So, sugar stimulates your appetite (Light dawns on Marble Head)
Options
Zilla100
Posts: 137 Member
Things I wish a doctor had told me years ago. It would have been a GAMECHANGER for me.
I consider myself pretty knowledgeable about weight loss at this point, what I should and shouldn't be eating, and I know now exactly what I have to do to lose weight. I have been doing this for years and I am confident now that I am on the final effort I will ever have to make. I read articles, I pay attention when I see a new piece of information, and somehow I missed this. My doctor wanted to send me to a nutritionist a few years ago and I did not want to go because I feel like I have learned so much over the years that it was going to be a waste of time for me. And it was, I sat there while the nutritionist talked to me like I was someone who grew up totally food-ignorant. She was telling me very basic things that I had learned years ago. But not once did she ever say that a huge reason to cut down on sugar is that it increases your appetite. The only things I have really ever heard about it over the years were "it turns to fat," "it's quick energy that diverts your body from using its fat storage," "it rots your teeth," "it breaks down collagen and can accelerate aging in the skin".
I started this last attempt at the end of June and am down about 22 pounds, with 47 more to go. I cut out the cookies, chips and candy and have been exceeding protein intake every day, inadvertently. One of the weird things that happened this time is that I completely lost my appetite. I actually started to wonder if something was wrong with me, if I was sick and didn't know it. Now, I am eating because it's time to eat or because I have to eat something each day. I am not hankering to eat or craving junk. But I have had two occasions where I did want something specific, a softserve vanilla cone from Carvel, which I did plan and calorie budget for and logged, and I enjoyed it, though I didn't get the same joy as I would have once. Another was a few days ago. I wanted a Peppermint Patty, which I got, and again, liked, but not LIKED like I used to. But both times I felt my appetite begin to open back up and so the bell went off in my head. I thought "Uh oh," and got myself back on track. When I went to Google "sugar and appetite", I saw the reports. So, yeah.
I really think this is something all doctors should stress to patients trying to lose weight. I'm sure it must have been told to other people here, but surprisingly, it was never a point that was made to me.
I consider myself pretty knowledgeable about weight loss at this point, what I should and shouldn't be eating, and I know now exactly what I have to do to lose weight. I have been doing this for years and I am confident now that I am on the final effort I will ever have to make. I read articles, I pay attention when I see a new piece of information, and somehow I missed this. My doctor wanted to send me to a nutritionist a few years ago and I did not want to go because I feel like I have learned so much over the years that it was going to be a waste of time for me. And it was, I sat there while the nutritionist talked to me like I was someone who grew up totally food-ignorant. She was telling me very basic things that I had learned years ago. But not once did she ever say that a huge reason to cut down on sugar is that it increases your appetite. The only things I have really ever heard about it over the years were "it turns to fat," "it's quick energy that diverts your body from using its fat storage," "it rots your teeth," "it breaks down collagen and can accelerate aging in the skin".
I started this last attempt at the end of June and am down about 22 pounds, with 47 more to go. I cut out the cookies, chips and candy and have been exceeding protein intake every day, inadvertently. One of the weird things that happened this time is that I completely lost my appetite. I actually started to wonder if something was wrong with me, if I was sick and didn't know it. Now, I am eating because it's time to eat or because I have to eat something each day. I am not hankering to eat or craving junk. But I have had two occasions where I did want something specific, a softserve vanilla cone from Carvel, which I did plan and calorie budget for and logged, and I enjoyed it, though I didn't get the same joy as I would have once. Another was a few days ago. I wanted a Peppermint Patty, which I got, and again, liked, but not LIKED like I used to. But both times I felt my appetite begin to open back up and so the bell went off in my head. I thought "Uh oh," and got myself back on track. When I went to Google "sugar and appetite", I saw the reports. So, yeah.
I really think this is something all doctors should stress to patients trying to lose weight. I'm sure it must have been told to other people here, but surprisingly, it was never a point that was made to me.
2
Replies
-
I said on another thread this summer that after 1,000's of calories, I am finally able to moderate M&M's. Well, I didn't realize until this week that they stimulate my appetite. So, while I can stop at 15 grams of M&M's (plus 8 g chocolate chips, 11 g peanuts, and 5 g raisins,) this stimulates my appetite so an hour later, I end up feeling hungry and eating another 200 calorie protein bar, plus another 200 calories either before to try to prevent this, or after. My afternoon snack became more caloric than my dinner >.<
I realized the appetite stimulating effect of M&Ms when someone gave me a bag of beef jerky and I swapped out the above snack for it. I can have a snack of an oz of beef jerky plus a half ounce of cheese AND STOP EATING. (< 140 calories.)
What's confusing for me is that fruit doesn't do this. Yes, fruit has fiber, but this snack has 3 g of fiber, and I run around 40 g fiber/day, so I'm certainly not short on fiber. I also hit my protein goal. (I ate tropical fruit all day long when I was in Costa Rica for six weeks yet dropped a size without even trying.)
Also, this snack used to be just nuts, raisins, and chocolate chips, and I think that didn't stimulate my appetite. I'm going to avoid this for a few months and see what happens when I add it back in.
I was a firm believer that "sugar is sugar" but no longer.1 -
Perhaps it's not universal? I didn't put any particular emphasis on sugar to lose weight, personally, one way or the other. Generally, I got overweight then obese eating a lot of healthy foods, including some very calorie-dense ones.
Cookies, chips and some candies typically get more of their calories from fat than from sugar/carbs. Since fat has 9 calories per gram, carbs (including sugars) 4 calories per gram, that makes those things quite calorie dense. (I do eat fewer calorie dense things than I used to. And admittedly, I'm more likely lifelong to favor foods that are salty or savory. Sweets - especially simple sweets like soda pop or sugary candy - somewhat less so, even during my overweight/obese phase.)
Some people do find fat sating. I don't. Like you seem to, I do find protein filling, and I've seen others here say the same.
Being here on MFP as long as I have (loss then maintenance), it's surprised me how much individuals differ in the foods they find filling or appetite-spiking.
I have no doubt in what you're saying about what you've found regarding sugar: We're each the world's foremost experts on our own feelings and reactions. (Probably some of those difference arise from genetic/physiological differences, I'd guess.)
Usually, I'd encourage other people to do exactly what you have: Experiment with eating patterns; notice the effects on appetite, satiation, and energy level; and adjust based on that analysis to achieve better personal results. Good show that you've figured out that sugar is a particular problem for you: That's powerful insight!3 -
kshama2001 wrote: »I realized the appetite stimulating effect of M&Ms when someone gave me a bag of beef jerky and I swapped out the above snack for it. I can have a snack of an oz of beef jerky plus a half ounce of cheese AND STOP EATING. (< 140 calories.)
What's confusing for me is that fruit doesn't do this. Yes, fruit has fiber, but this snack has 3 g of fiber, and I run around 40 g fiber/day, so I'm certainly not short on fiber. I also hit my protein goal. (I ate tropical fruit all day long when I was in Costa Rica for six weeks yet dropped a size without even trying.)
YES! I have used dried apricots as part of my snacks, and though sweet, they don't have the same effect on me as candy/cookies. There is a difference between fructose (from fruit, not drinks/junk) and sucrose, I guess. Like you, I would much rather eat more for my snacks than have a quick sugar fix that will consume most/all of the calories I have to play with outside of my meals.
0 -
Perhaps it's not universal? I didn't put any particular emphasis on sugar to lose weight, personally, one way or the other. Generally, I got overweight then obese eating a lot of healthy foods, including some very calorie-dense ones.
Cookies, chips and some candies typically get more of their calories from fat than from sugar/carbs. Since fat has 9 calories per gram, carbs (including sugars) 4 calories per gram, that makes those things quite calorie dense. (I do eat fewer calorie dense things than I used to. And admittedly, I'm more likely lifelong to favor foods that are salty or savory. Sweets - especially simple sweets like soda pop or sugary candy - somewhat less so, even during my overweight/obese phase.)
Yes, my tastes have changed as I've gotten older. I have always known that I have had a huge sweet tooth, but these days it is more satisfying for me to have something crunchy or savory, with an occasional something sweet. And you make a good point, anything can put weight on if you eat too much of it. (pound of feathers = pound of bricks?)
1 -
Sure. Highly processed foods increase appetite. They're designed to. Just keep in mind, it's not specifically sugar that increases your appetite. It doesn't. That's why nobody's ever told you that until recently. It's the combination of fat and sugar. Disagree? Down a cup of sugar, let me know how much appetite you have after that. I'm gonna guess you'll feel too sick to your stomach to have any appetite.1
-
sollyn23l2 wrote: »Sure. Highly processed foods increase appetite. They're designed to. Just keep in mind, it's not specifically sugar that increases your appetite. It doesn't. That's why nobody's ever told you that until recently. It's the combination of fat and sugar. Disagree? Down a cup of sugar, let me know how much appetite you have after that. I'm gonna guess you'll feel too sick to your stomach to have any appetite.
Just sugar? I don't know. Something that high GI, eaten alone, maybe no satiation plus blood sugar peak then drop? Maybe appetite spike. I'm not going to try the experiment, because I'm a hedonist and it would be unpleasant, but I think I could eat a cup of sugar and there'd be no "sick to stomach".
For sure, I could eat enough SAD grocery store white cake with shortening "buttercream" to amount to a cup of sugar, easily, not feel sick (in the sense of nausea). Blood sugar peak then drop? I'm betting.
Still not going to do it, because pure-sugar, high-sweetness, no subtlety white cake with shortening frosting isn't remotely tasty.
I'm inclined to agree that fat plus sugar is potentially more cravings-provoking.0 -
I don't tend to eat a lot of fatty/fried food, and never have. It tends to make me feel sick, even things like tempura, though in the past I have liked matzoh and butter, and some sour cream with potatoes or with chips. In my experience, it is the sugar that has spiked my appetite. Chips are something I have binged on, but I see that more as a mindless grazing thing, if they were available, I'd eat 'em, but they weren't actually making me hungrier.0
-
sollyn23l2 wrote: »Sure. Highly processed foods increase appetite. They're designed to. Just keep in mind, it's not specifically sugar that increases your appetite. It doesn't. That's why nobody's ever told you that until recently. It's the combination of fat and sugar. Disagree? Down a cup of sugar, let me know how much appetite you have after that. I'm gonna guess you'll feel too sick to your stomach to have any appetite.
Just sugar? I don't know. Something that high GI, eaten alone, maybe no satiation plus blood sugar peak then drop? Maybe appetite spike. I'm not going to try the experiment, because I'm a hedonist and it would be unpleasant, but I think I could eat a cup of sugar and there'd be no "sick to stomach".
For sure, I could eat enough SAD grocery store white cake with shortening "buttercream" to amount to a cup of sugar, easily, not feel sick (in the sense of nausea). Blood sugar peak then drop? I'm betting.
Still not going to do it, because pure-sugar, high-sweetness, no subtlety white cake with shortening frosting isn't remotely tasty.
I'm inclined to agree that fat plus sugar is potentially more cravings-provoking.
Yep. And that buttercream is a mix of fat and sugar. Which is why it's easy to eat. I'm definitely agreeing that foods that contain sugar can increase appetite. I'm just arguing it's not specifically the sugar, but rather the palatability of the mix of ingredients. I just get salty when people try to blame one specific thing. But, it's easy to go back and forth on it all day. And everyone will differ in what they find palatable, for sure.2 -
sollyn23l2 wrote: »sollyn23l2 wrote: »Sure. Highly processed foods increase appetite. They're designed to. Just keep in mind, it's not specifically sugar that increases your appetite. It doesn't. That's why nobody's ever told you that until recently. It's the combination of fat and sugar. Disagree? Down a cup of sugar, let me know how much appetite you have after that. I'm gonna guess you'll feel too sick to your stomach to have any appetite.
Just sugar? I don't know. Something that high GI, eaten alone, maybe no satiation plus blood sugar peak then drop? Maybe appetite spike. I'm not going to try the experiment, because I'm a hedonist and it would be unpleasant, but I think I could eat a cup of sugar and there'd be no "sick to stomach".
For sure, I could eat enough SAD grocery store white cake with shortening "buttercream" to amount to a cup of sugar, easily, not feel sick (in the sense of nausea). Blood sugar peak then drop? I'm betting.
Still not going to do it, because pure-sugar, high-sweetness, no subtlety white cake with shortening frosting isn't remotely tasty.
I'm inclined to agree that fat plus sugar is potentially more cravings-provoking.
Yep. And that buttercream is a mix of fat and sugar. Which is why it's easy to eat. I'm definitely agreeing that foods that contain sugar can increase appetite. I'm just arguing it's not specifically the sugar, but rather the palatability of the mix of ingredients. I just get salty when people try to blame one specific thing. But, it's easy to go back and forth on it all day. And everyone will differ in what they find palatable, for sure.
Mostly, I was disputing the "eat a lot of sugar, feel sick" idea. Not generally true, for me.
I see that said here about lots of things - that they become sick-making: Fast food, sweets, junk food, deep-fried foods, etc. That's not my personal experience, at a physical level. I find a lot of those things not tasty, not worth their calories, etc. I don't enjoy them, don't want to eat them. (Mostly didn't enjoy them, even when obese.) Maybe they even make me a little less energetic, positive, low-pain, etc., in some cases. No nausea, though.
Usually, I believe people's assertions about their subjective reactions to things. My personal experience leads me to question whether nausea reactions to "bad foods" are fully physical, universally. Physical or psychological, the subjective reaction is real, no question.
(I know that some health conditions and certain foods are a bad combo, too - and that can make certain reactions very physical.)0 -
sollyn23l2 wrote: »sollyn23l2 wrote: »Sure. Highly processed foods increase appetite. They're designed to. Just keep in mind, it's not specifically sugar that increases your appetite. It doesn't. That's why nobody's ever told you that until recently. It's the combination of fat and sugar. Disagree? Down a cup of sugar, let me know how much appetite you have after that. I'm gonna guess you'll feel too sick to your stomach to have any appetite.
Just sugar? I don't know. Something that high GI, eaten alone, maybe no satiation plus blood sugar peak then drop? Maybe appetite spike. I'm not going to try the experiment, because I'm a hedonist and it would be unpleasant, but I think I could eat a cup of sugar and there'd be no "sick to stomach".
For sure, I could eat enough SAD grocery store white cake with shortening "buttercream" to amount to a cup of sugar, easily, not feel sick (in the sense of nausea). Blood sugar peak then drop? I'm betting.
Still not going to do it, because pure-sugar, high-sweetness, no subtlety white cake with shortening frosting isn't remotely tasty.
I'm inclined to agree that fat plus sugar is potentially more cravings-provoking.
Yep. And that buttercream is a mix of fat and sugar. Which is why it's easy to eat. I'm definitely agreeing that foods that contain sugar can increase appetite. I'm just arguing it's not specifically the sugar, but rather the palatability of the mix of ingredients. I just get salty when people try to blame one specific thing. But, it's easy to go back and forth on it all day. And everyone will differ in what they find palatable, for sure.
Mostly, I was disputing the "eat a lot of sugar, feel sick" idea. Not generally true, for me.
I see that said here about lots of things - that they become sick-making: Fast food, sweets, junk food, deep-fried foods, etc. That's not my personal experience, at a physical level. I find a lot of those things not tasty, not worth their calories, etc. I don't enjoy them, don't want to eat them. (Mostly didn't enjoy them, even when obese.) Maybe they even make me a little less energetic, positive, low-pain, etc., in some cases. No nausea, though.
Usually, I believe people's assertions about their subjective reactions to things. My personal experience leads me to question whether nausea reactions to "bad foods" are fully physical, universally. Physical or psychological, the subjective reaction is real, no question.
(I know that some health conditions and certain foods are a bad combo, too - and that can make certain reactions very physical.)
Undoubtedly0 -
sollyn23l2 wrote: »Sure. Highly processed foods increase appetite. They're designed to. Just keep in mind, it's not specifically sugar that increases your appetite. It doesn't. That's why nobody's ever told you that until recently. It's the combination of fat and sugar. Disagree? Down a cup of sugar, let me know how much appetite you have after that. I'm gonna guess you'll feel too sick to your stomach to have any appetite.
Yeah, agree. I've been saying this for years. Also throw refined carbohydrates into the mix with sugar and fat.1 -
There’s more to it, we’re born with a sweet tooth but have to develop a taste for salty, but a lot of the hunger that comes after eating the sugar is the insulin cycle. When you eat all that glucose, your body creates insulin to let it into the cells (insulin is like the key), but often with metabolic issues the body is secreting too much insulin, so when the glucose is taken care of, the insulin is still there. This tells your body ‘hey, we need to eat something, we’ve got this insulin running around’, so then you’re hungry again. This is why all the nutrition advice says to eat complex carbs, proteins, etc allows for a more moderated insulin release and slower absorption. Simple sugars are the biggest culprit. I’m probably forgetting pieces of this, since that’s simplified version, but it’s pretty interesting how all of that works, definitely worth digging into!0
-
Things I wish a doctor had told me years ago. It would have been a GAMECHANGER for me.
I consider myself pretty knowledgeable about weight loss at this point, what I should and shouldn't be eating, and I know now exactly what I have to do to lose weight. I have been doing this for years and I am confident now that I am on the final effort I will ever have to make. I read articles, I pay attention when I see a new piece of information, and somehow I missed this. My doctor wanted to send me to a nutritionist a few years ago and I did not want to go because I feel like I have learned so much over the years that it was going to be a waste of time for me. And it was, I sat there while the nutritionist talked to me like I was someone who grew up totally food-ignorant. She was telling me very basic things that I had learned years ago. But not once did she ever say that a huge reason to cut down on sugar is that it increases your appetite. The only things I have really ever heard about it over the years were "it turns to fat," "it's quick energy that diverts your body from using its fat storage," "it rots your teeth," "it breaks down collagen and can accelerate aging in the skin".
I started this last attempt at the end of June and am down about 22 pounds, with 47 more to go. I cut out the cookies, chips and candy and have been exceeding protein intake every day, inadvertently. One of the weird things that happened this time is that I completely lost my appetite. I actually started to wonder if something was wrong with me, if I was sick and didn't know it. Now, I am eating because it's time to eat or because I have to eat something each day. I am not hankering to eat or craving junk. But I have had two occasions where I did want something specific, a softserve vanilla cone from Carvel, which I did plan and calorie budget for and logged, and I enjoyed it, though I didn't get the same joy as I would have once. Another was a few days ago. I wanted a Peppermint Patty, which I got, and again, liked, but not LIKED like I used to. But both times I felt my appetite begin to open back up and so the bell went off in my head. I thought "Uh oh," and got myself back on track. When I went to Google "sugar and appetite", I saw the reports. So, yeah.
I really think this is something all doctors should stress to patients trying to lose weight. I'm sure it must have been told to other people here, but surprisingly, it was never a point that was made to me.
It's now basically called the "carbohydrate insulin model" This is beyond the "standard of care" which is basically the eat less and move more mantra so for the most part your not going to see Doctors prescribing a low carb or ketogenic diet, but some do. Basically everyone has a different metabolism, it's specific to them based on the life they've lived. What these clinics that work this model will do after basic consultation is perform a "glucose tolerance test" which will indicate how a persons metabolism performs. It's based on the spike after consuming the glucose and how fast a person blood sugar then comes down to baseline, pretty simple really. A CGM is a normal piece of equipment for the nerds or for extreme cases that need monitoring.1 -
I think it may also be a mental thing. I think we treat thinks that are processed treats as "treats" mentally. Obviously they aren't necessities in life, but because the fat and sugar in them taste so good, we want to have them.
And I don't really recall but I believe a scientist (or someone in nutrition) told me long ago that part of the way people discovered if things were edible back in the stone ages was whether it was sweet or bitter. The bitter stuff was poisonous and sweet things were safe. Don't really know if that held up to science once discovered. Eh, maybe I should research that.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
1 -
I think it may also be a mental thing. I think we treat thinks that are processed treats as "treats" mentally. Obviously they aren't necessities in life, but because the fat and sugar in them taste so good, we want to have them.
And I don't really recall but I believe a scientist (or someone in nutrition) told me long ago that part of the way people discovered if things were edible back in the stone ages was whether it was sweet or bitter. The bitter stuff was poisonous and sweet things were safe. Don't really know if that held up to science once discovered. Eh, maybe I should research that.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 35+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Yeah, it's actually a pretty big subject. It's basically evolutionary where calories with a sweet taste, which was fairly rare normally indicated calorie dense which works in general with the " optimal foraging theory" where time spent is energy and the more calories foraged on a timeline, a day for example, helped you and your clan survive. Bitter was the safeguard to poison, which most plants have evolutionarily devised ways not to be eaten, so plants produce insecticides, pesticides, and other compounds which we identified as bitter, basically. It's funny how a baby's first instinct when first encountering a vegetable is to spit it out, most of the time, evolution Watson lol.0 -
sollyn23l2 wrote: »Sure. Highly processed foods increase appetite. They're designed to. Just keep in mind, it's not specifically sugar that increases your appetite. It doesn't. That's why nobody's ever told you that until recently. It's the combination of fat and sugar. Disagree? Down a cup of sugar, let me know how much appetite you have after that. I'm gonna guess you'll feel too sick to your stomach to have any appetite.
I might try 187 calories worth of sugar, just to see what happens.
Here are the macros of my appetite stimulating snack:
Vs:
I wonder if just chocolate would have that effect on me, as it is also high in sugar and fat. Here are the macros for 187 calories worth of that chocolate:
For all I know it's the green dye in the M&Ms stimulating my appetite.
1 -
neanderthin wrote: »Things I wish a doctor had told me years ago. It would have been a GAMECHANGER for me.
I consider myself pretty knowledgeable about weight loss at this point, what I should and shouldn't be eating, and I know now exactly what I have to do to lose weight. I have been doing this for years and I am confident now that I am on the final effort I will ever have to make. I read articles, I pay attention when I see a new piece of information, and somehow I missed this. My doctor wanted to send me to a nutritionist a few years ago and I did not want to go because I feel like I have learned so much over the years that it was going to be a waste of time for me. And it was, I sat there while the nutritionist talked to me like I was someone who grew up totally food-ignorant. She was telling me very basic things that I had learned years ago. But not once did she ever say that a huge reason to cut down on sugar is that it increases your appetite. The only things I have really ever heard about it over the years were "it turns to fat," "it's quick energy that diverts your body from using its fat storage," "it rots your teeth," "it breaks down collagen and can accelerate aging in the skin".
I started this last attempt at the end of June and am down about 22 pounds, with 47 more to go. I cut out the cookies, chips and candy and have been exceeding protein intake every day, inadvertently. One of the weird things that happened this time is that I completely lost my appetite. I actually started to wonder if something was wrong with me, if I was sick and didn't know it. Now, I am eating because it's time to eat or because I have to eat something each day. I am not hankering to eat or craving junk. But I have had two occasions where I did want something specific, a softserve vanilla cone from Carvel, which I did plan and calorie budget for and logged, and I enjoyed it, though I didn't get the same joy as I would have once. Another was a few days ago. I wanted a Peppermint Patty, which I got, and again, liked, but not LIKED like I used to. But both times I felt my appetite begin to open back up and so the bell went off in my head. I thought "Uh oh," and got myself back on track. When I went to Google "sugar and appetite", I saw the reports. So, yeah.
I really think this is something all doctors should stress to patients trying to lose weight. I'm sure it must have been told to other people here, but surprisingly, it was never a point that was made to me.
It's now basically called the "carbohydrate insulin model" This is beyond the "standard of care" which is basically the eat less and move more mantra so for the most part your not going to see Doctors prescribing a low carb or ketogenic diet, but some do. Basically everyone has a different metabolism, it's specific to them based on the life they've lived. What these clinics that work this model will do after basic consultation is perform a "glucose tolerance test" which will indicate how a persons metabolism performs. It's based on the spike after consuming the glucose and how fast a person blood sugar then comes down to baseline, pretty simple really. A CGM is a normal piece of equipment for the nerds or for extreme cases that need monitoring.
My doctor wants me to do keto for neurological reasons, and my mom's cardiologist wanted her to do low carb way back before she died. It's not that unusual.0 -
Mountainbreezes wrote: »There’s more to it, we’re born with a sweet tooth but have to develop a taste for salty, but a lot of the hunger that comes after eating the sugar is the insulin cycle. When you eat all that glucose, your body creates insulin to let it into the cells (insulin is like the key), but often with metabolic issues the body is secreting too much insulin, so when the glucose is taken care of, the insulin is still there. This tells your body ‘hey, we need to eat something, we’ve got this insulin running around’, so then you’re hungry again. This is why all the nutrition advice says to eat complex carbs, proteins, etc allows for a more moderated insulin release and slower absorption. Simple sugars are the biggest culprit. I’m probably forgetting pieces of this, since that’s simplified version, but it’s pretty interesting how all of that works, definitely worth digging into!
That explains it. Sugar definitely causes it for me.0 -
ap·pe·tiz·er
/ˈapəˌtīzər/
noun
a small dish of food or a drink taken before a meal or the main course of a meal to stimulate one's appetite.
"the meal started off with an assortment of appetizers including mini egg rolls and fried mozzarella"
Sharing because, by definition, an appetizer is something that spikes your appetite and the example they’re using is a mixture of fat, carbs, and protein 🤔
Here’s an explanation I found-
Your gut and digestive system react as though a big meal is on the way. The resulting drop in blood sugar can shoot your hunger through the roof, Dr. Lennerz says. That can send you running back to the break room to pound those cookies and chips by the fistful.
Sounds about right 😆.0 -
kshama2001 wrote: »sollyn23l2 wrote: »Sure. Highly processed foods increase appetite. They're designed to. Just keep in mind, it's not specifically sugar that increases your appetite. It doesn't. That's why nobody's ever told you that until recently. It's the combination of fat and sugar. Disagree? Down a cup of sugar, let me know how much appetite you have after that. I'm gonna guess you'll feel too sick to your stomach to have any appetite.
I might try 187 calories worth of sugar, just to see what happens.
Here are the macros of my appetite stimulating snack:
Vs:
I wonder if just chocolate would have that effect on me, as it is also high in sugar and fat. Here are the macros for 187 calories worth of that chocolate:
For all I know it's the green dye in the M&Ms stimulating my appetite.
I tried to eat m&m’s the other day and for some reason it tasted like chemicals. So I went for the Reese’s instead, my favorite, and the same thing. What the heck happened!? I’ve lost all interest in sweets now I guess.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.6K 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
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 914 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions