Comments on: Unclear on the fructose concept

By: Andy

Andy — Thu, 07 Feb 2008 17:58:08 +0000

I am a defender of Inko’s. My entire family drinks it. It is a white tea, not sugar water. And, even if it was, as you say, sugar water, compared to 99% of the beverage offerings in stores (excluding flouride-less water and saccarin-based diet drink) it is MUCH MUCH lower in calories than other offerings and therefore considered by many to be a contributor to a healthier lifestyle.

Also, according to my understanding, fructose crystals have a different metabolic makeup from HFCS and packs more sweetness in less calories. And, it is all natural.

You can find plain-packaged fructose crystals at many of your better health food stores.

Thank you for allowing me to voice my opinion.

Fructose is fructose and is one of the most damaging sugars around. Pure crystalline fructose is 100 percent fructose whereas HFCS is 55 percent fructose. Gram per gram the former is more harmful than the latter.

Cheers–

By: Jeremy

Jeremy — Tue, 05 Feb 2008 05:06:14 +0000

Dr. Mike,

I hope you still read and reply to these older posts, but anyways:

I recently read “The New Glucose Revolution” and then picked up a copy of your book the following day�wow, much different. Both books claim that they are not “theories” but “proven science”. PP was more convincing.

This post reminded me of a couple of questions I’ve been driving myself insane thinking about. The first is in TNGR they state that 100g of fructose is better than 100g of glucose because of it’s low GI rating, but here you say that pure glucose is better�why?

Second, after reading your book I now know that I want to keep my insulin levels low, but I’m curious: If a carb is a low-GI, won’t it keep your blood glucose levels low enough (or hardly change it) because of the rate of digestion that your insulin won’t rise? And if you eat lots of low-GI foods�because your body can’t possibly process the food faster (I’m guessing)�won’t it always keep your insulin levels low?

Last, I’m really trying to wrap my head around the part of the book where you were speaking about the growth hormone for building strength opposed to eating lots of protein, or eating a high-GI carb, just after a workout. Being involved with some of the worlds fittest athletes, I’ve never heard of not eating until an hour after a workout. It sounds interesting.

Thanks,

Jeremy

The idea that 100 g fructose being better than 100 g of glucose is absurd. Fructose is much more harmful. And it the reason I discount the idea of the glycemic index. Fructose is a low-glycemic carbohydrate, and, as such, can be consumed as part of a low-glycemic diet, which, in my opinion, is not a good thing.

I’ve changed my mind a little about the consuming of carbs after a workout reducing the output of GH.

By: Chris H

Chris H — Sat, 06 Oct 2007 08:07:21 +0000

Couple of interesting articles just out on fructose in the latest American Journal of Clinical Nutrition

http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/abstract/86/4/1174?etoc

http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/86/4/895?etoc

Chris
http://www.conditioningresearch.com

Hey Chris–

I’ve got my Oct. issue of the AJCN on my desk, but haven’t opened it yet. I’m looking forward to reading the articles.

Thanks–

MRE

By: Alex

Alex — Sun, 30 Sep 2007 04:42:16 +0000

Hello Dr. Mike,

Thanks for your comments on my comments!

Why is HFCS worse than sucrose if the latter breaks down into fructose and glucose in equal amounts?

Let me take a guess: HFCS is a heterogenous “mixture” of fructose and glucose while sucrose which is a disaccharide. This is a real guess! Look forward to your answer.

Regards,

Alex

Hi Alex–

There are several types of HFCS. One that is 90% fructose/10% glucose and the more commonly used one that is 55% fructose/45% glucose. If we consider that people eating the standard American diet consume about 20% of their calories as sugar. If this is HFCS, then the average American gets about 10 extra grams of fructose per day compared to 30 years ago when the only sweetener was sucrose. But it’s not this extra 10 grams that is troubling. I don’t eat any sugar per day. None. Therefore to make the averages work, someone is eating 40% of calories as sugar, making this person consume an extra 20 grams per day of fructose compared to 30 years ago. 20 grams per day is about 4 teaspoons of pure fructose, which is more than plenty.

Cheers–

MRE

By: Tim Farrell

Tim Farrell — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 04:51:35 +0000

Hey!!! Waving arms!!!! anybody home?

i read that… “Your comment is awaiting moderation.”

That’s been a few days now.

Is this about Q&A, or Snake Oil? …the Star-Ledger wants to know!

Q & A or Snake oil?!?! Where does it say Q & A? On my software is says ‘Comments’ not Q & A.

Cheers–

MRE

By: deirdra

deirdra — Wed, 26 Sep 2007 12:46:04 +0000

I wonder how much fructose is in the second ingredient, “all-natural white peach extract”? Looks like 29 calories of sugar water to me. “Natural” on a label is a red flag for me to figure out what they are trying to hide/obscure.

29 calories of sugar water is pretty much what it is. And even worse, it’s 29 calories of fructose water.

Cheers–

MRE

By: Alex

Alex — Tue, 25 Sep 2007 13:15:27 +0000

So I need to throw away my ketchup (it is spicy ketchup, as it’s laced with Tabasco). For some reason I was thinking small amounts were probably okay. But since you mention it’s one of the culprits in insulin resistance–better to avoid it. What are some good substitutes?

Thanks!
Alex

Hi Alex–

A little ketchup here and there probably won’t hurt much; just don’t overdo it. Also, there are diet and/or diabetic ketchup products that contain no or little sugar.

Best–

MRE

By: Tim Farrell

Tim Farrell — Tue, 25 Sep 2007 05:25:19 +0000

I don’t know if this is along the same line… But I’m wondering if there is anything different about “brown rice syrup” that is an ingredient of one of the Kashi brand granola bars I have in the pantry. (Cliff Bars list the same) I’m guessing ’tis all the same story… searching for the sweetness grail.
Thanks,

Tim

Hi Tim–

Brown rice syrup is basically glucose, maltose (two glucose molecules hooked together) and some other liquid complex carbs. It’s not fructose, but it still raises blood sugar.

Cheers–

MRE

By: Anne

Anne — Mon, 24 Sep 2007 20:13:18 +0000

You have hit on yet another of my pet peeves.

The last time someone suggested that things that were “natural” were automatically better, I suggested we both have a nice poison ivy salad. Nowadays we have a new version of this: It is in “Whole Foods” so it must be good for me!” This tea is a perfect example.

I’ll give you one guess as to what “soy wax” really is in those “all natural soy wax candles” that they sell. ha! (Ok, no…not talking about eating candles after all…but the point that people only want the illusion that they are living healthfully or in a way friendly to the environment. Its all labeling/packaging.)

Hi Anne–

Let me make my one guess (and it is a guess because I’ve never even heard of ‘soy wax’): partially hydrogenated soybean oil? Right?

Cheers–

MRE

By: Yvonne M.

Yvonne M. — Mon, 24 Sep 2007 18:52:56 +0000

A friend who has PCOS and is Insulin Resistant is on Weight Watchers. I know what you’re thinking! (I’m not THANKFULLY). And is on the Core Program that is actually a bit healthier than the traditional “eat whatever crap you want as long as it’s in your points for the day” program. But they actually RECOMMEND fructose. It’s the sweetener of choice. Sad, really.

Hi Yvonne–

It’s worse than sad. And totally misguided.

Best–

MRE