Lo carb or low fructose?

(Tim Cee) #41

In Venezuela everything is a laxative if you’re from the states. Maybe Drs should prescribe a travel experience instead of a prune. Venezuela is a beautiful place with a toothsome culinary tradition and good people. I’d rather have dinner with a Venezuelan than eat a handful of prunes.

(Tim Cee) #42

@Fangs: if you don’t run from prunes they might run from you.


Now that you say this, I remember hearing about licks in that sense… Only once so it’s nice to make this knowledge stronger!
But how the prune gets into the picture…?

(I still like prunes. Almost never eat them but I like them. If they are nice and sour enough, they usually aren’t.)

(Joey) #44

Rather than argue with the specifics of 45/55 being close to 50/50, the general principle upon which this logic relies is fraught.

Chemically speaking, there isn’t much difference between CO2 & CO, or H2O and HO. But their effects are severely different on the human body. :nerd_face:


I’m confused. I was merely agreeing that on the surface the makeup of HFCS to sucrose is not materially different, 45/55 to 50/50 is seemingly very similar.

However, even chemical compounds with infinitesimally minor differences can effect a change exponentially different within the ecosystem that is our bodies. The sensitivity provided by two almost identical compounds can very well lead to very meaningfully variant results.

(Joey) #46

No confusion detected … I think we’re on the same page :+1: Sorry that I gave the wrong impression!


Started by couldn’t finish yet, problem is I’ve seen this horse beat to death many times. There’s a handful of NIH listed studies showing that it’s near impossible to give yourself NAFLD from real fruit, I’ll try to find it. I should be able to watch the rest later once the kid passes out. Like everything else with the word science on it, it’ll show what the person presenting it wants it to show… which is the problem.

(Michael - When reality fails to meet expectations, the problem is not reality.) #49

There seems to be a prevalent and incorrect presumption that fruit is a natural food for humans. It’s not. We evolved over the course several million years not eating fruit. Pliocene and Pleistocene ‘fruits’ were very different from what we know as fruit today. Pliocene and Pleistocene fruits were very high in indigestible cellulose (90-95%) and very low in digestible fructose. In fact, most so-called fruit that we eat today did not exist a couple hundred years ago, and what actually did was very different from the sacs of fructose we have now. The fact that fructose and ethanol are metabolized by the exact same process in the liver should be enough to tell us that fructose is not better/worse than ethanol.

(Take time to smell the bacon) #50

Well, as even Dr. Lustig admits, the liver can handle a certain amount of alcohol/fructose/BCAA’s without damage; the problem comes when that rate limit is exceeded. If I understand him correctly, Dr. Lustig maintains that, because of the fibre in whole fruit, it is impossible to eat enough fruits in one sitting to do the damage that one glass of the equivalent fruit juice would do. His idea is that the fibre not only fills us up, it also slows down the absorption of the fructose to a rate that the liver can handle.

(Michael - When reality fails to meet expectations, the problem is not reality.) #51

The whole point of selective breeding has been to reduce the percentage of fiber and increase the percentage of fructose. Yes, juicing it makes the concentration of fructose much higher and hence more deleterious. I’m simply agreeing with Bruckner and Mason that fructose even in small amounts is a toxin and the fiber in fruit doesn’t make it any less so. Some folks eat fruit all day long and think they’re eating healthy.

(Take time to smell the bacon) #52

While this is certainly true, the assertion that fructose in any quantity is always toxic is not warranted. As for ethyl alcohol, a small quantity can be handled by the liver. Persons vulnerable to addiction may, because of that vulnerability, wish to avoid these substances altogether, but a significant portion of the population, not being vulnerable to addiction, can tolerate a certain quantity of them without damage. Furthermore, as Dr. Lustig notes, while ethanol has short-term toxic properties as well as long-term toxic properties, the toxic properties of fructose are only manifest over the long term.

Fortunately, the liver is highly resilient and can quickly recover from fairly significant damage, once exposure to the toxin ceases.

(Tim Cee) #53

I’m coming down on the side of counting fruit and fruit juices against my alcohol limit since the chemistry indicates they have the same affect in the same quantity. So, eating fruit with high fiber is the same as drinking beer with a plate of greens.