What's the deal with low carb diets?
Replies
-
Carbs are bad if they make you insulin resistant. Insulin resistance is very bad.
If your relationship with insulin is working, you have no reason to avoid carbs. Talk to your doctor if you would like more information.4 -
People use the terms like "eating clean" and "no processed foods" to give their excess consumption virtue. Their overall health is unaffected by the choices and only the radical endpoints of food choices have any actual impact beyond excess body weight.1
-
I don't understand why carbs would be "bad". Anything in excess is bad but I know some people that swear by carb cutting and low carb diets. A certain someone close to me keeps inquiring as to why I'm not cutting carbs instead of calories.
⚫ Is it healthier?
⚫ Is weight loss faster?
⚫ Does the body burn more calories when carbs are subtracted?
⚫ How is it better than regular calorie counting?
⚫ What do carbs have to do with fat?
Personally I feel I -need- carbs. A lot of the time when I'm low on energy or my body just wants something extra I turn to carbs. I feel like carbs react quickly, are more filling, and the energy lasts longer. Honestly before I started caring I relied on sugar very much and I feel like carbs replace that instant energy for me. I'm no expert though so, will someone please explain?
- Is it healthier? You can have a healthy or unhealthy diet on either low carb or high carb or moderate carb. There are many sources of carbohydrates that are nutritional powerhouses and others with not much nutrition at all. Things like potatoes and other root vegetables, oats and other whole grains, legumes, lentils, vegetables, fruit, other grains and seeds, etc pack a lot of nutrition...a Jolly Rancher, not so much.
- Is weight loss faster? Only in the sense that when you drop carbs, you drop a lot of water weight early on as each gram of carbohydrate carries roughly 4 grams of water...but that has jack crap to do with fat, and in reality, carbohydrates are rarely converted to fat by the body as it is an inefficient and difficult process.
- Does the body burn more calories when carbs are subtracted? Of course not...carbs have nothing to do with your metabolism and how many calories you expend doing stuff.
- How is it better than regular calorie counting? It's not...cutting carbs is for many an easy way to cut calories out of the diet. When I diet I tend to reduce carbohydrates because they are the easiest calories to cut...ie instead of my steak with roasted broccoli and roasted potatoes, I'd just have my steak with extra roasted broccoli...by cutting out the roasted potatoes I've cut out a significant number of calories from that particular meal. Nothing more magical than that.
- What do carbs have to do with fat? Nothing. As I mentioned earlier, carbohydrates are rarely converted to body fat. Carbohydrates are ready to burn energy. There is a reason endurance athletes carry around gu and dried fruits and hard candies when they're training and racing. Carbohydrates are the only source of dietary fiber (cuz fiber is a carbohydrate) and provides the overwhelming majority of vitamins and minerals and antioxidants that the human body needs to be healthy.
2 -
Carbs are bad if they make you insulin resistant. Insulin resistance is very bad.
If your relationship with insulin is working, you have no reason to avoid carbs. Talk to your doctor if you would like more information.
But EXCESS carbs are not the biggest contributors to insulin resistance - the two biggest contributors to insulin resistance are:
"Acquired causes of insulin resistance
Acquired causes, meaning you’re not born with the cause, of insulin resistance include:
Excess body fat: Scientists believe obesity, especially excess fat in your belly and around your organs (visceral fat), is a primary cause of insulin resistance. A waist measurement of 40 inches or more for men and people assigned male at birth and 35 inches or more for women and people assigned female at birth is linked to insulin resistance. Studies have shown that belly fat makes hormones and other substances that can contribute to long-term inflammation in your body. This inflammation may play a role in insulin resistance
Physical inactivity: Physical activity makes your body more sensitive to insulin and builds muscle that can absorb blood glucose. A lack of physical activity can have opposite effects and cause insulin resistance. In addition, a lack of physical activity and a sedentary lifestyle are associated with weight gain, which can also contribute to insulin resistance."
from the following article:
https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/22206-insulin-resistance
Eating carbs in a reasonable diet DOES NOT cause insulin resistance.10 -
My opinion: the low-carb thing has been waaaayyy oversold. Obviously, you should avoid sugar, sweets, white flour and other white carbs with basically no nutrition (rice, potatoes pasta). Not only do these things give you a bunch of calories with minimal nutrition, they also get digested quickly, giving you a sugar spike and then a low and leave you feeling hungry. Also, simple carbs are not good from a diabetes perspective. They tend to promote insulin spikes, insulin resistance, and more likelyhood of diabetes in the long-run. Though unless you are already diabetic or pre-diabetic, that is more of a concern with the standard American diet than with your weight loss diet. Any diet that is semi-healthy and helping you to loose weight is also likely to lower your diabetes risk. But all that mostly pertains to the simple carbs. When carbs are complex, and combined with fiber, protein, and vitamins, they can be a very healthy part of a good diet; especially if you want to lean toward plant-based, whole-food, and/or Mediterranean. Beans, whole grains, legumes, pseudo-grains (quinoa, amaranth), nuts, all have carbs and can be a very healthy part of a weight loss diet. Minimally processed whole grains, legumes, etc have a fairly low glycemic index (i.e. don't produce sugar or insulin spikes), and should not be a problem unless you are seriously diabetic). If you are doing significant athletic activity, carbs are the most natural energy source for you muscles. Ultra low-carb (i.e. keto) can detract from your athletic performance or progress.
1 -
Potatoes aren't "basically no nutrition," and they are pretty low cal per volume compared to plenty of other starchy carbs (and of course fat): 70 cal for 100 g of red potatoes, flesh and skin.
Rice and pasta (like potatoes) are also not normally eaten on their own, but as a vehicle to add to the overall satiating effect/satisfying effect (for many of us) of a total meal that typically (for me, anyway) includes plenty of protein, lots of veg, and some fat. So -- as Ann pointed out a ways back -- this idea of spikes/fast digestion (or GI in particular) is basically mooted as they are eaten with other foods that slow them down.
As for hunger, as always that is personal, but I don't feel hungrier sooner after a meal including rice, potatoes, or pasta, assuming the meal as a whole is not unbalanced (I think there's a lot more to hunger anyway).
On diabetes, the post above yours is a good one. No, including potatoes in your diet doesn't cause diabetes.
I agree that a semi-healthy diet that promotes weight loss is generally going to reduce diabetes risk.
As for "all that mostly pertains to the simple carbs" -- you do realized that the foods you were discussing, potatoes, pasta, and rice, are all complex carbs? Not that there's anything inherently wrong with simple carbs -- I quite like fruit and consider it a good part of a healthy diet.
You don't have to "lean toward plant-based" to enjoy starchy carbs (which are "complex" by definition).Beans, whole grains, legumes, pseudo-grains (quinoa, amaranth), nuts, all have carbs and can be a very healthy part of a weight loss diet.
Something I agree with!Minimally processed whole grains, legumes, etc have a fairly low glycemic index (i.e. don't produce sugar or insulin spikes), and should not be a problem unless you are seriously diabetic).
See above re GI.6 -
Today for me. I'm off to bed in a moment.
3 -
I apologize. I just don't imagine that people are eating as healthy as many of you suppose and so my baseline understanding of average American diet is probably off.
1 -
-
I apologize. I just don't imagine that people are eating as healthy as many of you suppose and so my baseline understanding of average American diet is probably off.
I don't think you need to apologize, personally - obviously, I don't speak for the crowd.
I don't necessarily think your baseline understanding of the average American diet is off, either - honestly, I have no idea. I see statistics about things like obesity or sugar consumption, but I don't really know how to translate that into a picture of what an average individual life looks like, vs. the outer ends of the bell curve. My view is biased, I'm sure, by tending to have friends who tend to be more like me, less like . . . something else. (I suspect most people are similarly biased by their personal social context.)
My marketing classes back in the day told me that it tends to be that 20% of the people are going to use 80% of your company's product category, and (while no one believes those are the exact percents), I think that's generally true.
Consequently, I assume there are a minority of people who eat almost entirely whatever we mean by the "bad" kinds of "highly processed" "junk" "fast food". I also assume there are a minority who eat relatively little of that stuff (I think I'm one, and was one when obese). Finally, I think there's probably a larger middle group who eat some of it sometimes, maybe multiple times a week, even some daily, but also eat a reasonable fraction of meat and fish and vegetables and grains and such during a typical week.
People who eat almost entirely low nutrient-dense and high calorie-dense foods, few or no veggies and fruits (and those they do eat heavily sugared) . . . that's not a good thing: They'd likely be better off health-wise eating differently.
The group in the middle, though - majority? good-sized minority? I don't know - can potentially be getting semi-adequate nutrition, maybe too many calories; or good nutrition and way too many calories; or some variation . . . or even be doing OK on both nutrition and calories, though the obesity rates suggest that's rare. (On the nutritional front, it seems like serious under-nutrition or deficiencies are mostly reasonably rare in the US, too - sub-optimality probably more common.)
That middle group, which is a good sized group, I suspect, doesn't necessarily need to take every morsel of "bad" "highly processed" "junk" "fast food" out of their eating entirely. If they really enjoy those "hyperpalatable" things, they may find it easier to stick with reasonable calories and decent-ish nutrition long enough to manage their weight, if they don't try to give all those foods up entirely forever. Just a guess, though.
It's not uncommon here to see people start with calorie counting thinking they can keep eating exactly the same foods as before, including in some cases a lot of less nutrient-dense, high calorie, non-sating foods, just less of them, and lose weight. Which they can, technically.
Pretty quickly, the smart ones tend to discover that they're less hungry if they start to mix in some more nutrient-dense, filling foods. Their eating evolves. Not everyone sticks with it that long, of course. But I think those who do are increasing their long-term success odds, figuring out what mix of things they personally need to feel full, get enough treats not to feel deprived or feel socially isolated in their social context, keep their energy level up, improve health markers, etc. That's a good thing.
By contrast, another common scenario here is the "revolutionize my whole way of eating and never eat the 'bad' foods I like ever again" route. That often doesn't end well, and may end quickly: If weight loss happens, do they make it all the way to a healthy weight? If they make it to a healthy weight, do they stay there? How often? Or does life get complicated, and they "go back to normal"? Decide that since they ate that "bad" food or meal or few, they've blown it, might as well give up?
Here, on MFP, we have an opportunity to be clear and specific about what it might mean to have a "healthy diet" (with "diet" as a noun, there). People arrive here with incorrect ideas from popular culture (like that "potatoes are a simple carb with no nutritional value" thing) and a tendency to think in abstractions or generalities (like "junk food" vs. "superfood"). I'm going to keep advocating hitting one's calorie goal, tweaking details to feel full, then to get better nutrition, and so forth . . . while eating foods that that specific person enjoys eating (or at least tolerates well), that are practical and affordable for them. In that context, it doesn't matter if they have fries for lunch three times a week, have a donut on Sunday, etc., if the overall way of eating is reasonable.
Going back to the OP: If low carb gets a person to reasonable calories, feeling full, eating in a practical and enjoyable way, getting adequate nutrition, reaching and staying at a heathy weight and good health markers, I'm all for it . . . for them. Ditto for IF, paleo, Bright Line Eating, Whole 30 forever not just 30 days, whole foods plant based, or any other modality that can accommodate good health, including eating some junk food sometimes in a context of overall reasonable calories and nutrition.
/End rant.
5 -
Carbs are bad if they make you insulin resistant. Insulin resistance is very bad.
If your relationship with insulin is working, you have no reason to avoid carbs. Talk to your doctor if you would like more information.
But EXCESS carbs are not the biggest contributors to insulin resistance - the two biggest contributors to insulin resistance are:
"Acquired causes of insulin resistance
Acquired causes, meaning you’re not born with the cause, of insulin resistance include:
Excess body fat: Scientists believe obesity, especially excess fat in your belly and around your organs (visceral fat), is a primary cause of insulin resistance. A waist measurement of 40 inches or more for men and people assigned male at birth and 35 inches or more for women and people assigned female at birth is linked to insulin resistance. Studies have shown that belly fat makes hormones and other substances that can contribute to long-term inflammation in your body. This inflammation may play a role in insulin resistance
Physical inactivity: Physical activity makes your body more sensitive to insulin and builds muscle that can absorb blood glucose. A lack of physical activity can have opposite effects and cause insulin resistance. In addition, a lack of physical activity and a sedentary lifestyle are associated with weight gain, which can also contribute to insulin resistance."
from the following article:
https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/22206-insulin-resistance
Eating carbs in a reasonable diet DOES NOT cause insulin resistance.
I applaud you on the five minutes it took you to find this article and copy and paste it here. But I have to say it's horrifically wrong. Insulin resistance is caused by carbohydrate intolerance, full stop.
It's 100% about the carbs. To say that it's not about the carbs, it's about the consequence of eating the carbs, is a silly distinction. But it was pop science on a google search, so you get what you pay for.
Let's take it further though: how does one become overweight? How does one get visceral fat?
Well let's see.
Let's say I want to fatten my pigs. I give them fanta to drink so they will eat more. That's established science. And I will feed them grains/bread. They fatten up real well on carbs.
Or I want to make some pate de foie gras. So I'm going to force feed my goose grains. No point feeding it fat. It won't get visceral fat on fat. It won't get fat at all.
So.. are we genetically similar to farm animals.
Most of us grew up in the 80s, 90s, noughties - on low fat, high carb diets. Can you see a problem?
Low fat foods had added sugar to make them still taste okay.
I quit an almost zero fat lifestyle in about 2017 after forty odd years of desperate dieting. At which time I was 100kg. And I'd given myself gallstones, not by being obese. No. By not using bile - by not eating any fat. Supersaturated solutions precipitate crystals! We all learned that in high school. Hey. We all made them in high school. I supersaturated my gallbladder bile and precipitated cholesteral balls. Well played.
Everyone with type 2 diabetes has 'acquired' it. That's not news. What is type 2 diabetes? It's an intolerance of carbs. If you cannot process milk, you are called milk intolerant. Well, a diabetic can't process carbs. He is intolerant of carbs.
Therefore talking about 'too many' changes meaning. Too many is over 50g a day. Too many for you might be 150.
So which come first? The carbs or the diabetes? The carbs or the obesity?
For me now, with a glucometer in my arm, I can tell you quite definitively what kicks my blood sugar off the charts, and it's any carb at all. slow release, fast release. don't matter. And sugar in the blood is poison. So in that regard, carbs are most assuredly toxic to someone with insulin resistance.
5 -
From: Manabe Y, Matsumura S, Fushiki T. Preference for High-Fat Food in Animals. In: Montmayeur JP, le Coutre J, editors. Fat Detection: Taste, Texture, and Post Ingestive Effects. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press/Taylor & Francis; 2010. Chapter 10.
Full chapter at this link: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK53543/The phenomenon of animals preferring high-fat foods has been accepted as natural behavior. Animals are equipped with fat not only for energy storage, but also for regulation of body temperature and as a source of many hormones. It is reasonable that animals eat and store fat based on physiological demands. On the other hand, eating an excessive amount of fat causes many metabolic diseases such as type II diabetes, atherosclerosis, and cardiovascular disease. Reflecting the current health situation in industrialized nations, fat studies are focused on why we overeat high-fat foods and how we can cope with accumulating body fat.
Reported in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, article on a small study, in humans, using measurements in a whole-room calorimeter, title "Fat and carbohydrate overfeeding in humans: different effects on energy storage"
Abstract here: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7598063/Carbohydrate overfeeding produced progressive increases in carbohydrate oxidation and total energy expenditure resulting in 75-85% of excess energy being stored. Alternatively, fat overfeeding had minimal effects on fat oxidation and total energy expenditure, leading to storage of 90-95% of excess energy. Excess dietary fat leads to greater fat accumulation than does excess dietary carbohydrate, and the difference was greatest early in the overfeeding period.
There are others.
By the way, Cleveland Clinic is not a "pop science" source. It's a a major US academic medical center, involved in teaching and research, regarded as one of the top handful of such institutions in the world.
Does eating fat make people (or other animals) fat? Per se, no. Does eating carbohydrates make people (or other animals) fat? Per se, no. Does consuming excess energy (calories) make people fat? Yes.
In a state of consuming excess energy from mixed macronutrients, which macronutrient is preferentially stored as fat? Fat.
Does eating carbohydrates cause insulin resistance? Per se, no. Does eating fat cause insulin resistance? Per se, no. Is excess body fat, however accumulated, correlated with insulin resistance? Strongly. Is a lifestyle (diet and exercise) that creates frequent large insulin spikes a pancreatic stressor that may contribute to developing insulin resistance? Likely (. . . says that very same Cleveland Clinic so-called "pop science" article, down the list of potential causes of IR, below excess bodyweight and under-exercise).14 -
@Bridgie3
I agree with sijomial, Bridgie - you are way off-base.
I just don't have the energy to dispute every one of your points, but they are all wrong.12 -
My opinion: the low-carb thing has been waaaayyy oversold. Obviously, you should avoid sugar, sweets, white flour and other white carbs with basically no nutrition (rice, potatoes pasta). Not only do these things give you a bunch of calories with minimal nutrition, they also get digested quickly, giving you a sugar spike and then a low and leave you feeling hungry. Also, simple carbs are not good from a diabetes perspective. They tend to promote insulin spikes, insulin resistance, and more likelyhood of diabetes in the long-run. Though unless you are already diabetic or pre-diabetic, that is more of a concern with the standard American diet than with your weight loss diet. Any diet that is semi-healthy and helping you to loose weight is also likely to lower your diabetes risk. But all that mostly pertains to the simple carbs. When carbs are complex, and combined with fiber, protein, and vitamins, they can be a very healthy part of a good diet; especially if you want to lean toward plant-based, whole-food, and/or Mediterranean. Beans, whole grains, legumes, pseudo-grains (quinoa, amaranth), nuts, all have carbs and can be a very healthy part of a weight loss diet. Minimally processed whole grains, legumes, etc have a fairly low glycemic index (i.e. don't produce sugar or insulin spikes), and should not be a problem unless you are seriously diabetic). If you are doing significant athletic activity, carbs are the most natural energy source for you muscles. Ultra low-carb (i.e. keto) can detract from your athletic performance or progress.
You should go look at the nutritional profile of a potato. It's actually packed with nutrition and about as close as you can get to one food being a complete food. In particular they are high in vitamin C and an exceptional source of potassium (way more than a banana). They are also a very good source of iron and a decent source of vegetarian protein and a good source of dietary fiber. They are also a whole food.13 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »My opinion: the low-carb thing has been waaaayyy oversold. Obviously, you should avoid sugar, sweets, white flour and other white carbs with basically no nutrition (rice, potatoes pasta). Not only do these things give you a bunch of calories with minimal nutrition, they also get digested quickly, giving you a sugar spike and then a low and leave you feeling hungry. Also, simple carbs are not good from a diabetes perspective. They tend to promote insulin spikes, insulin resistance, and more likelyhood of diabetes in the long-run. Though unless you are already diabetic or pre-diabetic, that is more of a concern with the standard American diet than with your weight loss diet. Any diet that is semi-healthy and helping you to loose weight is also likely to lower your diabetes risk. But all that mostly pertains to the simple carbs. When carbs are complex, and combined with fiber, protein, and vitamins, they can be a very healthy part of a good diet; especially if you want to lean toward plant-based, whole-food, and/or Mediterranean. Beans, whole grains, legumes, pseudo-grains (quinoa, amaranth), nuts, all have carbs and can be a very healthy part of a weight loss diet. Minimally processed whole grains, legumes, etc have a fairly low glycemic index (i.e. don't produce sugar or insulin spikes), and should not be a problem unless you are seriously diabetic). If you are doing significant athletic activity, carbs are the most natural energy source for you muscles. Ultra low-carb (i.e. keto) can detract from your athletic performance or progress.
You should go look at the nutritional profile of a potato. It's actually packed with nutrition and about as close as you can get to one food being a complete food. In particular they are high in vitamin C and an exceptional source of potassium (way more than a banana). They are also a very good source of iron and a decent source of vegetarian protein and a good source of dietary fiber. They are also a whole food.
That's so funny because you don't think of potato chips as being nutritionally sound or anything but I was checking out the nutrition label (I tend to only look at calories/sodium/protein if it's generally a proteinish food) on a bag and saw how high the potassium was and was "whoa!" Then I realized...."oh yeah, potatoes".
2 -
Carbs are bad if they make you insulin resistant. Insulin resistance is very bad.
If your relationship with insulin is working, you have no reason to avoid carbs. Talk to your doctor if you would like more information.
But EXCESS carbs are not the biggest contributors to insulin resistance - the two biggest contributors to insulin resistance are:
"Acquired causes of insulin resistance
Acquired causes, meaning you’re not born with the cause, of insulin resistance include:
Excess body fat: Scientists believe obesity, especially excess fat in your belly and around your organs (visceral fat), is a primary cause of insulin resistance. A waist measurement of 40 inches or more for men and people assigned male at birth and 35 inches or more for women and people assigned female at birth is linked to insulin resistance. Studies have shown that belly fat makes hormones and other substances that can contribute to long-term inflammation in your body. This inflammation may play a role in insulin resistance
Physical inactivity: Physical activity makes your body more sensitive to insulin and builds muscle that can absorb blood glucose. A lack of physical activity can have opposite effects and cause insulin resistance. In addition, a lack of physical activity and a sedentary lifestyle are associated with weight gain, which can also contribute to insulin resistance."
from the following article:
https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/22206-insulin-resistance
Eating carbs in a reasonable diet DOES NOT cause insulin resistance.
I applaud you on the five minutes it took you to find this article and copy and paste it here. But I have to say it's horrifically wrong. Insulin resistance is caused by carbohydrate intolerance, full stop.
It's 100% about the carbs. To say that it's not about the carbs, it's about the consequence of eating the carbs, is a silly distinction. But it was pop science on a google search, so you get what you pay for.
Let's take it further though: how does one become overweight? How does one get visceral fat?
Well let's see.
Let's say I want to fatten my pigs. I give them fanta to drink so they will eat more. That's established science. And I will feed them grains/bread. They fatten up real well on carbs.
Or I want to make some pate de foie gras. So I'm going to force feed my goose grains. No point feeding it fat. It won't get visceral fat on fat. It won't get fat at all.
So.. are we genetically similar to farm animals.
Most of us grew up in the 80s, 90s, noughties - on low fat, high carb diets. Can you see a problem?
Low fat foods had added sugar to make them still taste okay.
I quit an almost zero fat lifestyle in about 2017 after forty odd years of desperate dieting. At which time I was 100kg. And I'd given myself gallstones, not by being obese. No. By not using bile - by not eating any fat. Supersaturated solutions precipitate crystals! We all learned that in high school. Hey. We all made them in high school. I supersaturated my gallbladder bile and precipitated cholesteral balls. Well played.
Everyone with type 2 diabetes has 'acquired' it. That's not news. What is type 2 diabetes? It's an intolerance of carbs. If you cannot process milk, you are called milk intolerant. Well, a diabetic can't process carbs. He is intolerant of carbs.
Therefore talking about 'too many' changes meaning. Too many is over 50g a day. Too many for you might be 150.
So which come first? The carbs or the diabetes? The carbs or the obesity?
For me now, with a glucometer in my arm, I can tell you quite definitively what kicks my blood sugar off the charts, and it's any carb at all. slow release, fast release. don't matter. And sugar in the blood is poison. So in that regard, carbs are most assuredly toxic to someone with insulin resistance.
There's a difference between having to restrict your carbs because you have insulin resistance and becoming insulin resistant because you ate carbs.11 -
I have acid reflux from time to time. When it flares up, I have to take Tums roughly once an hour, I feel bloated all the time, and sleeping becomes uncomfortable.
The only thing that has quelled these symptoms is low carb diet. I go low carb for 3-4 weeks, and gradually reintroduce fruits and some sweets (I have a sweet tooth), and the reflux just goes away like magic.
Generally I avoid bread all the time now, because it seems to be the chief instigator. I mean, a little bread now and then seems to be okay, but sadly I just can't go back to eating a bagel every day and so forth.
Your mileage may vary, but that's what I've found. By the way, low carb has also been great for losing weight. Right now, I'm on a myfitnesspal calorie limited diet, not low carb, but I still try to limit grain and starch carbs as much as possible.3 -
From: Manabe Y, Matsumura S, Fushiki T. Preference for High-Fat Food in Animals. In: Montmayeur JP, le Coutre J, editors. Fat Detection: Taste, Texture, and Post Ingestive Effects. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press/Taylor & Francis; 2010. Chapter 10.
Full chapter at this link: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK53543/The phenomenon of animals preferring high-fat foods has been accepted as natural behavior. Animals are equipped with fat not only for energy storage, but also for regulation of body temperature and as a source of many hormones. It is reasonable that animals eat and store fat based on physiological demands. On the other hand, eating an excessive amount of fat causes many metabolic diseases such as type II diabetes, atherosclerosis, and cardiovascular disease. Reflecting the current health situation in industrialized nations, fat studies are focused on why we overeat high-fat foods and how we can cope with accumulating body fat.
Reported in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, article on a small study, in humans, using measurements in a whole-room calorimeter, title "Fat and carbohydrate overfeeding in humans: different effects on energy storage"
Abstract here: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7598063/Carbohydrate overfeeding produced progressive increases in carbohydrate oxidation and total energy expenditure resulting in 75-85% of excess energy being stored. Alternatively, fat overfeeding had minimal effects on fat oxidation and total energy expenditure, leading to storage of 90-95% of excess energy. Excess dietary fat leads to greater fat accumulation than does excess dietary carbohydrate, and the difference was greatest early in the overfeeding period.
There are others.
By the way, Cleveland Clinic is not a "pop science" source. It's a a major US academic medical center, involved in teaching and research, regarded as one of the top handful of such institutions in the world.
Does eating fat make people (or other animals) fat? Per se, no. Does eating carbohydrates make people (or other animals) fat? Per se, no. Does consuming excess energy (calories) make people fat? Yes.
In a state of consuming excess energy from mixed macronutrients, which macronutrient is preferentially stored as fat? Fat.
Does eating carbohydrates cause insulin resistance? Per se, no. Does eating fat cause insulin resistance? Per se, no. Is excess body fat, however accumulated, correlated with insulin resistance? Strongly. Is a lifestyle (diet and exercise) that creates frequent large insulin spikes a pancreatic stressor that may contribute to developing insulin resistance? Likely (. . . says that very same Cleveland Clinic so-called "pop science" article, down the list of potential causes of IR, below excess bodyweight and under-exercise).
how old is this.
You need to update. The universities themselves need to update. The sugar myth is over, it's time for the scientists to catch up.
Beware. I have a GP who in one sentence said fat is fine and in the next said eat lean chicken and remove the fat. She can't see the conflict but it's glaring.
Offload the old science. The internet doesn't date its entries; you have to be more awake.
It has been discovered that eating fructose forces about 80% conversion to fat. That's how your liver do. And if you're converting a percentage of it to fat, you can't use it.
Insulin is the fat storage hormone. That's how insulin do. If you are sending insulin out for your glucose, that is what it are doing.
There's a huge gap in the science at the moment, regarding fat storage and insulin use. And until that gap in the knowledge is locked down, none of you can rely on any of the information you're getting from these american universities. And while you're at it, check their funding.1 -
Wow, getting big time larry vibes (none of you will get that).4
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 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
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 901 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.2K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions