Fructose - A Debate

Health & Body
41

Hi tndkemp

To a point you are correct about sucrose in that it has first to be broken down into it’s simple sugars, that is glucose and fructose, see this from Healthy Living: Nutrition, Diet & Fitness Advice - Week&
“Sucrose digestion does not begin until the sugar reaches the small intestine. Your body cannot absorb polysaccharides as is, so it must first break sucrose down into its component parts. Through a process called hydrolysis, water assists in severing the glycosidic bond to separate the glucose and fructose molecules; one molecule of water is needed for each molecule of sucrose. However, this reaction naturally occurs very slowly. The presence of sucrase, an enzyme in the small intestine, accelerates this reaction.”

However once it has been broken down in the small intestine it becomes 50% fructose + 50% glucose and then the body adsorbs it. In these forms the body does not treat this fructose or glucose any differently than fructose & glucose that has been consumed as simply fructose & glucose. So to say it is largely converted to blood sugar is probably true but only in that 50% glucose is derived from a sucrose molecule and the fructose needs to be processed in the liver.

@jepc I think @Fred in his comment [quote=“Fred, post:33, topic:13375”]
Evidence, please.
[/quote]

Is making the point that to make a too broad statement is as bad as making too narrow a statement. @Fred has pointed out this previously I think when he questioned your statement about Fructose being a poison and addictive. You say that Fructose will damage the body and the brain but you do not then qualify this with something like “if eaten or consumed in too large an amount”. Even Dr Lutsig qualifies his statements with similar. And again much of the research does say when fructose is consumed in free sugar form and or in large amounts such as in fruit juices/drinks or their concentrates (added as a sweetener rather than as the natural sugar of the product in some cases) that the problems arise.

I agree that Dr Lutsig does not have to produce his own evidence to promote his beliefs when the evidence has been previously evaluated in other people’s research. As long as he is able to quote the relevant reputable evidence that supports his stance then his point is relevant and is a valid conjecture. I am not saying he hasn’t I am just stating a point. This is likened to a court case where a person uses Case Law to prove their case, they do not then need to create their own case law to have a valid case.

I would also like to point out that most plants actually store sucrose and when we eat them we consume sucrose. This is why our bodies have an enzyme to utilize this sugar. So to broadly say that to eat a food that has fructose or sucrose is bad for you is incorrect however to say that to eat a food that has added sucrose or fructose is bad for you is more supportable by evidence.

I welcome your input and hope you do not leave Choice’s forums but I may not always agree with your points just as you may not agree with mine but the debate we create may lead, and I hope leads, to better outcomes for us all.

Finally, I think the evidence is becoming clearer that added sugars and particularly fructose are becoming/have become health hazards for many in our population and the need to clearly identify them and if needed remove/reduce them in our diets is of great importance.

3 Likes
42

@BrendanMays

I found research while not able to readily quantify the consumption of sugar due to a number of issues that they discuss, is able to show a rising consumption of sugar with a fairly high confidence and it shows that “The Australian Paradox” was flawed. As much of this rising consumption was from imported foodstuffs it could be extrapolated that this includes a large increase in fructose.

I feel that probably none of the concerns about the quality of the data sources has changed in relation to the researchers requests and this is why I support Choice’s attempt to change the labeling and identification of sugar in the products we consume. If the sugar content can be even more categorised into specific sugars this can only be of benefit to us all.

2 Likes
43

While you won’t get an argument on that statement, as consumers, reality is most of us already suffer severe information overload, and the more data that is available to us the less we take notice of it as it becomes just more “noise” in our daily lives.

The singular cause of death is life, and “life systems” are very complex. More of “it” might be bad, but then that is only true except when “it” is accompanied by more [or less] of “that” when “it” can be good [or worse]. “It” can be bad for one thing but good for another. Few if any consumers are going to be able to make rational judgements when there is information overload, and researchers have so many variables to contend with all they can do is focus on a constrained bit at a time, and once something appears to be established to add another small step toward a bigger picture.

This link is pure gold in some ways, and perhaps fructose will one day replace tobacco among the curiosities, but a fun read.

1 Like
44

Especially when the recommendations about what is good and bad, how much is safe etc, from health authorities keep changing!

45

Thanks for the links everyone, and that article did give me a chuckle @PhilT. Seeing as though HFCS is likely not a significant factor in most Australian diets, it’s hopefully seen as reasonable that this will be reflected in our future work. It’s worth noting again that our aim will be to encourage less added sugar including fructose in our diets, clearer labelling and better health.

@jepc, sorry to hear that you’re disappointed in your experience here. Your conduct and passion is admirable and personally it’s been a great learning opportunity for me (and hopefully others feel the same). CHOICE deals with a lot of tough issues, and rigorous discussions like this make us stronger, so thanks again and I hope we will see you around in the future.

1 Like
46

It comes down to basically a good diet.Eat the right foods,and exercise.Then at times eat whatever you like.But it all must be in moderation.Otherwise you will get fat.Or have other issues because your in taking to much of a bad thing

1 Like
47

It seems to me that in this debate there are valid points made by Dr Lustig but they are taken to the extreme. He doesn’t recommend giving up fruit; he recommends eating fruit rather than cake and biscuits, and he seems to be, from my reading, to be condemning the processed High Fructose Corn Syrup and the fruit concentrates used to sweeten processed food. In other words, eating fruit is fine, eating HFCS and other high-fructose concentrates is not.

Saying that, some of us with IBS are sensitive to fructose, just like some people are sensitive to lactose. A Monash University team http://fodmapmonash.blogspot.com.au/ have done significant research in this area, and have evidence showing that reducing fructose gives relief from IBS to some people. However, it seems very much like the gluten-free debate: just because a small number of people are sensitive to gluten doesn’t mean gluten per se is bad. So it depends on the individual.

So sugar is bad; processed food is bad; fruit in normal quantities is good - except for people like me. :slight_smile:

1 Like
48

I like your style @Buzz3!

@gwendolen.johnson thanks for that, what an interesting perspective. I can’t imagine how difficult it would be to cut out fructose in this day and age.

1 Like
49

Hello all, first time poster but long time diet junky. The problem of course with working out the best diet for humans is that its complicated. And we like simple. Really simple. So if someone comes up with a theory to just cut out sugar, or just cut out fat, it can be very appealing. But of course, there are cultures that have thrived on a wide variety of diets, so you need a better theory.

The claim that humans could never have consumed large amounts of fructose laden fruit is a common claim but I don’t think there’s much proof of that. In equatorial regions, there is a plethora of wild fruit that are absolute sugar bombs. And these haven’t been selectively bred. This is a very interesting post on it:

It’s not a journal article, but I think its compelling reading anyway!

2 Likes
50

Wow, fascinating read @mountie. At the very least, I now have a severe craving for some exotic fruit.

51

Very intetesting @mountie. Many of these haven’t tried or heard of but they do look interesting. It’s amazing how the inside of some looks like common fruits such as custard apples.

I have tried many jungle fruit in SE Asia, many very sweet and delicious. Some again never heard of, never seem again or knew what they before consuming. Have seen them grow profusely in the wikd and harvested by the locals.

Now I have another handful or more to try if and when I travel to those parts where they grow.

With the invent of the paleo diet, it as confused and caused confusion over what our ancestors ate.

52

And just for fun, an actual journal article on the effects of honey on humans:

compared to glucose and sucrose, the consumption of honey decreases glycemic levels and blood lipids in healthy, diabetic and hyperlipidemic individuals. Moreover, long periods of honey intake seem to reduce fasting glucose levels in humans, suggesting that honey consumption influences plasma glucose regulation, mainly through a normo- or hypoglycemic effect.

Kind of an obscure journal, but it was the reference I had to hand.

This clearly invalidates the contention that all sugar is the same. Honey is a much more functional food than white table sugar. Which isn’t to say that it should be gorged on.

In truth, I’m probably more paleo than anything else, but I think food quality is the most important thing. Whole foods beat manufactured foods everyday of the week.

1 Like
53

I’ve pretty much stopped using white sugar in cooking, I use honey in custard with our duck eggs, for cooking rhubarb from the aquaponics, and the occasional cake. Fortunately we have an apiarist friend who produces raw local honey, and we even have a few of his hives here.
As a test I preserved some of my home grown cherries and apricots using plain organic pear juice with a big spoon of honey per jar, instead of the vast amounts of sugar syrup called for in most recipes, and they have kept well so far - 2 months, and were delicious.

54

Chemical Composition of Honey

Carbohydrates
Unsurprisingly, these comprise the major portion of honey - about 82%. The carbohydrates present are the monosaccharides fructose (38.2%) and glucose (31%); and disaccharides (~9%) sucrose, maltose, isomaltose, maltulose, turanose and kojibiose. There are also some oligosaccharides present (4.2%), including erlose, theanderose and panose, formed from incomplete breakdown of the higher saccharides present in nectar and honeydew.

Proteins and Amino Acids
Honey contains a number of enzymes, including invertase, which converts sucrose to glucose and fructose; amylase, which breaks starch down into smaller units; glucose oxidase, which converts glucose to gluconolactone, which in turn yields gluconic acid and hydrogen peroxide; catalase, which breaks down the peroxide formed by glucose oxidase to water and oxygen; and acid phosphorylase, which removes inorganic phosphate from organic phosphates.

Honey also contains eighteen free amino acids, of which the most abundant is proline.

Vitamins, Minerals and Antioxidants
Honey contains trace amounts of the B vitamins riboflavin, niacin, folic acid, pantothenic acid and vitamin B6. It also contains ascorbic acid (vitamin C), and the minerals calcium, iron, zinc, potassium, phosphorous, magnesium, selenium, chromium and manganese.

The main group of antioxidants in honey are the flavonoids, of which one, pinocembrin, is unique to honey and bee propolis. Ascorbic acid, catalase and selenium are also antioxidants. Generally speaking, the darker the honey, the greater its antioxidising properties.

Other compounds
Honey also contains organic acids such as acetic, butanoic, formic, citric, succinic, lactic, malic, pyroglutamic and gluconic acids, and a number of aromatic acids. The main acid present is gluconic acid, formed in the breakdown of glucose by glucose oxidase. Honey also contains hydroxymethylfurfural, a natural product of the breakdown of simple sugars below pH 5.

Source: http://www.chm.bris.ac.uk/

1 Like
55

Thanks BrendanMays appreciate it

1 Like
56

Fructose intolerant here.

Having done much research and reading, my understanding of “free sugars” is as follows. You can do your own research to confirm.

For most people with dietary intolerance resulting in various IBS symptoms, the cause is an inability to absorb the fructose. Those people are recommended no more than 50g a day or meal.

Glucose binds with fructose enabling it to be carried through the body and processed and excreted. Those with the dietary intolerance need to match each fructose molecule with one of glucose to absorb it. Some foods have both glucose and fructose in varying degrees (food lists can be googled), the “free sugar” refers to the excess amount of fructose over the matching glucose to bind.

Example, table sugar is 50/50 fructose/glucose ergo no issue for those with dietary intolerance, and what they need to strive for. If a food contains more ‘free/unbound’ fructose than glucose, they need to add glucose to meet the amount of fructose to avoid symptoms. More glucose than fructose is fine.

Unfortunately for me, the issue is different - hereditary intolerance. I absorb but cant break it down so i have to avoid any where possible. Not just fructose but fructans and sugar alcohols ie gum etc. Fructans can be found in vegetables, grains (wheat, corn, tomato) not just fruit. So it can become almost impossible.

For me the effects of not avoiding it is long term liver and kidney issues as those organs are put under excess strain trying to process something they just cant. There are long term health implications.

Short term… I hypo losing consciousness and convulse which is (i found out not tooo long ago considered a medical emergency, whoops). My blood sugars are fine otherwise, i monitor them regularly. Im not diabetic nor pre.

Soon as I cut out any foods with fructose etc, my health issues disappeared. I had more energy, no brain fog, no IBS and NO hypos !

I have to wear medical bracelets advising NO FRUCTOSE in case of unconsciousness. Also in hospital ask for glucose ONLY drips. RPA failed to give me one during surgery last year, I was 4.1 after surgery and 1.7 in hypo after coming off drip, when they discharged me vomiting, in a wheelchair.

Also, if i have a hypo I cant drive for 6 weeks after, its in the road legislation. So managing it isnt just about health, but also lifestyle.

Sorry, bit of a ramble - the point was ‘free sugar’ is unbound sugar :slight_smile: Hope that helps.

(btw glucose, lactose, dextrose and maltose are fine for me to consume - thankfully !!! … I use dextrose or glucose in place of table sugar, not as sweet but no health issues. Rice malt syrup is good for baking/in place of honey.)

4 Likes
57

I sympathise, Khary, and it’s why doctors call my minor problem fructose malabsorption, not the far more severe fructose intolerance, which you have. I have a nephew with your rare intolerance, and when only four months old, he went into a coma and had to be rushed to hospital because his mother gave him orange juice! His diet since then has been strictly monitored in the same way as someone with a peanut allergy.
So it’s all very strange and fascinating. And proves what’s good for one can be downright dangerous for someone else.

1 Like
58

I totally agree with this and have been living by this way of thinking for about 18 months now, I still can’t understand why shows such as the biggest loser who in previous episodes would ask contestants in challanges to choose a healthier option of food and would put potato crisps before avocado as an example as the avocado had more calories. I finally thought this latest season called transformations would finally catch up with the new findings on good fats and bad fats but the expert person that judged a cook off marked one team down for using olive oil. Low fat is still being encouraged as the chosen option on foods, when will the so called experts that are talking to the general public catch up on the good fat way of thinking, I love the dismissal of calorie counting when choosing foods, I am sure lots of people would change their eating habits if they knew they could still have bacon and eggs, full cream milk and yogurt, skin on pork and chicken etc, whats not to love??

1 Like
59

I use rice malt syrup which I love, found it hard not to keep eating honey as I have always loved it but eating a low fructose way of life meant an alternative was found. My brain still looks at raw honey fresh from a hive and says “good natural food”. Eating well is so hard!

60

It’s not important how much sugar is “added” to a product. What matters is the actual “sugars” percentage content . Sugar is sugar, and with a couple of exceptions it’s all bad for your health, in spades! Glucose is the fuel which powers just about all animal life.Lactose is milk sugar which metabolises as glucose when digested. In fact nearly every carbohydrate we eat ends up as glucose. The notable exception is FRUCTOSE, or fruit sugar. Sucrose (cane sugar) is a double molecule of glucose and fructose, so it’s 50% fructose. This sugar has three main harmful effects:

  1. In inhibits the gut hormones which control hunger and satiety. So the brain doesn’t get the message that we are full. This is why obese people can eat and eat when they are obviously not hungry.
  2. It inhibits the production if insulin in the pancreas, leading to the pandemic of Type-2 diabetes which accompanies that of obesity.
  3. All the fructose beyond the 10 grams a day we need goes directly to the liver where it is converted to fat which is deposited around the vital organs. Which is why so many overweight people have large bellies. Average daily consumption in Australia is about 30 g/day.which accounts for the large proportion of overweight and obese people in the community.
  4. In addition, fructose has been causally linked to a string of undesirable medical conditions as long as your arm, including tooth decay, leaky gut, non-alcoholic fatty liver, kidney failure, gout, Alzheimer’s disease, depression, hypertension, erectile dysfunction, and so on.

Cutting fructose from your diet will enable you to avoid most of these conditions. It’s easy to avoid eating excess fructose - limit your fruit to two small pieces (200g) per day, avoid fruit juices, dried fruits (concentrated fructose) and any processed food with more than 2% “sugars”. Yogurt s OK at up to 7% as the first 5% is lactose based. And watch out for “low fat” foods. The flavour is removed with the fat and replaced by sugar and salt.

Mainstream medicine is slowly getting around to recognizing the role of “sugar” in community health. But many doctors and nutritionists do not understand the role of fructose. Interested readers can check authors like David Gillespie, Robert Lustig, Peter Dingle, John Yudkin etc.

1 Like