Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Health and Wellness > Diet and Weight Loss
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
 
Old 01-09-2018, 06:51 PM
 
Location: Ohio
1,884 posts, read 1,005,458 times
Reputation: 2871

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by riaelise View Post
Which really doesn't matter if you practice calorie management and portion control. Besides if you are active, you're burning that sugar.

I'm for moderate fat. I physically get ill if I consume too much fat.
You're mostly right, but it does matter.

IF you don't burn it off or store it, sugar will glycate the living heck out of you. Not good. But if you burn it off through exercise (especially intense exercise, the one place where sugar might have hormonal benefits), it's mostly fine.

But sugar does have a negative effect on satiety, due to its effects on leptin via SCSO3 and its effects on neuropeptide YY and AgRP. These last two hormones increase food cravings (especially more sugar) big time.
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-09-2018, 06:58 PM
 
Location: Wine Country
6,102 posts, read 8,828,075 times
Reputation: 12324
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haksel257 View Post
You're mostly right, but it does matter.

IF you don't burn it off or store it, sugar will glycate the living heck out of you. Not good. But if you burn it off through exercise (especially intense exercise, the one place where sugar might have hormonal benefits), it's mostly fine.

But sugar does have a negative effect on satiety, due to its effects on leptin via SCSO3 and its effects on neuropeptide YY and AgRP. These last two hormones increase food cravings (especially more sugar) big time.
I am curious about your education. Are you a nutritionist? What is your training?
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2018, 08:24 PM
 
Location: Ohio
1,884 posts, read 1,005,458 times
Reputation: 2871
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luckyd609 View Post
I am curious about your education. Are you a nutritionist? What is your training?
I'm a hobbyist. XD

Last edited by Haksel257; 01-09-2018 at 08:55 PM..
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2018, 09:07 PM
 
Location: Round Rock, Texas
13,448 posts, read 15,499,397 times
Reputation: 19007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haksel257 View Post
You're mostly right, but it does matter.

IF you don't burn it off or store it, sugar will glycate the living heck out of you. Not good. But if you burn it off through exercise (especially intense exercise, the one place where sugar might have hormonal benefits), it's mostly fine.

But sugar does have a negative effect on satiety, due to its effects on leptin via SCSO3 and its effects on neuropeptide YY and AgRP. These last two hormones increase food cravings (especially more sugar) big time.
I agree with you and I'm definitely not advocating sugar replace more nutritious food. I consider simple sugars to be treats, to be eaten on occasion. While complex carbs like whole grains legumes and tubers do get broken down into sugar, they have a longer digestion time and, when paired with protein and a vegetable can achieve satiety. Unlike a cinnamon bun which is nothing but simple carbs and fat and you're hungry an hour later. People like to lump all things that contain carbohydrates as sugar and therefore bad. People don't pig out on stone ground wheat bread or beans. Even rice..many people stop at a cup and one half. I don't have the same cravings after eating a cup of rice as I do after eating a chocolate cookie. There's a distinction. I personally think that if one is physically able he/she shoukd be active and burn more. Our bodies are designed for activity. Previous generations did a lot of physical work and therefore burned a lot of calories. Today, we are a largely sedentary society young and old and that is just as bad if not worse than eating processed food imho.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2018, 10:02 PM
 
Location: Ohio
1,884 posts, read 1,005,458 times
Reputation: 2871
Quote:
Originally Posted by riaelise View Post
I agree with you and I'm definitely not advocating sugar replace more nutritious food. I consider simple sugars to be treats, to be eaten on occasion. While complex carbs like whole grains legumes and tubers do get broken down into sugar, they have a longer digestion time and, when paired with protein and a vegetable can achieve satiety. Unlike a cinnamon bun which is nothing but simple carbs and fat and you're hungry an hour later. People like to lump all things that contain carbohydrates as sugar and therefore bad. People don't pig out on stone ground wheat bread or beans. Even rice..many people stop at a cup and one half. I don't have the same cravings after eating a cup of rice as I do after eating a chocolate cookie. There's a distinction. I personally think that if one is physically able he/she shoukd be active and burn more. Our bodies are designed for activity. Previous generations did a lot of physical work and therefore burned a lot of calories. Today, we are a largely sedentary society young and old and that is just as bad if not worse than eating processed food imho.
Totally, whole foods and a natural lifestyle (AKA moving around) are the way to go.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-10-2018, 08:33 AM
 
16,579 posts, read 20,725,020 times
Reputation: 26860
Quote:
Originally Posted by riaelise View Post
Honestly though the real food doesn't produce any more satiety with me:/
I can't disagree with you, but that certainly has not been my experience. If we were friends in real life, I'd make you a loaf of 100% whole wheat bread and serve you up a thick slice with an egg fried in butter on top and a sliced avocado on the side. I bet you wouldn't be hungry for hours.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-10-2018, 09:51 AM
 
Location: Round Rock, Texas
13,448 posts, read 15,499,397 times
Reputation: 19007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marlow View Post
I can't disagree with you, but that certainly has not been my experience. If we were friends in real life, I'd make you a loaf of 100% whole wheat bread and serve you up a thick slice with an egg fried in butter on top and a sliced avocado on the side. I bet you wouldn't be hungry for hours.
sounds yummy (except for the avocado, which I don't care for lol) I definitely love homemade bread and all fried eggs.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-10-2018, 03:29 PM
 
Location: Round Rock, Texas
13,448 posts, read 15,499,397 times
Reputation: 19007
Default This is what my usual dinner comprises

OP, this is what I ate last night. Less than 500 calories, and this is pretty much typical of how I eat. Half the plate has vegetables, a quarter is a starch of some type, and a quarter is protein (meat usually). Chicken breast 5 oz (200 cals), glaze (35 cals per T), 2 cups of broccoli (44 cals), rice (160) and beans (45). Full until the next day at 10 am.
Attached Thumbnails
Help! I am overwhelmed researching a diet that will help me lose 40lbs-dinner.jpg  
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-11-2018, 09:01 AM
 
Location: Home, Home on the Front Range
25,826 posts, read 20,721,231 times
Reputation: 14818
Quote:
Originally Posted by fernweh View Post
About Me:

Female
29 years old
5’2 and 160lbs

I’m finally done sitting back and not doing anything about my weight. My goal is to lose 30 - 40lbs. I will be going to the gym at least 5 days a week. However, when it comes to nutrition, I’m so lost. I Google what type of foods (low calorie) I should be eating and calculating how many calories I need to burn so I can lose weight. I’m overwhelmed with all the online articles....

For those that lost significant amount of weight, what did you do as far as nutrition? Did you see a dietician, buy books, download apps?

Any advice is much appreciated!
This is what worked for me:

https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/...always-hungry/
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-11-2018, 09:35 AM
 
Location: Greenville, SC
227 posts, read 247,859 times
Reputation: 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by riaelise View Post
OP, this is what I ate last night. Less than 500 calories, and this is pretty much typical of how I eat. Half the plate has vegetables, a quarter is a starch of some type, and a quarter is protein (meat usually). Chicken breast 5 oz (200 cals), glaze (35 cals per T), 2 cups of broccoli (44 cals), rice (160) and beans (45). Full until the next day at 10 am.
Love this! I’m working on getting a good nutrition plan set up with the gym. I loathe cooking, so I need easy, low calorie food ideas.

Again, thanks everyone for all the info! It’s a lot to take in, but I appreciate the advice.
Quick reply to this message
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 update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Health and Wellness > Diet and Weight Loss

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top