71–80 of 248 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
it all comes back to calories in vs calories out. 12 cans of Coke a day = healthy diet?
It was never argued that 12 cans of Coke a day is healthy. It was simply argued that body weight gain/loss is governed by calories in vs calories out. These are two entirely separate statements.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Precisely. Experiment: eat 500 calories of sugar (ice cream, soda, candy). Wait 15-20 minutes, how hungry are you? Now, eat 500 calories of fat (heavy cream, bacon, pork belly, etc). Wait 15-20 minutes, how hungry are you? I've done this experiment a few times now, and without fail, I crave more food after the sugar and can't eat another bite after the fat.
I don't think the idea that junk food is bad for you is surprising to anyone, even if Lustig paints it as a revelation. Have you tried 500 calories worth of apples? The closer people move to actual food and sanity, the further I feel we'll move away from obesity. Rehashed sensationalism helps few other than diet gurus and their brand.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Precisely. Experiment: eat 500 calories of sugar (ice cream, soda, candy). Wait 15-20 minutes, how hungry are you? Now, eat 500 calories of fat (heavy cream, bacon, pork belly, etc). Wait 15-20 minutes, how hungry are you? I've done this experiment a few times now, and without fail, I crave more food after the sugar and can't eat another bite after the fat.
I can confirm that from my own experience. I lost 20kg in 6 months. Yes I restricted my calorie intake. But how I did that? By controlling my appetite with avoiding carbs especially sugar. Ketogenic diet is powerful tool for restricting calorie intake.
Lustig could no doubt write some great posts here about growth hacking and selling your product, but if there's one thing he's proven about nutrition, it's that he's no one to be taken seriously when talking about it. One taste of what Joe Public doesn't see in his unintended hyperbole is here: http://sweetenerstudies.com/sites/default/files/resources/fi... Blaming sugar for everything is no better than what the fat-…
What exactly is self-parodying about a "keto-adapted" lifestyle? Rice and bananas cause some of the same effects of sugar on the body. Some people can tolerate this and others can't.
It's not as simple as "sugar is poison". Some form of "sugar" is in virtually everything we eat. It is unavoidable. Just stick to the rule of "Eat food, not too much, mostly plants" and quit screaming about sugar.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think the idea that junk food is bad for you is surprising to anyone, even if Lustig paints it as a revelation. Have you tried 500 calories worth of apples? The closer people move to actual food and sanity, the further I feel we'll move away from obesity. Rehashed sensationalism helps few other than diet gurus and their brand.
How about 500 calories worth of 100% natural apple juice (about 4.5 cups) Try it. Drink it and come back in 15-20 minutes and let me know. Then try 11 slices of pan fried bacon (43 cal/slice according to google) and then tell me how hungry you are in 15-20 minutes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hey man, calories-in, calories-out! Calorie-is-a-calorie! Sugar is fine! All in moderation! Heroin is fine, all in moderation!
Heroin is fine, all in moderation! In fact, numerous studies have found exactly this.
I'm getting sick of this ignorant sugar alarmism. Sugar is not the culprit behind all the diseases listed in the article. Obesity is [5] [6]. Unless of course you're talking about cavities. Then not brushing your teeth is the culprit. The reason sugar gets such a bad rep is that high-sugar foods tend to be less-filling and lead to overeating [1]. Stay at a healthy weight by controlling caloric consumption [2]. The ar…
As they say: "The dose makes the poison". Stating that sugar is toxic, as Lustig and others do, (see his talk on YouTube or http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/17/magazine/mag-17Sugar-t.htm... ) to me does not make much sense in fighting against the super high levels of consumption: When you argue a position that's too far removed from most people's accepted positions, they tend to tune you out. Note that high-fructose co…
No. Lustig explains that fructose is toxic, detailing its metabolic pathway.
A better option would be to single HFCS out and fight against its use.
Exactly. Just as Lustig and others have clearly, exhaustively, definitively, pointed out, ad nauseam.
If Yudkin's results were so groundbreaking and well backed up, why was he kind of shut off from the academic community.
As the article clearly explains, Yudkin had the data, but not the explanation. e.g. 3 of the 4 hormones needed to explain what was happening hadn't been discovered yet.