Fructose - better than sucrose or glucose? Yes says the EFSA
steve2kay
Posts: 194 Member
I just read this article on the guardian website which I found pretty interesting
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/21/fructose-poison-sugar-industry-pseudoscience
The summary is that the European Food Safety Authority has decided that fructose offers health benefits over sucrose or glucose - the writer of this article disagees. I guess the worry is that food manufacturers will replace sucrose and glucose with fructose in soft drinks, sweetened food etc. He seems to suggest this is a bad thing,
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/21/fructose-poison-sugar-industry-pseudoscience
The summary is that the European Food Safety Authority has decided that fructose offers health benefits over sucrose or glucose - the writer of this article disagees. I guess the worry is that food manufacturers will replace sucrose and glucose with fructose in soft drinks, sweetened food etc. He seems to suggest this is a bad thing,
0
Replies
-
The author is Lustig....
http://www.alanaragonblog.com/2010/01/29/the-bitter-truth-about-fructose-alarmism/0 -
My manhood contains fructose. So it can't be all that bad.0
-
They already use fructose to sweeten drinks and food. High-fructose corn syrup.
The controversy is that some people believe that HFCS leads to obesity... but that is pretty much true of any food consumed in large quantities, including glucose and sucrose.0 -
This just shows that paying attention to every food study that comes out is hazardous to your health.0
-
Everything is bad for us and causes cancer. We should just learn to survive without eating. :laugh:0
-
Lolstig!! Seriously, exactly what difference does this make in a overall balanced diet at proper calories levels??? Pretty much NONE!0
-
Lolstig.0
-
I'm reading some info on this now. A combo of the sugars is worse than one alone because it is a lot harder on the liver.
I recall a mention that fructose might not be a problem now but that it can become a problem when consumed in large amounts over years. In other words, moderation now will prevent health problems later. Evidently it is not the best idea to avoid sugars only if you already have health problems. The idea is to eat in a way that doesn't lead to them. The source of the fructose and/or other sugars is also important - different sources are processed differently by our bodies so even when the caloric value is the same there can be a big difference in our bodies - and in fat loss results. .
But, I have only just started reading about this. Lots of research ahead...0 -
Isn't the problem with fructose the fact that it doesn't trigger satiety? We were designed to gorge on fruit when available.0
-
I recall a mention that fructose might not be a problem now but that it can become a problem when consumed in large amounts over years. In other words, moderation now will prevent health problems later.
That's basically true of every food and element of food. Also, didn't the US already try the whole fructose is better thing, and now high fructose corn syrup is suppose to be the great satan of healthy weight?0 -
Fructose is in pretty much every fruit and vegetable you eat, so you better make sure you are consuming it.
The problem comes down to HFCS which is a perversion of fructose. I consume supplements sweetened with fructose because a) it's better than artificial sweeteners and b) it is sourced from apples and beets. Our brains and bodies need a certain amount of fructose to function optimally.
Dr. Michael Colgan - All tree, bush, and vine fruits, and all berries that folk eat as fruits, contain fructose and glucose, as do most vegetables. In plants, fructose may be present as fructose, and glucose as glucose, or both as components of sucrose. Sucrose is composed of a molecule of glucose and a molecule of fructose bonded together.
If you are eating plant based foods you are consuming all three. Just avoid HFCS 0 -
One thing I've learned from researching this topic and other similar ones is that I end up spending a lot of time only to find out that what I thought in the first place was correct.0
-
Watch this video, it explains how your body breaks fructose down into what is basically poison. All scientifically based.
This changed my life. I hope it helps others too.
It's not an add or anything, just a video on fructose
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgTlFFWMNy0
To each their own though, I'm not here to tell anyone whats right or wrong, this is just what makes sense for me. Please just ignore this if you don't agree, as I don't like getting into MFP spats 0 -
Those who refuse to recognize that there are nuances in nutritional knowledge that are constantly changing due to new scientific evidence are either snowed by the protestations of industry, are part of that industry, or are made so uncomfortable by changing knowledge and nuance that they find living in the 21st century very disturbing.
The fructose battle pits moneyed interests against science. The recent European decision certainly represents the triumph of money over science. Our bodies do, indeed, process different sugars differently. Fructose places a high burden on the liver. High fructose consumption seems to be linked to non-alcoholic liver disease, among other problems.
Yes, fructose is a natural substance that occurs in fruits. It seems fructose ingested with the related insoluble fibers in complete fruits does not create the same degree of fructose-related effects in the body as fruit juices and fructose-laden corn sugars. The complete science of this effect is not yet determined but is the subject of current research.
High fructose corn syrup is the preferred sweetener for many food manufacturers because it is inexpensive and tastes sweeter than many other sugars. The sweet flavors can induce increased consumption in many people so enables greater sales of HFCS-sweetened products.
ON AVERAGE, a calorie is a calorie and our body weights are determined by calories in, calories out. Our diets comprise a wide variety of animals, vegetables, and minerals that are processed in different ways by our bodies. As there is a great deal of variety in our diets, there is a great deal of variety in each of our dietary processes. We each have different biota living in our intestines, the importance of which is just coming to be understood by science.
Anyone who says "All fructose is evil" or "All sugars are the same" is being simplistic to the point of silliness. Different sugars are processed differently in the body. Recent scientific evidence seems to indicate that concentrated fructose ingestion without associated fruit fibers makes a hit on the liver similar to alcohol.
Many of us reading the literature on this topic choose to avoid fructose beyond one to two fruit servings per day. This seems the prudent approach. I choose prudence.0 -
^ This.Anyone who says "All fructose is evil" or "All sugars are the same" is being simplistic to the point of silliness.
The science makes a good amount of sense.
The demogoguery of either extreme, makes less sense.0 -
I'm of the opinion that sugar is good... when it is in it's natural form. By that I mean sugar is fine when you are counting it as blueberries that you ate this morning or the sugar in the orange you had for a snack. it's when we process and refine it and add substances to it that it turns into a perversion of what itself and become unhealthy. That's why i don't even track the sugar in my fruits and vegetables. Only the stuff that is in the processed foods I eat, like bread or ice cream.0
-
Just to add a possibly useful tidbit to the conversation:
Sucrose is 50/50 fructose and glucose.
The important thing is adding up your calories. in the big picture, it will make no difference which sugar you had more of.0 -
My manhood contains fructose. So it can't be all that bad.
this is true you gentlemen are basically one big sugar load0 -
I'm of the opinion that sugar is good... when it is in it's natural form. By that I mean sugar is fine when you are counting it as blueberries that you ate this morning or the sugar in the orange you had for a snack. it's when we process and refine it and add substances to it that it turns into a perversion of what itself and become unhealthy. That's why i don't even track the sugar in my fruits and vegetables. Only the stuff that is in the processed foods I eat, like bread or ice cream.
Please help me to understand exactly how the sugar in an orange or blueberries affects weight loss differently or is any way different from the sugar in Ice Cream or bread. What would the difference be?0 -
Just to add a possibly useful tidbit to the conversation:
Sucrose is 50/50 fructose and glucose.
The important thing is adding up your calories. in the big picture, it will make no difference which sugar you had more of.
Actually, it can. And does. Lots of new research coming out these days...I am only just starting to read up on it. Totally proves all sorts of things we "knew" to be true are flat out wrong.0 -
Please help me to understand exactly how the sugar in an orange or blueberries affects weight loss differently or is any way different from the sugar in Ice Cream or bread. What would the difference be?
Sugar in ice cream is sucrose or high fructose corn syrup, sugar in bread is glucose (and depending on the bread, sucrose or high fructose corn syrup). Sugar in blue berries and oranges is largely fructose (though proportions of sugars vary with the fruit, and then there's a question of fiber... but that's probably more nuance than a discussion of just sugar).
Glucose is readily absorbed by most cells in the body and is probably the most easily burned fuel for the body. It also raises your need for insulin faster than other forms of sugars. (simplified: glucose = glucose)
Fructose cannot be directly absorbed the same as glucose. For your body to process fructose, it must be handled by the liver first. Your liver processes fructose into fuels the body can use, which happen to predominantly be fat and glucose. (Simplified: fructose = glucose + fat)
In order for sucrose to be processed by the body, it is broken first into glucose + fructose. For your body to break down the fructose component, it's processed by the liver into glucose + fat. (So simplified explanation: sucrose = glucose + glucose + fat)
High Fructose Corn Syrup is not a product of nature. It is something that modern science created. It is a disaccharide of glucose+fructose and a few researchers wonder if it is processed as efficiently as naturally occuring sugars due to covalent bond-issues in the structure of the molecules.
In sum: calorie load matters. A calorie is a calorie (if we're discussing calories). Dfferent sugars are different, however, because they structurally differ on a molecular level. They literally differ, which in turn affects the body's hormonal response and determines the ways in which the body can break down and metabolize each of them into fuel.0 -
I only know it would be a bad thing, because too much fructose can cause digestive upsets.0
-
Please help me to understand exactly how the sugar in an orange or blueberries affects weight loss differently or is any way different from the sugar in Ice Cream or bread. What would the difference be?
Sugar in ice cream is sucrose or high fructose corn syrup, sugar in bread is glucose (and depending on the bread, sucrose or high fructose corn syrup). Sugar in blue berries and oranges is largely fructose.
Glucose is readily absorbed by most cells in the body and is probably the most easily burned fuel for the body. It also raises your need for insulin faster than other forms of sugars. (simplified: glucose = glucose)
Fructose cannot be directly absorbed the same as glucose. For your body to process fructose, it must be handled by the liver first. Your processes fructose into fuels the body can use, which happen to predominantly be fat and glucose. (Simplified: fructose = glucose + fat)
In order for sucrose to be processed by the body, it is broken into glucose + fructose. For your body to break down fructose, it's processed by the liver into glucose + fat. (So simplified explanation: sucrose = glucose + glucose + fat)
High Fructose Corn Syrup is not a product of nature. It is something that modern science created. It is a disaccharide of glucose+fructose and a few researchers wonder if it is processed as efficiently as naturally occuring sugars due to covalent bond-issues in the structure of the molecules.
In sum: calorie load matters because of calorie load. A calorie is a calorie (if we're discussing calories). And dfferent sugars are different because they structurally differ on a molecular level, which in turn affects the ways in which the body can break down and metabolize each of them as fuel.
And in a reasonable dose of each the impact on weight loss and health would be.......?0 -
I only know it would be a bad thing, because too much fructose can cause digestive upsets.
How much is too much and why does it cause digestive upsets?0 -
A combo of the sugars is worse than one alone because it is a lot harder on the liver.
So we're back to "fruit is bad for you"?
Gah.0 -
A combo of the sugars is worse than one alone because it is a lot harder on the liver.
So we're back to "fruit is bad for you"?
Gah.
No. It is not that cut & dry. But you'll probably have to do your own research if you really care to know.0 -
Please help me to understand exactly how the sugar in an orange or blueberries affects weight loss differently or is any way different from the sugar in Ice Cream or bread. What would the difference be?
Sugar in ice cream is sucrose or high fructose corn syrup, sugar in bread is glucose (and depending on the bread, sucrose or high fructose corn syrup). Sugar in blue berries and oranges is largely fructose (though proportions of sugars vary with the fruit, and then there's a question of fiber... but that's probably more nuance than a discussion of just sugar).
Glucose is readily absorbed by most cells in the body and is probably the most easily burned fuel for the body. It also raises your need for insulin faster than other forms of sugars. (simplified: glucose = glucose)
Fructose cannot be directly absorbed the same as glucose. For your body to process fructose, it must be handled by the liver first. Your liver processes fructose into fuels the body can use, which happen to predominantly be fat and glucose. (Simplified: fructose = glucose + fat)
In order for sucrose to be processed by the body, it is broken first into glucose + fructose. For your body to break down the fructose component, it's processed by the liver into glucose + fat. (So simplified explanation: sucrose = glucose + glucose + fat)
High Fructose Corn Syrup is not a product of nature. It is something that modern science created. It is a disaccharide of glucose+fructose and a few researchers wonder if it is processed as efficiently as naturally occuring sugars due to covalent bond-issues in the structure of the molecules.
In sum: calorie load matters. A calorie is a calorie (if we're discussing calories). Dfferent sugars are different, however, because they structurally differ on a molecular level. They literally differ, which in turn affects the body's hormonal response and determines the ways in which the body can break down and metabolize each of them into fuel.
Say what?
HFCS is a MIXTURE of fructose and glucose. There are no covalent bonds between them, as far as I am aware. And, even if there were, wouldn't that make it sucrose?
To quote Wiki on HFCS production:
"HFCS is produced by milling corn (maize) to produce corn starch, then processing that starch to yield corn syrup, which is almost entirely glucose, and then adding enzymes that change some of the glucose into fructose. The resulting syrup (after enzyme conversion) contains approximately 42% fructose and is HFCS 42. Some of the 42% fructose is then purified to 90% fructose, HFCS 90. To make HFCS 55, the HFCS 90 is mixed with HFCS 42 in the appropriate ratios to form the desired HFCS 55. The enzyme process that changes the corn starch into HFCS 42 is as follows:
alpha-amylase – produces shorter chains of sugars called oligosaccharides from raw cornstarch.
Glucoamylase – breaks the oligosaccharides down even further to yield the simple sugar glucose.
Xylose isomerase (aka glucose isomerase) – converts glucose to a mixture of about 42% fructose and 50–52% glucose with some other sugars mixed in."0 -
And in a reasonable dose of each the impact on weight loss and health would be.......?
As stated: a calorie is a calorie if we're discussing calories.
I gather you want the straight to the bottom line, and the calorie load bottom line is going to remain. Calories, though a simplified concept in itself, are the most practical way of monitoring your dietary intake in real-world circumstances, especially if you're seeking weight loss.
There's no magic pill around that.
Calorie counting works and if that's all that one wishes to concern themselves with for weight loss/weight maintenance, that's fine. That's really all you need to know.
Though it does gloss over some nuances. In those nuances are the facts that your body's hormonal response and methods of metabolizing different things happen to differ. Different sugars are literally different. They have different structures and are handled differently by the body. While not the make or break of a weight-loss regime, they are issues of import if someone is concerned with hormonal responses to a type of food, for example if discussing diabetes, hyperinsulinemia, PCOS, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, hypoglycemia, etc.
EDIT: Fructose and glucose are themselves monomers held together by glycolic bonds... which are a type of covalent bond.
Fructose alone has covalent bonds within itself.
HFCS are science-created due to naturally occuring sugars going through industrial enzymatic processing to convert some of the glucose into fructose. And that is "mixed" as it were.
Sucrose as a sugar has fructose and glucose linked via ether bond/glycosidic linkage.
Also, HFCS actually has a higher fructose to glucose ratio than sucrose does, so they are not molecularly the same.0 -
Sorry. Glycosidic not glycolic. Brain fart.0
-
Just to add a possibly useful tidbit to the conversation:
Sucrose is 50/50 fructose and glucose.
The important thing is adding up your calories. in the big picture, it will make no difference which sugar you had more of.
Actually, it can. And does. Lots of new research coming out these days...I am only just starting to read up on it. Totally proves all sorts of things we "knew" to be true are flat out wrong.
I get that different sugars have different nuances in how they are processed by the body. But I'd be interested in hearing how this really makes any difference in the arena of weight management. Can't we account for the calories and be done with it?
What are these new studies, and what exactly are they proving wrong?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
- 426 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