Stop Eating Sugar

[Buck]

Added sugar in particular. Most fruit is okay.

Please watch this.

[WhiteWhale]

Originally Posted by DaKCMan AP

The studies target added sugar, not the natural sugars found in fruit.

I responded to something someone said about sugars in fruits. You should have seen it quoted in my post.

[DaKCMan AP]

Originally Posted by WhiteWhale

I responded to something someone said about sugars in fruits. You should have seen it quoted in my post.

[MahiMike]

Read this book. You'll realize that bread is sugar too.

[Silock]

...and this is why I hate vilifying certain foods. You end up excluding just about everything.

The devil is usually in the dose, not the actual food or product. That's why eating a balanced diet with a reasonable caloric intake works really well. You don't exclude anything, get lots of varied nutrients and still get to enjoy life (like eating cake) without wanting to kill yourself because you're constantly worried about what you can and cannot eat.

[Marcellus]

Originally Posted by Silock

...and this is why I hate vilifying certain foods. You end up excluding just about everything.

The devil is usually in the dose, not the actual food or product. That's why eating a balanced diet with a reasonable caloric intake works really well. You don't exclude anything, get lots of varied nutrients and still get to enjoy life (like eating cake) without wanting to kill yourself because you're constantly worried about what you can and cannot eat.

All things in moderation. Not complicated at all.

Not easy, but not complicated.

[WhiteWhale]

Originally Posted by Silock

...and this is why I hate vilifying certain foods. You end up excluding just about everything.

The devil is usually in the dose, not the actual food or product. That's why eating a balanced diet with a reasonable caloric intake works really well. You don't exclude anything, get lots of varied nutrients and still get to enjoy life (like eating cake) without wanting to kill yourself because you're constantly worried about what you can and cannot eat.

I was told earlier that such a stance was a 'cop-out'.

How it was a 'cop-out' was never explained, but I try not to expect too much from this group. I doubt guy knows what it even means. It's making an excuse for avoiding accountability. Saying that people should take responsibility for their own diet is not a cop out... it's the exact opposite. Blaming sugar for being fat... that's a cop out. Sugar makes you fat, but you have to eat it. It's not injected into you by the government.

I do agree with you though.

[2112]

Originally Posted by WhiteWhale

Even apples are high in sugar when compared to other natural foods, perhaps not so much compared to a lot of other fruits.

Bananas are high in sugar and they're easily one of the best foods you can eat.

If one avoids fruit because of the sugar, they're thinking too small. A good diet isn't about avoiding or focusing on one thing (be it calories, carbs, or fat) and cutting it. You gotta look at the bigger picture. Your body needs sugars for quick energy and fats and proteins for a more sustained energy.

Personally I eat mostly fruit in the mornings... a bottle of OJ and a banana at least. The sugar and vitamins give me a quick energy boost that other people seem to prefer getting from coffee.

The most important part people dont realize is that eating a lot of fruit and salads causes very very nice 5 star bowel movements. thats one of the most important reasons why I eat fruit. f the sugar..lol

[Epic Fail 007]

Just eat whatever you want . Just don`t overdue it. **** this shit Im out! **** the government ,**** obama and his porker of a wife! Put that bitch on a diet!

[Simply Red]

The OP is discussing eating extra sugar, not sugar in breads etc but rather the sugar ON TOP of those allocated 'normal' foods. I can't believe some of you still don't recognize that, especially the self-proclaimed experts. I've had my sugar problems in the past and I'm cutting out the extra candies, etc.. Mostly for ME and honestly, nothing ANYone on Chiefs Planet 'LOL' could say to stop what i'm doing to better my health.

You all would argue w/ a Cal. Medical Proffesor, I swear.

[Silock]

"Extra" sugar is still just a matter of consumption. It's six and one half dozen to the other. You may eat grapes and get 50g of sugar. Or, you may drink some juice that has added sugar, but still end up ingesting only 50g of sugar.

What's the big deal?

[DaKCMan AP]

Originally Posted by Silock

"Extra" sugar is still just a matter of consumption. It's six and one half dozen to the other. You may eat grapes and get 50g of sugar. Or, you may drink some juice that has added sugar, but still end up ingesting only 50g of sugar.

What's the big deal?

The body processes fructose and sucrose differently.

[Silock]

Originally Posted by DaKCMan AP

The body processes fructose and sucrose differently.

Sucrose still gets broken down into simple sugars in the end.

[Fire Me Boy!]

Originally Posted by Silock

"Extra" sugar is still just a matter of consumption. It's six and one half dozen to the other. You may eat grapes and get 50g of sugar. Or, you may drink some juice that has added sugar, but still end up ingesting only 50g of sugar.

What's the big deal?

How about the fact that fiber slows absorption into the body and blood, which lowers GI.

[Silock]

Originally Posted by Fire Me Boy!

How about the fact that fiber slows absorption into the body and blood, which lowers GI.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17234503

Abstract
OBJECTIVE:
Fructose has been implicated in obesity, partly due to lack of insulin-mediated leptin stimulation and ghrelin suppression. Most work has examined effects of pure fructose, rather than high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS), the most commonly consumed form of fructose. This study examined effects of beverages sweetened with HFCS or sucrose (Suc), when consumed with mixed meals, on blood glucose, insulin, leptin, ghrelin, and appetite.
METHODS:
Thirty lean women were studied on two randomized 2-d visits during which HFCS- and Suc-sweetened beverages were consumed as 30% of energy on isocaloric diets during day 1 while blood was sampled. On day 2, food was eaten ad libitum. Subjects rated appetite at designated times throughout visits.
RESULTS:
No significant differences between the two sweeteners were seen in fasting plasma glucose, insulin, leptin, and ghrelin (P > 0.05). The within-day variation in all four items was not different between the two visits (P > 0.05). Net areas under the curve were similar for glucose, insulin, and leptin (P > 0.05). There were no differences in energy or macronutrient intake on day 2. The only appetite variable that differed between sweeteners was desire to eat, which had a higher area under the curve the day after Suc compared with HFCS.
CONCLUSION:
These short-term results suggest that, when fructose is consumed in the form of HFCS, the measured metabolic responses do not differ from Suc in lean women. Further research is required to examine appetite responses and to determine if these findings hold true for obese individuals, males, or longer periods.

[DaKCMan AP]

Originally Posted by Silock

Sucrose still gets broken down into simple sugars in the end.

The difference is in the rate at which they are metabolized.