Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That's what I"d like to know...fruit and veggies all have sugar...I'd like to see her meal plan.
And I think the coffee reaction was due to the caffeine, not the sugar (although that much sugar is bad for you)
I will amend that I eat nothing with "added sugar" Any vegetables I eat are low carb and low on the glycemic index so as not to spike my blood sugar. No fruit especially apples, grapes, banana's, etc. No veges like peas, carrots etc. I will eat cauliflower and broccoli which are lower glycemic. Never anything white like sugar (no brown sugar or honey) flour or any wheat products, no rice, potatoes, pasta etc.
Example of yesterday
Eggs, 2 scrambled with butter and 1 oz. swiss cheese - 2 carbs
Leftover Pork Roast - 0 carbs
lettuce Salad - 5 carbs
1 tablespoon ranch dressing - 1 carb
homemade Salisbury Steak, 1/2 recipe - 6 carbs
Broccoli with butter - 6 carbs
Total 20 carbs
As for caffeine, nope I drink coffee all day long without this issue. It was the fact that my blood spiked fast with the high amount of sugar, my pancreas shot out insulin to combat the sugar and once it ate up the sugar my blood sugar dropped so fast I nearly didn't make it to bed to lie down (says my doctor)
Last edited by anitak1982; 05-04-2017 at 05:14 AM..
You say you only eat low glycemic carbs, but both apples and grapes are considered low glycemic (on the mid-higher end of low glycemic, but still low glycemic). Beans are starchy carbs, but still low glycemic, (albeit full of letting if not soaked properly)...just saying there seems to be inconsistencies in your meal logic to me.
You say you only eat low glycemic carbs, but both apples and grapes are considered low glycemic (on the mid-higher end of low glycemic, but still low glycemic). Beans are starchy carbs, but still low glycemic, (albeit full of letting if not soaked properly)...just saying there seems to be inconsistencies in your meal logic to me.
I absolutely will never eat apples. I disagree that they are low glycemic as I have read studies where the sugar in an apple and the sugar in a candy bar will spike the blood sugar faster than the candy bar because it is fructose and doesn't have to be digested. Grapes are higher on the sugar index than many candy bars. There is no inconsistencies in my meal logic. Our bodies cannot tell the differences in sugars. Sugar is sugar is sugar as far as how our blood reacts.
I have read that beans can be a subject for discussion whether or not they impact the blood but I haven't trusted it yet.
Eating this way for 13 years has allowed me to:
1. stop being a bulimic (I purged never binged for over 35 years)
2. kept my weight down
3. kept diabetes away
4. my cholesterol is perfect
5. my blood pressure is perfect
I am 58 years old and my family history is full of obese members with diabetes, high blood pressure. Why do you fight me so. Can you say the same?
I absolutely will never eat apples. I disagree that they are low glycemic as I have read studies where the sugar in an apple and the sugar in a candy bar will spike the blood sugar faster than the candy bar because it is fructose and doesn't have to be digested. Grapes are higher on the sugar index than many candy bars. There is no inconsistencies in my meal logic. Our bodies cannot tell the differences in sugars. Sugar is sugar is sugar as far as how our blood reacts.
I have read that beans can be a subject for discussion whether or not they impact the blood but I haven't trusted it yet.
Eating this way for 13 years has allowed me to:
1. stop being a bulimic (I purged never binged for over 35 years)
2. kept my weight down
3. kept diabetes away
4. my cholesterol is perfect
5. my blood pressure is perfect
I am 58 years old and my family history is full of obese members with diabetes, high blood pressure. Why do you fight me so. Can you say the same?
"Fight you so"?...lol relax..I made one statement basically requesting clarification. You've said that you define apples and grapes as high glycemic. Where's the fight? Although this contradicts everything I've read about the glycemic load or the glycemic index of grapes and apples, if that's how you feel, then that's how you feel. Congrats on your perfect health..and yes, I can say the same.
"Fight you so"?...lol relax..I made one statement basically requesting clarification. You've said that you define apples and grapes as high glycemic. Where's the fight? Although this contradicts everything I've read about the glycemic load or the glycemic index of grapes and apples, if that's how you feel, then that's how you feel. Congrats on your perfect health..and yes, I can say the same.
Apples: 19 grams of sugar in a small apple: as much as I eat in one entire day
Some of the popular low-carb diet plans differ, based on whether they consider glycemic index or glycemic load (South Beach, Zone), while others just look at the amount of carbohydrate (Atkins, Protein Power). Other diets (Atkins, South Beach) don't allow fruit at all in the first phase. Not all low-carb diets limit fruit, however. Diets like the Paleo diet, Whole30, and even Weight Watchers (although it's not necessarily a low-carb diet) do not place a limit on fruit.
For me I eat Atkins even though I am way past the first phase, I haven't personally allowed them back into my diet. That is just how I eat
Some of the popular low-carb diet plans differ, based on whether they consider glycemic index or glycemic load (South Beach, Zone), while others just look at the amount of carbohydrate (Atkins, Protein Power). Other diets (Atkins, South Beach) don't allow fruit at all in the first phase. Not all low-carb diets limit fruit, however. Diets like the Paleo diet, Whole30, and even Weight Watchers (although it's not necessarily a low-carb diet) do not place a limit on fruit.
For me I eat Atkins even though I am way past the first phase, I haven't personally allowed them back into my diet. That is just how I eat
Kudos to you...and I'm not being sarcastic. Because I do Keto/LCHF now and its not the easiest thing to adhere to...but if you can do it with no sugar in any form whatsoever, then way to go.. I agree that excessive fruit intake can be counterproductive. And I understand that apples and grapes, mangos, watermelon etc can have a relatively high amount of carbs..however when I adjust for the effect of the fiber content, and calculate the glycemic load vs the glycemic index of each, the sugar is a compromise I'm willing to make...the main thing I avoid are added and refined sugars in addition to artificial sweeteners , not necessarily sugars in general....but I do agree that such tradeoffs arent worth it for everyone. Everyone has to find the right diet for themselves.
Kudos to you...and I'm not being sarcastic. Because I do Keto/LCHF now and its not the easiest thing to adhere to...but if you can do it with no sugar in any form whatsoever, then way to go.. I agree that excessive fruit intake can be counterproductive. And I understand that apples and grapes, mangos, watermelon etc can have a relatively high amount of carbs..however when I adjust for the effect of the fiber content, and calculate the glycemic load vs the glycemic index of each, the sugar is a compromise I'm willing to make...the main thing I avoid are added and refined sugars in addition to artificial sweeteners , not necessarily sugars in general....but I do agree that such tradeoffs arent worth it for everyone. Everyone has to find the right diet for themselves.
I personally have no issues with artificial sweeteners because I feel I have removed so much from my diet that this is a trade off for me. I do however avoid aspartame. My favorite is swerve. I would rather forgo any added sugar as I know that real sugar is ever so much as dangerous. It is like a drug for some and they literally have withdrawals when removing it from their diet.
While overconsumption of sugar isn't a good thing, come on, it's not the "other white powder".
Sugar addiction: pushing the drug-sugar analogy to the limit.
Ahmed SH1, Guillem K, Vandaele Y.
Author information
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW:
To review research that tests the validity of the analogy between addictive drugs, like cocaine, and hyperpalatable foods, notably those high in added sugar (i.e., sucrose).
RECENT FINDINGS:
Available evidence in humans shows that sugar and sweetness can induce reward and craving that are comparable in magnitude to those induced by addictive drugs. Although this evidence is limited by the inherent difficulty of comparing different types of rewards and psychological experiences in humans, it is nevertheless supported by recent experimental research on sugar and sweet reward in laboratory rats. Overall, this research has revealed that sugar and sweet reward can not only substitute to addictive drugs, like cocaine, but can even be more rewarding and attractive. At the neurobiological level, the neural substrates of sugar and sweet reward appear to be more robust than those of cocaine (i.e., more resistant to functional failures), possibly reflecting past selective evolutionary pressures for seeking and taking foods high in sugar and calories.
SUMMARY:
The biological robustness in the neural substrates of sugar and sweet reward may be sufficient to explain why many people can have difficultly to control the consumption of foods high in sugar when continuously exposed to them.
Sugar addiction: pushing the drug-sugar analogy to the limit.
Ahmed SH1, Guillem K, Vandaele Y.
Author information
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW:
To review research that tests the validity of the analogy between addictive drugs, like cocaine, and hyperpalatable foods, notably those high in added sugar (i.e., sucrose).
RECENT FINDINGS:
Available evidence in humans shows that sugar and sweetness can induce reward and craving that are comparable in magnitude to those induced by addictive drugs. Although this evidence is limited by the inherent difficulty of comparing different types of rewards and psychological experiences in humans, it is nevertheless supported by recent experimental research on sugar and sweet reward in laboratory rats. Overall, this research has revealed that sugar and sweet reward can not only substitute to addictive drugs, like cocaine, but can even be more rewarding and attractive. At the neurobiological level, the neural substrates of sugar and sweet reward appear to be more robust than those of cocaine (i.e., more resistant to functional failures), possibly reflecting past selective evolutionary pressures for seeking and taking foods high in sugar and calories.
SUMMARY:
The biological robustness in the neural substrates of sugar and sweet reward may be sufficient to explain why many people can have difficultly to control the consumption of foods high in sugar when continuously exposed to them.
While the evidence is compelling on sugar being really bad for us it is still going to be a part of a lot of people's lives. Moderate sugar consumption is not going to hurt most people. Its the hidden sugars that really add up that people need to be mindful of.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
