February 28th, 2008, 11:55 PM
Refined Sugar, White Flour
Hello everyone! I'm not sure if a similiar thread exists, but I'd like your opinions on how refined sugar and flour affects weight loss. I'm healthy in that I'm active, focusing on cardiovascular endurance activities, strength training, core strengthening, etc... the overall basics to decent workouts. My diet has gotten rather "sloppy" if you know what I mean. I've become addicted to sugary foods, refined/simple carbohydrates. I know everything is okay in moderation, but these foods cause such a spike in my insulin levels that I always end up overeating afterwards it seems.
Has anyone seen any related effects (weight loss, etc) with taking refined sugars and white flour from your diet? I've noticed it is hard at first (I'd almost consider myself a sugar-addict!) I wonder if these items are "sabotaging" my diet.
I'd like to lose about 10 pounds, but I can't imagine it is my exercise routine (I'm a phys. ed teacher and a certified aerobics instructor) I believe my diet is more of an issue. I sometimes have such extreme cravings for sugary foods, that I super over-indulge (almost a mini-binge) and hate that feeling.
Any thoughts or comments would be great. Thanks! :-)
February 29th, 2008, 12:37 AM
SPend some time reading the stickied threads in the nutrition forum...
It's total calories that make a difference in weight loss..
However refined carbs (what I call the KKK carbs, white sugar, white flour, white rice, etec) don't do much for your body - no they won't make you fat -unless you over indulge in them -but they are useless calories - and not all that satifying or filling.
Stick with whole grains...
And start reading..
February 29th, 2008, 12:39 AM
I myself stopped eating "the evil whites" this year. My weight has not changed significantly because of it. And that is the answer to your question.
Sugar is so friggin bad for you dude!!
Sugar - Pure White and Deadly - The Problem of Sugar
February 29th, 2008, 05:32 PM
In a nut shell, sugar causes a spike in insulin levels that triggers fat storage and increased food cravings.
March 1st, 2008, 03:59 AM
I have a similar thread and people keep telling me that, NO, eating the refined stuff DOES NOT cause fat storage...more so than if you ate the same amount of food in, say, veggies. I tend to believe it does. But no one has explained to me WHY it doesn't trigger the fat storage.
Insulin and Its Metabolic Effects 7/14/01
Last edited by phix95; March 1st, 2008 at 04:13 AM.
March 1st, 2008, 07:41 PM
Okay, phix95, let me start by saying I don't profess to be an expert in this area. It's not my field of study. Like a lot of people I read then figure out what works in the real world by testing it out.
Originally Posted by phix95
Anyhow, here's an article that makes sense of why insulin promotes fat storage without getting too bogged down in details - Insulin and Fat Storage.
"Insulin is a storage hormone, and one of the things it loves to store is fatty acids. This is mediated by the enzymes Acetyl-CoA carboxylase 1 and Acetyl-CoA carboxylase 2 (ACC2).
ACC2 is a regulator of how fatty acids are transferred to the mitochondria. That is, insulin increases the production of ACC2, causing a blunted effect in fatty acids being transferred to the mitochondria. This results in less fat being burned for energy. When insulin is elevated in the body, fat loss is blunted because of increased ACC2."
You might like to use this article as a starting point to figure out just how insulin increases fat storage.
March 3rd, 2008, 08:34 AM
Sugar is not OK
I think that sugar is a MAJOR problem with the modern diet.
Some say that weight loss or gain depends only on the number of calories consumed and the number of calories burned. I mostly agree with this. But it is not the whole story.
50 years ago, there were not that many people that were severely overweight. If one wants to understand what to do to get/keep thin, one can look at the trends over the last 50 years that made everyone so overweight, and then strive to do the opposite.
I donít think that people counted calories back then, at least not very much. People were not counting what they ate and what they burned. And exercise was not very popular as far as I can tell. So what is different?
1. Burn Rate is lower. More people have desk jobs and therefore live more sedentary lives, burning fewer calories. However, the number of calories burned back then cannot be all that many more than what people are burning today. Maybe 100-500 more per day, depending on the job and person; just look at the tables of how much one burns for a given exercise and time and you will see that it is hard to get the burn rate up. Most people cannot be bothered to work that hard, even 50 years ago.
2. Intake is higher. This is the main problem. It is the only thing that can account for how overweight the population is getting. Yet people 50 years ago did not watch what they ate much. They did not eat low-fat diets. These ideas have only become popular over the last couple of decades.
So why are people overeating more than they used to? Because they are eating unnatural foods. People are eating low-fat, but they are eating huge amounts of sugar, refined flower, and potatoes (which are both pretty similar to sugar and something people never ate much until the last few hundred years). Just pick up anything in the grocery store and read the ingredients. Sugar is in everything.
Now, at which of these meals are you the most likely to overeat:
1. Pastries and bread products.
2. Steak and mashed potatoes.
3. Steak and salad (without salad dressing)
I would overeat on 1,2,4,5. But not 3, because too much steak gets disgusting after a while. All the others have sugar or sugar-like substances. (Salad dressing usually has a lot of sugar, which is why it should be omitted.) So omitting sugar and sugar-like substances may make it easier for you not to overeat.
March 3rd, 2008, 05:12 PM
That is so frickin true! I don't do cooking, so everything I eat comes from the freezer or from a can. Unless its seafood I caught/harvested or a steak.
Originally Posted by wlfguy
So the other day I was checking my canned vegetables..my green beans, my corn, and my collards all have sugar!
March 3rd, 2008, 06:11 PM
too much steak gets disgusting after a while
No, seriously, I can overeat on ANYthing - even steak. I can eat to the point of physical illness because I've packed my stomach too full of something. That is one of my main weight issues. When I am not strict about my intake, I WILL eat to the point of being over stuffed - weather it's steak and dressingless salad or lasagna or ice cream. I've had a big appetite ever since I hit puberty (and hey, I'm a woman ...).
Here's the rub, though. Sugar, white rice, refined white flour, and all the processed junk that masquerades as food on the grocery store shelves are all very CALORIE RICH and NUTRIENT POOR. By contrast, salad, raw veggies and unprocessed whole grains are NUTRIENT RICH and low to moderate in calories. If you eat the junk, and you are like me and have to purposely avoid overeating ANYTHING, then it doesn't take much to go overboard on your calories. BUT if you are eating high quality fruits, veggies, dairy and meat products, then you are getting alot of real nutrients with your volume for not nearly as many calories.
I can stuff myself to saturation with a huge tossed salad and take in a much smaller amount of calories than I can with lasagna, or grilled cheese sandwiches, etc.
There is one HUGE problem with sugar, white flour and white rice. These empty carbs create a large and rapid insulin response because of the huge dump of glucose into the blood stream. This then creates a corresponding massive and rapid clearing of glucose from the blood and that triggers your body to tell you it needs food because it doesn't have enough circulating glucose. It is a vicious cycle. This happens regardless of the volume of food you have just eaten.
I remember my biochemistry prof in college said that someone who eats primarily processed carbs can literally "starve" themselves with a veritable bounty. You can eat white bread all day and always be hungry because of the insulin response it generates in your body.
If you stick primarily with a moderation of healthy fats, high quality and unprocessed whole food carbohydrates and lean proteins, you won't have the huge spikes in blood glucose that lead to cravings and binges. You should have a normal satiety response and experience fewer cravings for the sugary junk.
March 3rd, 2008, 06:59 PM
Good post mikitta.
As for some of the other one's above..... ya, insulin is a storage hormone. But you have to keep in mind that net energy balance still trumps all. If you eat nothing but refined sugar, you're going to have some crazy glycemic swings and large responses from the pancreas in terms of insulin output.
Still though, if you're in a caloric deficit, the net result will be an oxidation of fat. Not a storage.
Believe me, I'm not suggesting anyone go out and load up on nutrient-sparse foods.
I'm simply saying the common belief that insulin = fat gain is wrong in the context most people use it.
March 3rd, 2008, 11:00 PM
Thanks guys, I appreciate all your inputs. Mikitta what you said here really makes sense. (specifically about "starving" with processed foods) BTW, I have no idea how to insert the quote-back things... I will eat a huge bagel sometimes 300 cal, and then still feel hungry. I feel starved within an hour! I tried for 3 days to eat no processed sugars/flour/etc. I felt great. I'm having a really hard time sticking to the "diet" (although I dont' really believe in dieting per say) but it was amazing how differently I felt. I didn't have the mood swings either. Somehow my sweet tooth overrules everything...
March 3rd, 2008, 11:07 PM
We can thank A certain author within the low carb craze for the popularization of that particular myth.
the common belief that insulin = fat gain is wrong in the context most people use it.
March 3rd, 2008, 11:12 PM
Got that right.
Originally Posted by mikitta
March 4th, 2008, 05:29 AM
Frozen veggies like Bird's Eye or most store brands, normally seem to have a lot less salt & sugar added than the canned stuff. Plus they seem fresher when cooked.
Originally Posted by JMike
By ecilaaa in forum Nutrition
Last Post: January 5th, 2009, 06:11 PM
By GonnaGetAbs in forum Nutrition
Last Post: June 24th, 2008, 05:27 AM
By squeak in forum Nutrition
Last Post: January 25th, 2008, 11:29 PM
By Slim Col in forum Weight Loss Programs
Last Post: July 2nd, 2007, 02:36 AM
By renewal in forum Newcomers
Last Post: January 10th, 2007, 11:08 AM
Top Poster: maleficent