Baby explanation of why carbs are harmful?

(Michael - When reality fails to meet expectations, the problem is not reality.) #23

Carbs are an option. The daily requirement for carbs is zero. There is no carb deficiency disease because gluconeogenesis synthesizes all the glucose we need thus there is no need to eat it. The only difference between so-called ‘simple’ carbs and so-called ‘complex’ carbs is about 2 hours to metabolize to glucose. All carbs have the same amount of energy whether ‘simple’ or ‘complex’. Your mileage may vary, but it’s the ups and downs of glucose and insulin from eating carbs that makes you perpetually hungry by messing up ghrelin signalling.

(A fool and his bacon are soon parted) #24

Apart from sugars, carbohydrates are nothing more than glucose molecules arranged in various ways. If we can digest them, we call them dietary carbohydrates, if we can’t, we call them fibre. Complex carbohydrates contain more energy only because they contain more glucose.

Moreover, I would question the matter of “less hungry.” In my carb-burning days, I could easily fill my stomach to the literal bursting-point with pasta, and still be hungry for more. On a low-carbohydrate diet, I find I can go many hours between meals, without hunger. I watched, over a couple of decades, as the experts’ nutrition advice, post-dietary guidelines, evolved from “three square meals a day” (with several hours between meals) to “three large meals and three snacks a day” (i.e., eating every couple of hours) as a coping strategy for the constantly recurring hunger many people feel on a high-carbohydrate diet. This constantly recurring hunger actually has a good mechanistic explanation, involving how the elevated insulin level that results from consuming so much carbohydrate blocks the receptors in the brain that are supposed to detect how much energy the body has stored.