Anyone else think rice eaters are just delusional sugar addicts? page 2

[Neckhammer]

Rice gets broken down into simple sugars for the body to use, doesn't it?

Rice as a starch and there has been significant amounts of research done that show certain individuals may be better adapted at breaking it down and utilizing it as energy than others. Amylase. Some have more of it than others. I would assume those with an abundance have better use of the product for energy. Those without are better off getting energy from elsewhere. But, as a low carber (as I am also) you may make the question as to even if you are acclimated to this particular substace is it actually necessary OR beneficial. Why would glyconeogenisis suffice. Well, that is were it gets hairy......I could continue with my own hypothesis here but I'll just leave the questions....In the end we know of humans surviving AND thriving in each state.....

[sbhikes]

food jesus. That's funny.

[mostofthetime7]

Some people CAN handle rice, and the amount of it would be a factor as well. I could eat about 500g of carbs every day when I was 20, and I was scary skinny. Now at 47? Not so much. I also could eat more carbs when my job was more physical, but as driving replaces the walking (not my choice) then I'm less able to handle it.

So it just depends.

But I do think it's a little rude to be preaching to everyone here right after you join, when you don't really know what issues people are dealing with or how much they have been successful or failed with it.

Just because your skinny doesn't mean you need carbs aren't negatively affecting your body.

[magicmerl]

food jesus. That's funny.

It is indeed.

Rice gets broken down into simple sugars for the body to use, doesn't it?

It does, but people can mistake that for table sugar. Glucose is a fairly benign carbohydrate, particularly if you have a good hormone balance already, or lots of cardio.

[bloodorchid]

is this where people start posting studies rebutting your OP? and then you go 'oh snap! here's my rebutt of your rebutt'

like there's been forever so many times here?

did you know there's now a post out there talking about how low carbing stresses the female body?

WHERE'S YOUR GOD NOW

[mostofthetime7]

Rice as a starch and there has been significant amounts of research done that show certain individuals may be better adapted at breaking it down and utilizing it as energy than others. Amylase. Some have more of it than others. I would assume those with an abundance have better use of the product for energy. Those without are better off getting energy from elsewhere. But, as a low carber (as I am also) you may make the question as to even if you are acclimated to this particular substace is it actually necessary OR beneficial. Why would glyconeogenisis suffice. Well, that is were it gets hairy......I could continue with my own hypothesis here but I'll just leave the questions....In the end we know of humans surviving AND thriving in each state.....

All Amylase does is convert starches into sugars, correct? They are just more adapted to being sugar addicts if they have more of that perhaps, but it doesn't mean its optimal for them.

[mostofthetime7]

It is indeed.

It does, but people can mistake that for table sugar. Glucose is a fairly benign carbohydrate, particularly if you have a good hormone balance already, or lots of cardio.

You mean chronic cardio that is going to cause excessive inflammation in my body? No thanks.

[magicmerl]

You mean chronic cardio that is going to cause excessive inflammation in my body? No thanks.

I agree. You're inflammatory enough as it is.

All Amylase does is convert starches into sugars, correct? They are just more adapted to being sugar addicts if they have more of that perhaps, but it doesn't mean its optimal for them.

If you were'n t such a tool you'd realise that paleo/primal is a form of eating that is based on evolutionary science. And given that humans have significantly more salivary amylase than other primates, that's a sign that we are much more able to successfully consume starches than them.

[tarek]

Anyone else think human beings are just delusional food addicts?

Your qualifications ("im completely ripped, can lift more than ever, have tons of energy, eat in a 4 hour window most days, i don't get sunburn anymore, i seem to be getting more muscular all the time and i hardly work out") hardly defend your way of life as a universal solution for everyone. What about the many people throughout the health community who tried low carb for years and still failed miserably? What about the people who are just as "ripped" as you but eat high carb?

When you live in a society where Coke Zero and Oreos are the norm, white rice should be the least of your concerns.

[mostofthetime7]

I agree. You're inflammatory enough as it is.

If you were'n t such a tool you'd realise that paleo/primal is a form of eating that is based on evolutionary science. And given that humans have significantly more salivary amylase than other primates, that's a sign that we are much more able to successfully consume starches than them.

I know lots about evolution. It's possible that's just an evolutionary response to agriculture and not a reflection on the diet of our earlier ancestors. Even if these people are a bit more adapted to the change of environment, but it does not mean fat isn't a better source of energy for them as well.