Pepper Brooks said:
I don't think I've seen any posts saying sugar is healthy or that your body needs it to function optimally. The folks(you included) defending it seem to be arguing that it's not poison, though probably not great for you, and that a reasonably active person can tolerate it without incurring major side effects.
I used to think this way(see my post on pg 1) and thinking about the opportunity cost of the "sugar calories" in the maintenance calories equation was part of what helped me flip the switch in my head.
For example, say I need 2,000 calories to maintain my current state and 500 are from sugar. I'm pretty OCD about hitting protein goals and know I feel, and look, better when I consistently eat "clean" and hit the goal.
What amount of protein am I giving up I those 500 calories?
There is consuming to feel fine and be reasonably healthy. Then there is consuming to feel as good as you possibly can and try and optimize for health. I don't understand why anyone would choose option 1 if they have the knowledge and means to do option 2.
You have found a way of eating that works for you, and that's awesome. Your way of eating to maintain a healthy weight and lifestyle means you limit sugar consumption.
I also have found a way of eating that works for me. My way entails eating highly variable amounts of sugar, which allows me incredible flexibility to structure my diet in a way that allows me to eat the foods I want. As long as I hit my calorie and protein goals, I freestyle everything else. And I love it
But our unique ways of eating may not work for a third person, who prefers to do it a different way than you and I do.
But it all WORKS provided:
- Calories are in check
- Protein is consistently highly
- You match your calorie intake with your energy expenditure
That's it. That makes up 95% of the whole equation. The other 5% are so minor that it's just not worth the extra effort to worry about it, as long as you're at the weight you want to be at and feel great and your metabolic bio markers are good
I never have an issue with someone saying they don't like sugar because they prefer to cut it out to eat healthy. My issue is people who loudly proclaim sugar is "poison" and offer zero context to support that argument. When pressed to explain why "sugar is poison", they point to some guru online who's convinced them that sugar is poison. And that "guru" very likely has their own very poor understanding of the science, or they're intentionally misleading you to make a profit off some product or service that they claim "is the only thing that works". In many cases, it's both issues
