3 ms·
That's why I said "unbound" fructose. Sucrose is glucose and fructose with a chemical bond between. HFCS is a slurry; there's no chemical bond connecting the t
by teach 9y ago
That's why I said "unbound" fructose.
Sucrose is glucose and fructose with a chemical bond between. HFCS is a slurry; there's no chemical bond connecting the two.
"Broken down in the small intestine very rapidly into 50/50..." ignores the fact that it takes a while to make it down as far as the small intestine.
I can't speak more to the differences personally because I'm not the one with the PhD and I'm not going to interrupt my wife from grading papers just to correct some rando on the Internet. :)
- SigmundA 9y agoBoth sucrose and HFSC must make it to the small intestine to be metabolized, the only difference is the chemical bond is broken by sucrase in the intestinal wall. Both are metabolized quickly and into the same components in the bloodstream. I am still not seeing the difference? edit Perhaps I misunderstood what you meant by "unbound" I thought you where referring to the chemical bond in sucrose, vs being bound up physically with fiber in fruit.