Fruits = Sugar?
Replies
-
Phill science would disagree with you there in regards to your body not being able to distinguish between the different sugars because the molecular structure of fructose is different than that of glucose which is different again to sucrose which happens to be a combination of both fructose and glucose. Lactose has a different molecular structure also so the body will respond to that one different also.1
-
@Lillymoo01
Let me clarify, fructose is the same no matter what fruit or product it's in. But yes, there are multiple sugar compounds, and you know some of them!9 -
Lillymoo01 wrote: »Lillymoo01 wrote: »"Fruit is nature's candy" is a common saying but to then use that as the reason why you will not eat fruit makes little logical sense because it shows that you do not really understand so much about nutrition.
Then please enlighten us on how the body processes sugar in a candy bar different than sugar in fruit. I must have missed that class/study/whatever....
Did you miss the bit where fruit has a wide variety of vitamins and minerals which a candy bar doesn't? Did you miss the bit where the high fibre content of most fruit slows down the absorption of sugar into the blood stream?
Here is also an article which describes the differences in the bodies reaction to fructose from fruit in comparison to other sugars.
http://www.precisionnutrition.com/all-about-fructose
I'm glad you asked.
So if you eat some candy along with something that contains fiber or even fat, you should see a similar reaction.. slower absorption rate. And yes, you do get more nutrients from fruit, but in the context of a diet, it probably doesn't matter.
OP, like others have stated, it doesn't really matter if you don't have a need to watch sugar (medical condition) or it doesn't take away from other important nutrients. I generally have 3-6 servings of fruit a day... it's very filling and helps keep me on track.3 -
The rare occasions when I eat just sugar or have sugary drinks is precisely because I want to get it into my bloodstream quickly. So that's a benefit to me and not a problem.
Eat your fruit OP, it's good for you as part of an overall balanced diet.
5 -
Lillymoo01 wrote: »Comparing fruit to candy is crazy. A candy bar is not jammed pack full of vitamins and minerals like a piece of fruit is. It does not contain fibre which will slow down the absorption of sugar into our bloodstream to prevent sudden sugar spikes. A candy bar also comprises of a different kind of sugar structure which the body breaks down differently to begin with.
Pfft, my candy bar has more diverse vitamins and minerals than your fruit:
3 -
YES! Sugar is a killer! That's why those of us on a ketogenic diet only eat raspberries, blueberries, blackberries and strawberries, and only up to 1/2 cup once in a great while as a "treat". They are the lowest in carbohydrates, and they have a decent amount of fiber (some of the carbs are insoluble fiber, which your body can't digest, so some of us subtract the fiber grams from the carb grams for net grams). We also don't eat any grains or root vegetables for the same reason. They turn to glucose in the bloodstream, causing the insulin response, and insulin is the fat-storing hormone. There is ALWAYS a medical reason for EVERYBODY to NOT eat sugar. Sugar causes high blood pressure, heart disease, high cholesterol, high triglycerides, Type II diabetes, metabolic syndrome, fatty liver, leads to some cancers and neurological disorders, like Parkinsons and Alzheimers, some epilepsy cases and may contribute to autism. There's a reason fruit is called "nature's candy". And it matters not what type of sugar it is, whether it's sucrose, glucose, fructose, or any type of -ose. It's all the same once it's in the bloodstream, and all cause the same problems. This information has been known for DECADES, but deep pockets keep the people ill-informed, and the high carb/low fat diet simply won't go away, even though that's what's caused the obesity and diabetes epidemic worldwide. Don't believe me? Google "Sugar Industry Pays off Harvard Scientists".1
-
HeidiGrrrl wrote: »YES! Sugar is a killer! That's why those of us on a ketogenic diet only eat raspberries, blueberries, blackberries and strawberries, and only up to 1/2 cup once in awhile. They are the lowest in carbohydrates, and they have a decent amount of fiber (some of the carbs are insoluble fiber, which your body can't digest, so some of us subtract the fiber grams from the carb grams for net grams). We also don't eat any grains or root vegetables for the same reason. They turn to glucose in the bloodstream, causing the insulin response, and insulin is the fat-storing hormone. There is ALWAYS a medical reason for EVERYBODY to NOT eat sugar. Sugar causes high blood pressure, heart disease, high cholesterol, high triglycerides, Type II diabetes, metabolic syndrome, fatty liver, leads to some cancers and neurological disorders, like Parkinsons and Alzheimers, some epilepsy cases and may contribute to autism. There's a reason fruit is called "nature's candy".
As a keto advocate, allow me to say: get out. You have no idea what you are talking about, and you make us all look dumb to the general public.28 -
HeidiGrrrl wrote: »YES! Sugar is a killer! That's why those of us on a ketogenic diet only eat raspberries, blueberries, blackberries and strawberries, and only up to 1/2 cup once in a great while as a "treat". They are the lowest in carbohydrates, and they have a decent amount of fiber (some of the carbs are insoluble fiber, which your body can't digest, so some of us subtract the fiber grams from the carb grams for net grams). We also don't eat any grains or root vegetables for the same reason. They turn to glucose in the bloodstream, causing the insulin response, and insulin is the fat-storing hormone. There is ALWAYS a medical reason for EVERYBODY to NOT eat sugar. Sugar causes high blood pressure, heart disease, high cholesterol, high triglycerides, Type II diabetes, metabolic syndrome, fatty liver, leads to some cancers and neurological disorders, like Parkinsons and Alzheimers, some epilepsy cases and may contribute to autism. There's a reason fruit is called "nature's candy". And it matters not what type of sugar it is, whether it's sucrose, glucose, fructose, or any type of -ose. It's all the same once it's in the bloodstream, and all cause the same problems. This information has been known for DECADES, but deep pockets keep the people ill-informed, and the high carb/low fat diet simply won't go away, even though that's what's caused the obesity and diabetes epidemic worldwide. Don't believe me? Google "Sugar Industry Pays off Harvard Scientists".
Yeah, no.
I normalized a high/prediabetic glucose number while still eating sugar, and I'm the only one in my family who's reversed the progression of prediabetes. I also improved all my other health markers as well-things like a total cholesterol number of 143, heart disease risk ratio of 2.6 (anything under 5.0 is considered optimal), blood pressure 102/74, waist circumference measured at a 25 (measured by a nurse), a bmi of around 20 and yes-glucose numbers in the 80s and 90s. I no longer have any medical/health problems and I take no prescriptions. And I eat sugar every single day. I've also been successfully maintaining my 50lb weight loss and excellent health for almost 4 years now.5 -
HeidiGrrrl wrote: »YES! Sugar is a killer! That's why those of us on a ketogenic diet only eat raspberries, blueberries, blackberries and strawberries, and only up to 1/2 cup once in a great while as a "treat". They are the lowest in carbohydrates, and they have a decent amount of fiber (some of the carbs are insoluble fiber, which your body can't digest, so some of us subtract the fiber grams from the carb grams for net grams). We also don't eat any grains or root vegetables for the same reason. They turn to glucose in the bloodstream, causing the insulin response, and insulin is the fat-storing hormone. There is ALWAYS a medical reason for EVERYBODY to NOT eat sugar. Sugar causes high blood pressure, heart disease, high cholesterol, high triglycerides, Type II diabetes, metabolic syndrome, fatty liver, leads to some cancers and neurological disorders, like Parkinsons and Alzheimers, some epilepsy cases and may contribute to autism. There's a reason fruit is called "nature's candy". And it matters not what type of sugar it is, whether it's sucrose, glucose, fructose, or any type of -ose. It's all the same once it's in the bloodstream, and all cause the same problems. This information has been known for DECADES, but deep pockets keep the people ill-informed, and the high carb/low fat diet simply won't go away, even though that's what's caused the obesity and diabetes epidemic worldwide. Don't believe me? Google "Sugar Industry Pays off Harvard Scientists".
This is horribly inaccurate. All of it.9 -
HeidiGrrrl wrote: »YES! Sugar is a killer! That's why those of us on a ketogenic diet only eat raspberries, blueberries, blackberries and strawberries, and only up to 1/2 cup once in a great while as a "treat". They are the lowest in carbohydrates, and they have a decent amount of fiber (some of the carbs are insoluble fiber, which your body can't digest, so some of us subtract the fiber grams from the carb grams for net grams). We also don't eat any grains or root vegetables for the same reason. They turn to glucose in the bloodstream, causing the insulin response, and insulin is the fat-storing hormone. There is ALWAYS a medical reason for EVERYBODY to NOT eat sugar. Sugar causes high blood pressure, heart disease, high cholesterol, high triglycerides, Type II diabetes, metabolic syndrome, fatty liver, leads to some cancers and neurological disorders, like Parkinsons and Alzheimers, some epilepsy cases and may contribute to autism. There's a reason fruit is called "nature's candy". And it matters not what type of sugar it is, whether it's sucrose, glucose, fructose, or any type of -ose. It's all the same once it's in the bloodstream, and all cause the same problems. This information has been known for DECADES, but deep pockets keep the people ill-informed, and the high carb/low fat diet simply won't go away, even though that's what's caused the obesity and diabetes epidemic worldwide. Don't believe me? Google "Sugar Industry Pays off Harvard Scientists".
Did you actually read the study or just a newspapers interpretation of it? It didn't even prove what people are thinking it proved. The bold is my favorite.
"The Roger Adams papers and other documents used in this research provide a narrow window into the activities of 1 sugar industry trade association; therefore, it is difficult to validate that the documents gathered are representative of the entirety of SRF internal materials related to Project 226 from the 1950s and 1960s or that the proper weight was given to each data source. There is no direct evidence that the sugar industry wrote or changed the NEJM review manuscript; the evidence that the industry shaped the review’s conclusions is circumstantial. We did not analyze the role of other organizations, nutrition leaders, or food industries that advocated that saturated fat and dietary cholesterol were the main dietary cause of CHD. We could not interview key actors involved in this historical episode because they have died."
I would also recommend that you look into glucenogenesis (the bodies ability to convert nutrients into sugar) and also research Acylation Stimulating Protein (ASP). Anytime you body is fed, it will inhibit lipolysis (breakdown of body fat) and store nutrients, period. You can do it whether or not you are eating carbs are not. And it should be noted that longest living and healthiest people in the world eat around 70% carbs.
The bold is a wild and unsubstantiated claim and at best are some peoples theories. Most of the bold is multifactorial.
And why is insulin the bad guy? Its a response to suppress blood glucose to normal levels and a key to the cells to shuttle nutrients in them... sounds like a good think. It also inhibits protein breakdown and enables muscle protein synthesis to work at a maximum rate (when combined with adequate protein). The ability to gain or maintain muscle is highly underrating by many groups. Consider that muscle drives EE, is linked to a health immune system and metabolism, it would be argued that maintaining or gaining muscle is critical during weight loss... something a ketogenic diet makes it difficult, especially if you believe in the broscience that protein kick you out of ketosis at very low levels.13 -
HeidiGrrrl wrote: »YES! Sugar is a killer! That's why those of us on a ketogenic diet only eat raspberries, blueberries, blackberries and strawberries, and only up to 1/2 cup once in a great while as a "treat". They are the lowest in carbohydrates, and they have a decent amount of fiber (some of the carbs are insoluble fiber, which your body can't digest, so some of us subtract the fiber grams from the carb grams for net grams). We also don't eat any grains or root vegetables for the same reason. They turn to glucose in the bloodstream, causing the insulin response, and insulin is the fat-storing hormone. There is ALWAYS a medical reason for EVERYBODY to NOT eat sugar. Sugar causes high blood pressure, heart disease, high cholesterol, high triglycerides, Type II diabetes, metabolic syndrome, fatty liver, leads to some cancers and neurological disorders, like Parkinsons and Alzheimers, some epilepsy cases and may contribute to autism. There's a reason fruit is called "nature's candy". And it matters not what type of sugar it is, whether it's sucrose, glucose, fructose, or any type of -ose. It's all the same once it's in the bloodstream, and all cause the same problems. This information has been known for DECADES, but deep pockets keep the people ill-informed, and the high carb/low fat diet simply won't go away, even though that's what's caused the obesity and diabetes epidemic worldwide. Don't believe me? Google "Sugar Industry Pays off Harvard Scientists".
no, I'm on a higher carb,low fat diet per drs orders due to my familial hypercholesterolemia, which is high cholesterol due to a genetic defect(and its a metabolic disorder), my cholesterol is now in the normal ranges for the first time in over 15 years. I dont have insulin issues,I dont have high blood pressure(mine is actually low),fatty liver,cancer,etc
I used to eat a lot of junk when i was younger,still none of those issues,. My heart issues,another defect called MVP/MVR(mitral valve prolapse/mitral valve regurgitation). which they think I was born with as my mother was a healthy eater.my grandpa developed parkinsons and he was born in 1917- he was a healthy eater because back then they couldnt afford junk foods. he was healthy otherwise. parkinsons can be genetic too because my mother has it.
so you cant say that certain diets/sugar cause these issues,because for many its genetic. I became obese due to being less active and eating more,I was eating healthier too. I was always thin before that. Ive lost a LOT of fat too and Im even smaller in size now than when I was 20+ lbs less. because I have less fat. so stop saying sugar causes these issues when a lot of those issues are caused from becoming overweight/obese.
your body can stop/produce too much insulin. even a vegetarian/vegan can end up with these health issues,a normal weight person can end up being diabetic. anyone can get cancer.2 -
I am T2Dm. I do not limit my sugars, I limit my total carbs to a max of 160 g per day in order to keep my blood glucose average down. In order to limit my carbs, I do tend to not eat much fruit because it is not satisfying. I would rather get my carbs from veggies, grains, legumes, etc.
All carbs, whether complex carbs (starches made up of 4 or more sugar molecules) or simple carbs (sugars, usually 1-2 molecules) get converted to glucose in your body so the important thing is the other nutrition surrounding the carbs and how it all fits into your personal plan.3 -
2-3 servings of fruit and 2-3 servings of complex carbs is a good rule of thumb. That will keep you solidly out of ketosis, but not affect your blood sugar much.0
-
Not all monosaccharides are created equal, and one shouldn't evaluate the fructose in fruits the same way one might evaluate the fructose honey because fruit has the "magical" thing called pectin that retards glycemic response (among just moving things along, moving things along)2
-
Not all monosaccharides are created equal, and one shouldn't evaluate the fructose in fruits the same way one might evaluate the fructose honey because fruit has the "magical" thing called pectin that retards glycemic response (among just moving things along, moving things along)
Is it just a statement? Or is there an associated concern with a faster absorbing sugar? What occurs when its combined with other foods.. because who eats straight up honey? I mean glucose and dextrose process very quickly, but should be there concern based on an absorption rate?3 -
I have eaten three servings of fruit, including mixes berries, apples, pears, bananas, oranges, strawberries, blueberries just about every day for the last many years, including the last 10 weeks during which I lost 13 lbs. I have no particular health problems, for which I am very grateful.
I understand the areguments behind ultra-low-carb and I have tried it. I just didn't have enough energy while on it. I typically expend 600-700kcals daily on exercise, maybe that's why.2 -
Jthanmyfitnesspal wrote: »I have eaten three servings of fruit, including mixes berries, apples, pears, bananas, oranges, strawberries, blueberries just about every day for the last many years, including the last 10 weeks during which I lost 13 lbs. I have no particular health problems, for which I am very grateful.
I understand the areguments behind ultra-low-carb and I have tried it. I just didn't have enough energy while on it. I typically expend 600-700kcals daily on exercise, maybe that's why.
You should still be expending the same amount of calories during exercise while low carb. Just the source changes. Fat instead of sugars/carbs.
Some low carbers notice a very slight drop in energy for a few weeks while the body is fat adapting. It's slight though. If you experienced a large dip in energy, chances are that it was an electrolyte imbalance because you did not increase sodium to make up for the water and electrolytes you were losing.0 -
Jthanmyfitnesspal wrote: »I have eaten three servings of fruit, including mixes berries, apples, pears, bananas, oranges, strawberries, blueberries just about every day for the last many years, including the last 10 weeks during which I lost 13 lbs. I have no particular health problems, for which I am very grateful.
I understand the areguments behind ultra-low-carb and I have tried it. I just didn't have enough energy while on it. I typically expend 600-700kcals daily on exercise, maybe that's why.
You should still be expending the same amount of calories during exercise while low carb. Just the source changes. Fat instead of sugars/carbs.
Some low carbers notice a very slight drop in energy for a few weeks while the body is fat adapting. It's slight though. If you experienced a large dip in energy, chances are that it was an electrolyte imbalance because you did not increase sodium to make up for the water and electrolytes you were losing.
I would say it depends on the sport... because if it was that simple, you would have a lot more athletes that LCHF in season.3 -
Jthanmyfitnesspal wrote: »I have eaten three servings of fruit, including mixes berries, apples, pears, bananas, oranges, strawberries, blueberries just about every day for the last many years, including the last 10 weeks during which I lost 13 lbs. I have no particular health problems, for which I am very grateful.
I understand the areguments behind ultra-low-carb and I have tried it. I just didn't have enough energy while on it. I typically expend 600-700kcals daily on exercise, maybe that's why.
You should still be expending the same amount of calories during exercise while low carb. Just the source changes. Fat instead of sugars/carbs.
Some low carbers notice a very slight drop in energy for a few weeks while the body is fat adapting. It's slight though. If you experienced a large dip in energy, chances are that it was an electrolyte imbalance because you did not increase sodium to make up for the water and electrolytes you were losing.
I would say it depends on the sport... because if it was that simple, you would have a lot more athletes that LCHF in season.
We need to discuss this again in 20 years once the diet is more widely known. Most people who ind out I restrict carbs instantly worry about my vitamins and my starving brain. LOL It may be used more once people get pat the old preconceptions and myths out there.
It really is that simple. Athletes who switched to LCHF, while taking care of their electrolytes noticed no dip in energy, or a slight dip. Those who didn't take care of their electrolytes are often floored and quit.
I do think explosive sports, like power lifting or 100 m dash, would do well with a carb up. Extreme endurance athletes tend to do better LCHF. The vast majority of athletes in the middle could probably go either way, or mix and match (LCHF with a carb feed during competition).1 -
Jthanmyfitnesspal wrote: »I have eaten three servings of fruit, including mixes berries, apples, pears, bananas, oranges, strawberries, blueberries just about every day for the last many years, including the last 10 weeks during which I lost 13 lbs. I have no particular health problems, for which I am very grateful.
I understand the areguments behind ultra-low-carb and I have tried it. I just didn't have enough energy while on it. I typically expend 600-700kcals daily on exercise, maybe that's why.
You should still be expending the same amount of calories during exercise while low carb. Just the source changes. Fat instead of sugars/carbs.
Some low carbers notice a very slight drop in energy for a few weeks while the body is fat adapting. It's slight though. If you experienced a large dip in energy, chances are that it was an electrolyte imbalance because you did not increase sodium to make up for the water and electrolytes you were losing.
I would say it depends on the sport... because if it was that simple, you would have a lot more athletes that LCHF in season.
We need to discuss this again in 20 years once the diet is more widely known. Most people who ind out I restrict carbs instantly worry about my vitamins and my starving brain. LOL It may be used more once people get pat the old preconceptions and myths out there.
It really is that simple. Athletes who switched to LCHF, while taking care of their electrolytes noticed no dip in energy, or a slight dip. Those who didn't take care of their electrolytes are often floored and quit.
I do think explosive sports, like power lifting or 100 m dash, would do well with a carb up. Extreme endurance athletes tend to do better LCHF. The vast majority of athletes in the middle could probably go either way, or mix and match (LCHF with a carb feed during competition).
You'd think 80 years is long enough to know its not that beneficial for sports
. 8
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 388 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 910 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.2K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions