Tag: fructose

Larabars: Healthy Snack or Sweet Treat?

by Monica Reinagel, MS, LDN

Simon writes:
lara-50934

“These days many people are eating date-based snack bars as they are perceived to be healthier than some other snacks. I love them and eat one every day after I was advised by a nutritionist to eat one instead of dessert. My concern is the effect the fructose may have on us, including our microbiota.”

The question about snack bars sweetened with dates has come up before. As I’ve written previously, “Because dates are a fruit, products sweetened with dates and date puree can legitimately claim to have zero added sugars. But, frankly, dates are about as close as you can get to pure sugar and still call yourself a fruit.”

I agree with your nutritionist that if a LARABAR satisfies the urge for candy or baked goods, that’s a pretty good upgrade.  But the fact that snack bars are sweetened only with fruit doesn’t mean that they can be eaten in unlimited quantities. Continue reading “Larabars: Healthy Snack or Sweet Treat?” >

New low glycemic sweetener is higher in calories than indicated

by Monica Reinagel, MS, LDN

I recently received a sample for review of a new sweetener from Italy called Dolcedi, made from organic apples. According to the manufacturer’s website:

“Dolcedì’ can be used any way you would use traditional table sugar or honey and in the same proportions; one teaspoon of sugar equals one teaspoon of Dolcedì’.”

It’s promoted as having a lower glycemic index than sugar–which it does. But the manufacturer also claims that it’s 25% lower in calories than sugar–which it is not.

When used as directed, Dolcedi actually provides 31% MORE calories than sugar.

Continue reading “New low glycemic sweetener is higher in calories than indicated” >

Fructose leaves you hungrier than glucose: Why this doesn’t matter

by Monica Reinagel, MS, LDN

Glasses of various juicesA new study found that people who consumed a beverage sweetened with glucose were less hungry afterwards than people who drank a beverage sweetened with fructose.  This makes a lot of sense. Some of the hormones that regulate your desire for food are cued by rising blood sugar and insulin levels. Because fructose causes a much lower rise in both, it doesn’t send as strong a signal to your brain that you’ve eaten. Continue reading “Fructose leaves you hungrier than glucose: Why this doesn’t matter” >

This week: Fructose fears, apricot cures, and grilling tips

by Monica Reinagel, MS, LDN

A public service campaign on one of the networks has as its tagline, The More You Know.  And information is, in general, a good thing. But sometimes it seems to me as if the constant stream of nutrition information and advice coming at you from all directions serves only to ratchet up needless anxiety.  Take, for example, the alarmist rhetoric about fructose that circulates around the internet these days.  I regularly hear from people who are now afraid to eat fruit. In this week’s Nutrition Diva podcast, I explain the two crucial details that the fructose fear-mongers forget to tell you.

In this week’s Nutrition Diva newsletter, I address internet rumors that eating apricot pits can help prevent cancer.  And on the Quick and Dirty Blog, I calm one reader’s fear that eating too many vegetables could  lead to vitamin toxicity and perhaps even cause her hair to fall out.

On a lighter note, as we Northern Hemispher-ites get ready to kick off the summer barbecue season, I have some reminders on how to keep those cook-outs healthy as well as delicious over on the What’s Cooking Blog.  (Don’t you love it when the thing that tastes better is also better for you?)

 

The Antidote to Fructose Fears

by Monica Reinagel, MS, LDN

For as long as Gary Taubes and Robert Lustig have been sounding the alarm about sugar (in general) and fructose (in particular) being the fall of Western civilization, I have been attempting to inject some much-needed perspective into the discussion.  (See the bottom of the post for  links to my articles dating back to 2007).

In  my opinion, the black-and-white view promoted by Taubes and Lustig is counter-productive. Instead of helping people set reasonable limits on their sugar intake, they’ve got people afraid to have an apple for fear of the fructose it contains.

If you eat large quantities of sugar–say, 25% or more of your daily calories for an extended period of time–you may well experience the doomsday scenario that Taubes and Lustig depict–fatty liver, altered metabolism, increased appetite, diabetes, obesity, and reduced life expectancy.  On the other hand, these effects have not been seen in people (or rats) who consume sugar in moderate quantities.

Continue reading “The Antidote to Fructose Fears” >

Sugar: The Bitter Half-Truth?

by Monica Reinagel, MS, LDN

Q. Are you familiar with Dr. Robert Lustig’s presentation on fructose, called “Sugar, The Bitter Truth” ?
What’s your opinion on this? Shouldn’t pure fructose sweeteners (which are marketed as low calorie) be banned? According to this presentation, wouldn’t it be a good idea to substitute all sucrose with a larger amount of maltose?

A.   Although I respect Dr. Lustig and his work, your questions are the perfect illustration of just how badly this viral video has confused the issue among consumers (and more than a few professionals).   Here’s what always seems to get lost in the biochemical mumbo-jumbo:  Dr. Lustig’s observations apply to the dangers of excessive fructose intake.

Continue reading “Sugar: The Bitter Half-Truth?” >

Is Coconut Sugar a Healthier Choice?

by Monica Reinagel, MS, LDN

Q. Makers of coconut sugar claim that it has a low glycemic index and is high in potassium and some other minerals.  Would using coconut sugar make my cookies the healthiest on the block?

A. Replacing cane sugar with coconut sugar might make your cookies a little higher in potassium.  And to the extent that coconut sugar has a lower glycemic index than regular sugar, the cookies might not cause quite as high a bump in blood sugar–although I’m sure it would still be significant.

But here’s the thing: The fact that coconut sugar has a lower glycemic index is a tip-off that it has a high fructose ratio.  (Same is true of agave nectar.)  There’s been a lot of buzz about fructose lately: how fructose doesn’t stimulate the release of hormones that signal satiety or fullness, leading to over-consumption and how over-consumption of fructose triggers fat storage or even liver damage.  Most of the hysteria, of course, has been focused on high fructose corn syrup. Ironically, high fructose corn syrup is a lot lower in fructose than “healthy” sweeteners like coconut sugar and agave nectar. Continue reading “Is Coconut Sugar a Healthier Choice?” >

Fructose: Poison, Nutrient, or Both?

by Monica Reinagel, MS, LDN

Given the escalating rhetoric on fructose, I think it’s time to revisit a couple of basic facts and try to regain some perspective.

Fructose is not a toxin. It is not a man-made “chemical.” The fact that is it metabolized in the liver does not mean that it is a poison.

Fructose is a naturally occurring mono-saccharide (sugar) found in fruits, vegetables, nuts, grains, eggs, dairy products and other whole foods. It has been part of the human diet since the beginning. Presumably, our bodies are well-adapted to it.  In fact, there might be an evolutionary advantage to the ability to metabolize sugars through multiple pathways–including one that does not lead to an immediate rise in blood sugar.

All nutrients are potentially toxic

As the National Academy of Sciences states: “All nutrients can have adverse effects when intakes are excessive.”  That’s why tolerable upper limits (ULs) have been established for many nutrients. The NAS recommends that you don’t exceed 45mg per day of iron, for example. But no-one is suggesting that iron is a poison or that it should be avoided at all costs. Maybe if we had a tolerable upper limit for fructose, we could all relax a little bit.

How much fructose is too much?

According to a recent analysis, Americans are now consuming somewhere between 38 and 73g of fructose a day. A third of that comes from sweetened beverages. The rest comes from other processed foods as well as grains, fruits, vegetables, eggs, cheese, and other whole foods.

It seems clear that current sugar intake is excessive and making us sick. Many argue that it’s fructose, specifically, that’s doing most of the damage. Fine: For the sake of argument, let’s just say that the current average intake of 55g of fructose (or around 10% of total calories) is enough to overload the liver and contribute to obesity and other ills. That suggests that somewhere between 0 and 55g per day is a threshold at which fructose ceases to be a useful (or at least harmless) nutrient and starts to be a problem.

Seeing as it doesn’t seem possible, necessary, or even desirable to reduce fructose consumption to zero, I think it would be useful to start looking for that threshold.

What is the tolerable upper limit for fructose?