I did a video recently about the relationship of carbs sugars with fatty
liver got some good reaction to it here's one of them fellow named grant
Douglas Grant says, "okay so the question is which car fructose or sucrose or
glucose does the most damage? I bet fructose since in ancient times
the Romans and Greeks used to cram geese with figs to create fatty liver." He
didn't mention that the French and a lot of other folks currently stuff geese
with corn high fructose corn to do the same thing to create that fatty liver
now John (as he usually does) came up with some very interesting research he said
it would appear fructose is the worst actor this study shows fructose raises
LDL and CRP c-reactive protein higher than the other two but none of the
sugars are good certain whole fruits can spike blood glucose to a very high level
in an hour less than an hour as well so I looked up John's the study he cited
and here's what I saw at least coming out of the blocks some interesting
results glucose and sucrose supplementation initially resulted in
significant increase in blood glucose and insulin levels as well compared to
fructose in other words fructose didn't really increase the the glucose blood
glucose or insulin now does that mean that maybe fructose is not that bad
after all when I asked that question I'm remembered of a arm remember I'm
reminded of a very well-known quote you got to ask yourself the question, "do I
feel lucky?" I live in Lexington. For about a
decade I worked with Toyota in terms of healthcare healthcare benefits
helping develop prevention for the Toyota employees and family members and
it's a common thing here in - in Toyota land - in Kentucky as well as a couple of
surrounding states Tennessee as well big states for having Mountain Dew for
breakfast and lunch and snacks in between now this one's a Diet Mountain
Dew so maybe it's far healthier. Mm-hmm. Actually it may be but again the vast
minority of Mountain Dews that I've seen people drinking are diet. so let's
get a little bit deeper into the article and find out really what this what this
is saying about fructose it was in a the journal lipids in health and disease is
published in 2014 and it's acute effects of feeding fructose glucose and sucrose
on blood lipid levels now what they're doing is comparing fructose to glucose
and sucrose it's a post they're looking at post prandial impact like Pia Mia
impacts of cholesterol and blood lipids meaning cola cholesterol and the other
blood fats and low grade inflammation HSC RP here's how they did it it's very
small study only 14 people they had an overnight fast and then they gave these
people - they did a they blinded (study) and said okay you're gonna get one of three
different drinks isocaloric meaning same number of calories the drinks contain 50
grams of either fructose or glucose or sucrose then they took blood samples at
baseline then at thirty sixty and a hundred and twenty minutes and analyzed
those blood samples for glucose, insulin and c-reactive protein as well as blood
lipids - again cholesterol values. Now why did they do this according to
them fructose is commonly known as fruit sugar it's a component of sweetener such
as sugar honey and high fructose corn syrup high fructose corn syrup has
quadrupled since the beginning of the 20th century when it was introduced into
a lot of foods in terms of food processing there's been a concomitant
rise in cardiovascular disease blood lipids cholesterol insulin resistance
satiety hormones hormones regarding whether I'm hungry or not that's insulin
leptin and ghrelin inflammatory markers and obesity now they make an assumption
here and I wasn't quite there but let's go let's go on and see if it makes sense
they said since similar effects do not occur following the intake of starch or
glucose it has been proposed that fructose induced metabolic changes are
not mediated by excessive sugar in intake in general but by a specific
response to fructose now you'll see this Robert Lustig is a major proponent I
don't I don't haven't read enough of him to where I could say for sure that he
said look the other sugars don't bother you but what he has said and what many
people have said is that fructose is much much worse
well again at least in terms of blood glucose and insulin levels you certainly
couldn't tell that by this small study so again the aim of this study was to
investigate the effects of fructose compared to glucose and sucrose well
here's the first the first set of numbers as you can see glucose their
numbers are very interesting the graph is very interesting and the low glucose
blood glucose compared in that with the so here are the people that took
fructose they have a very low blood glucose impact
compared to sucrose and glucose glucose ingestion same thing with insulin and
those two sort of go hand to hand in hand so they certainly support each
other if you look at it on this right side again this is total area under the
curve when you take all of these this time period relatively minimal impact on
blood glucose by ingesting fructose but a significant impact on blood glucose by
ingesting glucose or sucrose same thing with insulin relatively small impact on
insulin at least within this first two-hour period take those that took the
fructose had a very relatively small impact on their insulin compared to
glucose and sucrose but here's where the maybe you shouldn't feel lucky and maybe
you should. maybe it's not open season on Mountain Dew after all. you start looking
at things like c-reactive protein well significant job in c-reactive
protein even in the first two hours I didn't know that c-reactive protein
actually was going to be that quick of a an inflammatory response but with
fructose evidently it is not so much with glucose and sucrose and again this
is the area under the curve bar showing significant increase with fructose
ingestion but not with glucose here's the other thing you look at LDL there
the cholesterol values he'll DL significant increase now for fructose
slight decrease with glucose and sucrose sucrose is sort of the opposite impact
with triglycerides not a significant increase with fructose but some
significant increase in triglycerides with glucose and sucrose again those are
supported by the first two things that we saw because the
as you may remember insulin stops the body from burning triglycerides. so the
same things the glucose and sucrose that caused increase in insulin also cause an
increase in triglycerides. Here's an interesting thing that I don't - there's a
lot of questions raised by this a lot of interesting information some of it is
again totally unexplained you get a significant increase in HDL over that
first two-hour period with fructose not with glucose and sucrose so what does
that mean? I don't think anybody can tell you right now and to go back and recap
it from a chart perspective cholesterol significant increases in LDL and HDL
from fructose not from glucose and sucrose. On the other hand glucose and
sucrose cause increases in triglycerides that you don't see with fructose these
this is just further discussion that was in the article and they basically cover
some of the same things that I've already covered and that is I think one
of the major takeaways from here is NOT that fructose is safe. In fact, as John
said, and as Robert Lustig and a lot of other people have said there's a very
good chance that fructose is far, far more dangerous. I'm not taking any of
them. I'm not drinking Mountain Dew. I'm not drinking fructose. I'm not drinking
glucose or sucrose. Just to remind you I have insulin resistance, like over half
of us 60 and above. Even those that don't already have documented insulin
resistance or diabetes I still have to go back to that same question. Are you
thinking that you can have carbs in your diet routinely like this?
Are you really feeling that lucky? thanks for your interest