I've stopped eating one food - now my 8 health issues have gone
Fatmagul Karabacak, 23, lost 5kg in a month and has experienced clearer skin, no bloating, better sleep and improved mental clarity
A TikTok creator has revealed her incredible no-sugar journey, which has taken the platform by storm, gaining over 16.6 million views. For years, 23-year-old Fatmagül Karabacak struggled with several health issues, including bloating, fatigue, inflammation, poor sleep, dull skin, and lack of focus, prompting her to seek a change.
Initially committing to the popular 75 Hard challenge on social media, Fatmagül soon made a long-term shift towards a no-sugar lifestyle, declaring she's never felt better. The 75 Hard Challenge, made famous by entrepreneur and public speaker Andy Frisella, is an intensive 75-day program designed to boost mental toughness, physical fitness, and self-discipline by adhering to strict daily guidelines.
The challenge involves sticking to a healthy diet plan and completing two workouts daily (including one outdoors). As well as drinking a gallon of water, reading 10 pages from a self-improvement book, and taking a daily progress photo, all for 75 consecutive days.
During the challenge, Fatmagül decided to cut out sugar from her diet. She claims to have experienced remarkable changes since making the switch, including clearer skin, reduced bloating, improved sleep, and enhanced mental clarity, all due to ditching sugar, reports Bristol Live.
Before giving up processed foods and sugar, she described herself as slender but with a "fat face". Consuming too much sugar can lead to a fuller face, mainly due to water retention. Speaking to Fat Burners Only about her transformation, she said: "I just woke up one day and had enough."
'The best decision I've made for my body, mind and skin'
Fatmagül has experienced remarkable transformations after cutting out sugar for just four weeks, including enhanced sleep, consistent energy levels, and sharper focus. She said: "I sleep 7 to 9 hours now and actually feel rested. I've lost over 5 kilograms, my skin's clearer, and I've said goodbye to bloating. Pants I couldn't fit into before? Now they're too big!"
The benefits weren't solely physical. "I just feel so much better mentally, I'm calmer, clearer, and honestly just lighter all around. Not just in my body, but in my mind too - like I've got a sense of control back," she explained.
'I'm not restricting myself, I'm listening to my body'
Her approach differs from temporary diets because she only eliminated sugar. "I'm not starving or skipping out on carbs, I'm simply just eating more intuitively now, fuelling my body with food that makes me feel good," she said.
Fatmagül attributes her success to the fact that removing sugar isn't a quick fix but a lasting lifestyle adjustment. She said: "I've found a few go-to healthy snacks that really help when I'm craving something sweet, like dates with peanut butter, berries with a bit of dark chocolate, or caramelised banana with oats.
"I also love simple meals like chicken breast with hummus and apple slices, or making protein pancakes and fruit bowls. They're honestly delicious, and I never feel like I'm missing out."
'Saying no was the biggest challenge AND milestone'
Embarking on a sugar-free lifestyle wasn't easy for Fatmagül, though. "Eating out was hard, and so was explaining the diet to people who didn't get it. But as soon as people started noticing the difference - that's when it clicked, not only for them, but for me too," she said.
"The hardest challenge of all was simply just saying no to myself. I found when I started posting my journey on TikTok it held me accountable and helped me stay focused. Knowing that others started the diet because of me was also incredibly motivating."
'Just start, it's hard to begin with but it really is worth it'
Reflecting on what advice she would have given herself before starting her no-sugar journey, Fatmagül said: "You'll have to let go of a few things, and it won't always be easy, but you are so worth the effort. Don't wait for the perfect moment, just take the first step."
For those considering cutting out sugar, her guidance is to take it easy and pay attention to how your body responds rather than adhering to rigid guidelines. "Take it slow, be patient, and really listen to your body," the TikToker adds. "If the process feels good and you're seeing positive changes, then keep going. But if it doesn't feel right for you, that's okay too, it's about what works for you."
Fatmagül is 56 days into her health journey and has no intention of stopping. Her transformation has also inspired her friends and family to make changes. She said: "My friends and family have noticed such a big shift in me, physically and mentally, so much so that a lot of them have started making changes, too. That part has been really special."
How does sugar affect the body?
Excessive sugar intake can lead to weight gain and obesity as surplus glucose gets stored as fat, increasing the risk of chronic diseases like heart disease and type 2 diabetes. It can also cause blood sugar levels to fluctuate, leading to energy slumps and irritability.
A diet high in sugar may contribute to chronic inflammation, impacting overall health. Sugar can disrupt hormone levels, potentially affecting ovulation and causing hormonal acne. It's also a major culprit in tooth decay and dental problems.
Some studies suggest a link between high sugar consumption and heightened anxiety and depression. Consuming sugary foods, especially at night, can disrupt sleep patterns and diminish sleep quality. For individuals with diabetes, excessive sugar can damage the kidneys, and elevated sugar levels can harm nerve fibres, resulting in tingling, numbness, and pain.
The NHS warns: "The type of sugars most adults and children in the UK eat too much of are 'free sugars'." These include:
Any sugars added to food or drinks. These include sugars in biscuits, chocolate, flavoured yoghurts, breakfast cereals and fizzy drinks. These sugars may be added at home, or by a chef or other food manufacturer.
Sugars in honey, syrups (such as maple, agave and golden), nectars (such as blossom), and unsweetened fruit juices, vegetable juices and smoothies. The sugars in these foods occur naturally but still count as free sugars.
The health service continues: "Sugar found naturally in milk, fruit and vegetables does not count as free sugars. We do not need to cut down on these sugars, but remember that they are included in the 'total sugar' figure found on food labels."
Wondering if you should cut out sugar entirely?
It's a good idea to cut back on added sugars for your health. You don't have to eliminate sugar entirely from your diet, but lowering your intake of added sugars can bring many health advantages.
Added sugars are added to foods during processing or cooking, unlike the natural sugars found in fruits, vegetables, and dairy. It's often suggested to concentrate on reducing added sugars instead of removing all types of sugar.
Major dietary changes can be challenging for many; for some, a slow and steady decrease in added sugar might be more manageable and sustainable. Always check with a doctor or a healthcare professional before making significant changes to your diet or lifestyle, especially if you have health concerns or are receiving treatment.
Being mindful of labels is important, too. Be aware of the hidden added sugars in packaged foods and drinks. Many items contain hidden sugars, highlighting the need to read labels carefully.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Ban on advertising and safeguard for child patients added to Assisted Dying Bill
It is expected the next major vote on the overall Bill could take place next Friday, which could see it either fall or pass through to the Lords. Campaigners supportive of a change in the law outside Parliament (James Manning/PA) Impassioned debate heard the Bill described by Conservative MP Kieran Mullan as a 'deeply consequential and highly contentious piece of legislation for our society'. He argued not enough time has been allocated for debate on such a divisive issue, but health minister Stephen Kinnock said there had been more than 90 hours of parliamentary time spent so far, and more than 500 amendments had been considered at committee stage earlier this year. On Friday a majority of MPs approve a new clause, tabled by Labour MP Dame Meg Hillier, to ensure medics cannot raise the topic of assisted dying with under-18s. Her separate amendment to prevent health workers from bringing up the issue with adults patients before they have raised it was voted down. The amendment on child patients was hailed as a 'first major Commons defeat' by opposition campaigners Care Not Killing which welcomed 'MPs removing the ability of doctors to raise unprompted assisted suicide with children'. A group of Labour MPs opposed to the proposed legislation called it an '11th hour rejection of the claims made about the safety of this Bill' which 'proves that confidence is slipping away from it'. They also cautioned that MPs might not have a copy of the final Bill by the time they vote 'on this life and death issue' next week, as some outstanding amendments will still be being considered on Friday morning. A ban on advertising assisted dying should the Bill pass into law has also been approved. An amendment, by fellow Labour MP Paul Waugh, to limit exceptions on that ban did not pass. He said the ban as it stands has 'unspecified exceptions, which could make the ban itself worthless', warning online harms from ads about assisted dying on TikTok 'could be a reality without the tighter safeguards in my amendment'. A number of other amendments were passed, including a provision for assisted dying deaths to not automatically be referred to a coroner and around the regulation of substances for use in assisted dying. Other issues debated included an amendment requiring the Health Secretary to publish an assessment of the availability, quality and distribution of palliative and end-of-life care one year after the Bill passing into law. Pledging her support for the amendment, which was tabled by Liberal Democrat Munira Wilson, Kim Leadbeater said MPs should not have to choose between supporting assisted dying or palliative care as it is not an 'either/or' conversation for dying people. She said palliative care and assisted dying 'can and do work side by side to give terminally-ill patients the care and choice they deserve in their final days', and urged MPs to support 'all options available to terminally ill people'. Campaigners against a change in the law gather outside Parliament (James Manning/PA) Ms Wilson's amendment is supported by Marie Curie, which said it is 'desperately needed as the end-of-life care system is in crisis, with huge gaps in services and a lack of NHS leadership on this vital part of our health and care system'. It is expected that amendment could be voted on next Friday. One MP, who became emotional as she recalled the death of her husband who she said had been 'in extreme pain' with terminal cancer, urged her colleagues to 'mind our language' after words like 'murder' were used. Liberal Democrat MP Caroline Voaden, whose husband died of oesophageal cancer, said it is 'so wrong' to use such language. She said: 'This is about helping people die in a civilised way and helping their families not go through a horrendous experience of watching a loved one die in agony.' The beginning of Friday's session saw MPs add a new opt-out clause to the Bill. A person holds a hard copy of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Stefan Rousseau/PA) The amendment, meaning no person including all health and social care professionals, can be obliged to take part in assisted dying had been debated and approved last month, but has now been formally added to the Bill. The Bill passed second reading stage by a majority of 55 during a historic vote in November which saw MPs support the principle of assisted dying. Demonstrators both for and against a change in the law once again gathered outside Parliament to make their views known on the Bill. Sarah Wootton, chief executive of Dignity in Dying which is in favour of a change in the law, said: 'Our country is closer than ever before to the safe, compassionate, and tightly regulated assisted dying law that so many people want, from all walks of life and every part of the country.' But former MP Caroline Ansell, from Christian Action Research and Education (Care), which opposes assisted dying, urged parliamentarians to vote against the Bill. She said: 'It is irredeemably flawed in principle and in detail. Parliament should close the door to assisted suicide and focus on truly compassionate and life-affirming forms of support.' As it stands, the proposed legislation would allow terminally-ill adults in England and Wales, with fewer than six months to live, to apply for an assisted death, subject to approval by two doctors and a panel featuring a social worker, senior legal figure and psychiatrist. MPs are entitled to have a free vote on the Bill and any amendments, meaning they vote according to their conscience rather than along party lines.
Leader Live
an hour ago
- Leader Live
Ban on advertising and safeguard for child patients added to Assisted Dying Bill
The new parts to the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill were voted in on Friday as a second day of debate on various amendments came to a close. It is expected the next major vote on the overall Bill could take place next Friday, which could see it either fall or pass through to the Lords. Impassioned debate heard the Bill described by Conservative MP Kieran Mullan as a 'deeply consequential and highly contentious piece of legislation for our society'. He argued not enough time has been allocated for debate on such a divisive issue, but health minister Stephen Kinnock said there had been more than 90 hours of parliamentary time spent so far, and more than 500 amendments had been considered at committee stage earlier this year. On Friday a majority of MPs approve a new clause, tabled by Labour MP Dame Meg Hillier, to ensure medics cannot raise the topic of assisted dying with under-18s. Her separate amendment to prevent health workers from bringing up the issue with adults patients before they have raised it was voted down. The amendment on child patients was hailed as a 'first major Commons defeat' by opposition campaigners Care Not Killing which welcomed 'MPs removing the ability of doctors to raise unprompted assisted suicide with children'. A group of Labour MPs opposed to the proposed legislation called it an '11th hour rejection of the claims made about the safety of this Bill' which 'proves that confidence is slipping away from it'. They also cautioned that MPs might not have a copy of the final Bill by the time they vote 'on this life and death issue' next week, as some outstanding amendments will still be being considered on Friday morning. A ban on advertising assisted dying should the Bill pass into law has also been approved. An amendment, by fellow Labour MP Paul Waugh, to limit exceptions on that ban did not pass. He said the ban as it stands has 'unspecified exceptions, which could make the ban itself worthless', warning online harms from ads about assisted dying on TikTok 'could be a reality without the tighter safeguards in my amendment'. A number of other amendments were passed, including a provision for assisted dying deaths to not automatically be referred to a coroner and around the regulation of substances for use in assisted dying. Other issues debated included an amendment requiring the Health Secretary to publish an assessment of the availability, quality and distribution of palliative and end-of-life care one year after the Bill passing into law. Pledging her support for the amendment, which was tabled by Liberal Democrat Munira Wilson, Kim Leadbeater said MPs should not have to choose between supporting assisted dying or palliative care as it is not an 'either/or' conversation for dying people. She said palliative care and assisted dying 'can and do work side by side to give terminally-ill patients the care and choice they deserve in their final days', and urged MPs to support 'all options available to terminally ill people'. Ms Wilson's amendment is supported by Marie Curie, which said it is 'desperately needed as the end-of-life care system is in crisis, with huge gaps in services and a lack of NHS leadership on this vital part of our health and care system'. It is expected that amendment could be voted on next Friday. One MP, who became emotional as she recalled the death of her husband who she said had been 'in extreme pain' with terminal cancer, urged her colleagues to 'mind our language' after words like 'murder' were used. Liberal Democrat MP Caroline Voaden, whose husband died of oesophageal cancer, said it is 'so wrong' to use such language. She said: 'This is about helping people die in a civilised way and helping their families not go through a horrendous experience of watching a loved one die in agony.' The beginning of Friday's session saw MPs add a new opt-out clause to the Bill. The amendment, meaning no person including all health and social care professionals, can be obliged to take part in assisted dying had been debated and approved last month, but has now been formally added to the Bill. The Bill passed second reading stage by a majority of 55 during a historic vote in November which saw MPs support the principle of assisted dying. Demonstrators both for and against a change in the law once again gathered outside Parliament to make their views known on the Bill. Sarah Wootton, chief executive of Dignity in Dying which is in favour of a change in the law, said: 'Our country is closer than ever before to the safe, compassionate, and tightly regulated assisted dying law that so many people want, from all walks of life and every part of the country.' But former MP Caroline Ansell, from Christian Action Research and Education (Care), which opposes assisted dying, urged parliamentarians to vote against the Bill. She said: 'It is irredeemably flawed in principle and in detail. Parliament should close the door to assisted suicide and focus on truly compassionate and life-affirming forms of support.' As it stands, the proposed legislation would allow terminally-ill adults in England and Wales, with fewer than six months to live, to apply for an assisted death, subject to approval by two doctors and a panel featuring a social worker, senior legal figure and psychiatrist. MPs are entitled to have a free vote on the Bill and any amendments, meaning they vote according to their conscience rather than along party lines.
South Wales Argus
an hour ago
- South Wales Argus
Ban on advertising and safeguard for child patients added to Assisted Dying Bill
The new parts to the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill were voted in on Friday as a second day of debate on various amendments came to a close. It is expected the next major vote on the overall Bill could take place next Friday, which could see it either fall or pass through to the Lords. Campaigners supportive of a change in the law outside Parliament (James Manning/PA) Impassioned debate heard the Bill described by Conservative MP Kieran Mullan as a 'deeply consequential and highly contentious piece of legislation for our society'. He argued not enough time has been allocated for debate on such a divisive issue, but health minister Stephen Kinnock said there had been more than 90 hours of parliamentary time spent so far, and more than 500 amendments had been considered at committee stage earlier this year. On Friday a majority of MPs approve a new clause, tabled by Labour MP Dame Meg Hillier, to ensure medics cannot raise the topic of assisted dying with under-18s. Her separate amendment to prevent health workers from bringing up the issue with adults patients before they have raised it was voted down. The amendment on child patients was hailed as a 'first major Commons defeat' by opposition campaigners Care Not Killing which welcomed 'MPs removing the ability of doctors to raise unprompted assisted suicide with children'. A group of Labour MPs opposed to the proposed legislation called it an '11th hour rejection of the claims made about the safety of this Bill' which 'proves that confidence is slipping away from it'. They also cautioned that MPs might not have a copy of the final Bill by the time they vote 'on this life and death issue' next week, as some outstanding amendments will still be being considered on Friday morning. A ban on advertising assisted dying should the Bill pass into law has also been approved. An amendment, by fellow Labour MP Paul Waugh, to limit exceptions on that ban did not pass. He said the ban as it stands has 'unspecified exceptions, which could make the ban itself worthless', warning online harms from ads about assisted dying on TikTok 'could be a reality without the tighter safeguards in my amendment'. A number of other amendments were passed, including a provision for assisted dying deaths to not automatically be referred to a coroner and around the regulation of substances for use in assisted dying. Other issues debated included an amendment requiring the Health Secretary to publish an assessment of the availability, quality and distribution of palliative and end-of-life care one year after the Bill passing into law. Pledging her support for the amendment, which was tabled by Liberal Democrat Munira Wilson, Kim Leadbeater said MPs should not have to choose between supporting assisted dying or palliative care as it is not an 'either/or' conversation for dying people. She said palliative care and assisted dying 'can and do work side by side to give terminally-ill patients the care and choice they deserve in their final days', and urged MPs to support 'all options available to terminally ill people'. Campaigners against a change in the law gather outside Parliament (James Manning/PA) Ms Wilson's amendment is supported by Marie Curie, which said it is 'desperately needed as the end-of-life care system is in crisis, with huge gaps in services and a lack of NHS leadership on this vital part of our health and care system'. It is expected that amendment could be voted on next Friday. One MP, who became emotional as she recalled the death of her husband who she said had been 'in extreme pain' with terminal cancer, urged her colleagues to 'mind our language' after words like 'murder' were used. Liberal Democrat MP Caroline Voaden, whose husband died of oesophageal cancer, said it is 'so wrong' to use such language. She said: 'This is about helping people die in a civilised way and helping their families not go through a horrendous experience of watching a loved one die in agony.' The beginning of Friday's session saw MPs add a new opt-out clause to the Bill. A person holds a hard copy of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Stefan Rousseau/PA) The amendment, meaning no person including all health and social care professionals, can be obliged to take part in assisted dying had been debated and approved last month, but has now been formally added to the Bill. The Bill passed second reading stage by a majority of 55 during a historic vote in November which saw MPs support the principle of assisted dying. Demonstrators both for and against a change in the law once again gathered outside Parliament to make their views known on the Bill. Sarah Wootton, chief executive of Dignity in Dying which is in favour of a change in the law, said: 'Our country is closer than ever before to the safe, compassionate, and tightly regulated assisted dying law that so many people want, from all walks of life and every part of the country.' But former MP Caroline Ansell, from Christian Action Research and Education (Care), which opposes assisted dying, urged parliamentarians to vote against the Bill. She said: 'It is irredeemably flawed in principle and in detail. Parliament should close the door to assisted suicide and focus on truly compassionate and life-affirming forms of support.' As it stands, the proposed legislation would allow terminally-ill adults in England and Wales, with fewer than six months to live, to apply for an assisted death, subject to approval by two doctors and a panel featuring a social worker, senior legal figure and psychiatrist. MPs are entitled to have a free vote on the Bill and any amendments, meaning they vote according to their conscience rather than along party lines.
