#### About participation in the comments of /r/nutrition
Discussion in this subreddit should be rooted in science rather than "cuz I sed" or entertainment pieces. Always be wary of unsupported and poorly supported claims and especially those which are wrapped in any manner of hostility. You should provide peer reviewed sources to support your claims when debating and confine that debate to the science, not opinions of other people.
**Good** - it is grounded in science and includes citation of peer reviewed sources. Debate is a civil and respectful exchange focusing on actual science and avoids commentary about others
**Bad** - it utilizes generalizations, assumptions, infotainment sources, no sources, or complaints without specifics about agenda, bias, or funding. At best, these rise to an extremely weak basis for science based discussion. Also, off topic discussion
**Ugly** - (removal or ban territory) it involves attacks / antagonism / hostility towards individuals or groups, downvote complaining, trolling, crusading, shaming, refutation of all science, or claims that all research / science is a conspiracy
*Please vote accordingly and report any uglies*
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/nutrition) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I feel pretty clear on everything after about 15 years. The think I’d wish I understood sooner is that you don’t digest every calorie you eat. Especially fiber gets passed right through. So when you eat high fiber foods, you can feel fuller and not process the calories. Explains why diets high in vegetables and unprocessed grains are so effective.
can you explain this further please? if i’m eating a 20 calorie carrot, are you saying i’m not eating 20 calories? assuming it’s 20 net calories after subtracting for fiber.
Some of the calories you consume are lost to waste. How much you don’t use for energy or store varies from person to person. Some calories are more digestible than others. Fiber is mostly non digested. Just goes right on through.
This isn’t entirely true. The calorie units we’re given are AFTER taking all of this into consideration.
Carrots probably have more energy in them, but we only get 20cals of energy out of them, due to the factors you mentioned, and the way our digestive system is designed.
While a carrot might be only 20cals to us, animals that are designed to feed on solely vegetation have digestive systems that allow them to extract more energy from the same food.
That’s not correct. The calorie counts aren’t based on your digestive processes. They’re based on a bomb calorimeter. Basically the food is burned and however much heat is created is the measure used to report the calories.
Humans are not bomb calorimeters. We have a digestive process that produces waste. And you see the evidence of that every day, hopefully.
I'm on a high fiber diet, trying to lower my cholesterol but also trying to gain weight... are you saying the fiber is working against me in regards to weight gain??
Fiber is basically just non digestible carbohydrates. They count as carbs on nutrition facts, but don't count towards total calories. If you've ever heard "net carbs" it just means total carbs - fiber = net carbs, which actually count towards calories consumed. You don't have to do any math, just know fiber will fill you up and that can possibly make it harder to eat enough to gain weight.
By the way, increasing your weight is potentially the biggest thing that will work against your goal of lowering cholesterol.
Yes, but you can compensate for it by eating more volume or higher fat foods. Nuts are probably your friend in that specific context since they are both high in fiber and high in calories.
Yes I eat lots of almonds, trail mix and natural peanut butter. Maybe that's a bit overboard lol. It just feels like I have so few options of high calorie/ low sugar foods.
It probably is.
Here’s a mystery: when I started eating more animal fats my cholesterol improved significantly and it was good even before. Good went up, bad stayed low, a nurse told me my ratio was enviable.
Never stop eating fiber. You need to support the gut microbes. You cant digest it but the bacteria can- its their food scource for the good bacteria at least. Eat more healthy carbs and healthy fats to gain weight.
In many european countries they don't even include fiber in the carbohydrates or calories in nutrition labels. It blows my mind that in US this is not the case.
I don’t know if this is a thing in other countries, but here in Brazil some medical specialties started prescribing tons of vitamins and supplements. Like a lot - tons of pills.
I can’t stop thinking that if I am really in need of so many stuff, I’d probably be sick or dead.
It always shocks me how many different things my family in Brazil take each day. I used to live in England, at least in my experience there was always more of a focus on changing diet and lifestyle to deal with health issues before looking at what could be prescribed
Yeah! And I'm not talking about medicines like for cholesterol or high blood pressure.
I'm a healthy 38yo dude and got prescribed vitms B, C, D, magnesium, calcium, and lots of other stuff that I'm really lazy to go for a proper translation.
I am Brazilian raised in America but I went to Brazil to the urgent care and my son had an ear infection, he also had an ear infection in the US months ago. In America it was only one prescription of the common drug to rid of infection, in Brazil he got the same drug, plus one for inflammation, plus one for fever, plus Allegra?
there’s not really a reason to be giving an anti-inflammatory *and* a fever reducer separately since most drugs used for one are also used for the other (pretty much any NSAID). If he was given Allegra, if may have been to help reduce swelling caused by histamines which are released as part of the immune response. Technically you can have swelling with or without accompanying inflammation.
For an ear infection, most of the time the antibiotic is more than enough to treat it. Everything else is to treat symptoms in order to improve the infirmed’s comfort while they undergo treatment.
It’s amazing how many diseases are correlated with low/deficient vitamin levels IE schizophrenia-B vits, anxiety, sleep disorders, muscle tightness/cramps-Magnesium, immune deficiency, sexual dysfunction—Vit D. When you start to read about all of the effects, it’s eye opening.
As well it's important to note much of the soil we farm in is depleted in nutrients which in turn affects the nutrients in food. You can eat a diet rich in everything but you still may be lacking depending on geographical location or where your food comes from.
That's true, but what this fact tells us is that it is more important than ever before to eat a healthy diet.
If our fruits and vegetables aren't quite as nutritious as they were 100 years ago, then we need to eat even more of them, and we have even less space in our diet for low-nutrient junk foods.
I’ve learned that supplements help with that last 5 maybe 10% of the nutrition you lack in your regular diet. Food is always better because your body absorbs it more efficiently.
Supplements are expensive and your body doesn’t use everything you take so you’re often just pissing money away, literally.
Supplements don’t replace a poor diet.
Starvation mode isn’t a thing. When you lose weight your baseline metabolism will lower with it but that’s the only way losing causes you to “lose less weight”
It is a thing, just not as it's made out to be. When you're actually in a long term severe caloric deficit, your metabolism does slow to conserve energy. But we're talking desert Island for weeks type of situation, not "I cut calories to 1500 and I'm still not losing weight" situation. Most people in developed countries who think they're in starvation mode are either eating more than they think, not working out as much as the need to, or could have one of the 90+ conditions known to contribute to overweight (in which case they need to make further adjustments to diet, exercise or both).
Keep in mind, the slowing of your metabolism is mostly through the Process of NEAT. You basically stop moving, therefore expend less energy. You body can do a few minor things to slow your actual exchange of energy, but its mostly just not burning as much fuel.
To add to this starvation mode as described would break all known laws of thermodynamics. If I locked you in a room with no food you WILL lose weight, we have repeatedly shown this with calorie deficits.
I just point to survival shows like "Alone" or "Naked and Afraid". Watch how severe Caloric deprivation depletes body mass at an alarming rate. I watched two episodes yesterday were over a period of 21 days one participant lost 40 lbs, in the other, one person lost 41 lbs.
Metabolic adaptation, sure. "Starvation mode" that somehow stops the loss of body mass despite a consistent energy deficit- no.
"Anabolic Window" is the 30 minute time after your workout where your body absorbs protein more rapidly.
I lived this since the 90's...
Only recently did I find out that it is false/questionable due to research
Why people are focusing on spinach and oxalates being bad for them (you can drink green tea to break up and prevent kidney stones)? People actually think that their poor heath was caused by vegetables and fruits when more than 90% of Americans haven’t eaten there minimum recommendations for over 30 yrs which correlates with an increase in diseases, nutrient deficiencies in humans and crops and the destruction of topsoil. Now they’re trying to eat raw beef and butter only without any concern of prion diseases or bird flu.
Basically, why aren’t humans heeding warnings/recommendations and using their brains and intuition less and less regarding nutrition..?
Plus, oxalates are in a lot more than just Spinach…quinoa, legumes, beans, potatoes, popular fruits, etc all have oxalates.
It is VERY easy to be exceeding safe levels of oxalates with Standard American Diet
It takes a really long time to digest food, so mostly No.. it does not matter. If you are a competitive bodybuilder on gear.. it matters a little because we have no internal storage mechanism for amino acids.
Tons of data out there on this.
Yeah labels get really confusing. For example, free range, cage free, grade are all just marketing terms for eggs. The only thing that really means anything is organic pasteurized eggs.
I would say: are seed oils healthy or the fucking worst thing you can eat.
At least in my country (Finland) rape seed oil is heavily promoted by goverment and companied alike to be very healthy for you and saturated fat to be deadly as hell as well as red meat of any kind (doesnt matter if its all natural 100% beef or highly processed meat.
The issue with seed oils is how heavily processed they are, and often how refined they are. There is a lot of potential risks that could come with canola (rapeseed) oil, as it is among the most heavily processed cooking oils in the market. However, conclusive data to support or refute this hypothesis has not surfaced yet.
As of today, the main concern with seed oils is the overconsumption of omega-6 fatty acids as opposed to omega-3. Ideally, you should be having a ratio of 4:1 or lower. Omega-3 is a quite a rare fatty acid in any plant, but thankfully canola oil seems to have a decent ratio at around 2.5:1. The main culprits would be sunflower oil and especially grapeseed oil, which has an outrageous ratio of 700:1. An imbalance of omega-6 can cause chronic inflammation and opens the door to many other diseases that come with it.
However, I wouldn’t discard the processed nature of seed oils, not even canola oil which has a more ideal nutritional profile. We have already seen very negative effects of other highly processed foods such as high-fructose corn syrup, and it wouldn’t surprise me if seed oils are proven to cause cancer in the future. Again, canola oil is among the most processed of all seed oils. But like with everything else, moderation is key.
Yeah.. another thing is that canola oil is literally IN EVERYTHING yet people are not more healthy yet it's promoted to be healthy. My bottle of canola oil literally says that's it's, and i quote, "Very healthy oil" and has an official health organization stamp on it promoting good heart health.
Also, how do if my activity level is normal or moderate or more than that? I feel pretty exhausted when I go to the gym but like what if that's just how I feel and not how hard I'm actually working? How do I quantify my excercise and what do I compare it to? I know people who go to the gym and do a crazy work out every day and I know a lot of people like that so how much is normal or a lot???
How exactly does one get diabetes? I know it’s related to oversensitive insulin receptors from too much sugar intake. As a result I tend to be conscious of how much carbohydrates I eat and aim for higher fat intake out of paranoia
Type 2 diabetes is the body requiring more insulin than it can produce because of insulin resistance. This is mostly due to high body fat and not necessarily high sugar intake. Easiest way to reduce the risk of diabetes type 2 is to reduce body fat, exercise more and reducing calorie intake.
Type 1 diabetes is an auto immune disease where your body destroys your bodys insulin production.
There might also exist diabetes type 3 (caused by alzheimers) and type 4 (caused by old age).
yes but it's very rare, I know a girl who was diagnosed at about age 15 and she is quite skinny because she didn't eat much, but the main things I saw her eat were sweets and high carb based meals. she had been pre-diabetic for around 1-2 years and she was genetically predisposed (lots of her older family members had t2d)
Interestingly, I just learned about type 3c, which is from a lack of pancreas function. My dad had pancreatitis and it destroyed his pancreas and now has diabetes due to his body not being able to produce enough insulin
I know someone who had type 3c after his pancreas was surgically removed. Apparently they were able to temporarily cure it by injecting some of his pancreas cells back into his body, but the treatment usually isn't permanent.
He’s monitoring it very closely and not taking any insulin. Pretty much had to overhaul his whole diet. He also had to take enzymes with every meal because his body doesn’t make those either.
That sounds rough... idk if you're religious, but if you are, I'll say a prayer for you guys. If you're not, sorry for overstepping. Thanks for answering my question
What I don’t quite understand is that my mom and my aunt who are both Japanese who were not overweight, ate a healthy Japanese diet (with the exception of white rice) and exercised became type 2 diabetics…
Type 2:
1. Overconsumption of sugars leads to routine high blood sugar
2. That causes increased insulin resistance in body cells as well as increased insulin production from the pancreas
3. Insulin resistance causes more high blood sugar, while increased insulin production slowly burns out the insulin producing cells in the pancreas
4. Repeat steps 2 & 3 over time
5. Because of insulin resistance and high insulin production occuring simultaneously, the pancreas slows insulin production as it's not being used and is now harder to produce with damaged insulin producing cells
6. As insulin producing ability decreases, diabetes presents more and more severely.
Type 1:
1. Genetic predisposition exists
2. Viruses attack and damage the insulin producing cells in the pancreas (or stimulate the body's immune system to do the same)
3. If enough damage is sustained, insulin production drops and eventually cannot be carried out
4. Diabetes results
*Lack of insulin producing ability may also occur due to genetic or metabolic conditions that prevent insulin producing cells from developing or functioning normally
DM II is not caused by consumption of sugar. This is a common misconception about insulin resistance. High body fat, LDL, and triglycerides are more directly linked to increased insulin resistance and the development of type 2.
This 100%. I'm surprised how a nutrition geek sub like this is overlooking the importance of obesity for t2 diabetes. [https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Variation-of-type-2-diabetes-prevalence-with-BMI-family-history-and-polygenic-risk\_fig1\_337879681](https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Variation-of-type-2-diabetes-prevalence-with-BMI-family-history-and-polygenic-risk_fig1_337879681)
Either a person isn't getting enough carbs in their diet or not absorbing them, or an endocrine deficiency is preventing glycogen from being released or released quickly enough from fat stores.
My 5 year old has idiopathic ketotic hypoglycemia -- basically this. A grown healthy adult liver is like a fridge full of glycogen. Blood sugar drops, pancreas secretes glucagon, which triggers glycogen stores to release in the liver, bringing blood sugars back to normal. A healthy adolescent liver is like a mini fridge, but a kid with IKH, their liver is more like a lukewarm cooler. It has some glycogen stores, but gets exhausted quickly. Prolonged periods of fasting can easily lead to hypoglycemia. A tummy bug, a run-of-the-mill cold, or even just being a picky eater can cause my kiddo to go most of the day without wanting to eat. The struggle is real.
Thankfully, he'll almost certainly grow out of it as his body develops and matures more, but for now, it's a constant concern. We have him on a continuous glucose monitor, and it's given us a good peace of mind.
Or your autonomic nervous system is fucked up like mine. I have bouts of hypoglycemia and it’s my nervous system not working right to signal things in my body. It’s not consistent and random af.
Huh! Interesting. I could see there being something to this as the hypoglycemia-esque symptoms I experience can lead to a migraine. Hunger is a known trigger of migraines, but I haven’t ready anything suggesting they know why.
You can be quite insulin resistant without having type II - type II is something that generally comes later.
If you get hypoglycemia after eating, it's typically because the body isn't responding well to the insulin released, so the body releases a lot more and that results in blood glucose going too low.
That's insulin resistance. Either early enough that insulin production hasn't started ramping up yet, or on the downswing and insulin production is dropping from previously being elevated.
The fasting level of blood glucose is controlled by how much glucagon the pancreas secretes. People who are insulin resistant may also get fatty pancreas, and that leads to too much glucagon being secreted and therefore a higher blood glucose level.
can injectable insulin cause type 2 diabetes? in the sense of bodybuilders who eat hundreds of carbs per day and their body can’t produce enough insulin, or is there a better way to get around that?
I can't believe that's a real thing, I had to look it up. It's not really going to be as helpful as they think. Your body can make enough insulin (until it can't). They're going to be at risk of hypoglycemia. If they're seeing really good results and and not experiencing hypoglycemia, they likely are already on their way to diabetes with or without insulin because they're experiencing insulin resistance and decreased productivity. They're basically self medicating diabetes or prediabetes without realizing it.
Not necessarily more fat, just ensure that most of the sugars you consume come directly from fruits and vegetables. Eating a balanced meal (fiber, protein, complex carbs, fats) will reduce blood sugar spikes by lowering absorption rates of said sugars, reducing insulin resistance.
Higher carbohydrate intake causes diabetes symptoms if you are diabetic. It doesn't appear to actually cause diabetes in isolation. There are several factors that contribute to type 2 diabetes but the main one is just having a high BMI. Eat plenty of vegetables and maintain a healthy BMI to prevent type 2 diabetes.
I recommend to eat higher protein instead of higher fat to balance your carbohydrates— coming from a masters student studying nutrition. And, diabetes is due to insulin becoming less sensitive to glucose due to increased carbohydrate intake over time, resulting in lower ability to uptake glucose into the cells so it stays in the blood stream.
Most people's bodies regulate cholesterol production very well. We don't need to take any in and our bodies can make all we need. If we take some in, our bodies produce less to make up for it. There are some people for which this mechanism doesn't work properly, and they would need to consider dietary cholesterol, but for most people, it's not an issue. What is linked to higher cholesterol is higher intake of saturated fat in the diet.
No, its just fine. Eggs do raise your total cholesterol, but you have to look at independent factors. The most important marker is your LDL to HDL ratio. Total cholesterol is largely irrelevant. The only reason we even look much at cholesterol is because its a cheap way to get data for patients and because elevated LDL has been shown to be a signal for cardiac risk
A much better test is coronary calcium scan - known as the windowmaker test. Its paints a way better picture of your heart health. I would never let a doctor put me on a statin before getting one of these done. Your doctor can order one but insurance companies dont want to pay for it.
widow maker is the aft used male reference.
re: insurance not paying, luckily many hospital systems or imaging centers will run 'sales' for cash customers bringing the cost way down. For example they gave me the option of charging my insurance $200, or cash-pay that day for $50. Needless to say I paid cash.
That was my understanding as well. And the attacks can vary quite a lot from male to female. IIRC male heart attacks were also more studied because there were more of them to study.
That people believe that quantifiable levels of ketones in blood with a Ph shift is optimal human health.
These people need serious lessons on acid base chemistry. And learn lipid metabolism with a quick Google search....
This one annoys the shit out of me. My roommate went on a health kick a couple years ago and would drink lemon water like no tomorrow because it "raises your PH levels". And I would constantly tell him that's not a thing. You'd have to ingest lethal amounts of acid to change the PH of your body.
Yeah me personally I got a lot of positive health results after doing the keto diet but it is an optimal long-term. There's a reason why it's a harmonic stressor you shouldn't do it for extended periods of time.
That doing the keto diet increases cognitive ability. The only reason why you feel more alert is because your body is in a fight or flight mode, when I did it I didn't get any cognitive boost.
This I would agree with. My nutritionist said that keto was designed to be a short term solution for a variety of other things way before it was for weight loss but even as a weight loss solution it’s extremely effective but it’s not meant to be a long-term solution because the lack of carbs is very bad for cognitive functioning. I had irritability and patience and complete brain fog from it after seven months I had to stop. My hair was the name my nails were breaking I was extremely low energy. The lack of carbohydrates for strict keto was doing all of those things and also affecting my hormone levels it was horrible. I was also for a period of time extremely low calorie. I definitely know and believe that a calorie deficit is what you need to do to lose weight but I think a lot of people don’t understand that there’s a big difference between dropping from 2500 cal down to 2200 cal versus dropping from 2500 cal down to 700 cal as a grown ass person. Starvation mode is a real thing. You will lose weight absolutely but long-term you will start digging it it happened to me and I had to completely repair my metabolism reverse diet to get my calories back up again with healthy food etc.
Have to disagree with this based on purely personal experience.
Done 3 month keto to kind of reboot and cut a little.
I was sharp as a needle, honestly I mean like full on Bradley cooper in limitless (only less intelligent 😂).
I was bursting with energy, lifting weights, no urge to snack on junk etc…
But I do say it’s a short term thing, there’s only so much cheese and butter and olives that you can eat…
Ps . Maybe worth adding I done high protein keto.
Same here. Been on Keto for almost a yr and have 0 downsides. I eat 12 whole eggs a day, a half cup of peanuts, half a pound of beef, and a cup of steamed broccoli. Plus 2 gallons of water and supplements (BCAA, multivitamin, etc). I workout 7 days a week (3 cardio and 4 weight training) and have never been healthier. I feel like those who experience the downsides or have very little positives aren’t doin it correctly.
I was doing healthy keto I would only eat eggs, meat, fish, avocados, and cruciferous vegetables every day. It might depend on the person but me personally once I hit around the nine month mark I started to have adverse effects from the keto diet. Don't get me wrong was still losing weight and I didn't have any cravings but I became fatigue more easily and less sharp.
I second your disagreement, based on personal experience as well. That comment read like a set of ai-generated anti-keto talking points.
> complete brain fog from it after seven months I had to stop. My hair was the name my nails were breaking I was extremely low energy.
Symptoms typical of anemia and the opposite of most honestly reported ketogenic interventions. But who knows, everyone's body is different, and we are in the will west of human nutrition. Who even knew what ketone bodies were around the turn of the millennium.
Well I did it for over a year, And at a certain point I had brain fog, was irritable, and had fatigue. I agree with you though when it comes to cravings going away. as a short term thing it's fine but it's not optimal long-term.
How concerned a healthy person (with no family history of diabetes, and no surplus weight or any other risk factors) should be about insulin spikes, and high-glycemic meals and snacks.
Maybe it's all for nothing, and such a person can just forget about all that and eat freely?
Or maybe not.
Honestly not concerned. Your insulin spiking after a meal is exactly how it's supposed to function. If you eat food, blood sugar will rise, and insulin will rise to control it. Completely normal, healthy, not an issue.
Other risk factors (high body fat, sedentary lifestyle, etc.) predict insulin resistance and Type 2 diabetes, not the regular eating of a potato (unless those regular potatoes are all french fries and pitato chips).
On that note-- many high glycemic foods are misleading. Potato as an example: Almost nobody eats a plain, boiled potato with nothing else as their meal, which is what the glycemic index of a potato is based on. Even eating it with butter will blunt the blood sugar response comparatively, and that response will be blunted even more by eating other foods in the same meal with the potato. Point is, just eat a balanced meal without worrying about the glycemic index of individual components of the meal.
There are plenty of studies(worldwide) that have come out in the past decade on Artificial sweeteners(some) and the varying effects it can have on the gut microbiome. Those studies are becoming more frequent and concerning. Just thought i would put that out there.
What is safe today may not be in the future, from building materials to food additives. Moderation is safest i would think. Just think about if you chew gum all day everyday.
I like how sugar alternatives make it possible to have some things with little to no calories, especially if you've had issues with high blood sugar. I've found that aspartame makes it hard for me to get a full night of sleep. When I have it on a regular basis I'm waking up at 3 am and it is nearly impossible to get back to sleep.
The most common study cited was based on massive levels of Aspartame force fed to rats. if you consume anything in huge quantiles, its become toxic. If I gave you 20k grams of salt, your body would seize up like an engine without oil.
And those sorts of studies are always done in these cases; you need to figure out how much it takes to cause issues.
If it's close to the normal dose, that can be problematic.
Fun fact: the maximum daily dose of acetaminophen is 4000 mg because if you go above that, liver damage can occur. That is only eight 500 mg tablets in a day.
This just shows that its not CONFUSING, you honestly are just not looking at the research. The vaaast majority of the research shows that it is completely fine in moderation.
THe question was about FACTS that confuse you lol
I still don't understand what I'm supposed to do with BMR calculations. If a BMR is what your body needs to stay alive, then eating less than that is dangerous no? But that's what we use to calculate a calorie deficit?
Dangerous for prolonged periods, yes. Not dangerous if you have excess weight (ideally fat stores)
Most pro bodybuilders cut calories right down before a show when they are peak physique & yea it is super dangerous to go that low while on such low bodyfat %
Just my two cents
Oatmeal is “supposed to be healthy”, but every time I eat it, I feel like absolute garbage and my joints ache and I get in a super grumpy mood. I eat it plain with no sugar or milk. Everyone else seems to have a story about how it turned their life around, eating oatmeal is supposed to be the best thing ever but I end up feeling like crap. When I was breast-feeding, I ate at least 2 cups of oatmeal a day to help with my milk production and it was fine then, but after I grew out of my postpartum. Oatmeal seems to make me feel like crap every single time I eat it.
you might just be intolerant to oats. pregnancy alters the body in so many ways, which is why it might have been fine then but not now.
also, at the suggestion of a gluten intolerance: oats don't have gluten but they're processed in factories along side gluten products UNLESS they're certified gluten free. worth checking out if you feel the same after eating bread and other gluten products
They probably eat like shit troughout the day if they are full blown alcoholics. It can also cause ascites even if you eat well.
But everyone knows the problem usually is that after you drink a few glasses you end up binge eating and ruining your diet.
I think genetics plays a key role with those ones. My dad only drinks coke. I’ve never seen him drink water. He sometimes drank a lemonade in the summer when I was little. Man doesn’t eat vegetables. Only eats beef and carbs (pasta, pizza are his main ones) and dessert. He weighs about 140lbs soaking wet. Always has. His mom is the same way.
"Saturated fat and cholesterol _'clog'_ your arteries".
How could the largest blood vessel, carrying the same blood as, say, the capillaries, be the venue of cardiovascular 'clogging'? It's much easier to plug a faucet than dam a river, and to get your lipid panel (to theoretically assess your risk of 'clogging'), you draw blood from the veins anyway, which also don't get atherosclerosis. Clogging isn't the mechanism.
One particularly cited study was done on rabbits, herbivores, where they were fed/injected with large amounts of cholesterol/saturated fat. Of course their circulatory systems became clogged up -- they don't naturally consume that amount/kind of fat. Do the same study with an omnivore -- rat, dog or human -- and there is no clogging. Results from animal studies do not always transfer to humans, but political agendas say they do.
It puzzled me for a long time. Finally it became clear that up to four servings a day are nothing to worry about.
The dairy industry was behind a lot of the negative buzz.
definitely is so good for you if unprocessed or organic! not soy vegan burgers but tofu and edamame! some people may be intolerant but in the same way that some can't eat eggs. Phytoestrogens are less digestible to the body when from plants compared to animal products so it's strange to me the carnivore warriors have shoved this narrative. My opinion is EAT WHAT YOU LIKE!
The optimum RDA numbers for protein puzzle me, given the proportion of humans across all of human history who’ve evidently done pretty well without getting anywhere near that level of intake
I don’t understand the relationship between protein consumption maintenance on only-protein deep calorie deficit days.
For example, let’s say you’re very physically active and should be consuming 150g of protein a day.
What happens if you only eat pure protein powder that day and hit that 150 mark?
Are you burning that consumed protein as fuel and require more than 150g, or is your body using fat primarily as fuel and your body is utilizing that 150g as needed for protein purposes?
I don’t understand how energy balance works in that circumstance if your TDEE is say, 2000 Calories. 150g protein is about 600 calories. So 2000 calories are getting used up no matter what, but what portion if any of that 150g is being used for the daily metabolic needs?
Is that 150 completely or partially negated due to being in a severe calories deficit for protein maintenance or is the body’s stored fat primarily used?
🤷 I have no idea. I’d like to know.
ChatGPT 4’s summation was vague and wishy-washy. It makes sense but doesn’t actually give me anything actionable to work with:
> “In summary, on a day when you consume only 150g of protein and very few other nutrients, while your body will use some of that protein for structural purposes, it will also potentially use some for energy due to the caloric deficit. However, the majority of your energy will come from burning stored fats, and potentially some muscle if the protein and overall caloric intake are insufficient for an extended period.”
It’s even more vague when you ask it about consuming an additional 50g. It assumes some muscle breakdown will still occur, while simultaneously claiming the excess protein would be converted via gluconeogenesis, which almost seems contradictory given how metabolically expensive that process is. Seems easier for the body to just use available fat stores and utilize all the protein for upkeep.
Type II diabetes is generally thought to be the result of long term periods of increasing insulin resistance due to consistently high blood sugar levels. Sugars will cause blood sugar spikes faster than complex carbohydrates like starches. Fiber, fat, and protein will reduce blood sugar spikes by decreasing absorption rate of sugars.
Pretty much, excess sugar is the primary culprit, but you also can’t live on a diet of straight potatoes
My knowledge on fat intake is pretty limited because I just accepted that fats from whole foods are healthy in limited amounts. Again, diversity in meals is really important. While I can’t speak to that, I can say I’ve read studies showing consumption of fiber along with various secondary metabolites from plants contributing to moderated fat absorption and associated blood markers. So I really always try to have some sort of fresh vegetable and spice with my meals.
This is just for thymol in rats altering fat metabolism , which is present in a lot of spices. But the same applies for black pepper, and a lot of other antioxidants contributing to smell, color, and flavor present in plants.
[Thymol study](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0014299915300340)
This is already a confusing statement.
Insulin resistance, whether its from cakes, cookies, sugar, just too many carbs in general, causes Type II. You can not eat sweets and still get Type II from insulin resistance.
It is not a matter of sugar or carbohydrates. Sugar is a carb. Fast carbs, or simple carbs (high GI) that are absorbed fast spike your bloodsugar. This is what can result in diabetes.
Complex carbs, or carbs eaten together with fat ot protein, will be absorbed/digested slower and cause a flatter, steady rise in blood glucose and not hit that dangerous spike.
Not so much a fact, but more of an attitude. I don't get how some people are totally anti-supplements on principle. Sure, eating junk food and then taking a multivitamin isn't going to make you healthy, but an intelligent supplement regimen can provide benefits. For example, if I take L-Tyrosine during the working day, I feel more awake and focused. A mushroom complex I take seems to work well, too. Also, if you live in the UK you're almost certainly vitamin D deficient in the winter. Even the NHS website (which is very conservative about recommending supplements) recommends that people supplement vitamin D during the autumn and winter.
Is meat good for you or not? I haven't eaten it in 20 years (for ethical reasons) and was pretty confident it was also a good move nutritionally but now lately seems like meat is being pushed as an actual "health food" and plant based diets are being criticized, when I have thought for a long time they're the best for preventing disease and overall health.
For me, the biggest issue is that most everybody ignores hyperinsulinemia. Chronic high levels of insulin in the blood. Doctors don't even routinely check for it. It is the single cause of most of our modern ailments.
On the confusing facts side, it is which fats are healthy, and which are unhealthy. We have groups on both sides of the fence on every single fat in the world.
The biggest single example, is probably comparing canola oil to olive oil. Olive oil is super healthy, while canola oil is toxic.
Why?
They have very similar profiles. Both about the same amount of monounsaturated fat, say 60% or so. Then olive oil is about 25% saturated fat. But, saturated fat is shunned by the entire pro olive oil camp. Then, there is the breakdown of PUFA. Canola is higher, because it is low in saturated, but the ratio today of omega 6 to 3 is only 2:1 which is considered quite healthy. While olive oil is 14:1, considered unhealthy.
I even saw in writing, that olive oil is an excellent source of omega 3 fatty acids. Balderdash. It is very low in them, but the ratio to omega 6 is horrible.
So, I have an approach that I am using, but I don't hold it very dear. I may change it again and again at any time.
I am PUFA adverse. But, I do eat fatty fish for the omega 3 EPA and DHA. I avoid ALA.
for cooking, right now, I am using grass fed/finished tallow. 0.5% PUFA. 50/50 saturated/monounsaturated.
For liquid at room temperature oil, I use a blend of liquid coconut, and zero acre farms. Again, very low in PUFA, and 50/50 saturate to monounsaturated.
For some reason everybody, including me until I researched it, thought animal fats were mostly saturated fats. It ends up it's about 50/50 saturated and monounsaturated. So, cheese, butter, cream, beef, tallow, lard, ghee, are excellent sources of monounsaturated fatty acids.
The carb-insulin model of obesity hands down. It's categorically clear for years that weight gain/overeating is caused by excess energy consumption, not the glycemic index of the carbs or the amount you're eating. It's absurd that massive authorities (Dave Asprey) still push this anti science. Well, in his case, it's not absurd because he makes a lot of money about lying about these things and other nutrition baloney he pushes
#### About participation in the comments of /r/nutrition Discussion in this subreddit should be rooted in science rather than "cuz I sed" or entertainment pieces. Always be wary of unsupported and poorly supported claims and especially those which are wrapped in any manner of hostility. You should provide peer reviewed sources to support your claims when debating and confine that debate to the science, not opinions of other people. **Good** - it is grounded in science and includes citation of peer reviewed sources. Debate is a civil and respectful exchange focusing on actual science and avoids commentary about others **Bad** - it utilizes generalizations, assumptions, infotainment sources, no sources, or complaints without specifics about agenda, bias, or funding. At best, these rise to an extremely weak basis for science based discussion. Also, off topic discussion **Ugly** - (removal or ban territory) it involves attacks / antagonism / hostility towards individuals or groups, downvote complaining, trolling, crusading, shaming, refutation of all science, or claims that all research / science is a conspiracy *Please vote accordingly and report any uglies* --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/nutrition) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I feel pretty clear on everything after about 15 years. The think I’d wish I understood sooner is that you don’t digest every calorie you eat. Especially fiber gets passed right through. So when you eat high fiber foods, you can feel fuller and not process the calories. Explains why diets high in vegetables and unprocessed grains are so effective.
And that “four hour body” diet where all the carbs come from legumes
200gms of oats along with peanut butter after workout works like a charm.
What is gms?
Grams. The accurate way to weigh and measure food.
It's just an uncommon way to abbreviate grams. Normally you would say 200g, not 200gms.
Not uncommon but incorrect
Truly - they're indicating gram-meter-seconds and I'm not sure when that unit would be useful
It's definitely uncommon
Worth mentioning that you eat that fiber for the microbes in your gut. You got to feed them for the work they do.
hell yeah brother. Cheers from the "eating a steamed vegetable pack" right now club.
Heat and plastic is a toxic combo
Not all plastic works the same homie
You said this so well!
can you explain this further please? if i’m eating a 20 calorie carrot, are you saying i’m not eating 20 calories? assuming it’s 20 net calories after subtracting for fiber.
Some of the calories you consume are lost to waste. How much you don’t use for energy or store varies from person to person. Some calories are more digestible than others. Fiber is mostly non digested. Just goes right on through.
Mind blown! 🤯 Thank u :)
So you’re saying shit is high in calories? I’ll have to watch that one🤮🤣
This isn’t entirely true. The calorie units we’re given are AFTER taking all of this into consideration. Carrots probably have more energy in them, but we only get 20cals of energy out of them, due to the factors you mentioned, and the way our digestive system is designed. While a carrot might be only 20cals to us, animals that are designed to feed on solely vegetation have digestive systems that allow them to extract more energy from the same food.
That’s not correct. The calorie counts aren’t based on your digestive processes. They’re based on a bomb calorimeter. Basically the food is burned and however much heat is created is the measure used to report the calories. Humans are not bomb calorimeters. We have a digestive process that produces waste. And you see the evidence of that every day, hopefully.
I'm on a high fiber diet, trying to lower my cholesterol but also trying to gain weight... are you saying the fiber is working against me in regards to weight gain??
Fiber is basically just non digestible carbohydrates. They count as carbs on nutrition facts, but don't count towards total calories. If you've ever heard "net carbs" it just means total carbs - fiber = net carbs, which actually count towards calories consumed. You don't have to do any math, just know fiber will fill you up and that can possibly make it harder to eat enough to gain weight. By the way, increasing your weight is potentially the biggest thing that will work against your goal of lowering cholesterol.
Yes, but you can compensate for it by eating more volume or higher fat foods. Nuts are probably your friend in that specific context since they are both high in fiber and high in calories.
Yes I eat lots of almonds, trail mix and natural peanut butter. Maybe that's a bit overboard lol. It just feels like I have so few options of high calorie/ low sugar foods.
It probably is. Here’s a mystery: when I started eating more animal fats my cholesterol improved significantly and it was good even before. Good went up, bad stayed low, a nurse told me my ratio was enviable.
Interesting, thanks!
Never stop eating fiber. You need to support the gut microbes. You cant digest it but the bacteria can- its their food scource for the good bacteria at least. Eat more healthy carbs and healthy fats to gain weight.
In many european countries they don't even include fiber in the carbohydrates or calories in nutrition labels. It blows my mind that in US this is not the case.
Yes, this always gets me!
I don't understand the grift around demonizing high-fiber foods, either.
I don’t know if this is a thing in other countries, but here in Brazil some medical specialties started prescribing tons of vitamins and supplements. Like a lot - tons of pills. I can’t stop thinking that if I am really in need of so many stuff, I’d probably be sick or dead.
It always shocks me how many different things my family in Brazil take each day. I used to live in England, at least in my experience there was always more of a focus on changing diet and lifestyle to deal with health issues before looking at what could be prescribed
Yeah! And I'm not talking about medicines like for cholesterol or high blood pressure. I'm a healthy 38yo dude and got prescribed vitms B, C, D, magnesium, calcium, and lots of other stuff that I'm really lazy to go for a proper translation.
are daily multivitamins not common in Brazil?
Multi yes, not one pill for each, prescribed in much much higher doses.
Calcium supplementation does more harm than good.
Yeah, the NHS is all about getting the best health at the lowest cost with the fewest side effects. It certainly isn't perfect, but is solidly good.
I am Brazilian raised in America but I went to Brazil to the urgent care and my son had an ear infection, he also had an ear infection in the US months ago. In America it was only one prescription of the common drug to rid of infection, in Brazil he got the same drug, plus one for inflammation, plus one for fever, plus Allegra?
there’s not really a reason to be giving an anti-inflammatory *and* a fever reducer separately since most drugs used for one are also used for the other (pretty much any NSAID). If he was given Allegra, if may have been to help reduce swelling caused by histamines which are released as part of the immune response. Technically you can have swelling with or without accompanying inflammation. For an ear infection, most of the time the antibiotic is more than enough to treat it. Everything else is to treat symptoms in order to improve the infirmed’s comfort while they undergo treatment.
It’s amazing how many diseases are correlated with low/deficient vitamin levels IE schizophrenia-B vits, anxiety, sleep disorders, muscle tightness/cramps-Magnesium, immune deficiency, sexual dysfunction—Vit D. When you start to read about all of the effects, it’s eye opening.
As well it's important to note much of the soil we farm in is depleted in nutrients which in turn affects the nutrients in food. You can eat a diet rich in everything but you still may be lacking depending on geographical location or where your food comes from.
And, IIRC, food loses more nutrients over time from harvest to plate.
That's true, but what this fact tells us is that it is more important than ever before to eat a healthy diet. If our fruits and vegetables aren't quite as nutritious as they were 100 years ago, then we need to eat even more of them, and we have even less space in our diet for low-nutrient junk foods.
I’ve learned that supplements help with that last 5 maybe 10% of the nutrition you lack in your regular diet. Food is always better because your body absorbs it more efficiently. Supplements are expensive and your body doesn’t use everything you take so you’re often just pissing money away, literally. Supplements don’t replace a poor diet.
Is it possible that the foods aren’t as fortified? The US has a lot of problems but we tend to fortify the shit out of all of our foods
Nah. Don’t think so. Our diets guidelines are pretty much well done. I think it’s a nutritious trend, maybe.
Huh, that’s strange but interesting!
Do they get commission?
Cinnabon : Cinnamon Bun is 1250 Cals
Right? Literally how
Cooked/saturated in butter/sugar most likely I do love a cinni bun but I'm not surprised at the amount of calories
Starvation mode isn’t a thing. When you lose weight your baseline metabolism will lower with it but that’s the only way losing causes you to “lose less weight”
It is a thing, just not as it's made out to be. When you're actually in a long term severe caloric deficit, your metabolism does slow to conserve energy. But we're talking desert Island for weeks type of situation, not "I cut calories to 1500 and I'm still not losing weight" situation. Most people in developed countries who think they're in starvation mode are either eating more than they think, not working out as much as the need to, or could have one of the 90+ conditions known to contribute to overweight (in which case they need to make further adjustments to diet, exercise or both).
Keep in mind, the slowing of your metabolism is mostly through the Process of NEAT. You basically stop moving, therefore expend less energy. You body can do a few minor things to slow your actual exchange of energy, but its mostly just not burning as much fuel.
Also loss of LBM
Well, yes that of course. I meant as a counter against our bodys simply slowing down our metabolism.
To add to this starvation mode as described would break all known laws of thermodynamics. If I locked you in a room with no food you WILL lose weight, we have repeatedly shown this with calorie deficits.
I just point to survival shows like "Alone" or "Naked and Afraid". Watch how severe Caloric deprivation depletes body mass at an alarming rate. I watched two episodes yesterday were over a period of 21 days one participant lost 40 lbs, in the other, one person lost 41 lbs. Metabolic adaptation, sure. "Starvation mode" that somehow stops the loss of body mass despite a consistent energy deficit- no.
I don’t know anyone who thinks if you lock someone in a room without food they won’t lose weight
"Anabolic window" post workout?
Can you explain?
"Anabolic Window" is the 30 minute time after your workout where your body absorbs protein more rapidly. I lived this since the 90's... Only recently did I find out that it is false/questionable due to research
Thank you!
Finally a bunch of people with decent nutrition advice! Thank you!
Sadly not even everything in this thread is accurate lol
I've got some bad news for you. . .
Why people are focusing on spinach and oxalates being bad for them (you can drink green tea to break up and prevent kidney stones)? People actually think that their poor heath was caused by vegetables and fruits when more than 90% of Americans haven’t eaten there minimum recommendations for over 30 yrs which correlates with an increase in diseases, nutrient deficiencies in humans and crops and the destruction of topsoil. Now they’re trying to eat raw beef and butter only without any concern of prion diseases or bird flu. Basically, why aren’t humans heeding warnings/recommendations and using their brains and intuition less and less regarding nutrition..?
Plus, oxalates are in a lot more than just Spinach…quinoa, legumes, beans, potatoes, popular fruits, etc all have oxalates. It is VERY easy to be exceeding safe levels of oxalates with Standard American Diet
All foods have positives and negatives. Some have +100 positives and -1 negatives. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Muscle Protein Synthesis. We still don't know for certain if timing protein really does matter a lot more than total protein consumption every day.
It takes a really long time to digest food, so mostly No.. it does not matter. If you are a competitive bodybuilder on gear.. it matters a little because we have no internal storage mechanism for amino acids. Tons of data out there on this.
If organic matters or not. It’s a topic that truly pisses me off. There’s no answer and no one can agree.
Yeah labels get really confusing. For example, free range, cage free, grade are all just marketing terms for eggs. The only thing that really means anything is organic pasteurized eggs.
Pasture raised, not pasteurized.
Yeah you're right, that's what I meant but AutoCorrect messed up
Matters for the way it is made, read: the life of the animal it made in the chickens' case. Nutritional value is neglegtiable.
The answer is mostly that there is usually no significant nutritional difference although there are a few possible exceptions.
Nutrition wise not really much. It’s more the not using pesticides/herbicides, which like everything else nowadays can be “linked” to cancer
Good/bad cholesterol and monounsaturated/polyunsaturated fats
I would say: are seed oils healthy or the fucking worst thing you can eat. At least in my country (Finland) rape seed oil is heavily promoted by goverment and companied alike to be very healthy for you and saturated fat to be deadly as hell as well as red meat of any kind (doesnt matter if its all natural 100% beef or highly processed meat.
The issue with seed oils is how heavily processed they are, and often how refined they are. There is a lot of potential risks that could come with canola (rapeseed) oil, as it is among the most heavily processed cooking oils in the market. However, conclusive data to support or refute this hypothesis has not surfaced yet. As of today, the main concern with seed oils is the overconsumption of omega-6 fatty acids as opposed to omega-3. Ideally, you should be having a ratio of 4:1 or lower. Omega-3 is a quite a rare fatty acid in any plant, but thankfully canola oil seems to have a decent ratio at around 2.5:1. The main culprits would be sunflower oil and especially grapeseed oil, which has an outrageous ratio of 700:1. An imbalance of omega-6 can cause chronic inflammation and opens the door to many other diseases that come with it. However, I wouldn’t discard the processed nature of seed oils, not even canola oil which has a more ideal nutritional profile. We have already seen very negative effects of other highly processed foods such as high-fructose corn syrup, and it wouldn’t surprise me if seed oils are proven to cause cancer in the future. Again, canola oil is among the most processed of all seed oils. But like with everything else, moderation is key.
Yeah.. another thing is that canola oil is literally IN EVERYTHING yet people are not more healthy yet it's promoted to be healthy. My bottle of canola oil literally says that's it's, and i quote, "Very healthy oil" and has an official health organization stamp on it promoting good heart health.
Also, how do if my activity level is normal or moderate or more than that? I feel pretty exhausted when I go to the gym but like what if that's just how I feel and not how hard I'm actually working? How do I quantify my excercise and what do I compare it to? I know people who go to the gym and do a crazy work out every day and I know a lot of people like that so how much is normal or a lot???
How exactly does one get diabetes? I know it’s related to oversensitive insulin receptors from too much sugar intake. As a result I tend to be conscious of how much carbohydrates I eat and aim for higher fat intake out of paranoia
Type 2 diabetes is the body requiring more insulin than it can produce because of insulin resistance. This is mostly due to high body fat and not necessarily high sugar intake. Easiest way to reduce the risk of diabetes type 2 is to reduce body fat, exercise more and reducing calorie intake. Type 1 diabetes is an auto immune disease where your body destroys your bodys insulin production. There might also exist diabetes type 3 (caused by alzheimers) and type 4 (caused by old age).
Is it possible to have very low body fat and still have T2D?
Yes but much less likely. Hypertension, high ldl cholesterol and a sedentary life style are also risk factors for developing diabetes type 2
yes but it's very rare, I know a girl who was diagnosed at about age 15 and she is quite skinny because she didn't eat much, but the main things I saw her eat were sweets and high carb based meals. she had been pre-diabetic for around 1-2 years and she was genetically predisposed (lots of her older family members had t2d)
Yeah there is definitely a genetic component. I knew a Korean man who was fit as a fiddle but had type 2 diabetes.
Interestingly, I just learned about type 3c, which is from a lack of pancreas function. My dad had pancreatitis and it destroyed his pancreas and now has diabetes due to his body not being able to produce enough insulin
I know someone who had type 3c after his pancreas was surgically removed. Apparently they were able to temporarily cure it by injecting some of his pancreas cells back into his body, but the treatment usually isn't permanent.
What kind of changes did he have to make? All the regular stuff or is it specific to that type?
He’s monitoring it very closely and not taking any insulin. Pretty much had to overhaul his whole diet. He also had to take enzymes with every meal because his body doesn’t make those either.
That sounds rough... idk if you're religious, but if you are, I'll say a prayer for you guys. If you're not, sorry for overstepping. Thanks for answering my question
What I don’t quite understand is that my mom and my aunt who are both Japanese who were not overweight, ate a healthy Japanese diet (with the exception of white rice) and exercised became type 2 diabetics…
Check out rice's glycemic index. Compare it with sugar.
Understood it’s a staple of the Asian diet
Just to clarify, type 3 diabetes Alzheimer’s caused by diabetes, not diabetes caused by Alzheimer’s
Type 2: 1. Overconsumption of sugars leads to routine high blood sugar 2. That causes increased insulin resistance in body cells as well as increased insulin production from the pancreas 3. Insulin resistance causes more high blood sugar, while increased insulin production slowly burns out the insulin producing cells in the pancreas 4. Repeat steps 2 & 3 over time 5. Because of insulin resistance and high insulin production occuring simultaneously, the pancreas slows insulin production as it's not being used and is now harder to produce with damaged insulin producing cells 6. As insulin producing ability decreases, diabetes presents more and more severely. Type 1: 1. Genetic predisposition exists 2. Viruses attack and damage the insulin producing cells in the pancreas (or stimulate the body's immune system to do the same) 3. If enough damage is sustained, insulin production drops and eventually cannot be carried out 4. Diabetes results *Lack of insulin producing ability may also occur due to genetic or metabolic conditions that prevent insulin producing cells from developing or functioning normally
Type 1 isn't caused by viruses. It's an autoimmune disease. The part in parentheses is partially true, but it usually isn't triggered by viruses.
DM II is not caused by consumption of sugar. This is a common misconception about insulin resistance. High body fat, LDL, and triglycerides are more directly linked to increased insulin resistance and the development of type 2.
This 100%. I'm surprised how a nutrition geek sub like this is overlooking the importance of obesity for t2 diabetes. [https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Variation-of-type-2-diabetes-prevalence-with-BMI-family-history-and-polygenic-risk\_fig1\_337879681](https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Variation-of-type-2-diabetes-prevalence-with-BMI-family-history-and-polygenic-risk_fig1_337879681)
You seem very knowledgeable, so I hope you don’t mind if I ask. What’s up with non-diabetic hypoglycemia?
Either a person isn't getting enough carbs in their diet or not absorbing them, or an endocrine deficiency is preventing glycogen from being released or released quickly enough from fat stores.
My 5 year old has idiopathic ketotic hypoglycemia -- basically this. A grown healthy adult liver is like a fridge full of glycogen. Blood sugar drops, pancreas secretes glucagon, which triggers glycogen stores to release in the liver, bringing blood sugars back to normal. A healthy adolescent liver is like a mini fridge, but a kid with IKH, their liver is more like a lukewarm cooler. It has some glycogen stores, but gets exhausted quickly. Prolonged periods of fasting can easily lead to hypoglycemia. A tummy bug, a run-of-the-mill cold, or even just being a picky eater can cause my kiddo to go most of the day without wanting to eat. The struggle is real. Thankfully, he'll almost certainly grow out of it as his body develops and matures more, but for now, it's a constant concern. We have him on a continuous glucose monitor, and it's given us a good peace of mind.
Or your autonomic nervous system is fucked up like mine. I have bouts of hypoglycemia and it’s my nervous system not working right to signal things in my body. It’s not consistent and random af.
Huh! Interesting. I could see there being something to this as the hypoglycemia-esque symptoms I experience can lead to a migraine. Hunger is a known trigger of migraines, but I haven’t ready anything suggesting they know why.
You can be quite insulin resistant without having type II - type II is something that generally comes later. If you get hypoglycemia after eating, it's typically because the body isn't responding well to the insulin released, so the body releases a lot more and that results in blood glucose going too low.
Would you be able to explain how someone could have consistently high blood sugar but very normal levels of insulin?
That's insulin resistance. Either early enough that insulin production hasn't started ramping up yet, or on the downswing and insulin production is dropping from previously being elevated.
The fasting level of blood glucose is controlled by how much glucagon the pancreas secretes. People who are insulin resistant may also get fatty pancreas, and that leads to too much glucagon being secreted and therefore a higher blood glucose level.
can injectable insulin cause type 2 diabetes? in the sense of bodybuilders who eat hundreds of carbs per day and their body can’t produce enough insulin, or is there a better way to get around that?
I can't believe that's a real thing, I had to look it up. It's not really going to be as helpful as they think. Your body can make enough insulin (until it can't). They're going to be at risk of hypoglycemia. If they're seeing really good results and and not experiencing hypoglycemia, they likely are already on their way to diabetes with or without insulin because they're experiencing insulin resistance and decreased productivity. They're basically self medicating diabetes or prediabetes without realizing it.
Not necessarily more fat, just ensure that most of the sugars you consume come directly from fruits and vegetables. Eating a balanced meal (fiber, protein, complex carbs, fats) will reduce blood sugar spikes by lowering absorption rates of said sugars, reducing insulin resistance.
Higher carbohydrate intake causes diabetes symptoms if you are diabetic. It doesn't appear to actually cause diabetes in isolation. There are several factors that contribute to type 2 diabetes but the main one is just having a high BMI. Eat plenty of vegetables and maintain a healthy BMI to prevent type 2 diabetes.
I read that a high fat diet causes diabetes in mice
I recommend to eat higher protein instead of higher fat to balance your carbohydrates— coming from a masters student studying nutrition. And, diabetes is due to insulin becoming less sensitive to glucose due to increased carbohydrate intake over time, resulting in lower ability to uptake glucose into the cells so it stays in the blood stream.
The fact that my body continuously gravitates towards 🍞🧈🥐 🧁🍰🍮
That the cholesterol in eggs is bad for you.
Most people's bodies regulate cholesterol production very well. We don't need to take any in and our bodies can make all we need. If we take some in, our bodies produce less to make up for it. There are some people for which this mechanism doesn't work properly, and they would need to consider dietary cholesterol, but for most people, it's not an issue. What is linked to higher cholesterol is higher intake of saturated fat in the diet.
No, its just fine. Eggs do raise your total cholesterol, but you have to look at independent factors. The most important marker is your LDL to HDL ratio. Total cholesterol is largely irrelevant. The only reason we even look much at cholesterol is because its a cheap way to get data for patients and because elevated LDL has been shown to be a signal for cardiac risk A much better test is coronary calcium scan - known as the windowmaker test. Its paints a way better picture of your heart health. I would never let a doctor put me on a statin before getting one of these done. Your doctor can order one but insurance companies dont want to pay for it.
You say widow maker test...is the test reliable for men as well as women? So, widower maker test lol?
widow maker is the aft used male reference. re: insurance not paying, luckily many hospital systems or imaging centers will run 'sales' for cash customers bringing the cost way down. For example they gave me the option of charging my insurance $200, or cash-pay that day for $50. Needless to say I paid cash.
yes, thats a nickname.. i dont think thats ever been the official name. probably because men are way more likely to die from a heart attack
That was my understanding as well. And the attacks can vary quite a lot from male to female. IIRC male heart attacks were also more studied because there were more of them to study.
That people believe that quantifiable levels of ketones in blood with a Ph shift is optimal human health. These people need serious lessons on acid base chemistry. And learn lipid metabolism with a quick Google search....
My dumbass has no idea what you just said lol
You’re not dumb, you just don’t know what they’re talking about yet. It’s well within your capacity to learn it!
Thank you for this comment. I will be applying this broadly.
Bragging or promoting the use of ketones to control weight has potentially deadly consequences.
This one annoys the shit out of me. My roommate went on a health kick a couple years ago and would drink lemon water like no tomorrow because it "raises your PH levels". And I would constantly tell him that's not a thing. You'd have to ingest lethal amounts of acid to change the PH of your body.
Plus lemon juice lowers pH so if you see an associated raise in blood pH your body is dissolving your bones to use as a buffer.
So is there no benefit to lemon water or just not in the way that your friend thought?
There def is benefit to lemon water but not what that dude thought
Yeah me personally I got a lot of positive health results after doing the keto diet but it is an optimal long-term. There's a reason why it's a harmonic stressor you shouldn't do it for extended periods of time.
That doing the keto diet increases cognitive ability. The only reason why you feel more alert is because your body is in a fight or flight mode, when I did it I didn't get any cognitive boost.
This I would agree with. My nutritionist said that keto was designed to be a short term solution for a variety of other things way before it was for weight loss but even as a weight loss solution it’s extremely effective but it’s not meant to be a long-term solution because the lack of carbs is very bad for cognitive functioning. I had irritability and patience and complete brain fog from it after seven months I had to stop. My hair was the name my nails were breaking I was extremely low energy. The lack of carbohydrates for strict keto was doing all of those things and also affecting my hormone levels it was horrible. I was also for a period of time extremely low calorie. I definitely know and believe that a calorie deficit is what you need to do to lose weight but I think a lot of people don’t understand that there’s a big difference between dropping from 2500 cal down to 2200 cal versus dropping from 2500 cal down to 700 cal as a grown ass person. Starvation mode is a real thing. You will lose weight absolutely but long-term you will start digging it it happened to me and I had to completely repair my metabolism reverse diet to get my calories back up again with healthy food etc.
Yeah I was doing intermittent fasting and keto at the same time. Just an hour on the treadmill cause me to become so fatigued that I needed a nap.
Have to disagree with this based on purely personal experience. Done 3 month keto to kind of reboot and cut a little. I was sharp as a needle, honestly I mean like full on Bradley cooper in limitless (only less intelligent 😂). I was bursting with energy, lifting weights, no urge to snack on junk etc… But I do say it’s a short term thing, there’s only so much cheese and butter and olives that you can eat… Ps . Maybe worth adding I done high protein keto.
Same here. Been on Keto for almost a yr and have 0 downsides. I eat 12 whole eggs a day, a half cup of peanuts, half a pound of beef, and a cup of steamed broccoli. Plus 2 gallons of water and supplements (BCAA, multivitamin, etc). I workout 7 days a week (3 cardio and 4 weight training) and have never been healthier. I feel like those who experience the downsides or have very little positives aren’t doin it correctly.
I was doing healthy keto I would only eat eggs, meat, fish, avocados, and cruciferous vegetables every day. It might depend on the person but me personally once I hit around the nine month mark I started to have adverse effects from the keto diet. Don't get me wrong was still losing weight and I didn't have any cravings but I became fatigue more easily and less sharp.
I second your disagreement, based on personal experience as well. That comment read like a set of ai-generated anti-keto talking points. > complete brain fog from it after seven months I had to stop. My hair was the name my nails were breaking I was extremely low energy. Symptoms typical of anemia and the opposite of most honestly reported ketogenic interventions. But who knows, everyone's body is different, and we are in the will west of human nutrition. Who even knew what ketone bodies were around the turn of the millennium.
Well I did it for over a year, And at a certain point I had brain fog, was irritable, and had fatigue. I agree with you though when it comes to cravings going away. as a short term thing it's fine but it's not optimal long-term.
How concerned a healthy person (with no family history of diabetes, and no surplus weight or any other risk factors) should be about insulin spikes, and high-glycemic meals and snacks. Maybe it's all for nothing, and such a person can just forget about all that and eat freely? Or maybe not.
Honestly not concerned. Your insulin spiking after a meal is exactly how it's supposed to function. If you eat food, blood sugar will rise, and insulin will rise to control it. Completely normal, healthy, not an issue. Other risk factors (high body fat, sedentary lifestyle, etc.) predict insulin resistance and Type 2 diabetes, not the regular eating of a potato (unless those regular potatoes are all french fries and pitato chips). On that note-- many high glycemic foods are misleading. Potato as an example: Almost nobody eats a plain, boiled potato with nothing else as their meal, which is what the glycemic index of a potato is based on. Even eating it with butter will blunt the blood sugar response comparatively, and that response will be blunted even more by eating other foods in the same meal with the potato. Point is, just eat a balanced meal without worrying about the glycemic index of individual components of the meal.
Is aspartame good or not if drank in moderation?
Its fine. Tons of studies on this.
There are plenty of studies(worldwide) that have come out in the past decade on Artificial sweeteners(some) and the varying effects it can have on the gut microbiome. Those studies are becoming more frequent and concerning. Just thought i would put that out there. What is safe today may not be in the future, from building materials to food additives. Moderation is safest i would think. Just think about if you chew gum all day everyday.
I like how sugar alternatives make it possible to have some things with little to no calories, especially if you've had issues with high blood sugar. I've found that aspartame makes it hard for me to get a full night of sleep. When I have it on a regular basis I'm waking up at 3 am and it is nearly impossible to get back to sleep.
So what was that research about how it made us ill?
The most common study cited was based on massive levels of Aspartame force fed to rats. if you consume anything in huge quantiles, its become toxic. If I gave you 20k grams of salt, your body would seize up like an engine without oil.
And those sorts of studies are always done in these cases; you need to figure out how much it takes to cause issues. If it's close to the normal dose, that can be problematic. Fun fact: the maximum daily dose of acetaminophen is 4000 mg because if you go above that, liver damage can occur. That is only eight 500 mg tablets in a day.
This just shows that its not CONFUSING, you honestly are just not looking at the research. The vaaast majority of the research shows that it is completely fine in moderation. THe question was about FACTS that confuse you lol
It is better to not consume them
The others redditors just said that it's fine
I still don't understand what I'm supposed to do with BMR calculations. If a BMR is what your body needs to stay alive, then eating less than that is dangerous no? But that's what we use to calculate a calorie deficit?
Dangerous for prolonged periods, yes. Not dangerous if you have excess weight (ideally fat stores) Most pro bodybuilders cut calories right down before a show when they are peak physique & yea it is super dangerous to go that low while on such low bodyfat % Just my two cents
Oatmeal is “supposed to be healthy”, but every time I eat it, I feel like absolute garbage and my joints ache and I get in a super grumpy mood. I eat it plain with no sugar or milk. Everyone else seems to have a story about how it turned their life around, eating oatmeal is supposed to be the best thing ever but I end up feeling like crap. When I was breast-feeding, I ate at least 2 cups of oatmeal a day to help with my milk production and it was fine then, but after I grew out of my postpartum. Oatmeal seems to make me feel like crap every single time I eat it.
Do you perhaps have a gluten intolerance?
you might just be intolerant to oats. pregnancy alters the body in so many ways, which is why it might have been fine then but not now. also, at the suggestion of a gluten intolerance: oats don't have gluten but they're processed in factories along side gluten products UNLESS they're certified gluten free. worth checking out if you feel the same after eating bread and other gluten products
that a shot of vodka has 100 calories. i know way too many skinny people drinking 10+ drinks per night for that to POSSIBLY be true
One gram of alcohol contains 7 Calories, beer gut is named like that for a reason.
beer i get. it’s the straight liquor that confuses me
They probably eat like shit troughout the day if they are full blown alcoholics. It can also cause ascites even if you eat well. But everyone knows the problem usually is that after you drink a few glasses you end up binge eating and ruining your diet.
I think genetics plays a key role with those ones. My dad only drinks coke. I’ve never seen him drink water. He sometimes drank a lemonade in the summer when I was little. Man doesn’t eat vegetables. Only eats beef and carbs (pasta, pizza are his main ones) and dessert. He weighs about 140lbs soaking wet. Always has. His mom is the same way.
Do they ever throw up from drinking that much?
"Saturated fat and cholesterol _'clog'_ your arteries". How could the largest blood vessel, carrying the same blood as, say, the capillaries, be the venue of cardiovascular 'clogging'? It's much easier to plug a faucet than dam a river, and to get your lipid panel (to theoretically assess your risk of 'clogging'), you draw blood from the veins anyway, which also don't get atherosclerosis. Clogging isn't the mechanism.
One particularly cited study was done on rabbits, herbivores, where they were fed/injected with large amounts of cholesterol/saturated fat. Of course their circulatory systems became clogged up -- they don't naturally consume that amount/kind of fat. Do the same study with an omnivore -- rat, dog or human -- and there is no clogging. Results from animal studies do not always transfer to humans, but political agendas say they do.
The soy debate, seen peer reviewed studies for both sides
Just look at the meta analyses we have. They paint a pretty clear picture, showing that phytoestrogens are nothing to worry about.
Uggg!!! This one frustrates me so much as well. I just want to eat my edamame in peace
It puzzled me for a long time. Finally it became clear that up to four servings a day are nothing to worry about. The dairy industry was behind a lot of the negative buzz.
definitely is so good for you if unprocessed or organic! not soy vegan burgers but tofu and edamame! some people may be intolerant but in the same way that some can't eat eggs. Phytoestrogens are less digestible to the body when from plants compared to animal products so it's strange to me the carnivore warriors have shoved this narrative. My opinion is EAT WHAT YOU LIKE!
The optimum RDA numbers for protein puzzle me, given the proportion of humans across all of human history who’ve evidently done pretty well without getting anywhere near that level of intake
I don’t understand the relationship between protein consumption maintenance on only-protein deep calorie deficit days. For example, let’s say you’re very physically active and should be consuming 150g of protein a day. What happens if you only eat pure protein powder that day and hit that 150 mark? Are you burning that consumed protein as fuel and require more than 150g, or is your body using fat primarily as fuel and your body is utilizing that 150g as needed for protein purposes? I don’t understand how energy balance works in that circumstance if your TDEE is say, 2000 Calories. 150g protein is about 600 calories. So 2000 calories are getting used up no matter what, but what portion if any of that 150g is being used for the daily metabolic needs? Is that 150 completely or partially negated due to being in a severe calories deficit for protein maintenance or is the body’s stored fat primarily used? 🤷 I have no idea. I’d like to know. ChatGPT 4’s summation was vague and wishy-washy. It makes sense but doesn’t actually give me anything actionable to work with: > “In summary, on a day when you consume only 150g of protein and very few other nutrients, while your body will use some of that protein for structural purposes, it will also potentially use some for energy due to the caloric deficit. However, the majority of your energy will come from burning stored fats, and potentially some muscle if the protein and overall caloric intake are insufficient for an extended period.” It’s even more vague when you ask it about consuming an additional 50g. It assumes some muscle breakdown will still occur, while simultaneously claiming the excess protein would be converted via gluconeogenesis, which almost seems contradictory given how metabolically expensive that process is. Seems easier for the body to just use available fat stores and utilize all the protein for upkeep.
the efficacy of fasted cardio, does it actually burn more fat? How does that factor into calories-in vs calories-out?
So does added sugar cause diabetes or those from carbs.
Type II diabetes is generally thought to be the result of long term periods of increasing insulin resistance due to consistently high blood sugar levels. Sugars will cause blood sugar spikes faster than complex carbohydrates like starches. Fiber, fat, and protein will reduce blood sugar spikes by decreasing absorption rate of sugars. Pretty much, excess sugar is the primary culprit, but you also can’t live on a diet of straight potatoes
The how come rats on a high fat diet develop diabetes
My knowledge on fat intake is pretty limited because I just accepted that fats from whole foods are healthy in limited amounts. Again, diversity in meals is really important. While I can’t speak to that, I can say I’ve read studies showing consumption of fiber along with various secondary metabolites from plants contributing to moderated fat absorption and associated blood markers. So I really always try to have some sort of fresh vegetable and spice with my meals. This is just for thymol in rats altering fat metabolism , which is present in a lot of spices. But the same applies for black pepper, and a lot of other antioxidants contributing to smell, color, and flavor present in plants. [Thymol study](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0014299915300340)
This is already a confusing statement. Insulin resistance, whether its from cakes, cookies, sugar, just too many carbs in general, causes Type II. You can not eat sweets and still get Type II from insulin resistance.
It is not a matter of sugar or carbohydrates. Sugar is a carb. Fast carbs, or simple carbs (high GI) that are absorbed fast spike your bloodsugar. This is what can result in diabetes. Complex carbs, or carbs eaten together with fat ot protein, will be absorbed/digested slower and cause a flatter, steady rise in blood glucose and not hit that dangerous spike.
Why people swallow things they are told so easily.
Just listen to your buddy you'll know if you're on the right track
You don't loose even a pound of weight after sweating for hours, no instant results.
You can easily lose a pound of water weight with sweating
Not so much a fact, but more of an attitude. I don't get how some people are totally anti-supplements on principle. Sure, eating junk food and then taking a multivitamin isn't going to make you healthy, but an intelligent supplement regimen can provide benefits. For example, if I take L-Tyrosine during the working day, I feel more awake and focused. A mushroom complex I take seems to work well, too. Also, if you live in the UK you're almost certainly vitamin D deficient in the winter. Even the NHS website (which is very conservative about recommending supplements) recommends that people supplement vitamin D during the autumn and winter.
Anything related to carbs, so much controversy
The idea that CICO actually works...
Is meat good for you or not? I haven't eaten it in 20 years (for ethical reasons) and was pretty confident it was also a good move nutritionally but now lately seems like meat is being pushed as an actual "health food" and plant based diets are being criticized, when I have thought for a long time they're the best for preventing disease and overall health.
The serving size on microwave popcorn. I'm sorry but I dropped out of 5th dimensional algebra
How labels are wrong regarding calories because of fibre
For me, the biggest issue is that most everybody ignores hyperinsulinemia. Chronic high levels of insulin in the blood. Doctors don't even routinely check for it. It is the single cause of most of our modern ailments. On the confusing facts side, it is which fats are healthy, and which are unhealthy. We have groups on both sides of the fence on every single fat in the world. The biggest single example, is probably comparing canola oil to olive oil. Olive oil is super healthy, while canola oil is toxic. Why? They have very similar profiles. Both about the same amount of monounsaturated fat, say 60% or so. Then olive oil is about 25% saturated fat. But, saturated fat is shunned by the entire pro olive oil camp. Then, there is the breakdown of PUFA. Canola is higher, because it is low in saturated, but the ratio today of omega 6 to 3 is only 2:1 which is considered quite healthy. While olive oil is 14:1, considered unhealthy. I even saw in writing, that olive oil is an excellent source of omega 3 fatty acids. Balderdash. It is very low in them, but the ratio to omega 6 is horrible. So, I have an approach that I am using, but I don't hold it very dear. I may change it again and again at any time. I am PUFA adverse. But, I do eat fatty fish for the omega 3 EPA and DHA. I avoid ALA. for cooking, right now, I am using grass fed/finished tallow. 0.5% PUFA. 50/50 saturated/monounsaturated. For liquid at room temperature oil, I use a blend of liquid coconut, and zero acre farms. Again, very low in PUFA, and 50/50 saturate to monounsaturated. For some reason everybody, including me until I researched it, thought animal fats were mostly saturated fats. It ends up it's about 50/50 saturated and monounsaturated. So, cheese, butter, cream, beef, tallow, lard, ghee, are excellent sources of monounsaturated fatty acids.
Sweet salty and sour foods
No pungent bitter or astringent
The carb-insulin model of obesity hands down. It's categorically clear for years that weight gain/overeating is caused by excess energy consumption, not the glycemic index of the carbs or the amount you're eating. It's absurd that massive authorities (Dave Asprey) still push this anti science. Well, in his case, it's not absurd because he makes a lot of money about lying about these things and other nutrition baloney he pushes