Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.

What a lot of us here already know: "Fast" carbs don't make you fat!

Speakeasy76
Speakeasy76 Posts: 961 Member
edited August 2021 in Debate Club
https://www.abc27.com/news/health/fast-carbs-dont-make-you-fat-study-says/

I saw this article yesterday, and it confirms what a lot of us here already know: There is no difference between carbs that are supposedly processed faster (e.g., white bread, pasta, etc.) than slower-digesting carbs in terms of weight loss or gain and obesity. I was a bit skeptical that the report was commissioned by the "Grain Foods Foundation" and would like to read the actual report, but still think it's true in terms of weight loss. Nutritionally of course they are different, but I think there are still a lot of people out there who think white carbs are the devil!

I'll admit I used to never want to eat white rice, bread or pasta and do like whole-wheat, but lately have been eating more of the white stuff and not feeling bad about it. I actually think I may digest the white stuff more easily than the whole-wheat and the whole-wheat sometimes causes bloating/cramps, but need to experiment a bit more to see if that's what it is.

«1345

Replies

  • neanderthin
    neanderthin Posts: 10,201 Member
    It amazes me that grants or getting paid for this kind of study is still around. The Barnum & Bailey effect in full bloom. :)
  • neanderthin
    neanderthin Posts: 10,201 Member
    It amazes me that grants or getting paid for this kind of study is still around. The Barnum & Bailey effect in full bloom. :)

    There is value in applying rigorous scientific methodology to testing out "common sense" ideas that "everyone knows." Sometimes folk wisdom is just flat-out wrong, or broadly right but for the wrong reasons.

    I sure your right but I'll continue to think based on current science that it's calories and it's overconsumption that makes people gain weight, but who knows it might be individual foods like fast carbs.
  • neanderthin
    neanderthin Posts: 10,201 Member
    edited August 2021
    It amazes me that grants or getting paid for this kind of study is still around. The Barnum & Bailey effect in full bloom. :)

    There is value in applying rigorous scientific methodology to testing out "common sense" ideas that "everyone knows." Sometimes folk wisdom is just flat-out wrong, or broadly right but for the wrong reasons.

    I sure your right but I'll continue to think based on current science that it's calories and it's overconsumption that makes people gain weight, but who knows it might be individual foods like fast carbs.

    She isn't saying it's not calories. She's saying good science involves testing 'common knowledge' things that have never been put to the test.

    That is accurate.

    Because sometimes common sense is right and sometimes we drew a wrong conclusion, and either way having scientific evidence of that is useful to us.

    Yes, thank you.

    I like science. I'm what some might call a nutritional nerd and have been doing my own research since the late 90's, so I agree science and testing hypothesis is crucial. The comparison between simple and complex carbs effects have been researched to death. This article even mentions 34 previous studies that came to the same conclusion. I give the researchers of this study credit for getting paid for something that has ben done over and over again and to no surprise they came to the same conclusion.
  • 33gail33
    33gail33 Posts: 1,155 Member
    edited August 2021
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    I realized in 2004 that I preferred white rice and felt guilty about abandoning brown rice for a long time, but no more!

    I believe I first saw this graphic here on MFP:

    https://www.aworkoutroutine.com/brown-rice-vs-white-rice/

    esod5x60wsai.png

    I can easily make up that 1 g of protein and fiber elsewhere. Actually, as I type this I am eating cottage cheese and blueberries, so check :lol:

    How is possible that white rice has vitamin C and brown rice doesn’t? That’s odd.
  • This content has been removed.
  • 33gail33
    33gail33 Posts: 1,155 Member
    edited August 2021
    lemurcat2 wrote: »
    33gail33 wrote: »
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    I realized in 2004 that I preferred white rice and felt guilty about abandoning brown rice for a long time, but no more!

    I believe I first saw this graphic here on MFP:

    https://www.aworkoutroutine.com/brown-rice-vs-white-rice/

    esod5x60wsai.png

    I can easily make up that 1 g of protein and fiber elsewhere. Actually, as I type this I am eating cottage cheese and blueberries, so check :lol:

    How is possible that white rice has vitamin C and brown rice doesn’t? That’s odd.

    Rice doesn't have vit C, but lots of white rice is fortified, so maybe it was added.

    I like brown rice better (I'm not that into rice anyway in that I think it works well with some food and is fine but I could easily live without it, but think if one must choose brown is tastier), but I don't think either is really better from a nutritional perspective. One can likely get nutrients more easily from fortified white rice than brown, and it's not like I find brown rice super filling -- it's way more about the protein and veg one eats with the rice.

    That's what I was thinking too - but if that is the case then I think that showing a nutritional comparison between a fortified and non-fortified food item is a bit disingenuous. I mean it probably doesn't matter but it would make me question the rest of the comparatives as well (if I was interested in choosing rice with the best nutritional profile which personally I am not).
  • ninerbuff
    ninerbuff Posts: 48,961 Member
    33gail33 wrote: »
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    I realized in 2004 that I preferred white rice and felt guilty about abandoning brown rice for a long time, but no more!

    I believe I first saw this graphic here on MFP:

    https://www.aworkoutroutine.com/brown-rice-vs-white-rice/

    esod5x60wsai.png

    I can easily make up that 1 g of protein and fiber elsewhere. Actually, as I type this I am eating cottage cheese and blueberries, so check :lol:

    How is possible that white rice has vitamin C and brown rice doesn’t? That’s odd.
    Fortification.



    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png


  • neanderthin
    neanderthin Posts: 10,201 Member
    https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/carbohydrates/low-carbohydrate-diets/

    I can't believe Harvard wrote this considering their ground zero for plant based diets. Anyway there's actually hundreds of studies that show that when carbs and we're talking mostly refined carbs and sugar are reduced in the diet that health markers improve, and significantly in some studies.
  • 33gail33
    33gail33 Posts: 1,155 Member
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    33gail33 wrote: »
    lemurcat2 wrote: »
    33gail33 wrote: »
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    I realized in 2004 that I preferred white rice and felt guilty about abandoning brown rice for a long time, but no more!

    I believe I first saw this graphic here on MFP:

    https://www.aworkoutroutine.com/brown-rice-vs-white-rice/

    esod5x60wsai.png

    I can easily make up that 1 g of protein and fiber elsewhere. Actually, as I type this I am eating cottage cheese and blueberries, so check :lol:

    How is possible that white rice has vitamin C and brown rice doesn’t? That’s odd.

    Rice doesn't have vit C, but lots of white rice is fortified, so maybe it was added.

    I like brown rice better (I'm not that into rice anyway in that I think it works well with some food and is fine but I could easily live without it, but think if one must choose brown is tastier), but I don't think either is really better from a nutritional perspective. One can likely get nutrients more easily from fortified white rice than brown, and it's not like I find brown rice super filling -- it's way more about the protein and veg one eats with the rice.

    That's what I was thinking too - but if that is the case then I think that showing a nutritional comparison between a fortified and non-fortified food item is a bit disingenuous. I mean it probably doesn't matter but it would make me question the rest of the comparatives as well (if I was interested in choosing rice with the best nutritional profile which personally I am not).
    The body doesn't distinguish whether a food is fortified or not, so really wouldn't the biggest concern be what you're really getting from a food when you compare it with something similar?


    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png

    My point is that any food can be high in nutrients if you add them to it. I would think the whole point of comparing two foods side by side would be to do a comparison of the nutrients that are inherent in those foods.
  • ninerbuff
    ninerbuff Posts: 48,961 Member
    33gail33 wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    33gail33 wrote: »
    lemurcat2 wrote: »
    33gail33 wrote: »
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    I realized in 2004 that I preferred white rice and felt guilty about abandoning brown rice for a long time, but no more!

    I believe I first saw this graphic here on MFP:

    https://www.aworkoutroutine.com/brown-rice-vs-white-rice/

    esod5x60wsai.png

    I can easily make up that 1 g of protein and fiber elsewhere. Actually, as I type this I am eating cottage cheese and blueberries, so check :lol:

    How is possible that white rice has vitamin C and brown rice doesn’t? That’s odd.

    Rice doesn't have vit C, but lots of white rice is fortified, so maybe it was added.

    I like brown rice better (I'm not that into rice anyway in that I think it works well with some food and is fine but I could easily live without it, but think if one must choose brown is tastier), but I don't think either is really better from a nutritional perspective. One can likely get nutrients more easily from fortified white rice than brown, and it's not like I find brown rice super filling -- it's way more about the protein and veg one eats with the rice.

    That's what I was thinking too - but if that is the case then I think that showing a nutritional comparison between a fortified and non-fortified food item is a bit disingenuous. I mean it probably doesn't matter but it would make me question the rest of the comparatives as well (if I was interested in choosing rice with the best nutritional profile which personally I am not).
    The body doesn't distinguish whether a food is fortified or not, so really wouldn't the biggest concern be what you're really getting from a food when you compare it with something similar?


    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png

    My point is that any food can be high in nutrients if you add them to it. I would think the whole point of comparing two foods side by side would be to do a comparison of the nutrients that are inherent in those foods.
    Well since most processed foods end up stripping nutrients, you MAY NOT find any process foods that aren't fortified. So the search for those could be in vain. But again, I think the whole point of nutrients in food is what is offered to you whether fortified or not.



    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png
  • 33gail33
    33gail33 Posts: 1,155 Member
    edited August 2021
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    33gail33 wrote: »
    ninerbuff wrote: »
    33gail33 wrote: »
    lemurcat2 wrote: »
    33gail33 wrote: »
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    I realized in 2004 that I preferred white rice and felt guilty about abandoning brown rice for a long time, but no more!

    I believe I first saw this graphic here on MFP:

    https://www.aworkoutroutine.com/brown-rice-vs-white-rice/

    esod5x60wsai.png

    I can easily make up that 1 g of protein and fiber elsewhere. Actually, as I type this I am eating cottage cheese and blueberries, so check :lol:

    How is possible that white rice has vitamin C and brown rice doesn’t? That’s odd.

    Rice doesn't have vit C, but lots of white rice is fortified, so maybe it was added.

    I like brown rice better (I'm not that into rice anyway in that I think it works well with some food and is fine but I could easily live without it, but think if one must choose brown is tastier), but I don't think either is really better from a nutritional perspective. One can likely get nutrients more easily from fortified white rice than brown, and it's not like I find brown rice super filling -- it's way more about the protein and veg one eats with the rice.

    That's what I was thinking too - but if that is the case then I think that showing a nutritional comparison between a fortified and non-fortified food item is a bit disingenuous. I mean it probably doesn't matter but it would make me question the rest of the comparatives as well (if I was interested in choosing rice with the best nutritional profile which personally I am not).
    The body doesn't distinguish whether a food is fortified or not, so really wouldn't the biggest concern be what you're really getting from a food when you compare it with something similar?


    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png

    My point is that any food can be high in nutrients if you add them to it. I would think the whole point of comparing two foods side by side would be to do a comparison of the nutrients that are inherent in those foods.
    Well since most processed foods end up stripping nutrients, you MAY NOT find any process foods that aren't fortified. So the search for those could be in vain. But again, I think the whole point of nutrients in food is what is offered to you whether fortified or not.



    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

    9285851.png

    OK - so if I buy protein fortified almond milk then I can claim that almond milk is higher protein than soy milk?

    I mean sure maybe most white rice is fortified - that wasn't really the point of the post - it was a comparison between the two of them which to me would imply a comparison between their inherent nutritional profile. I mean the claim was that white rice is fairly comparable nutritionally to brown rice, if they have to add nutrients into because they "end up stripping" them out, then that claim is disingenuous, imo.

    But honestly I don't care to argue about it, it was just an observation that I made looking at the comparative which made me curious, I honestly don't care that much about it to keep discussing it.
  • neanderthin
    neanderthin Posts: 10,201 Member
    edited August 2021
    https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/carbohydrates/low-carbohydrate-diets/

    I can't believe Harvard wrote this considering their ground zero for plant based diets. Anyway there's actually hundreds of studies that show that when carbs and we're talking mostly refined carbs and sugar are reduced in the diet that health markers improve, and significantly in some studies.

    Are there studies that look at the impacts of carbohydrate restriction outside of the context of weight loss?

    That is, studies where there was no weight loss, but health markers improved? I ask because if people are losing weight it's going to be very hard to determine if it was due to carbohydrate restriction or due to losing weight.

    Yes actually quite a few and if I have time I'll post. It can be confusing if one diet is ad lib and the other is in a deficit, no doubt about it. Which actually triggers my memory recalling that most comparisons of a low carb diet vs a low fat diet had the low carb diet was instructed to eat at ad libitum while the low fat was given a calorie restriction, and almost all of the time, given the span and controls involved the low carb diet generally lost more weight and improved health markers.
  • neanderthin
    neanderthin Posts: 10,201 Member
    lemurcat2 wrote: »
    https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/carbohydrates/low-carbohydrate-diets/

    I can't believe Harvard wrote this considering their ground zero for plant based diets. Anyway there's actually hundreds of studies that show that when carbs and we're talking mostly refined carbs and sugar are reduced in the diet that health markers improve, and significantly in some studies.

    The Harvard nutrition people have never been pro eating lots of refined carbs or added sugar. It's just that they don't think that's the only thing that matters for a healthy diet.

    Also, no fast carbs (like at least one person seems to be arguing in this thread) and don't overeat highly refined carbs and added sugars are different things.

    I agree.