Is sugar from fruits bad for you?

Lesa_Sass

Sugar is sugar, whether from fructose, dextrose, or any other source. The difference is that, in fruit, there are tremendous amounts of micronutrients which more than make up for it from a nutritional perspective.

So do most sweetened cereals.

Mmmm--no. I have yet to see ellagic acid as an additive to sweetened cereal. Yet it is in certain fruits and is a potent inhibitor of angio-genesis.

You're a one note musician as always. When you actually have something to show other than pseudoscience, reading into real science in a unique and incorrect way, and an empty avatar, let me know.

In the meantime, I'll continue to get stronger, faster, and more muscular even though I'm in my 40s. Best of luck!

ETA: And you probably should read the side of a cereal box sometime. But I know, that would conflict with your world view.

Dude, you have no idea how ignorant you sound to someone reading through these threads.

I'm getting stronger, faster and more muscular (for a woman) than before and I'm in my 40s too, but guess what? I couldn't do it while eating garbage. Does that make me somehow inferior to you, muscle man? I'm sure that you think so. Yet, I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to determine that healthy food is a better way to fuel one's body than the processed stuff that comes in a box so devoid of nutrients that they have to add a few back just to tout their product as "healthy", even if it's a complete lie.

Good on you for eating anything you want and everything is perfect. That's not the way it is for ALL of us.

PS. Oops, I am eating everything I want! Ribeye steak, mushrooms fried in butter, salads, bacon and eggs..... So, never mind.

LOL! RIGHT! I swear, for the life of me, I do not understand why people are so hell bent on defending crap food. I say take a course in nutrition and learn about the scientific evidence from someone that actually knows what they are talking about. Coursea has them on line for free.

I have an auto immune disease, when I cut out processed and refined foods, my symptoms went away and my pain levels went down by 50%. Now can someone please explain to me, if there is nothing wrong with chemically laden crap food, why this happened to me? And the whole its in your head thing has been disproven by someone who thought they would pull one over on me and I ended up in horrid pain 45 minutes after I ate it. Then there is the fact that some of our foods are packed with crap that other countries have banned. Well, governments do not just ban products because it was a slow week, they did it for the good of their people, unlike the US government, who does stuff for the good of their pocketbooks.

I am 45 and thought to be in my early 30s. I look younger now than I did 7 years ago. Cutting all the poison out of my diet is the reason. I also am less concerned about the way I look than about my over all health. I want to be in an Eco Lodge in Sri Lanka in my 70s not sitting in a dr office like I did with my father in law. Every choice we make today, everything we put in our mouth today, is going to impact our lives when we cross over 60 years old. My choice is healthy organs, skin and bones. Not big muscles or a size 2 dress.

SanteMulberry

So I try to eat a couple apples a day and some other fruit at times, but I notice that I'm usually over (sometimes way over) my sugar allowance for the day and the majority of it is from the fruit. I understand that sugar ultimately turns into fat so I'm wondering if fruit sugar is bad for you and/or will make you fat. And if its not, what makes fruit sugar ok?

Not sure if this was asked but, is it only sugar that is over or is it sugar AND overall calories that you went over?

A complicating factor is that the bodies of obese folk are typically quite efficient in converting high blood glucose into fructose and then on to the problems that fructose creates. According to recent research done at the University of Colorado by Dr. Richard Johnson and his team of researchers, fructose acts as a type of "fat switch" in the body. Johnson goes on to say that it is this way in all species and that it is a "normal" function for animals to search out sources of fructose in preparation for times of food scarcity--such as the winter. As an example, black bears gorge on massive quantities of wild blueberries in August and also any other fructose source throughout the early fall, such as fallen apples (one reason why they counsel homeowners in bear country to clean up fallen apples quickly, so as not to attract bears). Fructose does two things, it accelerates the deposition of fat and it makes the animal (or human) sluggish. It works just fine for animals that hibernate--not so much for modern humans who have access to plentiful supplies of food the year round. Blood sugar must be controlled at a lower level for those desiring to lose body fat. In general, fructose should be limited to one or two servings of fruit per day and sucrose, which is 50% fructose, should be avoided entirely because it does not carry the benefits of fruit to the consumer. High blood sugar, caused by the excessive intake of sugar and starch in the modern diet, will inevitably lead to the accumulation of body fat, in the absence of vigorous exercise. But excessive intake of calories from ALL sources will also contribute to high blood sugar and then onto the previously mentioned set of metabolic consequences. What is interesting is that a person is MUCH less likely to consume excessive calories when eating a diet of whole foods as opposed to heavily processed food where sugars are stripped out of their natural contexts and consumed by themselves.

paleojoe

So I try to eat a couple apples a day and some other fruit at times, but I notice that I'm usually over (sometimes way over) my sugar allowance for the day and the majority of it is from the fruit. I understand that sugar ultimately turns into fat so I'm wondering if fruit sugar is bad for you and/or will make you fat. And if its not, what makes fruit sugar ok?

Not sure if this was asked but, is it only sugar that is over or is it sugar AND overall calories that you went over?

A complicating factor is that the bodies of obese folk are typically quite efficient in converting high blood glucose into fructose and then on to the problems that fructose creates. According to recent research done at the University of Colorado by Dr. Richard Johnson and his team of researchers, fructose acts as a type of "fat switch" in the body. Johnson goes on to say that it is this way in all species and that it is a "normal" function for animals to search out sources of fructose in preparation for times of food scarcity--such as the winter. As an example, black bears gorge on massive quantities of wild blueberries in August and also any other fructose source throughout the early fall, such as fallen apples (one reason why they counsel homeowners in bear country to clean up fallen apples quickly, so as not to attract bears). Fructose does two things, it accelerates the deposition of fat and it makes the animal (or human) sluggish. It works just fine for animals that hibernate--not so much for modern humans who have access to plentiful supplies of food the year round. Blood sugar must be controlled at a lower level for those desiring to lose body fat. In general, fructose should be limited to one or two servings of fruit per day and sucrose, which is 50% fructose, should be avoided entirely because it does not carry the benefits of fruit to the consumer. High blood sugar, caused by the excessive intake of sugar and starch in the modern diet, will inevitably lead to the accumulation of body fat, in the absence of vigorous exercise. But excessive intake of calories from ALL sources will also contribute to high blood sugar and then onto the previously mentioned set of metabolic consequences. What is interesting is that a person is MUCH less likely to consume excessive calories when eating a diet of whole foods as opposed to heavily processed food where sugars are stripped out of their natural contexts and consumed by themselves.

So is that a yes or a no...

SanteMulberry

So I try to eat a couple apples a day and some other fruit at times, but I notice that I'm usually over (sometimes way over) my sugar allowance for the day and the majority of it is from the fruit. I understand that sugar ultimately turns into fat so I'm wondering if fruit sugar is bad for you and/or will make you fat. And if its not, what makes fruit sugar ok?

Not sure if this was asked but, is it only sugar that is over or is it sugar AND overall calories that you went over?

A complicating factor is that the bodies of obese folk are typically quite efficient in converting high blood glucose into fructose and then on to the problems that fructose creates. According to recent research done at the University of Colorado by Dr. Richard Johnson and his team of researchers, fructose acts as a type of "fat switch" in the body. Johnson goes on to say that it is this way in all species and that it is a "normal" function for animals to search out sources of fructose in preparation for times of food scarcity--such as the winter. As an example, black bears gorge on massive quantities of wild blueberries in August and also any other fructose source throughout the early fall, such as fallen apples (one reason why they counsel homeowners in bear country to clean up fallen apples quickly, so as not to attract bears). Fructose does two things, it accelerates the deposition of fat and it makes the animal (or human) sluggish. It works just fine for animals that hibernate--not so much for modern humans who have access to plentiful supplies of food the year round. Blood sugar must be controlled at a lower level for those desiring to lose body fat. In general, fructose should be limited to one or two servings of fruit per day and sucrose, which is 50% fructose, should be avoided entirely because it does not carry the benefits of fruit to the consumer. High blood sugar, caused by the excessive intake of sugar and starch in the modern diet, will inevitably lead to the accumulation of body fat, in the absence of vigorous exercise. But excessive intake of calories from ALL sources will also contribute to high blood sugar and then onto the previously mentioned set of metabolic consequences. What is interesting is that a person is MUCH less likely to consume excessive calories when eating a diet of whole foods as opposed to heavily processed food where sugars are stripped out of their natural contexts and consumed by themselves.

So is that a yes or a no...

Well, it was a kind of yes and no. "Fast" carbs (sugars and starches), because they raise blood sugar precipitously, force the body to respond with "emergency" measures to bring blood sugar down (converting that high blood glucose into fats to be stored in the fat cells). "Slower" carbs (that is, carbohydrates that are mediated by fiber and fluid) will not raise blood sugar as quickly, because the body must work at extracting the carbohydrates and other nutrients over a longer time period. But it is important to realize that TOTAL calories is important too. A heavy meal, no matter what it is composed of, will raise blood sugar over time and contribute to the storage of excess blood glucose as fat. What has been observed however, is that those who eat mostly proteins and fats almost inevitably limit their calories as well. That is a primary reason why Atkins and Paleo diets work.

But the hormones of fat storage and fat burning respond to changing the components of the diet because of complex bio-chemical interactions. (See the thread on how certain types of food inhibit angiogenesis which is thought to have a bearing on obesity.) The seriously obese are fighting against that biochemistry which is influenced by the fact that most seriously obese folk are quite "addicted" to "fast" carbs. They almost always have seriously aberrant fat storage and fat burning hormones in addition to having altered sensitivity to them. Such hormones as adiponectin, insulin, and leptin just don't work properly in the seriously obese--especially not in obese women because of the additional influence of estrogen/progesterone (estrogen promotes fat storage, progesterone promotes fat burning because of their influence on the use of thyroid hormone at a cellular level) imbalance caused by the additional estrogen put out by their fat cells. Exercise is also important because it too influences the hormones of metabolism and deposition and also because exercise directly reduces blood glucose levels.. But there are two barriers to exercise that operate for the obese. Their chronically elevated blood sugar causes them to be sluggish and the load on their joints discourages them from exercise.

The bottom line is that those with 20-30 pounds to lose will respond adequately to any restriction of calories but the obese must work to keep their blood sugar down in order to lose body fat. What will often happen with obese folk is that they refuse to change the composition of their diet or exercise and just rely on calorie restriction alone. The calorie restriction and lack of exercise usually results in at least as much loss of lean body mass as body fat and puts them further behind when the nearly inevitable happens: They stop dieting and go to gorging on the "fast" carbs that they are addicted to--the end result is that they are worse off than when they began their diet.

paleojoe

The bottom line is that those with 20-30 pounds to lose will respond adequately to any restriction of calories but the obese must work to keep their blood sugar down in order to lose body fat. What will often happen with obese folk is that they refuse to change the composition of their diet or exercise and just rely on calorie restriction alone. The calorie restriction and lack of exercise usually results in at least as much loss of lean body mass as body fat and puts them further behind when the nearly inevitable happens: They stop dieting and go to gorging on the "fast" carbs that they are addicted to--the end result is that they are worse off than when they began their diet.

The OP has 58 lbs to go. Would you consider her obese?

MellieCc

bump for later

SanteMulberry

The bottom line is that those with 20-30 pounds to lose will respond adequately to any restriction of calories but the obese must work to keep their blood sugar down in order to lose body fat. What will often happen with obese folk is that they refuse to change the composition of their diet or exercise and just rely on calorie restriction alone. The calorie restriction and lack of exercise usually results in at least as much loss of lean body mass as body fat and puts them further behind when the nearly inevitable happens: They stop dieting and go to gorging on the "fast" carbs that they are addicted to--the end result is that they are worse off than when they began their diet.

The OP has 58 lbs to go. Would you consider her obese?

All depends on her body composition. Does she really have 58 pounds of body fat to lose? A short, small-boned and not very well-muscled woman could be pretty obese while carrying 58 excess pounds of body fat. A woman who is six-feet tall and large-boned and with large muscles might merely be "overweight" with "58 pounds to lose".

The hormone picture for women, in terms of losing body fat is much more daunting than that facing men. For one thing, women ALWAYS have 2 to 3 times the amount of leptin circulating in their blood AT THE SAME BODY FAT LEVEL as a man. They (women) are MUCH more prone to develop a condition called "leptin-resistance" and I'll explain what that is.

Body fat does not just "sit there". It is metabolically active and one of the things that it pumps out is the hormone, leptin. So the more body fat you carry, the more leptin you will pump out. Leptin SHOULD cause us to burn more fat and scientists who first discovered leptin thought they were on their way to a mountain of gold because they assumed that supplying obese folk with leptin would cause them to burn body fat (worked in some animal studies they did). But they didn't yet understand that some people (and particularly obese women) are "leptin resistant". Just like being exposed to high levels of insulin produces insulin-resistance over time, so being exposed to large amounts of leptin over time produces a condition where the body no longer responds properly to the leptin. Women are already at a handicap when it comes to loss of body fat because of their female hormones but the leptin-resistant woman finds it extremely difficult to achieve permanent weight loss on mere calorie restriction.

Another interesting hormone that impacts body fat gain or loss is adiponectin. From ehow.com: "Adiponectin is a protein-based hormone produced naturally by the body that manages fat lipids and glucose (blood sugar). The hormone has direct control over the way a body metabolizes insulin, and so adiponectin is believed to play a key role in the management of type 2 diabetes, although research is ongoing. The hormone is abnormally low in obese people, suggesting a healthy diet may contribute to adiponectin production, and that may, in turn, help prevent people form developing diabetes. Adiponectin also reduces inflammation in cell tissue inside blood vessels and so holds some clinical promise in treating cardiovascular disease." Two more strikes against obese folks. Adiponectin lowers blood sugar but adiponectin levels are "abnormally low in obese people" and inflammation is part of the obesity picture. Obese people have much higher levels of inflammation--probably because their adiponectin levels are "abnormally low". Adiponectin levels can be increased when a person is well-nourished, but we already determined that many obese folk are addicted to the nutritionally empty calories represented by sucrose and white flour (starch). Oh, they fortify white flour, because if they didn't, people would start to develop the major nutritional deficiency diseases--but that does NOT mean that white flour is nutritionally adequate because there are many nutritional substances removed during the milling and bleaching process that are NOT replaced. Would you consider your mouth "enriched" if they pulled out all of your teeth and replaced seven or eight of them with artificial implants? So, obese people are "overfed and undernourished" to start with. Magnesium for example, which is widely available in vegetables and fruits, is in short supply in the diets of obese folk. And magnesium is essential to the production of not only adiponectin but for intracellular energy transport through adenosine-5'-triphosphate (ATP). Interestingly, the metabolism of fructose (we're back to talking about sugar again) "uses up" a lot of ATP. Obese folk do not ordinarily "pig out" on fruit--in fact, in examining the food diaries of some morbidly obese people, you see a singular lack of fruit in their diet. But they eat massive quantities of sugar (which is, remember, 50% fructose). The greatest single exposure to fructose in the standard diet is through sugar consumption. Processed food is typically loaded with sugar.

And don't forget that the "female" hormone, estrogen, which is not only supplied by a woman's ovaries but her fat cells as well, blunt the effect of thyroid hormone at a cellular level. In addition, xenoestrogens (chemical pollutants that act like estrogen in the body) in the environment contribute further to the problem.

Eating nourishing whole foods is VERY important to the process of losing body fat for the obese. Very few people have the ability to burn calories at the rate of high performance athletes so they must make every calorie count, if they are going to stay healthy while on a program to lose body fat. All of this adds up to: Yes, the sugar in fruits is bad for you, if you are trying to shed body fat, BUT the amount is small in whole fruits and the nutritional benefits are so strong that fruit is a good thing to eat in moderation. But sugar and particularly high fructose corn syrup, is a no-no for the obese woman for all the reasons I have outlined. The amount of fructose in one can of orange soda is equivalent to the amount of fructose in 10 to 12 oranges. I don't know anyone who sits down to eat a dozen oranges but it is easy to quaff a can of orange soda.

And this doesn't even begin to cover the topic of enhanced angiogenesis in those who eat virtually no whole fruits or vegetables (such as the morbidly obese). (See my thread on angio-genesis.)

Lesa_Sass

The bottom line is that those with 20-30 pounds to lose will respond adequately to any restriction of calories but the obese must work to keep their blood sugar down in order to lose body fat. What will often happen with obese folk is that they refuse to change the composition of their diet or exercise and just rely on calorie restriction alone. The calorie restriction and lack of exercise usually results in at least as much loss of lean body mass as body fat and puts them further behind when the nearly inevitable happens: They stop dieting and go to gorging on the "fast" carbs that they are addicted to--the end result is that they are worse off than when they began their diet.

The OP has 58 lbs to go. Would you consider her obese?

All depends on her body composition. Does she really have 58 pounds of body fat to lose? A short, small-boned and not very well-muscled woman could be pretty obese while carrying 58 excess pounds of body fat. A woman who is six-feet tall and large-boned and with large muscles might merely be "overweight" with "58 pounds to lose".

The hormone picture for women, in terms of losing body fat is much more daunting than that facing men. For one thing, women ALWAYS have 2 to 3 times the amount of leptin circulating in their blood AT THE SAME BODY FAT LEVEL as a man. They (women) are MUCH more prone to develop a condition called "leptin-resistance" and I'll explain what that is.

Body fat does not just "sit there". It is metabolically active and one of the things that it pumps out is the hormone, leptin. So the more body fat you carry, the more leptin you will pump out. Leptin SHOULD cause us to burn more fat and scientists who first discovered leptin thought they were on their way to a mountain of gold because they assumed that supplying obese folk with leptin would cause them to burn body fat (worked in some animal studies they did). But they didn't yet understand that some people (and particularly obese women) are "leptin resistant". Just like being exposed to high levels of insulin produces insulin-resistance over time, so being exposed to large amounts of leptin over time produces a condition where the body no longer responds properly to the leptin. Women are already at a handicap when it comes to loss of body fat because of their female hormones but the leptin-resistant woman finds it extremely difficult to achieve permanent weight loss on mere calorie restriction.

Another interesting hormone that impacts body fat gain or loss is adiponectin. From ehow.com: "Adiponectin is a protein-based hormone produced naturally by the body that manages fat lipids and glucose (blood sugar). The hormone has direct control over the way a body metabolizes insulin, and so adiponectin is believed to play a key role in the management of type 2 diabetes, although research is ongoing. The hormone is abnormally low in obese people, suggesting a healthy diet may contribute to adiponectin production, and that may, in turn, help prevent people form developing diabetes. Adiponectin also reduces inflammation in cell tissue inside blood vessels and so holds some clinical promise in treating cardiovascular disease." Two more strikes against obese folks. Adiponectin lowers blood sugar but adiponectin levels are "abnormally low in obese people" and inflammation is part of the obesity picture. Obese people have much higher levels of inflammation--probably because their adiponectin levels are "abnormally low". Adiponectin levels can be increased when a person is well-nourished, but we already determined that many obese folk are addicted to the nutritionally empty calories represented by sucrose and white flour (starch). Oh, they fortify white flour, because if they didn't, people would start to develop the major nutritional deficiency diseases--but that does NOT mean that white flour is nutritionally adequate because there are many nutritional substances removed during the milling and bleaching process that are NOT replaced. Would you consider your mouth "enriched" if they pulled out all of your teeth and replaced seven or eight of them with artificial implants? So, obese people are "overfed and undernourished" to start with. Magnesium for example, which is widely available in vegetables and fruits, is in short supply in the diets of obese folk. And magnesium is essential to the production of not only adiponectin but for intracellular energy transport through adenosine-5'-triphosphate (ATP). Interestingly, the metabolism of fructose (we're back to talking about sugar again) "uses up" a lot of ATP. Obese folk do not ordinarily "pig out" on fruit--in fact, in examining the food diaries of some morbidly obese people, you see a singular lack of fruit in their diet. But they eat massive quantities of sugar (which is, remember, 50% fructose). The greatest single exposure to fructose in the standard diet is through sugar consumption. Processed food is typically loaded with sugar.

And don't forget that the "female" hormone, estrogen, which is not only supplied by a woman's ovaries but her fat cells as well, blunt the effect of thyroid hormone at a cellular level. In addition, xenoestrogens (chemical pollutants that act like estrogen in the body) in the environment contribute further to the problem.

Eating nourishing whole foods is VERY important to the process of losing body fat for the obese. Very few people have the ability to burn calories at the rate of high performance athletes so they must make every calorie count, if they are going to stay healthy while on a program to lose body fat. All of this adds up to: Yes, the sugar in fruits is bad for you, if you are trying to shed body fat, BUT the amount is small in whole fruits and the nutritional benefits are so strong that fruit is a good thing to eat in moderation. But sugar and particularly high fructose corn syrup, is a no-no for the obese woman for all the reasons I have outlined. The amount of fructose in one can of orange soda is equivalent to the amount of fructose in 10 to 12 oranges. I don't know anyone who sits down to eat a dozen oranges but it is easy to quaff a can of orange soda.

And this doesn't even begin to cover the topic of enhanced angiogenesis in those who eat virtually no whole fruits or vegetables (such as the morbidly obese). (See my thread on angio-genesis.)

:flowerforyou:

paleojoe

The OP has 58 lbs to go. Would you consider her obese?

All depends on her body composition. Does she really have 58 pounds of body fat to lose? A short, small-boned and not very well-muscled woman could be pretty obese while carrying 58 excess pounds of body fat. A woman who is six-feet tall and large-boned and with large muscles might merely be "overweight" with "58 pounds to lose".

[/quote]

I guess until we hear from the OP, we will never know.

I am with you on everything else... great post!

tigersword

Wait, morbidly obese people don't eat fruits and vegetables? Crap, I always did, funny how I was still morbidly obese.

Wall of text or not, calories are still king when it comes to weight management.

SanteMulberry

Wait, morbidly obese people don't eat fruits and vegetables? Crap, I always did, funny how I was still morbidly obese.

Wall of text or not, calories are still king when it comes to weight management.

I'm talking about the REALLY big people--like the 450 to 650-pounders. Never knew any of the ones I have counseled to list any fruits and only a tiny amount of vegetables (does pizza sauce count as a vegetable?) on their food diaries. I never denied that overall, calories are important. However, the composition of the diet is very important too. The very newest obesity research is showing this to be the case. The newest most exciting research is focusing on controlling obesity through controlling angiogenesis. And there are specific FOODS that inhibit angiogenesis better than DRUGS. See my thread on that.

wlammrn

I am brand new to this site, just started last week. I love how easy it is to keep track of what I eat: calories, carbs, etc. But I was finding that everyday I was over on sugar. But it was the fruit I was eating that was causing the overage. I wish there was a way for the system to differentiate fruit sugar from the sugar in other foods. I've just started keeping track of my fruit sugar vs "other" sugar and making sure I don't go over on the "other"category. Other than that I LOVE THIS SITE!!!! So glad I found it!

health1971

I eat fruits every day and I also go over , but I don't worry about it... I use the fruits that are high in sugars after my workouts and in the morning and the ones lower in sugar at night for a snack. Hope it helps 8-)...

Wildflower0106

Most fruit is bad for me because of high fiber levels... if you don't have any medical issues with sugar and fiber doesn't double you over in pain then eat the fruit.

brandileeg

There sure are a lot of different opinions on this. I just can't get on board with the "sugar is sugar" argument. I will go toe-to-toe with someone, eating the equivalent in apples to their snickers bars and see who comes out ahead.

tigersword

There sure are a lot of different opinions on this. I just can't get on board with the "sugar is sugar" argument. I will go toe-to-toe with someone, eating the equivalent in apples to their snickers bars and see who comes out ahead.

Holding calories equivalent, I'd honestly take the Snickers bar. Decent fiber, more protein, healthy fats. And, calorie for calorie, less sugar than the apple. If sugar is your concern, a Snickers bar is 250 calories with 27 grams of sugar, while 250 calories of apple is about 50 grams of sugar.

Personally, I think comparing foods like that is silly. Sometimes eat an apple, sometimes eat a Snickers bar. It's called variety and balance.

judychicken

Why on weight watchers it not count you can have as many you want.

Kevalicious99

I am always over on my sugar macro .. but reading this I am not going to worry about it, as it is always cause of fruit that I am eating (or rather .. having it in smoothies).

Great thread.