What is the predominant kind of sugar in fruit? You, my friend, have drunk the Kool-Aid.Well, there is yogurt added to keep it creamy but it is a lot less fat and has a fresh taste but it still tastes great. It also tastes better to me when cold. I keep the jar in the refrigerator. It does not have to be, but i like cold mayo.
But to add one negative aspect, it contains more sugar compared to regular mayo. But it is real sugar and not hfcs corn syrup garbage.
edit, sigh. Now they also add that hfcs glucose fructose shit to it.It was not in it
I will have to start making my own yogurt based maynonaisse.
What is the predominant kind of sugar in fruit? You, my friend, have drunk the Kool-Aid.
Master nutritionist here, folks. Yeah, I guess they leave all the vitamins and fiber in when they process beets into table sugar too. Sucrose/Dextrose is just FULL of other Good Stuff(tm). I'd love to hear about how little sucrose/dextrose is processed by comparison and how much of the other nutrients, vitamins, and fiber remain.Ah, A Occam's Razor thinker.
Only one variable at a time.
Fruit contains a lot more fibres and other healthy nutrients.
So, you can consume an apples or banana weight of hfcs anytime you like if you think it is healthy.
The point is that the large amount of hfcs is not good.
Fructose alone is not good and in large amounts it is not good.
And the problem is that there is not a pinch of glucose fructose (hfcs) used per serving but large amounts.
Also, most people, when on a fruit diet only get diarrea because of the large fructose amounts even while getting a large amount of fibres and other nutrients.
edit:
Forgot to mention,
You might want to look up how your liver handles fructose and what the consequences are for consuming large amounts of fructose.
Yep!I'll put what ever I want on anything I want, and I invite everyone else to do the same.
Master nutritionist here, folks. Yeah, I guess they leave all the vitamins and fiber in when they process beets into table sugar too. Sucrose/Dextrose is just FULL of other Good Stuff(tm). I'd love to hear about how little sucrose/dextrose is processed by comparison and how much of the other nutrients, vitamins, and fiber remain.
The vitamin C and fiber from a fruit diet cause the diarrhea, not the liver processing HFSC (DUH).
"Apples" and "bananas," huh? OK: Tell me how you feel about drinking OJ. "Poor Anna Nicole Liversmith never stood a chance against that high-fructose monster!"
Who is looking at one variable again? The simplest explanation here is that you got caught up in a bunch of hysterical anti-HFCS sentiment thanks to all the books and Internet BS about it. Might as well dig into the anti-vaccination vaxxer stuff next. It's right up your alley.
I don't like that corn subsidies and tariffs on imports is manipulating the market to use HFCS instead, but I won't delude myself about fructose or nutrition in general to further demonize HFCS and ignore that we get too much sugar (regardless of what kind).
Look up the side effect of too much vitamin C. Vitamin C probably does not boost your immune system so there's no reason to overdose with Vitamin C cough drops and Airborne supplements. Sure, it "can't hurt" ...unless you DON'T want diarrhea. Most people know that fiber loosens your bowels (it's one of the main health benefits), but too much can cause intestinal distress, gas, bloating, etc on top of that... the very same stuff that goes along with diarrhea and IBS.Pfff, internet warriors are so boring.
And you are wrong on so many levels.
Vitamin C does not cause diarrhea.
Nor does fibers. You are bananas.
A fructose food allergy would be unfortunate but it wouldn't make HFCS worse than fructose in fruit whether you are or aren't allergic. The HFCS warnings that seemingly don't apply to other forms of fructose is what I'm calling out here. Ignoring fruits/vegetables to rail against HFCS really smacks of bandwagoning and discredits anyone who doesn't acknowledge that contradiction. Seems way too much like an anti-HDCS slant instead of a genuine fructose concern, which makes it hard to convince anyone who notices the contradiction.Fructose in high amounts can cause diarrhea.
Fructose on its own not, but when processed by the bacteria in the large intestines, the byproducts can cause diarrhea.
Also, some people are having a food allergy to fructose and have similar problems.
Just going to guess, but pretty much anything ending in "-tose" is a carbohydrate/sugar (biologically, all sugar). I'm sure it works similarly to other carbs people may be intolerant of: your body lacks an enzyme it needs to properly digest it leaving the carb available to other processes (mostly bacteria in your gut). Those processes create gas and other normally-unwanted byproducts that make you "go." Excuse me while I eat this bean and cheese burrito!As a medicin against constipation :
There is a polysaccharide for example called lactulose.
This is made from chemically processing lactose and is made up of fructose and galactose.
I do not know the specific workings. But it works, because i used it years ago.
The manual says not to leave the house after taking this medicine in. And it is true.
Me too, and I have horrible digestion issues as a result. The thing is, the fructose in corn and the fructose in other fruits and vegetables are both "normal sugar." If I have a reaction to fructose from one source I accept that I would likely have that reaction to fructose from another.Also, i eat fresh fruit and vegetables daily but i also take in my healthy but low amount of fats and protein.
I do not get digestion problems until i let myself go a little bit on processed foods with hcfs in it.
Products with normal sugar do not cause these effects.
Fruit and vegetables do not cause these effects.
I will admit that i have a sensitive digestive system by nature. Maybe i have some allergy or problem absorbing fructose.
But I am not an exception.
You said it: "when saturated." That's because we have too much fructose from all sources, not just HFCS. Adding HFCS to food isn't the only issue because substituting too much of one for too much of another also means having too much of any kind. If it is notably worse then we should be warning against fruits and vegetables with too much fructose as well. If you are getting too much fructose due to having too many sweets then you'd be getting too much sucrose if you substituted that (along with all the health consequences of having too much sucrose).The liver produces many biochemicals and when saturated with fructose it will not function properly anymore.
And that is the problem, too much hcfs in food nowaydays.
The liver processes fructose.
Right, but fructose is the main sugar in most natural fruits and vegetables. That fructose is often chemically the same as the fructose from corn, thus, the resulting effects are the same and there is no reason to specifically single out HFCS. Take table sugar for example (sucrose). I wouldn't go on a crusade against specifically beet sugar or specifically cane sugar when concerns about sucrose come to light. I'd say that having too much of the sugar from any source can cause concern. I also wouldn't crusade against only sucrose from refined sources while ignoring that my concerns also apply to lots of inarguably healthy things naturally containing sucrose (fruits and vegetables).I agree to this,though :
High Fructose Corn Syrup is nothing more then a political product.
Sugar canes have high import tariffs.
Corn is heavily subsidized.
HFCS is promoted as USA product that creats jobs.
It was not created as a sweatener to reduce the use of sugar, Stevia would have been fine for that.
Not as a means for a healthy and happy customer.
No it was after lobbying.
No, it is cheaper to produce than just sugar from sugar cane which is also a glucose fructose unit.
In the end it costs more because of all health side effects and related medical costs.
EDIT:
I should note that the chemical composition from sucrose and hfcs seem to be different. AKA not identical.
Look up the side effect of too much vitamin C. Vitamin C probably does not boost your immune system so there's no reason to overdose with Vitamin C cough drops and Airborne supplements. Sure, it "can't hurt" ...unless you DON'T want diarrhea.
Most people know that fiber loosens your bowels (it's one of the main health benefits), but too much can cause intestinal distress, gas, bloating, etc on top of that... the very same stuff that goes along with diarrhea and IBS.
I think it's funny that you'd direct the "Internet warrior" insult toward me in this matter. I mean, that's EXACTLY how I felt the anti-HFCS bandwagon behaves by treating HFCS any differently from naturally-occurring fructose. Even then, they'll demonize HFCS for being refined while being totally OK with refined sucrose.
Anti vaxxers who are refusing vaccination for the sole reason of vaccination are stupid.It really isn't that much different than all the anti-vaxxers gathering together online to share "research" made with selective bias. If we want to state the dangers of HFCS then we have to be honest with ourselves and acknowledge that they apply to fruits and vegetables with naturally-occurring fructose as well.
A fructose food allergy would be unfortunate but it wouldn't make HFCS worse than fructose in fruit whether you are or aren't allergic. The HFCS warnings that seemingly don't apply to other forms of fructose is what I'm calling out here. Ignoring fruits/vegetables to rail against HFCS really smacks of bandwagoning and discredits anyone who doesn't acknowledge that contradiction. Seems way too much like an anti-HDCS slant instead of a genuine fructose concern, which makes it hard to convince anyone who notices the contradiction.
Just going to guess, but pretty much anything ending in "-tose" is a carbohydrate/sugar (biologically, all sugar). I'm sure it works similarly to other carbs people may be intolerant of: your body lacks an enzyme it needs to properly digest it leaving the carb available to other processes (mostly bacteria in your gut). Those processes create gas and other normally-unwanted byproducts that make you "go." Excuse me while I eat this bean and cheese burrito!
Well, sugar fomr the sugar beet has a bit nicer production process than hcfs.Me too, and I have horrible digestion issues as a result. The thing is, the fructose in corn and the fructose in other fruits and vegetables are both "normal sugar." If I have a reaction to fructose from one source I accept that I would likely have that reaction to fructose from another.
Fructose is a normal type of sugar that exists naturally in most fruits and vegetables. HFCS is simply the primary source of refined fructose but the fructose itself is still "normal" fructose. Pretty much any problem you have with fructose applies to the other sources equally. Not sure how an HFCS-sweetened product would trigger it and a tomato or tangerine wouldn't. They are all loaded with fructose. If being refined from a particular source is what makes it anything other than "normal," then how is table sugar (sucrose) any more "normal?" It's refined from sugar beets in the USA and sugar cane in much of the rest of the world. I could just as easily call it "High Sucros Cane Sugar (HSCS)" and behave as if it alone causes diabetes and obesity while ignoring the other sources of sucrose, but that would not be an effective argument (not to mention that all the other sugars and starches cause the same thing). Fructose is fructose. You aren't supposed to be arguing against one source of a particularly bad sugar if the other sources of that same sugar are all equally bad.
You said it: "when saturated." That's because we have too much fructose from all sources, not just HFCS. Adding HFCS to food isn't the only issue because substituting too much of one for too much of another also means having too much of any kind. If it is notably worse then we should be warning against fruits and vegetables with too much fructose as well. If you are getting too much fructose due to having too many sweets then you'd be getting too much sucrose if you substituted that (along with all the health consequences of having too much sucrose).
Even natural foods with no added sugar have WAY too much fructose and sucrose. The fruits and vegetables we eat today do not exist that way in nature so our bodies weren't built for even the "natural" diets promoted to us. Our ancestors couldn't slam down a tall glass of orange juice from concentrate any time of the year. Wild strawberries are small and flavorless with no detectable sweetness. Wild watermelon is tiny and isn't even palatable. Corn doesn't even exist in the wild, and never has (interesting that it even exists now). Almost every "vegetable" we eat is actually a fruit and the carbs/calories are mostly fructose... corn is no exception.
Right, but fructose is the main sugar in most natural fruits and vegetables. That fructose is often chemically the same as the fructose from corn, thus, the resulting effects are the same and there is no reason to specifically single out HFCS. Take table sugar for example (sucrose). I wouldn't go on a crusade against specifically beet sugar or specifically cane sugar when concerns about sucrose come to light. I'd say that having too much of the sugar from any source can cause concern. I also wouldn't crusade against only sucrose from refined sources while ignoring that my concerns also apply to lots of inarguably healthy things naturally containing sucrose (fruits and vegetables).
Both sucrose and fructose exist in natural fruits and vegetables... in high concentrations. HFCS and cane/beet sugar are just refined examples. Fructose refined from corn (HFCS) is not somehow worse than fructose from other sources in the same way that sucrose refined from sugar beets/sugar cane is not somehow worse than sucrose from other sources.
Ignoring all the other sources of fructose to irrationally target one specific source (HFCS) hurts the argument. It makes the argument appear agenda-driven (anti-HFCS) rather than fact-based (fructose could be bad). I have no problem with saying too much fructose is bad and only spoke up because you perpetuated the irrational "HFCS is abnormal and much worse than natural sugar" idea. Fructose *is* every bit as natural and normal as sucrose/dextrose... even if there are consequences for saturating your liver with one and not the other. That's because the consequences are irrelevant to the specific source (refined versus natural).
Here's how you can overdose on vitamin C pretty quickly:I do not agree on your view on fibers but i will admit that large amounts of vitamine c can produce diarrhea. However on average, a person needs to consume more than 2 grams a day.
That is the equivalent of 25 (150 gram) oranges a day. That would mean you also have consumed more then 173 grams of fructose consumed in 1 day.
150 grams weight for 1 orange with on average 6.9 grams of fructose equals for 25 oranges to ~173 grams of fructose.
25 oranges is about 3,75kg of food one has to consume. That is a lot.
Right. My point exactly. We can also say that HFCS and other fructose sources are "pretty safe," like most any sugar/starch we regularly consume in appropriate quantities.We can safely say that vitamine c is pretty safe , as are fibers knowing that one has to consume so much fruit.
Perfect example of delusional hysteria. Anti-HFCS bandwagon imagines a difference where there is none to support the pre-conceived conclusion that HFCS is bad. HFCS was an easy target simply because you really do see it on almost any label and it does sound worse than simply "sugar." That's why it's so easy to get gullible people whipped into a frenzy over it with smart-sounding "research." No research suggests that pure fructose from other sources is healthier than pure HFCS.Anti vaxxers who are refusing vaccination for the sole reason of vaccination are stupid.
However, it is another question that the vaccination medicine is not polluted.
Vaccination is not bad, but when you are supposed to get one weakened virus or parts of it and also get an injection of healthy pathogens or other byproducts of the vaccine production process, that is just wrong.
I can safely say that i am not fructose in tolerant since i consume fruit and vegetables often and i do not have any problems. But when i consume food with high amounts of hcfs i have suddenly problems.
Yes, the news plays into hysteria. I once watched an award-winning news program tell viewers that Daddy Long-Legs was "the most poisonous spider in the world."Well, sugar fomr the sugar beet has a bit nicer production process than hcfs.
The worst chemical used for the production of typical table sugar is calciumoxide.
For hcfs it is mercury chlorine.
And hcfs (yes the syrup) has been in the news more than once because of the high amounts of mercury found in hcfs.
I'm not. I'm specifically saying that no reasonable person would say the same thing about those specifically to show how UNreasonable it is to so narrowly target fructose over the same applicable concerns. Guess that was a *woosh* if you even noticed the absurdity and still didn't understand why I pointed it out.When a person eats healthy fruits and vegetables each day, that person consumes on average( i estimate) about 600 grams of fruits and vegetables a whole day.
See my calculation above.
What worries me more is that sucrose is a covalent bond between fructose and glucose. When we consume it our bodies needs to break those bonds.
I do not know which enzymes are responsible for that. But i cannot find any fact sheet that hcfs glucose / fructose is covalently bond as well it seems thee monosaccharids are already separate.
And trying to give fruits and vegetables a bad reputation is just silly.
No. Fructose (and excessive amounts of any carb) should be treated with caution, just like any other thing you can easily have too much of (including "normal" sugar).hcfs should be treated with caution. Especially since it is used so much.
Being not from Chicagoland, ketchup still isn't put on a hot dog. And neither are pickles, hot peppers or tomatoes.
A proper hot dog is
spicy brown mustard, relish, diced raw onion, sauerkraut
or
chili and diced raw onion
or
spicy brown mustard, NY-style red onion sauce, sauerkraut
^^^ This man knows of which he speakes.
/thread
Ha ha, ok. Sauerkraut optional (I like it but wouldn't ordinarily ladle it on.) Chili and diced raw onion as an alternative, especially on a less than stellar to begin with dog.Absolutely not. Neither Sauerkraut or Chili should be anywhere near a dog.
Ha ha, ok. Sauerkraut optional (I like it but wouldn't ordinarily ladle it on.) Chili and diced raw onion as an alternative, especially on a less than stellar to begin with dog.
Here's how you can overdose on vitamin C pretty quickly:
There's a whole gram in one Airborne tablet and 100% daily recommended value in each cough drop.
Also, some people are more sensitive than others and they experience diarrhea even at regular doses of vitamin C. Even one glass of apple juice sends me STRAIGHT to the toilet, so of course orange juice does (twice the vitamin C). Maybe I'm allergic. I do get inflamed taste buds pockmarking my tongue about a fourth of the time I consume citrus.
Speaking of the ridiculous volume necessary to consume to experience diarrhea for the average person: the vitamin C in an orange is going to cause diarrhea in an average person long before the fructose. It really is grasping at straws to suggest that diarrhea is reason to avoid fructose when you need enormous quantities to have that problem with either. You're making my case for me. Granted, many people do have enormous quantities of all kinds of sugar, but there are much bigger problems with that (obesity, diabetes, etc).
Right. My point exactly. We can also say that HFCS and other fructose sources are "pretty safe," like most any sugar/starch we regularly consume in appropriate quantities.
Perfect example of delusional hysteria. Anti-HFCS bandwagon imagines a difference where there is none to support the pre-conceived conclusion that HFCS is bad. HFCS was an easy target simply because you really do see it on almost any label and it does sound worse than simply "sugar." That's why it's so easy to get gullible people whipped into a frenzy over it with smart-sounding "research." No research suggests that pure fructose from other sources is healthier than pure HFCS.
Again, HFCS is a source of fructose, not a different kind that gets metabolized a different way with different effects on the body. It's a source just like sugar cane is a source of sucrose and sugar beets are another source of sucrose. Both are refined into pure sucrose just like high-fructose varieties of corn are refined into HFCS. Other natural sources of sugars are nectar, fruits, maple syrup, honey, etc. Most have multiple kinds of sugar (nectar has four) and ALL have fructose.
To imply that one fructose is different from another is evidence that you are blindly believing nutritional hysteria, just like all the people who don't have gluten allergies suddenly thinking they do... oh, and anti-vaxxers spreading their bad ideas on the Internet. Yes, you can argue that less refined sugars have other essential vitamins and minerals but, if that's your concern, then why aren't you even more concerned about the incredibly-refined beet/cane sugar that has absolutely no nutritional value other than the sugar?
Yes, the news plays into hysteria. I once watched an award-winning news program tell viewers that Daddy Long-Legs was "the most poisonous spider in the world."
Table/baking sugar is much more refined than HFCS. Even the varieties that try to play themselves off as being more natural are laughably over-processed, like "Sugar in the Raw," for example. They go through all the same processing by law and then have impurities deliberately introduced making them, by definition, even more "processed" than table sugar.
I'm not. I'm specifically saying that no reasonable person would say the same thing about those specifically to show how UNreasonable it is to so narrowly target fructose over the same applicable concerns. Guess that was a *woosh* if you even noticed the absurdity and still didn't understand why I pointed it out.
No. Fructose (and excessive amounts of any carb) should be treated with caution, just like any other thing you can easily have too much of (including "normal" sugar).
Why would I do that? I was comparing what was probably the fruit most commonly consumed by average people that we know contains a lot of fructose and vitamin C. Why? Because when you gulp down a glass of orange juice you are gulping down at least as much sugar as a similar volume of soda... and a whole lot of that is fructose. Do they even sell "rosehip juice?"You just keep using your burritos, cough drops and lots of hcfs.
If you wanted to speak about high volume vitamin c you could have come up with kiwi or the rosehip. The rosehip has ~0.5 gram of vitamin c stored.
Joking? I specifically said that it's as bad as other fructose and that's because we get WAY too much sugar of all kinds. "Diabetes and obesity." Of course, we need calories to survive so it has some nutritional value from a baseline that doesn't apply to most anyone who isn't starving in poverty.You wrote an entire post, but you can just say : hcfs good. Because that sums up your opinion.
I was hoping to dig down into what hcfs really is. But i have to do that myself.
Why would I do that? I was comparing what was probably the fruit most commonly consumed by average people that we know contains a lot of fructose and vitamin C. Why? Because when you gulp down a glass of orange juice you are gulping down at least as much sugar as a similar volume of soda... and a whole lot of that is fructose. Do they even sell "rosehip juice?"
Joking? I specifically said that it's as bad as other fructose and that's because we get WAY too much sugar of all kinds. "Diabetes and obesity." Of course, we need calories to survive so it has some nutritional value from a baseline that doesn't apply to most anyone who isn't starving in poverty.
I also said that HFCS is the same as natural fructose from fruit (which we also get too much of) that you seem to deliberately ignore in your quest to single out one source of fructose. I even pointed out that our fruit has way too much (an unnatural amount). Now you're ignoring what I said to put the wrong words in my mouth and dismiss them instead of learning.
I challenged your entrenched beliefs and the Backfire Effect is now on full display.