Is Anybody Here Fructose Free?

[FD8]

No fructose means no sugar, honey, maple syrup, etc. No fruit or fruit juice of any kind. Even sugary vegetables and squash have small amounts of fructose.

No fructose is virtually impossible, I think the idea is to focus more on "low fructose" and to rely on glucose more.
Maple syrup and lots of fruits (grapes, melon, etc) would be ok then.

 

[PeatThemAll]

I think my question got lost in the server issues a couple of days ago. Has a grams/day/kg LBM (Lean Body Mass) guideline for fructose ever been posted?

I know about protein, and with regards to carbs you can always go by your blood sugar meter to see how much is too much. But fructose?

 

[Jayfish]

Some frutarians take in probably 500g a day of fructose. I don't think there is a realistic upper limit. You would have to guzzle fructose water or something. And really the only detrimental thing about fructose is when you pair it with pufa.

Personally I think most people should get as much sugar as they possibly can to saturate glycogen storage and increase its capacity. That's probably upward of 500g sugar a day, maybe to toping over 1000g in athletes.

 

[jyb]

I think my question got lost in the server issues a couple of days ago. Has a grams/day/kg LBM (Lean Body Mass) guideline for fructose ever been posted?

I know about protein, and with regards to carbs you can always go by your blood sugar meter to see how much is too much. But fructose?

Diabetics usually look at HbA1C, as just blood sugar is really difficult to interpret. That's to monitor metabolic health generally, not just the effects of having eaten fructose.

 

[PeatThemAll]

Some frutarians take in probably 500g a day of fructose. I don't think there is a realistic upper limit. You would have to guzzle fructose water or something. And really the only detrimental thing about fructose is when you pair it with pufa.

Personally I think most people should get as much sugar as they possibly can to saturate glycogen storage and increase its capacity. That's probably upward of 500g sugar a day, maybe to toping over 1000g in athletes.

If that's the case (upper limit), why did Lustig go that far to demonize fructose (especially)?

I wish I were in the hundreds of grams of fructose per day. Alas, I have to watch out for FODMAPs (still haven't singled them out one by one, and my 'safe' daily intakes), but fructose is the easiest one to add up, that's for sure.

 

[tara]

But fructose?

I think Peat has said that a craving for sugar usually indicates a need for sugar. Personally, I'm currently assuming my tastes are the best guide I've got - whether sweet food tastes good at the moment.

 

[Jayfish]

If that's the case (upper limit), why did Lustig go that far to demonize fructose (especially)?

I wish I were in the hundreds of grams of fructose per day. Alas, I have to watch out for FODMAPs (still haven't singled them out one by one, and my 'safe' daily intakes), but fructose is the easiest one to add up, that's for sure.

Lustig had no scientific background and made outrageously false claims. He's a moron

Table sugar is a safe and easy way to up fructose levels.

 

[Ukall]

I had a period of years of mostly low sugar for quite a while years ago. No added refined sucrose, no honey, little or no lactose, and only small amounts of fruit. I also got some fructose from sweet vegetables like sweet potatoes, onions, sweetcorn. For the later part of that time I mostly avoided wheat/gluten, but did eat other grains/seeds (rice, qinoa, buckwheat, corn, millet). It was tough to give up sugar. I think teh large amount of whole grains, and other components of the diet, were hard on my gut at times. Aside from that, the main problem for me was not that the starchy foods were obviously bad for me, but that the logistics were too hard, so I often went hungry for want of easy enough options. I do think I hold for longer without hunger now when I eat both starchy foods and sweet ones.

I think Peat has said that a craving for sugar usually indicates a need for sugar. Personally, I'm currently assuming my tastes are the best guide I've got - whether sweet food tastes good at the moment.

You remind me a lot how I was. Low GI foods and the trend continuous. Now I don't know if they are really good for us or not. I really had gut issues when I used to eat huge amounts of grains and vegetables. And I actually think I don't crave sugar anymore. It tastes good, but it is not the same thing...

Lustig had no scientific background and made outrageously false claims. He's a moron

All that it is said here, is wrong?
Fructose: the poison index | Robert Lustig
For example, reading this "Fructose causes seven times as much cell damage as does glucose, because it binds to cellular proteins seven times faster; and it releases 100 times the number of oxygen radicals (such as hydrogen peroxide, which kills everything in sight)."
and this
"Endogenous glycations occur mainly in the bloodstream to a small proportion of the absorbed simple sugars: glucose, fructose, and galactose. It appears that fructose and galactose have approximately ten times the glycation activity of glucose"
Glycation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
scares me a bit whether it is true or not :S

 

[tara]

"Endogenous glycations occur mainly in the bloodstream to a small proportion of the absorbed simple sugars: glucose, fructose, and galactose. It appears that fructose and galactose have approximately ten times the glycation activity of glucose"

I think Peat has suggested that PUFAs are more implicated in glycation than sugars.