View Full Version : Cutting down sugar
I have been quite unhappy with my weight. I have let myself go with the middle age flow for awhile but now want to address it. After some reading I realize I need to deal with sugar, when I track food I go over recommended sugar all the time. Plus it makes sense that I don't process it as well as I used to.
I have watched it for a week now, not so successfully. But in one week there has been no change of course. I really hope that I can do something, I am about 5'3" and 160. I don't think I look too heavy but the weight affects my health. And with the lower work load over summer maybe that can really help
I need to do this too. My feet, knee and hip joints, skin, and stamina are affected by the 20 pounds I've added over the past 3 years, which also coincides with menopause. And there's the hurt vanity when I can't fit comfortably into clothes I like.
Yes I have better stamina and energy overall, but I know I could make more changes. It would be easier if I had an improvement in my asthma or my weight. It takes time, and I am not terribly patient. I can be patient with a little progress.
So far today I am in the recommended sugar with only natural sugar like some fruit and the sugar that is in milk and cheese.
Williamsmith
6-12-17, 3:43am
It is apparent that the food industry marketing and the research are at odds. The food industry floods the stores with processed food high in carbohydrates and packed with hidden sugar. They make it convenient and appear to be cheaper than cooking your own food from scratch.
Most of our schools have stopped preparing food for students. Fast food companies contract with school districts, sugary drinks are sold in schools, pizza is considered a vegetable.
Obesity is a national problem. We have genetically evolved into an insulin resistant population prone to fattening.
I believe sugary drinks are the worst. That includes fruit juices and energy drinks. Foods with added sugar to make them taste good are marketed as fat free. Cereal and potatoes and pasta basically are processed by your body as sugar.
You take the journey to lose weight.....it is War. It is really tough. You must be determined and be willing to make small progress. I am 5'11". The recommended weight is approximately 180 lbs. I really started about 11 months ago at 220 lbs. Yesterday's weight was 191. My doctor said 190 would be a good weight but I will be satisfied to reach 185.
Our system of food distribution and marketing is largely to blame. It is really difficult to keep from making poor choices when you are surrounded and inudated by the pushers of sugar. Sugar affects the same part of the brain as cocaine and nicotine. It is a chemical addiction. Very hard to use it in moderation. Chip away a little at a time and make it a lifestyle change. Good luck.
Our system of food distribution and marketing is largely to blame. It is really difficult to keep from making poor choices when you are surrounded and inudated by the pushers of sugar. Sugar affects the same part of the brain as cocaine and nicotine. It is a chemical addiction. Very hard to use it in moderation. Chip away a little at a time and make it a lifestyle change. Good luck.
+1
Ultralight
6-12-17, 7:42am
I wish you luck, as cutting down on sugar is like cutting down on heroin.
And I totally understand your struggle! The fight against junk food is tough as all hell.
Thank you both, I thought I was pretty good about sugar since I have a health food background and pack lunch every day. It is in drinks a lot. In the winter a nice hot tea, in the summer any iced goes way over. And then if you add even a small snack to it.
My weight has always been okay, not always what I want but fine. It seems that it will not budge regardless. Changing that 'set weight' just seems impossible some days
I wish you luck, as cutting down on sugar is like cutting down on heroin.
And I totally understand your struggle! The fight against junk food is tough as all hell.
Agreed - one thing to keep in mind when trying to regulate sugar are starches - a lot of that immediately breaks down into sugars, so you need to watch that as well.
Totally agree with WilliamSmith's post. It's a public health problem and the solution is best found at that level ... not at the level of each individual's struggle.
Agreed - one thing to keep in mind when trying to regulate sugar are starches - a lot of that immediately breaks down into sugars, so you need to watch that as well.
Thanks for noting that. It seems to be a little-known fact. I always cringe when people go on about their "healthy" starch-laden diets.
Good post Williamsmith, and congratulations on your steady progress. You are doing what I am trying to embark upon right now. It is definitely one step forward one step back--seem to go up and down in a three pound range and never get anywhere.
But I am going to double the time I think I need to do this and keep plugging away.
Not worried about sugar per se right now. Trying to instead find asthma triggers to eliminate them.
It all seems related to menopause for me, the weight gain. Ironically, my asthma is much better now that I am heavy. I just hate being heavy and am sick of it and sick of not being able to change it over the past 5 years.
I'm plugging along with a ketogenic approach and losing at my usual glacial pace. I've noticed that many on grain- and/or dairy-free plans seem to experience relief from asthma. And many other ailments, as well.
Jane, I will definitely look into this. My allergist told me to give up wheat, for example.
Jane, I will definitely look into this. My allergist told me to give up wheat, for example.
Most doctors seem to be coming around to the idea that wheat--whole or otherwise--isn't a health food for most people.
I made a rare trip to a clinic once because I was having trouble breathing--I was very wheezy, and my chest felt tight. The diagnosis was bronchospasm (a throwaway diagnosis if there ever was one), and I think they gave me an antibiotic or something equally useless. I figured out on my own that eating ricotta cheese for breakfast was probably the culprit, took a Sudafed, changed my breakfasts up, and the problem went away. I've since indulged in ricotta and other dairy products without incident, but I think I probably have a sensitivity to dairy and/or calcium, which contracts muscles.
ApatheticNoMore
6-12-17, 2:55pm
ricotta might be particularly bad (if consumed regularly, a lot of things are dose dependent) as it seems to be higher in either lactose and/or protein than many cheeses (a lot of cheeses are mostly just fat and made more digestible by the cheese making process as well) and lactose and milk protein are some of the major the things in dairy people react to if they are sensitive to dairy, fat is not so allergenic.
Supposedly people who are really well adapted to dairy (most likely strictly northern European ancestry - so if all one's ancestors were Scandinavian dairy might be ideal but listen to your body - but some parts of India and Africa as well) actually absorb more vitamins from it when they eat dairy with all the lactose etc.. Some people were almost designed for dairy it seems. But people who aren't so well adapted don't do so well and absorb less nutrients when consuming lactose and have more problems with lactose.
I unconsciously adjust my diet to sensitives as I have more than I'd like but it's all dose dependent, and that is not following anyone's official diet (as MOST of them aren't taking sensitives into account at all!). I don't think anyone loses much weight just by avoiding sensitivities necessarily it's more just a rat in a cage reaction: this food causes pain, I don't like pain, avoid pain ...
And sweets are just not so healthy and I think it is possible to cut down on them a lot.
It probably was dose-dependent, as I had got in the habit of eating it for breakfast most mornings, and by afternoon experienced chest tightness. I have generally Northern ancestry, but i'm pretty sure dairy--at least as it's produced here--is an iffy substance for me. Which probably won't keep me from indulging in it.
frugal-one
6-12-17, 4:12pm
which contracts muscles.
... what does this mean exactly?
... what does this mean exactly?
Calcium is essential for proper contraction of smooth muscle; magnesium is responsible for muscle relaxation. Most of us get enough--more than enough--calcium, but not enough magnesium.
Yesterday was hard, I didn't bring a large lunch and had a long car trip in rush hour. I did have some nuts with me but bought a tea that was ice cold and had some sugar. Still not as much as I had been doing. I can see why this is so hard!
Yesterday was hard, I didn't bring a large lunch and had a long car trip in rush hour. I did have some nuts with me but bought a tea that was ice cold and had some sugar. Still not as much as I had been doing. I can see why this is so hard! If I miscalculate how much food I need then I don't have many options
Good quality protein and fat will keep you satiated longer.
Some researchers consider sugar as addictive as hard drugs--it seems to target the same pleasure receptors in the brain.
There are a few more or less natural sugar substitutes you can use, like stevia, erythritol, and xylitol.
catherine
6-13-17, 10:24am
bought a tea that was ice cold and had some sugar. Still not as much as I had been doing. I can see why this is so hard!
Beware... just about EVERYTHING you buy in a store, processed, bottled, or boxed has sugar or some sugar substitute (i.e. high fructose corn syrup) in it. When I gave up HFCS for Lent one year, I was astounded at the things that had some HCFS in it.. You really have to go completely process-free to stay away from sugar! It's crazy.
ETA: This article from CNN on how and why to do a sugar detox.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/09/health/sugar-detox-food-drayer/index.html
ApatheticNoMore
6-13-17, 1:32pm
Yesterday was hard, I didn't bring a large lunch and had a long car trip in rush hour. I did have some nuts with me but bought a tea that was ice cold and had some sugar. Still not as much as I had been doing. I can see why this is so hard! If I miscalculate how much food I need then I don't have many options
yes, it's really hard to bring enough healthful food to get through the work day and sometimes it ends up being more than one trip from the car to work to bring it in if I do. I eat breakfast at work, I eat lunch at work, and it's pretty late in the day by the time I get home (I eat dinner at home but it's not large).
So it will lead to situations like last week where I'm wandering around outside work hungry, wishing there was food somewhere, thinking "oh I SO wish there was food", not finding healthy food (even bananas were sold out, free nuts at work were not there etc.), wandering around, trying to decide what to do, feeling very irritated, utterly perplexed about what to do about being hungry. I had an extra pack of nuts at work in my desk that I finally found, thank heavens. I bring a salad everyday for lunch, but it's not enough ... it's hard to think of enough food to make, it's hard to cook that much, etc..
One nice thing about a ketogenic plan is that it quells insulin production, and since you're running on fat, you can just carry on for hours. When I'm "in the zone," I eat one meal a day, and that's it--which cuts down on the annoying food prep.
ApatheticNoMore
6-13-17, 2:39pm
I think going on a ketogenic diet is to be approached kind of like trying to be a healthy vegan, only if you know what you are doing.
While it might not lead to as many LONG RUN nutritional deficiencies as veganism can, it can lead to much quicker short run problems. You have to know that like vegans have to supplement say B12, you have to supplement fiber etc.. Or suffice I tried it and crashed and burned but I tried to just eat a pretty normal diet but no carbs (and I really was eating almost no carbs - it wasn't some cheating "ketogenic" diet). I got constipated in a way no amount of trying to eat veggies with fiber cured and I looked up the fiber in nearly EVERY fricken low carb veggie and tried hard to maximize but day after day not really. Body just wouldn't work properly. That's why I suspect you need supplemental fiber or maybe it's not even fiber that helps with carbs in that department, I don't know, worth a try. I did whatever crazy things are suggested like drinking salt water. Completely crazy. Then because of all those things I think my stomach got way too acidic, I had horrible stomach pain, that I waited out, "this too shall pass", only to wake up with stomach pain the next day ("uh I don't think heartburn and stomach pain that like never goes away is uh normal and healthy ...").
Maybe one needs to do a lot of research first to make sure all the i's are dotted and t's crossed, or slowly work their way down to less carbs to let their gut microbes adjust or something (this is contrary to just jumping straight into an induction period but maybe it's actually works better, I don't know), maybe one needs supplemental fiber, maybe one needs to avoid all food sensitivies like dairy MUCH MORE than normal since they irritate the body more if they are stuck in it and won't pass through. But you really do need to do a lot of research I think, trial and error, working up toward, or something. Don't jump without a parachute, don't try this at home kids. :)
Or maybe do, supposedly it comes easy to some people, don't even know fully why it came so hard to me (that's why I speculate). I was mentally quite open to trying it at the time as I was trying it with my bf, even though now I'm afraid of it in many ways, and it would take even more courage than it did the first time to try again.
I think all these diets are ridiculous. We need to eat fruits vegetables whole grains and lean meats ... as close to their natural state as possible. Everything else is problematic in some way.
I make this bold declarative statement after 20 years of being an RN and 30 years of doing massive supplemental personal reading about healthy diet choices. I sound quite sure of myself today don't I?!?
...
Maybe one needs to do a lot of research first to make sure all the i's are dotted and t's crossed, or slowly work their way down to less carbs to let their gut microbes adjust or something (this is contrary to just jumping straight into an induction period but maybe it's actually works better, I don't know), maybe one needs supplemental fiber, maybe one needs to avoid all food sensitivies like dairy MUCH MORE than normal since they irritate the body more if they are stuck in it and won't pass through. But you really do need to do a lot of research I think, trial and error, working up toward, or something. Don't jump without a parachute, don't try this at home kids. :)
Or maybe do, supposedly it comes easy to some people, don't even know fully why it came so hard to me (that's why I speculate). I was mentally quite open to trying it at the time as I was trying it with my bf, even though now I'm afraid of it in many ways, and it would take even more courage than it did the first time to try again.
The big sticking point seems to be electrolytes--you need more salt and potassium, etc. because the plan tends to dehydrate you. So dizziness, bathroom issues, tiredness will be a problem if you don't stay on top of that--at least until your body becomes accustomed to it. I'm not wedded to this level of LCHF, and I haven't experienced any miracle cure, but I'll always follow some kind of low-carb plan.
I think all these diets are ridiculous. We need to eat fruits vegetables whole grains and lean meats ... as close to their natural state as possible. Everything else is problematic in some way.
I make this bold declarative statement after 20 years of being an RN and 30 years of doing massive supplemental personal reading about healthy diet choices. I sound quite sure of myself today don't I?!?
I agree about food in its natural state--I eat fatty meats, many vegetables, quality fats (saturated) and oils (non-industrial), a few fruits, nuts and seeds, and occasional fish. This comes from 70 years of living in my cranky hyperinsulinemic body and decades of reading nutritional literature--most of it, unfortunately, bullshit--due to information provided by the processed food manufacturers. I'm not interested in getting any of the diseases associated with "healthy eating" as it is perceived currently, but I'm sure something will get me soon enough. BTW, the most "ridiculous" diets I've ever seen--obscenely so, really--are those fed to hospital patients, particularly ones with diabetes.
Williamsmith
6-13-17, 3:58pm
I agree about food in its natural state--I eat fatty meats, many vegetables, quality fats (saturated) and oils (non-industrial), a few fruits, nuts and seeds, and occasional fish. This comes from 70 years of living in my cranky hyperinsulinemic body and decades of reading nutritional literature--most of it, unfortunately, bullshit--due to information provided by the processed food manufacturers. I'm not interested in getting any of the diseases associated with "healthy eating" as it is perceived currently, but I'm sure something will get me soon enough. BTW, the most "ridiculous" diets I've ever seen--obscenely so, really--are those fed to hospital patients, particularly ones with diabetes.
+1
It is apparent at this point in my life that the last thirty years of advice offered by the so called experts regarding lean meats, whole grains and plenty of fruits and vegetables has been a huge failure both in terms of assisting the population to be healthy and in the reduction of obesity in our culture. Plenty of cultures have been studied that ate strictly fatty meats - Inuit Eskimos for instance - and had none of the diseases attributed to western diets, until sugar and grain was introduced. We are clearly moving from one in three people being prediabetic or diabetic to one in two. In my own study, I find it beyond a reasonable doubt that the diet of carbohydrates touted as fat free and preventing heart disease is responsible for much of our chronic illness.
About the "natural state" of things. Fruits have long ago been genetically engineered to be sweeter than they ever were in nature.
... .That's why I suspect you need supplemental fiber or maybe it's not even fiber that helps with carbs in that department, I don't know, worth a try. I did whatever crazy things are suggested like drinking salt water. Completely crazy. Then because of all those things I think my stomach got way too acidic, I had horrible stomach pain, that I waited out, "this too shall pass", only to wake up with stomach pain the next day ("uh I don't think heartburn and stomach pain that like never goes away is uh normal and healthy ..."). ...need to do a lot of research I think, trial and error, working up toward, or something. Don't jump without a parachute, don't try this at home kids. :)
Or maybe do, supposedly it comes easy to some people, don't even know fully why it came so hard to me (that's why I speculate). I was mentally quite open to trying it at the time as I was trying it with my bf, even though now I'm afraid of it in many ways, and it would take even more courage than it did the first time to try again.
You bring up good points--an individual's genetic makeup and personal gut garden undoubtedly have a lot to do with how they respond to any diet. Anecdotal reports of remarkable healing abound, as well as reports of people never adjusting, really, at all. I'm sure that at the end of the day, I'll have a firm grasp of what doesn't work. But this is fine for now. How's your BF doing on it?
ApatheticNoMore
6-13-17, 4:45pm
How's your BF doing on it?
He seems to do ok on it physically, which is one reason why I wanted to try it as he claimed to be happier and calmer mentally etc. while on it, which all sounded good. But he hasn't been very successful at sticking with it needless to say (gets bored I guess, which yea after all the problems I had on that diet does sound like: cry me a river.:doh: But oh well.)
I notice improved focus and mood. I've heard of people going into remission from all kinds of conditions, mental and physical--even improved eyesight (which I guess is common with improved blood sugar levels). I should be glad that I didn't suffer your constellation of ailments. :sick:But I expect I will loosen the reins with a slightly more flexible plan eventually.
I drink Pure Leaf unsweetened tea. Today I had two lemon meringue candies from the office candy jar, the halva I am finishing off, and fructose in fruit the company provided, plus some lactose in the half and half creamer I put in the office coffee. Sugar is everywhere! I tried to be good at the supermarket this week, but I bought some carb rich vegetables, beets and potatoes. I do not think I could ever be completely carb free.
One helpfull thing is being fructose intolerant. That means over 5 years ago I got all HFCS out of my diet, many fruits and beets. I have a few fruits like berries I can eat. But I do not get ketchup, sauces or desserts out to eat. The effect is like a serious lactose issue, I lose 5 lbs in 24 hours, not in a good way! So I am very aware of that.
At least with the sugar tea I did not get the one with 3 servings in a can, which is deceptive, I drink the can over the course of the day. Today I made it on my lunch, but was hungry driving home. Almost there
Regarding the tea--I make it myself (in fact I just made a batch). I steep several tea bags, whatever kind I feel like: black, green, herbal, and then I put it in a large container with a spigot, and add slices of lemon. Sometimes I throw in fresh mint, which grows in my yard. I love it. It's cheap and basic.
I'm drinking a big jar of jasmine tea that I steeped in the refrigerator. I never get tired of iced tea.
Halva sounds awfully good; there are some sugar free recipes on line that I might attempt. I haven't had it for years.
Sugar is in everything. It's worth reading labels carefully, and knowing all the various synonyms for it.
Just reading an article by Food Babe, who has a good last word on this topic:
I’ve learned that the only way to feel great is to stop outsourcing my food to corporations and spend more time preparing meals at home. When I began cooking and eating whole foods, my health soared as a result – and now I never look back.
This was in an article I just read about The Best Diets in America--and how U.S. News and World Reports listed common well-knowns diets which sell their own processed foods. She then quotes a study cited in The Atlantic (https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/03/science-compared-every-diet-and-the-winner-is-real-food/284595/):
Katz and Yale colleague Stephanie Meller published their findings in the current issue of the journal in a paper titled, "Can We Say What Diet Is Best for Health?" In it, they compare the major diets of the day: Low carb, low fat, low glycemic, Mediterranean, mixed/balanced (DASH), Paleolithic, vegan, and elements of other diets. Despite the pervasiveness of these diets in culture and media, Katz and Meller write, "There have been no rigorous, long-term studies comparing contenders for best diet laurels using methodology that precludes bias and confounding. For many reasons, such studies are unlikely." They conclude that no diet is clearly best, but there are common elements across eating patterns that are proven to be beneficial to health. "A diet of minimally processed foods close to nature, predominantly plants, is decisively associated with health promotion and disease prevention."
This affirms what Tammy said, basically.
Those "best diets' articles are usually biased in favor of whatever commercial diet slips them the most money, I imagine--Weight Watchers being one example. People on their own--n=1 experiments--and researchers who can manage to eke out grants for diets with no financial reward--are coming up with all kinds of intriguing evidence (telomere length, autophagy, mitochondrial repair and regrowth, neuroprotection, etc.). I say eat what works--really works--for you, and don't discount what works for others out of hand. A ketogenic diet is a therapeutic one, clearly not necessary for everyone, but it was a natural progression for me.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2649682/
http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/42273/title/Nourishing-the-Aging-Brain/
catherine
6-14-17, 11:23am
Those "best diets' articles are usually biased in favor of whatever commercial diet slips them the most money, I imagine--Weight Watchers being one example. People on their own--n=1 experiments--and researchers who can manage to eke out grants for diets with no financial reward--are coming up with all kinds of intriguing evidence (telomere length, autophagy, mitochondrial repair and regrowth, neuroprotection, etc.). I say eat what works--really works--for you, and don't discount what works for others out of hand. A ketogenic diet is a therapeutic one, clearly not necessary for everyone, but it was a natural progression for me.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2649682/
http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/42273/title/Nourishing-the-Aging-Brain/
My favorite publishing company, Chelsea Green, recently published this book (https://www.chelseagreen.com/food-drink/the-ketogenic-kitchen), and I heard the author interviewed on my permaculture podcast (http://www.thepermaculturepodcast.com/2017/1714/). It was interesting.. it's not REALLY a typical permaculture topic, but the interviewer/owner of the podcast experienced great improvement in his health from it, so he figured he'd give the authors a platform.
I'm not there yet--but I certainly am not against fat or for carbs. I'm kind of keto-lite I guess. (messing around with ketones scares me, frankly, but I'm not a doctor or an expert in the digestive system, so what do I know?)
iris lilies
6-14-17, 11:36am
But there are a LOT of prepared foods that do NOT have high fructose syrup, you just have to look for them.
Yesterday i read ingredients on these favorites and things I bought yesterday with no hfcs:
my favorite salsa--a locally produced brand
a locally made bread
A spaghetti sauce I absolutely love, made with cream, made by Hunts
a fabulous low calorie ice cream "Halo top" which has lots of protein as well as, of course! ,sugar-( hey, it is ice cream,) but the source is "organic cane sugar."
I did look at the content of tomaote paste and it is full of hfcs.
We have to read ingrediant lists, but also know that more and more processed foods are made without the hfcs because people are demanding it.
catherine
6-14-17, 11:45am
We have to read ingrediants lists, but also know that more and more processed foods are made without the hfcs be ause people are demanding it.
You're right, but back when I gave it up for Lent, it was fairly soon after Michael Pollan's book, the Omnivore's Dilemma, came out--which was highly influential in bringing public awareness to unhealthy food production practices. So the market hadn't had a chance to catch up. I could not find any bread without it. I had to make everything from scratch. Trust me. I wouldn't have cooked so much if I didn't have to! I agree, that local sources were far less likely to have it.
My favorite publishing company, Chelsea Green, recently published this book (https://www.chelseagreen.com/food-drink/the-ketogenic-kitchen), and I heard the author interviewed on my permaculture podcast (http://www.thepermaculturepodcast.com/2017/1714/). It was interesting.. it's not REALLY a typical permaculture topic, but the interviewer/owner of the podcast experienced great improvement in his health from it, so he figured he'd give the authors a platform.
I'm not there yet--but I certainly am not against fat or for carbs. I'm kind of keto-lite I guess. (messing around with ketones scares me, frankly, but I'm not a doctor or an expert in the digestive system, so what do I know?)
That looks like a book I would enjoy reading!
Ketosis is frequently confused with ketoacidosis, a dangerous condition people with type 1 diabetes can get with very high blood sugars. You're not likely to get high blood sugars with LCHF--certainly not dangerously high--and if you don't have type 1, ketoacidosis is highly unlikely to occur anyway. I see misinformation spouted regularly in published articles, which has soured me on a lot of mainstream publications. People slip in and out of ketosis regularly, even during sleep. It was likely our natural state when we were hunter gatherers.
Ketogenic diets are known to be therapeutic for a number of conditions from some type of cancers to neurodegenerative diseases to the aging process, but they are considered extreme because it's difficult to stay fat-adapted (using fat for fuel) in a carb-laden culture--which is why I may return to LCHF at some point rather than walk a nutritional tightrope. But it would just be a matter of degree.
But there are a LOT of prepared foods that do NOT have high fructose syrup, you just have to look for them.
Yesterday i read ingredients on these favorites and things I bought yesterday with no hfcs:
my favorite salsa--a locally produced brand
a locally made bread
A spaghetti sauce I absolutely love, made with cream, made by Hunts
a fabulous low calorie ice cream "Halo top" which has lots of protein as well as, of course! ,sugar-( hey, it is ice cream,) but the source is "organic cane sugar."
I did look at the content of tomaote paste and it is full of hfcs.
We have to read ingrediant lists, but also know that more and more processed foods are made without the hfcs because people are demanding it.
Reading labels can be eye-opening. I agree that there seems to be a movement toward less sugar/HFCS in processed foods--heaven knows we don't need sugar/HFCS in everything. Is it there, as some suggest, to addict us? Could be, I suppose. It worked for cigarettes, after all.
yes IL, I can find so much more than 5 years ago. There is ketchup and specialized soda and the better quality ice creams. I also get local salsa and breads, sourdough is great and doesn't tend to be sweet. I even see national brands of bread that are advertised with no HFCS. Some desserts I trust like cheesecake, but skip any fruit sauces. I still don't trust when I am eating out in general, however a few places like Garbanzos have soda that I can drink when I am splurging my sugar.
That looks like a book I would enjoy reading!
Ketogenic diets are known to be therapeutic for a number of conditions from some type of cancers to neurodegenerative diseases to the aging process, but they are considered extreme because it's difficult to stay fat-adapted (using fat for fuel) in a carb-laden culture--which is why I may return to LCHF at some point rather than walk a nutritional tightrope. But it would just be a matter of degree.
Ketogenic diets are also used sometimes to mitigate epilepsy. And it is very difficult to stay in ketosis.
Williamsmith
6-15-17, 8:24am
I am studying and implementing some of the material put out there by Dr. Eric Westman of Duke University. He has labeled the "No Sugar, No Starch" diet. This is essentially known as the ketogenic diet. His diet has a famous "page 4" which lists only the foods you can eat. AnyThing else is forbidden.
It does seem true that your ability to lose weight is directly impacted by a strict adherence to the diet and that any slips could sabbotage things temporarily. As an example, a patient reported he was not losing weight on the diet. When he was interviewed in person it was found he was eating from a box of tic tac candies daily. This was plenty of sugar to make the entire attempt at weight loss futile.
It is interesting that anyone who takes diabetes medication and begins this diet, essentially must cut their medication approximately in half and their insulin levels must be monitored diligently. I have already lost 14% of my body weight in nine months and am approaching ideal weight based on many professional recommendations. The challenge now is how to taper off the weight loss as I approach the chosen weight without rebounding by falling back into the unhealthy eating patterns.
It is almost like crossing a stream that is strewn with moss covered rocks. It is possible to get to the other side without getting wet.....but one has to be very deliberate and careful. The grocery is filled with poor choices. Yesterday I did find a cranberry juice with no sugar that tasted good enough to use at breakfast. Fruit juices seems to be no better than drinking Coke or Pepsi for breakfast.
Yes--diabetics and people with high blood pressure find they have to cut their medication pretty much immediately--or risk falling in a heap, in the case of hypertensives.
I find it fascinating that people who are just fine with endless prescriptions bad-mouth therapeutic diets--which can actually reverse many conditions those endless prescriptions are addressing. IMO, finding the cause of one's condition and fixing it is always superior.
Dr. Westman studied with the much-reviled Dr. Atkins, I believe, who's finally being vindicated. Other enthusiastic supporters of ketogenic diets include Dr. Gary Fettke, and Dr. Tim Noakes, who have both been hauled up in front of "authorities" to prove their cases. But many others are coming forward to address the sad state of nutritional dogma, so I hope the tide has started to turn.
" .. First they ignore you. Then they ridicule you. And then they attack you and want to burn you. And then they build monuments to you." ...--1914 speech by Nicholas Klein, union leader
I applaud your progress; I'm lucky to shed a pound a month. But I am old, and stubborn, so I will persevere. :(
If anyone needs inspiration, there are a bunch of documentaries out --That Sugar Film, and Fed Up come to mind. Some are better than others, and I can't remember which ones stood out. I've always liked Tom Naughton's Fat Head.
Yes, fruit juice is marginally better than Coke, and worse than sugar free Coke when you consider sugar content. Fruit is highly over-rated, micronutrient wise.
I have realized getting Friday lunch delivered with the group at work is not a good idea. Even salads come with dressings that I suspect have sugar in them. At home I make my own with lemon juice and olive oil. A dry salad is not to my liking. Any food prepared commercially by others is probably not good.
My last healthy diet book was "How Not to Die". I have been sort of closely following his vegan diet recommendations, however I don't think that he correctly or completely covered diets high in processed foods and how they relate to the glycemic indices. It is something I could improve upon. It's not just sugar, but the close relatives that include white flour. For me it gets confusing when you talk low sugar and how that may or may not include the starches in things like whole wheat or whole grain breads and pastas or the starches in legumes which are one of my main sources of protein. I also wonder if the differences in fruits and fructose and how they compare to plain cane sugar. And I've yet to be convinced that HFCS is any worse than cane sugar, or fructose for that matter.
Fructose--unlike sucrose--is metabolized directly in the liver, and can lead to non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.
http://healthyeating.sfgate.com/difference-between-sucrose-glucose-fructose-8704.html
ApatheticNoMore
6-16-17, 2:05am
I have realized getting Friday lunch delivered with the group at work is not a good idea. Even salads come with dressings that I suspect have sugar in them. At home I make my own with lemon juice and olive oil. A dry salad is not to my liking. Any food prepared commercially by others is probably not good.
but that just shows the "it's a social problem" people are probably right, it's not entirely an individual problem. Not when you either socialize with people which may involve things prepared commercially, or you hide all alone in your house all day like an extreme hermit (and I'm a serious introvert and even I've never reached those levels of hermitry) and so you can say all the food you eat is unprocessed as you never go out to eat with others (mostly you eat alone, turn down social invitations because your avoiding all processed food etc.).
Well not everyone gets the lunch ordered in. Some don't for financial reasons. So I am not a hermit yet! I will be eating processed food for Father's Day for instance. But I get your point. A man trying to lose weight told me once it was hard because all socializing involves either eating or drinking alcohol or both.
but that just shows the "it's a social problem" people are probably right, it's not entirely an individual problem. Not when you either socialize with people which may involve things prepared commercially, or you hide all alone in your house all day like an extreme hermit (and I'm a serious introvert and even I've never reached those levels of hermitry) and so you can say all the food you eat is unprocessed as you never go out to eat with others (mostly you eat alone, turn down social invitations because your avoiding all processed food etc.).
At the same time it's important to realize that socializing is a very healthy activity--not just mentally healthy, but it supports long life. I would never be so stuck to diet dogma that I would give up being with friends or even coworkers. There's that famous study about the town in Pennsylvania, Roseto, where the people smoked, drank, ate all kinds of carbs (the town was nearly 100% Italian) and they all lived well into their 90s and even hundreds. The key variable to their long life was their tightly-knit community.
I'm an introvert, too, and more than 2 hours at a party seems like prison to me, but I still think life is about balance.
Williamsmith
6-16-17, 8:34am
At the same time it's important to realize that socializing is a very healthy activity--not just mentally healthy, but it supports long life. I would never be so stuck to diet dogma that I would give up being with friends or even coworkers. There's that famous study about the town in Pennsylvania, Roseto, where the people smoked, drank, ate all kinds of carbs (the town was nearly 100% Italian) and they all lived well into their 90s and even hundreds. The key variable to their long life was their tightly-knit community.
I'm an introvert, too, and more than 2 hours at a party seems like prison to me, but I still think life is about balance.
Last night, I attended a pot luck dinner, at my wife's request. She's the social butterfly, I am the pretender. We were seated at a table with two other couples. After the main course everybody brought back dessert. My wife and I brought back a tiny sample in order to be social. Not that we both didn't want all the sweets that were available. The other two couples arrived with a plateful of each dessert that was offered. I thought, "Wow, these people are heavy, no wonder." Then the conversation turned to blood sugar readings. Each of the other four had diabetes, each was on medication and each had recent readings that scared the heck out of me yet they were devouring this sugar and chasing it down with wine.
As we left, I asked my wife if she thought it was strange that people could sit and eat tons of sugary desserts while they talked about their chronic diabetes problems. I thought is was very odd.
Roseto has long been one of my favorite examples of how the "rules" can be rubbish. (I bet they ate mostly homemade meals, and I know they liked their red wine.)
I can usually find something to eat that fits my needs, but I will want a bowl of pho from time to time, or Ethiopian injera, and the macros be damned.
I see by this morning's weigh-in that I'm losing 2# a month, not one. So that's something...:cool:
As we left, I asked my wife if she thought it was strange that people could sit and eat tons of sugary desserts while they talked about their chronic diabetes problems. I thought is was very odd.
Having interviewed thousands of doctors and patients dealing with "lifestyle" diseases, it's very complex--the relationship people have with their food. I did one study with a psychologist and we worked jointly on a project with people who had Type II diabetes and kidney disease. Some said that they did everything they could to help themselves, but their actions clearly contradicted that. Some were blatant about just wanting to "eat, drink and be merry" no matter what the consequences were. Very, very few had made the radical changes necessary to turn their health around. My own husband has diabetes, and he still eats pretty much the way he always ate. And he considers walking a few blocks to be a real hardship, although he has no physical reason that should be so.
It's a struggle to make those changes. Doctors I speak with get emotional about their helplessness in getting patients to change behavior, and their emotions run from compassion to outright disdain. Our relationship with food is a really complex and interesting phenomena.
oh the social stuff, so hard. I started eating significantly different than my family before I went to college. It has been hard, as long as I am in my 'tribe' it is good, but moving in and out of that group makes for challenges. So I am the one meditator who will have a diet soda now and then. Heck most of them hardly eat sugar! And then with my family I can't eat everything very often. There is always something I can eat and I bring things to events. Often my food barely gets eaten unless my sister points out to her in-laws what it is and encourages them to try it. My mother also does not really believe in food sensitivities. So I have heard her tell my kids that I just refuse food, sigh. I know they try but the family bonding that comes from shared food is impacted.
Over winter break my parents visited and my mom got angry because I was 'picking on' Iowa, my brother and I talked on the phone about how his neighbors do not like spicy food, only one tried his chocolate chip cookies with a touch of cayenne. I kinda snapped and told her they have been making a joke of my food for 30 years, including the night before at a restaurant. I am stubborn and not really great at making friends so it is okay that I am more stubborn about my food than bonding over food. Heck at least I think my DR likes me! I don't secretly eat junk and then go in complaining. He finally told me I didn't need the cholesterol test so often, I was worried about a family history, but I didn't get it and I have been veggie on and off for many years.
Update: my weight is fluctuating, however I have been able to work on my sugar and it is under the recommended for 3 days now. I noticed that even though I fluctuate up by the end of the day I am starting off with my early morning weight being lower and feeling less like I am starving when I wake up.
...
As we left, I asked my wife if she thought it was strange that people could sit and eat tons of sugary desserts while they talked about their chronic diabetes problems. I thought is was very odd.
Not so odd, really, when you find out that diabetes "educators" regularly push high-carbohydrate diets on their clients. Have you ever looked at a magazine aimed at diabetics? They usually have some extreme dessert on the cover. They counsel people to eat 3 meals a day, at 60 carbs per, plus snacks with more carbohydrates. Often their charges end up on insulin, at which point it's "carb up and shoot up." One might think they're afraid of losing business if people get a real education in the dangers of high carbohydrate diets.
An Australian doctor, Gary Fettke, is an orthopedic surgeon who was so dismayed at having to perform amputations on diabetic patients that he started counseling them on the merits of LCHF eating. As a result an anonymous (read cowardly) complaint was filed by the Australian Health Practitioner Registration Agency, and he was told in no uncertain terms to back down. As a result, APHRA itself is being investigated by the government. But Fettke is still silenced. This has happened elsewhere. In Sweden, Dr. Annika Dahlqvist took a similar stand, was investigated and acquitted, and now LCHF is an accepted dietary choice there.
ApatheticNoMore
6-16-17, 12:17pm
people at work will be eating donuts on friday and I'll be like "good grief, who actually eats donuts?". But more of these people are thin than anything (it probably helps that many are young). But donuts have to be the most unhealthy thing ever created. It's not really possible to go to a restaurant and avoid processed food because you don't really know all the ingredients, I try my best, I often get something vegetarian, I don't like getting meat at restaurants unless they are the rare place that serves grass fed, organic etc.
SteveinMN
6-21-17, 10:28pm
Have you ever looked at a magazine aimed at diabetics? They usually have some extreme dessert on the cover. They counsel people to eat 3 meals a day, at 60 carbs per, plus snacks with more carbohydrates. Often their charges end up on insulin, at which point it's "carb up and shoot up." One might think they're afraid of losing business if people get a real education in the dangers of high carbohydrate diets.
Though I am not, generally, a conspiracy theorist, this one hits home.
For the last six years or so the medical community has considered me a diet-controlled diabetic. For the last six years or so I have not displayed the symptoms that diabetics are warned about (neuropathy, slow healing, frequent thirst, etc., though I had high blood pressure [now controlled] before the diagnosis and I am overweight). I've blown low 6s on my A1cs for years. I've done it through a low-carb whole-foods diet (I may not get 60 net carbs in during a day) and exercise. It's taken some effort, but I've had the results to prove it.
The conversation with my doctor a few weeks ago included the dreaded "Our protocol says you should be on a statin" statement. No test beyond the (normal) A1c and a (normal) albumen to verify the need. It's "protocol". I will give my doctor credit for not pushing an oral medication on me and for acknowledging that fat is far less of an enemy than carbs. But I flat-out refused the script, and the more research I've done myself the more I'm convinced it was the right answer.
I really think the advice is based more on economics (of scale) than the sense it makes for an individual. Even the research I did on statins for people without cardiovascular disease makes the American Diabetes Association look incredible -- like they're afraid the diabetic population will go down and they won't be raking in the $$$$ like they used to.
Like I said, I'm not typically a conspiracy theorist. But one wonders why they don't address avoiding diabetes the way they addressed quitting smoking. Where are the dire labels on food packages warning consumers about the dangers of HFCS? Where are the cross-media campaigns warning that fruit juice is, for all intents and purposes, just non-fizzy sugar water and not "part of this healthy breakfast" and that you're far better off eating the actual fruit? Instead we get magazines with gooey desserts on the covers and TV shows ("Your dLife!"?). I just find it puzzling. Or maybe I shouldn't when I think about it.
I agree, maybe because I am in the family that really does what is healthy even when it is hard. I get comments on how I look much younger than my age, and yeah I do things to promote my health. I really hate women's magazines with diet tips and dessert recipes. If I care for my family I will feed them deal.
BTW it looks like 5 lbs down just by staying in sugar recommendations and having lower stress
I am still struggling. Last week I didn't buy anything with added sugar, but did not resist Alexia Italian herb corn on sale. It is sweetened with sundried tomatoes, and I know dried fruits are concentrated fructose.
Williamsmith
6-22-17, 9:24am
I am still struggling. Last week I didn't buy anything with added sugar, but did not resist Alexia Italian herb corn on sale. It is sweetened with sundried tomatoes, and I know dried fruits are concentrated fructose.
There's a definite battle going on between sugar industry monied interests and the "low carb medical advocates". Both have their "experts" and "researchers" funded by each interest. As I recall and as has been pointed out by others ....it is similar to the cigarette battle prior to the tide turning in favor of the "hazardous to your health - causes cancer" crowd.
But sugar is so innocent looking and hidden in so many food products that it is hard to create a poster similar to one where animals had a cigarette in their mouths and the slogan was...."It looks just as stupid when you do it."
As as far as doing your own research...there are just so many easy ways to get your ideas published on the internet that veracity is always something needing considered. At least when the publishing was book and periodical based, someone had to decide if it warranted the financial expense and that someone was Agency or organization based and what was written couldn't easily be edited when it was decidedly beneficial to its publisher. People thought carefully about what they published.
My ownexperience and what I observe in the community is clearly that the diabetes and healthcare problems are a result of our food choices. Healhy choices are terribly limited by monied interests who know their product is junk and yet advertise them as a health food.
In response, we have the vegetarian and vegan crowd , some of which are almost militant in their campaign against red meat, processed meats and all meats in general. They poo poo the anti sugar and starch movement as without scientific merit because to acknowledge it would severely limit the diet.
Its a befuddling atmosphere of contrary expert advice. To me it makes sense to shop around the edges of your grocery and avoid the processed lab food you find in the middle isles because that's where most of our diet is coming from and taking a look around.....it is generally depressing to see the shape we are in. Never mind the collapse of our healthcare system impending due to diseases inspired by this same diet. It really feels more like a cancer on society than anything....no different than the community heroine deal.
We don't need to move more, like Michelle Obama famously championed. We need to eat better. And even she caved to the sugar industry.
catherine
6-22-17, 10:11am
There's a definite battle going on between sugar industry monied interests and the "low carb medical advocates". Both have their "experts" and "researchers" funded by each interest. As I recall and as has been pointed out by others ....it is similar to the cigarette battle prior to the tide turning in favor of the "hazardous to your health - causes cancer" crowd.
My ownexperience and what I observe in the community is clearly that the diabetes and healthcare problems are a result of our food choices. Healhy choices are terribly limited by monied interests who know their product is junk and yet advertise them as a health food.
...
Its a befuddling atmosphere of contrary expert advice. To me it makes sense to shop around the edges of your grocery and avoid the processed lab food you find in the middle isles because that's where most of our diet is coming from and taking a look around.....it is generally depressing to see the shape we are in. Never mind the collapse of our healthcare system impending due to diseases inspired by this same diet. It really feels more like a cancer on society than anything....no different than the community heroine deal.
I agree with everything you said. I think it's amazing how high our healthcare costs per capita are: the highest by far of any nation, and our life expectancy is actually going down. Talk about a bad ROI. We are silently sabotaged by the food industry--they're the ones with the great ROI. Yes, we are responsible for our food choices for sure, and moreso as we learn about the effects of bad choices, but as you said, how do we know what's a bad choice and what's a good choice? Just a few years ago, fat was BAD now it's GOOD. Butter was BAD, margarine was GOOD. Now all transfats are BAD. Even eggs--for some reason, we were sucked into believing that EGGS are BAD and a superior alternative is processed, boxed "egg beaters." Now we know that dietary cholesterol only accounts for a small part of our numbers, and eggs are actually a perfect protein.
I have thrown my hands up. And I do my best to make everything from scratch and buy local.
sweetana3
6-22-17, 10:24am
I prefer to believe that nothing is really bad but it is a whole lot better to eat good wholesome simple foods and to limit as much processed food as possible. I put white flour and sugar into the processed category. I use butter because it is a "pure" product and margarine is a chemical product. I use eggs but just limit them to a reasonable amount. Hubby uses egg whites in his breakfast to limit his cholesterol. He has a known problem.
We are not going to live forever. But we watch things like blood sugar, cholesterol, blood pressure, quality of breathing, exericse, etc. Nothing to extreme though.
SteveinMN
6-22-17, 12:23pm
As as far as doing your own research...there are just so many easy ways to get your ideas published on the internet that veracity is always something needing considered. At least when the publishing was book and periodical based, someone had to decide if it warranted the financial expense and that someone was Agency or organization based and what was written couldn't easily be edited when it was decidedly beneficial to its publisher. People thought carefully about what they published.
My ownexperience and what I observe in the community is clearly that the diabetes and healthcare problems are a result of our food choices. Healhy choices are terribly limited by monied interests who know their product is junk and yet advertise them as a health food.
We just don't know enough about nutrition and the human body, period. There are genetic and cultural influences in life that severely screw up controlled testing. Not that I'm making a case for processed foods. Just noting that, despite the increasing prevalence of highly-processed foods across the world, life expectancy in most highly-developed countries keeps going up while the incidence of obesity and diseases like Type II diabetes and cardiovascular disease are on the rise. Yay modern medicine? >8) Boo fast-food eat-on-the-run culture? I just don't think we have a full picture today. It's quite complex.
As for research, you're right that the Internet has succeeded in lowering the bar for making opinions and information visible. There is some high-quality research out there -- and some real junk science. I am not a medical doctor. But I understand the scientific method and statistics. I look at who is sponsoring the research/opinion. Or whether it fits well into the rest of their body of work. I look for a preponderance of evidence and educated opinion -- and use that to guide me in further inquiry. Those skills were necessary back when it cost real money to publish and they're still very worthwhile now.
frugal-one
6-22-17, 3:33pm
Though I am not, generally, a conspiracy theorist, this one hits home.
For the last six years or so the medical community has considered me a diet-controlled diabetic. For the last six years or so I have not displayed the symptoms that diabetics are warned about (neuropathy, slow healing, frequent thirst, etc., though I had high blood pressure [now controlled] before the diagnosis and I am overweight). I've blown low 6s on my A1cs for years. I've done it through a low-carb whole-foods diet (I may not get 60 net carbs in during a day) and exercise. It's taken some effort, but I've had the results to prove it.
The conversation with my doctor a few weeks ago included the dreaded "Our protocol says you should be on a statin" statement. No test beyond the (normal) A1c and a (normal) albumen to verify the need. It's "protocol". I will give my doctor credit for not pushing an oral medication on me and for acknowledging that fat is far less of an enemy than carbs. But I flat-out refused the script, and the more research I've done myself the more I'm convinced it was the right answer.
I really think the advice is based more on economics (of scale) than the sense it makes for an individual. Even the research I did on statins for people without cardiovascular disease makes the American Diabetes Association look incredible -- like they're afraid the diabetic population will go down and they won't be raking in the $$$$ like they used to.
Like I said, I'm not typically a conspiracy theorist. But one wonders why they don't address avoiding diabetes the way they addressed quitting smoking. Where are the dire labels on food packages warning consumers about the dangers of HFCS? Where are the cross-media campaigns warning that fruit juice is, for all intents and purposes, just non-fizzy sugar water and not "part of this healthy breakfast" and that you're far better off eating the actual fruit? Instead we get magazines with gooey desserts on the covers and TV shows ("Your dLife!"?). I just find it puzzling. Or maybe I shouldn't when I think about it.
I recently was told by my doctor that I should be on statins because my cholesterol is way too high. I told her the studies I have seen show that less than 1% of the people who take statins are actually helped. She directed me to the pharmacist. I asked to see studies that indicated how many people are helped by statins. She came back proudly telling me and showing statistics that show 10% are kept from dying and 20% are helped from having an "episode". Some of the side effects of statins are deterioration of leg muscles (most common), diabetes, cancer, cateracts ++ The other thing to note... as we age our cholesterol rises. I don't think 20% is a large enough percentage to take the risk of getting cancer, etc.
Not enough for me to take but hubby takes a very low dose of a brand name because his heart scan shows a plaque build up in significant amounts. He has had muscle issues with three previous brands (and friends have all had serious muscle issues too). So other than his mother, all his friends or 100% of the males he knows on statins have had issues with side effects. I bet none of their doctors bothered to report.
ApatheticNoMore
6-23-17, 2:38am
I was trying to avoid sweets on weekdays, but uh I ended up grabbing the free trail mix at work that has M&Ms and only eating the M&Ms.
Ah well I'm not perfect, or how it was is I fought them off for awhile, but I felt drained of energy, pleasure, and to a degree will to live while at work (this is probably the universal experience of being at work - but it's painful beyond my capacity to cope with it in more constructive ways than M&Ms sometimes I suppose). So yea want a quick jolt of pleasure. Healthier alternatives may be sometimes to take a walk etc., but clearly I wasn't up to them then (might have been trying to power through and keep working of course).
So feeling discouraged, I had a soda on Friday night with real sugar (not HFCS). It was my sugar for the day, but the weekend had a little more junk food than I wanted. I got on the scale and it was back up to 2 lbs less than my highest weight again. My overall calories were not that bad, very discouraging. Then my hormones for my period kicked in, explained the sugar craving and the weight gain. I expect in 1-2 days with good eating it will drop down quite a bit. I really want to wear this gorgeous skirt I made last winter that matches my cowgirl boots and is just too tight in the hips, but there is no more fabric to let it out another smidge. I made it out of black wool with a windowpane pattern in red and lined it. Other than that weight loss should help a few other issues.
ApatheticNoMore
6-27-17, 2:51am
oh I put the goal aside for the meantime, because clearly something wasn't working if I turn to sugar just for being desperately uncontent to be at work or something, and can't resist even if I want to at that moment. Yes maybe if I thought to take a walk or something .. maybe ...
Oh I don't worry about sugar hidden in processed foods or anything as I don't buy those foods anyway (I am sure sometimes when I eat at restaurants and so on, but what I buy I read labels period, so yea I can say safely say I never buy hidden sugar unless it's so hidden it's not even labeled). I was talking about sugar when I'm consciously eating sweets which to exactly noone's surprise have sugar in them (if I buy a chocolate bar, look I KNOW ...). But not focusing on it for now, as I prefer to focus on goals I might actually build into habits and if I'm falling off the wagon all the time maybe it's just not a top contender at this point. Doesn't mean I have to go off on some crazy sugar binge or anything.
Good points ANM. I am the same way - good at home at avoiding processed sugar, but in the crunch at work yesterday with two people in the group on vacation I ate four pieces of candy from the candy jar.
Today was family day at work. We had perfect weather, lots of activities, and great participation. We also had carbs carbs carbs - popcorn, crackers, pretzels, pizza, breaded chicken fingers and ice cream. Fruit juice, water and soda were the beverages. I thought, this is how we start our kids down the sugar road, though the intentions of the organizers were good.
I thought, this is how we start our kids down the sugar road, though the intentions of the organizers were good.
Yup.
I get that, to some extent, most Americans are biologically "wired" for sweetness (other societies seem to be "wired" for heat and/or bitterness). But what is often presented as "kids' food" -- macaroni and cheese, chicken or cheese enrobed in batter and deep-fried, hot dogs (or hot dogs enrobed in batter and deep-fried :(), sugary breakfast cereals (with sides of toast and juice or sugar-laden yogurt) -- certainly seem to set the expectation that "this is what grownups eat".
(Potluck) holiday dinners at my wife's family -- brother's and sisters' houses -- are minefields for low-carbers: lots of sweets and baked goods, starchy side dishes, flour- or cornstarch-laden sauces, ... Sometimes someone brings a green salad or raw carrots/broccoli/cauliflower -- but only a sugary salad dressing or dip comes with it to top it. We try to bring a vegetable side dish that's fairly "clean" but interesting but only a couple in the family are at all adventurous eaters and we often end up taking most of it back home. It's a holiday meal; I understand that there's some element of "treating oneself" and of tradition governing what's served -- perhaps more for DW's family than many.
But on Father's Day we were invited to dinner with DD/DSiL/DGD: bratwurst on white buns, potato salad, corn on the cob, sweet cole slaw, and brownies for dessert. I don't think they cooked anything special because they knew we were coming over. Fortunately for DD/DSiL, they're young and they like to exercise. And, in their defense, they do not feed DGD grownup food much different from what they eat. They did buy better brands of baby food. And I can't say I've ever seen corn dogs or mac-and-cheese served for dinner at their house -- though IMHO brats and pasta salad don't land on the ground too far from that tree.
Me? I've learned that, if the menu looks like something I shouldn't eat, I eat what I can at home and just pick when I get there. But I know differently and I worked to jostle myself out of the Standard American Diet rut. Will anything jostle these folks out of it?
catherine
6-29-17, 11:29am
Me? I've learned that, if the menu looks like something I shouldn't eat, I eat what I can at home and just pick when I get there. But I know differently and I worked to jostle myself out of the Standard American Diet rut. Will anything jostle these folks out of it?
My minefield is only a few feet away: my DH. Our thinking about food is absolutely diametrically opposed. I'm an "eat to live" person and he's a "live to eat" person. He'a a great amateur chef, but his Holy Grail is flavor at the expense of health. He's told me I'm "wrong" for preferring grassfed beef (when I eat beef at all) because it "sucks." He's told me I'm "wrong" for objecting to the copious salt he uses. If I make potato salad, I use just enough mayo to coat the potatoes.. then he'll come in and add another cup to it. The other day we went to a potluck at the farm, and we actually brought bratwurst (speaking of bratwurst). He was the one that cooked it, and I layered some sauerkraut in the bottom of the baking dish, and he proceeded to POUR the pan drippings into the sauerkraut. When I protested, I was "wrong" again because "fat provides the flavor." When he shops for ground beef, it can't be too fatty--he seeks out 75%/25%. ETA: I am not averse to fat, and I particularly don't mind if DH eats fat, in general. I'd rather see him eat fat than carbs for sure.
But I do spend a lot of time scraping salt and gravy off food.
My minefield is only a few feet away: my DH. Our thinking about food is absolutely diametrically opposed. I'm an "eat to live" person and he's a "live to eat" person. He'a a great amateur chef, but his Holy Grail is flavor at the expense of health. He's told me I'm "wrong" for preferring grassfed beef (when I eat beef at all) because it "sucks." He's told me I'm "wrong" for objecting to the copious salt he uses. If I make potato salad, I use just enough mayo to coat the potatoes.. then he'll come in and add another cup to it. The other day we went to a potluck at the farm, and we actually brought bratwurst (speaking of bratwurst). He was the one that cooked it, and I layered some sauerkraut in the bottom of the baking dish, and he proceeded to POUR the pan drippings into the sauerkraut. When I protested, I was "wrong" again because "fat provides the flavor." When he shops for ground beef, it can't be too fatty--he seeks out 75%/25%. ETA: I am not averse to fat, and I particularly don't mind if DH eats fat, in general. I'd rather see him eat fat than carbs for sure.
But I do spend a lot of time scraping salt and gravy off food.
Although I disagree that you have to sacrifice flavor for nutrition, I'm sure I'd enjoy sharing a meal with your husband.
I'll never be an "eat to live" person; just no.
I find that as I eat less processed food, I need more salt, not less--more electrolytes in general. I enjoy lots of mayonnaise, but commercial brands have industrial seed oils, starches, and sugar, so I usually make my own. Fat is an essential nutrient--especially animal fats, so I don't try to avoid them. Like your husband, I always get the fatty ground beef. But I understand the challenge of trying to meld two different eating styles--it can be difficult, at best.
catherine
6-29-17, 12:37pm
Although I disagree that you have to sacrifice flavor for nutrition, I'm sure I'd enjoy sharing a meal with your husband.
I'll never be an "eat to live" person; just no.
I find that as I eat less processed food, I need more salt, not less--more electrolytes in general. I enjoy lots of mayonnaise, but commercial brands have industrial seed oils, starches, and sugar, so I usually make my own. Fat is an essential nutrient--especially animal fats, so I don't try to avoid them. Like your husband, I always get the fatty ground beef. But I understand the challenge of trying to meld two different eating styles--it can be difficult, at best.
I knew I'd hear from you, Jane! :). I'm sure you would love my husband's cooking--I do, too, MOST of the time. And I do believe he needs fats. But I still think he uses way too much salt, mayo, oils, etc. I'm a plain and simple eater. I generally go for unadulterated food, and he's a big adulterer.
Williamsmith
6-29-17, 2:36pm
I knew I'd hear from you, Jane! :). I'm sure you would love my husband's cooking--I do, too, MOST of the time. And I do believe he needs fats. But I still think he uses way too much salt, mayo, oils, etc. I'm a plain and simple eater. I generally go for unadulterated food, and he's a big adulterer.
Catherine, I feel you have to question the advice we've been given over the last 30 years or so regarding the fat in our diet and the salt based on the lack of true scientific research that is out there. And looking at the so called low fat diet Americans have been eating and the current poor health of the populace (cancer, heart disease and diabetes).....seems to indicate that the American Heart Association and some of the other evangelists for the low fat diet have ulterior motives. Women have in fact been victimized by shorter life expectancy and higher rates of disease apparently in part due to diet. We are getting to a point where the kitchen is not even necessary as a room of food preparation. It just houses our Keurig machine.
ApatheticNoMore
6-29-17, 2:45pm
The American diet isn't that low fat (35% true not high, but not that low), and yes adding fat to everything (added fat, not talking about removing fat from things that naturally come that way) probably does add extra calories over time plus it's fairly empty calories as far as nutrients (yea you could argue about the polyphenols in olive oil, or vitamins in butter but overall it's not that high a nutrient content per calorie if it's pure concentrated fat ... concentration by definition means it's not a whole food but that' doesn't mean it's bad in moderation). And our bodies also self-adjust to regulate our calorie balance somewhat so ... (and that assumes one is even trying to eat less, if one actually needs those calories because they have high calorie needs then that is hardly a concern).
I regularly add 2 TB of olive oil to my salads etc.. but l can admit it's not the most nutrients I could get for those 240 calories (though neither is it the worst 240 calories and sometimes I consume worse), but I do need my lunch to be somewhat filling so there is also that ...
Catherine, I feel you have to question the advice we've been given over the last 30 years or so regarding the fat in our diet and the salt based on the lack of true scientific research that is out there. And looking at the so called low fat diet Americans have been eating and the current poor health of the populace (cancer, heart disease and diabetes).....seems to indicate that the American Heart Association and some of the other evangelists for the low fat diet have ulterior motives. Women have in fact been victimized by shorter life expectancy and higher rates of disease apparently in part due to diet. We are getting to a point where the kitchen is not even necessary as a room of food preparation. It just houses our Keurig machine.
I basically agree with you (and Jane).. it's just that old habits die hard. I basically believe in pure food. I totally agree that the vaunted food pyramid is nothing but a consensus between the government and food lobbyists.
I remember back in 2007 one of my DDs boyfriends--a really smart guy--told me that if you were out in the wilderness and only ate rabbit you would die because rabbit has no fat and the body needs fat to live. He was one of the first who put the bee in my bonnet that fat is not just "bad" across the board. After all, I had only just recently seen Oprah truck 60 lbs of lard out on the stage to show people what she had "lost" as a result of her diet--and heard all the people in the audience going "ewwww!!!!"
I've never been one for low-fat dairy or cookies or cakes. It seemed more dangerous to eat manufactured stuff than eat the real stuff. Plus, low-fat ice cream is just not worth eating.
Williamsmith
6-29-17, 4:06pm
I want to learn more about artificial sweeteners and sugar substitutes. Again, the propaganda was that they caused cancer in mice......but they didn't tell you that the amounts that were fed mice and rats were comparable to amounts a human couldn't possibly consume. So the sugar industry conspiracy raises its ugly head again. I am particularly curious about how to use stevia and I'm wondering about any dangers in aspartame as many of the diet drinks I like for mixing beverages with contain this.
I knew I'd hear from you, Jane! :). I'm sure you would love my husband's cooking--I do, too, MOST of the time. And I do believe he needs fats. But I still think he uses way too much salt, mayo, oils, etc. I'm a plain and simple eater. I generally go for unadulterated food, and he's a big adulterer.
:devil: I'm a big adulterer, too!
I don't much like plain anything. I'm with Iris Apfel: "More is more, less is a bore." I have some simple tendencies, but they mostly involve work and social situations. The only reason I eat simple food is that I'm a desultory cook. Otherwise, I'd eat the most complicated Indian, Thai, and other Asian food possible.
My philosophy on non-nutritive sweeteners is the same as Dr. Stephen Phinney's: "Sugar is worse than the most "evil" of artificial sweeteners."
Every time a new sweetener is introduced, sugar manufacturers rush out a flurry of scare stories to combat it. I can tell that when I eat sugar, my insulin rises (hunger alert!) and my blood sugar quickly follows (nap alert!) When I have sucralose or Truvia or some other sweetener in my coffee or tea, I observe neither of those things. It's possible that they may affect my gut biome, but what doesn't. Surely, the packet of aspirin I take every morning is much worse for them than a few drops of whatever sweetener.
Rabbit starvation is a real thing. It's no wonder fatty pemmican was the ultimate survival food.
Calories are a poor measure of much of anything (See Sam Feltham's Smash the Fat experiments for fascinating proof of that), but I find that when I eat mainly protein and fat, I'm satisfied with much less food--the opposite of my experience with high-carb diets. That's why it's so easy to fast when you're fat adapted.
I've grown stevia in my garden and recommend it.
I have to say, I don't like sugar substitutes--the taste of them--so I try to get by without them. I've long since abandoned sugar in coffee and tea. I don't drink soda, or any kind of flavored water with sweeteners of any kind.
Jane, wish you could come by for dinner--
DH's joke is "What's ma-ma-mo-deration??" I should be the Libra and he should be the Aries--but instead it's the other way around.
Does anyone know about sugar content in alcoholic beverages? Is buying Skinny Girl worth the extra cost?
Does anyone know about sugar content in alcoholic beverages? Is buying Skinny Girl worth the extra cost?
Spirits with no added sugar are OK. I like brandy. I'm not familiar with Skinny Girl (what a retrograde brand name!), but there are quite a few sugar-free mixers out there, including Zevia and La Croix.
Thanks Jane. They have wines and vodka and other drinks.
I am so pleased to see new single ingredient products in the supermarket. Today I got zucchini noodles, cauliflower rice, and seaweed. I felt like yes! I can cut down the sugar and carbs. Thank you to all the boomers who are aging and focusing on their health. I feel like you are driving the market to a better place.
I probably get most of my sugar from wine. I don't like sweet wines, but I think all alcohol has sugar in it.
I like the occasional brandy. The only wines I've ever liked are the single-note dessert wines, like plum--and I don't like them well enough to buy them. I called an expert here once at the UW to see if brandy had the same (supposed) health properties as red wine (from which its made), but alas, he didn't know. Oh well, I don't drink it often enough to benefit anyway...
Pure spirits don't have sugar, but--like all alcohol--they're metabolized first--before whatever else you ingest--in the liver, probably because the body perceives them as toxic. Next up, carbohydrates, which are also hard on the liver, as in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.
Pure spirits don't have sugar, but--like all alcohol--they're metabolized first--before whatever else you ingest--in the liver, probably because the body perceives them as toxic.
Jane, thanks for bringing this up. I do drink wine, on average one glass a day. I'll have two glasses some nights but then none for a couple of days. But I've been grappling with the idea of becoming a teetotaler, for several reasons. The one you mention is a good one. If the liver thinks it's toxic, it probably is! I know it's considered to be benign in moderate consumption, and studies even show some health benefits, but I'm thinking, why bother with it? It's probably worse for you than it is better, it's expensive, and it's calorie-ridden.
I never bought myself a bottle of wine (or any alcohol) until I was 52. I hardly ever drank before then. When I went freelance I started doing a "cocktail hour" with a glass of wine in the evening in the back yard as way to unwind. At that time, I looked 10 years younger--I know because people used to mistake my son for my husband and my husband for my father.
Now, I know I'm 15 years older, so I should look older, but I feel like I've lost that advantage--I definitely look my age, if not older, partly because of my Anglo skin and the long-time effects of time in the sun, and other post-menopausal factors. I've wondered if my glass of wine has contributed at all to my accelerated aging.
You've given me food (or drink) for thought!
iris lilies
7-8-17, 12:09pm
Oh I do not like this talk at all about evils of wine, it should be banned. Perhaps I will exercise my moderator powers and zap this thread! Haha.
Now lets get real--an occasional, even daily glass of wine is not the sugar devil. For God's sake, people, you are going off the edge of reality.
That said, I have cut way down in wine consumption while I am doing a Weight Watcher's program. That one glass of wine
was more than 10% of my daily allowed WW points, and it wasnt worth it UNlESS it was coming from my high end favorites. I find that I can nurse a 4oz glass from my $60 bottle of Silver Oak. cabernet for at least an hour.
Oh I do not like this talk at all about evils of wine, it should be banned. Perhaps I will exercise my moderator powers and zap this thread! Haha.
Yeah, this was a tough one to bring up! I've been thinking of switching to port, because port is so much more "sip-able" as opposed to chilled white wine, which goes down like lemonade.
I don't think wine is evil--except for its taste, haha*--nor do I really think a glass a day is going to do you in. Unless your liver is fragile, or something.
*And I know there are wines that taste pretty good; I went to a wine-tasting once. Unfortunately, I forget which ones they were. I think one was white.
I had the same problem, but I managed to stop eating unhealthy food especially sugar. I'm 35 and I know if you are getting older its hard to loose weight, but not impossible. public health have nothing to do with that. They can't make people to stop eating fast food, It's your life choice. If you really want to stop it you will and if you like junkie food you will carry on with it. There is no one to blame except you and your diet.
They can't make people to stop eating fast food, It's your life choice. If you really want to stop it you will and if you like junkie food you will carry on with it.
I read this and was picturing the culinary equivalent of speakeasies during a sugar ban.
On the other hand, Tom Naughton proved in the documentary Fat Head* that you can eat every meal in a fast food joint, lose weight, and improve your health markers, if you choose judiciously.
*a rebuttal to Supersize Me, among other things.
Okay this morning was 156, I probably started over 160. My goal is 150, although I would feel awesome at 145.
SteveinMN
7-14-17, 10:21pm
I had the same problem, but I managed to stop eating unhealthy food especially sugar. I'm 35 and I know if you are getting older its hard to loose weight, but not impossible. public health have nothing to do with that. They can't make people to stop eating fast food, It's your life choice. If you really want to stop it you will and if you like junkie food you will carry on with it. There is no one to blame except you and your diet.
First post! Welcome, Dan!
Went to a different location of my favorite supermarket chain and bought some prepared quinoa salads as well as quinoa to cook. This should be better than my past tendency to load up on potatoes or higher glucose grains, though I did get some taboule as that wheat isn't processed. No fruit this week, but vegetables, nuts, tofu, falafel, some dairy, and my weekly cheat item was a couple thin crust Newman's pizzas loaded with vegetable toppings to enjoy with my son, who is going through a rough patch.
my weekly cheat item was a couple thin crust Newman's pizzas loaded with vegetable toppings to enjoy with my son, who is going through a rough patch.
We've discovered that the Bellatoria thin-crust pizzas are relatively carb-friendly -- 45 grams of carbohydrates in half the pizza. As frozen pizzas go, much better than some. Good positive moves in the less-sugar direction, Yppej!
I'm still "eating to my meter" to figure out trends in my blood glucose, so I've only had 1/8 of one of those Bellatorias in the last three weeks. The vast majority of the other carbs have been non-starchy vegetables. Strangely, it has not been hard for me to just drop the starchy carbs. But if I can sustain this way of eating, I'll have to figure out how to accommodate DW's interest in starchy carbs. She likes them and (in the quantity in which she eats them) they seem to like her. So a clean sweep of the pantry probably is not going to happen.
Williamsmith
8-9-17, 8:12am
It has been about ten months since I started looking at sugar intake with an eye toward curbing it. I have plenty of doubts about information that proliferates the web on and about sugar. But I have had success in incremental reduction of weight at about 3 lbs per month. Although I go to the gym four mornings per week, ride 30 miles on the bike per week, walk an additional 20 miles on average per week, I still attribute the gradual weight loss to restricting sugar and carbs. The exercise is more about rehabbing my back, mental health and muscular toning than weight loss.
I havent cut out all sugar and carbs by a long stretch. I like soft serve ice cream and I eat cereal sometimes in the morning but there are categories of food that are completely non existent....soft drinks, energy drinks, juices, candy bars have all gone extinct. I am due for an annual physical in October and interested in what the bloodwork reveals about changes in cholesterol and such.
Overall, less weight - down 15% - has improved my life.
That is great William! I am also one to question all the diet info that is everywhere, but cutting down sugar to about a third of what I was consuming has been the only thing affecting my weight in the last 10 years. Even with the women's tricky hormones I am staying at about 7 lbs down, and I have a loose goal of getting to 15 total. I feel a lot better already, lighter, clothes fit better, easier to move and be active. I have noticed it is slowly affecting my weight around my waist, that is what really needed to move! And I can still have sweets but a candy bar or sweet soda would probably be waaay too much.
I did have a small reduction in my cholesterol, I have not had it checked in many years however. I will be interested to see what yours says.
ApatheticNoMore
8-9-17, 10:53am
I tried cutting down on fat just to see (it seems most doable anyway), sure enough my weight dropped (not no fat, the human body does need some small amount of fat, let's not be crazy, I still ate 30 grams). Of course that actually means VERY LIMITED SUGAR in the form of treats as they are ALL sugar-fat combos, unless you are counting fruits whose consumption along with starchy veggies I increased and my weight went down, so yea fruits are not to blame. Look I eat LOTS OF FAT otherwise, so it's really just calories, I've never been one for sweet drinks or anything, I'm not that in to sugar that doesn't come with fat.
But it's hard to sustain psychologically so I don't know if I recommend it as it's too hard to sustain psychologically under boatloads of stress, a lower fat diet is stressful or maybe and just as likely it's just that ALL dieting can be stressful, it's having to be so on guard with food. One can debate how much it's is worth it, sure I have some fat, but all that and having "healthy weight" BMI anyway, how much is it worth dieting for me, I'm not sure. And I work out at the gym with weights twice a week and walk.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.