Earlier quoted context omitted.
Merely tasting sweetness causes an anticipatory rise in insulin which shuts down fat metabolism. Best to go cold turkey, unfortunately. You can control cravings, however, by raising your fat intake to the point where you're too full to find eating more appetizing. You will still lose weight like this on a ketogenic diet.
It makes you wonder if artificial sweeteners can also do this. Has that been studied?
A gut-derived hormone suppresses sugar appetite/regulates food choice Drosophila
151–160 of 162 posts
Re: A gut-derived hormone suppresses sugar appetite/regulates food choice Drosophila
#152Earlier quoted context omitted.
Advice from a T2 Diabetic and regular Keto dieter. If you have never given up sugar before, it will take at least 6-8 weeks of non-use before the cravings go away. These will be some of the hardest weeks too. 1) everything has sugar in it, and you have to absolutely avoid it, not just sweets, fruits, juices, I'd even tell you diet drinks and artificial sweeteners too. That means no ketchup, sauces, breads, and most p…
I so want to do this, but I have such a sweet tooth I don’t think I can succeed. I can go a few days without sweets but then the urge is just overwhelming. I want to try weaning, by just eating fruit instead of processed treats. Will that have any effect at all, make it harder overall, or is the only way to just cut sugar completely?
To get the benefits of keto, you have to get the body adapted to burning fat. Depending on the body, this can take a week or so. All those cravings are the body crying out for a fix of easy sugar, because it really doesn't want to have to switch over and burn fat for fuel as its harder for it to do.
If you just had sugar every 3rd day, you're body would never adjust.
Re: A gut-derived hormone suppresses sugar appetite/regulates food choice Drosophila
#153Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder if the satiated feeling isn't from volume but from some nutrient showing up in blood or in intestinal detectors for something signaled as in short supply.
I think the satiated feeling is from your body having enough fat. Rich, heavy meals will trigger it. Carbs cause the opposite, they trigger the need to eat more (carbs).
Re: A gut-derived hormone suppresses sugar appetite/regulates food choice Drosophila
#154People weren't fat 100 years ago so what happened? We didn't just evolve to have lower self control. Something was introduced in the food/water supply that causes obesity, particularly high appetite. What can it be? HFCS? Antibiotics? PFAS? Canola oil? Some mystery chemical? The CICO cult are a hindrance to society, obviously everyone would count calories if it didn't make them feel like they're dying. The fact is we…
Re: A gut-derived hormone suppresses sugar appetite/regulates food choice Drosophila
#155Earlier quoted context omitted.
> CICO is still law. Calories are a measure chemical energy, not mass. Our digestive systems don't get anywhere near e=mc^2 in their efficiency. The conservation law is MIMO; calories are way more complicated. For example, people who extol CICO rarely take into account the fact that poop has a variable amount of chemical energy, which depends on a huge variety of factors including gut flora, hydration and fiber intak…
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_thermodynamics > The laws of thermodynamics define a group of physical quantities, such as temperature, energy, and entropy, that characterize thermodynamic systems in thermodynamic equilibrium. If you eat 2000 calories of food and burn 2000 calories (taking into account inefficiencies in the metabolic processes our bodies undertake to convert molecules to other molecules), the…
Re: A gut-derived hormone suppresses sugar appetite/regulates food choice Drosophila
#156I've been hitting the gym for a few months now, and one thing that completely blew my mind was the existence of hypercalorics. Imagine that, not being able to eat a lot (specially carbs) and having to resort to these solutions. Point being, people like to spew out CICO as if fat people just don't understand thermodynamics. What I've found is that matters is appetite: some people just get full way faster than others.…
> What I've found is that matters is appetite: some people just get full way faster than others. This is a half truth. If you cut down portion size your stomach will shrink over time. I eat a lot less before feeling full now, and I only changed my life a year ago. It's also important that you eat stuff that makes you feel full, fibers and greens. Changing diet also changed my taste, so I crave more healthy things now…
That too is a half truth. It's not just that the stomach's available volume decreases that a feeling of appetite is satiated. Smaller portions of rich foods can do this, sometimes. Eating slower can but only if the right foods are consumed to help trigger the biochemical response (not vanishing calories). There is actually a feedback mechanism and it's not as cut and dry as fill the space = I'm done.
I recognize I've only given a high level talking point and I apologize that I can't recant the physiology and chemical pathways that perform this function. Maybe someone in the medical field can chime and and fill the gaps we're both creating? I happen to be the skinny one in a very obese family and have probably spent too much time time to figure this out.
Re: A gut-derived hormone suppresses sugar appetite/regulates food choice Drosophila
#157I've been hitting the gym for a few months now, and one thing that completely blew my mind was the existence of hypercalorics. Imagine that, not being able to eat a lot (specially carbs) and having to resort to these solutions. Point being, people like to spew out CICO as if fat people just don't understand thermodynamics. What I've found is that matters is appetite: some people just get full way faster than others.…
It wasn't until high school that the doctors detected and diagnosed the ulcers, and my mom felt horribly bad because I'd always complained about my stomach pain and that I was hungry, and she asked if this is what I had always felt.
Unfortunately, the doctors didn't actually cure the ulcers. They came back. But at least now we know what causes them, and I can hopefully get proper treatment for them, once I get other things like my blood pressure and kidney stones dealt with.
But I am convinced that ulcers were at least a major contributor in my developing diabetes and obesity.
I wonder how many other people who are overweight have also had to deal with ulcers, but may not have realized what was causing that pain, or why it went away with food?
Re: A gut-derived hormone suppresses sugar appetite/regulates food choice Drosophila
#158Earlier quoted context omitted.
Appetite differences are almost certainly the primary factor in why some people get heavy and others don't, but that isn't inconsistent with CICO at all.
It’s not inconsistent (obviously, because thermodynamics), but it does make CICO a pretty useless contribution to the conversation. Not the silver bullet that proponents position it as. Successful dieting is about managing the sensation of hunger. That’s it.
All of these are valid approaches and can work! But you have to first know that CICO is what matters, in order to appreciate your (very correct) statement that "Successful dieting is about managing the sensation of hunger."
If someone thinks that IF works regardless of CICO, they're going to get it wrong. I know, I was there many years ago before starting to count calories and losing a lot of weight. (Though counting calories works for me, I don't necessarily advocate it for everyone!)
One other small point: While managing the sensation of hunger is a big part of it, other people "overeat" for other reasons. E.g. I have far less issues with hunger, than I have with just liking novelty in foods - I like to try a lot of different things, and lately I've started to cook a lot. That is a bigger source of problems for my dieting goals than feeling hungry, personally. Other people eat for stress, or to stay awake, etc. Hunger is a big part of the equation, but not the only part.
Re: A gut-derived hormone suppresses sugar appetite/regulates food choice Drosophila
#159I've been hitting the gym for a few months now, and one thing that completely blew my mind was the existence of hypercalorics. Imagine that, not being able to eat a lot (specially carbs) and having to resort to these solutions. Point being, people like to spew out CICO as if fat people just don't understand thermodynamics. What I've found is that matters is appetite: some people just get full way faster than others.…
That is certainly what some people do, and they're wrong.
But CICO as a model is incredibly important. Mostly because a lot of people don't actually believe it! For years, I had the vague sense that I wanted to lose a bit of weight (for context, I wasn't obese, just a bit overweight.) And for years, my kind of underlying assumption was that I'd have to eat completely differently, mostly have to cut out carbs, etc.
Today, people talk about all sorts of different diets - Intermittent fasting, or Keto, low-carb in general, etc. Those are all legit! They all can work for some people. But understanding that the way they work is by making you consume less calories (and most likely making you less hungry) is a critical part of their success, IMO. Otherwise you'll do as I did- I started doing IF, lost a few kilo, then get used to consuming all the sweets I otherwise would've had late at night, but right before my IF window closed. Not helpful in the slightest, and just made my day less flexible.
Re: A gut-derived hormone suppresses sugar appetite/regulates food choice Drosophila
#160I read a lot of good things about intermittent fasting. Is there a good canonical resource if I want to try it? Note that I am lifting weighs 3 times per week. Is IF still a good idea...? I don't feel confident that this is something that I can lift with my GP, as it is not part of their standard set of guidelines (?)
So here's my current summary of the evidence:
1. Obviously, everything depends on what your goals are.
2. Since you're lifting weights, I assume your goal is better body composition, which in most cases means losing fat and gaining muscle.
3. The main thing you need to do to lose fat is be on a caloric deficit. In order to lose mostly fat and not much muscle, you should be on the smallest caloric deficit you can reasonably manage, -300 calories per day is perfect. (Less than that and you can't really measure it accurately enough to see that you're actually losing fat.)
4. The other thing you need to do to not lose muscle is eat enough protein. Around 0.8 grams for each pound of body weight is probably good enough, though going up to 1 gram per pound is totally safe and makes sure you aren't getting too little protein.
5. How to achieve a caloric deficit mostly depends on what's easiest/funnest/best for you. Intermittent Fasting is very popular, because it makes it easy for many people to get a caloric deficit.
6. I personally don't love IF because it doesn't fit in with my life schedule, and personally prefer counting calories explicitly cause it's the most accurate and gives me the feeling of the most control, which I like. That said, it's a lot of work and isn't for everyone.
7. IF is not a panacea by any means. If you are doing IF but not actually getting a caloric deficit, it won't help you lose weight.
8. As far as I can tell, there are no known benefits to IF, health-wise. There's a lot of claimed benefits, but nothing actually proven. (And people claim health benefits for a lot of other things as well.) The only thing it's known to be good for is that a lot of people really like it as a way of managing calories/hunger. And there's plenty of anecdotal evidence that it actually helps for that - a lot of people really do find it easier to be on IF when they're dieting. If you're curious, totally worth just giving it a shot.
9. In terms of IF and weightlifting - technically speaking, a lot of studies have shown that it's best to get 4-5 protein feedings in a day, relatively spread out. So it's better to have 4 meals a day of protein than 2. As far as I can tell, this is a real effect, but it's not an enormous one. You're "leaving some gains on the table" if you do IF, but if it helps you reach a desired bodyweight, that's probably worth it. Especially since, after dieting down, you can start a bulking round of having a caloric surplus in order to actually gain weight and muscle.