Again fructose added to foods is still fine if it fits into your calories and macros for the day. Just because fructose is refined and added to things doesn't make it automatically bad.
-
Join the Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum The Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum is dedicated to no nonsense muscle and strength building. If you need advice that works, you have come to the right place. This forum focuses on building strength and muscle using the basics. You will also find that the Ausbb- Australian Bodybuilding Forum stresses encouragement and respect. Trolls and name calling are not allowed here. No matter what your personal goals are, you will be given effective advice that produces results.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Please consider registering. It takes 30 seconds, and will allow you to get the most out of the forum.
Thoughts on Artificial Sweeteners?
- Thread starter aminoz
- Start date
-
- Tags
- artificial sweeteners thoughts
Again fructose added to foods is still fine if it fits into your calories and macros for the day. Just because fructose is refined and added to things doesn't make it automatically bad.
chocchillimango
Well-known member
mmm unless you have fructose intolerance ... then it's a whole lotta bad.
Goosey
.
Can someone please explain to my satisfaction why the steady rise of obesity?
Prior to ten years ago it seems to have gone under the radar for the last twenty years.
I mean in my thirty years of exercising and "dieting" I've seen and read a lot.
What keeps coming back to me is; "you can't make chicken soup out of chicken shit."
And if someone like 0ni believes they can turn themselves into Cutler then they have their head firmly up their arse.
Now I just use those examples as an analogy, I'm not having a go at 0ni, but no diet, or workout is going to do it.
What's this got to do with artifcial sweeteners and processed food?
If you are sixty and you are unable to eat solid food and move on your own then I think you have made some poor choices at 20.
I really have no idea, I'm still piecing it altogether, am I stupid? Maybe.
Food is medicine, you got to really watch what goes in the pie hole and exercise safely, because I am now at my age seeing how it's affecting people around me.
Prior to ten years ago it seems to have gone under the radar for the last twenty years.
I mean in my thirty years of exercising and "dieting" I've seen and read a lot.
What keeps coming back to me is; "you can't make chicken soup out of chicken shit."
And if someone like 0ni believes they can turn themselves into Cutler then they have their head firmly up their arse.
Now I just use those examples as an analogy, I'm not having a go at 0ni, but no diet, or workout is going to do it.
What's this got to do with artifcial sweeteners and processed food?
If you are sixty and you are unable to eat solid food and move on your own then I think you have made some poor choices at 20.
I really have no idea, I'm still piecing it altogether, am I stupid? Maybe.
Food is medicine, you got to really watch what goes in the pie hole and exercise safely, because I am now at my age seeing how it's affecting people around me.
DREADLIFT
Member
Backed, 99% of health related problems can be fixed or alleviated with correct diet IMO. The amount of shit that people readily consume and shove down their throats is unbelievable. Even the foods that people perceive as healthy are chock full of artifical additives or lacking all the natural good stuff.
Fortified fruit juice - Its fortified because they stripped all the good stuff out of it in the first place.
Super marketed breakfast cereals - with omega's, iron, zinc, heaps of added minerals and shit, high protein cereal, zero fat (but tons of sugar)
Bread - again, same shit with cereals, fortified with a whole bunch of shit
Grain fed beef/chickens/eggs/anything - super low in omegas, higher fat content low mono/poly unsaturated, tastes like ass.
The fact that the typical western diet is 50% grains (i just made that up, but you know what i mean)
And thats not even touching on all the actual shit food people munch on daily, fizzy drinks, lollies, doughnuts, cakes, fast food takeout etc.
WIzZaMaBoB
New member
With regards to the consumption of sugar, added vitamins, minerals and fats, am I allowed to recommend a book I have recently read by David Gillespie?
While it is more so directed at the mainstream and average adult it does cover a lot of very interesting topics regarding how fructose and polyunsaturated fats metabolize in the body and their associated health effects. There is definitely more to understand than the first law of thermodynamics, although this is the best place to start IMO.
While it is more so directed at the mainstream and average adult it does cover a lot of very interesting topics regarding how fructose and polyunsaturated fats metabolize in the body and their associated health effects. There is definitely more to understand than the first law of thermodynamics, although this is the best place to start IMO.
Last edited by a moderator:
You need more than a book by David Gillespie to prove your claim. His claims go against much of the evidence and are not backed up by the science.
You a cane farmer dude?
From memory his claims are based on his reading of lots of science. You can always find a study to refute another study so nothing is backed up by 'the science'.
Take a fatty, hide their sugar, check them in 3 months. There's your science. Weight will improve, blood lipids will improve, insulin sensitivity will improve, arteries will improve.
A couple of times above you have referred to cals in vs cals out and I agree with that. The interesting part is that the body has mechanisms to measure cals from fat, protein and glucose so it is able to control their consumption. No such mechanism exists for fructose and in the absence of fibre you can consume a shitload of it. Hence the cals in part of the equation becomes difficult to regulate without a calculator.
You a cane farmer dude?
From memory his claims are based on his reading of lots of science. You can always find a study to refute another study so nothing is backed up by 'the science'.
Take a fatty, hide their sugar, check them in 3 months. There's your science. Weight will improve, blood lipids will improve, insulin sensitivity will improve, arteries will improve.
A couple of times above you have referred to cals in vs cals out and I agree with that. The interesting part is that the body has mechanisms to measure cals from fat, protein and glucose so it is able to control their consumption. No such mechanism exists for fructose and in the absence of fibre you can consume a shitload of it. Hence the cals in part of the equation becomes difficult to regulate without a calculator.
No I just don't listen to every quack with a gimmick trying to sell books.
Yes this will just restrict calories. Doesn't prove sugar is the problem.
WIzZaMaBoB
New member
I never claimed anything?
I don't agree with many points in the book, eg. "exercise will not help you lose weight" To me this is a ridiculous premise, however there are many interesting points raised that do deserve further scrutiny, which are backed up by a whole chapter of references. People, and no one in particular, shouldn't be scared at exploring new nutritional claims and studies just because they currently don't do it themselves, it's how we learn.
Do a bit of reading, his claims are shut down by many other people who acutally study nutrition, saying he has got the science wrong. Sure he may has references but have you checked them? He is a laywer isn't he, it's is possible he has stuffed up in a field out of his depth.
Don't get me wrong too much fructose will be bad but too much of anything is bad. Fructose is just the current scape goat for obesity. First is was fat then carbs and sugar and now fructose. You have to look at the overall diet and not just blame one thing for all our obesity problems.
I agree. Sugar is not the problem. Overall calorie intake is what matters.
WIzZaMaBoB
New member
Agree with all those comments.
I just want to understand how bad, as it is the dominate ingredient in just about everything processed.
Dominate ingredient in just about everything processed. That's a bit of an overstatement.
strong enough?
Member
Anyway...back to artificial sweeteners.
Everyone talks about aspartame. I've got no problem with the chemical per se. My concern is that for me at least they are like a sugar-addiction enabler.
I have an occasional Coke Zero or before I know it I'm having it for lunch every day and craving sweet foods. Its not the caffeine, because I'm already a coffee addict.
In my experience, it has the same effect on the brain as natural sugars in terms of its addictiveness and promoting sugar cravings.
Everyone talks about aspartame. I've got no problem with the chemical per se. My concern is that for me at least they are like a sugar-addiction enabler.
I have an occasional Coke Zero or before I know it I'm having it for lunch every day and craving sweet foods. Its not the caffeine, because I'm already a coffee addict.
In my experience, it has the same effect on the brain as natural sugars in terms of its addictiveness and promoting sugar cravings.
Rambodian
No I'm not cambodian
That's interesting as I too have a similar experiance when I drink to much coke zero or Pepsi max, I have to stop myself from having to much or I cut loose on all sorts of sweets lol.
That's going to be a personal thing. I find having a Pepsi Max kills my sweet cravings.
