WHO: Daily sugar intake 'should be halved'
Replies
-
Meh...I eat a well balanced diet that is nutritionally dense and I rock my fitness...and I eat a little sugar...I eat fruit...I eat jelly beans on occasion...I really like gummy bears...so really,
I even put a Tsp of brown sugar in my oats every morning...I know, I know...
And don't even get me started on my recovery smoothies after a nice long endurance ride...
[img][/img]0 -
In my opinion, it comes down to where the sugar is coming from.
If someone is eating 80 g of sugar daily but their sugar intake is mainly coming from fruits, that's much different than someone who consumes 80 g of sugar daily from soda and cookies.
Why is it different? The body cannot differentiate where the sugar came from and uses it for energy in the same way, regardless of whether it came from a banana or in a mug of tea.
That's incorrect. Your body can absolutely tell the difference. Sucrose, fructose, and glucose all provide the same amount of energy per gram, but are processed and used differently throughout the body. Simple carbs are classified as one of two things: monosaccharides or disaccharides. Glucose and fructose are monosaccharides and sucrose is a disaccharide.
The body's "preferred" energy source is glucose. Most carbs we eat are processed into glucose. It's either used immediately for energy or stored in the liver as glycogen. Unlike fructose (found in fruits), glucose requires the secretion of insulin. Insulin lowers blood glucose.
Fructose is totally different from other sugars because it uses a different metabolic pathway. It is also not the preferred energy source for the brain. As I mentioned before, fructose does not cause insulin to be released. It has minimal effect on blood glucose levels. It also does not stimulate the production of leptin (hunger hormone). Glucose does, however. This is why when a person eats a cookie, 30 minutes later they are "hungry" again.
The problem arises when glucose is continuously high. The pancreas can handle this workload for a while; however, over time it becomes overworked and unable to efficiently release insulin. This can result in the chronically elevated blood glucose levels found in type 2 diabetes or metabolic syndrome. At the same time, because insulin release is now inefficient, glucose is no longer being delivered to the cells that need it, resulting in cell starvation. Now the person has a risk of becoming insulin dependent.
You're hurting your own argument. Almost everything in America that uses added sugar comes from High Fructose Corn Syrup, including soda and cookies...
I'm actually not hurting my own argument. What you are talking about is the CONCENTRATED FORM of fructose. I'm referring to the natural form of fructose found in fruits.
And how exactly are they processed by your body differently?
I already posted the answer to that question. Not explaining it again.
What about the fact that fructose is almost always found with glucose, even in fruit? That negates your entire argument about fruit being superior because of the fructose present and the fact that it does not illicit an insulin response due to the claimed absence of glucose.Fructose in both the commercial and natural domain has an equal amount of glucose attached to it. You’d have to go out of your way to obtain fructose without the accompanying glucose. Sucrose is half fructose and half glucose. High-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) is nearly identical to sucrose in structure and function. Here’s the point I’m getting at: contrary to Lustig’s contentions, both of these compounds have substantial research showing not just their ability to elicit an insulin response, but also their suppressive effect on appetite0 -
My favorite sentence is this:The suggested limits apply to all sugars added to food, as well as sugar naturally present in honey, syrups, fruit juices and fruit concentrates.
Is my comprehension off, or couldn't that be summed down to "Don't eat sugar and food with sugar in it"?0 -
In my opinion, it comes down to where the sugar is coming from.
If someone is eating 80 g of sugar daily but their sugar intake is mainly coming from fruits, that's much different than someone who consumes 80 g of sugar daily from soda and cookies.
Why is it different? The body cannot differentiate where the sugar came from and uses it for energy in the same way, regardless of whether it came from a banana or in a mug of tea.
That's incorrect. Your body can absolutely tell the difference. Sucrose, fructose, and glucose all provide the same amount of energy per gram, but are processed and used differently throughout the body. Simple carbs are classified as one of two things: monosaccharides or disaccharides. Glucose and fructose are monosaccharides and sucrose is a disaccharide.
The body's "preferred" energy source is glucose. Most carbs we eat are processed into glucose. It's either used immediately for energy or stored in the liver as glycogen. Unlike fructose (found in fruits), glucose requires the secretion of insulin. Insulin lowers blood glucose.
Fructose is totally different from other sugars because it uses a different metabolic pathway. It is also not the preferred energy source for the brain. As I mentioned before, fructose does not cause insulin to be released. It has minimal effect on blood glucose levels. It also does not stimulate the production of leptin (hunger hormone). Glucose does, however. This is why when a person eats a cookie, 30 minutes later they are "hungry" again.
The problem arises when glucose is continuously high. The pancreas can handle this workload for a while; however, over time it becomes overworked and unable to efficiently release insulin. This can result in the chronically elevated blood glucose levels found in type 2 diabetes or metabolic syndrome. At the same time, because insulin release is now inefficient, glucose is no longer being delivered to the cells that need it, resulting in cell starvation. Now the person has a risk of becoming insulin dependent.
You're hurting your own argument. Almost everything in America that uses added sugar comes from High Fructose Corn Syrup, including soda and cookies...
I'm actually not hurting my own argument. What you are talking about is the CONCENTRATED FORM of fructose. I'm referring to the natural form of fructose found in fruits.
And how exactly are they processed by your body differently?
I already posted the answer to that question. Not explaining it again.
What about the fact that fructose is almost always found with glucose, even in fruit? That negates your entire argument about fruit being superior because of the fructose present and the fact that it does not illicit an insulin response due to the claimed absence of glucose.Fructose in both the commercial and natural domain has an equal amount of glucose attached to it. You’d have to go out of your way to obtain fructose without the accompanying glucose. Sucrose is half fructose and half glucose. High-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) is nearly identical to sucrose in structure and function. Here’s the point I’m getting at: contrary to Lustig’s contentions, both of these compounds have substantial research showing not just their ability to elicit an insulin response, but also their suppressive effect on appetite
Not once did I say fruit contains no glucose. The amount of glucose found in fruit is so minute. It all depends on its glycemic index. You're still not getting the point but that's okay.0 -
This is a very good synopsis.In my opinion, it comes down to where the sugar is coming from.
If someone is eating 80 g of sugar daily but their sugar intake is mainly coming from fruits, that's much different than someone who consumes 80 g of sugar daily from soda and cookies.
Why is it different? The body cannot differentiate where the sugar came from and uses it for energy in the same way, regardless of whether it came from a banana or in a mug of tea.
That's incorrect. Your body can absolutely tell the difference. Sucrose, fructose, and glucose all provide the same amount of energy per gram, but are processed and used differently throughout the body. Simple carbs are classified as one of two things: monosaccharides or disaccharides. Glucose and fructose are monosaccharides and sucrose is a disaccharide.
The body's "preferred" energy source is glucose. Most carbs we eat are processed into glucose. It's either used immediately for energy or stored in the liver as glycogen. Unlike fructose (found in fruits), glucose requires the secretion of insulin. Insulin lowers blood glucose.
Fructose is totally different from other sugars because it uses a different metabolic pathway. It is also not the preferred energy source for the brain. As I mentioned before, fructose does not cause insulin to be released. It has minimal effect on blood glucose levels. It also does not stimulate the production of leptin (hunger hormone). Glucose does, however. This is why when a person eats a cookie, 30 minutes later they are "hungry" again.
The problem arises when glucose is continuously high. The pancreas can handle this workload for a while; however, over time it becomes overworked and unable to efficiently release insulin. This can result in the chronically elevated blood glucose levels found in type 2 diabetes or metabolic syndrome. At the same time, because insulin release is now inefficient, glucose is no longer being delivered to the cells that need it, resulting in cell starvation. Now the person has a risk of becoming insulin dependent.0 -
Correlation is not causation
Is there really ever a study that can 100% say something causes something else?
Yes, absolutely there are. You run the same test with different groups and control different variables and you find causation.
Is there a magic number of studies where someone can officially say "X causes Y" instead of X and Y are correlated? Statistics is basically all about correlations and testing hypotheses. People seem to throw out "Correlation is not causation" all the time on studies, but really that's basically all we can really get is correlations when it comes down to it.
If you set up your study design right to begin with, with a large and diverse enough sample and have proper knowledge of statistics, you only need 1 study. You can say with 99.99% certainty, that x CAUSES y. Though usually we settle for 95% certainty.
If you would like further explanation of sample design and statistics, you can PM me.
My credentials are 4th year PhD candidate in Mathematical Biology.
As a PhD candidate in Epidemiology I would definitely disagree that you only need one study. Even if you somehow got the money to do such a study, it still wouldn't imply causation because it is one study.
As for causation:
The Bradford-Hill Causation Criteria is most commonly used to infer causation
1. Strength of the association.
According to Hill, the stronger the association between a risk factor and outcome, the more likely the relationship is to be causal.
2. Consistency of findings.
Have the same findings must be observed among different populations, in different study designs and different times?
3. Specificity of the association.
There must be a one to one relationship between cause and outcome.
4. Temporal sequence of association.
Exposure must precede outcome.
5. Biological gradient.
Change in disease rates should follow from corresponding changes in exposure (dose-response).
6. Biological plausibility.
Presence of a potential biological mechanism.
7. Coherence.
Does the relationship agree with the current knowledge of the natural history/biology of the disease?
8. Experiment.
Does the removal of the exposure alter the frequency of the outcome?0 -
I'm actually not hurting my own argument. What you are talking about is the CONCENTRATED FORM of fructose. I'm referring to the natural form of fructose found in fruits.
And how exactly are they processed by your body differently?
I already posted the answer to that question. Not explaining it again.
What about the fact that fructose is almost always found with glucose, even in fruit? That negates your entire argument about fruit being superior because of the fructose present and the fact that it does not illicit an insulin response due to the claimed absence of glucose.Fructose in both the commercial and natural domain has an equal amount of glucose attached to it. You’d have to go out of your way to obtain fructose without the accompanying glucose. Sucrose is half fructose and half glucose. High-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) is nearly identical to sucrose in structure and function. Here’s the point I’m getting at: contrary to Lustig’s contentions, both of these compounds have substantial research showing not just their ability to elicit an insulin response, but also their suppressive effect on appetite
Not once did I say fruit contains no glucose. The amount of glucose found in fruit is so minute. It all depends on its glycemic index. You're still not getting the point but that's okay.
Fruit contains about equal parts fructose and glucose so I wouldn't call that minute...
Also the glycemic index was developed for diabetics and if you're not diabetic it's basically irrelevant. The way they determined the glycemic index was they would feed one specific carb BY ITSELF to a person in a fasted state and watch the insulin response during digestion. How often does that happen for a person? Who eats only one specific carb by itself in a fasted state? For most people rarely ever. It has been shown that the glycemic index is washed out and basically irrelevant when carbs are consumed with protein and or fat as both of those macronutrients slow digestion and thus slow the speed in which the carbs are processed resulting in a reduction in the insulin response and even if carbs are eaten alone, but in a fed state, the same situation applies.0 -
Sugar is not the cause of obesity and cavities - these are caused by excessive eating, laziness and poor oral hygiene habits
simply put without debate :flowerforyou:0 -
I'm actually not hurting my own argument. What you are talking about is the CONCENTRATED FORM of fructose. I'm referring to the natural form of fructose found in fruits.
And how exactly are they processed by your body differently?
I already posted the answer to that question. Not explaining it again.
What about the fact that fructose is almost always found with glucose, even in fruit? That negates your entire argument about fruit being superior because of the fructose present and the fact that it does not illicit an insulin response due to the claimed absence of glucose.Fructose in both the commercial and natural domain has an equal amount of glucose attached to it. You’d have to go out of your way to obtain fructose without the accompanying glucose. Sucrose is half fructose and half glucose. High-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) is nearly identical to sucrose in structure and function. Here’s the point I’m getting at: contrary to Lustig’s contentions, both of these compounds have substantial research showing not just their ability to elicit an insulin response, but also their suppressive effect on appetite
Not once did I say fruit contains no glucose. The amount of glucose found in fruit is so minute. It all depends on its glycemic index. You're still not getting the point but that's okay.
Fruit contains about equal parts fructose and glucose so I wouldn't call that minute...
Also the glycemic index was developed for diabetics and if you're not diabetic it's basically irrelevant. The way they determined the glycemic index was they would feed one specific carb BY ITSELF to a person in a fasted state and watch the insulin response during digestion. How often does that happen for a person? Who eats only one specific carb by itself in a fasted state? For most people rarely ever. It has been shown that the glycemic index is washed out and basically irrelevant when carbs are consumed with protein and or fat as both of those macronutrients slow digestion and thus slow the speed in which the carbs are processed resulting in a reduction in the insulin response and even if carbs are eaten alone, but in a fed state, the same situation applies.
It all depends on the fruit.
Irrelevant if you're not diabetic? Lol. If the glycemic index is washed out and basically irrelevant when carbs are consumed with protein and fat, why are so many people diabetic nowadays? It's not from eating protein, healthy fats, and low glycemic fruits. I can promise you that.0 -
I'm actually not hurting my own argument. What you are talking about is the CONCENTRATED FORM of fructose. I'm referring to the natural form of fructose found in fruits.
And how exactly are they processed by your body differently?
I already posted the answer to that question. Not explaining it again.
What about the fact that fructose is almost always found with glucose, even in fruit? That negates your entire argument about fruit being superior because of the fructose present and the fact that it does not illicit an insulin response due to the claimed absence of glucose.Fructose in both the commercial and natural domain has an equal amount of glucose attached to it. You’d have to go out of your way to obtain fructose without the accompanying glucose. Sucrose is half fructose and half glucose. High-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) is nearly identical to sucrose in structure and function. Here’s the point I’m getting at: contrary to Lustig’s contentions, both of these compounds have substantial research showing not just their ability to elicit an insulin response, but also their suppressive effect on appetite
Not once did I say fruit contains no glucose. The amount of glucose found in fruit is so minute. It all depends on its glycemic index. You're still not getting the point but that's okay.
Fruit contains about equal parts fructose and glucose so I wouldn't call that minute...
Also the glycemic index was developed for diabetics and if you're not diabetic it's basically irrelevant. The way they determined the glycemic index was they would feed one specific carb BY ITSELF to a person in a fasted state and watch the insulin response during digestion. How often does that happen for a person? Who eats only one specific carb by itself in a fasted state? For most people rarely ever. It has been shown that the glycemic index is washed out and basically irrelevant when carbs are consumed with protein and or fat as both of those macronutrients slow digestion and thus slow the speed in which the carbs are processed resulting in a reduction in the insulin response and even if carbs are eaten alone, but in a fed state, the same situation applies.
It all depends on the fruit.
Irrelevant if you're not diabetic? Lol. If the glycemic index is washed out and basically irrelevant when carbs are consumed with protein and fat, why are so many people diabetic nowadays? It's not from eating protein, healthy fats, and low glycemic fruits. I can promise you that.
It's from over consuming calories in general and becoming obese. Obesity for the most part causes type 2 diabetes, results in insulin resistance, and therefore carbs and sugars must be carefully monitored once you become diabetic. It's very rare to see someone in a healthy weight range have type 2 diabetes and if they do, it is usually because they consume a ridiculous percentage of their caloric intake in carbohydrates and don't eat enough protein or it is genetic.0 -
Guys. Guys. Fructose is only bad if it's CONCENTRATED. Duh.0
-
Apparently the average Canadian eats 22 teaspoons of sugar every day. 22 x 6 = 132. That's 132 grams of sugar in just one day, or 511 calories. Nobody needs that.0
-
I'm actually not hurting my own argument. What you are talking about is the CONCENTRATED FORM of fructose. I'm referring to the natural form of fructose found in fruits.
And how exactly are they processed by your body differently?
I already posted the answer to that question. Not explaining it again.
What about the fact that fructose is almost always found with glucose, even in fruit? That negates your entire argument about fruit being superior because of the fructose present and the fact that it does not illicit an insulin response due to the claimed absence of glucose.Fructose in both the commercial and natural domain has an equal amount of glucose attached to it. You’d have to go out of your way to obtain fructose without the accompanying glucose. Sucrose is half fructose and half glucose. High-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) is nearly identical to sucrose in structure and function. Here’s the point I’m getting at: contrary to Lustig’s contentions, both of these compounds have substantial research showing not just their ability to elicit an insulin response, but also their suppressive effect on appetite
Not once did I say fruit contains no glucose. The amount of glucose found in fruit is so minute. It all depends on its glycemic index. You're still not getting the point but that's okay.
Fruit contains about equal parts fructose and glucose so I wouldn't call that minute...
Also the glycemic index was developed for diabetics and if you're not diabetic it's basically irrelevant. The way they determined the glycemic index was they would feed one specific carb BY ITSELF to a person in a fasted state and watch the insulin response during digestion. How often does that happen for a person? Who eats only one specific carb by itself in a fasted state? For most people rarely ever. It has been shown that the glycemic index is washed out and basically irrelevant when carbs are consumed with protein and or fat as both of those macronutrients slow digestion and thus slow the speed in which the carbs are processed resulting in a reduction in the insulin response and even if carbs are eaten alone, but in a fed state, the same situation applies.
It all depends on the fruit.
Irrelevant if you're not diabetic? Lol. If the glycemic index is washed out and basically irrelevant when carbs are consumed with protein and fat, why are so many people diabetic nowadays? It's not from eating protein, healthy fats, and low glycemic fruits. I can promise you that.
It's from over consuming calories in general and becoming obese. Obesity for the most part causes type 2 diabetes, results in insulin resistance, and therefore carbs and sugars must be carefully monitored once you become diabetic. It's very rare to see someone in a healthy weight range have type 2 diabetes and if they do, it is usually because they consume a ridiculous percentage of their caloric intake in carbohydrates and don't eat enough protein or it is genetic.
Of course they became obese from consuming more than they were expending but reality is, most obese people became obese from overconsumption of sugary junk. Not overconsumption of veggies, fruits, etc.
I know all about watching carbs and sugar because I am insulin resistant and have hypoglycemia. Hence why I know a boat load about this stuff.0 -
Apparently the average Canadian eats 22 teaspoons of sugar every day. 22 x 6 = 132. That's 132 grams of sugar in just one day, or 511 calories. Nobody needs that.
I don't know what the average person eats but I have only had 4 days since Jan 1 where I was over 100 and most days I am between 50 and 75. I eat normal foods the only thing I really opt for when reading labels is low sodium and low or 0 fat dairy the rest is just normal food.0 -
Good idea. I myself am guilty of not reading labels at every meal. But I'm working on that. Still, that's just you and me, not the average Canadian. By average I think they mean a survey done then divided by the numbers to get an average. There'd be obese and fit people contributing to that.Apparently the average Canadian eats 22 teaspoons of sugar every day. 22 x 6 = 132. That's 132 grams of sugar in just one day, or 511 calories. Nobody needs that.
I don't know what the average person eats but I have only had 4 days since Jan 1 where I was over 100 and most days I am between 50 and 75. I eat normal foods the only thing I really opt for when reading labels is low sodium and low or 0 fat dairy the rest is just normal food.0 -
more nanny state interventionism combined with sugar fear mongering…
sugar does not make you fat..
overeating FOOD makes you fat…0 -
In my opinion, it comes down to where the sugar is coming from.
If someone is eating 80 g of sugar daily but their sugar intake is mainly coming from fruits, that's much different than someone who consumes 80 g of sugar daily from soda and cookies.
lolz…right, because the fruit sugar is sooooo good for you, but the added sugar is evil….logical conclusion..rolling eyez...0 -
Oh yea - there was something about this on Yahoo and CNN and FoxNews - tomorrow they'll be telling us to supplement our diet with dog treats- I would take all suggestions with a grain of salt and go ahead and do your own research and form your own opinion.0
-
In my opinion, it comes down to where the sugar is coming from.
If someone is eating 80 g of sugar daily but their sugar intake is mainly coming from fruits, that's much different than someone who consumes 80 g of sugar daily from soda and cookies.
Why is it different? The body cannot differentiate where the sugar came from and uses it for energy in the same way, regardless of whether it came from a banana or in a mug of tea.
That's incorrect. Your body can absolutely tell the difference. Sucrose, fructose, and glucose all provide the same amount of energy per gram, but are processed and used differently throughout the body. Simple carbs are classified as one of two things: monosaccharides or disaccharides. Glucose and fructose are monosaccharides and sucrose is a disaccharide.
The body's "preferred" energy source is glucose. Most carbs we eat are processed into glucose. It's either used immediately for energy or stored in the liver as glycogen. Unlike fructose (found in fruits), glucose requires the secretion of insulin. Insulin lowers blood glucose.
Fructose is totally different from other sugars because it uses a different metabolic pathway. It is also not the preferred energy source for the brain. As I mentioned before, fructose does not cause insulin to be released. It has minimal effect on blood glucose levels. It also does not stimulate the production of leptin (hunger hormone). Glucose does, however. This is why when a person eats a cookie, 30 minutes later they are "hungry" again.
The problem arises when glucose is continuously high. The pancreas can handle this workload for a while; however, over time it becomes overworked and unable to efficiently release insulin. This can result in the chronically elevated blood glucose levels found in type 2 diabetes or metabolic syndrome. At the same time, because insulin release is now inefficient, glucose is no longer being delivered to the cells that need it, resulting in cell starvation. Now the person has a risk of becoming insulin dependent.
fruit sugar contains both glucose and fructose in them..an apple has 13.3% glucose in it..so I am not getting your argument...0 -
If your intaking natural sugars such as fruit and honey you should be fine.
If its refined sugar you will have problems reaching to your goal it may take a little longer but we all have those days where our willpower gets the best of us and we just have to give in just make smarter choices, were only human just don't the same thing one day will not hurt. But over time it will
Just make smarter choices. Fruits can not harm you. But process sugar can read your labels very carefully. 0 -
I believe the agenda is to reduce processed foods. Over consumption isn't normally associated with steak, vegetables, eggs, fish but sugary, fatty, salty goodness found in refined carbs and soft drinks.Correlation is not causation
Is there really ever a study that can 100% say something causes something else?
Yes, absolutely there are. You run the same test with different groups and control different variables and you find causation.
Is there a magic number of studies where someone can officially say "X causes Y" instead of X and Y are correlated? Statistics is basically all about correlations and testing hypotheses. People seem to throw out "Correlation is not causation" all the time on studies, but really that's basically all we can really get is correlations when it comes down to it.
Calorie consumption has gone up drastically in the past 100 years, and due to this, fat and carbohydrate consumption including sugar consumption has also increased. You can't just single out sugar and blame it for the cause of the problems especially when we know concretely that over consumption of calories causes weight gain and obesity, not an over consumption of sugar. 15-20 years ago fat was the devil and you had to eat low fat foods to be healthy without any real explanation of why. Now sugar is the devil and you have to keep sugar consumption low to be healthy. That's complete nonsense. Obesity is caused by an over consumption of calories...period.0 -
So if I'm not fat and not diabetic and get 100+ grams of protein a day as well as hitting my suggested micro nutrient amounts...Can I continue to eat my 100+ grams of sugar a day?
Please hurry with the answer, my cookies and ice cream is literally depending on it.
J/K, I'm totally eating it no matter what.0 -
It all depends on the fruit.
Irrelevant if you're not diabetic? Lol. If the glycemic index is washed out and basically irrelevant when carbs are consumed with protein and fat, why are so many people diabetic nowadays? It's not from eating protein, healthy fats, and low glycemic fruits. I can promise you that.
It's from over consuming calories in general and becoming obese. Obesity for the most part causes type 2 diabetes, results in insulin resistance, and therefore carbs and sugars must be carefully monitored once you become diabetic. It's very rare to see someone in a healthy weight range have type 2 diabetes and if they do, it is usually because they consume a ridiculous percentage of their caloric intake in carbohydrates and don't eat enough protein or it is genetic.
Of course they became obese from consuming more than they were expending but reality is, most obese people became obese from overconsumption of sugary junk. Not overconsumption of veggies, fruits, etc.
I know all about watching carbs and sugar because I am insulin resistant and have hypoglycemia. Hence why I know a boat load about this stuff.
Millions of people become obese by over consuming fat as well. Don't demonize one subcategory of a macronutrient just because people over consume calories and become obese. People become obese because they eat more calories than they burn every single day. The only thing the body can do is keep storing it as fat and when there is too much stored fat in the body it stops functioning properly and that's when problems like type 2 diabetes, heart failure, high cholesterol, etc come into play. Stop blaming sugar...0 -
So true. My aunt hates sugar, wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole, but still ate way too many fatty foods (and PB on toast with almost every meal) and surprise surprise, she's obese now and will be testing for diabetes next week.It all depends on the fruit.
Irrelevant if you're not diabetic? Lol. If the glycemic index is washed out and basically irrelevant when carbs are consumed with protein and fat, why are so many people diabetic nowadays? It's not from eating protein, healthy fats, and low glycemic fruits. I can promise you that.
It's from over consuming calories in general and becoming obese. Obesity for the most part causes type 2 diabetes, results in insulin resistance, and therefore carbs and sugars must be carefully monitored once you become diabetic. It's very rare to see someone in a healthy weight range have type 2 diabetes and if they do, it is usually because they consume a ridiculous percentage of their caloric intake in carbohydrates and don't eat enough protein or it is genetic.
Of course they became obese from consuming more than they were expending but reality is, most obese people became obese from overconsumption of sugary junk. Not overconsumption of veggies, fruits, etc.
I know all about watching carbs and sugar because I am insulin resistant and have hypoglycemia. Hence why I know a boat load about this stuff.
Millions of people become obese by over consuming fat as well. Don't demonize one subcategory of a macronutrient just because people over consume calories and become obese. People become obese because they eat more calories than they burn every single day. The only thing the body can do is keep storing it as fat and when there is too much stored fat in the body it stops functioning properly and that's when problems like type 2 diabetes, heart failure, high cholesterol, etc come into play. Stop blaming sugar...
that being said, she loved artificial sweeteners, diet coke and Jols.0 -
I never did like The Who . . .0
-
In my opinion, it comes down to where the sugar is coming from.
If someone is eating 80 g of sugar daily but their sugar intake is mainly coming from fruits, that's much different than someone who consumes 80 g of sugar daily from soda and cookies.
lolz…right, because the fruit sugar is sooooo good for you, but the added sugar is evil….logical conclusion..rolling eyez...
again? :laugh:0 -
I'm actually not hurting my own argument. What you are talking about is the CONCENTRATED FORM of fructose. I'm referring to the natural form of fructose found in fruits.
And how exactly are they processed by your body differently?
I already posted the answer to that question. Not explaining it again.
What about the fact that fructose is almost always found with glucose, even in fruit? That negates your entire argument about fruit being superior because of the fructose present and the fact that it does not illicit an insulin response due to the claimed absence of glucose.Fructose in both the commercial and natural domain has an equal amount of glucose attached to it. You’d have to go out of your way to obtain fructose without the accompanying glucose. Sucrose is half fructose and half glucose. High-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) is nearly identical to sucrose in structure and function. Here’s the point I’m getting at: contrary to Lustig’s contentions, both of these compounds have substantial research showing not just their ability to elicit an insulin response, but also their suppressive effect on appetite
Not once did I say fruit contains no glucose. The amount of glucose found in fruit is so minute. It all depends on its glycemic index. You're still not getting the point but that's okay.
Fruit contains about equal parts fructose and glucose so I wouldn't call that minute...
Also the glycemic index was developed for diabetics and if you're not diabetic it's basically irrelevant. The way they determined the glycemic index was they would feed one specific carb BY ITSELF to a person in a fasted state and watch the insulin response during digestion. How often does that happen for a person? Who eats only one specific carb by itself in a fasted state? For most people rarely ever. It has been shown that the glycemic index is washed out and basically irrelevant when carbs are consumed with protein and or fat as both of those macronutrients slow digestion and thus slow the speed in which the carbs are processed resulting in a reduction in the insulin response and even if carbs are eaten alone, but in a fed state, the same situation applies.
It all depends on the fruit.
Irrelevant if you're not diabetic? Lol. If the glycemic index is washed out and basically irrelevant when carbs are consumed with protein and fat, why are so many people diabetic nowadays? It's not from eating protein, healthy fats, and low glycemic fruits. I can promise you that.
so now you are saying that some fruit is good and some bad ..but all added sugar still bad? your argument is crumbling before your eyes...0 -
as long as it is fruit sugar you are fine…fruit sugar is negative calories...So if I'm not fat and not diabetic and get 100+ grams of protein a day as well as hitting my suggested micro nutrient amounts...Can I continue to eat my 100+ grams of sugar a day?
Please hurry with the answer, my cookies and ice cream is literally depending on it.
J/K, I'm totally eating it no matter what.0 -
I'm actually not hurting my own argument. What you are talking about is the CONCENTRATED FORM of fructose. I'm referring to the natural form of fructose found in fruits.
And how exactly are they processed by your body differently?
I already posted the answer to that question. Not explaining it again.
What about the fact that fructose is almost always found with glucose, even in fruit? That negates your entire argument about fruit being superior because of the fructose present and the fact that it does not illicit an insulin response due to the claimed absence of glucose.Fructose in both the commercial and natural domain has an equal amount of glucose attached to it. You’d have to go out of your way to obtain fructose without the accompanying glucose. Sucrose is half fructose and half glucose. High-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) is nearly identical to sucrose in structure and function. Here’s the point I’m getting at: contrary to Lustig’s contentions, both of these compounds have substantial research showing not just their ability to elicit an insulin response, but also their suppressive effect on appetite
Not once did I say fruit contains no glucose. The amount of glucose found in fruit is so minute. It all depends on its glycemic index. You're still not getting the point but that's okay.
Fruit contains about equal parts fructose and glucose so I wouldn't call that minute...
Also the glycemic index was developed for diabetics and if you're not diabetic it's basically irrelevant. The way they determined the glycemic index was they would feed one specific carb BY ITSELF to a person in a fasted state and watch the insulin response during digestion. How often does that happen for a person? Who eats only one specific carb by itself in a fasted state? For most people rarely ever. It has been shown that the glycemic index is washed out and basically irrelevant when carbs are consumed with protein and or fat as both of those macronutrients slow digestion and thus slow the speed in which the carbs are processed resulting in a reduction in the insulin response and even if carbs are eaten alone, but in a fed state, the same situation applies.
It all depends on the fruit.
Irrelevant if you're not diabetic? Lol. If the glycemic index is washed out and basically irrelevant when carbs are consumed with protein and fat, why are so many people diabetic nowadays? It's not from eating protein, healthy fats, and low glycemic fruits. I can promise you that.
so now you are saying that some fruit is good and some bad ..but all added sugar still bad? your argument is crumbling before your eyes...
No, what I'm saying is each fruit contains a different amount of glucose.
The word "bad" never came out of my mouth so don't try to put it there.0 -
I'm actually not hurting my own argument. What you are talking about is the CONCENTRATED FORM of fructose. I'm referring to the natural form of fructose found in fruits.
And how exactly are they processed by your body differently?
I already posted the answer to that question. Not explaining it again.
What about the fact that fructose is almost always found with glucose, even in fruit? That negates your entire argument about fruit being superior because of the fructose present and the fact that it does not illicit an insulin response due to the claimed absence of glucose.Fructose in both the commercial and natural domain has an equal amount of glucose attached to it. You’d have to go out of your way to obtain fructose without the accompanying glucose. Sucrose is half fructose and half glucose. High-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) is nearly identical to sucrose in structure and function. Here’s the point I’m getting at: contrary to Lustig’s contentions, both of these compounds have substantial research showing not just their ability to elicit an insulin response, but also their suppressive effect on appetite
Not once did I say fruit contains no glucose. The amount of glucose found in fruit is so minute. It all depends on its glycemic index. You're still not getting the point but that's okay.
Fruit contains about equal parts fructose and glucose so I wouldn't call that minute...
Also the glycemic index was developed for diabetics and if you're not diabetic it's basically irrelevant. The way they determined the glycemic index was they would feed one specific carb BY ITSELF to a person in a fasted state and watch the insulin response during digestion. How often does that happen for a person? Who eats only one specific carb by itself in a fasted state? For most people rarely ever. It has been shown that the glycemic index is washed out and basically irrelevant when carbs are consumed with protein and or fat as both of those macronutrients slow digestion and thus slow the speed in which the carbs are processed resulting in a reduction in the insulin response and even if carbs are eaten alone, but in a fed state, the same situation applies.
It all depends on the fruit.
Irrelevant if you're not diabetic? Lol. If the glycemic index is washed out and basically irrelevant when carbs are consumed with protein and fat, why are so many people diabetic nowadays? It's not from eating protein, healthy fats, and low glycemic fruits. I can promise you that.
so now you are saying that some fruit is good and some bad ..but all added sugar still bad? your argument is crumbling before your eyes...
No, what I'm saying is each fruit contains a different amount of glucose.
The word "bad" never came out of my mouth so don't try to put it there.
ok lets clarify …so you are saying fruit sugar and added sugar are both the same…? Or one is better than the other?0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 427 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions