4 ms·

> Combined with all the sugar they get from eating fruit, they end up eating about the same amount of sugar as Americans do. ... These are all unrefined sugars,

> Combined with all the sugar they get from eating fruit, they end up eating about the same amount of sugar as Americans do. ... These are all unrefined sugars, of course Isn't it important to distinguish the type of sugar? I thought the 5-10% increase in proportion of sucrose to fructose was sufficient enough to result in significant difference between how types of sugar impact insulin response. E.g., the shift to more easily-metabolized fructose results in even more available calories to convert to fat than the 50/50 sucrose/fructose found in fruits. > even when statistically adjusting for variables like age, BMI, and physical activity. I find this hard to believe, that the statistics were adjusted correctly for physical activity. You can talk about !Kung, Maasi, and Inuits all day long, but these tribes are wildly active compared to the typical desk-jockey westerner. That can't be shrugged off so easily.

code_duck 5y ago
Is fructose considered easy to metabolize? It takes drastically longer to convert to glucose than other sugars, requires liver enzymes and can creates gastric upset in excess. It seems quite inefficient compared to carbohydrate sources like starch which are simply chains of glucose molecules that your body separates.
- SavantIdiot 5y ago
  I think you have it backwards: fructose is a monosaccharide which is metabolized almost instantly, and sucrose is a disaccharide which requires additional energy to metabolize. Glucose is the end result, but glucose isn't what is added to industrial foods. So more effort is required to use sucrose than fructose, and I believe that is the source of the issue.
  - code_duck 5y ago
    I didn’t refer to sucrose. I said starches which are popular alternative carbohydrate sources to sugar. As far as sugars go, dextrose and maltose are much more easily digested than fructose.

code_duck 5y ago

Is fructose considered easy to metabolize? It takes drastically longer to convert to glucose than other sugars, requires liver enzymes and can creates gastric upset in excess. It seems quite inefficient compared to carbohydrate sources like starch which are simply chains of glucose molecules that your body separates.

SavantIdiot 5y ago
I think you have it backwards: fructose is a monosaccharide which is metabolized almost instantly, and sucrose is a disaccharide which requires additional energy to metabolize. Glucose is the end result, but glucose isn't what is added to industrial foods. So more effort is required to use sucrose than fructose, and I believe that is the source of the issue.
- code_duck 5y ago
  I didn’t refer to sucrose. I said starches which are popular alternative carbohydrate sources to sugar. As far as sugars go, dextrose and maltose are much more easily digested than fructose.