Sk8man101
Member
How many grams of carbs depends on your goals and how many calories you want to consume.
I'm on that perma-bulk status I try to hit around 250-300 a day.
MESO-Rx
Anabolic Steroids
Sugar!
- Thread starter tdad
- Start date
I'm on that perma-bulk status I try to hit around 250-300 a day.
GeorgeForemanRules
Banned
Dummy- a retard that thinks sugar is a valuable carbohydrate source because as dummy thinks carbs are all the same.
Sk8man101
Member
I never said they were exactly the same I even highlighted some of the differences in my previous post.
Care to prove me wrong?
GeorgeForemanRules
Banned
I will be glad to once you have proved me wrong young lady.
Sk8man101
Member
No you won't. Cause I already did prove you wrong.
In fact this is a VERY basic understand of the physiology of the digestive system and biochemistry. Any RN would know this, it is borderline common knowledge in the medical field.
GeorgeForemanRules
Banned
Still waiting..................we both know you are not smart enough to prove me wrong.
Sk8man101
Member
The only statement you have made to be proved wrong is, "sugar is a drug"
I proved you wrong with the deffintions I previously posted.
Like it or not you learned somthing from me today.
GeorgeForemanRules
Banned
This lady can not prove my truth wrong. All she can do is attack and insult. Pathetic.
Sk8man101
Member
Alright man you are obviously just trolling me so this will be my last message on the subject.
no_name
New Member
Sugar aka glucose is the main energy source for your brain. It might be helpful to have some. And before you mention it, yes, I know about gluconeogenesis.
Sugar in reasonable amounts is ok, excessive amounts not ok, same with protein or fats.
You and Sk8man get it lol!!!
Megadick3000
Member
Hey thats beleivable if hes a diabetic!
Sk8man101
Member
Haha true even though dying from hyperglycemia is really uncommon!
I was waiting for someone to say that lol.
tenpoundsleft
Member
Fructose is a different beast - that goes to the liver for processing into fat.
Fructose is of the devil.
Fructose is of the devil.
I always laugh when people mention that fructose can be converted into fat and yet conveniently forget to add that fat oxidation also goes up at the same time = zero net effect.
In excess, it's bad. As with most things
tenpoundsleft
Member
I always laugh when people mention that fructose can be converted into fat and yet conveniently forget to add that fat oxidation also goes up at the same time = zero net effect.
In excess, it's bad. As with most things
Well, I laugh at you then:
"Fructose is metabolized, primarily in the liver, by phosphorylation on the 1-position, a process that bypasses the rate-limiting phosphofructokinase step (4). Hepatic metabolism of fructose thus favors lipogenesis, and it is not surprising that several studies have found changes in circulating lipids when subjects eat high-fructose diets. "
How bad is fructose?
Fructose has no merit in any diet. Fruits are tasty, but keep them to a minimum.
Your relying on Bray, a well known fructose zealot who I've verbally raped for his shitty opinion papers before. This scenario is ironic since he completely destroyed Taubes for his illogical BS about carbs & insulin before showing the world that he's built from the same cloth.
How about this, you provide me with the papers that good old Bray is referring to and I'll proceed to show you the retarded, fantasy doses used to produce those results and thereby validate my original point about fructose only being bad in excess. Warning: I've done this exact thing to a 2010 paper written Bray a few years ago, so yea...
As for your statement about fruits, one of the most nutrient dense food groups around, well...leave nutrition to the pros man, and try to swallow this in the mean time:
The effect of two energy-restricted diets, a low-fructose diet versus a moderate natural fructose diet, on weight loss and metabolic syndrome param... - PubMed - NCBI
"...For weight loss achievement, an energy-restricted moderate natural fructose diet was superior to a low-fructose diet."
Last edited:
Sk8man101
Member
Ok man. Fructose is hardly different than glucose or any of the other carbs you eat everyday. This is another common misconception and I can explain why.
When they do these studies, they put people on a high calorie "fructose" diet. OF COURSE they are going to gain some fat, because they are eating a caloric surplus. The same thing would happen if the sugar happened to be glucose or dextrose or whatever kind of monosaccharide, even polysaccharide you choose.
Glucose and fructose and all the rest of the monosaccharides all have THE SAME chemical formula!
c6-h12-o6
This begs the question, If they are the same thing, then why have different names for them?
The only SLIGHT difference is the arrangement of these molecules, which is why they have different names in the biochemistry world.
Don't be fooled by the the market scheme, "Contains no Fructose'. It's all the same.
Sk8man101
Member
Miss the edit window^
I can site my sources, but it would take me a while to find it all.
Most of my knowledge comes from Elaine Marieb and her books as well as her peers who contribute to them.
I can site my sources, but it would take me a while to find it all.
Most of my knowledge comes from Elaine Marieb and her books as well as her peers who contribute to them.
Zilla is correct. Fructose in normal quantities isn't bad for you. Most studies that show fructose as being bad use an ABSURD amount of fructose. Something that isn't even realistic.
