• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

Fructose

S

scotland10

Member
Messages
19
Type of diabetes
Type 2
My breakfast this morning consisted of :
1 wheatabix biscuit with semi-skimmed milk
1 Bowl of fruit ( strawberries,Blackberries &Yogurt)
1 Glass of Tomato juice ) .
At lunch my sugar was 15.8 . As the fructose I ate was classed as good sugar ( non sticky type ) can I in this instance ignore this high reading ?
 
It could be a combination of everything you had.
The Weetabix will have caused a spike. It is very heavy in carbs. (69% carbohydrate)
Tomato juice is about 5g carbs per 150ml.
The bowl of fruit depends how many berries you ate. The max I can manage is 2 strawberries, but that is me.
The semi skimmed milk won't have helped unless it was just a small splash (such as you might add to a cup of tea) 7g carbs per 150ml.

Breakfast is often the most difficult meal of the day because insulin resistance is usually at its worst in the mornings. I can only eat protein and fat for breakfast.

What were you before your breakfast, and did you test 2 hours later?
Are you on diabetes medication?
 
Professor Lustig doesn't think that fructose is all that good. He says something like it gets metabolised directly in the liver and contributes to fatty liver. He says that Non Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease is prevalent in the Middle East where the water is iffy and the weather is hot so the inhabitants drink loads of sugary drinks. Table sugar is 50% fructose so loads of sugar in the drink causes the problem.

I got a smack round the head from another eminent professor when I last wrote about this. He doesn't like Lustig and it shows.
 
Thanks for your reply. I'm on Insulin, I was 8.4 @ breakfast . The point I was trying to make is the fructose I ate was supposedly good sugar not the sticky type so it wouldn't block up the arteries in which case should I disregard the high reading ? . I didn't test 2 hours after breakfast .
 
Hi. Fructose isn't good for you as it can cause the body to store it as fat and the body can't make good use of it; best avoided. If you Google the web about fructose as I did recently you will find the subject is a bag of worms and no two articles agree about exactly how the body handles it but overall we can best do without it. BTW was the breakfast yogurt Greek style without added sugar?
 
Once sugar gets into the arteries it's all glucose so sticky doesn't enter into it. No, you shouldn't disregard the high reading since I don't think you have tracked down the cause yet.
 
The others are right.
There is no good sugar. It is all bad.

No, you can't disregard the high reading. It was what it said at the time it said it. What you should do is try to learn from it.
 
Thank you all for correcting my knowledge about fructose. It does however conflict with my diabetic nurse who described it as
' Good Sugar ' I shall have to ask her to explain .
 
scotland10 said:
Thank you all for correcting my knowledge about fructose. It does however conflict with my diabetic nurse who described it as
' Good Sugar ' I shall have to ask her to explain .
Click to expand...

I'm guessing here, but she probably meant some foods that contain sugar are good for you in other ways, such as fruit. However, no sugar is good for diabetics, but as you are on insulin injections you could ask her how to inject to cover for this.
 
scotland10 said:
Thank you all for correcting my knowledge about fructose. It does however conflict with my diabetic nurse who described it as
' Good Sugar ' I shall have to ask her to explain .
Click to expand...
You are not the first to disagree with a diabetic nurse but please don't get confrontational with her since she is probably passing out information that she has been given. She is trying to help and in the case of diabetes the NHS are not very good at it. Also the world changes a bit with diabetes. For example, there are lots of people who think that brown bread is healthier. It isn't since it usually has a similar amount of carbs as does white bread and both will spike a diabetic. As said above, sugar is sugar and none of it is good for a diabetic.
 

I agree. I've seen and read Lustig in this and for me as a type of sugar metabolised only in the liver it seems credible. That said the entire mix of that brekkie would spike me big time along the lines outlined by Bluetit1802


Sent from my iPhone using DCUK Forum
 
I can't find any substantial amounts of fructose in your breakfast, possibly in the strawberries, but otherwise it's mostly starch and milk sugar so no wonder your BG went up so much.
 
Totto said:
I can't find any substantial amounts of fructose in your breakfast, possibly in the strawberries, but otherwise it's mostly starch and milk sugar so no wonder your BG went up so much.
Click to expand...
I surprised myself. A can of chopped tomatoes from my local shop had 35g / 100g of carbs, of which most was added sugar. So check the tomato juice, it may not be so innocent.

In general, fructose does not directly raise bgl, so the old thinking was that it was ok for diabetics to have. However, recent studies are suggesting that fructose contributes to NAFLD (fatty liver disease) and Insulin Resistance, which is why it has suddenly become an elephant in the room for us, since our body can store it, but not easily use it or dispose of it,
 
Here is a table of "sugar" content broken down by sugar type, for 84 fresh fruits, dried fruits, and selected brand name sweets. The source is the "Nutritionist V Database", whatever that is. From the introduction to the table: "For insulin-resistant subjects, fructose consumption may be particularly problematic. Consequently, he has tabulated the total metabolic fructose for items in the Table below." This is the rightmost column.

Here is the latest research on the possibility that fructose promotes NAFLD. Researchers from a hospital in Toronto conducted a metaanalysis and concluded that it doesn't.

Short article (7 paragraphs) from a nutritionists' journal on how fructose is metabolised. "Triacylglycerols" means triglycerides. This article affirms that fructose does not affect blood glucose, but fructose does boost blood TGs. Focus on paragraphs 5 and 6.

Context: higher levels of TGs are bad. The scientists whose research gave birth to the LCHF movement believed that TGs, not cholesterol, were really the dangerous lipid. The threshold adopted for bad TG level is about 1.7 (mmol/l), but a patient who already has diabetes or arterial disease needs to aim for much lower.

HFCS in foods is usually of the variety, HFCS 55. HFCS 55 and table sugar have about the same ratio of glucose to fructose.
 
In the same journal that you reported that fructose is not responsible for NAFLD, the following:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/09/130910142341.htm
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn More.…