• Keep up to date with Ausbb via Twitter and Facebook. Please add us!
  • Join the Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

    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.

    Please consider registering. It takes 30 seconds, and will allow you to get the most out of the forum.

Fed up (2014) thoughts?

I'm watch out at home.
What are your thoughts [MENTION=17683]bronx.system[/MENTION]; ?
 
I dont know enough about nutrition to really comment. They kept playing down how important cal in vs cal out is which seems wrong. I felt pretty bad for the kids especially the fat African American kid (is it offensive to say black kid?) he is likely to die early because his mum thinks dieting means buying reduced fat pizza pockets /=. Sad how these kids will have tough lifes because their parents have nfi how to feed them. Sure they have little self control and just want chocolate but their kids so i blame the parents.

Doctors talk about how consuming sugar without fiber is bad because fiber slows absorption down. i didnt know that.

fwiw i think its worth watching.
 
Last edited:
I watched this and cringed at the way the fast food chains have gotten a foot hold in the schools.

The basic message of sugar leading to inflammation in the system seems to be the latest focus in the studies Ive been looking at .

The extra load of calories from the sugar to make up for the low fat diet foods is creating very energy dense foods and could be also related to all sorts of immune system responses ,not good at all .
 
[h=1]The effect of artificial sweetener on insulin secretion. 1. The effect of acesulfame K on insulin secretion in the rat (studies in vivo).[/h]Liang Y, Steinbach G, Maier V, Pfeiffer EF.
[h=3]Abstract[/h]Acesulfame K is an artificial sweetener which has been used in the food industry for some years. As yet no metabolic effects have been reported. It was reported that the sweetener can induce a cephalic phase of insulin secretion. To analyse the mechanism of this phenomenon, we studied the effect of Acesulfame K on insulin secretion in vivo. Male Wistar rats, weighing 250-300 g were fasted overnight and anaesthetized with phenobarbital. A silicon catheter was inserted into the right cervical vein for injection of test substances and for obtaining blood samples. In some experiments, another catheter was inserted into the left cervical vein for continuous infusion. Blood samples were drawn at 0, 5, 10, 15, 30 and 60 min after injection, and at -10, 0, 10, 20, 30, 40, 60, 80, 100 and 120 min after the infusion started. Injection of Acesulfame K (150 mg/kg body weight) increased the plasma insulin concentration at 5 min from 27.3 +/- 3.0 microU/ml to 58.6 +/- 4.2 microU/ml without any significant change in the blood glucose. Infusion of Acesulfame K (20 mg/kg body weight/min) for one hour maintained the insulin concentration at a high level (about 85-100 microU/ml) during this period, and at the same time blood glucose was gradually reduced from 103.0 +/- 7.3 to 72.0 +/- 7.2 mg/dl. When using different amounts of Acesulfame K, the insulin secretion was stimulated in a dose-dependent fashion. The effect of Acesulfame K on insulin secretion was similar to that observed by injecting or infusing the same doses of glucose (150 mg/kg) body weight for injection and 20 mg/kg body weight/min for infusion), except that no hyperglycemia was observed with Acesulfame K.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)


PMID: 2887500 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
 
I have heard that from doctors before, that your brain is tricked into thinking you're eating something sweet and it will spike insulin to compensate. But as long as you're not binging after a diet soda, I still think it's far better than the equivalent sugar filled drink. For example, a 500ml energy drink or soft drink is about 400 calories, nearly all from carbs/sugar. The sugar free alternative is about 20 calories. 20x less. I would much rather use up those calories with something nice to eat.
 
agreed.

I personally think the "eat more because you had a diet coke" thing is an excuse. (currently drink aspartame filled coffee, not even scared) :D
 
I was drinking sugar free energy drinks regularly for the last 6 weeks of the Max's challenge. Lost more weight during that period than any other time.
 
steveP said:
I was drinking sugar free energy drinks regularly for the last 6 weeks of the Max's challenge. Lost more weight during that period than any other time.
Click to expand...

Devil's advocate - if artificial sweeteners can produce an insulin response maybe that means insulin's not the bogey one might think when it comes to fat loss.....:eek:
 
Repacked said:
Devil's advocate - if artificial sweeteners can produce an insulin response maybe that means insulin's not the bogey one might think when it comes to fat loss.....:eek:
Click to expand...

The problems with diets and fat loss, is that they all combine and merge the topics of eating less and eating habits. Where they are completely different issues and need to be treated as so.

So many fad diets want you to eat this or that because they claim it will "fill you up for longer". So what you're eating isn't anything magical and could be replaced with anything with similar macros, as long as you don't snack or eat other things after. Many "healthy" foods claim this, where looking at the actual food, it's nothing special.

So as long as you can control your cravings and stick to your macros/calories, a lot of these health claims/diets have no real benefit at all.

The problem with insulin spiking/sensitivity or even high/low GI food is the hunger affect it has on your body. Say you eat 200 calories of brown rice, you're probably going to be full for the next few hours and not really crave anything. 200 calories of a food high in sugar is little in volume, spikes insulin and you'll crave more of it pretty soon after. As long as you ignore the cravings, you'll be fine.
 
Last edited:
Its all genetics, not sugar. With some people, they are born with much bigger bones than others, which makes them bigger.

This is completely true cos I read it on the interwebs.

h0MXURM.jpg
 
bronx.system said:
(is it offensive to say black kid?)
Click to expand...
No.

When I got to my leanest (only about 10% to be fair) I was drinking a buttload of coke zero.
Many lulz were had at chubby kunce sharing articles coming out at the time saying all the stuff about tricking your brain and also making it more likely that you will eat sweet stuff.

It's called willpower dipshit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top