Sugar from fruit. Is it really bad?

Fruit is absolutely fine. You could eat 4 oranges and 4 apples per day and you'd still be fine.

It is refined sugars or syrups that you have to watch out for. E.g. Soft Drinks, Candy, Anything made with corn syrup

If you really want a soft drink, find one that is made with cane sugar. Cant it towards your calories but don't worry about the extra sugars, it takes your body a lot longer to process a raw natural sugar like cane opposed to corn syrups.

I actually changed my macros so that it showed me fiber and sodium instead of sugar because i was getting ticked off seeing my sugar in the red every damn day (from fruit)

so just watch your fiber instead. The fiber you get from fruit is a MUCH better benefit for you anyway :-)

Fructose (fruit sugars) are very different chemically from glucose (grain sugars) and are processed differently in the body.

Essentially, too much fructose in your diet has the same detrimental bodily effects as too much alcohol--and that makes sense because alcohol is made from fermented sugars (wine, anyone?)

Fresh fruit, as opposed to juice or HFCS, has fiber which helps to negate the bad effects of the fructose.

There is an amazing power in understanding the chemistry of food. I'm no scientist, but I'm self-educating to understand why I should avoid too much juice instead of just accepting it because someone on TV said so.

This video is what piqued my interest in the topic (Sugar: The Bitter Truth): http://youtu.be/dBnniua6-oM

I eat my former body weight in fruit every day... okay, maybe a slight exaggeration.

I disabled sugar from my macros anyway as nearly all my sugar comes from pure fruit. From what I've seen on MFP over the time I've been here you don't need to worry about it unless you have a medical condition.

Eat more fruit!

Just a small correction. There is no BAD EFFECT of fructose from consuming whole fruit unless you're eating 5 mangoes in a row. There is a rate limiting factor for complex sugars that prevents huge spikes in blood sugar levels. The fiber slows down digestion, thus sugar absorption. There is a difference configuration of sugars after pasteurization and processing which effectively allows the body to skip a step when processing. Further things like corn syrup are even simpler forms which cause spikes in blood sugar levels not because of the lack of fiber but because of the simplest forms do not have rate limiting factors.

Hard fruits like apples you really don't have to worry about. Tropical fruits like mangoes, pineapple have much higher levels of glucose.

You can't compare too much fruit to too much alcohol, it isn't even a remote comparison.

Fructose (fruit sugars) are very different chemically from glucose (grain sugars) and are processed differently in the body.

Essentially, too much fructose in your diet has the same detrimental bodily effects as too much alcohol--and that makes sense because alcohol is made from fermented sugars (wine, anyone?)

Fresh fruit, as opposed to juice or HFCS, has fiber which helps to negate the bad effects of the fructose.

There is an amazing power in understanding the chemistry of food. I'm no scientist, but I'm self-educating to understand why I should avoid too much juice instead of just accepting it because someone on TV said so.

This video is what piqued my interest in the topic (Sugar: The Bitter Truth): http://youtu.be/dBnniua6-oM

Pardon me, but I provided a link to a video explaining all of the statements I made...did you watch it?

Please do not "correct" me and then demonstrate your lack of knowledge by saying that pineapple and mangoes have glucose---no, they contain fructose. Those sugars ARE different.

I promise that if you check it out for yourself, you will be surprised at how different glucose and fructose are processed by the body.

PS--I see you amended your statement. I'm sticking to my guns about the effects of too much fructose (of which fresh fruit is not a concern)--it's juice and HFCS that cause problems that are equally as damaging as over consuming alcohol over the course of time.

No hard feelings, okay?

... i cannot logically accept the argument of the comparison between fructose & alcohol based on my education (BSc Biochemistry & Chemistry - Organic).

Quite recent science indicates there is a similar hit on the liver.

Hepatology. 2013 Jun;57(6):2525-31. doi: 10.1002/hep.26299. Epub 2013 May 1.
Dietary fructose in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.
Vos MB, Lavine JE.

Abstract

Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is the most common chronic liver disease in adults and children. A number of genetic and environmental factors are known to predispose individuals to NAFLD. Certain dietary sugars, particularly fructose, are suspected to contribute to the development of NAFLD and its progression. The increasing quantity of fructose in the diet comes from sugar additives (most commonly sucrose and high fructose corn syrup) in beverages and processed foods. Substantial links have been demonstrated between increased fructose consumption and obesity, dyslipidemia, and insulin resistance. Growing evidence suggests that fructose contributes to the development and severity of NAFLD. In human studies, fructose is associated with increasing hepatic fat, inflammation, and possibly fibrosis. Whether fructose alone can cause NAFLD or if it serves only as a contributor when consumed excessively in the setting of insulin resistance, positive energy balance, and sedentary lifestyle is unknown. Sufficient evidence exists to support clinical recommendations that fructose intake be limited through decreasing foods and drinks high in added (fructose-containing) sugars. (HEPATOLOGY 2013;57:2525-2531).

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23390127

Just a small correction. There is no BAD EFFECT of fructose from consuming whole fruit unless you're eating 5 mangoes in a row. There is a rate limiting factor for complex sugars that prevents huge spikes in blood sugar levels. The fiber slows down digestion, thus sugar absorption. There is a difference configuration of sugars after pasteurization and processing which effectively allows the body to skip a step when processing. Further things like corn syrup are even simpler forms which cause spikes in blood sugar levels not because of the lack of fiber but because of the simplest forms do not have rate limiting factors.

Hard fruits like apples you really don't have to worry about. Tropical fruits like mangoes, pineapple have much higher levels of glucose.

You can't compare too much fruit to too much alcohol, it isn't even a remote comparison.

Fructose (fruit sugars) are very different chemically from glucose (grain sugars) and are processed differently in the body.

Essentially, too much fructose in your diet has the same detrimental bodily effects as too much alcohol--and that makes sense because alcohol is made from fermented sugars (wine, anyone?)

Fresh fruit, as opposed to juice or HFCS, has fiber which helps to negate the bad effects of the fructose.

There is an amazing power in understanding the chemistry of food. I'm no scientist, but I'm self-educating to understand why I should avoid too much juice instead of just accepting it because someone on TV said so.

This video is what piqued my interest in the topic (Sugar: The Bitter Truth): http://youtu.be/dBnniua6-oM

Pardon me, but I provided a link to a video explaining all of the statements I made...did you watch it?

Please do not "correct" me and then demonstrate your lack of knowledge by saying that pineapple and mangoes have glucose---no, they contain fructose. Those sugars ARE different.

I promise that if you check it out for yourself, you will be surprised at how different glucose and fructose are processed by the body.

PS--I see you amended your statement. I'm sticking to my guns about the effects of too much fructose (of which fresh fruit is not a concern)--it's juice and HFCS that cause problems that are equally as damaging as over consuming alcohol over the course of time.

No hard feelings, okay?

Seriously? All fruit have a combination of fructose and glucose.

It's all about context and dosage.


http://jn.nutrition.org/content/139/6/1219S.full

Misconceptions about High-Fructose Corn Syrup: Is It Uniquely Responsible for Obesity, Reactive Dicarbonyl Compounds, and Advanced Glycation Endproducts?1,2

I have a question.

Is there a way to counter sugars in my diet? I just had a Naked Juice and now I've gone over my daily allowance of sugar. Naked Juice seems not to have refined sugar in it, does that make any difference?

For myself I watch the total carbs and don't worry too much about sugar from whole fruits, but count from juice. The fructose is bound up with dietary fibre and is released more slowly so doesn't cause the "rapid insulin spike". This is why eating sugary fruits is better for your teeth than say a soda with the same sugar content. Juice is different to whole fruit as the fructose has been released.

Just some points to consider:

All sugars are carbs/ all carbs are sugars

Fructose, Glucose are simple sugars, monosaccharide ( mono= one , saccharides = sugar) That is they are just one molecule of sugar. The molecular formula of both is C6H12O6 (that's 6 atoms of carbon, 12 of hydrogen and 6 of oxygen), however there is a slightly different arrangement of each atom within the molecule. Because they are simple sugars (small, one molecule) they both pass through the gut wall easily and enter the blood stream rapidly . When eating whole fruits it takes longer to release the sugars as stated above.

Lactose (milk sugar) and sucrose (cane sugar you put in coffee) are disaccharides ( di = two, two monosaccharides joined together). Lactose is one molecule of glucose and one molecule of galactose, sucrose is one molecule of fructose and one molecule of glucose. The two molecules in both are joined together by a glycosidic bond. As these are larger molecules they can't pass through the gut in this state (to big). Enzymes are responsible for breaking the glycosidic bond in a process called hydrolysis, thus forming two monosaccharides. In the case of lactose the enzyme that breaks it down is lactase. People who are lactose intolerant are deficient in the enzyme lactase as a result the lactose sits in the gut undigested. This causes water to enter the gut (osmosis) and gives people diarrhea.

Starch is complex carb, or polysaccharide (poly = many). Essentially its a long chain of glucose molecules which are broken into a disaccharide called maltose (two glucose molecules) then into glucose before being digested. This takes the longest hence no insulin spike.

Once the monsaccharides (from now on glucose) pass through the gut they enter the blood stream. Cells can use this directly as an energy source. If it's not used the pancreas detects the rise of blood sugar levels and releases the hormone insulin. Insulin stimulates the liver to turn glucose into a form that can be stored in the liver, thus reducing the blood sugar levels to a normal level. The amount of insulin released depends on how much sugar is in the blood. Large amounts cause the spike This is homeostasis, it's basically trying to return to a balanced state (another example would be sweating to cool down). If blood sugar is too low then a hormone called glucagon is released and that stimulates the liver to release some of the stored glucose. thus raising the blood sugar levels back to normal.

Carbs are the energy source that drives all our cells. It's required in respiration (energy production).

So there you have it, clear as mud. I hope it isn't written in a condescending manner, I'm just aware many people have never studied science to this level. I think I've laid out a pretty basic model of what's going on, not to say an expert may in reality say that's mostly true but it's more complex than that...

It doesn't really answer the OP's question but I hope it's given some understanding of what's going on. Like I said I happily eat fruit in it's whole form and just watch my overall carb intake. I'm not telling anyone else how/what to eat that's up to you.

There are some studies out there that different sugars have different effects on the body but I don't know so won't put them here but if you are interested look them up.

Finally I'd add if you want to look into this yourself I'd recommend scholar.google.co.uk to make sure you read proper peer reviewed articles rather than just what's out there on the net. I imagine if you do research this you'd find arguments for and against!


references:
My head
Old college text books

Our body's main source of energy is glucose. Eat the fruit.

Fruit sugars are not bad for you. But you do have to be careful and to eat protein with your fruit otherwise your body may become susceptible later in life to diabetes. You need to be wary of this as you don't want to unbalance your blood sugars! It is best to train your eating habits early in life!

You won't get diabetes and die.

How sure are you??

My understanding is you shouldn't worry too much about naturally occurring sugars, just processed & refined ones.

This question gets asked almost daily.

NO. Sugar is not bad for you unless you are diabetic.

IN for the ridiculous condemnation of sugar!