Re: Sugar Tax : Wed Feb 06, 2013 3:52 pm  

Rock God X wrote:

To begin with, there's a difference between eating a whole piece of fruit and drinking a glass of fruit juice...

I understand that completely, and apologies if that wasn't clear.

Rock God X wrote:

There's little wrong with having a few pieces of fruit a day as part of a balanced diet. Sure, there's some sugar in there, but there's also plenty of beneficial nutrients and usually a bit of fibre, too. As long as you stay fairly active and/or eat the fruit as part of a larger meal, there's little wrong with it...

but what do you mean by "a few"? I'm not remotely suggesting 'none', but how many is "a few"? and activity doesn't change the impact of consuming lots of sugar.

But I was specifically meaning who think it healthy to, say, munch fruit (including dried fruit) a lot. And that will impact on the body's sugar levels – regardless of activity.

Re: Sugar Tax : Wed Feb 06, 2013 3:54 pm  

Rock God X wrote:

There's definitely a place for those drinks. Like if you're undertaking intense training or some sort of endurance event. The place certainly isn't on a kids' sports field, I'd agree, but it's even worse when you see people drinking them who aren't even doing anything.

Completely agree, i have occasionly let them have them, very hot days and tournaments, but for a normal training or game i find it unneccesary. In fact even myself when doing a normal gymworkout id rather use water

And as for people not playing sports ha ha

Although they do wash down a Greggs Steak Bake well

Re: Sugar Tax : Wed Feb 06, 2013 4:47 pm  

Mintball wrote:

Rock God X wrote:

To begin with, there's a difference between eating a whole piece of fruit and drinking a glass of fruit juice...

I understand that completely, and apologies if that wasn't clear.

Rock God X wrote:

There's little wrong with having a few pieces of fruit a day as part of a balanced diet. Sure, there's some sugar in there, but there's also plenty of beneficial nutrients and usually a bit of fibre, too. As long as you stay fairly active and/or eat the fruit as part of a larger meal, there's little wrong with it...

but what do you mean by "a few"? I'm not remotely suggesting 'none', but how many is "a few"? and activity doesn't change the impact of consuming lots of sugar.

But I was specifically meaning who think it healthy to, say, munch fruit (including dried fruit) a lot. And that will impact on the body's sugar levels – regardless of activity.

On the contrary, exercise/activity does affect how the body metabolises sugar. If you drink a sports drink whilst sitting in a chair, your body will use a small amount of the sugar released into your bloodstream, and the rest will end up in your fat stores. If you drink that same sports drink immediately before (or after) an intense bout of exercise, the sugar is utilised immediately by the working tissues for energy and/or to replenish depleted glycogen stores.

The same applies to consuming fruit. If you just sit in a chair all day eating nothing but fruit, that's probably not a good thing. If, however, you have a fairly active job, or are on your feet all day, eating the same amount of fruit will be far less likely to cause you any problems.

Re: Sugar Tax : Wed Feb 06, 2013 5:20 pm  

Rock God X wrote:

On the contrary, exercise/activity does affect how the body metabolises sugar. If you drink a sports drink whilst sitting in a chair, your body will use a small amount of the sugar released into your bloodstream, and the rest will end up in your fat stores. If you drink that same sports drink immediately before (or after) an intense bout of exercise, the sugar is utilised immediately by the working tissues for energy and/or to replenish depleted glycogen stores.

The same applies to consuming fruit. If you just sit in a chair all day eating nothing but fruit, that's probably not a good thing. If, however, you have a fairly active job, or are on your feet all day, eating the same amount of fruit will be far less likely to cause you any problems.

That's almost as I understand it.
Except that I'd say that, before the gym, if one has been eating properly, one's glycogen stores ought to be pretty well topped-up and you won't need the "sports" drink.
After the gym, the average person doesn't need a "sports" drink to replenish their glycogen stores, just going home and having their dinner would do that.

Re: Sugar Tax : Wed Feb 06, 2013 5:40 pm  

El Barbudo wrote:

Rock God X wrote:

On the contrary, exercise/activity does affect how the body metabolises sugar. If you drink a sports drink whilst sitting in a chair, your body will use a small amount of the sugar released into your bloodstream, and the rest will end up in your fat stores. If you drink that same sports drink immediately before (or after) an intense bout of exercise, the sugar is utilised immediately by the working tissues for energy and/or to replenish depleted glycogen stores.

The same applies to consuming fruit. If you just sit in a chair all day eating nothing but fruit, that's probably not a good thing. If, however, you have a fairly active job, or are on your feet all day, eating the same amount of fruit will be far less likely to cause you any problems.

That's almost as I understand it.
Except that I'd say that, before the gym, if one has been eating properly, one's glycogen stores ought to be pretty well topped-up and you won't need the "sports" drink.
After the gym, the average person doesn't need a "sports" drink to replenish their glycogen stores, just going home and having their dinner would do that.

Yeah, it depends on how long/hard you're training and what you're training for. If, for example, you're trying not to lose any lean tissue and you've just done an intense workout, waiting until you've got showered, driven home and made your tea might not be the best idea.

Another point is that your glycogen stores can only be so full, so if you're training for a long time, you might need to refuel during your workout.

You're quite correct though when you say that most people don't need to routinely use sports drinks, it was merely an example I picked to illustrate a point.

Re: Sugar Tax : Wed Feb 06, 2013 5:48 pm  

Rock God X wrote:

Another point is that your glycogen stores can only be so full, so if you're training for a long time, you might need to refuel during your workout.

Isn't that the body's way of telling you that you've done enough?

Re: Sugar Tax : Wed Feb 06, 2013 5:56 pm  

Big Graeme wrote:

Rock God X wrote:

Another point is that your glycogen stores can only be so full, so if you're training for a long time, you might need to refuel during your workout.

Isn't that the body's way of telling you that you've done enough?

So you should stop in the middle of a marathon (or a tennis match, or whatever) because your glycogen stores are depleted?

Re: Sugar Tax : Wed Feb 06, 2013 5:57 pm  

Rock God X wrote:

You're quite correct though when you say that most people don't need to routinely use sports drinks, it was merely an example I picked to illustrate a point.

The nutritionist featured on the Panorama programme referred to by another poster suggested that 'sports' drinks could have a minor benefit for a small percentage of athletes performing at an elite level, but he was absolutely unequivocal that for the average joe doing his regular work-out, they have no benefit whatsoever.

We've tried to discourage their use at our junior rugby club but as has been alluded to, some lads think they 'need' them to get through a session; our parents were shocked when we told them that the average bottle contains 9-10 teaspoons of sugar and thankfully, their use is decreasing. We're advocating water or squash for hydration, and a milk-based drink within 40 mins of post-training to aid recovery.

Bit of an uphill struggle though, when you've got Mo Farah and Jessica Ennis working against you.

Re: Sugar Tax : Wed Feb 06, 2013 6:05 pm  

bren2k wrote:

Rock God X wrote:

You're quite correct though when you say that most people don't need to routinely use sports drinks, it was merely an example I picked to illustrate a point.

The nutritionist featured on the Panorama programme referred to by another poster suggested that 'sports' drinks could have a minor benefit for a small percentage of athletes performing at an elite level, but he was absolutely unequivocal that for the average joe doing his regular work-out, they have no benefit whatsoever.

We've tried to discourage their use at our junior rugby club but as has been alluded to, some lads think they 'need' them to get through a session; our parents were shocked when we told them that the average bottle contains 9-10 teaspoons of sugar and thankfully, their use is decreasing. We're advocating water or squash for hydration, and a milk-based drink within 40 mins of post-training to aid recovery.

Bit of an uphill struggle though, when you've got Mo Farah and Jessica Ennis working against you.

I don't think it's necessarily just elite athletes who can benefit from using sports drinks, but I certainly accept the point that you have to be working pretty hard to necessitate their use. If, for example, I play two hours of five-a-side back to back as I've been known to do, I'll knock back a bottle of Lucozade Sport in between the two games. I wouldn't, however, tend to use them during a normal gym workout.

The amount of sugar in one of the drinks (dental health aside) is only harmful if your body isn't working hard enough (or long enough) to utilise it.

Re: Sugar Tax : Wed Feb 06, 2013 6:05 pm  

At bloody last! After 50 years of being fed (no pun intended), what many of us knew was pure bollox, US scientists now think butter & lard may not have been so bad after all

At bloody last! After 50 years of being fed (no pun intended), what many of us knew was pure bollox, US scientists now think butter & lard may not have been so bad after all