for chickpea: hfcs info
AllEmailDeletedImmediately
This form of fructose is metabolized differently converts to fat more than
any other sugar.
It does not stimulate insulin secretion or enhance leptin, both of which act
as key signals in
regulating how much food you eat and your bodyweight.
Fructose in HFCS has no enzymes, vitamins or minerals, so it takes these
micronutrients
from your body while it assimilates itself for use. By comparison, other
sources of fructose,
such as fruit, do not create a problem for most people when used moderately
(unless they
already have insulin resistance), because they contain those micronutrients.
Don Klipstein
>here's what i found:
>
>This form of fructose is metabolized differently converts to fat more than
>any other sugar.
Differently from other fructose? How?
>It does not stimulate insulin secretion or enhance leptin, both of which act
>as key signals in regulating how much food you eat and your bodyweight.
>
>Fructose in HFCS has no enzymes, vitamins or minerals, so it takes these
>micronutrients from your body while it assimilates itself for use.
The same is true for low fructose corn syrup and cane sugar.
> By comparison, other sources of fructose, such as fruit, do not create a
>problem for most people when used moderately (unless they already have
>insulin resistance), because they contain those micronutrients.
- Don Klipstein (d...@misty.com)
hchi...@hotmail.com
I'll admit to having forgotten the initial conversation, but this post
tweaked me into doing some more research on my own. The first
discovery was that the google archives of the group are now no longer
consistent in their search by date function. This is disappointing to
me, because the archives of usenet used to be a great resource for
people.
Secondly, I was aware of the mix of sugars in fruits, but had thought
that the purity of fructose, sucrose, malt sugar and the other
packaged sugars was greater than it is. High fructose corn syrup can
have a variation in mix, where as long as the fructose is more than in
the basic corn syrup, it can be labeled as "high fructose."
Reviewing then, the discussion really isn't just about fructose, the
sugar, but about the issues with processing and removing (or not) the
other variations of sugars and impurities from high fructose corn
syrup.
Some of what you state makes little sense on the surface and could
benefit from cites. I think I found an online article that does that,
I'll reference it later. But, IMO, the statements above suffer from
shorthand where cause and effect are at best related by a chain of
events and not directly.
Looking at the info available, it appears that much of the proposed
damage from a diet high in sugars can be mitigated by slightly
increasing the ingestion of minerals, especially copper. It also is
important to recognize that any diet that is not mixed stands a
greater chance of being deleterious than one where a variety of food
groups are eaten moderately.
To review, sugars are generally converted into either glucose
(immediate use) or glycogen (temporary storage) by the body. While
enzymes may help in the conversion, vitamins and minerals don't appear
to be directly involved in the processes required. For example, the
common problem of lactose intolerance is a lack of the lactase enzyme
in the gut, but any effect on mineral use or depletion occurs outside
of that primary conversion. Similarly, but different in location,
hereditary fructose intolerance is a condition in which the liver
enzymes that break up fructose are deficient.
Digging a little deeper, I found some cites that both explain some of
the issues you bring up and partly contradict what you have just
written.
Source of the following paragraph:
http://chemed.chem.purdue.edu/genchem/topicreview/bp/1biochem/carbo5.html
The substance most people refer to as "sugar" is the disaccharide
sucrose, which is extracted from either sugar cane or beets. Sucrose
is the sweetest of the disaccharides. It is roughly three times as
sweet as maltose and six times as sweet as lactose. In recent years,
sucrose has been replaced in many commercial products by corn syrup,
which is obtained when the polysaccharides in cornstarch are broken
down. Corn syrup is primarily glucose, which is only about 70% as
sweet as sucrose. Fructose, however, is about two and a half times as
sweet as glucose. A commercial process has therefore been developed
that uses an isomerase enzyme to convert about half of the glucose in
corn syrup into fructose.
(side note- this half glucose/half fructose mix is roughly a
proportion that emulates the sweetness in fruity drinks, like apple
juice. However, apple juice contains a mix low in glucose and
relatively high in fructose and sucrose, which can lead to a more even
digestion of sugars than the HFCS - first the small amounts of
glucose, then the split sucrose, then the fructose)
High-fructose corn sweetener is just as sweet as sucrose and has found
extensive use in soft drinks.
So, if I read this right. HFCS contains fructose AND glucose AND
whatever byproducts the conversion process and corn make, including
some sucrose and/or partly converted disaccharide chains. It might be
prudent to remember that corn starch can be an allergy sensitizer for
some people. Example; the link between latex allergies and corn
starch as a lubricant in latex gloves seems fairly well accepted.
Now, referencing and doing a little re-arranging of:
http://recipes.howstuffworks.com/food2.htm
Glucose, fructose and galactose are monosaccharides and are the only
carbohydrates that can be absorbed into the bloodstream through the
intestinal lining.
The simplest carbohydrate is glucose. Glucose, also called "blood
sugar" and "dextrose," flows in the bloodstream so that it is
available to every cell in your body. Your cells absorb glucose and
convert it into energy to drive the cell. Specifically, a set of
chemical reactions on glucose creates ATP (adenosine triphosphate),
and a phosphate bond in ATP powers most of the machinery in any human
cell. If you drink a solution of water and glucose, the glucose passes
directly from your digestive system into the bloodstream.
Simple sugars require little digestion, and when a child eats a sweet
food, such as a candy bar or a can of soda, the glucose level of the
blood rises rapidly. In response, the pancreas secretes a large amount
of insulin to keep blood glucose levels from rising too high. This
large insulin response in turn tends to make the blood sugar fall to
levels that are too low 3 to 5 hours after the candy bar or can of
soda has been consumed. This tendency of blood glucose levels to fall
may then lead to an adrenaline surge, which in turn can cause
nervousness and irritability... The same roller-coaster ride of
glucose and hormone levels is not experienced after eating complex
carbohydrates or after eating a balanced meal because the digestion
and absorption processes are much slower.
Next, from:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fructose_malabsorption
In patients with fructose malabsorption, the small intestine fails to
absorb fructose properly. In the large intestine the unabsorbed
fructose osmotically reduces the absorption of water and is
metabolized by normal colonic bacteria to short chain fatty acids and
the gases hydrogen, carbon dioxide and methane. (IOW, the runs and
farts)
There is a tremendous amount of other information out there, some of
it contradictory, but again, the issues for most otherwise healthy
people are more with their unbalanced diets, which can lead to
deficiencies, which then cascade into more serious problems and
diseases.
The online article I mentioned at the top is:
http://www.westonaprice.org/modernfood/highfructose.html
Is HFCS a boogie-man? For some folks, I now think it probably is a
danger (a change from my previous thoughts). For others, who might
have a single soft drink every day or two, and eat right otherwise, or
who may just not like a lot of sweets, it probably is less so. In all
cases, it seems like the effects of mineral deficiencies in modern
diets may be an underlying problem that could be much worse than
passing vitamin deficiencies or even a moderate amount of increased
sugars intake.
AllEmailDeletedImmediately
http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/76/5/911
http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/abstract/79/4/537
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/559344 (signup required, so here it
is):
Fructose but Not Glucose Consumption Linked to Atherogenic Lipid Profile
Emma Hitt, PhD
July 5, 2007 - Fructose, a sugar used for sweetening most soft drinks in the
United States and elsewhere, has been linked to an increased atherogenic
profile relative to glucose in a short-term study of overweight/obese adults
Peter J. Havel, DVM, PhD, a research professor from the Department of
Nutrition at the University of California, Davis, and colleagues presented
the findings at the American Diabetes Association 67th Scientific Sessions
in Chicago, Illinois.
"Soft drink consumption is, for most people, the largest source of dietary
fructose," Dr. Havel told Medscape. "Of course, fructose is present in fruit
too, but at much lower levels, and...fruit contains many other nutrients."
Dr. Havel and colleagues studied 23 subjects with a body mass index of 23 to
35 kg/m2. In the beginning of the study, participants stayed in a clinical
facility for 2 weeks while consuming an energy-balanced diet containing a
moderate (30%) level of fat and 55% complex carbohydrates. Baseline blood
measurements were made.
Subjects then began an 8-week outpatient intervention, consuming drinks that
made up 25% of their daily energy needs. The drinks were sweetened with
either fructose (n = 13) or glucose (n = 10). The rest of the participants'
diet was self-selected.
At the end of the 8-week intervention, subjects returned to the clinical
facility for 2 additional weeks and consumed either glucose- or
fructose-sweetened beverages along with the same energy-balanced diet
consumed during the first 2-week stay.
Relative to baseline, 24-hour postprandial triglyceride profiles were
increased by 212% ą 59% in the fructose-consuming group (P < .0001). In
contrast, levels declined by about one third (?30% ą 23%) in the
glucose-consuming group. In addition, fasting plasma levels of low-density
lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C); apolipoprotein B; and small, dense LDL-C,
as well as postprandial levels of remnant lipoprotein (RLP)-triglycerides
and RLP-cholesterol, were all significantly increased (P < .01) in the
fructose group. By comparison, these levels remained unchanged in the
glucose group.
Fructose-consuming participants also demonstrated increased plasma
concentrations of the atherogenic risk factors oxidized LDL-C (P < .0001)
and intracellular adhesion molecule (P < .05), but those consuming glucose
did not.
"Consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages containing fructose has increased
by 135% from 1977 to 2001 and may be a contributing factor to an increased
incidence of metabolic syndrome," the authors note in their abstract.
According to Dr. Havel, most soft drinks in the United States are sweetened
with high-fructose corn syrup, which is a mixture of about 55% fructose and
45% glucose.
"It is known that fructose, after being metabolized by the liver, is more
likely to go into a lipogenic pathway than glucose," Dr. Havel noted. "So
these results were not surprising to us, but the magnitude of some of the
changes was striking," he added.
"While this is an interim report, the findings do suggest that persons at
risk for cardiovascular disease, diabetes, or hyperlipidemia should limit
consumption of fructose-sweetened beverages. It is unclear, however, whether
a nonatherogenic level of fructose consumption exists, and what that might
be."
According to Amy Hess-Fischl, MS, RD, LDN, BC-ADM, CDE, diabetes
educator/coordinator from the Adolescent and Teen Diabetes Program,
University of Chicago Comprehensive Diabetes Center, Chicago, Illinois, who
moderated the session at the meeting, although this study was conducted in
overweight and obese individuals, other studies indicate that the
atherogenic effect of fructose may extend to normal-weight individuals as
well.
However, Ms. Fischl told Medscape that controversy exists over the extent of
atherogenicity associated with fructose consumption: "On the basis of these
findings, fructose consumed at 25% of total energy had a negative effect,
while another study found that 17% of total energy had a negative impact."
"Finding the safe limit will be key, and more research is needed to identify
those persons most at risk," noted Ms. Fischl. "Until then, healthcare
professionals can recommend that, based on several studies, limiting
consumption of fructose-containing beverages is probably beneficial."
American Diabetes Association 67th Scientific Sessions: Abstract 0062-OR.
Presented June 23, 2007