Are carrots the only food that effect you skin?

Are carrots the only food that effect you skin?

Unattended Children Pitbull Club Shirt $21.68

Black Rifle Cuck Company, Conservative Humor Shirt $21.68

Unattended Children Pitbull Club Shirt $21.68

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Real question is:
    Does is effect your skin enough so that it justifies the consume?

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    who the hell told you carrots affect your skin

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      You

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      they literally do
      they give you a healthy glow, which makes people find you more attractive

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        [...]

        How do i know is not all bullshit?
        i mean it can be true that it helps the skin, but does it do that enough that its actually visible?
        maybe its all a placebo effect

        Beta carotene is toxic and if you eat too much of it, one of the symptoms of that toxicity is that your body loses the ability to properly process it and the excess ends up in your skin. This is known as carotenosis.
        >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carotenosis

        So yes, you can change your skin color if you're white and you eat an excessive amount of carrots or other carotene containing foods, but you are literally poisoning yourself to do so. Rather than eating a pound of carrots a day, try going outside.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Probably the most moronic post in this thread. Congrats.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      [...]

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        How do i know is not all bullshit?
        i mean it can be true that it helps the skin, but does it do that enough that its actually visible?
        maybe its all a placebo effect

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          It works, but you will need to eat an absurd amount.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            The top hand looks better

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Looks like it depends on how much vitamin A your body already has. The color comes from excess beto-carotene.
            So if you eat half a dozen eggs you can probably get away with only eating a few carrots.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          I used to drink carrot juice all childhood and my skin has warmer hue than my parents. I also like eating raw carrots a lot instead of snacks. It's great because i don't become pale-white-borderline-pink in winter, it's always as if i was slightly tanned.

          https://i.imgur.com/RMVLmAM.jpg

          It works, but you will need to eat an absurd amount.

          This looks unhealthy. Middle point between the two would be perfect.

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >he's not silvermaxxing
    NGMI

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >silver price goes up
      >personal net worth increases

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous
  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    no, all high carb foods affect your skin in a negative way by destroying elastin and collagen production
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5403374/
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC296942/

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I phrased it wrong, it's not high carb foods, rather fast carbs that frick you up and large quantities of carbs that raise your blood sugar for extended periods of time

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Sugar coffee wendys and jack and coke in the restaurant best pwo. Might even smoke a bowl or 2 dont mind me.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I phrased it wrong, it's not high carb foods, rather fast carbs that frick you up and large quantities of carbs that raise your blood sugar for extended periods of time

      moronic takes like this are why laypeople should be completely banned from accessing research articles. Son, your articles are about how insulin resistance in diabetics has side effects that restrict covalent bonding of sugar molecules to skin collagen molecules. I can't imagine how you could interpret this as
      >all high carb foods affect your skin in a negative way by destroying elastin and collagen production
      other than skimming the abstract, understanding about 15% of what you read, and filling in the gaps purely with your own imagination.

      To be specific, the effects described in your studies are the result of insulin resistance and one of the best ways to reverse insulin resistance is to feed someone a diet that is extremely high in carbs and low in fat. So no, these effects are not the result of eating high carb foods, and would in fact be reversed by a diet high in carbs, which has been consistently proven to reverse insulin resistance.

      >https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/5319129/
      >fasting blood glucose levels decreased, glucose tolerance improved, and insulin requirements were either unchanged or decreased, when patients with insulin-dependent diabetes were fed carbohydrate-rich diets.
      >https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/13984377/
      >Fasting plasma glucose decreased on the 85% carbohydrate diet in all 22 subjects in this study. Oral glucose tolerance was improved, as reflected by the diminished absolute glucose area.
      >https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM197103112841004
      >These data suggest that the high carbohydrate diet increased the sensitivity of peripheral tissues to insulin.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        why don't you post research that disproves the claim that blood sugar disrupts skin quality?

        >Nutrition and aging skin: sugar and glycation
        https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20620757/
        >The effect of sugars on aging skin is governed by the simple act of covalently cross-linking two collagen fibers, which renders both of them incapable of easy repair. Glucose and fructose link the amino acids present in the collagen and elastin that support the dermis, producing advanced glycation end products or "AGEs." This process is accelerated in all body tissues when sugar is elevated and is further stimulated by ultraviolet light in the skin

        https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23467327/
        >It has been shown that skin collagen glycation positively correlates with blood glucose levels and that a diet low in A.G.E.s may have a beneficial effect on skin glycation.

        So the question is how to keep your blood glucose levels low.

        Thanks for posting 2 papers from the 60s which look at high carb diet but don't compare it to a low carb diet. Here's some papers that do compare high carb vs low carb and end up recommending lower carbs

        >Comparison of low- and high-carbohydrate diets for type 2 diabetes management: a randomized trial
        https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002916523137026
        > Both diets achieved substantial weight loss and reduced HbA1c and fasting glucose. The LC diet, which was high in unsaturated fat and low in saturated fat, achieved greater improvements in the lipid profile, blood glucose stability, and reductions in diabetes medication requirements, suggesting an effective strategy for the optimization of T2D management.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          [...]
          cont

          >Low versus high carbohydrate diet in type 1 diabetes: A 12-week randomized open-label crossover study
          https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30924570/
          >Compared with an intake of 250 g of carbohydrate per day, restriction of carbohydrate intake to 100 g per day in adults with type 1 diabetes reduced time spent in hypoglycaemia, glycaemic variability and weight with no effect on cardiovascular risk factors.

          >Effect of a high-protein, low-carbohydrate diet on blood glucose control in people with type 2 diabetes
          https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15331548/
          Thus, a LoBAG diet ingested for 5 weeks dramatically reduced the circulating glucose concentration in people with untreated type 2 diabetes. Potentially, this could be a patient-empowering way to ameliorate hyperglycemia without pharmacological intervention. The long-term effects of such a diet remain to be determined.

          >i googled some relevant words and these are the studies that popped up
          That's nice but that's not how it works. If you already have your conclusion decided then it's easy to find one or two isolated studies that "prove" what you're already convinced is correct. Again, this is why this stuff needs to be gatekept so idiots like you can't misinterpret it to push your fad diet. You clearly aren't even reading the studies you're posting; you're literally just skimming the abstracts and posting what seems relevant.
          >papers from the 60s
          Do you imagine that the human body has changed significantly in the past 60 years? The 1960s were the peak of human scientific growth and progress.

          >So the question is how to keep your blood glucose levels low.
          We answered that already

          [...]
          moronic takes like this are why laypeople should be completely banned from accessing research articles. Son, your articles are about how insulin resistance in diabetics has side effects that restrict covalent bonding of sugar molecules to skin collagen molecules. I can't imagine how you could interpret this as
          >all high carb foods affect your skin in a negative way by destroying elastin and collagen production
          other than skimming the abstract, understanding about 15% of what you read, and filling in the gaps purely with your own imagination.

          To be specific, the effects described in your studies are the result of insulin resistance and one of the best ways to reverse insulin resistance is to feed someone a diet that is extremely high in carbs and low in fat. So no, these effects are not the result of eating high carb foods, and would in fact be reversed by a diet high in carbs, which has been consistently proven to reverse insulin resistance.

          >https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/5319129/
          >fasting blood glucose levels decreased, glucose tolerance improved, and insulin requirements were either unchanged or decreased, when patients with insulin-dependent diabetes were fed carbohydrate-rich diets.
          >https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/13984377/
          >Fasting plasma glucose decreased on the 85% carbohydrate diet in all 22 subjects in this study. Oral glucose tolerance was improved, as reflected by the diminished absolute glucose area.
          >https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM197103112841004
          >These data suggest that the high carbohydrate diet increased the sensitivity of peripheral tissues to insulin.

          >fasting blood glucose levels decreased, glucose tolerance improved
          >Fasting plasma glucose decreased
          >increased the sensitivity of peripheral tissues to insulin
          I realize that you don't understand what that last one means - higher insulin sensitivity means better glucose control.

          >https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20620757/
          This paper doesn't say what you seem to think it does. Read past the abstract.
          >https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002916523137026
          This paper claims that your "glucose stability" will improve if you eat a diet high in seed oils. Don't think I'll be doing that.
          >https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30924570/
          I see that in addition to not reading your own studies, you didn't read mine either. The important factor in all my studies (and countless more that I could have posted) is that the diets are high carb and low fat, the low fat being just as important as the high carb. While neither are good for you, a low carb, high fat diet is better for you than a high carb, high fat diet.
          >https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15331548/
          >"high protein, low carb"
          Your body metabolizes protein to glucose as fast as it can, not really relevant.

          Do better.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >If you already have your conclusion decided then it's easy to find one or two isolated studies that "prove" what you're already convinced is correct.
            isn't that what you're doing?
            I posted 3 relevant papers you replied with, "no that's wrong", "I'm not gonna eat seed oils", "protein metabolizes". Ok? How does that disprove their findings?

            The 60 year old research papers you posted don't compare high carb diets to other dietary choices but you still claim it's better. Why don't you share with us research that compares high carb vs lower carb and clearly states that high carb is better at lowering blood glucose levels?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        why don't you post research that disproves the claim that blood sugar disrupts skin quality?

        >Nutrition and aging skin: sugar and glycation
        https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20620757/
        >The effect of sugars on aging skin is governed by the simple act of covalently cross-linking two collagen fibers, which renders both of them incapable of easy repair. Glucose and fructose link the amino acids present in the collagen and elastin that support the dermis, producing advanced glycation end products or "AGEs." This process is accelerated in all body tissues when sugar is elevated and is further stimulated by ultraviolet light in the skin

        https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23467327/
        >It has been shown that skin collagen glycation positively correlates with blood glucose levels and that a diet low in A.G.E.s may have a beneficial effect on skin glycation.

        So the question is how to keep your blood glucose levels low.

        Thanks for posting 2 papers from the 60s which look at high carb diet but don't compare it to a low carb diet. Here's some papers that do compare high carb vs low carb and end up recommending lower carbs

        >Comparison of low- and high-carbohydrate diets for type 2 diabetes management: a randomized trial
        https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002916523137026
        > Both diets achieved substantial weight loss and reduced HbA1c and fasting glucose. The LC diet, which was high in unsaturated fat and low in saturated fat, achieved greater improvements in the lipid profile, blood glucose stability, and reductions in diabetes medication requirements, suggesting an effective strategy for the optimization of T2D management.

        cont

        >Low versus high carbohydrate diet in type 1 diabetes: A 12-week randomized open-label crossover study
        https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30924570/
        >Compared with an intake of 250 g of carbohydrate per day, restriction of carbohydrate intake to 100 g per day in adults with type 1 diabetes reduced time spent in hypoglycaemia, glycaemic variability and weight with no effect on cardiovascular risk factors.

        >Effect of a high-protein, low-carbohydrate diet on blood glucose control in people with type 2 diabetes
        https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15331548/
        Thus, a LoBAG diet ingested for 5 weeks dramatically reduced the circulating glucose concentration in people with untreated type 2 diabetes. Potentially, this could be a patient-empowering way to ameliorate hyperglycemia without pharmacological intervention. The long-term effects of such a diet remain to be determined.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >one of the best ways to reverse insulin resistance is to feed someone a diet that is extremely high in carbs and low in fat.
        that doesn't make any sense. the more carbs you eat, the more resistant you'll become to insulin because your body will be producing more than it needs, so it will down regulate your sensitivity to it to compensate.

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Beets, carrots, Rhubarb are the only 3 concentrated enough in dye to do anything iirc and people don't usually like the other 2 enough for their skin to go red, plus red is harder to see than orange

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    what is it with this fricking board and carrots are you so fricking insecure about eating vegetables that you're seeking external validation on IST? Are you afraid eating a fricking plant will make you not a man or something? Why carrots specifically? Is it a phallus freud thing?

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I googled around for this yesterday and most experts seemed to agree that you needed to eat like 10 carrots a day to get an effect, which seems pretty hard to incorporate into ones diet naturally. Some memers on social media claim that 3 a day is enough though.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >10 carrots a day
      >hard to incorporate into ones diet naturally
      homie just eat your goddamn vegetables

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    God I love it when two autists get in a paper citing war with each other, so much fun reading!
    >why laypeople should be completely banned from accessing research articles

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I'm not sure how else you expect people to back up their claims. You're welcome to leave the thread if you don't like it.

      >If you already have your conclusion decided then it's easy to find one or two isolated studies that "prove" what you're already convinced is correct.
      isn't that what you're doing?
      I posted 3 relevant papers you replied with, "no that's wrong", "I'm not gonna eat seed oils", "protein metabolizes". Ok? How does that disprove their findings?

      The 60 year old research papers you posted don't compare high carb diets to other dietary choices but you still claim it's better. Why don't you share with us research that compares high carb vs lower carb and clearly states that high carb is better at lowering blood glucose levels?

      >isn't that what you're doing?
      No, what I'm doing is providing extremely concrete and objective fact from multiple studies

      [...]
      moronic takes like this are why laypeople should be completely banned from accessing research articles. Son, your articles are about how insulin resistance in diabetics has side effects that restrict covalent bonding of sugar molecules to skin collagen molecules. I can't imagine how you could interpret this as
      >all high carb foods affect your skin in a negative way by destroying elastin and collagen production
      other than skimming the abstract, understanding about 15% of what you read, and filling in the gaps purely with your own imagination.

      To be specific, the effects described in your studies are the result of insulin resistance and one of the best ways to reverse insulin resistance is to feed someone a diet that is extremely high in carbs and low in fat. So no, these effects are not the result of eating high carb foods, and would in fact be reversed by a diet high in carbs, which has been consistently proven to reverse insulin resistance.

      >https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/5319129/
      >fasting blood glucose levels decreased, glucose tolerance improved, and insulin requirements were either unchanged or decreased, when patients with insulin-dependent diabetes were fed carbohydrate-rich diets.
      >https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/13984377/
      >Fasting plasma glucose decreased on the 85% carbohydrate diet in all 22 subjects in this study. Oral glucose tolerance was improved, as reflected by the diminished absolute glucose area.
      >https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM197103112841004
      >These data suggest that the high carbohydrate diet increased the sensitivity of peripheral tissues to insulin.

      that show very clearly that a high carb, low fat diet improves all metrics related to glucose metabolism. You've posted a bunch of completely irrelevant studies and you can handwave my criticisms of them but that doesn't make them any less valid.

      >I posted 3 relevant papers you replied with, "no that's wrong", "I'm not gonna eat seed oils", "protein metabolizes". Ok? How does that disprove their findings?
      The first study literally says, in the body of the text, that dietary sugar is irrelevant in the context of their findings and that a higher sugar intake does not correlate with skin aging. This is why I told you to actually read the paper which, again, I can clearly see that you didn't.

      The second study, in addition to recommending a diet high in seed oil, uses a diet that is
      >53% carb, 17% protein, 30% fat
      as the "high carb" diet. This is neither high carb nor, as I keep reminding you is the relevant factor, low fat, and as such is completely worthless.

      The final study, aside from what I've already said about it, trialed a similar ratio at 55:15:30 for carbs:protein:fat. If you use an objectively unhealthy macro ratio as your control diet then it's easy to make whatever fad you're testing look good.

      >The 60 year old research papers you posted
      I understand that you know nothing about nutrition but the effects of a high carb, low fat diet are so well known and so thoroughly studied at this point that there is no point in studying it further. It has been accepted knowledge since the '70s and I'm sorry you haven't done any research past watching some keto shills on youtube.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        lol I'm don't recommend keto or anything close to it, nor do I watch youtube
        >The first study literally says, in the body of the text, that dietary sugar is irrelevant in the context of their findings

        lmao so you're just making shit up now?
        1st study article body:
        >Consider that the long-term results obtained with
        cosmetic procedures are likely to be much better if healing
        is not compromised by a diet high in preformed AGEs and
        dietary sugar.
        >compromised by high dietary sugar

        1st study conclusion:
        >By reducing inflammation and the burden of oxidative stress, the
        potential collateral health benefits of a diet low in simple
        sugars and dietary AGEs are many
        >recommend diet low in simple sugar

        >Studies use macro ratio you don't like
        The point is they prove that by lowering the share of carbs they lower blood glucose levels.

        >effects of a high carb, low fat diet are so well known at this point that there is no point in studying it further
        I posted 3 studies from 5-10 years ago that do study it further and don't agree with your 60 year old papers.

        Post studies with 2 or more groups with macro ratios you agree with if you want to disprove that.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >I'm not sure how else you expect people to back up their claims. You're welcome to leave the thread if you don't like it.
        the other autist is right, the studies you've been posting are either not proving the point you claim or tangentially suggesting at an undisclosed uninvestigated mechanism. You'r eprobably better off looking for buokinetics papers regarding the biomechanical pathways your describing, unless you're already scraping that bin for these. I'm too tired and tangential to my field to do any research to help/disprove you but between the two people posting papers, yours suck.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      nice...what's the next step in your policy : start burning all the books you don't agree with and requiring member of the party cards to access certain documents?
      Jesus get a hold of yourself, everybody and their mother has a Masters of Research in any field nowadays. Stop sniffing your own farts over the fact two morons who could be from the same graduating crop as you are arguing about shit on the internet, with source (TM).

      Babby learned about research methodology and sourcing in school and thinks that this essential didactic process needs to be an arcanic knowledge gatekept from others unless they shill out 50k for a degree, so some dumb TA can teach them to use a basic search engine tool for literature like pubmed/equivalent.

      Your ego need to be taken down a couple notches.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >nice...what's the next step in your policy : start burning all the books you don't agree with and requiring member of the party cards to access certain documents?
        learn how to read a fricking writeup lmao you're so victimized for being called out as a midwit you've immediately jumpe don the defensive, methinks she doth protest too much

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          I'm the guy you've been arguing this for most of this thread and I'm not the one making the ministry of truth arguments
          post fricking papers, idc about political arguments on IST

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I'm literally not the one you're arguing with, I'm another spectator anon who thinks you're fricking moronic, the other anon is right and you're stupid, keep it up dumbfrick

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              ok, prove it

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Go read the other anons fricking papers, if you haven't already done that it's obvious you're not engaging in the debate YOURE fricking arguing in gay, I accept you have no fricking arguments now that you're backed into a corner

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          not even the guy you were originally talking to.
          I just think you need to take a step back and read what you wrote about how ''laypeople should not have access to scientific literature'' and see how much of a pompous gay it makes you come across as, and how fricking moronic in the interest of science it is to propose such extreme ideas like ''ideas or information should only be accessible to certain people''.
          You do know that the scientific process involves making mistakes or forming wrong hypothesis? I could care less if one gay always ends up being wrong, all I care about is that morons like you stop trying to legislate or police who gets to have access to information or knowledge.
          But you're probably one of those gays who's always right and never makes any mistakes and view those who do as inferior or lesser than you, meanwhile at least this gay is conducting his own research, taking risks, experimenting. All things that in the end better the pool of information for all of us.

          So shut the frick up next time and mind your little extremist penchants and fascist takes on scientific procedures.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            learn how to cite a paper that actually backs you up dumbfrick, I'm in school to work towards funding this kind of study, do the same or stfu

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Jesus this guy still hasn't figured out I just showed up to read about carrots and didn't contribute anything to the conversation other than to tell him to stop preventing or judging people for conducting their own research, regardless of outcome.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      It's a reminder (as if we needed more) that IST is basically r*edit now

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Nope. Eating too many sweet potatoes can turn your skin orange from too much vitamin A

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The American Diabetes Association (ADA) used to recommend that people with diabetes get around 45% of their calories from carbs. However, after 2012 ADA now promotes an individualized approach
    https://diabetesjournals.org/care/article/35/2/434/38403/Macronutrients-Food-Groups-and-Eating-Patterns-in

  12. 1 month ago
    SwedishBrorsan

    carrots and potatoes is whats worth eating for skin and gut health at least

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Skinmaxing
    Back on track help me out bros.
    Beta carotine for orange,
    anastaxin and lycopene for a reddish tinge

    So beta carotine is also in broccoli and spinich/kale as well the other stuff just blocks the color and their healthier
    Also luetin colors the skin and is in kale/spinich
    So a handful of baby carrots 2 handfuls of brocholi and kale everyday raw.
    4 mg anastaxin supplement and like 1 cup of tomato sauce from a can for lycoene maybe every other day with some added olive oil for absorption

    I started like a week ago anyone have thoughts.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Sounds like a soup I eat almost daily that has chicken, garlic and lentils in it too. Idk if cooking interferes with anything in terms of absorbtion or availability. Frankly the soup did frick all for me until I started added 15-25g of olive oil to it at the end.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >anastaxin
      Presumably you mean astaxanthin.. Tried it, it inhibits test->dht so your estrogen will increase. Stopped it because it made me emotional after each dose @ 1x12mg per week

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    berries do the same

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Seems that berries are mostly vit c and antioxidents. Maybe a tiny bit of carotenids.

      Sounds like a soup I eat almost daily that has chicken, garlic and lentils in it too. Idk if cooking interferes with anything in terms of absorbtion or availability. Frankly the soup did frick all for me until I started added 15-25g of olive oil to it at the end.

      Their fat soluble so you absorb them better with some fat, I dont think you need much

      Cooking them makes the beta carotine in carrots more bioavailable. Not sure how much
      For lycopene sites said in tomatoes its like 5 times more absorable cooked vs raw tomatoes

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Eating five servings of carrots per week was linked to a 20% reduction in developing all types of cancer

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      never talking to a doctor has a 100% reduction in cancer

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *