King Watermelon Gets Sick: A Fairy Tale Encourages Children to Love Fruit: 1 (Nutrition Stories II)

Lustig specifies a safe amount of fructose. I could have missed that. Alan made it pretty clear in his article with some qualification. Probably late in the video. Fructose would not be the first chemical that humans can tolerate in low amounts but is damaging in high doses. Lustig did not enumerate a specific amount, and rightly so, as it is specific to individuals, as Alan pointed out. Along with his discussion of fiber, he generalized that fructose occurring in nature come in safe amounts with benefits that override the fructose dangers. Lustig was clear about context and dosage, yet, you dance around the fact that he did not specify any threshold below which adverse effects are not seen to any degree of concrete significance.

The message to most who view this video is clear, and it is alarmist against fructose.

How fruit juice went from health food to junk food | Life and style | The Guardian

Deny all you want, but at least support your argument with more than a mess of excuses. This is really a mountain being made out of a molehill. They then threw the numbers into the mix in and did not adjust for years prior. This makes it appear like a huge increase in added fats when in fact this is not the case. This also makes it look like total fat intake or calories is the cause of obesity epidemic but not so.

From the USDA information I have, the only macronutrient that significantly increased was carbohydrate between and Grain and flour consumption went way up. Fruit consumption went up. Added sugars went way up as did vegetable consumption. So in fact, it is certainly not added fats that have caused an obesity epidemic as is touted in the industry. Indeed if anything it is the total carbohydrate that has caused the obesity epidemic and not total calories. But this is always the key issue. Yes, total calories went up, but the calories were sugar.

So, which is responsible for people getting fatter? This is why we need to convince someone in a position of authority to do metabolic ward studies and feed half a dozen men calories of a balanced diet and feed another half a dozen calories of a ketogenic diet. Biochemistry suggests that this may very well be true.

From my experience with clients I know this to be true. Because the dose makes the poison, Nicholas — the very point Alan hammered home and the very point that you insist Dr. A fanciful red herring. If he feels otherwise, he ought to show evidence of this. The thing is, though that metabolic ward studies HAVE been done and the majority show that it IS in fact calories that make the biggest difference in weight. Nobody is suggesting you just eat x number of calories — without any regard for macro composition. But when protein is matched and adequate, the fat and carb chips can fall where they may and people will lose weight — provided they are in a deficit.

And would you be so kind as to list the references for these studies you say have been done? As far as I am aware they have not. The only ward studies I know of were not ketogenic vs standard USDA fare and not maintenance level calorically. And I gave several references as to other studies that do show a metabolic advantage to truly low carb diets on that godforsaken message board. When you see a 7 foot tall 13 year old at a table eating a huge portion of food do you think even for a second that his height is caused by his eating enormous amounts of calories?

You know the child has a hormonal abnormality. Why then if you see a fat person eating an enormous amount of food do you blame his obesity on his caloric consumption? And when they are in a deficit, they are always eating less carbohydrate usually significantly less on their new found diets. And no one can keep up eating a low calorie diet for long. If you were to match protein intake and assuring adequate protein intake for both groups, do you really think that if the subjects were fed maintenance level calories if there is such a thing one group getting pure fat and the other pure sugar there would be no difference in body composition after say a 6 month period?

This is not correct. There is a major problem with the credibility of anything else that gets said after something this blatantly inaccurate. This is a constant argument point you use. In fact, I have seen you use this stance at least 3 times. It seems you and guys like Taubes have a common theme. Your theme is to pull out circus sideshow cases and make them relevant for the general population. Yes, there is room for discussion on why people overeat and how to better optimize diets. The majority of us fall in a close line to what a proper macro distribution should be.

No one ever says to mainline fructose. What we do say, or I should say for myself, is there is a fundamental base of energy distribution and it is king. It is possible and frequent due to genetics and lifestyle habits, that energy and apdatation has a large margin to move around in, but energy demand is the base to build everything on.

The rest of the people fall closer to the middle of that line. His body functions on energy demand the exact same way mine does, it is just at a higher level of energy demand. You are adjusting the wrong line. Instead of placing the movement into freak hormonal response you need to place it in energy needs and demands.

Then and only then will you start to make a genuine change in client response because you base is starting off with common sense and something measurable. In any case, keep in mind this is a lecture, not a dissertation nor academic paper. It may be forgiven for missing or not clarifying some points. I think overall the message is correct. Their Coke tastes like club soda. There is more fresh food with little corn syrup ie real food. There may not be absolute zero fructose, but you are being nit picky. Bottom line is that Japanese eat less sugar. While added sugars as a whole are decreased as a percentage of total calories, HFCS consumption has increased significantly.

Chris — You said: And, it's also false for you to turn the statement into something distinctly different. Selectively read much, bro? Their purpose is to entertain, not necessarily to educate. If you can get me a more solid scientific link like Pubmed, then my ears perk up a little more. Fred — If you can present a more recent update than the USDA data that I linked, you'll be in a better position to argue. I've laid out data that has been updated as recently as Feb I agree with you that well-controlled prolonged hypercaloric comparisons of varying macronutrient intakes are lacking.

It is quite obvious that all sorts popular today are selected with the sweetness as a first priority. But it probably has little to do with the obesity. My point is that people are obese because they want to do what makes them obese consume calories. Lustig has made it clear here that there is context and dose-response but he continues to obfuscate — not commenting on the context of calories or dose ranges.

Context is an afterthought. This is what is disingenuous and perhaps what Alan and others are objecting to. To quote Lustig himself in this video;. At about the In terms of caloric context, Lustig proclaims at about the 21 min. These are caustic statements — statements that demand immediate qualification.

By not contextualizing these bold proclamations it makes Lustig sound agenda-driven. This is contrary to scientific thought and in my mind, reduces his message to some good points mixed in with a lot of noise. Lustig — Please see my interjections to your numbered quotes below. The only evidence directly linking HFCS consumption and weight gain is ecological data.

Ecological data are widely recognized as insufficient for establishing cause-effect relationships. HFCS consumption and weight gain have major gaps. The impact of HFCS consumption on BMI must be put in context with other broad economic and societal changes during the past several decades.

Many other plausible explanations for rising overweight and obesity rates exist, including a decrease in smoking; an increase in sedentary occupations; an increase in two-income households and single-parent households; transportation and infrastructure changes that discourage physical activity; a decrease in PE classes and extracurricular sports programs in schools; an increase in sedentary forms of entertainment i.

The expert panel concluded that the currently available evidence is insufficient to implicate HFCS per se as a causal factor in the overweight and obesity problem in the United States. Sushi rice is made with about 1 tbsp sucrose per cup of uncooked rice. Even some non-dessert items have added sugar within dips and sauces such as teriyaki.

However, based on my observations of the reactions of those on fitness message boards, that certainly has not been the predominant take-home message absorbed by the viewers. Let me also add the fact that unless I missed it, you neglected to provide anything concrete in terms of a safe fructose dosage range, nor any contextual guidelines in which to frame such a range.

After viewing your response, I will maintain my position, and I suggest you rethink the content and delivery of your next lecture. Let me suggest that you place a little more emphasis on dose-dependence rather than painting a black-white picture of fructose that crucially downplays the importance of context. Obese people were used as circus sideshow cases years ago when obesity was very rare.

The point is excessive height as well as excessive fat accumulation is a hormonal disorder. It is a disorder of excess fat accumulation. And every single time a fitness professional decreases someones calories they also decrease their total carb intake and alter the type of carbs from highly refined to fibrous.

You will never get an obese person lean by lowering their calories and yet keeping the refined sugars high. My point was that in the RDA asked many more companies to report on vegetable oil. The spike from to was due to previous underreporting. They did not however go BACK and adjust. Therefore the percentage of nutrients are all askew. My USDA table is from In addition, other factors influence hunger, appetite, and subsequent food intake; these factors include neurochemical factors e.

When considering food consumption in everyday life it is important to consider the above-mentioned factors. The effects of a chemical will change with different amounts, so that below a certain dose it may be harmless or beneficial and at a higher dose it may be toxic. I wonder why he would make a claim that is so easily refuted? Does he assume the absence of fructose in a hypercaloric diet results in weight loss?

Does he assume fructose consumption in a hypocaloric diet results in weight gain? Does he assume that everyone following the Atkins and Japanese Diet are lean? Cynthia- Please re-read my comments on correlation and causation. Please refer to any basic manual on logic. There is an ample amount of data explaining the difference between correlation and causation.

This false assumption is generally derived from the idea that processes performed by living things are fundamentally different than ones created through chemical laboratory processes. Ok, never mind that every living process is fundamentally a chemical process.

Screenshots

They include ricin, abrin, botulinum, and strychnine—highly evolved chemical weapons used by organisms for self-defense and territorial expansion. Indeed, every plant and microbe carries a variety of mostly uncharacterized, more or less toxic attack chemicals, and synthetic chemicals are no more likely to be toxic than natural ones Silver, Other examples of dangerous natural substance include water hemlock, arsenic and mercury.

The chemical reality- whether a substance is manufactured by people, copied from nature or extracted directly from nature, tells us little at all about its properties. Where do we draw the line and how can we ever expect to gain any real knowledge if interesting info takes precedence over evidence-based claims? Not sure, but I know I saw it. Why get hung up on dosage?

Nicholas puts forth a pitiful argument. Is that nit picky? Saying the Japanese diet is absent- not present, not existing- of fructose means no fructose. Actually, this lack of nit pickiness is one of the most common problems with communication. Japanese eat less sugar, so what? Please refer to the info I posted above discussing correlation and causation. Thanks Mike for pointing that out.

Seems like when he comments on the blog he is trying to wiggle his way out of some of the assertions made on the video. I would recommend he look at the scientific data- maybe all of the available data, distinguish the strengths of different types of evidence, invest some time into studying logic science of reason , admit he is fallible, pay credit where credit is due- to Alan Aragon, and if he has a team of research data associates get rid of them and get some new ones.

The addition of HFCS to a negative energy diet does not cause weight gain. Fred, the circus ladies back in the day at their lowest weight were in the lb range and sometimes very short in height. If you look at the tale of one lady, Baby Ruth, she was pounds by the age of ten. You consider that normal? You should also check out how easy it was for her to lose weight and the effort they had to go through to get her to gain more weight for what she was doing.

In United States it is estimated less than 0. The average person see the effects of their body increase overtime due to a lack of movement in correlation with a increase in calorie consumption. This study shows that the average fitness level of the morbidly obese body mass indexes between This leaves the burning very close to a BMR level of expenditure.

Clinical Cardiology, ; 32 3: Fat, carbs or protein, it is highly easy to out eat that type of activity especially when there is such a disruption in the endocrine system. Fred, you got get over the height thing. Not to mention you are comparing apples and oranges. Excessive growth hormone is the likely factor of excessive height. Growth hormone is usually blunted in those with obesity. In terms you might understand, it is much like relating your stance to the event that took place when the Ninja Turtles walked in the green goo.

In the process of achieving a leaner state, people need to consume less calories. Once they have achieved a leaner state, calorie consumption can be whatever the hell you want it to be depending on your movement and training lifestyle. Actually you can Fred but this is a flawed argument stance. Some people crash on low carb and decrease their daily activity as well as see severe depletion in mental function. This leads to faster stalls or binge incidences on the rebound.

For others it is smooth sailing, it just depends. You will only find a success with a small population of people who fit into a certain criteria but hey, that is fine. I have no problem using critical thought and assessment of situation to aid different people and pick up your slack. See, that is the ironic part of your argument Fred. You claim hormonal abnormalities bridge a large scale and are responsible for differences.

I agree; we are all different. Your thinking on the matter is 2 dimensional. We can discuss this at length on my site if you wish. And there is no slack for you to pick up. ALL my clients who follow my recommended low carb ad libitum plan lose fat quite well.

Listen to my story. I was around pounds. I learned about carbohydrate restriction and went on an Atkins style diet. My caloric intake quadrupled. Did I gain or lose? I lost 6 pant sizes in 3 months. Yeah, screw caloric restriction. Continually citing anecdotal reports does not help further your cause. There may be limited research, but a recent study suggests that the ketogenic diet does not offer a metabolic advantage over a standard, reduced-calorie diet see: You can grab the same type of testimonials claiming the same results from the promoters of low fat diets like the Pritikin diet, Body for Life, or any diet for that matter.

Whatever it takes to get the person to stick with a calorie deficit is the right diet for that person. I agree with Leigh Peele that you have a one-size-fits-all approach that ignores individual differences. On the whole, studies do not match protein intakes between diets.

Adequate protein intakes have multiple advantages ie, LBM support, satiety, thermic effect , and they simply end up being compared to inadequate protein intakes. Once you match protein intake between diets, the one with more carbs is actually the one with the potential for a slight metabolic advantage. The funny part is, the majority of long-term trials 12 months or more STILL fail to show a significant weight loss difference. Note that these trials use the sedentary obese, so in the fit population, any weight loss differences would be even more miniscule. Once again, keep in mind that the lack of significant difference in weight loss is seen despite unequal protein intakes between treatments.

For some folks, low-carb is warranted. It always amazes me how hard that concept is to grasp for low-carb absolutists. What I find to be a common thread among people who deny that individual carbohydrate requirements vary widely is a lack of client experience, particularly with different types of athletes. From my plebeian point of view, Alan seems to have the most thought out stance on the subject that looks at the big picture. Just an attack on the quality of your evidence and arguments. Always nice to see a debate going on. I am a specialist in East Asian international affairs and have spent a great deal of time in Japan for research purposes.

Bakeries serving all variety of desserts both Western and Asian are ubiquitous, easily as ubiquitous as Starbucks is here in Seattle. I would argue that fructose consumption through HFCS-loaded sweetened drinks and dessert products is even more common than it is in America. This tends to become quite the competitive endeavor amongst inebriated company men. Many restaurants encourage you to purchase both for a discount so you can drink and eat yourself sick at the same time.

Workers in Osaka will typically get off work and begin their binge at 5: The major difference between Japan and America? The Japanese walk, and walk, and walk, and walk, and walk, and walk some more and can manage the calories in versus calories out issue far better than we Americans. Anyone who believes that the Japanese, in daily practice, eat more healthfully than the average American needs to go abroad.

As a parting thought, anyone familiar with Japanese cooking knows that nearly every single sauce used has a foundation consisting of soy sauce and sugar as syrup, honey, or straight-up cane sugar. Hopefully this will educate the people who are ignoring the realities of the Japanese diet in regards to sugar consumption. I hope that Dr. Lustig does the responsible thing and comments further, perhaps with a modified stance based on the evidence discussed here.

I have a bad feeling that he may have taken his ball and ran home. I hope not, though. This type of discussion just goes to show that anyone can have holes in his case, be it a doctor, professor, or both. I doubt you understand how complexe metabolism regulation is. If it was just as simple as excess insulin, obesity would not be hard to treat. Well hot damn, this is good stuff. Thanks for the contributions, everyone.

One thing that needs to be emphasized is that hashing these matters out facilitates learning for everyone involved. Lustig, please do me a favor and address some of the contentions leveled at you. Mr Aragon thanks for writing this article. Especially enjoyed the points you raised on context-dropping.

This is a very important point and what she is referring to is intrinsicism. This occurs when people treat value or non-value as a non-relational property of an object. Instead the value is seen as contained somewhere where? You took the words right out of my mouth. In addition to the forms you mentioned as being staple ingredients in traditional Japanese dishes, sucrose is also paired with sake rice wine in a liquid called mirin. Another staple ingredient is called ryori-shu or cooking alcohol.

A piece of fish. Seasoning may be salt or teriyaki sauce combo soy sauce, sugar, mirin, and ryori-shu or A breaded and deep-fried paddy of ground meat or potato. Seasoning is a sweet, brown sauce similar to BBQ sauce. Seasoning combo of soy sauce, sugar, mirin, and ryori-shu or Shredded cabbage that is companion to the breaded and deep-fried paddy. Eggs beaten with sugar, soy sauce and soup stock and then fried and rolled into a cube shape.

The latter, is a soup made of a combo of soy sauce, sugar, mirin, and ryori-shu. The more fat on a cut of meat, the more expensive it is. I live near a restaurant that sells a steak dinner for USD of which the steak is more white than red. Your inane ramblings, strawmen and anecdotal counter arguments do more to discredit yourself than anyone here could. Lustig is missing the forest and demonizing the tree. Thank you to both for sharing your thoughts. Good posts, but far too measured. Sorry folks, the days of a conservative bowl of rice, raw fish, and a bowl of miso are long gone.

Is my rambling a sweeping generalization? Anyway, back to apples…. You asked for some decent evidence. It merely tells us that they contain a range of grams of carbohydrate per g serving. Quoting my article above: Here is what has changed and continues to change since Crisco was introduced in — the consumption of processed foods. Fructose is part of that over-all picture that began years ago. We eat more, we move less. I look through my HS yearbook and can only find pictures of teenage men or women over weight, none obese.

It was rare for parents to be more than a few pounds overweight until they were over Here is a study that suggests many of those extra calories are in beverages. Though fructose is not an evil food, consuming it in large quantities easily while watching TV or playing video games contributes to the problem but the obestiy problem though not caused by fructose alone, is certainly aided by economic and social policy just as tobacco use was years ago. The decline in cancer rates is attributed to falls in the number of tobacco users.

If we want to do something meaningful to prevent a generation of youth growing up with NAFLD, then we need to do something about our policy regarding fructose production. Alan, ya got me. I did find The effect of a high consumption of apples or grapes on dental caries and periodontal disease in humans. That still leaves the problem of the metabolically-impaired. Metabolically-impaired people who eat lots of fruit can deteriorate into full-blown diabetics. Nothing that you said above in any way changes the truth of anything that Alan wrote in his blog post. The other part of the picture that people are missing is that Americans have become MUCH lazier and rely much more heavily on a sedentary lifestyle.

Furthermore, as stated above, Japanese foods and the trend of liking desserts is just as high there as in the USA. However, among many favoring factors, they do walk more day-to-day compared to those living in the USA…most notably either in a car, behind a desk, in front of a TV or Playstation, in bed, no more Physical Education in schools, etc. I think it is clear that nobody is promoting suagry liquid consumption either from socrose or HFCS on any party in this debate, and it is definitely part of the puzzle to obesity.

However, this is mainly because of the overconsumption from all foods as stated by Alan. Furthermore, Jamie pointed out that there is a HUGE difference when it is consumed on a hypocaloric diet than compared to a hypercaloric diet. Factor in physical activity, and it makes even more of a difference. Mitch had a banana, orange, and blueberries for breakfast.

For him to turn a recommendation of 2 servings of fruit a day into 20 servings, who knows what else he did to screw up dietary compliance. If you all agree that fructose at a certain level is damaging, then I challenge you to come up with a number. Try it, and you might see why Dr. Lustig does not, because it would be highly specific to the individual.

Some of you focus on calories, when the issue with fructose is really metabolic disorder which would cause you to regulate your body weight poorly. If your hormonal signals of insulin, leptin, etc. Yes, exercise and other can help you maintain this balance, which allows you to consume more fructose mentioned in the lecture during the biochemistry. In addition, some populations including Japanese handle carbs better. Come up with a one-size-fits-all number for fructose now when you have to deal with diet, genetics, exercise, etc.?

As for Japan, it should not be denied that less sugar is consumed overall, despite the existence of dessert shops and drinking houses. Some of the population obviously will go for that. Japan does have over a million people after all. Lustig is not a lawyer, I can forgive him for that. If people are consuming enough fructose to cause metabolic disorders, they have more problems than just the soda.. And when you read the text books that fact slaps you in the face. JLB — You speak as if you have great client experience using different diets.

I know nothing more than that. I was asked last year by Dr. I run a gym that for the past 12 years has shed hundreds of pounds off of people and been on the T0day show twice, and oh I forget 2 dozen other major TV and radio shows including Oprah and friends with Dr. I can see that you work hard to whet your craft, so let me suggest that you pay more attention and learn from the real gurus, not the ones who are so attached to their dogma that their quality of info has stopped improving 15 years ago.

No insulin, no fat storage regardless of the calories ingested. Also, why is it that in studies where they used drugs to inhibit insulin secretion they showed no difference in weight loss? Why is it so hard to accept as true? All that you are doing is wishful thinking and showing once again how people are stubborn when it comes to changing their mind. Anyway, the low-carb infatuation is fadding now, so you better take the train while you can. There are many reasons why this could be. Like the Barry Sears study that was mentioned here on this thread. Quite flawed and biased.

And if you think the low carb issue is fading you have not a clue of what is going on in the world of bariatric medicine. You are as wrong as wrong can be. Excess carbohydrate intake is the primary source for adipose tissue stores. Try to get fat on an all fat-meat diet. I dare any of you to try this. I guarantee you will will get leaner of you are somewhat over fat and more muscular if already lean and training. I bet you NONE of you will try. Assuming it is using it rather than storing it.

Hormones regulate fat storage.

Why so many of you want to hold onto the age old calorie nonsense is frightening. What do you say to your clients — eat enough protein and the rest is up to you so long as you eat less calories than you are now? Eat two chicken large breasts a day and the rest in bagels, poptarts and cookies? Listen, no hard feelings. We all choose to help our clients as best as we can. I doubt if most people could keep that up. My guess is that most people would eventually lower their calorie intake as they get tired of eating just meat and eggs.

Although I admit that that would probably lead to weight loss! Most people who lose weight gain the weight back. I lost 65 pounds, plateaued, and then gained most of it back. This was on a diet where my main carb source was fruit and whipped cream… too much fructose, I guess! We need sustainable diets that people can adhere to. Do you have any studies to support this? This is quite an outrageous claim to make without having any form of evidence to back it up.

In this world of pseudo-science, someone should at least have some academic credibility if he wants to talk about science and research. Do you have this? Not an ad hominem here, just being realistic. So, what credibility do you have regarding this? Nobody has shot my theory down in flames yet. This speaks to your business acumen — not your knowledge. There is absolutely NO WAY that someone with such a hard-lined stances on nutrition could be looking at the scientific data objectively.

Lustig on your part. Lustig even confirmed what he meant on this thread and he still got called out for his BS. And who are you? Post a pic on my website big shot. Full of BS are you? You might even be denser than Fred. There are numerous hormones that are involved in the regulation of fat metabolism….. You also seem very stuck on hormones, but you ignore the fact that there are many non-hormonal factors that are involved in the regulation of adipose tissue stores.

There are also extremely complicated interactions between all of these factors, which ultimately lead to the regulation of body fat stores. The fact is, fat cells can and do take up glucose and fatty acids in the complete absence of insulin. Fat cells can and do create triglycerides in the complete absence of insulin. The body is full of redundant biochemical pathways which are involved in the increase of adipose tissue stores. And there are people here who posted that they have.

Do their anecdotes not count? No, what is mind-boggling is how you continue to adhere to a simplistic, grade-school level of understanding of adipose tissue regulation. After all, the guy has been on the Today Show twice. In reference to a direct comparison of fructose consumption by the Japanese in Japan vs. Diabetes mellitus and its vascular complications in Japanese migrants on the Island of Hawaii. Japanese migrants and their offspring on the island of Hawaii and Japanese living in Hiroshima were examined for diabetes mellitus and its vascular complications. Death certificates of Japanese and Caucasians dying on the island during the past 26 yr were analyzed.

This suggests that diabetes is more prevalent in Japanese in Hawaii than in Japan, although lack of knowledge about the total population of Japanese migrants in Hawaii makes this generalization uncertain. The proportion of deaths attributed to diabetes was much higher in Japanese migrants and their offspring in Hawaii than in Japan. During the s, the proportional death rate from diabetes was about half as large in Japanese Hawaiians as in Caucasian Hawaiians, but it increased to become 1.

A nutritional study revealed that the total caloric intake was similar in Japanese in Hawaii and Hiroshima, although the estimated level of physical activity was less in the Hawaiian subjects. Consumption of animal fat and simple carbohydrates sucrose and fructose were at least twice as high in Hawaiian as in Hiroshima Japanese.

Conversely, Hiroshima Japanese consumed about twice the amount of complex carbohydrate as the Hawaiian Japanese. The proportion of deaths attributed to ischemic heart disease was higher in both diabetic and nondiabetic Japanese Hawaiians than in diabetic subjects in Japan. The rates were similar for Japanese and Caucasians in Hawaii. There was no evidence of an environmental influence on the development of microangiopathy retinopathy in diabetes, as the prevalence of diabetic retinopathy stratified for diabetes duration was similar in Japanese subjects in Hawaii and in Japan, and it was similar to previous reports from England.

On the other hand, diabetes alone did not appear to account for the greater prevalence of macroangiopathy in Hawaiian Japanese than in Hiroshima. Thus environmental factors, possibly including diet, appear to be involved in the development of macrovascular complications of diabetes. Surely a study done in discounts the anecdotes of people that were there from the late 90s to the present day.

stay on the cutting edge

Is being honest really so hard? I thought you had to pass ethics to be approved by the medical board. You gotta love the soup of confounding variables that limits epidemiological research. You can't cite a purported increase in fructose while at the same time omitting a decrease in physical activity. Furthermore, correlational research simply cannot establish causal relationships in the first place, so good luck with resting your stance on it. Stick with me here, I'll cite more epidemiology to further illustrate my point.

Here's a quote from a similar, but more recent correlational study [Diabet Med. Instead, you lasered in on sugar while dismissing the other factors. All this, while relying on correlational research. Similarly, neither did you during your lecture. My final point is that you have neglected to address the error of stating that the Japanese diet is fructose-free aside from fruit, and that it has no added sugars.

This is clearly an untenable claim, and it was the first, and one of the most memorable claims in your lecture. Aragon, since you seem to be unswayed by anything but randomized controlled trials in humans, and only those at fructose doses that are reasonable, and since you seem to like to journal quote, then here is just a sampling that demonstrates that fructose, and not just extra calories, is behind dyslipidemia, insulin resistance, visceral adiposity, and hepatic steatosis.

Studies in animals have documented that, compared with glucose, dietary fructose induces dyslipidemia and insulin resistance. Although both groups exhibited similar weight gain during the intervention, visceral adipose volume was significantly increased only in subjects consuming fructose. In contrast, hepatic de novo lipogenesis DNL and the hour postprandial triglyceride AUC were increased specifically during fructose consumption.

Similarly, markers of altered lipid metabolism and lipoprotein remodeling, including fasting apoB, LDL, small dense LDL, oxidized LDL, and postprandial concentrations of remnant-like particle-triglyceride and -cholesterol significantly increased during fructose but not glucose consumption. In addition, fasting plasma glucose and insulin levels increased and insulin sensitivity decreased in subjects consuming fructose but not in those consuming glucose. Effects of short-term feeding with high- vs low- fructose isoenergetic diets on hepatic de novo lipogenesis, liver fat content and glucose regulation.

We studied the effects of fructose on intrahepatic lipid accumulation. Seven subjects were scanned at baseline and after each of two successive 7-day isocaloric diets, one high in fructose, one high in complex carbohydrates in a randomized crossover fashion. These results suggest that fructose is unique in increasing intrahepatic lipid accumulation. In addition, you have completely ignored the thread that by inducing insulin and leptin resistance, fructose increased and persistent food intake both at the hypothalamic and the nucleus accumbens level. So while controlled and pair-feeding fructose consumption does not result in increased total aggregate weight gain vs.

There are also new studies demonstrating changes in the nucleus accumbens by PET scan, which equate fructose with other substances of abuse. Evidence for sugar addiction: I shall not respond any further, as I have satisfied your criteria for objectivity and experimental and mechanistic rigor, and I have better things to do than engage in this continued puerile one-upsmanship. Like anything else, fructose consumed in gross chronic excess can lead to problems, while moderate amounts are neutral, and in some cases beneficial [].

Pick a conclusion, cherry-pick til it looks right, and sell it to people without the scientific background to evaluate your claims. You have deftly evaded the acknowledgement of errors you made regarding the Japanese diet and the effect of fructose-containing sugars on satiety.

Please see my comments after your sections: Specifically, soft drinks are rarely sweetened exclusively with fructose, and rarely is there an all-glucose soft drink available through major commercial pipelines. Most nondiet soft drinks are sweetened with sucrose or similar ie, HFCS , which is roughly an even split of glucose and fructose.

Achieving that total would require a daily intake of 7 cans of nondiet soda. You mean to tell me that drinking 7 cans of nondiet softdrinks per day is a bad idea? Wow, thanks for the enlightenment. According to the text, the average intake of added sugars among Americans is This means that fructose intake is half of that, at 7.

The bitter truth about fructose alarmism.

If anyone reading this even finds the abstract, please link me. Can you tell me what fructose dose was used here? Again, the same principles of my argument would apply in this case. PS — Thanks for participating in the discussion, even if your last post was your white flag.

This thread has become a vindication for those of us who carry the good fight against the predatory media alarmism made ubiquitous by the egos who fail to temper their practice with ethics. For me, this thread has become a glowing illustration of positive community. It makes me smile knowing that a groundswell of critical thought is emerging against the dominant pseudo-scientific mainstream. A man who has committed his life to solving the ailments of our civilization has cited his number of YouTube hits in response to a direct, contextual criticism of his work.

This saddens me, but gives me hope knowing that people like Alan, and Jamie, and Leigh, and Lyle, and Mike, and James, and Roger, and JC, and everyone else who has built this rebellion are slowly making a name, making a dent into the rampant B. Although his ignorance still shines bright, hopefully he will remember the day when Alan Aragon laid the smack down on his high fructose candy ass. Youtube hits to determine credibility? Only a few people on this board are experts regarding food, I suppose mr.

Aragon is one of them, having watched the video of dr. Because, as they say he speaks more on the sensationalist side? Being passionate about a truthiness does not make him wrong. Lustig proven the theory about fructose, so that all doubt is removed? Are there any arguments to consume more fructose? To go, as Alan put it, out of your way to get pure fructose and use it generously on everything you eat, and why not? Maybe you, who doubt dr. Seriously, what our good doctor proposes is NOT unhealthy, it seems so even to a non professional nutritionist such as myself.

In my gym, evey guy I talked to knows that. Except that fat accumulation is in the individuals control based on calorie consumption and activity levels. One of the above situations is almost completely out of the control of the individual, and aside from malnutrition affecting final genetic potential, there is not much one can do to infuence and manipulate height. That is completely the opposite of what is true for fat accumulation.

Stop giving people excuses and acting like obesity is more of a disease than an eating disorder. Why would someone need to reduce saturated fat as much as possible? You clearly have missed the latest systematic reviews on the subject and the latest meta-analysis on the prospective studies regarding this issue. Please say things as they are. Lustig failed to provide any studies suggesting that moderate fructose consumption is hazardous to your health. I really expected Lustig to come up with at least more than he has….

LOL the youtube hits, like everybody who watched it agreed with it. I can see how you would want to leave the debate. Who would want to stick around when they have little to nothing supporting their arguments? You got your head handed to you.

How fruit juice went from health food to junk food

By folks with less advanced degrees than you. Where along the way does objective thought just disappear? In fact, it was a nearly perfect display of poor reasoning skills and denial of the research evidence. Alan was clear, logical, and evidence-based. You appeared confused, frustrated, and quite ignorant. At least you got me to chuckle.

I would suggest that you have your esteemed colleagues have a look at this discussion. Perhaps they can come across to you about how you fell short, as well as how you might improve your mindset and practice as a scientist and teacher. On a whim, I emailed Dr. Lustig thanking him for contributing, and I even praised him for his tenacity despite our disagreement. His initial response was cordial, but contentious. The last thing I want to do is spend my time in a private email debate with him. I let him know that the point of our discussion in the first place is to educate the public, so I invited him to re-engage with me over here, for the learning benefit of the readers.

His second response was less cordial, more contentious, and more bristling toward the idea of coming back here. Lustig, who I asked to respond again, but probably will not: Furthermore, valid arguments against your claims were repeatedly ignored. The large gaps in the accuracy of your material were also repeatedly ignored. Or from having to actually evaluate and analyze research, as opposed to being an abstract-warrior that cherry-picks the data that supports his case, to the exclusion of the bigger picture.

Lustig is smart enough to know that he lost this one pretty badly. His quick exit from the premises was probably the wisest option. I watched the entire 1. I checked my hamburger buns and several other products in my kitchen and most contained HFCS it was often in the first five ingredients listed. So it would seem to me the dose comes in the form of the cumulative exposure we, by virtue of HFCS being added to a great many products, consume on a regular basis.

So I did not come away from watching the video with a fear of HFCS consumed in moderation, however, I did come away with a good appreciation for how difficult it is for the typical American to do so given how ubiquitous it is in food products. From what I understood of the biochemistry involved and forgive me if I misspeak, I am a layperson trying to grasp this , sugar sucrose is not as harmful by far as HFCS due to the difference in the way it is metabolized in the liver.

Therefore, that Japanese consume a lot of sweet products does not necessarily do away with the underlying argument made in the video if these products are sweetened with sugar and not HFCS as is the case in a great many products in the US. Ryan, can you speak to the the type of sweetener most commonly used in Japan? Are they not metabolized differently? Finally, I am disappointed with the responses from Dr.

I would have liked to have seen more discussion of, and links to reliable information on the pediatric obesity epidemic. This is consistent with what I believe. Why would you need artificial sweeteners? I never had a sweet tooth for anything sweet, and time I put sugar in my coffee, tea, or anything else is long gone. The proving and disproving part — get serious, we all know how this one goes.

Also, I would like to see more discussion with dr. Lustig, I hope he will come back regardless of what he said in his last post and e-mail. Scientifically, any theory should and must go through a process of evaluation, it must stand to be criticised, looked at and debated from any imaginable angle NO MATTER how obviously correct it seems to the scientist behind it.

I have a few isssues with your comments. Also so it is not fair to compare the fructose in a starwberry or any other natural food that God created to the fructose in a fruit snack, juice, or any otehr food tha man creates!! Our country has an obesity problem because the additives in our foods are killing our metabolisms.

I am going to make a prediction. There will be signature lines wherein Dr. Lustig is either quoted or at least referenced by his comment about youtube video hits. This discussion will follow him for years. The weight of existing evidence is that aspartame is safe at current levels of consumption as a nonnutritive sweetener. There is little difference in the metabolism of HFCS versus sucrose. Good post on aspartame. I will probably make a blog post about this in the future. Also, I think one of the major points here is that we have so much more weight problems and accompanying diseases not because HFCS, but because sucrose or HFCS are ADDED to damn near everything that is processed, especially in America — this has got to be partly responsible for weight gains.

Sauces have grown immensely popular and all of them contain sugar, some to an almost obscene amount. Fact is, people love sugar and food industry loves to make money, connect the two and you get sugar everywhere. Again, why does everything you put in your mouth have to be sweet? The truth is probably as I can, with my modest knowledge, only sense it that there is not just one factor to be blamed for worldwide weight gains, there must be several.

Sugar is only one of them, over processed foods may be another, perhaps denaturalization of foods pesticides, growth hormones in animals etc. So maybe noone here is completely right, and noone is really wrong…. You are correct that the obesity epidemic is multifactorial, which is why it is erroneous for anyone to blame one factor for obesity. Notice how you implied a significant difference in sugar-sweetened foods versus HFCS-sweetened foods. Chronic overconsumption of either one is a bad idea. As for HFCS in various refined products, the amount will vary considerably.

How many buns will you be munching on today? Michael K — Your extremist stance on dietary intake is unproven and unproductive. It might even be detrimental.

This is where experience comes in, and I can tell you that most people eventually react rebelliously to orders of strict food avoidance. Even the Okinawans have added sugar in their diets. Moderation is a good thing when it comes to dietary habits. Rigid food avoidance, false designation of food taboos, and a dichotomous all-or-nothing approach has a stronger association with adverse outcomes than a more flexible approach.

As for research funding source, it should be factored into perspective, but not viewed as a reason to dismiss research completely. Would it make sense to dismiss the large body of low-carb research funded by the beef industry? All the egg research funded by the egg industry? The fish oil research funded by the fishing industry? Take funding source into consideration, sure.

The more we debate the minutiae, the farther we stray from solving the obesity problem in America. All — Couple things. I certainly hope he does, though. Thanks for the feedback, everyone. Even the alarmists — feel free to congregate here. If you can, always choose fresh fruit and veg [over juice]. Does she think the advice on juice being part of the five-a-day will change? Blythman, meanwhile, understands that the mixed messages about juice are perplexing for consumers. The simplest way to put it is: Britons have become the biggest European consumers of the rubbery, squeaky white cheese outside of Cyprus.

It's a versatile product in the sense you can do lots with it — grill it, eat it as it is. Waitrose claims to be the first supermarket to have stocked hummus, around 20 years ago. Now, says Jonathan Moore, the supermarket's executive chef, they have around 19 varieties. Theresa Huxley, apple technologist for Sainsbury's, says consumers are looking for sweeter apples. The supermarket is stocking a record 57 varieties of apple, including more British varieties than before. Jazz, which has a peardroppy flavour, and Rubens which has tones of melon, and Zari, which is a sweet, juicy apple.

However, as a report for the Grocer put it last month, "all is forgotten". Last year we drank 8. The decreasing cost of international travel and the ability of a growing number of people to experience other cultures and cuisines, says Moore, have had a huge influence on our national palate.

Middle Eastern influence has been strong, thanks to chefs such as Yotam Ottolenghi , but Moore is also looking at food inspired by South America, especially ceviche — raw fish cured with citrus juices. Twenty years ago, would anyone have said sushi was going to be this big in the UK? The survey was conducted for Eating Better, an alliance of groups including Friends of the Earth, launched in summer to encourage people to eat less meat. Others blamed falling sales on rising costs — according to the Financial Times last month [http: In September, the trade journal published a report on the hot drinks market.

In a more recent report, the Grocer found volume sales of tea were down 6. In a final indignity, last year the Office for National Statistics removed the round lettuce from its "typical" shopping basket to illustrate retail prices, though the iceberg lettuce remains. Order by newest oldest recommendations. Show 25 25 50 All. Threads collapsed expanded unthreaded.