What scientific evidence is there that Carbs will make you fat?
willmakehay
Posts: 9 Member
People say that eating too many carbs will make you gain fat.
0
Replies
-
People say a lot of things! Doesn’t make it all true.
Carbohydrates, just like Proteins and Fats, if you eat more (measured in calories) of them, over time, than your body burns, over time (again, measured in calories) will make you gain weight.
But it’s not the ‘carbs’ - it’s the calories!
By the way - vegetables are primarily carbohydrates. Do people often say:
‘Vegetables make you fat’?
(Although…as a vegetarian I’ve been overweight, so maybe they do! 😂)5 -
BarbaraHelen2013 wrote: »People say a lot of things! Doesn’t make it all true.
Carbohydrates, just like Proteins and Fats, if you eat more (measured in calories) of them, over time, than your body burns, over time (again, measured in calories) will make you gain weight.
But it’s not the ‘carbs’ - it’s the calories!
By the way - vegetables are primarily carbohydrates. Do people often say:
‘Vegetables make you fat’?
(Although…as a vegetarian I’ve been overweight, so maybe they do! 😂)
You know, I've been popping a lot more frozen fruit lately and gained a pound last week. Could be true!
(Kidding. Not about the popping frozen fruit and gaining but...it's the calories. Not the carbs.
) 1 -
I think the only reason people think this is because a lot of foods that contain simple carbs can be really easy to overeat. Furthermore, what a lot of people consider carbs just.. aren’t carbs. Pizza.. isn’t a carb. Pasta dishes… aren’t carbs. Vegetables are carbs. Legumes are carbs. Cereals (not stuff like Kellogg’s) are carbs0
-
willmakehay wrote: »People say that eating too many carbs will make you gain fat.
If "too many carbs" is so many carbs that it puts you above your weight-maintenance calories, yes, you will gain fat.
Same thing will happen if you eat "too much fat" or "too much protein" or a combination of too much fat/protein/carbs, and as a result go above your weight-maintenance calories.
Fun fact: In a state of calorie excess (i.e., above maintenance calories), the macronutrient most likely to be stored as body fat is . . . fat! (De novo lipogenesis - conversion of carbs in the body into fatty acids -is relatively rare under normal conditions, because it's inefficient. It "costs" calories to do the conversion, loosely. Human beings developed in an environment where food scarcity was much more common than food surplus, so our modern bodies still tend to prefer efficient pathways over inefficient ones.)
If low carb eating helps some specific individual manage calorie intake more happily, low carb eating is a good thing, for them. If someone has a medical condition (such as diabetes or insulin resistance) that requires managing carbs, then low (or at least managed) carbs are likely a good thing, for them.
Typical otherwise-healthy people can lose weight without deliberately focusing on reduced carbs. Nutrition is important, though, and protein/fats are essential nutrients (body can't manufacture them out of other nutrients), so only so many carbs will fit into an overall nutritionally balanced way of eating. How many? Varies by individual.3 -
A simple google search would answer your query. There is reams of information. This is not really debatable at this point. Too much of any food will cause you to put on weight of course. but it is much much easier to do with simple carbs.0
-
Okay so... suuuuuper over simplified but easy to understand explanation:
Carbs, or carbohydrates, are chains of sugar. Simple or complex, they are all sugar chains.
Everything edible contains trace amounts of these, because all plants (fruits, vegetables, grains) contain chains of sugar. Even fungi contain them. Mammals produce some types of sugar on their own. All animals either eat plants which contain carbohydrates, or eat other animals which have eaten plants which contain carbohydrates.
But plants have the most carbohydrates because they are literally made of these sugar chains, plus water, and a few other things (including a type of proteins which help them to stay in one piece while they grow)...
Animals are compromised of all of the above, plus fats, plus a different type of proteins which are, essentially, muscle tissue.
In every 1 gram (like, measured on a scale) of proteins there are 4 units of energy. There are 4 units of energy in every 1 gram of carbohydrates. Sugar alcohols contain 7 units of energy per gram. And there are 9 units of energy in a gram of fat.
Those units of energy are called calories.
When we eat, we injest all of those things, in their original form.
Our body uses the protein, sugars, and fats for various, specific needs. If there are proteins, sugars, or fats left, or if we have already met those needs when we eat, the body stores the excess, by converting their energy into its "storage" form: fat.
It doesn't matter what the initial form was. It's all *stored* as fat.
That's why some people say it doesn't matter what you eat. A calorie is a calorie, as far as fat storage is concerned.
But your body can't (typically) use fat or protein for the processes it needs sugar for. It can't use sugar (carbs) or protein for things it needs fat for. And likewise, it can't use fat or sugars for the processes it needs protein for.
Your body needs all three. These 3 things are all a) necessary and b) energy which is converted into fat. They are the big 3. MACRO-nutrients. Foods also contain lots of other things which either a) are unnecessary (like sugar alcohols) or b) are not energy which is converted into fat. These are called micronutrients.
So... carbs are essential, but eating too many can make you fat. Same as fats or proteins.
Some carbs, like the complex carbs you get from high fiber foods like fruits and whole grains are what your body prefers to use for essential processes.
Other carbs, like the simple carbs found in cake frosting and candy bars, are not in a form your body prefers to use, and go straight to "storage" (aka fat).
Some medical conditions can affect how the body processes carbs, and in these cases, reducing carbs and eating more fats and proteins can help with weight loss. Other conditions (extremely rare) make it impossible for the body to process carbs properly. This is the purpose of diets like keto.
But if you don't have these conditions you will not "get fat" from carbs any differently than you do from fats or proteins.
The reasons people claim carbs make you fat, therefore, are twofold:
1) Sugar makes you crave more sugar. Eating a lot of sugars/carbs will make you more likely to overeat because you *want* more.
2) Fad diets from decades ago. Honestly, its been done for everything. "Eating meat (protein) makes you fat!" , "Eating fats makes you fat!" , "Eating sugar (carbs) makes you fat!" It comes and goes in cycles. The current trend is low/no carb.
And all of those diets work. And none of them do. Because if you eat 3000 calories of fat and protein when your body only needs 2000, you'll gain a pound around every 3.5 days. (1lb of fat is ~3500 calories) same if you eat protein and carbs, but no fat. Or carbs and fat with no protein.
If you stay within your calories, your weight stays the same. Eat too many calories and you gain weight. Too few and you lose weight.
Unless there's a medical reason to do so, trying to completely eliminate one of the big 3 just damages your health while you're losing or gaining or maintaining.
Hope that helped, took forever to type up lol
6 -
Well that's "kinda true". If you eat carbs that exceed your calorie for maintenance, you'll gain weight. Same with added fat and protein.willmakehay wrote: »People say that eating too many carbs will make you gain fat.
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
2 -
Too much food will make you fatter.
Too little food will make you slimmer, even if that's eating a high carb diet.
3 -
pcrozier99 wrote: »A simple google search would answer your query. There is reams of information. This is not really debatable at this point.
I’m not sure that is the case - there is definitely a lot of info out there, but it’s not all accurate. Social media is flooded with weirdos selling snake oil and that can carry through to your Google searches, which means the results you see could be based on your previous search or viewing history i.e. unconscious bias.
It’s why I suspect Google keeps on giving me ads for beard oil - IG’s algorithms are sexist and because I mostly follow lifters I must be a bloke! 🤣5 -
claireychn074 wrote: »pcrozier99 wrote: »A simple google search would answer your query. There is reams of information. This is not really debatable at this point.
I’m not sure that is the case - there is definitely a lot of info out there, but it’s not all accurate. Social media is flooded with weirdos selling snake oil and that can carry through to your Google searches, which means the results you see could be based on your previous search or viewing history i.e. unconscious bias.
It’s why I suspect Google keeps on giving me ads for beard oil - IG’s algorithms are sexist and because I mostly follow lifters I must be a bloke! 🤣
We are all adults here capable of critical thinking, surely. One can easily weed out the good info from the bad info. There are plenty of trusted sources available on health and nutrition. Not all agree, but the credible ones are certainly informative. I mean, if everything on the internet is so untrustworthy, none of should be on here right now. It's about the quality of the information, and the source of that information.0 -
willmakehay wrote: »People say that eating too many carbs will make you gain fat.
Scientifically speaking carbohydrates are not readily converted to body fat...that's actually a difficult process for the human body biologically speaking. Carbohydrates also cover a very broad spectrum and consist of starches, sugar, and fiber. Vegetables are largely comprised of carbohydrates...so are fruits...root vegetables...whole grains and seeds...legumes and lentils, etc. These are all very healthful foods.
Some carbohydrates are calorie dense for what you get...like cereals, pasta and rice and bread for example. These are also staples in many cultures because they are cheap and provide for a lot of energy for very little consumption and very little money relatively speaking.
Also, many people mistake things like pizza or cookies or ice cream, etc as "carbs"...they do contain carbohydrates, but also most of these kinds of things have as many, if not more calories coming from dietary fat which makes them both calorie dense as well as highly palatable and easy to over consume.
Bottom line is that calories (energy) in excess of what the body needs is stored as fat (energy stores). When you consume fewer calories (less energy) than your body requires, you start using your energy stores to make up the difference. Kind of like if you spend more money than you're taking in, you have to dip into your savings to cover it...same concept.4 -
Cluelessmama1979 wrote: »Some carbs, like the complex carbs you get from high fiber foods like fruits and whole grains are what your body prefers to use for essential processes.
Other carbs, like the simple carbs found in cake frosting and candy bars, are not in a form your body prefers to use, and go straight to "storage" (aka fat).
No and no... all carbs (excluding the fiber that comes along with the fruits, grains, veggies, etc) - complex or simple are broken down into glucose by the body. Glucose is about as simple a carb as it gets and is the only usable form of sugar (carbs) that the body recognizes.
As for the original question, carbs only cause weight gain if they force you above the calories that you need for the given period of time that is being measured. Of course, this is true for all of the macro nutrients. Bottom line - calories are king and carbs are not evil, bad or the devil.4 -
Cluelessmama1979 wrote: »Some carbs, like the complex carbs you get from high fiber foods like fruits and whole grains are what your body prefers to use for essential processes.
Other carbs, like the simple carbs found in cake frosting and candy bars, are not in a form your body prefers to use, and go straight to "storage" (aka fat).
No and no... all carbs (excluding the fiber that comes along with the fruits, grains, veggies, etc) - complex or simple are broken down into glucose by the body. Glucose is about as simple a carb as it gets and is the only usable form of sugar (carbs) that the body recognizes.
As for the original question, carbs only cause weight gain if they force you above the calories that you need for the given period of time that is being measured. Of course, this is true for all of the macro nutrients. Bottom line - calories are king and carbs are not evil, bad or the devil.
That's literally what I was talking about. As I said in the beginning of my reply, it's all highly oversimplified. I didn't go into detail. But I genuinely don't see where you're seeing a problem.
If you break it down a bit, maybe I will understand, so we can discuss it. "No, no, and no" isn't very helpful in this instance, I'm afraid.0 -
Cluelessmama1979 wrote: »Cluelessmama1979 wrote: »Some carbs, like the complex carbs you get from high fiber foods like fruits and whole grains are what your body prefers to use for essential processes.
Other carbs, like the simple carbs found in cake frosting and candy bars, are not in a form your body prefers to use, and go straight to "storage" (aka fat).
No and no... all carbs (excluding the fiber that comes along with the fruits, grains, veggies, etc) - complex or simple are broken down into glucose by the body. Glucose is about as simple a carb as it gets and is the only usable form of sugar (carbs) that the body recognizes.
As for the original question, carbs only cause weight gain if they force you above the calories that you need for the given period of time that is being measured. Of course, this is true for all of the macro nutrients. Bottom line - calories are king and carbs are not evil, bad or the devil.
That's literally what I was talking about. As I said in the beginning of my reply, it's all highly oversimplified. I didn't go into detail. But I genuinely don't see where you're seeing a problem.
If you break it down a bit, maybe I will understand, so we can discuss it. "No, no, and no" isn't very helpful in this instance, I'm afraid.
I would assume the disagreement would be that sugar in cake frosting or candy bars are not in a form the body prefers...which is untrue. It's sugar. Your body doesn't biologically differentiate between sugar in a candy bar and sugar in an apple. It all gets processed exactly the same way. Also, fruits and vegetables are largely considered simple carbs as they are primarily sugar. Fiber and starches are complex carbohydrates.4 -
Cluelessmama1979 wrote: »Cluelessmama1979 wrote: »Some carbs, like the complex carbs you get from high fiber foods like fruits and whole grains are what your body prefers to use for essential processes.
Other carbs, like the simple carbs found in cake frosting and candy bars, are not in a form your body prefers to use, and go straight to "storage" (aka fat).
No and no... all carbs (excluding the fiber that comes along with the fruits, grains, veggies, etc) - complex or simple are broken down into glucose by the body. Glucose is about as simple a carb as it gets and is the only usable form of sugar (carbs) that the body recognizes.
As for the original question, carbs only cause weight gain if they force you above the calories that you need for the given period of time that is being measured. Of course, this is true for all of the macro nutrients. Bottom line - calories are king and carbs are not evil, bad or the devil.
That's literally what I was talking about. As I said in the beginning of my reply, it's all highly oversimplified. I didn't go into detail. But I genuinely don't see where you're seeing a problem.
If you break it down a bit, maybe I will understand, so we can discuss it. "No, no, and no" isn't very helpful in this instance, I'm afraid.
The issue is that "the complex carbs you get from high fiber foods like fruits and whole grains are what your body prefers to use for essential processes" is not accurate (more than just simplified), and "simple carbs . . . go straight to "storage" (aka fat)" likewise. Among other issues, it blurs the distinction between foods (apples, barley) and nutrients (carbohydrates, etc.) that are components of those foods, a distinction that can matter.
All carbs are broken down during digestion into glucose, a simple sugar. Once broken down, the body uses glucose the same way, no matter what food the glucose originated from. It will preferentially be used for energy, or used to top up glycogen stores (mostly in muscles/liver), but if there is a calorie surplus, it can indeed be further converted into triglycerides, and stored as bodyfat. Even in a calorie surplus, fat intake is more likely to be stored as body fat (vs. carbs), because less conversion is required, and the body tends toward efficiency in this way. (<= everything in this paragraph also very simplified.)
IMO, the problem with how you simplified it is that it leaves people with the wrong impression about the effect of eating carbs, and about the reasons for eating things like fruits and whole grains. We see so many people here demonize carbohydrates, and mis-identify them. (Demonize = e.g., thinking that if they eat "junk food" (whatever that is) it will go straight to fat, even in a calorie deficit; mis-identify = e.g., cookies or pizza are "a carb" when in reality most of the calories come from fats.)
Whole grains may be overall more beneficial foods than refined grains, and fruits more beneficial than cookies or candy, because they package their carb content in a form that includes relatively more fiber and more micros, and they're not as refined (which is sort of like being partially pre-digested) so it may take more energy to break them down, i.e., higher TEF, which is a component of our TDEE, and folks here like to have a higher TDEE. Also, because "whole foods" may be slower/harder to break down, they be less likely to spike blood sugar (this will vary depending on what's in the whole meal) than refined grains and such, and may be more useful to beneficials in the gut microbiome.
On the technical hair-splitting side, from the standpoint of technical nutritional definitions, fruits are not mostly "simple carbs".
In technical terms, sugars (monosaccharides, disaccharides) are simple carbs, starches are complex carbs (polysaccharides), regardless of which food is the delivery mechanism. All of them get broken down to glucose during digestion, but the process is simpler for sugars vs. starches. (I assume but don't know for certain that that's why high-sugar foods may spike blood sugar the most quickly/extremely.)
I know that the simple/complex terminology is casually used that way, but technically fruits contain primarily simple carbs (sugars). Refined white flour primarily contains complex carbs (starch), as do white potatoes, white rice and other refined grains, processed cereals like unsweetened puffed wheat or rice, etc., among other foods that are sometimes casually referred to as simple carbs.
Simple carbs - by either the casual or nutritional definitions - don't go directly to fat storage, as mentioned above. Foods high in simple carbs can be problematic, especially for people with certain health conditions (like diabetes), but so can foods high in complex carbs, and sometimes even unrefined whole-foods complex carbs like whole grains. (There seems to be some individual variability in what will spike blood sugar for individuals, based on threads here where diabetics compare notes on their post-eating blood sugar readings.)5 -
IMO, the problem with how you simplified it is that it leaves people with the wrong impression about the effect of eating carbs, and about the reasons for eating things like fruits and whole grains. We see so many people here demonize carbohydrates, and mis-identify them. (Demonize = e.g., thinking that if they eat "junk food" (whatever that is) it will go straight to fat, even in a calorie deficit; mis-identify = e.g., cookies or pizza are "a carb" when in reality most of the calories come from fats.)
Ahhhh I see what the problem is. I didn't realize that people demonizing carbs was such a big problem here. My intention was to show how the energy in foods (regardless of source) is taken into the body, used as energy, and stored as fat. On the forums I used to frequent, the biggest issue was people not understanding this process.
I do see how what I said in that snippet about breaking down sugars could be misleading. I wasn't sure how to explain the *way* the body breaks down sugars without being overly long-winded or complicated. I seem to have sacrificed too much accuracy...
That was my mistake. Sorry about that. I'm used to explaining things to small children, and blood glucose is *not* my area of expertise.
The body *does* process simple and complex carbohydrates differently, though. And although eventually they are all transformed into glucose, they don't start out that way.
I also tried to mitigate the foods vs nutrients confusion by referencing "foods with fiber", but I guess that didn't come across well?
I'd edit the post, but that would make tgis conversation rather confusing, lol.
Thank you @ccrdragon , @cwolfman13 , and @AnnPT77 for correcting me.
I'll be doing some more research on sugar processing so I can do better in the future!
4 -
Cluelessmama1979 wrote: »Cluelessmama1979 wrote: »Some carbs, like the complex carbs you get from high fiber foods like fruits and whole grains are what your body prefers to use for essential processes.
Other carbs, like the simple carbs found in cake frosting and candy bars, are not in a form your body prefers to use, and go straight to "storage" (aka fat).
No and no... all carbs (excluding the fiber that comes along with the fruits, grains, veggies, etc) - complex or simple are broken down into glucose by the body. Glucose is about as simple a carb as it gets and is the only usable form of sugar (carbs) that the body recognizes.
As for the original question, carbs only cause weight gain if they force you above the calories that you need for the given period of time that is being measured. Of course, this is true for all of the macro nutrients. Bottom line - calories are king and carbs are not evil, bad or the devil.
That's literally what I was talking about. As I said in the beginning of my reply, it's all highly oversimplified. I didn't go into detail. But I genuinely don't see where you're seeing a problem.
If you break it down a bit, maybe I will understand, so we can discuss it. "No, no, and no" isn't very helpful in this instance, I'm afraid.
Ok, let try again...
In your original statement you made the following claims:
1. The body prefers complex carbohydrates
2. Simple carbs (like sugar) just get shuttled off to fat storage as soon as you eat them
Neither of these statements are correct, even from a bird's eye view of the body and how it functions. The body does not prefer complex carbohydrates over simple carbohydrates. Nutritionists and dieticians prefer that you eat complex carbs over simple carbs for a whole host of reasons, but the body does not care - simple or complex, the carbs all get broken down into glucose by the body, which will either be used to satisfy immediate energy needs, get shuttled to the muscles/liver to top off glucose stores there and then if there is any left, will get stored as fat. Literally NONE of the sugar that you eat is immediately stored as fat. In fact, unless you are eating pure sugar (think table sugar or glucose tabs) most of the foods that we think of as sugars, are not pure sugars - neither the cake frosting nor the candy bar are pure sugar, since both of them derive about half their calories from the fat content.1 -
The body does not prefer complex carbohydrates over simple carbohydrates. Nutritionists and dieticians prefer that you eat complex carbs over simple carbs for a whole host of reasons, but the body does not care - simple or complex, the carbs all get broken down into glucose by the body,
I... think...
I was trying to reference the "whole host of reasons" with "the body prefers"... which is why I was confused by your initial reply. I wasn't referring to the sugars themselves but rather the micronutrients in the fiber/starches, if that makes sense.
I was attempting to leave words which tend to confuse a lot of people (fructose, glucose, triglycerides, etc) out of the explanation. And, like I said in my reply to @AnnPT77 , glucose is not my area of expertise. I am genuinely sorry if that contributed to the sea of misinformation out there.
the body does not care - simple or complex, the carbs all get broken down into glucose by the body, which will either be used to satisfy immediate energy needs, get shuttled to the muscles/liver to top off glucose stores there and then if there is any left, will get stored as fat. Literally NONE of the sugar that you eat is immediately stored as fat.
I instinctively wanted to state that I never said they did... but I did say that. Not sure how/why that happened. (You'll note that elsewhere in the reply I did say the body uses what it needs and sends the excess energy to storage...) I was typing faster than I was thinking, apparently.
That highlighted the specific error for me, thank you. I do see where I went wrong now. That's like... incorrect on so many levels.
What I was thinking of while typing that bit was how more *nutrients* tend to be in foods with fiber and complex carbs... whole foods... and the processes the body goes through to utilize those nutrients, as opposed to just sugars, which get transformed straight to glucose. My focus was on the huge issue with people thinking "specific macro = fat" as opposed to "macros = calories = fat" and, well, looks like I shot myself in the foot with that one and left the opposite impression.
Am kinda bummed... was so proud of the rest of that long explanation, lol...
Thank you for explaining more in depth. I legit didn't even see what I'd said when you quoted it to me.
As I said in my reply to Ann, I would edit the original post, but that would be confusing too.
Not sure how to make it right 😕...
9 -
Cluelessmama1979 wrote: »The body does not prefer complex carbohydrates over simple carbohydrates. Nutritionists and dieticians prefer that you eat complex carbs over simple carbs for a whole host of reasons, but the body does not care - simple or complex, the carbs all get broken down into glucose by the body,
I... think...
I was trying to reference the "whole host of reasons" with "the body prefers"... which is why I was confused by your initial reply. I wasn't referring to the sugars themselves but rather the micronutrients in the fiber/starches, if that makes sense.
I was attempting to leave words which tend to confuse a lot of people (fructose, glucose, triglycerides, etc) out of the explanation. And, like I said in my reply to @AnnPT77 , glucose is not my area of expertise. I am genuinely sorry if that contributed to the sea of misinformation out there.
the body does not care - simple or complex, the carbs all get broken down into glucose by the body, which will either be used to satisfy immediate energy needs, get shuttled to the muscles/liver to top off glucose stores there and then if there is any left, will get stored as fat. Literally NONE of the sugar that you eat is immediately stored as fat.
I instinctively wanted to state that I never said they did... but I did say that. Not sure how/why that happened. (You'll note that elsewhere in the reply I did say the body uses what it needs and sends the excess energy to storage...) I was typing faster than I was thinking, apparently.
That highlighted the specific error for me, thank you. I do see where I went wrong now. That's like... incorrect on so many levels.
What I was thinking of while typing that bit was how more *nutrients* tend to be in foods with fiber and complex carbs... whole foods... and the processes the body goes through to utilize those nutrients, as opposed to just sugars, which get transformed straight to glucose. My focus was on the huge issue with people thinking "specific macro = fat" as opposed to "macros = calories = fat" and, well, looks like I shot myself in the foot with that one and left the opposite impression.
Am kinda bummed... was so proud of the rest of that long explanation, lol...
Thank you for explaining more in depth. I legit didn't even see what I'd said when you quoted it to me.
As I said in my reply to Ann, I would edit the original post, but that would be confusing too.
Not sure how to make it right 😕...
I vote "just don't worry about it". Clarification at various levels of detail, from simple to nerd-y, has happened. Communication (between you and those who disagreed for various reasons) has also happened, from what I'm reading so far. Peace has been restored to the village . . . I think?
You're fine, IMO. Don't worry. 1 -
Cluelessmama1979 wrote: »
Not sure how to make it right 😕...
Take yourself to the woodshed and... j/k... j/k... j/k 😕:)
You don't need to go any further, we are close enough on the explanation for it not to matter!1 -
Cluelessmama1979 wrote: »The body does not prefer complex carbohydrates over simple carbohydrates. Nutritionists and dieticians prefer that you eat complex carbs over simple carbs for a whole host of reasons, but the body does not care - simple or complex, the carbs all get broken down into glucose by the body,
I... think...
I was trying to reference the "whole host of reasons" with "the body prefers"... which is why I was confused by your initial reply. I wasn't referring to the sugars themselves but rather the micronutrients in the fiber/starches, if that makes sense.
I was attempting to leave words which tend to confuse a lot of people (fructose, glucose, triglycerides, etc) out of the explanation. And, like I said in my reply to @AnnPT77 , glucose is not my area of expertise. I am genuinely sorry if that contributed to the sea of misinformation out there.
the body does not care - simple or complex, the carbs all get broken down into glucose by the body, which will either be used to satisfy immediate energy needs, get shuttled to the muscles/liver to top off glucose stores there and then if there is any left, will get stored as fat. Literally NONE of the sugar that you eat is immediately stored as fat.
I instinctively wanted to state that I never said they did... but I did say that. Not sure how/why that happened. (You'll note that elsewhere in the reply I did say the body uses what it needs and sends the excess energy to storage...) I was typing faster than I was thinking, apparently.
That highlighted the specific error for me, thank you. I do see where I went wrong now. That's like... incorrect on so many levels.
What I was thinking of while typing that bit was how more *nutrients* tend to be in foods with fiber and complex carbs... whole foods... and the processes the body goes through to utilize those nutrients, as opposed to just sugars, which get transformed straight to glucose. My focus was on the huge issue with people thinking "specific macro = fat" as opposed to "macros = calories = fat" and, well, looks like I shot myself in the foot with that one and left the opposite impression.
Am kinda bummed... was so proud of the rest of that long explanation, lol...
Thank you for explaining more in depth. I legit didn't even see what I'd said when you quoted it to me.
As I said in my reply to Ann, I would edit the original post, but that would be confusing too.
Not sure how to make it right 😕...
Actually this discussion is very helpful. Many people get confused and have the wrong idea about how carbs work. Asking questions, and answering, and being corrected are a process of knowledge. Don't worry about making mistakes. It's your attitude that counts, and being willing to learn. All good.4 -
Never mind ….1
-
No foods make you fat.
Over eating makes you fat - it's just that some foods are highly palitable and much more fun to over eat.
Usually the combination of salt, fat and sugar.
4 -
If you are posting in diary what you eat, click on nutrition at the bottom of the page, it will not only tell you how many calories you ate, but also break it down to the percentage of those calories are carbs, protein and fat. Too many calories for your goal and too many calories for your macros will be there if you record it.0
-
-
Carbs don’t make you fat excess calories of your maintenance does. 0
-
No scientific feedback from me but all I know is I love my carbs and if I open my mouth to let too many in, ^^^^ goes the scale. Carbs=calories, protein=calories, vegetables/meat/dairy/fruit=all equal calories. Too many of anything=weight gain. 1
-
Carbs are not the problem. However, two of the most readily available carbs in the standard american diet are sugar and white flour. These are just empty calories with virtually no nutritional value, and high glycemic index; which leads to high blood sugar, insulin spikes, insulin resistance, increased risk of diabetes, etc. However, there are plenty of health foods with a balance of carbs, fiber, protein, healthy fats, and or nutrients. Beans, lentils, sweet potatoes, whole grains, pseudograins, fruits, berries, seeds and nuts all contain carbs and are very healthy.0
-
Carbs are not the problem. However, two of the most readily available carbs in the standard american diet are sugar and white flour. These are just empty calories with virtually no nutritional value, and high glycemic index; which leads to high blood sugar, insulin spikes, insulin resistance, increased risk of diabetes, etc. However, there are plenty of health foods with a balance of carbs, fiber, protein, healthy fats, and or nutrients. Beans, lentils, sweet potatoes, whole grains, pseudograins, fruits, berries, seeds and nuts all contain carbs and are very healthy.
Well, loosely, yeah: But personally, I think they're over-demonized, especially the flour. Mostly, it's a problem that they're over-consumed, and other things (especially veg/fruits IMO) are under-consumed.
Sugar is pretty much empty calories, agreed.
Glycemic index is not so relevant for individual foods, because effective GI in the body involves a total meal/snack's profile. I think it's kind of unusual to eat flour by itself, though a few foods are mostly flour.
On the "empty calories" point, let's look at refined flour, vs. whole wheat, both unenriched, the main values typically considered important enough to be listed on nutrient labels, per the approximate amount of flour in a common slice of bread**:
Calories: 70.3, 65.7
Fat: 0.32g, 0.52g
Cholesterol: not listed, not listed
Sodium: 0.38g, 0.57g
Total Carbs: 14.2g, 13.5g
Fiber: 0.57g, 2g
Protein: 2.3g, 2.9g
Vitamin
not listed, not listed
Calcium: 4.2mg, 7.2mg
Iron: 1.2mg, 0.7mg
Potassium: 28.5mg, 71.4mg
Is whole wheat "better"? Sure. But not by very much, in common quantities. Is white flour "empty calories"? Nah. Neither is super nutrient-dense. Fiber's really only the meaningful difference, a whole 1.43g.
Statistically average USA-ian (and probable other developed countries) people would be better off nutritionally, eating less bread and more veggies, but the type of flour in the bread (or similar foods) is IMO not something worth agonizing over. If someone likes white bread, the switch to whole wheat isn't a big deal one way or another, in a reasonable overall dietary context.
Context: I've been a hippie-dippy vegetarian whole foods, whole grains preferring eater for decades, rarely drinking soda pop, eating fast food, etc. I got fat (obese) and unhealthy anyway (high BP, cholesterol, etc.), stayed that way for decades, even after becoming athletically active routinely for the final decade plus.
This "white flour is bad" thing (along with a number of other common dietary shibboleths) is a distraction, IMO, from the actually important issues of getting the right number of calories, getting adequate nutrients into one's eating (vs. worrying about getting supposedly "bad" ones out), on average, over reasonably short time horizons (day or few).
(**This is from the USDA database. Quantity assumes about 500g flour in a common loaf of bread, which can be 26-28 slices, so I used 26 slices, thus 19g flour (rounded from 19.23g). I had to use the unbleached entry for refined flour, because USDA doesn't list unenriched white flour. Since enriched white flour has more micros, using bleached flour entries would make white flour look better in that list, and in practice most white flour is enriched. Whole wheat flour does have more of other (non-label) micros than white flour, but the differences are equally non-dramatic.)
Honest P.S. Is there a chance I did the arithmetic wrong somewhere in there? Yes. Not the whole thing, though. Anyone else wants to check me, the pages are here:
https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/fdc-app.html#/food-details/790085/nutrients
https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/fdc-app.html#/food-details/790018/nutrients
White bread varies a lot in nutritional content, but it will have more nutrients than just the flour it contains. Even white bread has some nutritional value. Some "better" white bread might even have more nutrition than lower-quality whole-wheat bread.
Personally, I think anyone/everyone should be looking at their personal specific food selections, and evaluating them in terms of their individual nutritional needs and context. Endurance athletes sometimes eat pure sugar, the highest glycemic-index sugars they can find. It's "good for them" in their context. It wouldn't be great, in mine usually. For dinner, some nonfat refried beans would be a good food to include, most days, for me. For that endurance athlete, if they ate the refried beans mid-event, they wouldn't get the fast energy they truly need, and they'd probably end up vomiting into the nearest trash can.
Specifics matter, context matters.
4 -
Yay, thanks for defending the humble white flour, AnnP!
Seriously, if it was so bad then substantial populations had a massive problem, especially in southern Europe where white bread is not uncommon. Just think of Baguettes in France! If they were so bad then France had a massive health problem. 0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions