Fructose may be the ultimate driver of obesity
Fructose may be the ultimate driver of obesity
Recent research implicates fructose in suppressing cellular energy production and driving fat accumulation in the body.
HFCS in basically everything + driving everywhere instead of walking + no time / money to work out or cook healthy food = obesity epidemic.
That my hypothesis anyway. Many other countries have one or more of these issues, but it seems like America is the only one that has the full combination.
... + driving everywhere instead of walking + ... = obesity epidemic
New Yorkers remain the lowest in obesity, who would have guessed that walking literally everywhere and burning the same amount as your resting rate leads to a recommended 2500 calorie diet making you not gain weight? What do you mean obesity is simply solved by just eating less and actually has not much to do with the foods in question? But my fitness magazines have to sell me their new juice only diet!
Spoiler, diets are hard (calorie restrictions, not fad trash). Humans have spent millions of years evolving in an environment where every meal could be the last for days. You are biologically wired to crave and eat everything in sight, even more so the rare and useful sugar and sodium. In high amounts, these lead to higher calorie intake, obviously these are overdosed consistently. But you are still fighting millions of years of evolution, with only ~150 years of dietary knowledge and the ability for any person of any class to eat at any time. You are programmed to fail.
Adding to the topic though, numerous studies and almost all data shows sugars, refined or not, do fuck all to the obesity cause. They are a byproduct of larger problems.
I don't think sugars are an issue because they magically create fat, I think they're an issue because they have a ton of calories and make us crave more food.
But other countries have sugar, so like you said, that walking sure helps a ton. I have a friend that likes to alternate between living in their home town, and New York. It's wild to see how much their weight changes every time they move back.
HFCS is just a scary word. HCFS is just a form of sucrose and believe it or not can containe slightly less or slightly more fructose than regular sucrose 50/50. HCFS 42 is 42% fructose (less than regular sugar) or 55% fructose, slightly more than regular sugar.
HCFS is only bad because it made sugar cheap, but it shouldn't to be blamed directly.
Agree. The core issue is why the fuck is there so much sweetener in literally everything that isn't in the vegetable aisle.
I was blaming hfcs because of the calorie count, not because of any natural grocers "real food" nonsense.
Johnson’s ultimate goal is to bring a drug that inhibits fructose metabolism to market. He’s working on formulating and testing one now, and hopes that his efforts will bear fruit in the next five years or so.
That's... not a good idea. Why don't we just focus on not having people eat trash food in the first place? That approach is like the They Feed Us Poison meme, but unironic.
Also, here's a related chart that recent had some HN discussion:
In other news, the fossil fuel industry may be contributing more than most to climate change
And some scientists suspect that the plastic patch in the ocean may be made out of plastics.
Hilariously stated - and I couldn't agree more. Plus, I much admire your username!
I think it's been known that fructose negatively impacts the liver, there must be some weird fructose metabolism pathway involved in a host of diseases.
Fructose is metabolised in the liver like alcohol, and the consequence is the same - fatty liver disease.
I make most of my own food. Fructose isn't my problem. Eating my emotions bc no support network and lots of family relying on me is my problem.
• Hypotheses explain the rapid rise in obesity over recent decades.
• Energy balance: Weight gain due to consuming more calories.
• Carbohydrate-insulin hypothesis: Excess carbohydrate intake stimulates the insulin response.
• Effect of Protein: Eating insufficient protein causes constant hunger.
• New hypothesis: sugar, especially fructose, is to blame for obesity.
• Fructose suppresses mitochondrial function, causing hunger and thirst.
• In the long term, regular exposure to fructose can damage mitochondria.
• Corn syrup, honey and cane sugar are common sources of fructose.
• Fruits are still healthy, but they contain less fructose than juices or candies.
Excess carbohydrate intake stimulates the insulin response.
This. This right here is where the obesity epidemic comes from. People eat way, way more carbs than any time in history, and we wonder why everyone is fat. Carbs do not induce a satiation mechanism like fats, the opposite in fact. Yet it's fats that get demonized because of the shit science that came of the Seven Countries study.
No shit. Has everyone forgotten that the sugar industry (and corn lobby) literally backed the crusade against fatty foods for decades based on their own findings?
Not I.
I don't disagree, but bigthink.com? Not many names more sus than that.
Much better.
No. Still calories.
I constantly see people bickering about this online, but that's not at odds with CICO. Yes, the overarching limits is CICO, but most people don't track calories. Fructose makes you more hungry and so you eat more food, and therefore CICO means you gain weight. From the article:
When these cellular powerhouses are slowed, the cells get stuck in a low-energy state, triggering hunger and thirst
So you're correct, but it's an unhelpful response. Kind of like saying "No, the Earth still isn't flat" when people are trying to figure out exactly how round it is.
EDIT: To your other comment:
At no point is fructose a direct cause of obesity, a byproduct yes.
"direct cause" is the wrong way to look at this. Even if the mechanism by which it acts doesn't cause obesity itself, it can be a root cause if, without it, people wouldn't engage in behaviors that lead to obesity, i.e. overeating. The difference between "he died because he ran into a tree" vs "he died because he was texting and not paying attention".
It really isn't this complicated. You are obese because you do not count calories. End of discussion. External factors of a bad diet are entirely your fault. Personal responsibility is the only outcome for becoming healthier. Calorie counting and adherence are 90% of being not obese. Everything else is supplementary. Fructose is far from the problem, nor is it even as bad as this trash research wants to make believe.
Everyone needs calories, no one needs fructose.
What kind of statement is this. Calories are not comparable to the macronutrients that make them. Secondly, fructose (the worst of sugar) still isn't even dangerous unless in extreme amounts. It is objectively overeating calories, whether they be from protein fats or carbs, that make people obese. Objectively. At no point is fructose a direct cause of obesity, a byproduct yes.
The issue is more refined fats and sugars in general than any specific (anti)nutrients. Some of the healthiest people eat WFPB diets which often contain a fair amount of fruit, but they aren't drinking Coca Cola with every meal.
And at 11: rain is wet
No it's not.
Today I learned!