Sugar in fruit
xxjo35
Posts: 3 Member
Does sugar in fruit really count the same as sugar in a chocolate bar in the food diary section ? For example if I ate a chocolate bar that's 20g sugar is going to add to the same as if I ate a banana and dried fruit the equivalent would be 20g sugar??
0
Replies
-
Yup. Sugar is sugar; your body isn't going to process the dextrose from fruit any differently than the the dextrose from a donut (glucose, fructose, sucrose, lactose, galactose, dextrose, etc. are different mono/polysaccharides that are metabolized slightly differently depending on if the liver needs to "process it" into glucose, but it's sugar nonetheless).3
-
Dried fruit is an overly concentrated sugar source.0
-
Are you asking this question because of the mfp sugar daily goals?1
-
Sugar is sugar, period. Your body will break it down into glucose regardless of the source.
Although the whole fruit will have fiber which may slow down the absorption of said sugar. So, if you are a diabetic or have issues with hypoglycemia it may be a better option to eat whole fruit vs. a candy bar. p.s. the piece of fruit is also bundled with vitamins and minerals, water, and may be more filling. But hey, if you've met your goal for the day and you've got the cals, i say go for the candy bar!5 -
Echoing what everyone else is saying sugar is sugar. Fruit obviously has other micro nutrients that your body needs. And has fibre too, so there is some additional benefit for you in having your carbs from fruit.0
-
Sugar is not sugar, well, when it comes to overall calories it is but the absorption rate you get from fruits is much different from what you would get from processed foods. If you ate 100g of dates and had 100g processed sugary junk, the junk would spike your blood sugar and stimulate appetite much more. So fruit is better for weight loss and health overall.2
-
ConnorStuartJohnston wrote: »Sugar is not sugar, well, when it comes to overall calories it is but the absorption rate you get from fruits is much different from what you would get from processed foods. If you ate 100g of dates and had 100g processed sugary junk, the junk would spike your blood sugar and stimulate appetite much more. So fruit is better for weight loss and health overall.
assuming you don't have any medical issues and are controlling over all intake..... so what?1 -
Dried fruit is an overly concentrated sugar source.
Well often because dried fruit has additional added sugar.
Whu? I mean, I won't argue that fruit will give you additional nutrients but where do you get this from?ConnorStuartJohnston wrote: »Sugar is not sugar, well, when it comes to overall calories it is but the absorption rate you get from fruits is much different from what you would get from processed foods. If you ate 100g of dates and had 100g processed sugary junk, the junk would spike your blood sugar and stimulate appetite much more. So fruit is better for weight loss and health overall.0 -
ConnorStuartJohnston wrote: »Sugar is not sugar, well, when it comes to overall calories it is but the absorption rate you get from fruits is much different from what you would get from processed foods. If you ate 100g of dates and had 100g processed sugary junk, the junk would spike your blood sugar and stimulate appetite much more. So fruit is better for weight loss and health overall.
Then please tell me why I always see massive blood sugar spikes with grapes (can go from 80 to 250 in an hour even with accurate dosing) while I see nonexistant spikes with chocolate (the fat in chocolate really helps to delay the absorption of carbs so that it more closely matches how insulin is metabolized in my body).
Comparing apple juice to an apple, the apple juice would cause a more rapid BG spike than the apple because of the lack of dietary fiber, but it's like comparing apples to oranges if we're trying to talk about BG effects of fruit versus chocolate (the macros are hugely different, which will affect how quickly a "spike" is seen)
1 -
ConnorStuartJohnston wrote: »Sugar is not sugar, well, when it comes to overall calories it is but the absorption rate you get from fruits is much different from what you would get from processed foods. If you ate 100g of dates and had 100g processed sugary junk, the junk would spike your blood sugar and stimulate appetite much more. So fruit is better for weight loss and health overall.
When I was pre-diabetic, I could eat ice cream but dates were a big no. It was sad because I love dates. Thankfully I no longer need to restrict them, but they do spike blood sugar to heavens and back.0 -
Sugar is sugar, once it reaches your bloodstream your body processes it the same way. However fiber in fruit Helps to break the sugar down at a decreased rate.
I dont know what your reasons for asking are, but fruit was part of my weight loss journey and helped with cravings. I wouldn't cut it out!0 -
It's the other nutritional goodies in fruit that make the sugar in fruit a good thing for your food plan.0
-
ConnorStuartJohnston wrote: »If you ate 100g of dates and had 100g processed sugary junk, the junk would spike your blood sugar and stimulate appetite much more. So fruit is better for weight loss and health overall.
Agree with rainbowbow's so what, if one is a healthy person, but also this is not necessarily true. Dates are really sugary and have a higher GI and GL than many foods in the "junk" category (since what makes them high cal -- fat -- also tends to reduce GI/GL). Premium ice cream, which never stimulates my appetite, has a GL of 3 per serving, so I doubt it spikes blood sugar more than 100 g of dates.
Junk foods and fruits aren't identical -- fruits tend to have more nutrients, obviously, but that's not because the sugar is meaningfully different or because it's the end of the world if we eat something where the sugar is absorbed quickly (indeed, that's one reason people do eat bananas around workouts).0 -
JeromeBarry1 wrote: »It's the other nutritional goodies in fruit that make the sugar in fruit a good thing for your food plan.
That doesn't make sense. If it's the things apart from the sugar that are good, they don't make the sugar good if you think that sugar is bad (which it isn't but for the sake of argument). Something that had transfats but also vitamins doesn't make the transfats any better.0 -
Does sugar in fruit really count the same as sugar in a chocolate bar in the food diary section ? For example if I ate a chocolate bar that's 20g sugar is going to add to the same as if I ate a banana and dried fruit the equivalent would be 20g sugar??
Yes and some people will tell you not to track sugar as it doesn't matter unless you have a medical issue. But I'd say keep tracking anyway, to prevent any medical issues before they start.1 -
helenrosec0 wrote: »Does sugar in fruit really count the same as sugar in a chocolate bar in the food diary section ? For example if I ate a chocolate bar that's 20g sugar is going to add to the same as if I ate a banana and dried fruit the equivalent would be 20g sugar??
Yes and some people will tell you not to track sugar as it doesn't matter unless you have a medical issue. But I'd say keep tracking anyway, to prevent any medical issues before they start.
What medical issues can be prevented by tracking sugar? Hint: not diabetes.5 -
stevencloser wrote: »helenrosec0 wrote: »Does sugar in fruit really count the same as sugar in a chocolate bar in the food diary section ? For example if I ate a chocolate bar that's 20g sugar is going to add to the same as if I ate a banana and dried fruit the equivalent would be 20g sugar??
Yes and some people will tell you not to track sugar as it doesn't matter unless you have a medical issue. But I'd say keep tracking anyway, to prevent any medical issues before they start.
What medical issues can be prevented by tracking sugar? Hint: not diabetes.
The same medical issues people who say don't track unless you have a medical issue. Maybe I should've said prevent getting worse, for people who may have a medical issue and not know it yet.0 -
While sugar is indeed sugar, dextrose is not fructose is not sucrose and the list goes on.
Overly sugary fruits (they all have different amounts of sugar) are indeed bad for diabetics because the sugar is easily metabolized and goes into the blood stream.
Why are fruits better then? Fiber. Vitamins. Minerals. A little something we 'in the know' like to call NUTRITION.
Do you have to worry about sugar? If you are diabetic or pre-diabetic or have another medical condition that requires you to limit your sugar intake, then yes.
If you have a pancreas, liver, and kidneys as well as no medical condition as per above, then you shouldn't worry much about the sugar intake.
Big hint: If you are on MFP to lose weight and following your calorie goals, it is VERY unlikely you are going to be eating sugar in amounts that will cause an issue.1 -
Yay! Another sugar debate.
1 -
Does sugar in fruit really count the same as sugar in a chocolate bar in the food diary section ? For example if I ate a chocolate bar that's 20g sugar is going to add to the same as if I ate a banana and dried fruit the equivalent would be 20g sugar??
Sugar is sugar is sugar is sugar. The difference is that you're going to get more micronutrion (vitamins, minerals, antioxidants, etc) with fruit. Dried fruit is a pretty concentrated source of sugar which is why I eat dried fruit on long bike rides.0 -
I'm surprised no one mentioned GI index yet. Yes sugar is sugar but how fast it hits your blood stream and spikes your insulin is a whole different story. There is also the fact that fructose can only be stored in the liver which has a limited capacity while glucose can be stored as glycogen. So yea, sugar is sugar but it's not exactly the same.1
-
Overly sugary fruits (they all have different amounts of sugar) are indeed bad for diabetics because the sugar is easily metabolized and goes into the blood stream.
Do you have to worry about sugar? If you are diabetic or pre-diabetic or have another medical condition that requires you to limit your sugar intake, then yes.
All carbs are broken down into glucose. A diabetic needs to watch carbohydrates versus sugar alone. If anything, the sugar macro lets me see whether the food might quickly be broken down into glucose or not (I still need to take insulin based on total carbs), but even then it's highly dependent on the fat and protein relative to that sugar/carbs (chocolate and pizza affect me differently than plain rice or a donut)
0 -
I've heard and read that 20g sugar from a high fiber source, like fruit, is better (than non-fiberous sugar sources) because it takes longer for our bodies to process the sugar with all the fiber surrounding it.
Theoretically, processing the sugar more slowly will lessen the glycemic impact, ie. Lessening sugar high/crash and subsequent GI hunger that's commonly attributed to hitting the sweets hard
1
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 394.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.9K Getting Started
- 260.4K Health and Weight Loss
- 176.1K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 437 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.9K MyFitnessPal Information
- 15 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.7K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions