Salt or sugar: which is worse?

taem

Thanks for the info, but I wouldn't quote a lawyer when discussing technical or medical issues. Lawyers are good at arguing for your side, but they don't let facts get in the way of a good argument.

All carbs turn to sugar(bread, sugar, grain,etc...). If you don't use the sugar it is used to create fat eventually, but not instantly as in the glass of juice description.

And this is why Asians prior to 1950 (the arrival of the Western diet) they were all fat, full of chronic disease because they ate nothing but rice and vegetables (carbs by your definition) and when they came to America, they were cured of diabetes and hypertension and other chronic diseases.

Refined carbs and refined sugars is the culprit. Please get your nutrition straight. Even Gary Taubes acknowledges this.

LASH3S

bump for later

taem

Wow, honestly, terrible article. Carbs tell you when you're full, but sugar (which is a carb) doesn't? So carbs tell you when you're full but carbs don't tell you when you're full? Also, fructose is not the "main component" in sugar. It depends on the sugar for one thing. Lactose doesn't have any fructose in it at all. Neither does dextrose. Fructose is the main sugar in fruits, so I guess if you eat fruit your body will never tell you that you're full. There wasn't a lot of fructose to be had in the 1800's? Fruit didn't exist?

I didn't bother reading the rest of it, absolute total fear mongering. It also even said that the guy who wrote the book is a lawyer, not a doctor.

As Dr. Lustig notes, frutose without the fiber goes straight to your liver and fat cells, whereas glucose is needed by our body. The problem is that there is not source of pure glucose, it's a mixture, like fats (mono, poly, saturated when you eat animal fat). High Fructose Corn Syrup has no fiber and therefore a certain percentage consumed goes straight to your fat cells and liver (there is an exception for athletes who exercise for more than 3 hours, then the body uses the fructose). This is why fruit which contains fructose is fine, the fiber allows the liver to deal with it. However, Lustig does categorizes all sugars as bad but we need only small amounts of glucose.

Here is Taube's thoughts on "carbs" when asked why then the Asians weren't full of chronic disease prior to the 1950s (before the Western diet came over). http://www.wellsphere.com/general-medicine-article/gary-taubes-answers-questions/513424

azheelshock

Two months ago I added 1 cup / day of brown jasmine rice. My cholesterol has dropped like a rock, well worth the 320 cal / day.

shelbygeorge29

LOL....since I've been eating better the past few months, I have literally said several times, "I'm craving a salad!"

I'm with you!

I used to travel to London and Dublin frequently for work, and I would often eat at pubs. After about a week, all I wanted was a huge salad with grilled chicken. Not exactly fare you'll find at the local pub.

People do actually crave salads, we're living proof!

jtbaddison

Also, I've never heard of a link between fiber and fructose absorption, can you explain exactly how that works?

Source Wikipedia:
The main action of dietary fiber is to change the nature of the contents of the gastrointestinal tract, and to change how other nutrients and chemicals are absorbed.[1][2] Soluble fiber binds to bile acids in the small intestine, making them less likely to enter the body; this in turn lowers cholesterol levels in the blood.[3] Soluble fiber also attenuates the absorption of sugar, reduces sugar response after eating, normalizes blood lipid levels and, once fermented in the colon, produces short-chain fatty acids as byproducts with wide-ranging physiological activities (discussion below). Although insoluble fiber is associated with reduced diabetes risk, the mechanism by which this occurs is unknown.[21]

jtbaddison

How is dextrose less sweet than glucose when dextrose is actually just another name for glucose?

You are right about dextrose, I was mistaken. However, you are wrong if you think fructose is benign...If you can find a benefit that fructose has on the body (that would not better achieved by some other food), I would like to know what it is. If you find it, be sure to call the Doctor's and Lawyers representing the corn industry, because they are dying to tout the benefits of high fructose corn syrup. Problem is - there aren't any.

ninerbuff

Please find a more balanced article... it's fine for an article to reach a conclusion, but there's no point if it only discusses the FOR evidence or the AGAINST evidence alone.

Bingo. This is just information which isn't counter pointed by actual reasons FOR either.

tigersword

How is dextrose less sweet than glucose when dextrose is actually just another name for glucose?

You are right about dextrose, I was mistaken. However, you are wrong if you think fructose is benign...If you can find a benefit that fructose has on the body (that would not better achieved by some other food), I would like to know what it is. If you find it, be sure to call the Doctor's and Lawyers representing the corn industry, because they are dying to tout the benefits of high fructose corn syrup. Problem is - there aren't any.

I never said fructose is benign. If you read my post I listed all of the health problems that have been linked to fructose.

jtbaddison

Awesome. I'm glad we agree.

tigersword

Just a general question to prove that there is no link between fiber and fructose absorption. How do you explain honey? Honey has no fiber, it's mostly fructose, and it's healthy? If fiber is the sole thing that makes fructose healthy, how do you explain honey? Fiber does have a small effect on the digestive absorption rate of sugar overall, but that's actually glucose more than fructose. The only thing studies have proven about fructose absorption is that overall absorption levels are dependent on the amount of glucose in your digestive system at the time.

This is why HFCS has been proven in study after study to behave identically to sucrose in the body, the amount of fructose absorbed is equal to the amount of glucose, the rest is eliminated. This also explains honey, as the human body only absorbs a relatively small amount of fructose when there isn't glucose present.

The only thing scientists don't understand is why the glucose level effects the fructose absorption.

jtbaddison

Just a general question to prove that there is no link between fiber and fructose absorption. How do you explain honey? Honey has no fiber, it's mostly fructose, and it's healthy? If fiber is the sole thing that makes fructose healthy, how do you explain honey? Fiber does have a small effect on the digestive absorption rate of sugar overall, but that's actually glucose more than fructose. The only thing studies have proven about fructose absorption is that overall absorption levels are dependent on the amount of glucose in your digestive system at the time.

This is why HFCS has been proven in study after study to behave identically to sucrose in the body, the amount of fructose absorbed is equal to the amount of glucose, the rest is eliminated. This also explains honey, as the human body only absorbs a relatively small amount of fructose when there isn't glucose present.

The only thing scientists don't understand is why the glucose level effects the fructose absorption.

I'm not aware of honey being healthful. I've heard of benefits for allergies, but that is not the honey, but rather the pollen and beeswax in unfiltered honey. Please give me a core benefit that could not be better performed by another food and I might be persuaded that honey is healthy.

You would also need to provide the studies to me that fiber attenuates glucose absorpiton and not fructose absorption. My understanding is that dietary fiber aids in ALL sugar absorption. If I am in error, please show me. I have no knowledge regarding glucose levels and fructose absorption, so I won't pretend as if I do.

taem

Just a general question to prove that there is no link between fiber and fructose absorption. How do you explain honey? Honey has no fiber, it's mostly fructose, and it's healthy? If fiber is the sole thing that makes fructose healthy, how do you explain honey?

Dr. Lustig replies to that by saying honey has bees. We were never meant to eat a lot of it because of its protectors. The other fruit is grapes to which he doesn't know.

tigersword

He doesn't know because there's no scientific basis for his theory.

And honey has bees? We were never supposed to eat it? How does that explain it's health benefits? That doesn't explain anything. People have been eating honey for thousands of years. Thousands as in archaeologists have found sealed jars of honey in Egyptian Pharaohs' tombs. Before sugar was less expensive, honey was the main sweetener human beings used, along with sugar beets.