Skip to comments.
Fructose risk factor for metabolic syndrome, diabetes mellitus, and hypertension
FOODCONSUMER ^
| 06/25/2013
| David Liu, PHD
Posted on 06/26/2013 12:02:26 AM PDT by neverdem
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61 next last
To: neverdem
intake of high calories may play a role in the development of obesity Well, now, THERE is some news for you!
21
posted on
06/26/2013 4:02:10 AM PDT
by
Izzy Dunne
(Hello, I'm a TAGLINE virus. Please help me spread by copying me into YOUR tag line.)
To: sphinx
And raise the average age of babies being born! Now the gluten, dairy, peanut, fragrance, and smoke sensitive can cruise the restaurants demanding fructose free or court costs and fees.
Soon the only approved things will be soy, sodomy and organic marijuana.
22
posted on
06/26/2013 4:04:56 AM PDT
by
count-your-change
(you don't have to be brilliant, not being stupid is enough)
To: snarkytart
And because they have other nutrients like vitamins and fiber.But those 'healthy' features don't negate the affects of the fructose content. 12 oz of OJ has about 36 g. A 12 oz can of soft drink has about 40 g.
23
posted on
06/26/2013 4:22:22 AM PDT
by
Right Wing Assault
(Dick Obama is more inexperienced now than he was before he was elected.)
To: neverdem
Uric acid, which is commonly known to be associated with gout...Some kidney stones, too.
24
posted on
06/26/2013 4:24:11 AM PDT
by
Right Wing Assault
(Dick Obama is more inexperienced now than he was before he was elected.)
To: pbmaltzman
They may have somewhat come down on the wrong side of the issue, true. However, I’ll bet they never recommend the MASSIVE DOSES of fructose that people ingest to cause diabetes.
25
posted on
06/26/2013 4:25:18 AM PDT
by
numberonepal
(First they came for Sarah, then they came for Herman.....)
To: neverdem
Conclusion: eating food is will kill you. Previous studies have shown that eating food is necessary for survival. The package in front of me asks: How can I have a balanced treat? Their answer: Coated in rich Nestle chocolate, RAISINETS offers REAL FRUIT in every serving. That means “natural” fructose which according to the article is better than processed fructose.
26
posted on
06/26/2013 4:34:59 AM PDT
by
palmer
(Obama = Carter + affirmative action)
To: count-your-change
“I can barely drag myself to a breakfast Quarter Pounder. “
Well done satire.
27
posted on
06/26/2013 4:43:33 AM PDT
by
sergeantdave
(No, I don't have links for everything I post)
To: Mr Ramsbotham
“That’s because fruits are politically correct ... in more ways than one.”
Just let me repeat that for ya
“That’s because fruits are politically correct ... in more ways than one.”
LOL
28
posted on
06/26/2013 4:44:03 AM PDT
by
faucetman
( Just the facts, ma'am, Just the facts)
To: Neoliberalnot
Sucrose is likewise a risk factor. In general, grain is a risk factor and most people eat too much of it. Healthy Greenlander Inuits eat blocks and blocks of seal blubber.
29
posted on
06/26/2013 5:21:13 AM PDT
by
imardmd1
To: neverdem
Fructose occurs naturally in fruit.
Are they talking about high fructose corn syrup?
30
posted on
06/26/2013 6:03:53 AM PDT
by
metmom
(For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore & do not submit again to a yoke of slavery)
To: neverdem
Fructose is also found in many fruits, but fruits are generally considered healthier than added fructose."generally"???? There's a big difference between eating an apple, and snarfing down a 2 liter bottle of Mountain Dew. :-)
The author of this article could use some time on FR to learn a bit of critical reasoning.
31
posted on
06/26/2013 6:33:12 AM PDT
by
wbill
To: PeterPrinciple; DakotaGator
I suspect you are both right, and it is both the quantity and quality of sweetener that is problematic.
To: neverdem
Many other things such as trans-fat and red meat can also increase risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus while curcumin cna help prevent the disease. Lots of good data on turmeric curcumin Here and Here.
I get mine at Puritan's Pride and Swanson Health Products.
33
posted on
06/26/2013 11:19:48 AM PDT
by
Art in Idaho
(Conservatism is the only Hope for Western Civilization.)
To: neverdem
34
posted on
06/26/2013 11:21:15 AM PDT
by
thesearethetimes...
("Courage, is fear that has said its prayers." Dorothy Bernard)
To: D Rider
35
posted on
06/26/2013 11:22:25 AM PDT
by
dfwgator
To: DakotaGator
I have long suspected that the massive shift from cane sugar to corn syrup as our primary food sweetener has been the primary cause of the stunning increase in the nations obesity.
Metabolically, there's no meaningful difference between cane sugar and corn syrup. Both are about half fructose.
But there is one critical difference. Corn syrup is cheaper. So the manufacturers use a lot more of it.
36
posted on
06/26/2013 12:20:31 PM PDT
by
jdege
To: D Rider
HFCS. High fructose corn syrup. One of the main reasons of American obesity. Yeah, it can't be the fact that we consume more energy than we expend because of our sedentary lifestyle. The fact that we're a nation of fatties has to be because of something beyond our control. The food industry is making us fat. Bastards.
37
posted on
06/26/2013 1:31:29 PM PDT
by
Mase
(Save me from the people who would save me from myself!)
To: rfp1234
38
posted on
06/26/2013 1:43:07 PM PDT
by
RedhairRedhair
(I STILL love my (scab made) Toyota)
To: KeyWest
The body takes it and breaks the bond, processes the glucose and fructose up to a point then shuts down the cleaving and no more fructose or glucose enters your system. Huh?
HFCS, as noted in the study, bypasses the bodies control mechanism and you get all the problems noted.
Bypasses the bodies control mechanism? Huh?
So with less total input of sugar (which is what HFCS is called by the corn industry and many others) you get a magnified impact on your health.
What specific "magnified" impact are you claiming?
If HFCS is bad for you then so is sucrose. Either one, in moderation, is not bad for you in any way - unless you're a diabetic.
39
posted on
06/26/2013 1:44:42 PM PDT
by
Mase
(Save me from the people who would save me from myself!)
To: jdege
Metabolically, there's no meaningful difference between cane sugar and corn syrup. Both are about half fructose. Sucrose is half fructose and half glucose. Corn syrup is more than 90% glucose.
But there is one critical difference. Corn syrup is cheaper. So the manufacturers use a lot more of it.
There are many reasons manufacturers use corn syrup instead of sucrose. Cost is one.
40
posted on
06/26/2013 1:48:28 PM PDT
by
Mase
(Save me from the people who would save me from myself!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson