Study: Fructose Is A Cortisol Booster

Joined
Aug 21, 2018
Messages
1,237
Yes, and there is no body fat percentage on the table, nor a measurement of lean mass. Only a measurement of visceral fat mass, which showed an insignificant difference (both statistically and clinically).

If it's not lean mass what it is? Water loss?
 

rei

Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2017
Messages
1,607
Fraudulently useless study. The control should have been glucose or sucrose to say anything about fructose. Now we can only conclude that never receiving pure water is stressful.
 

tankasnowgod

Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2014
Messages
8,131
Fraudulently useless study. The control should have been glucose or sucrose to say anything about fructose. Now we can only conclude that never receiving pure water is stressful.

The corticosterone levels for both groups was quite high based on normal rhythms of rats. I'm not even sure that conclusion can be drawn.
 
Joined
Jun 16, 2017
Messages
1,790
The cortisone may be higher because fructose is helping turn cortisol into the less active form of it, right?
 

rei

Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2017
Messages
1,607
The corticosterone levels for both groups was quite high based on normal rhythms of rats. I'm not even sure that conclusion can be drawn.
You are right, i just got frustrated with reading that crap. No pure water= stress was mertely a rationalization according to how i would react to getting sugary liquid when i am thirsty.
 

mangoes

Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2013
Messages
457
The cortisone may be higher because fructose is helping turn cortisol into the less active form of it, right?

no rodents don’t really produce much cortisol, corticosterone, not cortisone, is their primary endogenous glucocorticoid and what the study measured
 
Joined
Jun 16, 2017
Messages
1,790
no rodents don’t really produce much cortisol, corticosterone, not cortisone, is their primary endogenous glucocorticoid and what the study measured
Thanks for the correction. I confused cortisone with corticosterone.
 
J

jb116

Guest
Salivary or blood? Salivary only shows the free fraction which doesn't show total cortisol at all.
Urinary cortisol shows the elimination of cortisol, so the total blood cortisol.

I see the one posted in this thread, apparently you can see a secret table that I haven't discovered, yet.

You first said that urinary cortisol shows total blood cortisol, which is not accurate.

No he didn't. You are reading it out of context.
His response is a continuance from the previous poster.
He was saying [since] urinary cortisol shows the elimination of cortisol [it's not accurate], so the total blood cortisol [is what will tell you actual cortisol levels].

It's not difficult to follow or understand.
 

Peater Piper

Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2016
Messages
817
The fructose fed rats ate more, weighed less, and didn't have any significant differences in visceral fat. Why wasn't that the headline of the study?
Don't PUFAs have the same effect in the short term? Would be nice to see a long term study, as short term results don't always paint the best picture.
 

baccheion

Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2017
Messages
2,113
Don't PUFAs have the same effect in the short term? Would be nice to see a long term study, as short term results don't always paint the best picture.
What causes reversal of PUFA effects? Does a 3:2 n-3:n-6 ratio have any effect?When and why does saturated fat increase insulin sensitivity? What if apoE 4/3?
 

tankasnowgod

Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2014
Messages
8,131
Don't PUFAs have the same effect in the short term? Would be nice to see a long term study, as short term results don't always paint the best picture.

Um, do you have any study lasting 2 months showing that any animal fed a high PUFA diet ate 25% more than controls and weighed less than controls? Because this thread now shows two, one lasting 8 weeks, the other 9. (okay, the other one only showed that mice could quadruple caloric intake from coke, and not gain any weight).

Regardless of that, the results of the study in no way justify the conclusions of the authors-

"Although the animals did not develop obesity, nonesterified fatty acid and plasma triglyceride levels were elevated, indicating that fructose, through enhanced prereceptor metabolism of glucocorticoids, could set the environment for possible later onset of obesity."

Possible later onset, eh? That phrase can be used to describe literally anything.

"Although the mice in this experiment did not turn into crocodiles, the levels of corticosterone could set the environment for the possible later onset of mice turning into crocodiles."

Impossible to be proven wrong.
 
Last edited:

Peater Piper

Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2016
Messages
817
Um, do you have any study lasting 2 months showing that any animal fed a high PUFA diet ate 25% more than controls and weighed less than controls? Because this thread now shows two, one lasting 8 weeks, the other 9. (okay, the other one only showed that mice could quadruple caloric intake from coke, and not gain any weight).
That's awfully specific. We multiple studies with humans showing that in the short term, saturated fat causes greater fat gain than pufa, especially visceral fat. Does that mean pufa is better than saturated fat for staying lean? In the long term, I'd say no. There's also studies showing mufa adds less weight than saturated fat. Personally, I've consumed high pufa in the past, and high saturated fat more recently. It doesn't seem to matter what kind of fat I consume, I don't add body fat, but even if pufa wasn't fattening, it poses other problems. Also, that mice study with coke was trending in a bad direction even in the short term, they were fatter, nefa and triglycerides were through the roof, liver was fatty. Simply staying lean isn't a great measure of health. There's lean diabetics, and I'd have a hard time arguing that's a good thing.

"Although the animals did not develop obesity, nonesterified fatty acid and plasma triglyceride levels were elevated, indicating that fructose, through enhanced prereceptor metabolism of glucocorticoids, could set the environment for possible later onset of obesity."
Fructose absolutely kills my blood glucose. I don't know why, but I wouldn't be surprised if it's increasing NEFA in my case for some reason (meanwhile, I can eat massive amounts of starch without issue, even though it should directly raise glucose more). But I'll also admit that some people do fabulously on high fructose diets, so I'm not sure what's going on there.
 

pepsi

Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2013
Messages
175
Location
Texas
Im actually testing this theory out on myself right now, or maybe Im just testing
if I have fructose intolerance.

Does anyone know what Dr Peat recommends for fructose intolerance/malabsorption?

All these years I thought milk was the problem, but now Im thinking its fructose.
I was on the vitamin A elimination diet rice/beef and lost weight/no bloating,
then went back to milk/OJ, bloating/weight gain came back.

I decided to try a fructose elimination diet, I went back on beef/rice and bought some dextrose to put in my coffee
instead of sugar. I have no stomach upset or intestinal inflammation/bloating as I
did on milk/OJ and the weight is coming back off. After a few weeks of stabilizing on this diet, Im going
to switch out the beef for milk and see if the problems recur.
It makes me think if Asian people with rice based diets are thin because of this.

I also had embarrassing bulging hand/arm veins for years. I dont notice any after I eat glucose.
I also had high triglycerides on my last blood test while on milk/OJ.
 

tankasnowgod

Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2014
Messages
8,131
That's awfully specific. We multiple studies with humans showing that in the short term, saturated fat causes greater fat gain than pufa, especially visceral fat.

I was basically just quoting back the conditions of the study up top and what they found. What are these human studies you speak of? How well did they control confounders, like caloric intake, NEAT, and exercise? How well did they even control SFA and PUFA amounts?

The ones that I have seen in this regard have been of poor quality in free living humans. I remember one that provided muffins with different fat ratios, but I don't even think they asked for a food diary.
 
Joined
Jun 16, 2017
Messages
1,790
It seems like rats' livers treat sugar very differently from humans. Converting several fold more fructose to fat than a human liver.
Sugar Does NOT Cause Inflammation (Part 2)
Not sure if this relation is concurrant with hormones as well?
This is something that forum member "tyw" brought up a while ago. Rats produce way more fat from carbs than humans do.

Thanks for the link. Very interesting about the JNK pathway. PUFA is a huge factor when it comes to what the rats were eating.

Human ancestors supposedly lived in the tropical forests with other primates, so we probably used to eat some fruit back then. They could do more fructose studies with fruit-eating primates instead of rats, but I imagine the cost would much higher. It would more interesting. I read that some rats eat a lot of fruit in nature, but not all of them do. Some are carnivorous, for example. Not sure if the common lab rat is adapted to high intakes of fructose. If I remember correctly, CLASH said that rats aren't supposed to eat foods which are extremely dense in energy due to their type of gut.
 

ccousz

Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2020
Messages
14
The difference in visceral fat was insignificant, (about 0.5 grams in a 311 gram animal), and the researchers didn't even test cortisol.

That’s what you test in mice, corticosterone. Cortisol is the main corticosteroid in human and most mammals where corticosterone is the corticosteroid in mice and lab rats.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom