From fruit juice to honey, the truth about 'healthy' sugars
Quote:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/health-...healthy-sugars/ |
Know what tastes sweet to me now? PECANS.
|
What tastes sweet to me now is a bunch of sugar-free sweetener, or kool-aid. I'm not sure pecans tasting sweeter would even work in my favour--they already taste more than good enough to binge on. Only half-joking here--I really do think a problem with becoming more sensitive to sweet is that more subtly sweet things taste sweeter, coming closer to that 'sweet spot' of sweetness that makes binges or just plain overconsumption more likely in the rodent studies. People say they don't binge on apples, unlike apple pastries, for instance--that might have been true for me back when I was heavier, and ate more apple pastries. At a much leaner weight, when I've experimented with fruit and berries, yes they've tasted sweeter, but I've also been much more likely to over-do them.
Shades of gray--to the extent that this is true, it needs to be applied not just to fruit-versus-added-sugars, but within the "fruit' group itself. Berries and cantalopes might be low enough sugar, something like a banana or pineapple is another thing entirely. Date paste or syrup? Heck, dates themselves, or figs, aren't much better than the concentrated forms. A date is 75 percent carbohydrate, most of that sugar. We can hack real food to give ourselves the same macronutrient ratios as the SAD. Not sure that's wise... |
This article is so well intentioned. But then...well, bless her heart for trying anyway. It's a step in the right direction.
|
I wonder at the "extra fiber" in place of sugar. Some fibers like inulin are fairly sweet and are already used sometimes in candy--at least I've read they're doing that in Japan. A bit of fiber for texture/bulk--but it wouldn't be as sweet. A slightly higher fructose sugar could make the "sugar" count lower without reduced sweetness. Just being paranoid ahead of time about a product I wouldn't buy anyways.
|
Quote:
I remember the years (decades?) of falling for the deception that honey and maple syrup were better for you than sugar, because they had small amounts of other nutrients in them. And fruit -well, there's all those vitamins and all that fiber in those. Of course the fructose in the fruit was considered harmless, because it didn't raise blood sugar, and high fructose corn syrup was better for you than sugar for the same reason. My excuse is that I fell for all that back before the internet - it was difficult to even find more than very vague information about what nutrients were in various foods, much less to be able to put those nutrients in any kind of perspective to the total amount of sugar in them. As far as fructose and HFCS are concerned - I don't know when it first came to light that it could cause NAFL problems, but even if THEY happened to have an inkling back in the 80's about all the problems it would cause, that information sure hadn't trickled down to the general populace. ~~~~ I don't know if the article quoted above was the entire article or not - all but the first few sentences are hidden, unless you pay to register to read the rest of it. But I wonder why Stevia was included in the list of sugars. If the list had been called natural sweeteners, I could see it included there, but the way it's written, it makes it sound as if even though it's a zero calorie sweetener, it's still just as bad for you as all the others they listed. (aside from the sweet taste of it - but to me the taste of stevia is quite different from the taste of sugars, so to me that's not even a reason to include it in that list): Quote:
Sure, if you ate a teaspoon of stevia, it would have about the same amount of carbs/sugar as a teaspoon of the other sweeteners. But the sweetening power of an entire teaspoon of straight stevia would make it impossible to gag down, unless you were eating... oh I don't know, maybe a quadruple big batch of cookies sweetened only with stevia, since such a tiny bit of it goes such a long way. |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 21:16. |
Copyright © 2000-2024 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.