Is Fruit Much Higher In Sugar Than It Used to Be?
From the American Council on Science and Health:
Is Fruit Much Higher In Sugar Than It Used to Be? Quote:
https://www.acsh.org/news/2019/08/2...t-used-be-14243 :rolleyes: |
I agree with the article that I'd like proof that fruits today contain more sugar. If untrue, that in no way means that I'll increase my currently extremely small consumption of nature's candy.
|
I still need to go read the article (so I don't know if they mentioned this), but consider that the analysis of fruit nutrients was done before the advent of genetically modified foods. Hybridization and genetic modifications have given us lots of "super sweet" varieties of fruits these days, so I really wouldn't be surprised if there's a higher sugar content than there was when I was a kid - because what else would make it taste super sweet aside from a higher sugar content?
Fruit sure tastes sweeter to me these days though - I can't stand to even take a bite of cantaloupe - it tastes sickeningly sweet to me. I don't know how much of that is due to different varieties being developed, and how much of it is from being off sugar for so many years that anything sugary tastes exceptionally sweet to me. It's probably time for the USDA to analyze the newer hybrids and GMO fruits, and compare them with the analysis done on old varieties from way back when the analysis was originally done. I had trouble finding information about when the first food composition analyses were performed, but here's a small quote from a book on Food Composition data first published in 1992: Quote:
It went on to explain how information has been updated over the years: Quote:
In other words, the data can be based on data gathered from as long ago as the 1818 data referred to above, or as recently as the most recent direct method. The individual checking the USDA database to know how much sugar is in that apple will have absolutely no idea which study the information is based on, so there's no way to determine just how accurate it is. In addition to that I have yet to see anything in the USDA database that compares the sugar content of a very tart Granny Smith apple to the super sweet Honey Crisp apple, but I can't imagine that the sugar content of the two is the same. |
I grow fruit trees and lots of tomatoes. Yes, there is a push for sweeter fruit. Measured as brix.
Tomatoes. Sungold is very sweet, Peach is the least sweet of the varieties I have tasted.Green Envy is a surprize: rather bitter until truly ripe, then a hint of richness and moderately sweet. My son picks the sungold for his lunches. No other. Apples. The most popular are the very sweet, like Yellow Delicious and its offspring; and the number one apple Honey crisp. Kingston Black is a bitter sharp and used in cider making, otherwise not edible. Generally, we humans have bred out bitterness, and increased the brix. Im not a professional, still learning.... We like sweet, and sweet sells. |
A lot of fruit is sweeter not because it contains more sugar per gram of fruit, but because they've bred out bitter compounds that compete with the sugar and make it seem less sweet. That is, they've bred out the very "phytonutrients" that we're supposed to benefit from if we take the advice to gorge ourselves on fruit.
The granny smith might have the same sugar as the honey crisp--but the tartness might have us eating less apple. Wild blackberries are all over my lot. They don't taste all that sweet, even to this low carber. The ones in the store are like candy--but will never have as much flavour as when I add sweetener to the wild variety. Quote:
|
I too prefer the wild blackberries.
I like bitter apples, and loved sampling the trees, as a kid. As they colored up and ripened, the sweetness increased. Brix is measured separately from bitter. There are bitter sweet and bitter sharp apples for cider making. Sometimes apples are rated as percent sugar. |
I’m thinking a slice of prosciutto wrapped around that melon could offset the sweetness.
|
I think it depends on how far you look back.
Humans have been selectively breeding the sweetest and largest fruit for almost the entire history of agriculture. "This tree makes the tasting apples in the orchard, so let's plant it's seeds." Repeat again and again, generation after generation. I understand the original wild apple wasn't much bigger than a crabapple and was quite tart. Corn used to be much smaller and probably had less fructose. On the other hand, is the apple sweeter than it was in my mother's day? Probably not. But the apple of a few hundred years ago was probably less sweet. The apple of the cave man/woman era was definitely much less sweet and much smaller. Sadly it doesn't matter to me, an apple has more than 20 carbs, and that's my limit for the day. Bob |
Quote:
This is an important point, as when you are fortunate enough to encounter berries growing in the wild, they are not even close in sweetness to what you can buy in a store. Wild blueberries in Maine and other parts of eastern New England are small, succulent, and very lightly sweet. Agriculture has changed all that and it started many years ago with selective breeding. We don't have store-bought fruits that even come close to a similar species in the wild. So, for a fair comparison, you'd have to go back many years. Not possible today. The danger with these observations refuting higher fructose content is that there are many people who will continue to over-consume fruit because they are continually told to for health improvement. Some people do fine, others, myself included, don't. And yes, one apple would be my carb meal for the day. Not worth it due to the lack of satiety and essential nutrients. |
Imho wild blueberries are sweeter than any cultivated variety Ive sampled.
Seems in the process of developing large berries, the sweetness and complex flavor was lost. |
Quote:
GS does have its own entry in the USDA. Not sure how many others do. I agree it would be great if the many main types were evaluated -- modern versions we get in the stores, maybe at the length of time they are normally purchased. By that I mean they are being bred for things like shipping, and are often picked well pre-ripe. Something picked pre-ripe, boxed, shipped or trucked, that you eat some time after its picking, might have some different values than something picked when ideally ripe from the vine and evaluated right then. I see the gaming of the USDA system already -- such as only providing the 'serving size' for evaluation (as opposed to a larger size they could divide into serving size) and which allows a label to come out saying something like 0 everything -- I have about five spices in my personal spreadsheet with the note "they hide it, USDA says 0 even for cups of it" -- so anything that can be done to game the system, food producers will. PJ |
Apples naturally come is a wide varierty of sizes. From tiny crab apple 1/2 inch across to supersized, like Wolf River.
Carbs per 100 grams would be MOST helpful. IMO ripeness matters. |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 21:43. |
Copyright © 2000-2024 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.