All,

In the universe of marketing wars between High Fructose Corn Syrup and Big Sugar sometimes the casualties are truth and understanding.  There is a clear WebMD article which discusses why this is a relevant topic: when glucose which is a simple sugar which is created by breaking down many types of food is used by the body, it is INHERENTLY better than using the same amount of fructose.  It’s better because it lowers bad cholesterol and other factors which make up a medical issue called Metabolic Syndrome.

the link to the article is here

-Bill

A study published last week in the Annals of Internal Medicine, claims that fructose should not be singled out for blame.  Here is a link to a news article about the study.  Two problems I find with this study are 1) they account for calories as calories, and don’t account for fructose calories in a separate way, and 2) the principal author is funded by Coca-Cola.  Big sugar is really trying to combat the message that fructose is somehow addictive or bad.

As a moderately obese person, I wanted so bad to eliminate sugar from my diet and magically drop weight like a stone.  Unfortunately, my body and I live in the real world.  Since April of 2011, I stopped eating fructose as my great sacrifice, and I waited for the weight to fall off.  I have found out since May that I’m a celiac  and can’t eat gluten or products made from gluten.  After going gluten free and fructose free, then I waited for the magic pounds to come off.  Yep I waited…

In mid-january I started a physician supervised weight loss program and I’ve lost just about 20 pounds. My goal is to leave obesity and overweight behind.  Part of the diet is low fat protein and lots of veggies.  This also includes no fructose.  :-)

Here’s to a healthier 2012,

Bill

I feel like the New York Times was duped earlier this month by the sugar and HFCS lobby into yet another poorly formulated story (link here) about how elite athletes can eat sugar when they have depeleted their glycogen (like after running a marathon).  I’m pretty sure the sugar industry loved this article; my guess is they helped place it.  The implication of this article is that sugar is great after exercise.  Parents react to this by giving their exercising child ‘sports drinks’ or fructose loaded drinks.  Drinking these drinks reverses the benefits of exercise.

In this morning’s Washington Post, “The Checkup” discusses whether sports drinks are Ok for kids.  The article is about the journal of Pediatrics saying

“Rigorous review and analysis of the literature reveal that caffeine and other stimulant substances contained in energy drinks have no place in the diet of children and adolescents,” wrote Marcie Schneider and Holly Benjamin of American Academy of Pediatrics in a review of both energy drinks, which include brand names such as Red Bull and Monster, and sports drinks.

where the Washington Post’s Checkup blog goes after quoting the Academy of pediatrics is to miss the sugar connection entirely!  They say:

Sports beverages (and the related sports recovery drinks) offer water, electrolytes and carbohydrates. Though they come in reduced-calorie varieties, most do contain some calories. As noted above, most kids should entirely avoid caloric beverages (except low- or nonfat milk) such as sports beverages and caloric soft drinks, the report explains. They should get the nutrients and calories they need from healthful foods and avoid the empty calories those drinks supply.

As you can see, fructose is not called out and is lumped into the ‘carbohydrates’ category.  We are also stuck on a calorie = a calorie which readers of this blog know to be false.

Read more »