[neverdem]

Taubes isn't a scientist. If he were, he'd know that calories are the bottom line.

I used to think a calorie is a calorie too, but not now.

Consumption of fructose-sweetened beverages for 10 weeks reduces net fat oxidation and energy expenditure in overweight/obese men and women.

Abstract

Background/Objectives

The results of short-term studies in humans suggest that, compared with glucose, acute consumption of fructose leads to increased postprandial energy expenditure and carbohydrate oxidation and decreased postprandial fat oxidation. The objective of this study was to determine the potential effects of increased fructose consumption compared to isocaloric glucose consumption on substrate utilization and energy expenditure following sustained consumption and under energy-balanced conditions.

Subjects/Methods

As part of a parallel arm study, overweight/obese male and female subjects, 40–72 y, consumed glucose- or fructose-sweetened beverages providing 25% of energy requirements for 10 weeks. Energy expenditure and substrate utilization were assessed using indirect calorimetry at baseline and during the 10th week of intervention.

Results

Consumption of fructose, but not glucose, led to significant decreases of net postprandial fat oxidation and significant increases of net postprandial carbohydrate oxidation (P < 0.0001 for both). Resting energy expenditure decreased significantly from baseline values in subjects consuming fructose (P = 0.031) but not in those consuming glucose.

Conclusions

Increased consumption of fructose for 10 weeks leads to marked changes of postprandial substrate utilization including a significant reduction of net fat oxidation. In addition, we report that resting energy expenditure is reduced compared to baseline values in subjects consuming fructose-sweetened beverages for 10 weeks.

There was at least one or two links on recent fructose threads about rats getting either fructose or glucose, but otherwise had the same number of calories. The rats that got fructose became obese. Rats getting glucose didn't. I couldn't find it, so I entered isocaloric diet and fructose into PubMed. I posted the abstract and linked the article. It's not that long. From the discussion:

For example, if the mean measured decrease of REE(resting energy expenditure) associated with 10 weeks of fructose consumption, 0.09 kcal/min, was maintained for one year it could total ~15,000 kcals, assuming that REE reflects metabolism during rest/sleep periods adding to about 8 h/d; potentially, a gain of ~1.6 kg of body fat could result. Additional studies examining the effects of chronic sugar consumption on 24-hour energy expenditure conducted in a whole-room calorimeter are needed to confirm these findings and determine if the observed reductions in metabolic rate are directly related to fructose or to sweetener (i.e. sucrose, high fructose corn syrup, etc.) consumption in general. We are currently performing such measurements.

That's 3.5 pounds a year. Add a few decades of excess fructose consumption, and that lean mean fightin' machine is hauling about 100 pounds of extra fat. Be sparing with table sugar and avoid soft drinks. The latter was supposed to be made 55 % fructose. Actual assays of some raw samples had 65 % fructose. Excess fructose can alter metabolism.

[JRandomFreeper]

If I put 3000 Kcals in my mouth, that doesn't mean that I've got 3000 Kcals that I'm going to use or store.

/johnny

[PA Engineer]

Interesting. Thanks for the ping.

[facedown]

Why did you ping me to this claptrap? You have become the ‘cogitator’ of fructose.

[SunkenCiv]

Low-carb diets (such as Atkins) emphasize that same point, that overall calories are not the important thing, and it makes perfect sense — fat calories are harder to absorb, and tend to, er, slip on through the alimentary canal; carbs (like sugars) are readily absorbed but are in quantities that the body can’t immediately use, so they’re stored as fat.

[poobear]

Very interesting facts. Fortunately I don’t like sweets or sodas. Maybe a couple per year. If I want to lose weight I drop my calorie intake by just 500 per day. That’s 3500 calories a week = 1 pound. Add it back when you’re at desired weight. The key is burning more than I eat.

Not scientific but it works for me.

I love your posts neverdem. Do you have a ping list?

[LS]

Absolutely right. I have seen this time and again with my own body: it doesn't matter how much I eat, but how many carbs I eat.

But I have a big problem. My wife is an excellent baker. But the science is absolutely true. If we could ban Panera, America's obesity epidemic would go away. (Only half joking)

[A Strict Constructionist]

I and a bunch of my colleges agree with you.

[Mase]

I used to think a calorie is a calorie too, but not now.

Huh? A calorie has always been a calorie and it will always remain such. A calorie is a measure of the amount of energy and this is exactly how it is defined. It is always the same no matter what. The metabolization of fat, carbs and amino acids will all require different pathways and the efficiencies will not be the same for all of those processes. You're confusing calorie with efficiency. Even so, a calorie is always a calorie.

I see you are still railing on fructose and continue to offer that same study on fructose and de novo lipogenesis as proof of the ill effects of fructose. I don't know why you persist, because it has been explained to you many times, and in great detail, that there is very little de novo lipogenesis going on in the human body. So much for that open mind you were critical of earlier.

Fat gain in humans is almost entirely due to dietary fats. De novo lipogenesis is rare and can only account for the most minute amount of fat gain. It could never be responsible for the incredible amount of maladies you appear eager to blame on it. You seem ready to believe that a diet high in fruit is dangerous. Call me crazy, but that's just crazy.

Of course, if you overwhelm the body with anything, including fructose, all sorts of bad things can occur. Feeding lab animals, or humans, quantities of ingredients that have no relationship to the real world is a very common practice by those looking to create alarm in the quest for grant money. And that's really what all this is. There is no way fructose consumption can be responsible for all the things charlatans like Taubes and Lustig claim. It's just plain old every day alarmism designed to separate people from their money. P.T Barnum understood human nature well.

[rmlew]

So that organic apple I had for desert was a bad idea?