Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

difference between HFCS and fruit juice

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • difference between HFCS and fruit juice

    So what's the difference between the fructose in 100% fruit juice, and fructose in HFCS? I've always assumed HFCS is evil, but as I search around more I'm starting to wonder. If HFCS is "unbonded" fructose and glucose, the argument is the sugars don't really need to be digested so they cause a bigger sugar spike, insulin production, or get converted directly to stored fat etc. But if that's true, then the "loose" fructose in fruit juice sounds like it would do the same thing.

    Anyone have something more about this? I honestly don't know, and I refuse to read anything written by the Corn Refiners Group about how safe their billion dollar product is.

    Anyone have something science based and convincing?

  • #2
    As I understand it, fruit juice is only better because it comes with micronutrients that the HFCS can't offer.

    Hormonally, metabolically, neither is a good choice.
    Nightlife ~ Chronicles of Less Urban Living, Fresh from In the Night Farm ~ Idaho's Primal Farm! http://inthenightlife.wordpress.com/

    Latest post: Stop Being Stupid

    Comment


    • #3
      Nope, there pretty much the same thing, and I've done a lot of research..........I agree, neither is a good choice.
      Whether you think you can..... or you think you can't..... your 100 % correct.

      Comment


      • #4
        Thanks, very interesting. I just read something else pointing out that glucose can be stored and used later (glycogen) but fructose can only be used "now" or stored as fat.

        If anyone has some links, I'd like to read more. Thanks again.

        Comment


        • #5
          If you've got time, watch Dr. Lustig's video "Sugar: The Bitter Truth" on youtube. It's got some nice basic biochemistry, history and statistics, and he's a fun speaker to listen to.

          Here's a paper that has a lot of the same info... I'm not sure if you can read the whole thing for free or if I have access because I'm on my computer at school. If you can only read the abstract and would like to see the rest, PM me your email address.
          "mayness, you need to have a siggy line that says "Paleo Information Desk" or something!" -FMN <3

          I'm blogging again, at least a little bit.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by barryman9000 View Post
            Thanks, very interesting. I just read something else pointing out that glucose can be stored and used later (glycogen) but fructose can only be used "now" or stored as fat.

            If anyone has some links, I'd like to read more. Thanks again.
            I do believe that fructose can be stored as glycogen, but only in the liver. Glucose can be stored as glycogen in the liver and in the muscle tissues themselves. So it makes sense to me to that we consume fructose only when it can be used for direct energy or when liver glycogen may be low such as upon waking up first thing in the morning.

            Comment


            • #7
              Here's an informative, short article about HFCS and fructose in general

              http://www.fitnessspotlight.com/2008...d-why-its-not/

              Comment


              • #8
                Something about the sucrose content of fruit juice is a better "balance." Anybody? Bueller?
                You lousy kids! Get off my savannah!

                Comment


                • #9
                  The propensity to convert fructose to triglycerides has to do with many factors such as liver health, glycogen stores, and most pertinent to the issue here, absorption speed. HFCS is likely worse than sucrose because sucrose being glucose bonded to fructose will need one extra step (sucrase) than HFCS which is "free fructose" and glucose. So the faster the absorption, the more of it gets turned into triglycerides and the more contributes to fatty liver (simply becoming liver glycogen doesn't do this). So then the logical hierarchy would be HFCS, non-fiber liquid-transported sucrose (pop and juice), fiber-bound sugar like cookies (though they're still bad), fiber-rich fruit.

                  http://www.nutritionandmetabolism.com/content/7/1/10

                  Damn I love nutrition and metabolism journal.
                  Stabbing conventional wisdom in its face.

                  Anyone who wants to talk nutrition should PM me!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Sucrose is a Glucose and Fructose molecule (50% fructose), HFCS currently used is 55% frustose. Strictly speaking HFCS has more fructose, but not by much.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X