Good Carbs vs. Bad Carbs

[Ultimate Burrito Moderator Member of the Month Oct 2017PEGym Hero Find all posts View Profile Close Ultimate Burrito]

One that I found particularly humorous was a guy who lost a bunch of weight eating nothing but QT Fried Taquitos If I remember correctly, his cholesterol even improved from it... which blew my mind.

Taqito? Yeah I know him, were related .

On a serious note (yes I can be serious...sometimes), I had tremendous success a year ago losing weight. I was weighing around 220lbs and having a hard time getting a stiffie. Decided to make a change. Got inspired by the goodlookingloser website and learned about carbs and ketosis. So I was like what-the-burrito, I'll give it a shot. I concockted a smoothie recipe that...well you can just read the thread I started in the exercise and health forum. Anyways, my diet went as such:
Breakfast - 2 eggs cooked in coconut oil
Lunch - Weight loss smoothie
Dinner - Boneless skinless chicken breasts in the skillet served with broccoli or zucchini or squash (I just avoided potatoes, corn, carrots, peas, beans or anything else that is starchy)

I also avoided soda, didn't add sugar to coffee etc. M-F I stuck to the diet and the weekends were free days. The results were after a period of only 8 weeks I went from 220lbs to 189lbs. Do the math . Erections were improved and the only downside was that I had to buy new clothes .

[WIItard Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close WIItard]

Taqito? Yeah I know him, were related .

On a serious note (yes I can be serious...sometimes), I had tremendous success a year ago losing weight. I was weighing around 220lbs and having a hard time getting a stiffie. Decided to make a change. Got inspired by the goodlookingloser website and learned about carbs and ketosis. So I was like what-the-burrito, I'll give it a shot. I concockted a smoothie recipe that...well you can just read the thread I started in the exercise and health forum. Anyways, my diet went as such:
Breakfast - 2 eggs cooked in coconut oil
Lunch - Weight loss smoothie
Dinner - Boneless skinless chicken breasts in the skillet served with broccoli or zucchini or squash (I just avoided potatoes, corn, carrots, peas, beans or anything else that is starchy)

I also avoided soda, didn't add sugar to coffee etc. M-F I stuck to the diet and the weekends were free days. The results were after a period of only 8 weeks I went from 220lbs to 189lbs. Do the math . Erections were improved and the only downside was that I had to buy new clothes .

Along those lines. Most fat people can just do this.

No drinks except water, milk or juice and a limited amount a day. All the water you want.

No sugary snacks. None. No salty snacks. None.

Go for a walk every day for an hour.

There you go fatties. Those three steps with make you lose weight. Can it be improved on? Yes it can but there is no reason to go overly complicated. I know about the whole insluin theory but just to much for me to worry about.

Here's another saying for you all. If it tastes good don't eat it.

[Thumper39 Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close Thumper39]

I was drinking to much. Cutting back on the whiskey has helped a lot even though it's only been a couple weeks. Now I limit myself to one glass three fingers deep after work.

I think I read somewhere that a single can of lite beer has something like a hundred and fifty percent of the recommended amount of sugar per day. Luckily I've never been too much of a beer drinker.

[Ultimate Burrito Moderator Member of the Month Oct 2017PEGym Hero Find all posts View Profile Close Ultimate Burrito]

I was drinking to much. Cutting back on the whiskey has helped a lot even though it's only been a couple weeks. Now I limit myself to one glass three fingers deep after work.

I think I read somewhere that a single can of lite beer has something like a hundred and fifty percent of the recommended amount of sugar per day. Luckily I've never been too much of a beer drinker.

Damn, well don't read pages 45, 46, and 47 of my progress log... LOL

[Thumper39 Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close Thumper39]

Meh. It wasn't that bad of a read.

I do enjoy a good stout on occasion but by and large I'm a whiskey guy. Though on occasion I'll e in the mood for whisky. There for a while I was having 3 or 4 glasses every day after work and a lot more on my days off.

Also never been much of a wine drinker either. But my wife loves wine. Well she likes the wine we make.

[ArtisticAnarchist Senior Member Member of the Month Aug 2018 Find all posts View Profile Close ArtisticAnarchist]

A 1,500-calorie diet of jelly beans is not the same as a 1,500-calorie diet of lean protein, veggies and low-glycemic fruit.

In terms of simple weight loss, they're the same. In terms of sustainability, body composition, and health, they're not.

I think this is where a lot of people fail in their nutritional understanding. And, I honestly think it's the government's fault in the promotion of this idea. Nutritional labeling, with their promotion of a "2,000-calorie diet" gives the general consumer the notion that that's the only number they need to worry about.

The general population's lack of nutritional understanding was caused by many things, and the government certainly perpetuated most of the myths that still exist today, but how a product is advertised and what's on the front label of the product is far more telling of what the consumer is looking for.

Take for instance a box of cereal, let's say Cocoa Puffs:

e2cc6314-f872-4191-bf78-1001f86ae477_1.a517764292a8d5be29001e40c5f2b3d5.jpg

It advertises NO High Fructose Corn Syrup, NO colors from artificial sources, and NO Artificial Flavors. It says that the Corn Puffs are also naturally flavored. And in the center of the box it says "Made with Real Cocoa!". Then in the bottom right corner you're given calories, saturated fat, sodium, and sugar content.

The most telling thing about this advertising is how they're avoiding the word: ingredient. The cereal could be naturally flavored but not necessarily contain natural ingredients, and even then unless it's specified as having 100% natural ingredients, chances are there's some unnatural ingredients in the product. They also don't specify the percentage of cocoa; for all we know it could be 10% cocoa and 90% of some cocoa-substitute.

How they phrase the advertising is just as, if not more important than what they advertise, because lawsuits from false advertising forces every business to be extremely careful with phrasing.

With regards to the calories, saturated fat, sodium, and sugar content; by tweaking the serving size they can mislead the consumer by advertising the product as having low calories, no saturated fat, low sodium, and low sugar (grams are rounded off in nutritional facts labels). The serving size for Cocoa Puffs is 3/4 a cup; I don't know about all of you, but when I ate cereal my serving size was based off the size of my bowl, not the nutritional facts label. So when consumers look and see "100 calories" they get a false sense of security, not realizing that they'll probably eat 4-5 servings in one sitting, but 400-500 calories doesn't look good on the front of a cereal box.

The fact that the cereal is advertised with no saturated fat illustrates that the general public is still under the illusion that saturated fat is bad. The fact that the cereal is advertised with no high fructose corn syrup illustrates that the general public is trying to avoid that particular ingredient, because they've smartened up from all the bad press on soda. I make these assumptions because companies spends a large chunk of money studying their consumers.

Now, couple this with the Low Fat/Heart Healthy craze since the 1980s, and you begin to see the issue here. The Food Pyramid, thanks to serious backing by the agricultural industry, was heavily-laden with carbs, in particular grains. For generations, we were told, "Eat a big heaping plate of mashed potatoes, just don't put butter on it, and you'll be healthy."

The low fat/heart healthy craze actually began in 1977 with the McGovern Committee; people were dropping like flies from heart disease due to years of alcohol and cigarettes, and a committee initially created to address starvation in the United States, expanded the scope of their purpose and issued nutritional guidelines (after ignoring the advice of research scientists who stated that said guidelines had no basis to support its claims) to the general public; McGovern was a vegetarian.

The American Heart Association receives money from every company that puts its logo on their products. The AMA has a monetary incentive to be scientifically dishonest, otherwise its label would become worthless.

cocoa-puffs.jpg

"Meets American Heart Association food criteria for saturated fat and cholesterol for healthy people over age 2." Nevermind the fact that saturated fat and cholesterol are good for you and excess carbohydrates can lead to heart disease.

In the 1960s, sugar companies paid off Harvard scientists to point the blame at fat for heart disease and not sugar (just google: harvard sugar companies).

In the 1990s, the CSPI campaigned for fast food chains to stop using saturated fat to fry their food, citing that saturated fat caused heart disease. Fast food chains then started using transfats to fry their food.

Off topic: because your post contained that link, my browser (chrome) wouldn't allow me to 'reply with quote/go advanced'.

[Thumper39 Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close Thumper39]

Anarchist. You're correct in saying saturated fats are not bad. That's what a lot of people don't get. But they are bad in large amounts. Amounts that most Americans consume are not good. The belief that they are bad is misreporting on them.

[ArtisticAnarchist Senior Member Member of the Month Aug 2018 Find all posts View Profile Close ArtisticAnarchist]

Anarchist. You're correct in saying saturated fats are not bad. That's what a lot of people don't get. But they are bad in large amounts. Amounts that most Americans consume are not good. The belief that they are bad is misreporting on them.

Saturated fats are not "bad in large amounts". You're operating under the misconception that saturated fats makeup the majority of calories which Americans consume (with the majority unsurprisingly being carbohydrates).

For example, dietary fat consumption has actually decreased while obesity has increased:

1-s2.0-S0749379707007398-gr1.jpg

"A Call for Higher Standards of Evidence for Dietary Guidelines"
Paul R. Marantz, MD, MPH, Elizabeth D. Bird, AB, Michael H. Al******, MD
A Call for Higher Standards of Evidence for Dietary Guidelines - ScienceDirect

The graph's source (which can be found in the above article):

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
Health United States, 2005, with chartbook on trends in the Health of Americans
National Center for Health Statistics, Hyattsville, MD (2005)

[Pegasus AdministratorPE Gym EditorPEGym Hero ☺ Admin of the Month Mar 2015 Find all posts View Profile Close Pegasus]

Saturated fats are not "bad in large amounts". You're operating under the misconception that saturated fats makeup the majority of calories which Americans consume (with the majority unsurprisingly being carbohydrates).

For example, dietary fat consumption has actually decreased while obesity has increased:

[ATTACH]94210[/ATTACH]

"A Call for Higher Standards of Evidence for Dietary Guidelines"
Paul R. Marantz, MD, MPH, Elizabeth D. Bird, AB, Michael H. Al******, MD
A Call for Higher Standards of Evidence for Dietary Guidelines - ScienceDirect

The graph's source (which can be found in the above article):

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
Health United States, 2005, with chartbook on trends in the Health of Americans
National Center for Health Statistics, Hyattsville, MD (2005)

Assuming causality is very dangerous.

[Thumper39 Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close Thumper39]

Saturated fats are not "bad in large amounts". You're operating under the misconception that saturated fats makeup the majority of calories which Americans consume (with the majority unsurprisingly being carbohydrates).

For example, dietary fat consumption has actually decreased while obesity has increased:

[ATTACH]94210[/ATTACH]

"A Call for Higher Standards of Evidence for Dietary Guidelines"
Paul R. Marantz, MD, MPH, Elizabeth D. Bird, AB, Michael H. Al******, MD
A Call for Higher Standards of Evidence for Dietary Guidelines - ScienceDirect

The graph's source (which can be found in the above article):

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
Health United States, 2005, with chartbook on trends in the Health of Americans
National Center for Health Statistics, Hyattsville, MD (2005)

You are making a fatal flaw many folks make. Remember. Correlation does not mean causation. Too much of anything is a bad thing. Hell. You can die from drinking too much water.

Nothing you said in your post refutes the information I provided. Too many sat fats with not enough protine vitamin d and what not will decrease testosterone production.

Nutrition like everything else in life is about balance.

[ArtisticAnarchist Senior Member Member of the Month Aug 2018 Find all posts View Profile Close ArtisticAnarchist]

You are making a fatal flaw many folks make. Remember. Correlation does not mean causation. Too much of anything is a bad thing. Hell. You can die from drinking too much water.

Nothing you said in your post refutes the information I provided. Too many sat fats with not enough protine vitamin d and what not will decrease testosterone production.

Nutrition like everything else in life is about balance.

Except that's not what you were saying. You said that saturated fats were bad in excess because that's what most Americans eat. Your entire statement was nothing but conjecture, and that's what I was responding to, I'm not sure why you're moving the goal posts by inserting a completely new statement into the discussion.

I'm not trying to prove causality, but there's plenty of data out there that contradicts your statement (that Americans eat dietary fat in excess).

This is what I've been responding to:

Anarchist. You're correct in saying saturated fats are not bad. That's what a lot of people don't get. But they are bad in large amounts. Amounts that most Americans consume are not good. The belief that they are bad is misreporting on them.

1-s2.0-S0749379707007398-gr4.jpg

The original topic (which is what my initial post was in response to) was discussing carbohydrates and how the myth of dietary fat being unhealthy became so prevalent in America (which I covered quite a bit in my response). The graphs I've been showing weren't for the purpose of proving causality, but to demonstrate how our carbohydrate consumption has increased and dietary fat consumption has decreased, which certainly contradicts your premise that Americans eat dietary fat in excess (nevermind the fact that you never quantified what 'excess' would be).

[Thumper39 Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close Thumper39]

Except that's not what you were saying. You said that saturated fats were bad in excess because that's what most Americans eat. Your entire statement was nothing but conjecture, and that's what I was responding to, I'm not sure why you're moving the goal posts by inserting a completely new statement into the discussion.

I'm not trying to prove causality, but there's plenty of data out there that contradicts your statement (that Americans eat dietary fat in excess).

This is what I've been responding to:


[ATTACH]94215[/ATTACH]

The original topic (which is what my initial post was in response to) was discussing carbohydrates and how the myth of dietary fat being unhealthy became so prevalent in America (which I covered quite a bit in my response). The graphs I've been showing weren't for the purpose of proving causality, but to demonstrate how our carbohydrate consumption has increased and dietary fat consumption has decreased, which certainly contradicts your premise that Americans eat dietary fat in excess (nevermind the fact that you never quantified what 'excess' would be).

I am not moving goalposts. It is in reference to what I said to you in the thread about testosterone. Call it a continuation. Eating saturated fats and colestoral heavy foods without balancing them then they become bad. At the same time if you increase the intake of other foods to balance them out without increasing what you are able to get rid of they all become bad.

Like I said. Everything in moderation what part of all this do you not get?

[Holm Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close Holm]

There are, of course, lots of mechanisms at play in the human being. But at the end of the day, the single largest factor BY FAR (it's not even close) is the # of calories you consume.

This isn't simply theory. So so many people have tested this out.

The prevalence of this simplistic school of thought might also be the reason why so many fail at weight reduction.

Sure, if you cut your daily calorie intake in half, you undoubtedly are going to lose weight. But there are other factors at play in how succesful one is going to be, when the ordeals of daily life sets in. If your body isn't tuned in to primarily burn one's sustinence, but store it instead, you are going to feel much less full and much sooner hungry again, and therefore less likely to achieve your calorie goals. That is where factors like eating routine and macronutrient composition comes into the picture.

Simply focusing on calories, and ignoring those factors, only reveals a small (but vital) part of the picture.

[TheGreatDivider Senior Member Member of the Month Dec 2015 Find all posts View Profile Close TheGreatDivider]

As I've mentioned, I've been studying nutrition for awhile. I even started writing a book, with all of the research I had found.

One chapter's title was - It's Not Rocket Science, But It Is Math.

The premise of the chapter is the function of calories in vs calories out when it comes to weight loss or gain.

I pretty much need to throw that entire chapter out.

A 1,500-calorie diet of jelly beans is not the same as a 1,500-calorie diet of lean protein, veggies and low-glycemic fruit.

I think this is where a lot of people fail in their nutritional understanding. And, I honestly think it's the government's fault in the promotion of this idea. Nutritional labeling, with their promotion of a "2,000-calorie diet" gives the general consumer the notion that that's the only number they need to worry about.

Now, couple this with the Low Fat/Heart Healthy craze since the 1980s, and you begin to see the issue here. The Food Pyramid, thanks to serious backing by the agricultural industry, was heavily-laden with carbs, in particular grains. For generations, we were told, "Eat a big heaping plate of mashed potatoes, just don't put butter on it, and you'll be healthy."

In 1972, the average wheat consumption, per person, in the US, was under 110 pounds annually. By 2000, it had increased 40%!

Low-fat and no-fat products flooded grocery stores and became a multi-billion dollar industry.

Americans were still becoming increasingly obese. We were counting calories and doing Jazzercise and step aerobics and exercising along at home with Richard Simmons and "sweatin' to his oldies"... and our society was becoming fatter and fatter.

The point is... Not all calories are the same.

And, not all carbs are the same.

Check out the article below.

Is There Such a Thing as Good Carbs?

You had me until I clicked on that "article" and saw it was an advertisement for Isagenix.

Nutrition and food science is my major. Right now I am studying food and culture which deals with why different cultures eat certain foods and have different eating patterns. If you ask me the obesity epidemic is not because we eat too many calories, or don't exercise enough, that's a symptom of the problem but not the cause itself. The problem as I see it is the attitude Americans have around food as a reward, for pleasure, and the culture that encourages overeating.

[Pegasus AdministratorPE Gym EditorPEGym Hero ☺ Admin of the Month Mar 2015 Find all posts View Profile Close Pegasus]

Ah I think americans eat too much crap both fat and sugar and need to be whipped to exercise.