Is fast food really so bad for you?

Actually, that is what the medical researcher Richard J. Johnson, M.D. and his colleagues did with a number of normal weight men during a study at the University of Colorado. At the end of the experiment, the majority had become Type II diabetics (fortunately, they reverted to their previous non-diabetic state after the experiment was over.) It was a calculated risk based on the researchers hypothesis that it is excessive fructose consumption (in the form of sugar and high fructose corn syrup consumption) that causes, not only obesity but Type II diabetes as well. Dr. Johnson believes that Type II is actually a "normal" response to the eating of fructose. What makes sugar (and HFCS) particularly devastating is that there is no mediating influence from fiber and water, which would be the case with fruit consumption. The dose makes the poison. Drinking just one 12-oz. can of "orange" soda has the fructose equivalent of 10 medium oranges. As a further note, the fructose in the fruit is locked in little "pillows" of fiber and is released slowly into the blood stream. It isn't that our bodies cannot handle fructose any more than it cannot handle alcohol, but when it is taken in unusually large amounts, it overwhelms.

Have you got a link / citation / title of the study please?

I am just heading out the door but would like to read it later when I have time.

I'll see if I can find it online but I read about the study in Dr. Johnson's book, "The Fat Switch" which he wrote for the public as a way of getting the results of his research before the people.

Edited to add: Here is an Endocrine Review paper that he published back in 2009. http://edrv.endojournals.org/content/30/1/96.full I think the study that he spoke of in his book was done more recently. I'll keep looking.

This may be what you're talking about, read the actual study and pay attention to the design and how closely it relates to the real world vs just copy pasting from his book

Excessive fructose intake induces the features of metabolic syndrome in healthy adult men: role of uric acid in the hypertensive response.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CDgQFjAB&url=http://www.optimalhealthresearch.com/uws/pharm/1_required/A_Intro-Midterm/Week4_DIABETES%20PARADIGM%20Excessive%20fructose%20intake%20induces%20the%20features%20of%20metabolic%20syndrome%20in%20healthy%20adult%20men.pdf&ei=AtmLUaLoEYXA8AT_k4GwDw&usg=AFQjCNG5EFGmjEedmtI3d0GA1i3fOW9YtA&sig2=cqod0nFyeGwYneR7ULrFIw&bvm=bv.46340616,d.eWU

Actually, that is what the medical researcher Richard J. Johnson, M.D. and his colleagues did with a number of normal weight men during a study at the University of Colorado. At the end of the experiment, the majority had become Type II diabetics (fortunately, they reverted to their previous non-diabetic state after the experiment was over.) It was a calculated risk based on the researchers hypothesis that it is excessive fructose consumption (in the form of sugar and high fructose corn syrup consumption) that causes, not only obesity but Type II diabetes as well. Dr. Johnson believes that Type II is actually a "normal" response to the eating of fructose. What makes sugar (and HFCS) particularly devastating is that there is no mediating influence from fiber and water, which would be the case with fruit consumption. The dose makes the poison. Drinking just one 12-oz. can of "orange" soda has the fructose equivalent of 10 medium oranges. As a further note, the fructose in the fruit is locked in little "pillows" of fiber and is released slowly into the blood stream. It isn't that our bodies cannot handle fructose any more than it cannot handle alcohol, but when it is taken in unusually large amounts, it overwhelms.

Have you got a link / citation / title of the study please?

I am just heading out the door but would like to read it later when I have time.

I'll see if I can find it online but I read about the study in Dr. Johnson's book, "The Fat Switch" which he wrote for the public as a way of getting the results of his research before the people.

Edited to add: Here is an Endocrine Review paper that he published back in 2009. http://edrv.endojournals.org/content/30/1/96.full I think the study that he spoke of in his book was done more recently. I'll keep looking.

This may be what you're talking about, read the actual study and pay attention to the design and how closely it relates to the real world vs just copy pasting from his book

Excessive fructose intake induces the features of metabolic syndrome in healthy adult men: role of uric acid in the hypertensive response.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CDgQFjAB&url=http://www.optimalhealthresearch.com/uws/pharm/1_required/A_Intro-Midterm/Week4_DIABETES%20PARADIGM%20Excessive%20fructose%20intake%20induces%20the%20features%20of%20metabolic%20syndrome%20in%20healthy%20adult%20men.pdf&ei=AtmLUaLoEYXA8AT_k4GwDw&usg=AFQjCNG5EFGmjEedmtI3d0GA1i3fOW9YtA&sig2=cqod0nFyeGwYneR7ULrFIw&bvm=bv.46340616,d.eWU

I did not copy and paste from his book. In the book, he answers his critics who have said that the fructose intake was excessive but it was designed in the way that most studies are designed---exposing the test subjects to a large amount of a substance in a short time frame. While that does not exactly relate to "real world" consumption, Dr. Johnson and his colleagues have always said that the effects are long term and cumulative.

Wut?

Fast food isn't bad in moderation. I eat it once a week or so if we can afford it. I don't classify foods as "good" or "bad." People get overweight/obese and have the related health problems by eating too much food (not just fast food. You can get overweight eating "healthy" food.) I've lost weight just fine.

And before anyone can chime in with, "It's more than just the number on the scale:"

My cholesterol is fine (bangin', in fact. It was over 300, I was prescribed meds for it, and now it's well into the healthy range without me ever taking the medication. And I was 103 pounds when it was tested that high, 141 pounds now. Go figure. Not weight-related,) my heart functions well, my liver and kidney function well, my blood tests came back with zero deficiencies... In fact, aside from having 20 pounds to lose still, I'm in tip-top shape according to every test my doctor could throw at me. I had 'em all (and, being in a healthy weight range and having an acceptable body fat % according to the doctor, the 20 pounds is just for my satisfaction and not for my health.)

I eat fast food more often than I used to, and I'm healthier than I was a year ago. Fast food didn't make me heathier, but eating everything in moderation did. Whether eating out or eating at home, it's about eating an appropriate amount.

Actually, that is what the medical researcher Richard J. Johnson, M.D. and his colleagues did with a number of normal weight men during a study at the University of Colorado. At the end of the experiment, the majority had become Type II diabetics (fortunately, they reverted to their previous non-diabetic state after the experiment was over.) It was a calculated risk based on the researchers hypothesis that it is excessive fructose consumption (in the form of sugar and high fructose corn syrup consumption) that causes, not only obesity but Type II diabetes as well. Dr. Johnson believes that Type II is actually a "normal" response to the eating of fructose. What makes sugar (and HFCS) particularly devastating is that there is no mediating influence from fiber and water, which would be the case with fruit consumption. The dose makes the poison. Drinking just one 12-oz. can of "orange" soda has the fructose equivalent of 10 medium oranges. As a further note, the fructose in the fruit is locked in little "pillows" of fiber and is released slowly into the blood stream. It isn't that our bodies cannot handle fructose any more than it cannot handle alcohol, but when it is taken in unusually large amounts, it overwhelms.

Have you got a link / citation / title of the study please?

I am just heading out the door but would like to read it later when I have time.

I'll see if I can find it online but I read about the study in Dr. Johnson's book, "The Fat Switch" which he wrote for the public as a way of getting the results of his research before the people.

Edited to add: Here is an Endocrine Review paper that he published back in 2009. http://edrv.endojournals.org/content/30/1/96.full I think the study that he spoke of in his book was done more recently. I'll keep looking.

This may be what you're talking about, read the actual study and pay attention to the design and how closely it relates to the real world vs just copy pasting from his book

Excessive fructose intake induces the features of metabolic syndrome in healthy adult men: role of uric acid in the hypertensive response.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CDgQFjAB&url=http://www.optimalhealthresearch.com/uws/pharm/1_required/A_Intro-Midterm/Week4_DIABETES%20PARADIGM%20Excessive%20fructose%20intake%20induces%20the%20features%20of%20metabolic%20syndrome%20in%20healthy%20adult%20men.pdf&ei=AtmLUaLoEYXA8AT_k4GwDw&usg=AFQjCNG5EFGmjEedmtI3d0GA1i3fOW9YtA&sig2=cqod0nFyeGwYneR7ULrFIw&bvm=bv.46340616,d.eWU

I did not copy and paste from his book. In the book, he answers his critics who have said that the fructose intake was excessive but it was designed in the way that most studies are designed---exposing the test subjects to a large amount of a substance in a short time frame. While that does not exactly relate to "real world" consumption, Dr. Johnson and his colleagues have always said that the effects are long term and cumulative.

Context and dosage. Seriously consuming 200 g's of fructose in the real world is consuming about around 400 g's of sugars or 1600 calories. Of course fructose and sugar can be problematic in these doses.......The equivalent of 40 oranges. Studies that show normal intake might be a good buffer for you considering the obsession you have with fructose.

Wut?

Fast food isn't bad in moderation. I eat it once a week or so if we can afford it. I don't classify foods as "good" or "bad." People get overweight/obese and have the related health problems by eating too much food (not just fast food. You can get overweight eating "healthy" food.) I've lost weight just fine.

And before anyone can chime in with, "It's more than just the number on the scale:"

My cholesterol is fine (bangin', in fact. It was over 300, I was prescribed meds for it, and now it's well into the healthy range without me ever taking the medication. And I was 103 pounds when it was tested that high, 141 pounds now. Go figure. Not weight-related,) my heart functions well, my liver and kidney function well, my blood tests came back with zero deficiencies... In fact, aside from having 20 pounds to lose still, I'm in tip-top shape according to every test my doctor could throw at me. I had 'em all (and, being in a healthy weight range and having an acceptable body fat % according to the doctor, the 20 pounds is just for my satisfaction and not for my health.)

I eat fast food more often than I used to, and I'm healthier than I was a year ago. Fast food didn't make me heathier, but eating everything in moderation did. Whether eating out or eating at home, it's about eating an appropriate amount.

You are 22 years old. And what works for you will not necessarily work for an obese 40 year-old. By the way, it is good that you did not go on the anti-cholesterol drug. They are dangerous drugs---the side effects are awful.

Wut?

Fast food isn't bad in moderation. I eat it once a week or so if we can afford it. I don't classify foods as "good" or "bad." People get overweight/obese and have the related health problems by eating too much food (not just fast food. You can get overweight eating "healthy" food.) I've lost weight just fine.

And before anyone can chime in with, "It's more than just the number on the scale:"

My cholesterol is fine (bangin', in fact. It was over 300, I was prescribed meds for it, and now it's well into the healthy range without me ever taking the medication. And I was 103 pounds when it was tested that high, 141 pounds now. Go figure. Not weight-related,) my heart functions well, my liver and kidney function well, my blood tests came back with zero deficiencies... In fact, aside from having 20 pounds to lose still, I'm in tip-top shape according to every test my doctor could throw at me. I had 'em all (and, being in a healthy weight range and having an acceptable body fat % according to the doctor, the 20 pounds is just for my satisfaction and not for my health.)

I eat fast food more often than I used to, and I'm healthier than I was a year ago. Fast food didn't make me heathier, but eating everything in moderation did. Whether eating out or eating at home, it's about eating an appropriate amount.

You are 22 years old. And what works for you will not necessarily work for an obese 40 year-old. By the way, it is good that you did not go on the anti-cholesterol drug. They are dangerous drugs---the side effects are awful.

I'm working as hard as I can at exercise (I have arthritis). I go to the pool twice a week and as my weight has come down (which makes the calorie restrictions become tighter and tighter) I have become a lot more active--as my arthritis improves. I am already down to a 2 pound a month weight loss, even though my macros are set at "1 pound a week". I added light weights several months ago and I am attempting to do heavier weights but I am also eating at a supposed deficit (and I am VERY careful to weigh and record EVERYTHING). I'm happy for you that you are able to maintain on 4,000 calories. I can assure you that I would blow up like a blimp on that many calories. I would have a problem maintaining on half of that.

It isn't my "obsession"--it is the subject of ongoing obesity research.

I am acquainted with several severely obese individuals (450+ pounds) who easily eat that much fructose in a day through their excessive consumption of sweets and soda. The food diary of one of them records at least 800 grams of carbohydrate a day--the majority of which comes from sugar and high fructose corn syrup. This woman is severely ill--Type II diabetic---and even though she is only in her early 30s her life expectancy is quite short. At over 500 pounds, she must even lose some body fat before her doctor will even consider lap band surgery. And the results of those surgeries is proving to be unsuccessful in avoiding many of the problems and illnesses of the severely obese, anyway. There have been studies done which show that the rate of illness and medical complications accelerates for those who have had the procedure.

Except that you are not accounting for what obesity researchers have observed as the "anti-satiety" effect of excessive fructose consumption.

So a poptart is less filling than 200 calories of celery; in a calorie controlled environment that doesn't matter outside of preference. Once again not saying you can't eat 'clean' or a specific way, just that you don't have to in order to reach success. If you are ravenous after filling your daily allotment of calories with twinkies and skittles, then that's not a very well laid out diet. If you reach your nutritional needs for the day and have 200 cals left over for a scoop of ice cream and want one, that's perfectly fine.

Wut?

Fast food isn't bad in moderation. I eat it once a week or so if we can afford it. I don't classify foods as "good" or "bad." People get overweight/obese and have the related health problems by eating too much food (not just fast food. You can get overweight eating "healthy" food.) I've lost weight just fine.

And before anyone can chime in with, "It's more than just the number on the scale:"

My cholesterol is fine (bangin', in fact. It was over 300, I was prescribed meds for it, and now it's well into the healthy range without me ever taking the medication. And I was 103 pounds when it was tested that high, 141 pounds now. Go figure. Not weight-related,) my heart functions well, my liver and kidney function well, my blood tests came back with zero deficiencies... In fact, aside from having 20 pounds to lose still, I'm in tip-top shape according to every test my doctor could throw at me. I had 'em all (and, being in a healthy weight range and having an acceptable body fat % according to the doctor, the 20 pounds is just for my satisfaction and not for my health.)

I eat fast food more often than I used to, and I'm healthier than I was a year ago. Fast food didn't make me heathier, but eating everything in moderation did. Whether eating out or eating at home, it's about eating an appropriate amount.

You are 22 years old. And what works for you will not necessarily work for an obese 40 year-old. By the way, it is good that you did not go on the anti-cholesterol drug. They are dangerous drugs---the side effects are awful.

You are a 65 year old arthritic woman. What appliies to you doesn't necessarily apply to the vast, vast majority of people on MFP. Sometimes people just have energy needs. How is it going to benefit someone any more if they have already achieved several hundred percent more of a nutrient than needed? You don't get extra credit.

But Magerum, that is assuming we even KNOW all of the nutrients that come together to form the synergy of health. I understand that what applies to me doesn't necessarily apply to everyone here but it likely applies to more than you think. I meet people here every day who have similar struggles (and they are mostly women). There is a vast difference between someone who maintains at 3,200 calories and someone who is eating less than half of that and only losing 1/2 pound per week.

Just for he record, I'm losing a little more than a pound a week at 3250. Maintenance is a bit north of 4,000. I only made that comment because of your previous comment about the posters age. I still don't see how demonizing food helps, regardless or caloric intake. Women are not unique butterflies, the laws of thermodynamics apply to both genders.

I happen to have had success following the laws of physics/thermodynamics. Success that any human can achieve by accurately measuring an using established controls.

Wut?

Fast food isn't bad in moderation. I eat it once a week or so if we can afford it. I don't classify foods as "good" or "bad." People get overweight/obese and have the related health problems by eating too much food (not just fast food. You can get overweight eating "healthy" food.) I've lost weight just fine.

And before anyone can chime in with, "It's more than just the number on the scale:"

My cholesterol is fine (bangin', in fact. It was over 300, I was prescribed meds for it, and now it's well into the healthy range without me ever taking the medication. And I was 103 pounds when it was tested that high, 141 pounds now. Go figure. Not weight-related,) my heart functions well, my liver and kidney function well, my blood tests came back with zero deficiencies... In fact, aside from having 20 pounds to lose still, I'm in tip-top shape according to every test my doctor could throw at me. I had 'em all (and, being in a healthy weight range and having an acceptable body fat % according to the doctor, the 20 pounds is just for my satisfaction and not for my health.)

I eat fast food more often than I used to, and I'm healthier than I was a year ago. Fast food didn't make me heathier, but eating everything in moderation did. Whether eating out or eating at home, it's about eating an appropriate amount.

You are 22 years old. And what works for you will not necessarily work for an obese 40 year-old. By the way, it is good that you did not go on the anti-cholesterol drug. They are dangerous drugs---the side effects are awful.

You are a 65 year old arthritic woman. What appliies to you doesn't necessarily apply to the vast, vast majority of people on MFP. Sometimes people just have energy needs. How is it going to benefit someone any more if they have already achieved several hundred percent more of a nutrient than needed? You don't get extra credit.

But Magerum, that is assuming we even KNOW all of the nutrients that come together to form the synergy of health. I understand that what applies to me doesn't necessarily apply to everyone here but it likely applies to more than you think. I meet people here every day who have similar struggles (and they are mostly women). There is a vast difference between someone who maintains at 3,200 calories and someone who is eating less than half of that and only losing 1/2 pound per week.

Just for he record, I'm losing a little more than a pound a week at 3250. Maintenance is a bit north of 4,000. I only made that comment because of your previous comment about the posters age. I still don't see how demonizing food helps, regardless or caloric intake. Women are not unique butterflies, the laws of thermodynamics apply to both genders.

I happen to have had success following the laws of physics/thermodynamics. Success that any human can achieve by accurately measuring an using established controls.

Except that you are not accounting for what obesity researchers have observed as the "anti-satiety" effect of excessive fructose consumption.

So a poptart is less filling than 200 calories of celery; in a calorie controlled environment that doesn't matter outside of preference. Once again not saying you can't eat 'clean' or a specific way, just that you don't have to in order to reach success. If you are ravenous after filling your daily allotment of calories with twinkies and skittles, then that's not a very well laid out diet. If you reach your nutritional needs for the day and have 200 cals left over for a scoop of ice cream and want one, that's perfectly fine.

Actually, it is less filling, according to the newest research on "food addiction". Here is a link to the proceedings from a recent scientific conference on that subject: http://www.foodaddictionsummit.org/index.htm