No Sugar or No fat – which would you choose?
If you’ve scoured the net for dieting tips, you might have encountered low-sugar and low-fat diets. If you follow these trends regularly, you would notice that these weight loss diets are usually low on sugar, or low on fat – which begs the question:
Which is worse for your body – sugar or fat?
The talk about sugar and fat has been going on for a long time, with so-called experts weighing in on the topic. It’s a no-brainer that an excess intake of sugar or fat is bad for your body, but figuring out which of the two causes more harm to your body is like comparing apples to oranges. Fat accumulates in the body, and sugar also turns into fat if unused. Sugar and fat are both crucial energy sources for our body. These substances are an integral part of making your body work the way it should. Sugar is a carbohydrate that spares protein as a source of energy. Fat, on the other hand, insulate the body, store energy, and serves as a catalyst for proteins. Conventional knowledge tells us that one cannot live without the other, and recently, an experiment was done to put fat and sugar to the test.
In an experiment that was produced, documented, and broadcasted by BBC, twin brothers, Chris and Xand van Tulleken, have undergone an intense diet, with each taking only the minimum required amount of sugar or fat to function. The van Tulleken twins are identical and are both physicians by profession. With their matching DNA, genetics is automatically ruled out, and only diet and physical activity would be factors to weight loss.
In the experiment that the twins conducted, Chris chose an extremely low-fat diet, keeping his fat intake at only 2 percent to maintain his crucial bodily functions, and Xand chose a high protein diet that shunned all carbohydrates. The brothers went through their day-to-day activities, seemingly doing similar routines and the same fitness regimen. They have followed their extreme diets to the letter, and in a short while, the results were very easy to spot.
Xand’s diet is probably easier to follow, since his diet allows him to consume fat, eggs, and meat. It took a little while for the effects of an extremely low carb diet to surface. He had bad halitosis, constipated, and tired most of the time. He found it challenging to focus, and his endurance suffered a major setback. For the duration of the diet, Xand managed to drop 9 pounds, with him yielding better weight loss than his twin. Xand’s diet was so detrimental to his health because of the loss of carbohydrates that his body went under ketosis – an effect of a low carbohydrate intake which results to a decrease in the supply of glucose for the brain that it needs for energy. According to a nutrition expert, it is advised to stay at 100g of carbohydrates to avoid going into ketosis.
Chris’ diet wasn’t as fruitful as his twin’s result. He lost a little weight, but his diet left him hungry most of the time, even when he was eating to his fill. This is because fat promotes the feeling of satisfaction when eating. Consuming foods with the absence of fat made supposedly scrumptious food unappetizing for Chris.
The result of the diet is already obvious at first. Any diet that takes one crucial element out is a recipe for disaster. It wasn’t until this experiment that the devastating effects were defined clearly. It goes clearly that we shouldn’t blame one nutrient for causing weight problems. In the end, they concluded that it’s not the presence of sugar or fat in the diet that causes weight gain, but dangerous amounts of the two combined is a more likely suspect than just one.
At the end of the day, you’re still looking at two different things that your body needs. You need both fat and sugar to stay healthy. If you’re looking to burn fat, there’s no better way than the proven concept of caloric deficit. Watch what you eat, and burn more calories than what you eat. You can burn more calories by boosting your metabolism with the best fat burning supplements like LipoGenix Elite. You shouldn’t simply cut sugar, fat or both, and this experiment tells us why.