3 ms·

Come on, are you seriously implying fruit is somehow bad for you now?

by gnz11 2y ago

lambdaone 2y ago
The parent poster is right in that pure fructose is probably worse for you than an equivalent amount of pure sucrose. But the way that fructose is delivered to your body by digesting fruit - slowly, and in conjuction with other materials, in a way that we have evolved to tolerate - is entirely different from eating the pure chemical.
- gnz11 2y ago
  The amount of fruit you’d have to consume to ingest unhealthy levels of fructose is astronomical. Worrying about whether fruit is unhealthy is most likely causing you more harm than the fructose in fruit. Don’t worry about eating fruit.
  - coldtea 2y ago
    >The amount of fruit you’d have to consume to ingest unhealthy levels of fructose is astronomical. What's "unhealthy" here? LD50?
jakubmazanec 2y ago
This is some latest research on this topic: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10363705/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10363705/
- duckmysick 2y ago
  What exactly do you mean by "this topic"? Fruits being bad for you, which is the comment you're replying to? This is the only mention of fruit in the linked paper: > Fructose is a simple sugar that is the primary nutrient in fruit and honey. However, in the western diet, its main source is table sugar (sucrose), which consists of fructose and glucose bound together, and high fructose corn syrup (HFCS), which consists of a blended mixture of fructose and glucose, often with slightly higher concentrations of fructose as testing has suggested humans prefer slightly more fructose as it is sweeter than glucose. Today these ‘added sugars’ account for ≈15% of overall energy intake, with some groups ingesting as much as 20% or more. > Fructose is also generated in the body from glucose. This occurs when glucose levels (i.e. the substrate) are excessive, such as in diabetes, following the ingestion of high glycaemic carbohydrates, and by high carbohydrate diets. Similarly, the grandparent comment "Fructose (the sugar that comes from fruits)" should read like this: "Fructose (the sugar that comes from fruits, but these days it's primarily from table sugar and processed foods)"
  - jakubmazanec 2y ago
    Yes, thank you; I was in a hurry and didn't write the best comment with the full context.
- hombre_fatal 2y ago
  This doesn't answer the question. The question is if fruit are associated with negative health outcomes in a human population. What you're doing is saying inflammation is bad and then inferring that exercise is bad because it increases inflammation.
coldtea 2y ago
Not implying, it's a settled thing. The ocassional fruit is ok, but fructose is bad, and smoothies are basically sugar bombs.
- TaylorAlexander 2y ago
  This is the opposite of the research-backed claims on whole fruits from this video: https://youtu.be/bHnsawfk43Y https://youtu.be/bHnsawfk43Y
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

Come on, are you seriously implying fruit is somehow bad for you now?

by gnz11 2y ago

Come on, are you seriously implying fruit is somehow bad for you now?

The parent poster is right in that pure fructose is probably worse for you than an equivalent amount of pure sucrose. But the way that fructose is delivered to your body by digesting fruit - slowly, and in conjuction with other materials, in a way that we have evolved to tolerate - is entirely different from eating the pure chemical.

gnz11 2y ago
The amount of fruit you’d have to consume to ingest unhealthy levels of fructose is astronomical. Worrying about whether fruit is unhealthy is most likely causing you more harm than the fructose in fruit. Don’t worry about eating fruit.
- coldtea 2y ago
  >The amount of fruit you’d have to consume to ingest unhealthy levels of fructose is astronomical. What's "unhealthy" here? LD50?

jakubmazanec 2y ago

This is some latest research on this topic: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10363705/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10363705/

duckmysick 2y ago
What exactly do you mean by "this topic"? Fruits being bad for you, which is the comment you're replying to? This is the only mention of fruit in the linked paper: > Fructose is a simple sugar that is the primary nutrient in fruit and honey. However, in the western diet, its main source is table sugar (sucrose), which consists of fructose and glucose bound together, and high fructose corn syrup (HFCS), which consists of a blended mixture of fructose and glucose, often with slightly higher concentrations of fructose as testing has suggested humans prefer slightly more fructose as it is sweeter than glucose. Today these ‘added sugars’ account for ≈15% of overall energy intake, with some groups ingesting as much as 20% or more. > Fructose is also generated in the body from glucose. This occurs when glucose levels (i.e. the substrate) are excessive, such as in diabetes, following the ingestion of high glycaemic carbohydrates, and by high carbohydrate diets. Similarly, the grandparent comment "Fructose (the sugar that comes from fruits)" should read like this: "Fructose (the sugar that comes from fruits, but these days it's primarily from table sugar and processed foods)"
- jakubmazanec 2y ago
  Yes, thank you; I was in a hurry and didn't write the best comment with the full context.
hombre_fatal 2y ago
This doesn't answer the question. The question is if fruit are associated with negative health outcomes in a human population. What you're doing is saying inflammation is bad and then inferring that exercise is bad because it increases inflammation.

coldtea 2y ago

Not implying, it's a settled thing. The ocassional fruit is ok, but fructose is bad, and smoothies are basically sugar bombs.

TaylorAlexander 2y ago
This is the opposite of the research-backed claims on whole fruits from this video: https://youtu.be/bHnsawfk43Y https://youtu.be/bHnsawfk43Y

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]