highly satiating to others.

    Yeah, but you’d have to spend a lot more money to overeat on fat and protein than carbs. I can buy a box of Little Debbie cakes for a dollar, or a pound of salmon or nuts for many times that. Carbs are not only delicious, in our culture they tend to be cheap, and they are easily made in a form which keeps well, which means they are often convenient. You need snacks to stash in your drawer at work, you can pick from nuts, jerky, or... almost any carbs you like. You can buy Coke from a vending machine, you can’t buy milk from a machine (in America, anyway.)

    I thought it was a smart article. As a diabetic who needs access to low carb foods, I have become aware of how much easier our culture makes it to eat an excess of carbs than of other foods. Free Continental breakfast at hotel? Carbs, pay for your own if you want protein. Coworkers bring in treats at work? Carbs. Side dishes at any fast food place? Carbs, fatty carbs, and more carbs. I know of a bbq joint which has deviled eggs as a side, but apart from that, all sides are primarily carbs, usually including beans because fast food joints like to cook beans in sugar sauce.

    I have to plan ahead and spend my own money and cook for myself to have non-carbs available. To eat carbs all I have to do is not say no to the carbs being forced on me.

    Most of the snacky "carbs" are carbs + fat (and I would disagree about how tasty they are, I think most pre-packaged snack foods aren't very good at all).

    You can eat probably just about as cheaply doing a healthy keto as a healthy omnivore, depending on cuts of meat chosen. Both would involve vegetables. Not buying snack foods is cheaper than buying them, no matter how cheap they are, also, and same with eating out vs. cooking at home.

    I think it’s valid that you can probably eat as cheaply doing healthy omnivore as healthy keto, but that’s not what’s being discussed here. What’s under discussion is the availablity of cheap, inexpensive foods, which in America tend to be carbs drenched in saturated fat. Avoid carbs (or conversely avoid saturated fat) and you will almost inevitably lose weight, if you have been accustomed to a standard American diet. Of course that doesn’t apply to all people, it only applies to people who have been eating a standard American diet. That you and I can happily become obese eating salmon and veggies drenched in olive oil is not the point of the article. People eating those things are not driving the increase in obesity rates in America today.

    I think that the bolded is at best included in this discussion parenthetically, if mentioned at all, is what those of us arguing against the article are trying to say. It's NOT carbs. It's convenience foods that are typically carb/fat/salt combinations or straight up sugary treats. But we are living in the "fat is good" period of the wellness industry, so we are just going to lazily say "carbs".

    I think there are probably more snack foods which are straight up carbs than ones which are straight up fat. Many candies are pure carbs, and apart from deep fried butter, it’s hard to find snack foods which are fats without a substantial amount of carbs for the fat to cling to. Therefore if you want to tell people to avoid convenience foods, telling them to avoid carbs is a reasonable shorthand.

    I understand that it’s hard to be smart and watch other people say dumb things without wanting to correct them with the subtleties. But it’s practically impossible to overrate how dumb many people are when it comes to nutrition. Dumbing it down is helpful for many people.
  • rheddmobile
    rheddmobile Posts: 6,841 Member
    lemurcat2 wrote: »
    lemurcat2 wrote: »
    sijomial wrote: »
    Executive summary....
    • Eating too much makes you fat.
    • Eating tasty foods makes it harder to moderate your intake.
    • What people find tasty is very varied.

    Don't suppose that would generate many website hits?

    TBH I find the whole this macro or that macro makes it harder to stay at a good weight vastly overblown - often just another diversion from the biggest issue (over-consumption). When you look at lists of highly satiating foods you find foods that are (predominantly) carbs, protein and fat all represented - plus of course various and varied combinations.

    Personally I could very easily overeat on meat/fish (protein), pasta (starchy carbs) or nuts (fat). That's being driven by my personal taste preferences and not the predominant macro composition of those foods.
    Some of those would be regarded as highly satiating to others.

    Yeah, but you’d have to spend a lot more money to overeat on fat and protein than carbs. I can buy a box of Little Debbie cakes for a dollar, or a pound of salmon or nuts for many times that. Carbs are not only delicious, in our culture they tend to be cheap, and they are easily made in a form which keeps well, which means they are often convenient. You need snacks to stash in your drawer at work, you can pick from nuts, jerky, or... almost any carbs you like. You can buy Coke from a vending machine, you can’t buy milk from a machine (in America, anyway.)

    I thought it was a smart article. As a diabetic who needs access to low carb foods, I have become aware of how much easier our culture makes it to eat an excess of carbs than of other foods. Free Continental breakfast at hotel? Carbs, pay for your own if you want protein. Coworkers bring in treats at work? Carbs. Side dishes at any fast food place? Carbs, fatty carbs, and more carbs. I know of a bbq joint which has deviled eggs as a side, but apart from that, all sides are primarily carbs, usually including beans because fast food joints like to cook beans in sugar sauce.

    I have to plan ahead and spend my own money and cook for myself to have non-carbs available. To eat carbs all I have to do is not say no to the carbs being forced on me.

    Most of the snacky "carbs" are carbs + fat (and I would disagree about how tasty they are, I think most pre-packaged snack foods aren't very good at all).

    You can eat probably just about as cheaply doing a healthy keto as a healthy omnivore, depending on cuts of meat chosen. Both would involve vegetables. Not buying snack foods is cheaper than buying them, no matter how cheap they are, also, and same with eating out vs. cooking at home.

    I think it’s valid that you can probably eat as cheaply doing healthy omnivore as healthy keto, but that’s not what’s being discussed here. What’s under discussion is the availablity of cheap, inexpensive foods, which in America tend to be carbs drenched in saturated fat. Avoid carbs (or conversely avoid saturated fat) and you will almost inevitably lose weight, if you have been accustomed to a standard American diet. Of course that doesn’t apply to all people, it only applies to people who have been eating a standard American diet. That you and I can happily become obese eating salmon and veggies drenched in olive oil is not the point of the article. People eating those things are not driving the increase in obesity rates in America today.

    I don't think we can generalize about who is becoming obese and who is not. Enough people are obese that I bet there are people who eat all kinds of diets, and plenty of people eat poorly (such as the so-called SAD) and don't become obese.

    One of my points, however, is that calling overeating junk foods "overeating carbs" or blaming carbs or the cheapness of carbs is wrong when they are largely carbs + fat (plus protein if we mean fast food).

    Fast foods and junk foods such as snack foods aren't really the cheapest way to eat (or, IMO, especially tasty). The cheapest carb options are things like rice, beans, potatoes, whole grains. Those, plus some veg (which everyone should eat and which are also carbs) and cheaper cuts of meat = a very healthy way to eat and probably not too hard not to overeat on for most.

    Once one is buying lots of pre-made foods and snacky foods, one is choosing to spend money they can avoid spending, so complaining that those are cheap vs., say, Alaskan salmon is kind of beside the point, IMO.

    I don’t agree with literally anything you’ve said here. :smiley:

    Time is money. It’s not valid to argue that dried beans are less expensive than a bag of chips when one requires cooking space, cooking gear, and time and the other requires picking up a bag of chips. Not everyone, and especially not all poor people, have the leisure and energy to want to cook every day. Could most people figure out how to find time? Probably. But it is a real cost which shouldn’t be ignored. And it’s a particular kind of snobbishness which labels the choices made by poor people “lazy” without being in those shoes.

    Also, we can indeed generalize about who’s becoming obese - there’s abundant research connecting poverty and obesity. As well as abundant research about which specific foods are strongly correlated with obesity.
  • rheddmobile
    rheddmobile Posts: 6,841 Member
    kimny72 wrote: »
    kimny72 wrote: »
    lemurcat2 wrote: »
    sijomial wrote: »
    Executive summary....
    • Eating too much makes you fat.
    • Eating tasty foods makes it harder to moderate your intake.
    • What people find tasty is very varied.

    Don't suppose that would generate many website hits?

    TBH I find the whole this macro or that macro makes it harder to stay at a good weight vastly overblown - often just another diversion from the biggest issue (over-consumption). When you look at lists of highly satiating foods you find foods that are (predominantly) carbs, protein and fat all represented - plus of course various and varied combinations.

    Personally I could very easily overeat on meat/fish (protein), pasta (starchy carbs) or nuts (fat). That's being driven by my personal taste preferences and not the predominant macro composition of those foods.
    Some of those would be regarded as highly satiating to others.

    Yeah, but you’d have to spend a lot more money to overeat on fat and protein than carbs. I can buy a box of Little Debbie cakes for a dollar, or a pound of salmon or nuts for many times that. Carbs are not only delicious, in our culture they tend to be cheap, and they are easily made in a form which keeps well, which means they are often convenient. You need snacks to stash in your drawer at work, you can pick from nuts, jerky, or... almost any carbs you like. You can buy Coke from a vending machine, you can’t buy milk from a machine (in America, anyway.)

    I thought it was a smart article. As a diabetic who needs access to low carb foods, I have become aware of how much easier our culture makes it to eat an excess of carbs than of other foods. Free Continental breakfast at hotel? Carbs, pay for your own if you want protein. Coworkers bring in treats at work? Carbs. Side dishes at any fast food place? Carbs, fatty carbs, and more carbs. I know of a bbq joint which has deviled eggs as a side, but apart from that, all sides are primarily carbs, usually including beans because fast food joints like to cook beans in sugar sauce.

    I have to plan ahead and spend my own money and cook for myself to have non-carbs available. To eat carbs all I have to do is not say no to the carbs being forced on me.

    Most of the snacky "carbs" are carbs + fat (and I would disagree about how tasty they are, I think most pre-packaged snack foods aren't very good at all).

    You can eat probably just about as cheaply doing a healthy keto as a healthy omnivore, depending on cuts of meat chosen. Both would involve vegetables. Not buying snack foods is cheaper than buying them, no matter how cheap they are, also, and same with eating out vs. cooking at home.

    I think it’s valid that you can probably eat as cheaply doing healthy omnivore as healthy keto, but that’s not what’s being discussed here. What’s under discussion is the availablity of cheap, inexpensive foods, which in America tend to be carbs drenched in saturated fat. Avoid carbs (or conversely avoid saturated fat) and you will almost inevitably lose weight, if you have been accustomed to a standard American diet. Of course that doesn’t apply to all people, it only applies to people who have been eating a standard American diet. That you and I can happily become obese eating salmon and veggies drenched in olive oil is not the point of the article. People eating those things are not driving the increase in obesity rates in America today.

    I think that the bolded is at best included in this discussion parenthetically, if mentioned at all, is what those of us arguing against the article are trying to say. It's NOT carbs. It's convenience foods that are typically carb/fat/salt combinations or straight up sugary treats. But we are living in the "fat is good" period of the wellness industry, so we are just going to lazily say "carbs".

    I think there are probably more snack foods which are straight up carbs than ones which are straight up fat. Many candies are pure carbs, and apart from deep fried butter, it’s hard to find snack foods which are fats without a substantial amount of carbs for the fat to cling to. Therefore if you want to tell people to avoid convenience foods, telling them to avoid carbs is a reasonable shorthand.

    I understand that it’s hard to be smart and watch other people say dumb things without wanting to correct them with the subtleties. But it’s practically impossible to overrate how dumb many people are when it comes to nutrition. Dumbing it down is helpful for many people.

    Considering how many people come here confused about why they aren't losing weight when they cut out most "carbs" and are worried the banana they are putting in their smoothie is the reason they can't lose weight, I personally think maybe we should stop assuming everyone is dumb and actually educate them about how it works. It's not rocket surgery, but it's sure better for the industry if they keep handing people dumbed down strategies that leave people largely ignorant. I'm not yet seeing the obvious success of the low-carb craze in society around me, people are still overweight/obese.

    I tend to agree with you, with reservations. However, I keep being distracted by the idea of rocket surgery.

    When a large number of people all make the same change at the same moment, the problem is environmental, not personal. It’s reasonable to look at environmental solutions.
  • lemurcat2
    lemurcat2 Posts: 7,894 Member
    kimny72 wrote: »
    kimny72 wrote: »
    lemurcat2 wrote: »
    sijomial wrote: »
    Executive summary....
    • Eating too much makes you fat.
    • Eating tasty foods makes it harder to moderate your intake.
    • What people find tasty is very varied.

    Don't suppose that would generate many website hits?

    TBH I find the whole this macro or that macro makes it harder to stay at a good weight vastly overblown - often just another diversion from the biggest issue (over-consumption). When you look at lists of highly satiating foods you find foods that are (predominantly) carbs, protein and fat all represented - plus of course various and varied combinations.

    Personally I could very easily overeat on meat/fish (protein), pasta (starchy carbs) or nuts (fat). That's being driven by my personal taste preferences and not the predominant macro composition of those foods.
    Some of those would be regarded as highly satiating to others.

    Yeah, but you’d have to spend a lot more money to overeat on fat and protein than carbs. I can buy a box of Little Debbie cakes for a dollar, or a pound of salmon or nuts for many times that. Carbs are not only delicious, in our culture they tend to be cheap, and they are easily made in a form which keeps well, which means they are often convenient. You need snacks to stash in your drawer at work, you can pick from nuts, jerky, or... almost any carbs you like. You can buy Coke from a vending machine, you can’t buy milk from a machine (in America, anyway.)

    I thought it was a smart article. As a diabetic who needs access to low carb foods, I have become aware of how much easier our culture makes it to eat an excess of carbs than of other foods. Free Continental breakfast at hotel? Carbs, pay for your own if you want protein. Coworkers bring in treats at work? Carbs. Side dishes at any fast food place? Carbs, fatty carbs, and more carbs. I know of a bbq joint which has deviled eggs as a side, but apart from that, all sides are primarily carbs, usually including beans because fast food joints like to cook beans in sugar sauce.

    I have to plan ahead and spend my own money and cook for myself to have non-carbs available. To eat carbs all I have to do is not say no to the carbs being forced on me.

    Most of the snacky "carbs" are carbs + fat (and I would disagree about how tasty they are, I think most pre-packaged snack foods aren't very good at all).

    You can eat probably just about as cheaply doing a healthy keto as a healthy omnivore, depending on cuts of meat chosen. Both would involve vegetables. Not buying snack foods is cheaper than buying them, no matter how cheap they are, also, and same with eating out vs. cooking at home.

    I think it’s valid that you can probably eat as cheaply doing healthy omnivore as healthy keto, but that’s not what’s being discussed here. What’s under discussion is the availablity of cheap, inexpensive foods, which in America tend to be carbs drenched in saturated fat. Avoid carbs (or conversely avoid saturated fat) and you will almost inevitably lose weight, if you have been accustomed to a standard American diet. Of course that doesn’t apply to all people, it only applies to people who have been eating a standard American diet. That you and I can happily become obese eating salmon and veggies drenched in olive oil is not the point of the article. People eating those things are not driving the increase in obesity rates in America today.

    I think that the bolded is at best included in this discussion parenthetically, if mentioned at all, is what those of us arguing against the article are trying to say. It's NOT carbs. It's convenience foods that are typically carb/fat/salt combinations or straight up sugary treats. But we are living in the "fat is good" period of the wellness industry, so we are just going to lazily say "carbs".

    I think there are probably more snack foods which are straight up carbs than ones which are straight up fat. Many candies are pure carbs, and apart from deep fried butter, it’s hard to find snack foods which are fats without a substantial amount of carbs for the fat to cling to. Therefore if you want to tell people to avoid convenience foods, telling them to avoid carbs is a reasonable shorthand.

    I understand that it’s hard to be smart and watch other people say dumb things without wanting to correct them with the subtleties. But it’s practically impossible to overrate how dumb many people are when it comes to nutrition. Dumbing it down is helpful for many people.

    Considering how many people come here confused about why they aren't losing weight when they cut out most "carbs" and are worried the banana they are putting in their smoothie is the reason they can't lose weight, I personally think maybe we should stop assuming everyone is dumb and actually educate them about how it works. It's not rocket surgery, but it's sure better for the industry if they keep handing people dumbed down strategies that leave people largely ignorant. I'm not yet seeing the obvious success of the low-carb craze in society around me, people are still overweight/obese.

    I tend to agree with you, with reservations. However, I keep being distracted by the idea of rocket surgery.

    When a large number of people all make the same change at the same moment, the problem is environmental, not personal. It’s reasonable to look at environmental solutions.

    I would agree that part of the issue is environmental in that our food environments changed in ways that are both very good (food availability and food choice are good things, and we actually can have more nutrient dense diets now for many of the same reasons, since vegetables and fruits are much more available throughout the year, at least up north where I live, food in general is cheaper) and somewhat bad (there are fewer cultural restrictions on food choice and eating such that many people find it very easy to mindlessly overeat, we are less active, there are more ways to eat excessive cals).

    But that it is environmental doesn't mean we have no choice. It just means we have to exercise the choice more than we did before. As a tradeoff for the good that came as part of that, I don't think that's all that bad.

    Wrt "looking at environmental solutions," what do you think is possible? (I'm reading this as you demanding a social change, such as taxing or banning certain food items, and not what I would suggest -- people taking charge of their own environments and more education/information available.
  • MustBeBrolic
    MustBeBrolic Posts: 9 Member
    I eat 700grams of Carbs a day. Don’t blame Carbs.
  • J72FIT
    J72FIT Posts: 5,936 Member
    I eat 700grams of Carbs a day. Don’t blame Carbs.

    He’s not blaming carbs. He’s blaming overeating. The headline was click-bate. If the article was called “Why Convenience Foods Make Us Fat” no one would bat an eyelash...
  • nighthawk584
    nighthawk584 Posts: 1,979 Member
    I eat 700grams of Carbs a day. Don’t blame Carbs.

    Good Lord! what are you doing, training for the olympics?
  • youngmomtaz
    youngmomtaz Posts: 1,075 Member
    edited September 2019
    J72FIT wrote: »

    100% true for me. And moderating does not work for me at all! A small serving of candy turns into the whole bag, one slice of toast becomes a whole loaf of bread, one pear turns into 4, I become a starving mad thing who stalks the house for anything with a sweet profile. Carbs are awesome! But low carb and keto works for me because they are severely limited. Therefore I can control my calories almost effortlessly.
  • SarahAnne3958
    SarahAnne3958 Posts: 78 Member
    The article has some pretty good points, but a link at the bottom of the page to a forthcoming book by Pilon sort of pings my woo-meter and makes me doubt his credibility: https://clkbooks.com/gbbb/exclusive/original/?hop=esenews&utm_source=bradpilon.com&utm_medium=referral&utm_content=underpost-ad

    Oh my, that was a painful read :| I thought the article the OP posted was pretty solid, but after reading that book blurb, ugh. Seriously, drinking OJ is going to save me from the 'toxins'?
  • AlabasterVerve
    AlabasterVerve Posts: 3,171 Member
    Wow. That's a shocker -- I knew he sold Eat Stop Eat on his site in a click bait-y way -- but that wasn't anything like "obesity toxins" that are cured by drinking a couple of glasses of orange juice a day. He's jumped the shark from trying to make a buck to outright scamming people.
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 26,865 Member
    lemurcat2 wrote: »
    J72FIT wrote: »
    I eat 700grams of Carbs a day. Don’t blame Carbs.

    He’s not blaming carbs. He’s blaming overeating. The headline was click-bate. If the article was called “Why Convenience Foods Make Us Fat” no one would bat an eyelash...

    Except we continue to see people who avoid carbs (including, in some cases, veg and fruit) saying the article is oh so true, so I'd argue that the focus on "carbs" especially for foods that are really as much fat, backfired if the author merely wanted to make a point about overeating and to say carbs should not be demonized.

    It has been quite the lesson in the variability of reading comprehension, inclination to read only the thread title, inclination to read only the OP then respond, etc.

    :lol: