Sugar

2»

Replies

  • jgnatca
    jgnatca Posts: 14,464 Member
    cokecan-label1.jpg
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    zamphir66 wrote: »
    stevencloser wrote: »

    She asked specifically about the sugar. Not if fruit is more nutritious. She asked if the sugar in fruit is just as bad as refined sugar.

    But you can't really divorce the sugar in fruit from the fruit itself, which has an effect on its overall nutritional value.

    That's why I created my illustration of an apple sauce made with just apples vs. a sauce made of cranberries and rhubarb with some added sugar. Is one healthier than the other? Are they meaningfully different?

    If not, and I think not, then the issue is NOT fruit sugar vs. cane or beet sugar, but simply the difference between two food items. No one eats fruit sugar on its own, but almost no one eats a spoonful of sugar on its own (even Mary Poppins added medicine).
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Apple (150 grams)

    Calories: 78
    Carbs: 21
    Fat: 0
    Protein: 0
    Fiber: 4
    Sugar: 16

    Lemurcat18's Chocolate Chip Cookies (1 cookie)

    Calories: 206
    Carbs: 22
    Fat: 14
    Protein: 2
    Fiber: 0
    Sugar: 14

    Note that although the nutrient make-up of the apple and cookie are quite different (and would be more different if we looked in more detail), the added calories in the cookie has nothing to do with the demon that is added sugar. The apple has MORE sugar than the cookie. The apple also has other things, as does the cookie, and the micronutrients and fiber in the apple don't happen to add many calories, whereas the butter (in particular) in the cookie adds a whole bunch.

    It seems weird, then, that the discussion ends up being about sugar.
  • earlnabby
    earlnabby Posts: 8,171 Member
    Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
    Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »
    It all has the same effects on your body, .

    Can you explain? How could fruit and plain sugar have the same effects on your body? What effects do you mean?

    The sugar from fruit and the sugar from any other source is processed by the body the same way. It makes no difference. The food that contains sugar might, but the sugar does not.

  • jenniferinfl
    jenniferinfl Posts: 456 Member
    I don't think that we know everything there is to know about food yet.
    My mom found out three months ago that her blood sugar was over 300 and she's a type II diabetic. She finally quit drinking that junk creamer made out of high fructose corn syrup and palm kernel oil along with a bunch of unpronounceable ingredients. She still eats a lot of fruit and other foods that contain sugar. She now uses regular half and half and sugar.

    After just three months without that fake creamer, she almost isn't a diabetic anymore.

    She hasn't lost a significant amount of weight. She hasn't cut out sugar, or really even cut back on it enough to make that much of a difference.

    She really shouldn't be seeing those kinds of results.

    Unfortunately, I believe that science has failed us. I feel that there is a lot more out there to know in the field of nutrition science that we will simply never know as big business and special interest groups are the ones paying for studies.
  • earlnabby
    earlnabby Posts: 8,171 Member
    KayleneP83 wrote: »
    I'm just trying to figure this all out. I love fruit but I'm going over in sugar according to fitnesspal. :'(

    Don't worry about it. Remove sugar tracking and add fiber tracking (unless your doctor had told you to track sugar because of a medical condition). Getting enough fiber does more to aid overall health than limiting sugar as long as your total carbs are in line. Even diabetics who do not take insulin are told to watch total carbs and not sugars.

  • yarwell
    yarwell Posts: 10,477 Member
    stevencloser wrote: »
    We're not talking vitamins, minerals and atioxidants though. We're talking sugar. And fact is, sucrose = glucose + fructose and your body splits it into those two. Fruits contain glucose + fructose. The sugars are all the same in the end.

    Fruits contain sucrose, glucose and fructose in various proportions. Quite a lot of sucrose in some. Once in the acid environment of your stomach the sucrose will be glucose and fructose in no time.
  • yarwell
    yarwell Posts: 10,477 Member
    jgnatca wrote: »
    The fruit is digested differently than say, a spoonful of "free sugar" (I'm switching to the WHO definition. I'm sure they slaved over that one). The fiber in fruit slows digestion somewhat.
    Not much though, if at all -
    uozhvj5dnmlg.png

  • neanderthin
    neanderthin Posts: 10,268 Member
    Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
    Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »
    Need2Exerc1se wrote: »
    Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »
    It all has the same effects on your body, .

    Can you explain? How could fruit and plain sugar have the same effects on your body? What effects do you mean?

    I mean your body processes it the same. And if eaten to excess, any sugar (or any other macronutrient) will make you gain weight.

    If you are otherwise eating a balanced diet, counting calories, and meeting macros, sugar (natural or otherwise) will have no negative effects on your body.

    Sorry if I worded it weird - it has been a long day.

    While I agree with most of this response (whether sugar has a negative affect could vary), your body most assuredly does not process plain refined sugar and fruit the same.
    Oh look stomach, we got fruit, oh boy.

  • RoxieDawn
    RoxieDawn Posts: 15,488 Member
    This is not going to end well...
This discussion has been closed.

Categories