Does anyone become overweight from eating a diet full of fruit? No. Do they become overweight from eating candy and soda? Yes they do.
You just changed the argument. I already agreed that fruit is a healthier choice than pop and chocolate. But why is the sugar in one, in and of itself, worse than the other?
That has nothing to do with health concerns. It has to with production quotas. Pure economics. Nothing to do with the public interest.
My objection to it (and happiness over the restrictions) is nothing to do with health concerns either... As already said, I can't stand the taste of it.
Does anyone become overweight from eating a diet full of fruit? No. Do they become overweight from eating candy and soda? Yes they do.
Well you could become overweight on a diet of fruit. It would just take more time and a lot more effort. I would say though that it's quite possible for a person that eats junk food but regularly exercises to find it easier to remain at a healthier weight than a person that limits their junk food intake but is largely sedentary. Not that weight is the only short term and long term reason to have a healthy diet. But exercise and lifestyle habits are the big factor that are so often overlooked in these diet discussions.
You just changed the argument. I already agreed that fruit is a healthier choice than pop and chocolate. But why is the sugar in one, in and of itself, worse than the other?
I haven't changed it. The sugar in fruit is natural. The sugar in a can of coke isn't.
Does anyone become overweight from eating a diet full of fruit? No. Do they become overweight from eating candy and soda? Yes they do.
Yes fruit is good for you and is much better for you than candy and soda... Nobody on this thread has disputed that.
However, that is due to many factors (fibre, vitamins, fat etc.) and not solely down to the sugar content. Just because fruit has other things in it that make it good for you, it doesn't make the sugar content any better, the benefits of it just outweigh the negatives in most cases.
Juicing fruit releases sugars that are bad for your teeth, which is why fruit juice consumption should be limited and it should be drunk with food. There are fruits that people with type 2 diabetes are told to avoid or restrict due to the sugar content.
My objection to it (and happiness over the restrictions) is nothing to do with health concerns either... As already said, I can't stand the taste of it.
Can you really discern the difference? Although not as ubiquitous as in the US and Canada there are many products here with it, labeled as Glucose Fructose. I wouldn't doubt you've happily consumed it blissfully unawares.
Yes fruit is good for you and is much better for you than candy and soda... Nobody on this thread has disputed that.
However, that is due to many factors (fibre, vitamins, fat etc.) and not solely down to the sugar content. Just because fruit has other things in it that make it good for you, it doesn't make the sugar content any better, the benefits of it just outweigh the negatives in most cases.
Juicing fruit releases sugars that are bad for your teeth, which is why fruit juice consumption should be limited and it should be drunk with food. There are fruits that people with type 2 diabetes are told to avoid or restrict due to the sugar content.
I know but as I said sugar in fruit and sugar in chocolate are not the same thing. Fruit sugar is not harmful like processed sugar.
Can you really discern the difference? Although not as ubiquitous as in the US and Canada there are many products here with it, labeled as Glucose Fructose. I wouldn't doubt you've happily consumed it blissfully unawares.
Yes I can taste the difference. So that I don't have to repeat myself, see my earlier posts where I already discussed this with another poster if you're interested.
I know but as I said sugar in fruit and sugar in chocolate are not the same thing. Fruit sugar is not nearly as harmful as processed sugar.
Two reasons:
First, naturally occurring sugar is less concentrated. In other words there's less of it. Secondly, the the sugar in fruits comes packed with other nutrients, which has been alluded to by the other posters up thread. That is the difference. An unrefined gram of sugar is not inherently superior to a processed gram of sugar. The foods/sweets with processed sugar are more unhealthy because you're getting much more sugar without the accompanying nutrients.
I know but as I said sugar in fruit and sugar in chocolate are not the same thing. Fruit sugar is not harmful like processed sugar.
Fruit sugar can be harmful in some circumstances though, hence why fruit juice intake should be restricted and why people with type 2 diabetes are told to avoid certain fruits.
Research shows that it is better to eat more vegetables than fruit because the sugar (fructose) in fruit can actually make you hungrier and pack on “bad” belly fat. But you are right not to avoid it altogether, as it contains micronutrients such as vitamin C, beta-carotene, health-promoting plant chemicals and fibre. Eat no more than 15g of fructose per day (the internet will tell you how much is in specific fruits) and avoid fruit juice, and tinned and dried fruit.
For most people, the benefits of eating fruit outweigh any disadvantages posed by its sugar content. The official recommendation is to eat at least five portions of fruit and vegetables a day, but evidence suggests that eating more than this may reduce mortality. Vegetables may be more protective than fruit, and in Australia people are encouraged to adopt a “5 + 2” approach – that is, five portions of vegetables and two of fruit every day.
An unrefined gram of sugar is not inherently superior to a processed gram of sugar. The foods/sweets with processed sugar are more unhealthy because you're getting much more sugar without the accompanying nutrients.
This is true. I go to the USA every 2 or 3 years and a few years ago I decided to try all those American brands which are always mentioned on TV shows etc.
Twinkies really are disgusting (same as corndogs), in fact my cousins over there didn't know anyone who liked them. Lucky Charms are very good (not worth the cost in Tesco though), as are milk duds. Mountain Dew used to be great, but I've grown sick of it now. Hersheys chocolate is really not that great at all.
BIB: I'm American. I tried a Twinkie a few years ago (I hadn't had once since childhood) and it was awful. I think Americans have great memories of Twinkies but no adult actually eats them.
Reading this is driving me to drink. Thank goodness you can get a reasonable bottle of Spanish red at Aldi for just over three quid. Much better for you than the sugar laden pineapples at 65p each.
Reading this is driving me to drink. Thank goodness you can get a reasonable bottle of Spanish red at Aldi for just over three quid. Much better for you than the sugar laden pineapples at 65p each.
Yes, strange thing to suggest they don't have decent chocolate because of the climate.
First of all, tastes differ in different countries. You are imposing your idea of what tastes "decent" on an entire country that prefers a different kind of chocolate than the one you prefer simply because you grew up with it and became used to it. Americans like their chalky-textured, slightly-sour chocolate, and a Cadbury's Dairy Milk couldn't even be legally sold in America as "chocolate" because it is made with vegetable fat in place of real cocoa butter.
As for the climate issue, in Canada we have both Cadbury and Hershey chocolate. Once in a while we (people in the part of Canada where I live) have an extremely hot summer of the type that is completely standard in the southern US. In these summers the Cadbury pure chocolate like Dairy Milks on shop shelves simply turn to liquid inside their plastic wrappers. The Cadbury products that aren't pure chocolate but have chocolate coating something more substantial are still a gooey mess when the wrappers are opened because the heat has melted the chocolate coating. By contrast, the Hershey products wouldn't liquify in their wrappers in intense summer heat. I say wouldn't (past tense) because that has changed over years, as Hershey Canada has changed their recipe from US Hershey to accommodate the Canadian taste for creamier, sweeter chocolate. They still don't taste as sweet and milky as Cadbury (and they still have a heavier cocoa taste), but the chalky texture that used to keep Canadian Hershey products from melting easily is now gone from their chocolate bars. Hershey Kisses are still done the American way, or perhaps Hershey Canada doesn't bother making those and just imports them from south of the border.
And for those that didn't spot it last time Hershey's chocolate is made from sour milk, that's why it tastes funny.
No it isn't. It's partially lipolyzed, which forms butyric acid and makes the chocolate tangy.
I do think it's a bit funny that people in this thread are simultaneously complaining about how all american food is too sweet, and american chocolate isn't sweet enough.
I've got marshmallow fluff from there for about 2 pound, just to eat when bored. I have also got most willy wonka sweets. A little tub of lucky charms for 1.50 (dont see the hype) huge marshmallows and I mean HUGE for about 6 pound. Cheetos for around a pound. And mine seems to be adding more by the day, I usually go looking there for sweet treats its been at our tesco for years
Comments
I'm fine just waiting for the evidence that you still haven't supplied.
Nice to know you can supply evidence when you can find it.
You just changed the argument. I already agreed that fruit is a healthier choice than pop and chocolate. But why is the sugar in one, in and of itself, worse than the other?
My objection to it (and happiness over the restrictions) is nothing to do with health concerns either... As already said, I can't stand the taste of it.
Well you could become overweight on a diet of fruit. It would just take more time and a lot more effort.
I haven't changed it. The sugar in fruit is natural. The sugar in a can of coke isn't.
Yes fruit is good for you and is much better for you than candy and soda... Nobody on this thread has disputed that.
However, that is due to many factors (fibre, vitamins, fat etc.) and not solely down to the sugar content. Just because fruit has other things in it that make it good for you, it doesn't make the sugar content any better, the benefits of it just outweigh the negatives in most cases.
Juicing fruit releases sugars that are bad for your teeth, which is why fruit juice consumption should be limited and it should be drunk with food. There are fruits that people with type 2 diabetes are told to avoid or restrict due to the sugar content.
Can you really discern the difference? Although not as ubiquitous as in the US and Canada there are many products here with it, labeled as Glucose Fructose. I wouldn't doubt you've happily consumed it blissfully unawares.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature
So what? Death cap mushrooms are natural, does that make them healthier than a bag of crisps?
I know but as I said sugar in fruit and sugar in chocolate are not the same thing. Fruit sugar is not harmful like processed sugar.
Do you ever see huge fat monkeys in the wild? No. They eat natural fruits, veggies, nuts etc rather than bars of cadburys chocolate.
Yes I can taste the difference. So that I don't have to repeat myself, see my earlier posts where I already discussed this with another poster if you're interested.
That's because they don't consume more calories than they need.
But you still haven't answered why fructose and glucose is worse than fructose and glucose.
Two reasons:
First, naturally occurring sugar is less concentrated. In other words there's less of it. Secondly, the the sugar in fruits comes packed with other nutrients, which has been alluded to by the other posters up thread. That is the difference. An unrefined gram of sugar is not inherently superior to a processed gram of sugar. The foods/sweets with processed sugar are more unhealthy because you're getting much more sugar without the accompanying nutrients.
Fruit sugar can be harmful in some circumstances though, hence why fruit juice intake should be restricted and why people with type 2 diabetes are told to avoid certain fruits.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthadvice/10795999/Health-advice-Cutting-out-fruit-on-a-low-sugar-diet.html
And a link to the Australian 2+5 approach that the second quote refers to -
http://www.gofor2and5.com.au/
Yeah this.
BIB: I'm American. I tried a Twinkie a few years ago (I hadn't had once since childhood) and it was awful. I think Americans have great memories of Twinkies but no adult actually eats them.
Lol!!
Don't consume more calories than is required and you wont get fat either, regardless of your diet, even if that diet was nothing but chocolate.
Although you may suffer health problems from lack of things like vitamins and fibre though.
Found these today, so I am happy!
First of all, tastes differ in different countries. You are imposing your idea of what tastes "decent" on an entire country that prefers a different kind of chocolate than the one you prefer simply because you grew up with it and became used to it. Americans like their chalky-textured, slightly-sour chocolate, and a Cadbury's Dairy Milk couldn't even be legally sold in America as "chocolate" because it is made with vegetable fat in place of real cocoa butter.
As for the climate issue, in Canada we have both Cadbury and Hershey chocolate. Once in a while we (people in the part of Canada where I live) have an extremely hot summer of the type that is completely standard in the southern US. In these summers the Cadbury pure chocolate like Dairy Milks on shop shelves simply turn to liquid inside their plastic wrappers. The Cadbury products that aren't pure chocolate but have chocolate coating something more substantial are still a gooey mess when the wrappers are opened because the heat has melted the chocolate coating. By contrast, the Hershey products wouldn't liquify in their wrappers in intense summer heat. I say wouldn't (past tense) because that has changed over years, as Hershey Canada has changed their recipe from US Hershey to accommodate the Canadian taste for creamier, sweeter chocolate. They still don't taste as sweet and milky as Cadbury (and they still have a heavier cocoa taste), but the chalky texture that used to keep Canadian Hershey products from melting easily is now gone from their chocolate bars. Hershey Kisses are still done the American way, or perhaps Hershey Canada doesn't bother making those and just imports them from south of the border.
No it isn't. It's partially lipolyzed, which forms butyric acid and makes the chocolate tangy.
I do think it's a bit funny that people in this thread are simultaneously complaining about how all american food is too sweet, and american chocolate isn't sweet enough.