Visit our Popular Forums

Jdege · 07-01-2016, 07:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Muckle Flugga

Sooo… this from the NIH:

"Physical Inactivity
Many studies have shown that physical inactivity is associated with insulin resistance, often leading to type 2 diabetes. In the body, more glucose is used by muscle than other tissues. Normally, active muscles burn their stored glucose for energy and refill their reserves with glucose taken from the bloodstream, keeping blood glucose levels in balance.

Studies show that after exercising, muscles become more sensitive to insulin, reversing insulin resistance and lowering blood glucose levels. Exercise also helps muscles absorb more glucose without the need for insulin. The more muscle a body has, the more glucose it can burn to control blood glucose levels."

Ergo, not only does exercise help to prevent this prediabetic condition, it helps to treat it. Further, a lack of exercise combined with excessive glucose and glucose precursor ingestion is what normally causes the condition in the first place.

Honestly, I really don't understand what you are attempting to argue for, here.

At all times, muscles burn both fat and carbs, but the ratio differs depending upon the metabolic health of the individual, and his level of activity.

A healthy person will primarily burn carbs for an hour or so after a carb-containing meal, while glucose is entering the bloodstream from the digestive system, after which insulin levels will drop and glucagon levels will rise, and the body will transition into burning mostly fat.

For someone who is not metabolically healthy, two hours after a high-carb meal their insulin levels will still be high, their glucagon levels will still be low, they'll be seeing their glucose levels falling, and their metabolically-available fat not rising to compensate, and they will suffer from severe cravings for high-carb foods.

As for exercise - the muscles store glycogen to use during intense demand. They do not use that glycogen to any significant extent except during periods of intense demand. Remember all you've heard about the "fat burning zone". If you keep exercise intensity low enough, your heart rate below 70% of max, you'll burn mostly fat. It's only when you exceed that that you start burning muscle glycogen.

What this means is if you keep your intensity down at that level, if you engage in the hours of aerobic cardio exercise that has been the standard recommendation for so long, you're not burning the glycogen in your muscles, and you're not seeing any of the benefits that the NIH has listed.

What I'm arguing here is that the standard advice - eat less, exercise more, eat low-fat, high-carb, and engage in long duration moderate intensity exercise, is almost exactly the worst advice you can give for someone who suffers from the metabolic syndrome.

The reason people with these problems give up is that it doesn't matter how carefully they follow that advice, it simply doesn't work. I spent years following it, and in the process almost ruined my health.

What does work, for those with these problems, is a low-carb, high-fat diet, combined with short-duration, high-intensity exercise.

Lizzy Belle · 07-01-2016, 07:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Muckle Flugga

However, there is a major problem in the US food industry. It is bad elsewhere, but honestly, it is worse in the US. Sugar is EVERYWHERE and in EVERYTHING.

I haven't been to the US in ... ohmigodsamIthatold?! ... over 20 years, so can't really compare US processed foods to what I see in our Dutch supermarkets, but we have the exact same problem: sugar. Loads and loads of sugar (and salt and other nasty additives) in *everything*.

If you don't want to eat food with added refined sugar in it, you're eating fresh fruits & veggies and whatever you can make at home from scratch. You can NOT buy food in the supermarkets anymore.

Trust me - I've tried. Simply can't be done ...

Even in basic meat (don't know what it's called in English - the meat you put on your bread) contains sugar. I mean ... really?! The water, I can understand (basic economics

) but sugar?

On the bright side of all this, leaving the sugar for what it is: when my doctor wants to prescribe me expensive antibiotics, I smile and say nothanks and buy myself some cheap chicken instead

Blue Crab · 07-01-2016, 07:10

I think you're looking for "cold cuts."

Lizzy Belle · 07-01-2016, 07:11

*google, google*

Yup, I was! Thx, Blue Crab

Blue Crab · 07-01-2016, 07:23

I'm a military guy and we stick together, so last night I visited Col. Sanders. Ate it by the bucketful. Had the remainder early this morning. Not quite paleo but "original" so no carbs or sugar amirite? I am kidding but it sure tasted good and didn't make me fat.

Muckle Flugga · 07-01-2016, 07:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lizzy Belle

I haven't been to the US in ... ohmigodsamIthatold?! ... over 20 years, so can't really compare US processed foods to what I see in our Dutch supermarkets, but we have the exact same problem: sugar. Loads and loads of sugar (and salt and other nasty additives) in *everything*.

If you don't want to eat food with added refined sugar in it, you're eating fresh fruits & veggies and whatever you can make at home from scratch. You can NOT buy food in the supermarkets anymore.

Trust me - I've tried. Simply can't be done ...

Even in basic meat (don't know what it's called in English - the meat you put on your bread) contains sugar. I mean ... really?! The water, I can understand (basic economics

) but sugar?

On the bright side of all this, leaving the sugar for what it is: when my doctor wants to prescribe me expensive antibiotics, I smile and say nothanks and buy myself some cheap chicken instead

Well… I don't quite buy that it is impossible to buy food without added sugar in the supermarkets of today. That is, I don't buy it at all. Harder than 30 years ago? Perhaps. Impossible? Exaggeration.

As to the US and sugar, it is is my anecdotal experience. But I do feel that there is a higher tolerance for sugar there. When working in Newport last summer, I decided to try one of the (rather large but delicious looking) cupcakes in the specialist cupcake shop a street back from the main drag close to Newport Shipyard. It seemed that people were chowing down on them left and right no problem, so I ordered a "red velvet" a variety I have eaten elsewhere with great enjoyment. Well , even after cutting 90 percent of the icing (maybe 45% of the total volume !) off the top and laying it aside… I found that I could only get through half of it, witheringly sweet as it was (so sweet I didn't really taste anything but sugar) and then had a headache for the next couple of hours.

It is definitely true that Europe has felt the assault of the sweet as well, and over here in the Far East, you have to specifically ask not to have a half cup of sugar syrup dumped in a fruit smoothie or coffee or whatever.

Muckle Flugga · 07-01-2016, 07:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jdege

At all times, muscles burn both fat and carbs, but the ratio differs depending upon the metabolic health of the individual, and his level of activity.

A healthy person will primarily burn carbs for an hour or so after a carb-containing meal, while glucose is entering the bloodstream from the digestive system, after which insulin levels will drop and glucagon levels will rise, and the body will transition into burning mostly fat.

For someone who is not metabolically healthy, two hours after a high-carb meal their insulin levels will still be high, their glucagon levels will still be low, they'll be seeing their glucose levels falling, and their metabolically-available fat not rising to compensate, and they will suffer from severe cravings for high-carb foods.

As for exercise - the muscles store glycogen to use during intense demand. They do not use that glycogen to any significant extent except during periods of intense demand. Remember all you've heard about the "fat burning zone". If you keep exercise intensity low enough, your heart rate below 70% of max, you'll burn mostly fat. It's only when you exceed that that you start burning muscle glycogen.

What this means is if you keep your intensity down at that level, if you engage in the hours of aerobic cardio exercise that has been the standard recommendation for so long, you're not burning the glycogen in your muscles, and you're not seeing any of the benefits that the NIH has listed.

What I'm arguing here is that the standard advice - eat less, exercise more, eat low-fat, high-carb, and engage in long duration moderate intensity exercise, is almost exactly the worst advice you can give for someone who suffers from the metabolic syndrome.

The reason people with these problems give up is that it doesn't matter how carefully they follow that advice, it simply doesn't work. I spent years following it, and in the process almost ruined my health.

What does work, for those with these problems, is a low-carb, high-fat diet, combined with short-duration, high-intensity exercise.

Well, fair enough. I find that a combination of both works for me, and carbs, well, I eat my fair share, but like they used to say, as part of a "balanced" diet. As to the intense exercise, I love it. I walk a lot, swim a lot (as Boatie says, sad to see not many doing this, even in a clean bay), but here in Thailand (where I am just now) I also love the Muay Thai or Thai boxing. A beasting workout and the effects are long lasting, so I agree, but I don't see why this can't be in balance with walking and general low level exercise. Each is different however, and anyhow, glad something's working for you.

Jdege · 07-01-2016, 08:07

Manufacturers don't put sugar in foods because they're evil, or because they want to make you sick. They put sugar in foods because it increases the shelf life.

Home-made bread (flour, water, salt, and yeast) goes stale in about two days. Store-bought bread replaces some of the water with sugar, and stays fresh for a couple of weeks.

Longer shelf-life means they can make in larger batches, warehouse it longer, ship it in larger trucks, and generally take advantage of all of the economies of scale.

Which means lower prices and higher profits.

Lizzy Belle · 07-01-2016, 08:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Muckle Flugga

Well… I don't quite buy that it is impossible to buy food without added sugar in the supermarkets of today.

True - I should have written processed food

But that really is close to impossible - in pretty much everything in a box, jar or package, you'll find added sugar.

There is a growing 'sugar free' movement here in the Netherlands, trying to list supermarket products w/out added sugar. Whenever someone finds something, it's added to the list: Suikervrije producten uit de supermarkt | Ik Eet Suikervrij (examle of a list, only looking at added sugar, nothing else).
Eko plaza & biowinkel = organic supermarket, so not everybody has access to those products.

We're lucky we're seeing more organic supermarkets pop up, but if that's above budget or there are none in your neighborhood, you are going to have a hard time eating sugar-free.