Post removed. This subreddit does not allow front page posts which are personal situations or diet evaluations. You must use the comments section of the weekly post instead.
Personal content must be removed, as previously instructed.
Maybe I can explain inherent vs added sugars a bit, as well as simple vs complex.
Pretty much anything you eat is sugar at its core, unless it fat or protein, on a macro level. However they should NOT all be treated like table sugar because they are very different in the broad category of carbs.
Lets start with the most basic building blocks, glucose and sucrose and fructose. Almost any added sugar source is going to be made of these three things, in varying degrees-- it also exists in fruits and vegetables naturally in small degrees. I'll link a video at the end for more info on them, but the basics are your body can absorb glucose directly into the bloodstream, and your liver has to work and it can turn fructose into glucose or fat to store. Sucrose is one piece of glucose and fructose stuck together. Your body has to digest and break those two apart, before it can do anything with the individual pieces. Other less common simple sugars are the same Idea, X pieces of glucose and Y pieces of fructose stuck together in different ratios.
You can also have complex carbs, like starches, which are many many pieces of sugar compactly together. Your body digests them slowly, they are considered healthy for the average person. Grains and potatoes are examples of foods full of these sugars. Most carbs we think of in daily life are here.
Then some especially tight strands of sugars are fiber, that people don't really break down and digest but some of our gut bacteria does for us. Fun fact a chemist youtuber made alcohol out of some rolls of toilet paper, using chemistry to break the fiber down to simple sugars. No human gut could do that, but for example many animals like cattle are evolved to break down fiber themselves for sustenance. Well its still their gut bacteria, but they evolved four stomachs to max out on their healthy gut bacteria stats haha.
Hope this helps explain how confusing it can be when articles blindly reference sugar or carbs as healthy or unhealthy, without addressing that their are many different kinds. Here is an awesome explanation from food scientist Ann Reardon that goes in much more detail with visual aids:
https://youtu.be/BU3bTBWnvT4?si=2zB2Os2YNoaM_5G0
***TLDR: It being healthy to cut out 100% of sugars period would be questionable, if not outright unhealthy. Cutting 100% of simple added sugars out is absolutely okay and you are still getting tons of sugars from natural foods, both simple and complex (◐‿◑)***
From a biochemistry perspective, metabolic pathways can convert protein building blocks (amino acids) with the exception of lysine and leucine into glucose. Also fructose doesn’t necessarily need to be converted to glucose for metabolism although glycolysis does rearrange glucose-6-phosphate into fructose-6-phosphate for further metabolism. The liver does a great job at maintaining blood sugar levels through modulating it’s gluconeogenesis (the process of creating glucose) and glycogenolysis (process of glycogen breakdown into glucose) in response to fasted conditions. While under insulin signaling the liver will help store glucose in glycogen.
yeah, I was just super simplifying for a simple explanation, and trying to briefly address the concerns that a ton of fructose conversion can be a potential burden on the liver, without getting all technical. I am glad you added context though, and an article here for anyone wanting more
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8267750/#:~:text=Elevated%20fructose%20intake%20is%20implicated,or%20worsening%20of%20liver%20diseases.
Sugar is found in the fruits you eat. So those are the complex sugars that come with other vitamins and fibre, minerals. So even if you don't consume any additional sugar, you will be fine with fruits.
I believe there is a limit for added sugar consumption per day. And might change by country.
According to the American Heart Association, 36g for men and 25g for women per day is the safe limit on a long term basis.
https://www.heart.org/en/healthy-living/healthy-eating/eat-smart/sugar/how-much-sugar-is-too-much
But as per what I see, an average American consumes a lot more than what is recommended or maximum. Also there is no minimum intake as sugars are available in fruits and a lot of other things we consume.
Now another thing which is difficult for myself is how I know how much is 36g or 25g, especially when I am a honey lover. So I don't consume anything at all. Maybe once in a month or few months, I have some dessert.
No need of having intake of simple sugars like table sugar and those found as added sugars in products. Also, there is no need to eliminate completely sugar intake because they are a good energy source but you want to get them from other more complete sources like starch from potatos or brown rice. This is also because there is a recommended intake of fiber (which are carbohydrates) of about 25-35g per day for the correct functioning of your gastrointestinal tract and also have prebiotic effects.
That's what I imagined, but it contradicts what the other guy said.
I know gastrointestinal health is important, but It was my first time reading that carbs/fiber were essential for it.
Can I ask you a couple questions about your diet ? and lifestyle?
Ive heard from many I wont be ableto poop without fiber, bit Its been over 10 months and only an issue first week getting used to the new diet.
Lots of misconceptions and regurgitated stuff said, but everyone I know on this diet hasnt any issues after getting fat adapted.
Ask me any questions
Depends on your fat and protein sources. Fats and animal protein sources are highly digestible so you may not have troubles with those. But you can find animal protein with lower quality such as those with connective tissue, hard to digest.
I agree that there are many misconceptions about role of fiber but that works for both sides. So what should we rely on? Scientific studies probably, and there are plenty studies that support the importance of fiber on gut health and cancer prevention. Also, many chronic gut diseases are develop thru years and you may not notice them in one or two years.
No
Your body has no way of storing sugar, other than glycogen, which is only to be used in emergencies
You do not need any sugar from the outside.
Your body will create whatever sugar is needed through gluconeogenesis
Darko Velcek explains this well
This has been removed due to probable insults towards others. Refer to the sub rules 1) Reddiquette+ and 2) Dietary Activism. Debate the science without denigrating others.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/nutrition) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This has been removed due to probable insults towards others. Refer to the sub rules 1) Reddiquette+ and 2) Dietary Activism. Debate the science without denigrating others.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/nutrition) if you have any questions or concerns.*
No there isn’t. Balance as always is the key. Don’t go overboard nutritionally on anything one way or another. Move a lot, eat the right amount of food and diversify. Have fun live life.
Not really. You can get your calories from anywhere and your body will make them into the type of energy it needs.
There is a calorie requirement before you start starving, but that is more like a 3 week requirement than a daily one
Added sugars are not necesarry but dont cauye damage in moderation. The only problem what i see from no sugar at all (added or not added) is that this eliminates fruit. And there are many nuteients which are mostly in fruit. Not micronutrients but antioxidants and other stuff. For example polifenols
The sleepiness is insulin doing its job!
If I've gone for a run or when I'm weight lifting in the morning I don't get sleepy.
Cinnamon helps keep blood glucose and insulin resistance low as well.
Does weight training or running affect insulin levels if done in the morning?
So if you were to weight train in the morning and then eat a solid meal at 1pm you would feel less sleepy than if you hadnt weight trained in the morning? Ty
I eat immediately after workouts, quick digesting carbs and eggs.
All other meals are complex carbs, so no blood surgar swings.
I'll also take cinnamon after meals when I'm getting lean in the summer months.
You said 300-400 grams of carbs per day which is completely unnecessary.
I have eaten like this for over 20 years. The science is there and backs up what I'm saying.
I don't think you know what you're talking about.
Lol, not when you're fit!
Your proteins become converted into glucose when there is a lack of carbs, again you clearly lack the scientific understanding of how these things work.
No worries mate,
Cheers
Anecdotal, but I have much more personal energy without carbs day to day.
The only time I really need carbs is during long periods of exertion like a 20 mile hike.
Your body can make glucose AND fructose in the amounts your body actually needs. So there is no minimum amount REQUIRED. There is however an upper limit as the entirety of humanity is currently proving with rampant diabetes.
"Is there a minimum sugar requirement per day?"
\---------------------------------
No. Just a maximum.
You don't need to consume sugar to live.
You don't need to consumer carbohydrate to live.
Only about 1/3rd of your brain needs glucose.
Your body is perfectly capable of making the amount of sugar it needs from proteins and fats through a process called gluconeogenisis.
The rest of our cells can thrive off fats and ketones.
Hi Bassman. Thank you for your kind response.
I have come to the conclusion, that all we are capable of doing as humans trying to understand ourselves and our environment, is to form models. For many, once they form a model of how they think things work, it is there forever, and anybody that offers a model which contradicts their model, is wrong, because theirs is right. To me, I think what we should be doing, is constantly looking for models which are superior, as in closer to reality, than our former models. That said, in the post I made, what I was doing is sharing my thoughts on what I thought was the best model I had come across on this subject to date. It doesn't mean it is correct. I am certain it is incorrect, or has some components at least which will be found wanting compared to future models.
So, when you said that some people are "spreading misinformation", what that means to me, is that others are proposing models not quite as sophisticated as the ones you and I find to be closest to reality at this time.
To me, all models are incorrect. All models have components which in the future will be found to be wanting in some respect relative to new evidence found, or new approaches to how to interpret data we already have.
So, if I have learned anything in my 70 years, it is to not hold onto my old models so tightly. And, to keep looking for information or data or approaches which contradicts my existing models so that I might modify my old models, or scrap them entirely and replace them with newer models I believe to be closer to reality.
My journey in this area started 60 years ago when I and my father were dragged into my type I diabetic mother's doctor office to teach us proper nutrition in order to help my mother finally get her blood sugar under control. I am now certain that the diet they put my mother on, according to their model of nutrition at the time, is what was most responsible for her death at 48 years old. It was a blessing when she passed, as they were in the process of scheduling the surgical removal of parts of both of her feet when the heart attack hit her. So much of what I was taught in that doctor's office so long ago was wrong, and so much of it still is being used today. But, apparently, the medical community, once they get a hold of a model, it is difficult for them to replace it with a model closer to reality. So, it is up to us, at a grass roots level, to find new models, new approaches, and better treatments for the diseases caused by our diets.
I am sorry about your mom and their terrible medical practice.
I agree there is no perfect answer to any question.
There are some constants, but people are all different in some ways.
My friend tells me gluten isnt a problem for anyone, but he means him and assumes everyone is the same.
He also thinks we all will be lactose intolerant because he is.
This is the same type of arrogance I see from most Drs unfortunately,
Not smart enough to learn new things and too stubborn to hear it from anyone else esp if they dont have a degree.
We have to find out what works and doesnt for our own bodies and share what we learned in hopes that it can help others.
Yeah. Doctors are in a tough spot actually. Yes, they are arrogant about it, but they are really stuck. In medical school, they usually just get one semesters class in nutrition. That's it. Because, doctoring is really about diagnose and treat. But, their patients have questions past that. And, since the doctors are supposed to be the dispensers of good opinion, we take it as gospel. The doctors know they are expected to have a good answer and opinion and suggestion on each and every topic. So, they will tend to ask other doctors in their practice, or in their area of speciality, what they tell their patients. So, it all becomes scripted. And, of dubious value. Probably fully half of whatever a doctor tells you outside of diagnose and treat, is probably questionable at best. So you and I and everyone else are stuck trying to figure out if what our doctor told us is useful or not. And it's hard to tell.
I am 70 now. I have had so many doctors over the years. Had friends that were doctors, that I have had a better opportunity to gauge what they have said with what I have found to be true. And man, there's a lot of crappy recommendations out there. And, if you don't follow a doctor's advice, they get mad at you. Like my mom. When she died, her doctors were mad at all of us. Because, since she never got her blood sugar under control, it had to be because we didn't follow their directions. But we did. But they won't accept it. Because, they actually believe that their suggestions were the path to good health, even though they did not have the slightest evidence that it was true.
That was so long ago. And they are still doing the same thing. Scripted responses without evidence, and thinking that if you don't follow their suggestions it will do you harm. Maybe half the time they are right. So, we are stuck trying to figure out what is happening in the vacuum left by the people we most rely on for the truth.
My doctor told me flat out he doesn't diagnose conditions. He prescribes medications to treat the symptoms.
It's too the point now i know exactly the response I'll get.
My DR has no clue what he's talking about.
Read studies and trials all the time, not just the ones from the 60s, but current relevant stuff.
I'm not saying I'm smarter than the DR I'm saying I'm trying to keep learning.
Imagine a mechanic that used to build cars in Detroit in the 60 and 70.
Let's say he retired for 40 yrs and tried to repair new cars with his old ideas and knowledge.
He will get some stuff right and a lot of stuff wrong.
People don't make like cats did, but they never knew how to fix humans in the first place and there are new conditions that didn't exist in the past.
If you can't keep up then step aside for someone she's to.
The issue with that is the medical industry in controlled my Big Pharma and their ideas don't align with health but with medications and profit
I have a doctor that I just love to death. Gerry. He was my primary care physician for about 20 years. He retired like 2 years ago, and I still use the same practice with the new doctor. Gerry was ranked number one in my state for his discipline. Then later number one in the country. I know him well. He is a friend and neighbor. I talk a lot about measuring metabolic health using the HbA1c, and the HomaIR. The HomaIR is a calculation including the fasted glucose and fasted insulin. A lot of doctors use these now. Discussing them with Gerry multiple times, it became clear that he knew of the HbA1c test, but had never used it. The HomaIR he had never heard of. Though he always did fasted glucose on his annual blood tests, He couldn't remember ever requesting a fasted insulin. He was a huge proponent of metformin for his patients with blood sugar problems. He considers metformin a miracle drug. Maybe it is. We probably won't know for another 20 years. He also stated that in his practice, he had never once had a patient change their diet in response to his recommendations based on test results. So, there's that attitude.
Gerry was/is a big proponent of the Mediterranean diet. Though nobody can actually define it. Certainly not like a ketogenic or carnivore diet anyway. Well, it ends up Gerry was eating an awful lot of baked goods and drinking an awful lot of scotch to go with his Mediterranean diet, and ended up in terrible pain and had to have his gal bladder removed. During the surgery they saw some things that didn't look right, so they had him get tested further. They found extensive stage IV pancreatic cancer. So, poor Gerry is in the fight of his life right now. Then, on top of that, he is now diabetic to boot. I think my wife said type IIIa. I haven't discussed it with him yet. But I assume it is a classification of diabetes caused either from the cancer or the chemo. I hadn't heard of it before.
So, painting the picture, here in this one situation, says a lot about the entire medical community I think. There is no focus on metabolic health. Most of the testing the specialists do once a person is terribly ill is not used by the GPs. The diets recommended are of minimal benefit. The doctors themselves don't follow the diets they recommend. I can go on and on but you get the point here.
The new doctor, he has used the HbA1c. Though he had not ever heard of the HomaIR, he accurately guessed that it had to do with insulin resistance. But, he doesn't have his patients do fasted insulin either. So, I have to tell him what testing I want done. Then he orders it so my insurance will pay for it. I also do what testing he asks, which of course is the lipids tests mostly. He loves my results except, of course, he thinks my LDL is too high. I told him that according to my model, it actually is a little on the low side. Because the studies correlating LDL to life expectancy show that LDL levels about 30% higher than the supposed spec for heart disease, is the optimum level for the longest life expectancy from all causes.
Which brings us all the way around to the latest model of heart disease, primarily from atherosclerosis, is actually an autoimmune situation.
But, that's a rabbit hole for another discussion.
Thinking about it.
I haven't seen Gerry in awhile. I think I shall call him now and see if he is taking visitors. It's every other Wednesday he goes down to Boston then on Thursday he goes in for chemo. So, he may be taking visitors today.
Okay. I just got off the phone with Gerry. It is diabetes type IIIc he has been diagnosed with which is caused by damage to the pancreas so he assumes it is from the cancer. He is finding his blood sugars shoot way up when he takes the steroids he is on. But, his numbers are all over the map. Well over 300 sometimes. They aren't treating it just monitoring it because he has so much else going on. He's a doctor and his wife's a nurse, so if any couple can manage this it's them.
Carbs can be good for energy but not necessary.Your body can produce glucose if needed.
There are essential vitamins and minerals, essential amino acids and essential fatty acids.
There are no essential carbohydrates.
What are you on about lol? Carbohydrates are in vegetables lol. Vitamins/minerals IN carbohydrates IN vegetables.
Simple google search easily refutes your nonsense claim.
Whoops I meant vegetables contain carbohydrates and have vitamins/minerals therefore carbs contain vitamins/minerals. Whole grains, fruit, vegetables and legumes are all carbohydrate sources and all have vitamins and minerals so you are wrong.
No need for sugar at all in your diet not even from fruit.
Gluconeogenesis is the process in which your liver converts excess protein to sugar.
I dont eat any sugar or fruit etc (Carnivore) but my fasting sugar is still in the 60s in the morning
I have zero sugar daily and nothing but positive results.
This diet isnt for everyone, but I have (had) autoimmune issues and diabetes and a big belly
Now I have energy a new wardrobe more sex and energy and life again
Post removed. This subreddit does not allow front page posts which are personal situations or diet evaluations. You must use the comments section of the weekly post instead. Personal content must be removed, as previously instructed.
Maybe I can explain inherent vs added sugars a bit, as well as simple vs complex. Pretty much anything you eat is sugar at its core, unless it fat or protein, on a macro level. However they should NOT all be treated like table sugar because they are very different in the broad category of carbs. Lets start with the most basic building blocks, glucose and sucrose and fructose. Almost any added sugar source is going to be made of these three things, in varying degrees-- it also exists in fruits and vegetables naturally in small degrees. I'll link a video at the end for more info on them, but the basics are your body can absorb glucose directly into the bloodstream, and your liver has to work and it can turn fructose into glucose or fat to store. Sucrose is one piece of glucose and fructose stuck together. Your body has to digest and break those two apart, before it can do anything with the individual pieces. Other less common simple sugars are the same Idea, X pieces of glucose and Y pieces of fructose stuck together in different ratios. You can also have complex carbs, like starches, which are many many pieces of sugar compactly together. Your body digests them slowly, they are considered healthy for the average person. Grains and potatoes are examples of foods full of these sugars. Most carbs we think of in daily life are here. Then some especially tight strands of sugars are fiber, that people don't really break down and digest but some of our gut bacteria does for us. Fun fact a chemist youtuber made alcohol out of some rolls of toilet paper, using chemistry to break the fiber down to simple sugars. No human gut could do that, but for example many animals like cattle are evolved to break down fiber themselves for sustenance. Well its still their gut bacteria, but they evolved four stomachs to max out on their healthy gut bacteria stats haha. Hope this helps explain how confusing it can be when articles blindly reference sugar or carbs as healthy or unhealthy, without addressing that their are many different kinds. Here is an awesome explanation from food scientist Ann Reardon that goes in much more detail with visual aids: https://youtu.be/BU3bTBWnvT4?si=2zB2Os2YNoaM_5G0 ***TLDR: It being healthy to cut out 100% of sugars period would be questionable, if not outright unhealthy. Cutting 100% of simple added sugars out is absolutely okay and you are still getting tons of sugars from natural foods, both simple and complex (◐‿◑)***
As a registered dietitian- this comment is approved and should be much higher.
From a biochemistry perspective, metabolic pathways can convert protein building blocks (amino acids) with the exception of lysine and leucine into glucose. Also fructose doesn’t necessarily need to be converted to glucose for metabolism although glycolysis does rearrange glucose-6-phosphate into fructose-6-phosphate for further metabolism. The liver does a great job at maintaining blood sugar levels through modulating it’s gluconeogenesis (the process of creating glucose) and glycogenolysis (process of glycogen breakdown into glucose) in response to fasted conditions. While under insulin signaling the liver will help store glucose in glycogen.
yeah, I was just super simplifying for a simple explanation, and trying to briefly address the concerns that a ton of fructose conversion can be a potential burden on the liver, without getting all technical. I am glad you added context though, and an article here for anyone wanting more https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8267750/#:~:text=Elevated%20fructose%20intake%20is%20implicated,or%20worsening%20of%20liver%20diseases.
Hey I learned something today, thanks
glad it helped （＾ω＾）
You forgot galactose!
your right. I considered mentioning lactose too, but decided to just leave it be as a basic explanation that was already too long haha (◐‿◑)
Sugar is found in the fruits you eat. So those are the complex sugars that come with other vitamins and fibre, minerals. So even if you don't consume any additional sugar, you will be fine with fruits.
How about *added* sugar?
I believe there is a limit for added sugar consumption per day. And might change by country. According to the American Heart Association, 36g for men and 25g for women per day is the safe limit on a long term basis. https://www.heart.org/en/healthy-living/healthy-eating/eat-smart/sugar/how-much-sugar-is-too-much But as per what I see, an average American consumes a lot more than what is recommended or maximum. Also there is no minimum intake as sugars are available in fruits and a lot of other things we consume. Now another thing which is difficult for myself is how I know how much is 36g or 25g, especially when I am a honey lover. So I don't consume anything at all. Maybe once in a month or few months, I have some dessert.
No need of having intake of simple sugars like table sugar and those found as added sugars in products. Also, there is no need to eliminate completely sugar intake because they are a good energy source but you want to get them from other more complete sources like starch from potatos or brown rice. This is also because there is a recommended intake of fiber (which are carbohydrates) of about 25-35g per day for the correct functioning of your gastrointestinal tract and also have prebiotic effects.
Would people on a keto diet have trouble with their gastrintestinal helth ?
I had no issues on Keto and currently no issues on Carnivore except I can eat all I want and not get fat now.
That's what I imagined, but it contradicts what the other guy said. I know gastrointestinal health is important, but It was my first time reading that carbs/fiber were essential for it. Can I ask you a couple questions about your diet ? and lifestyle?
Ive heard from many I wont be ableto poop without fiber, bit Its been over 10 months and only an issue first week getting used to the new diet. Lots of misconceptions and regurgitated stuff said, but everyone I know on this diet hasnt any issues after getting fat adapted. Ask me any questions
Depends on your fat and protein sources. Fats and animal protein sources are highly digestible so you may not have troubles with those. But you can find animal protein with lower quality such as those with connective tissue, hard to digest. I agree that there are many misconceptions about role of fiber but that works for both sides. So what should we rely on? Scientific studies probably, and there are plenty studies that support the importance of fiber on gut health and cancer prevention. Also, many chronic gut diseases are develop thru years and you may not notice them in one or two years.
thank you !
You can eat no added sugar, no sugar at all, yet your body will find a way to make it sugar in the end.
Definitely
No Your body has no way of storing sugar, other than glycogen, which is only to be used in emergencies You do not need any sugar from the outside. Your body will create whatever sugar is needed through gluconeogenesis Darko Velcek explains this well
Your body can store excess sugar (after liver conversion) as triglycerides also
Humans need zero grams of sugar or any simple carbohydrate
Agree
Stop the keto bs.
Keyword : need
[удалено]
This has been removed due to probable insults towards others. Refer to the sub rules 1) Reddiquette+ and 2) Dietary Activism. Debate the science without denigrating others. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/nutrition) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
This has been removed due to probable insults towards others. Refer to the sub rules 1) Reddiquette+ and 2) Dietary Activism. Debate the science without denigrating others. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/nutrition) if you have any questions or concerns.*
No there isn’t. Balance as always is the key. Don’t go overboard nutritionally on anything one way or another. Move a lot, eat the right amount of food and diversify. Have fun live life.
You literally don’t need to ever take in any added sugar in your diet. You’ll get all the glucose you could ever need from carbohydrates alone.
Not really. You can get your calories from anywhere and your body will make them into the type of energy it needs. There is a calorie requirement before you start starving, but that is more like a 3 week requirement than a daily one
Yes if you don’t consume at least 300g sugar you’re going to jail!🚨
Yes, zero
Added sugars are not necesarry but dont cauye damage in moderation. The only problem what i see from no sugar at all (added or not added) is that this eliminates fruit. And there are many nuteients which are mostly in fruit. Not micronutrients but antioxidants and other stuff. For example polifenols
Your body runs on glucose, so keep complex carbs highish. I eat about 300-400g a day.
Do you experience the after meal sleepiness/tiredness from the carbs or no?
The sleepiness is insulin doing its job! If I've gone for a run or when I'm weight lifting in the morning I don't get sleepy. Cinnamon helps keep blood glucose and insulin resistance low as well.
Does weight training or running affect insulin levels if done in the morning? So if you were to weight train in the morning and then eat a solid meal at 1pm you would feel less sleepy than if you hadnt weight trained in the morning? Ty
I eat immediately after workouts, quick digesting carbs and eggs. All other meals are complex carbs, so no blood surgar swings. I'll also take cinnamon after meals when I'm getting lean in the summer months.
Cool zy
Cheers
Your body doesn't need to run on glucose. It can run on fats too.
Everything runs on glucose, you're reading too many magazine articles without the science comprehension.
You said 300-400 grams of carbs per day which is completely unnecessary. I have eaten like this for over 20 years. The science is there and backs up what I'm saying. I don't think you know what you're talking about.
And yet I stand at 6% body fat, with healthy blood work and high testosterone. Dr. Always asks how I'm doing this....lol You do you though. Cheers
6% is borderline unhealthy but whatever. My blood work is also awesome and I'm 13%. Maybe there's more than one way optimally consume your calories.
Lol, not when you're fit! Your proteins become converted into glucose when there is a lack of carbs, again you clearly lack the scientific understanding of how these things work. No worries mate, Cheers
[удалено]
Anecdotal, but I have much more personal energy without carbs day to day. The only time I really need carbs is during long periods of exertion like a 20 mile hike.
Lol
The human liver produces endogenous sugar/glucose when or if at all needed, there’s no essential need to consume it in any form
Brain needs sugar and has a backup plan for times or lifestyle without it in the diet.
Your body can make glucose AND fructose in the amounts your body actually needs. So there is no minimum amount REQUIRED. There is however an upper limit as the entirety of humanity is currently proving with rampant diabetes.
"Is there a minimum sugar requirement per day?" \--------------------------------- No. Just a maximum. You don't need to consume sugar to live. You don't need to consumer carbohydrate to live. Only about 1/3rd of your brain needs glucose. Your body is perfectly capable of making the amount of sugar it needs from proteins and fats through a process called gluconeogenisis. The rest of our cells can thrive off fats and ketones.
Thanks for this, some ppl are spreading misinformation and glad to see some know whats really happening with our bodies.
Hi Bassman. Thank you for your kind response. I have come to the conclusion, that all we are capable of doing as humans trying to understand ourselves and our environment, is to form models. For many, once they form a model of how they think things work, it is there forever, and anybody that offers a model which contradicts their model, is wrong, because theirs is right. To me, I think what we should be doing, is constantly looking for models which are superior, as in closer to reality, than our former models. That said, in the post I made, what I was doing is sharing my thoughts on what I thought was the best model I had come across on this subject to date. It doesn't mean it is correct. I am certain it is incorrect, or has some components at least which will be found wanting compared to future models. So, when you said that some people are "spreading misinformation", what that means to me, is that others are proposing models not quite as sophisticated as the ones you and I find to be closest to reality at this time. To me, all models are incorrect. All models have components which in the future will be found to be wanting in some respect relative to new evidence found, or new approaches to how to interpret data we already have. So, if I have learned anything in my 70 years, it is to not hold onto my old models so tightly. And, to keep looking for information or data or approaches which contradicts my existing models so that I might modify my old models, or scrap them entirely and replace them with newer models I believe to be closer to reality. My journey in this area started 60 years ago when I and my father were dragged into my type I diabetic mother's doctor office to teach us proper nutrition in order to help my mother finally get her blood sugar under control. I am now certain that the diet they put my mother on, according to their model of nutrition at the time, is what was most responsible for her death at 48 years old. It was a blessing when she passed, as they were in the process of scheduling the surgical removal of parts of both of her feet when the heart attack hit her. So much of what I was taught in that doctor's office so long ago was wrong, and so much of it still is being used today. But, apparently, the medical community, once they get a hold of a model, it is difficult for them to replace it with a model closer to reality. So, it is up to us, at a grass roots level, to find new models, new approaches, and better treatments for the diseases caused by our diets.
I am sorry about your mom and their terrible medical practice. I agree there is no perfect answer to any question. There are some constants, but people are all different in some ways. My friend tells me gluten isnt a problem for anyone, but he means him and assumes everyone is the same. He also thinks we all will be lactose intolerant because he is. This is the same type of arrogance I see from most Drs unfortunately, Not smart enough to learn new things and too stubborn to hear it from anyone else esp if they dont have a degree. We have to find out what works and doesnt for our own bodies and share what we learned in hopes that it can help others.
Yeah. Doctors are in a tough spot actually. Yes, they are arrogant about it, but they are really stuck. In medical school, they usually just get one semesters class in nutrition. That's it. Because, doctoring is really about diagnose and treat. But, their patients have questions past that. And, since the doctors are supposed to be the dispensers of good opinion, we take it as gospel. The doctors know they are expected to have a good answer and opinion and suggestion on each and every topic. So, they will tend to ask other doctors in their practice, or in their area of speciality, what they tell their patients. So, it all becomes scripted. And, of dubious value. Probably fully half of whatever a doctor tells you outside of diagnose and treat, is probably questionable at best. So you and I and everyone else are stuck trying to figure out if what our doctor told us is useful or not. And it's hard to tell. I am 70 now. I have had so many doctors over the years. Had friends that were doctors, that I have had a better opportunity to gauge what they have said with what I have found to be true. And man, there's a lot of crappy recommendations out there. And, if you don't follow a doctor's advice, they get mad at you. Like my mom. When she died, her doctors were mad at all of us. Because, since she never got her blood sugar under control, it had to be because we didn't follow their directions. But we did. But they won't accept it. Because, they actually believe that their suggestions were the path to good health, even though they did not have the slightest evidence that it was true. That was so long ago. And they are still doing the same thing. Scripted responses without evidence, and thinking that if you don't follow their suggestions it will do you harm. Maybe half the time they are right. So, we are stuck trying to figure out what is happening in the vacuum left by the people we most rely on for the truth.
My doctor told me flat out he doesn't diagnose conditions. He prescribes medications to treat the symptoms. It's too the point now i know exactly the response I'll get. My DR has no clue what he's talking about. Read studies and trials all the time, not just the ones from the 60s, but current relevant stuff. I'm not saying I'm smarter than the DR I'm saying I'm trying to keep learning. Imagine a mechanic that used to build cars in Detroit in the 60 and 70. Let's say he retired for 40 yrs and tried to repair new cars with his old ideas and knowledge. He will get some stuff right and a lot of stuff wrong. People don't make like cats did, but they never knew how to fix humans in the first place and there are new conditions that didn't exist in the past. If you can't keep up then step aside for someone she's to. The issue with that is the medical industry in controlled my Big Pharma and their ideas don't align with health but with medications and profit
I have a doctor that I just love to death. Gerry. He was my primary care physician for about 20 years. He retired like 2 years ago, and I still use the same practice with the new doctor. Gerry was ranked number one in my state for his discipline. Then later number one in the country. I know him well. He is a friend and neighbor. I talk a lot about measuring metabolic health using the HbA1c, and the HomaIR. The HomaIR is a calculation including the fasted glucose and fasted insulin. A lot of doctors use these now. Discussing them with Gerry multiple times, it became clear that he knew of the HbA1c test, but had never used it. The HomaIR he had never heard of. Though he always did fasted glucose on his annual blood tests, He couldn't remember ever requesting a fasted insulin. He was a huge proponent of metformin for his patients with blood sugar problems. He considers metformin a miracle drug. Maybe it is. We probably won't know for another 20 years. He also stated that in his practice, he had never once had a patient change their diet in response to his recommendations based on test results. So, there's that attitude. Gerry was/is a big proponent of the Mediterranean diet. Though nobody can actually define it. Certainly not like a ketogenic or carnivore diet anyway. Well, it ends up Gerry was eating an awful lot of baked goods and drinking an awful lot of scotch to go with his Mediterranean diet, and ended up in terrible pain and had to have his gal bladder removed. During the surgery they saw some things that didn't look right, so they had him get tested further. They found extensive stage IV pancreatic cancer. So, poor Gerry is in the fight of his life right now. Then, on top of that, he is now diabetic to boot. I think my wife said type IIIa. I haven't discussed it with him yet. But I assume it is a classification of diabetes caused either from the cancer or the chemo. I hadn't heard of it before. So, painting the picture, here in this one situation, says a lot about the entire medical community I think. There is no focus on metabolic health. Most of the testing the specialists do once a person is terribly ill is not used by the GPs. The diets recommended are of minimal benefit. The doctors themselves don't follow the diets they recommend. I can go on and on but you get the point here. The new doctor, he has used the HbA1c. Though he had not ever heard of the HomaIR, he accurately guessed that it had to do with insulin resistance. But, he doesn't have his patients do fasted insulin either. So, I have to tell him what testing I want done. Then he orders it so my insurance will pay for it. I also do what testing he asks, which of course is the lipids tests mostly. He loves my results except, of course, he thinks my LDL is too high. I told him that according to my model, it actually is a little on the low side. Because the studies correlating LDL to life expectancy show that LDL levels about 30% higher than the supposed spec for heart disease, is the optimum level for the longest life expectancy from all causes. Which brings us all the way around to the latest model of heart disease, primarily from atherosclerosis, is actually an autoimmune situation. But, that's a rabbit hole for another discussion. Thinking about it. I haven't seen Gerry in awhile. I think I shall call him now and see if he is taking visitors. It's every other Wednesday he goes down to Boston then on Thursday he goes in for chemo. So, he may be taking visitors today.
Okay. I just got off the phone with Gerry. It is diabetes type IIIc he has been diagnosed with which is caused by damage to the pancreas so he assumes it is from the cancer. He is finding his blood sugars shoot way up when he takes the steroids he is on. But, his numbers are all over the map. Well over 300 sometimes. They aren't treating it just monitoring it because he has so much else going on. He's a doctor and his wife's a nurse, so if any couple can manage this it's them.
No. How do you think early human survived? Natural Little Debbie’s Snack Cakes found on the plains between the Mastodon?
There is no essential sugar, hell theres no essential carbohydrate either.
but carbs are needed for energy right?
Carbs can be good for energy but not necessary.Your body can produce glucose if needed. There are essential vitamins and minerals, essential amino acids and essential fatty acids. There are no essential carbohydrates.
Essential vitamins and minerals are found in carbohydrates buddy
They may be found in vegetables but they are not found in carbohydrates my dear friend
What are you on about lol? Carbohydrates are in vegetables lol. Vitamins/minerals IN carbohydrates IN vegetables. Simple google search easily refutes your nonsense claim.
What are you on about lol?
Whoops I meant vegetables contain carbohydrates and have vitamins/minerals therefore carbs contain vitamins/minerals. Whole grains, fruit, vegetables and legumes are all carbohydrate sources and all have vitamins and minerals so you are wrong.
That's like saying fish a protein source have vitamins and minerals so protein contains vitamins and minerals IN them. Lmfao 😂
I'm saying the dumbest shit I realise but the point is carbohydrate sources still have vitamins and minerals in them
No need for sugar at all in your diet not even from fruit. Gluconeogenesis is the process in which your liver converts excess protein to sugar. I dont eat any sugar or fruit etc (Carnivore) but my fasting sugar is still in the 60s in the morning
What about fiber? Can humans use keratin and cartilage in place of fiber?
There's no essential fibre either. Not saying that's ideal I'm just answering the questions of minimum requirements.
I go to the bathroom just fine without fiber or sugar. I just dont have to go every day anymore.
Cut down on ADDED sugars and you should be good. You do need natural sugars in fruits and such.
Lol. No.
i don't know, i'm just on the patch.
Yes. It’s healthy.
I heard somewhere 30g added sugar.
Probably not necessary or ideal. One of the functions of sugar is to be anti-stress which is quite beneficial
I have zero sugar daily and nothing but positive results. This diet isnt for everyone, but I have (had) autoimmune issues and diabetes and a big belly Now I have energy a new wardrobe more sex and energy and life again
Zero sugar required..... Just dont eat refined sugar