Posted on 07/20/2013 12:28:18 PM PDT by neverdem
I have not eaten more than 20 - 30 g of carbs in a singe day in many years. I'm a bit of a gym rat, so my energy output is extreme - lack of carbs has never been an issue for me. My A1C, LDL, HDL, and every other marker is at exceptional levels. I'm convinced that sugar, in any form is toxic and feeds cancer cells. I don't miss sugar, I certainly don't miss carbs and I feel better than I have in 30 years - I'm in better physical shape as well.
FReepmail me if you want on or off the diabetes ping list.
what is always “bad” is not so much “what” we consume, but simply “excess” - “excess” anything
as the old saying goes, “all things in moderation accepted”
I agree with you. The issue is not what type of sugar we ingest, it is one of total carbs, and especially the refined easily digestible carbs. My wife and I eat no whites carbs, no wheat and very few total carbs per day. All of our metabolic markers are excellent (blood sugar, HDL and triglycerides).
We eat a high-fat diet with moderate protein. The notion that cells need free glucose to burn is false. Most cells do very well burning fat. Our fats are animal fat, olive oil, coconut oil and high oleic safflower oil. We eat as much as we want. We do not count calories. My weight is now as it was in college.
Before we began our low-carb lifestyle, I was beset with multiple allergies. I was taking allergy shots, steroids and serial antihistamines. Nothing seemed to work. On the new diet, the allergies vanished. It seemed like a miracle until I began to understand the relation between carbs, insulin and inflammation in the body. No metabolic diseases for us.
Same here. And I bet you also look young for age especially compared to you peers. I look 15 to 20 years younger (depending on the light—lol. I also stay out of the sun and use sunscreen.) Congrats on the commitment!!
People have no idea how they can completely overhaul their bodies and their lives making these changes.
I am 47.
I have started ignoring all advise because it changes so often. The entire country was convinced that there was a huge problem with "fat", and that "fat" was making us fat. Now, we have an obesity epidemic. I believe Dr. Atkins and Gary Taubes probably have it right, it is not the fat, it is the carbs (sugar). Embrace the fat, it makes foods delicious (as I am sitting here with the aroma of my slow cooker which is filled with (fatty) short ribs, basted in a red wine/balsamic vinegar sauce --- and garlic, got to have garlic. Anyway, the meat is so delicious that I have no yen for a sweet finish. I am completely satisfied. Taking away the fat took away the flavor. So, we went for sweets.
The Govt. doesn't know what the hell it is doing. Stop letting it and the media make us hysterical over everything. It is just a way for them to have more control over us.
Society lost moderation a long time ago.
And you are going to live until you die just like them.
EAT LESS. We were designed to be hungry most of the time.
You sya that because you grew up unaware of how your food was produced. While beef feedlots may predate caged poultry, both have been around much longer than you realize, and much longer than the oldest Freeper has been alive.
SUGAR is a problem, HFCS is only slightly worse, but since HFCS have demonized, Sugar is being left off the hook, which is exactly my concern. Get off of your addiction to Sugar in general, and you will reap even greater rewards.
Nah... I'll be MUCH happier while I live.
/johnny
I get your point. Mine is that foods pre-sweetened with HFCS just don’t digest well. I don’t eat any pre-sweetened foods anymore. I have just four teaspoons of granulated cane sugar every day...two in my cereal and two in a cup of tea. I eat pure foods, no dairy fat, no trans fats. For the first time in my life, my weight is what it should be and I’m never hungry. Also, I walk a lot instead of gimmicky gym and exercise routines.
What, exactly, do you think our cells use for energy if not sugar? Gasoline?
Fat. most of them, most of the time, or byproducts of fat metabolism like ketones.
Remember all that stuff you learned in exercise class about your "fat burning zone"? How as you increased the intensity of your exercise you moved from aerobic to anaerobic energy pathways? How at low to moderate energy expenditures you were burning mostly fat, and only at higher energy expenditures you start burning sugar?
Burning fat is aerobic, burning sugar is anaerobic.
You know that. And if you'd thought about it a bit, you'd have realized that most of the time, you're burning fat, rather than sugar.
There are a few cell types that primarily burn glucose, the most significant of which are red blood cells. Blood cells exist to deliver oxygen, and if they burned fat for fuel they'd need to use the oxygen they are trying to deliver. So they, and a few other specialized cell types, burn sugar.
The rest of the body burns fat, except during periods of intense exercise, or immediately after meals while sugar is rushing into the bloodstream. If you have a healthy metabolism, your blood sugar levels are back to normal within an hour of completing the meal, and your body is back to burning fat for energy.
Of course, if you've been eating too many carbs, too often, and too close together, you've likely spent so much time burning sugar that you've down-regulated your fat metabolism. And if that's the case, you're probably insulin resistant. Which means that two hours after every meal you're tired, irritable, and starving for more carbs. Mainly because your insulin levels are going too high, and as a result your body doesn't easily switch over into fat burning mode after the sugar bolus has been dealt with - leaving your cells with no source of energy except for another Snickers bar.
Burning sugar for more than a couple of hours a day isn't normal, and it isn't healthy. It is, though, unfortunately common - and it's the primary reason so many people are so sick.
Is Sugar Really Toxic?
Try living without it.
Oops you can't.
The body requires sugar in one form or another for energy.
Therefore the question is stupid.
Actually, the comment is rather stupid. There is no dietary requirement for sugar, or for carbohydrates in any form. There are essential vitamins and minerals. There are essential amino acids. There are essential fatty acids. There are no essential carbohydrates.
More than that, the minimal required level of dietary carbohydrates, in all forms, is zero. Many people have not only survived, but have thrived, on diets with zero dietary carbohydrates.
There are only a few types of cells in the body that require glucose, the total demand of those cells is quite moderate - and the body is quite capable of meeting that demand by creating its own glucose from protein and fat.
I'll say it again - there is no requirement for dietary carbohydrates in humans.
C6H12O6 + 6O2 --> 6CO2 + 6H2O + ~38 ATP.
Looks aerobic to me.
/johnny
Everything ingested turns into sugar.
Life is fatal.
And I’m sold out of flagpoles.
Incorrect.
The brain is one big glucose sucking machine.
You starve it and your intelligence will drop.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.