[a8da6b0c91d]

The glycemic index is a totally broken concept. Your body and tissues are made to happily work with surges of insulin and there is absolutely nothing problematic about that.

From a weight loss perspective sugars, such as in fruit juice, are superior to starches for two reasons. The fructose is thermogenic and raises base metabolic rate. Secondly, starches tend to reach lower lengths of the intestine undigested where they can feed bacteria that generate endotoxins.

Low starch, high sugar, low fat, and 80 grams of protein a day is a very good formula for weight loss.

[manmal]

The amount of macronutrients to be consumed would of course depend on your weight and activity level. I use this calculator for Leangains: http://sareyko.net/leancalc/

I agree that fructose (whole fruits) is preferrable to starch, and people with colitis/IBD seem to find relief from that: http://www.breakingtheviciouscycle.info

But I'd recommend agains juices - they allow to pour down way more fructose quicker than you could chew in the form of whole fruit.

[grannyg00se]

You're reccomending a high sugar diet for weight loss. Yet its nutritional value is nil. How does it benefit? Low starch, high sugar, low fat, decent protein sounds like a diet that would be improved by omitting the sugar.

[dnissley]

That diet would be low in everything except protein. Of course, in theory, that would be better for weight loss. But the question is whether or not that is really sustainable, which is especially important for a long term goal.

IIRC, although your body can run on just the glucose it gets by breaking down fat, it is less efficient. In my own experience this shows up as a negative effect on mood -- which makes me more likely to want to eat (and binge).