Can we have an honest, good faith conversation about fat acceptance and body positivity?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It’s 2021. 5% is the new 100%. Right? Also, the cheeseburgers made people eat them.

In short, we can’t even have this discussion if the conversation diverts to rare disorders to the exclusion of actually talking about the overwhelming majority.

You really want to play this game? Metabolic syndromes include: cystic fibrosis, Tay Sachs, PCOS, maple syrup urine disease, phenylketonuria, tyrosinemia, sickle cell anemia.... you catch me, right? No, being overweight doesn’t cause most metabolic syndromes

Oh, you guys misspoke and when you said “metabolic disorders” you just meant type 2 diabetes? Maybe. But some researchers theorize that there’s something else at play, that the pre-diabetes/diabetes exist and stimulate the person to eat, much like how kids start eating before a growth spurt.

Seriously, read the two books I linked to. I know you think fat is funny and entirely the fault of the fat monster walking around in it, but you’re not right. (And since I mentioned it, PCOS is another one that causes a person to gain weight vs gaining weight causes a person to develop it.) You guys just want so badly for fat to be the person’s fault entirely because you know that if it’s true that there are multiple factors at play - and 2/3 of the US being overweight/obese suggests there are - then you’re kind of a smug douche. I don’t brag that I don’t need wine and beer to get through my days. Instead of being a smug douche who can control herself around the sauce, I recognize that I get no reward from alcohol. I can take or it or leave it and I pretty much leave it. You... go the other way.

All of this is incredibly narrow. If it wasn’t, we wouldn’t have historic rates of obesity. That wasn’t a thing as recently as the 1970s. I guess it’s all a wild conspiracy and the human body itself changed in the last 40 years. Amazing.

So, you really think people got lazier and more glutinous in just 40 years?
Doubt it, not long enough to change behavior patterns of big group of people. Food industry and pharma on the other hand did evolve to the levels one can only imagine.

Of course people are more glutinous now- because it is so easy to be! Fast/casual food on every corner, delivery of groceries, grubhub, amazon delivers, curbside pick up, out sourcing house cleaning and yard work, work from home. People move so much less and eat way more than they ever did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I woke up this morning thinking about this thread and the example of Subway in particular. I recall an episode of the Biggest Loser where the trainers treated everyone to a teriyaki. Chicken sub and extolled the virtues of this healthy lunch. That's the problem! So much added sugar and so much bad information. So many of us are trying so hard. We tried nutri systems and weight watchers and Jane Brody and fit it's and podcasts and it really does feel like the whole diet industry just takes your money and lies to you. He'll, I went to some shady place where they sold me amphetamines to curb my appetite. Now I have given up carbs and sugar and am weighing and measuring my food. I have been dieting for thirty years.

Among Subway sandwiches, sweet onion chicken teriyaki contains the most sugar, 14 g. (All others contain 5 to 6 g). But that's probably an entire meal for an average person, so if you eat 14 g of sugar per meal is not much. And you don't even eat it every day, I hope.

One medium banana contains 15 grams of sugar. Yes, fruits are better for you but in the end, it's the amount of carbs that matters most for your weight loss (or gain), according to American Diabetes Association.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It’s 2021. 5% is the new 100%. Right? Also, the cheeseburgers made people eat them.

In short, we can’t even have this discussion if the conversation diverts to rare disorders to the exclusion of actually talking about the overwhelming majority.

You really want to play this game? Metabolic syndromes include: cystic fibrosis, Tay Sachs, PCOS, maple syrup urine disease, phenylketonuria, tyrosinemia, sickle cell anemia.... you catch me, right? No, being overweight doesn’t cause most metabolic syndromes

Oh, you guys misspoke and when you said “metabolic disorders” you just meant type 2 diabetes? Maybe. But some researchers theorize that there’s something else at play, that the pre-diabetes/diabetes exist and stimulate the person to eat, much like how kids start eating before a growth spurt.

Seriously, read the two books I linked to. I know you think fat is funny and entirely the fault of the fat monster walking around in it, but you’re not right. (And since I mentioned it, PCOS is another one that causes a person to gain weight vs gaining weight causes a person to develop it.) You guys just want so badly for fat to be the person’s fault entirely because you know that if it’s true that there are multiple factors at play - and 2/3 of the US being overweight/obese suggests there are - then you’re kind of a smug douche. I don’t brag that I don’t need wine and beer to get through my days. Instead of being a smug douche who can control herself around the sauce, I recognize that I get no reward from alcohol. I can take or it or leave it and I pretty much leave it. You... go the other way.

All of this is incredibly narrow. If it wasn’t, we wouldn’t have historic rates of obesity. That wasn’t a thing as recently as the 1970s. I guess it’s all a wild conspiracy and the human body itself changed in the last 40 years. Amazing.

So, you really think people got lazier and more glutinous in just 40 years?
Doubt it, not long enough to change behavior patterns of big group of people. Food industry and pharma on the other hand did evolve to the levels one can only imagine.

Of course people are more glutinous now- because it is so easy to be! Fast/casual food on every corner, delivery of groceries, grubhub, amazon delivers, curbside pick up, out sourcing house cleaning and yard work, work from home. People move so much less and eat way more than they ever did.

Stop being mean. Mean equals not based on science or reason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It’s 2021. 5% is the new 100%. Right? Also, the cheeseburgers made people eat them.

In short, we can’t even have this discussion if the conversation diverts to rare disorders to the exclusion of actually talking about the overwhelming majority.

You really want to play this game? Metabolic syndromes include: cystic fibrosis, Tay Sachs, PCOS, maple syrup urine disease, phenylketonuria, tyrosinemia, sickle cell anemia.... you catch me, right? No, being overweight doesn’t cause most metabolic syndromes

Oh, you guys misspoke and when you said “metabolic disorders” you just meant type 2 diabetes? Maybe. But some researchers theorize that there’s something else at play, that the pre-diabetes/diabetes exist and stimulate the person to eat, much like how kids start eating before a growth spurt.

Seriously, read the two books I linked to. I know you think fat is funny and entirely the fault of the fat monster walking around in it, but you’re not right. (And since I mentioned it, PCOS is another one that causes a person to gain weight vs gaining weight causes a person to develop it.) You guys just want so badly for fat to be the person’s fault entirely because you know that if it’s true that there are multiple factors at play - and 2/3 of the US being overweight/obese suggests there are - then you’re kind of a smug douche. I don’t brag that I don’t need wine and beer to get through my days. Instead of being a smug douche who can control herself around the sauce, I recognize that I get no reward from alcohol. I can take or it or leave it and I pretty much leave it. You... go the other way.

All of this is incredibly narrow. If it wasn’t, we wouldn’t have historic rates of obesity. That wasn’t a thing as recently as the 1970s. I guess it’s all a wild conspiracy and the human body itself changed in the last 40 years. Amazing.

So, you really think people got lazier and more glutinous in just 40 years?
Doubt it, not long enough to change behavior patterns of big group of people. Food industry and pharma on the other hand did evolve to the levels one can only imagine.

Of course people are more glutinous now- because it is so easy to be! Fast/casual food on every corner, delivery of groceries, grubhub, amazon delivers, curbside pick up, out sourcing house cleaning and yard work, work from home. People move so much less and eat way more than they ever did.

Stop being mean. Mean equals not based on science or reason.

Not mean, this is realistic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It’s 2021. 5% is the new 100%. Right? Also, the cheeseburgers made people eat them.

In short, we can’t even have this discussion if the conversation diverts to rare disorders to the exclusion of actually talking about the overwhelming majority.

You really want to play this game? Metabolic syndromes include: cystic fibrosis, Tay Sachs, PCOS, maple syrup urine disease, phenylketonuria, tyrosinemia, sickle cell anemia.... you catch me, right? No, being overweight doesn’t cause most metabolic syndromes

Oh, you guys misspoke and when you said “metabolic disorders” you just meant type 2 diabetes? Maybe. But some researchers theorize that there’s something else at play, that the pre-diabetes/diabetes exist and stimulate the person to eat, much like how kids start eating before a growth spurt.

Seriously, read the two books I linked to. I know you think fat is funny and entirely the fault of the fat monster walking around in it, but you’re not right. (And since I mentioned it, PCOS is another one that causes a person to gain weight vs gaining weight causes a person to develop it.) You guys just want so badly for fat to be the person’s fault entirely because you know that if it’s true that there are multiple factors at play - and 2/3 of the US being overweight/obese suggests there are - then you’re kind of a smug douche. I don’t brag that I don’t need wine and beer to get through my days. Instead of being a smug douche who can control herself around the sauce, I recognize that I get no reward from alcohol. I can take or it or leave it and I pretty much leave it. You... go the other way.

All of this is incredibly narrow. If it wasn’t, we wouldn’t have historic rates of obesity. That wasn’t a thing as recently as the 1970s. I guess it’s all a wild conspiracy and the human body itself changed in the last 40 years. Amazing.

So, you really think people got lazier and more glutinous in just 40 years?
Doubt it, not long enough to change behavior patterns of big group of people. Food industry and pharma on the other hand did evolve to the levels one can only imagine.

Of course people are more glutinous now- because it is so easy to be! Fast/casual food on every corner, delivery of groceries, grubhub, amazon delivers, curbside pick up, out sourcing house cleaning and yard work, work from home. People move so much less and eat way more than they ever did.

100%

The world has changed so much in the last decades. People are moving a lot less. And it is getting worse everyday.

My family is a perfect example. I used to spend hours in the mall searching for clothes for my children and me. Now, I order every single thing online. My DH and I used to spend an hour and a half on the weekend grocery shopping. Now, we get food delivered from amazon whole foods, costco etc. We used to take the kids to burger king for fries. We liked one of the big ones around our house with the play space. Now we just have chic fil A delivered to our door.

The world has changed so much in the last decade. People are moving a lot less.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It’s 2021. 5% is the new 100%. Right? Also, the cheeseburgers made people eat them.

In short, we can’t even have this discussion if the conversation diverts to rare disorders to the exclusion of actually talking about the overwhelming majority.

You really want to play this game? Metabolic syndromes include: cystic fibrosis, Tay Sachs, PCOS, maple syrup urine disease, phenylketonuria, tyrosinemia, sickle cell anemia.... you catch me, right? No, being overweight doesn’t cause most metabolic syndromes

Oh, you guys misspoke and when you said “metabolic disorders” you just meant type 2 diabetes? Maybe. But some researchers theorize that there’s something else at play, that the pre-diabetes/diabetes exist and stimulate the person to eat, much like how kids start eating before a growth spurt.

Seriously, read the two books I linked to. I know you think fat is funny and entirely the fault of the fat monster walking around in it, but you’re not right. (And since I mentioned it, PCOS is another one that causes a person to gain weight vs gaining weight causes a person to develop it.) You guys just want so badly for fat to be the person’s fault entirely because you know that if it’s true that there are multiple factors at play - and 2/3 of the US being overweight/obese suggests there are - then you’re kind of a smug douche. I don’t brag that I don’t need wine and beer to get through my days. Instead of being a smug douche who can control herself around the sauce, I recognize that I get no reward from alcohol. I can take or it or leave it and I pretty much leave it. You... go the other way.

All of this is incredibly narrow. If it wasn’t, we wouldn’t have historic rates of obesity. That wasn’t a thing as recently as the 1970s. I guess it’s all a wild conspiracy and the human body itself changed in the last 40 years. Amazing.

So, you really think people got lazier and more glutinous in just 40 years?
Doubt it, not long enough to change behavior patterns of big group of people. Food industry and pharma on the other hand did evolve to the levels one can only imagine.

Of course people are more glutinous now- because it is so easy to be! Fast/casual food on every corner, delivery of groceries, grubhub, amazon delivers, curbside pick up, out sourcing house cleaning and yard work, work from home. People move so much less and eat way more than they ever did.

Um...I think you guys mean “gluttonous” lol

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It’s 2021. 5% is the new 100%. Right? Also, the cheeseburgers made people eat them.

In short, we can’t even have this discussion if the conversation diverts to rare disorders to the exclusion of actually talking about the overwhelming majority.

You really want to play this game? Metabolic syndromes include: cystic fibrosis, Tay Sachs, PCOS, maple syrup urine disease, phenylketonuria, tyrosinemia, sickle cell anemia.... you catch me, right? No, being overweight doesn’t cause most metabolic syndromes

Oh, you guys misspoke and when you said “metabolic disorders” you just meant type 2 diabetes? Maybe. But some researchers theorize that there’s something else at play, that the pre-diabetes/diabetes exist and stimulate the person to eat, much like how kids start eating before a growth spurt.

Seriously, read the two books I linked to. I know you think fat is funny and entirely the fault of the fat monster walking around in it, but you’re not right. (And since I mentioned it, PCOS is another one that causes a person to gain weight vs gaining weight causes a person to develop it.) You guys just want so badly for fat to be the person’s fault entirely because you know that if it’s true that there are multiple factors at play - and 2/3 of the US being overweight/obese suggests there are - then you’re kind of a smug douche. I don’t brag that I don’t need wine and beer to get through my days. Instead of being a smug douche who can control herself around the sauce, I recognize that I get no reward from alcohol. I can take or it or leave it and I pretty much leave it. You... go the other way.

All of this is incredibly narrow. If it wasn’t, we wouldn’t have historic rates of obesity. That wasn’t a thing as recently as the 1970s. I guess it’s all a wild conspiracy and the human body itself changed in the last 40 years. Amazing.

I’m not sure what you mean by “incredibly narrow.” I just enjoy pointing out where the fat shamers are wrongity wrong wrong.

I’ve posted a bunch on this thread and one of my other posts is that the low-fat/high-carb diet that was (and still is, sadly; some of you fat shamers have been scolding about fat people who have - gasp! - whipped cream) the doctor recommended diet for forty years is probably the main driver of the obesity epidemic. They effectively wrecked people’s diets by recommending people remove meats, sour cream, cheese and cream, fats for cooking/serving vegetables with, avocados, nuts, eggs and having them replace them with bread, generally. Back in the 80s, remember, the emphasis wasn’t on whole grain anything, it was on carbs and fruits and lean meats.

“But I’m a normal weight,” you might say. Bully for you! If you didn’t have the predisposition to blood sugar issues, I’m sure the low fat diet worked out great for you. Dr. Dean Ornish made an absolute killing, as did many other gurus. It just didn’t work for *most* people.

Sounds great as an academic exercise. We are talking about the overwhelming majority. It’s eating garbage and not moving enough. That’s it.

If you want to spend hours noodling about narrow population segments and rare conditions, go ahead. It’s meaningless in the grand scheme of the question presented.

No one here claimed being overweight causes ALL metabolic disorders. But yes it does highly contributes to developing the most common metabolic disorder BY FAR. 10% of the population has type II diabetes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It’s 2021. 5% is the new 100%. Right? Also, the cheeseburgers made people eat them.

In short, we can’t even have this discussion if the conversation diverts to rare disorders to the exclusion of actually talking about the overwhelming majority.

You really want to play this game? Metabolic syndromes include: cystic fibrosis, Tay Sachs, PCOS, maple syrup urine disease, phenylketonuria, tyrosinemia, sickle cell anemia.... you catch me, right? No, being overweight doesn’t cause most metabolic syndromes

Oh, you guys misspoke and when you said “metabolic disorders” you just meant type 2 diabetes? Maybe. But some researchers theorize that there’s something else at play, that the pre-diabetes/diabetes exist and stimulate the person to eat, much like how kids start eating before a growth spurt.

Seriously, read the two books I linked to. I know you think fat is funny and entirely the fault of the fat monster walking around in it, but you’re not right. (And since I mentioned it, PCOS is another one that causes a person to gain weight vs gaining weight causes a person to develop it.) You guys just want so badly for fat to be the person’s fault entirely because you know that if it’s true that there are multiple factors at play - and 2/3 of the US being overweight/obese suggests there are - then you’re kind of a smug douche. I don’t brag that I don’t need wine and beer to get through my days. Instead of being a smug douche who can control herself around the sauce, I recognize that I get no reward from alcohol. I can take or it or leave it and I pretty much leave it. You... go the other way.

All of this is incredibly narrow. If it wasn’t, we wouldn’t have historic rates of obesity. That wasn’t a thing as recently as the 1970s. I guess it’s all a wild conspiracy and the human body itself changed in the last 40 years. Amazing.

So, you really think people got lazier and more glutinous in just 40 years?
Doubt it, not long enough to change behavior patterns of big group of people. Food industry and pharma on the other hand did evolve to the levels one can only imagine.

Of course people are more glutinous now- because it is so easy to be! Fast/casual food on every corner, delivery of groceries, grubhub, amazon delivers, curbside pick up, out sourcing house cleaning and yard work, work from home. People move so much less and eat way more than they ever did.

Um...I think you guys mean “gluttonous” lol

If I eat too many glutinous Mochi ice cream, I would get fat too. Now there are people who don’t suffer from poverty, trauma, or rare metabolic diseases that are gluttonous and they are morbidly obese and flaunt it. There is a reason why gluttony is a character defect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It’s 2021. 5% is the new 100%. Right? Also, the cheeseburgers made people eat them.

In short, we can’t even have this discussion if the conversation diverts to rare disorders to the exclusion of actually talking about the overwhelming majority.

You really want to play this game? Metabolic syndromes include: cystic fibrosis, Tay Sachs, PCOS, maple syrup urine disease, phenylketonuria, tyrosinemia, sickle cell anemia.... you catch me, right? No, being overweight doesn’t cause most metabolic syndromes

Oh, you guys misspoke and when you said “metabolic disorders” you just meant type 2 diabetes? Maybe. But some researchers theorize that there’s something else at play, that the pre-diabetes/diabetes exist and stimulate the person to eat, much like how kids start eating before a growth spurt.

Seriously, read the two books I linked to. I know you think fat is funny and entirely the fault of the fat monster walking around in it, but you’re not right. (And since I mentioned it, PCOS is another one that causes a person to gain weight vs gaining weight causes a person to develop it.) You guys just want so badly for fat to be the person’s fault entirely because you know that if it’s true that there are multiple factors at play - and 2/3 of the US being overweight/obese suggests there are - then you’re kind of a smug douche. I don’t brag that I don’t need wine and beer to get through my days. Instead of being a smug douche who can control herself around the sauce, I recognize that I get no reward from alcohol. I can take or it or leave it and I pretty much leave it. You... go the other way.

All of this is incredibly narrow. If it wasn’t, we wouldn’t have historic rates of obesity. That wasn’t a thing as recently as the 1970s. I guess it’s all a wild conspiracy and the human body itself changed in the last 40 years. Amazing.

So, you really think people got lazier and more glutinous in just 40 years?
Doubt it, not long enough to change behavior patterns of big group of people. Food industry and pharma on the other hand did evolve to the levels one can only imagine.

Of course people are more glutinous now- because it is so easy to be! Fast/casual food on every corner, delivery of groceries, grubhub, amazon delivers, curbside pick up, out sourcing house cleaning and yard work, work from home. People move so much less and eat way more than they ever did.

Um...I think you guys mean “gluttonous” lol

Ha! thank you

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I woke up this morning thinking about this thread and the example of Subway in particular. I recall an episode of the Biggest Loser where the trainers treated everyone to a teriyaki. Chicken sub and extolled the virtues of this healthy lunch. That's the problem! So much added sugar and so much bad information. So many of us are trying so hard. We tried nutri systems and weight watchers and Jane Brody and fit it's and podcasts and it really does feel like the whole diet industry just takes your money and lies to you. He'll, I went to some shady place where they sold me amphetamines to curb my appetite. Now I have given up carbs and sugar and am weighing and measuring my food. I have been dieting for thirty years.

And that faulty advice - given everywhere from doctor’s offices to magazines to your nosy neighbor - that it’s just calories and fat! It’s crap. It’s processed, sweet, anti-nutritious crap and it sends your blood sugar and insulin on a wild ride if you’re inclined to problems with insulin. It has no fiber, the “vegetables” as minimal and sickly (and have probably been treated with bleach water or something similar to keep them from going bad)... it is perhaps the worst thing a person with weight problems can eat.

But this has been the advice, for decades. Don’t eat dietary fat. Eat carbs!

I mentioned incretins/linked to the New York Times article about them several pages back. They seem to represent a real possibility for making a fat body’s systems behave like a thin body’s, which means a lot. I know they’re not approved for weight loss yet, but I’m going to go ahead and guess that some docs will be prescribing them off label sooner rather than later.

[Anonymous]

Bread doesn't need any sugar!
Sure, some bread recipes call for sugar, but plenty of breads do not need any sugar at all.
I bake baguettes that have no sugar at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Bread doesn't need any sugar!
Sure, some bread recipes call for sugar, but plenty of breads do not need any sugar at all.
I bake baguettes that have no sugar at all.

Yes, but even if you put 1 flat tbsp (15 g) of sugar per 400 g of flour it does not make any significant difference.

Because

400 g of flour = 304 grams of simple carbohydrates.

15 g of sugar = 15 grams of simple carbohydrates.

So I am adding only 15 g to 304 g of carbs.

And if I eat one slice of bread per day I will only consume 2 grams of added sugar.

Pople who want to lose weight need to realise that calories and carbs are what really matters, not 2 grams of added sugar. Again, see American Diabetes Association.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bread doesn't need any sugar!
Sure, some bread recipes call for sugar, but plenty of breads do not need any sugar at all.
I bake baguettes that have no sugar at all.

Yes, but even if you put 1 flat tbsp (15 g) of sugar per 400 g of flour it does not make any significant difference.

Because

400 g of flour = 304 grams of simple carbohydrates.

15 g of sugar = 15 grams of simple carbohydrates.

So I am adding only 15 g to 304 g of carbs.

And if I eat one slice of bread per day I will only consume 2 grams of added sugar.

Pople who want to lose weight need to realise that calories and carbs are what really matters, not 2 grams of added sugar. Again, see American Diabetes Association.

They’re still pushing the same low fat, keep eating carbs nonsense as ever. https://www.diabetesfoodhub.org/articles/what-is-the-diabetes-plate-method.html#:~:text=The%20Diabetes%20Plate%20Method%20is,you%20need%20is%20a%20plate! (This link came from the American Diabetes Association website). Granted, they recommend whole carbohydrates, but if people are having trouble with their sugars, the advice shouldn’t be “keep eating the things that spike blood sugar at every meal and certainly don’t add fat to blunt it.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bread doesn't need any sugar!
Sure, some bread recipes call for sugar, but plenty of breads do not need any sugar at all.
I bake baguettes that have no sugar at all.

Yes, but even if you put 1 flat tbsp (15 g) of sugar per 400 g of flour it does not make any significant difference.

Because

400 g of flour = 304 grams of simple carbohydrates.

15 g of sugar = 15 grams of simple carbohydrates.

So I am adding only 15 g to 304 g of carbs.

And if I eat one slice of bread per day I will only consume 2 grams of added sugar.

Pople who want to lose weight need to realise that calories and carbs are what really matters, not 2 grams of added sugar. Again, see American Diabetes Association.

They’re still pushing the same low fat, keep eating carbs nonsense as ever. https://www.diabetesfoodhub.org/articles/what-is-the-diabetes-plate-method.html#:~:text=The%20Diabetes%20Plate%20Method%20is,you%20need%20is%20a%20plate! (This link came from the American Diabetes Association website). Granted, they recommend whole carbohydrates, but if people are having trouble with their sugars, the advice shouldn’t be “keep eating the things that spike blood sugar at every meal and certainly don’t add fat to blunt it.”

What the ada is recommending is perfectly reasonable. Whole grains are good for you and have a place in a balanced diet in moderation. Cutting out entire food groups is why people fail diets

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bread doesn't need any sugar!
Sure, some bread recipes call for sugar, but plenty of breads do not need any sugar at all.
I bake baguettes that have no sugar at all.

Yes, but even if you put 1 flat tbsp (15 g) of sugar per 400 g of flour it does not make any significant difference.

Because

400 g of flour = 304 grams of simple carbohydrates.

15 g of sugar = 15 grams of simple carbohydrates.

So I am adding only 15 g to 304 g of carbs.

And if I eat one slice of bread per day I will only consume 2 grams of added sugar.

Pople who want to lose weight need to realise that calories and carbs are what really matters, not 2 grams of added sugar. Again, see American Diabetes Association.

They’re still pushing the same low fat, keep eating carbs nonsense as ever. https://www.diabetesfoodhub.org/articles/what-is-the-diabetes-plate-method.html#:~:text=The%20Diabetes%20Plate%20Method%20is,you%20need%20is%20a%20plate! (This link came from the American Diabetes Association website). Granted, they recommend whole carbohydrates, but if people are having trouble with their sugars, the advice shouldn’t be “keep eating the things that spike blood sugar at every meal and certainly don’t add fat to blunt it.”

What the ada is recommending is perfectly reasonable. Whole grains are good for you and have a place in a balanced diet in moderation. Cutting out entire food groups is why people fail diets

Whole grains are good for you but have no place in your diet if they spike your blood sugar or stimulate your appetite.