Fructose More Toxic than Table Sugar in Mice

[DeSwiss]

Sensitive Toxicity Test Used Sugars in Doses Like What We Eat


Health & Medicine

Jan. 5, 2015

When University of Utah biologists fed mice sugar in doses proportional to what many people eat, the fructose-glucose mixture found in high-fructose corn syrup was more toxic than sucrose or table sugar, reducing both the reproduction and lifespan of female rodents. “This is the most robust study showing there is a difference between high-fructose corn syrup and table sugar at human-relevant doses,” says biology professor Wayne Potts, senior author of a new study scheduled for publication in the March 2015 issue of The Journal of Nutrition.

The study found no differences in survival, reproduction or territoriality of male mice on the high-fructose and sucrose diets. The researchers say that may be because both sugars are equally toxic to male mice. Both high-fructose corn syrup found in many processed foods and table sugar found in baked goods contain roughly equal amounts of fructose and glucose. But in corn syrup, they are separate molecules, called monosaccharides. In contrast, sucrose or table sugar is a disaccharide compound formed when fructose and glucose bond chemically.

Potts says the debate over the relative dangers of fructose and sucrose is important “because when the diabetes-obesity-metabolic syndrome epidemics started in the mid-1970s, they corresponded with both a general increase in consumption of added sugar and the switchover from sucrose being the main added sugar in the American diet to high-fructose corn syrup making up half our sugar intake.”

James Ruff, the study’s first author and a postdoctoral fellow in biology, says, “Our previous work and plenty of other studies have shown that added sugar in general is bad for your health. So first, reduce added sugar across the board. Then worry about the type of sugar, and decrease consumption of products with high-fructose corn syrup.”

MORE

[Xipe Totec]

1. You know what else is high in fructose?

Fruit.

That's where the name comes from.

[TreasonousBastard]

2. But, there it's often bonded with sucrose...

to form a disaccharide.

Besides, you have to eat a lot of apples to get as much as you get in a can of soda.

[Xipe Totec]

3. Isn't that what high fructose corn syrup is, fructose + glucose? nt

[Xipe Totec]

5. sucrose is the disaccharide of glucose and fructose.

[TreasonousBastard]

7. You're right-- I typed too fast.

[Major Nikon]

13. True, but that bond is easily broken in a low PH solution

Kinda like the one found in the human stomach. Which makes HFCS and sucrose almost exactly identical well before it ever enters the bloodstream.

[DeSwiss]

6. Fructose is NOT the same thing.....

...as HIGH-FRUCTOSE CORN SYRUP.

Heat forms potentially harmful substance in high-fructose corn syrup

Study Finds High-Fructose Corn Syrup Contains Mercury

A sweet problem: Princeton researchers find that high-fructose corn syrup prompts considerably more weight gain

- What we call, ''fructose'' was made by Mother Nature when we were first crawling out of the muck eons ago. And she did so with no aid nor input from mankind. Not even the name.

High-Fructose Corn Syrup by contrast is a sweet-poison responsible for many deaths and much disease. It is MANUFACTURED IN AN INDUSTRIAL PLANT NOT IN A FLOWER OR A PIECE OF FRUIT.

This has been a public service message.

[Kablooie]

4. Yeah, but are you a man or are you a mouse?

[woo me with science]

8. Corporations Have Renamed ‘High Fructose Corn Syrup’

An important post from edhopper that is relevant here:

edhopper (12,226 posts)

Corporations Have Renamed ‘High Fructose Corn Syrup’

http://wearechange.org/corporations-renamed-high-fructose-corn-syrup/

The product is General Mills’ Vanilla Chex, an updated version of the Chex cereal sold in most conventional grocery and discount stores for many years. The front of the box clearly states that the product contains “no high fructose corn syrup” (HFCS), but turn it over to read the ingredient list and there it is – the new isolated fructose.

Why is that a problem? According to the Corn Refiners Association (CRA), there’s been a sneaky name change. The term ‘fructose’ is now being used to denote a product that was previously known as HFCS-90, meaning it is 90 percent pure fructose. Compare this to what is termed ‘regular’ HFCS, which contains either 42 or 55 percent fructose, and you will know why General Mills is so eager to keep you in the dark.

CRA explains:

“A third product, HFCS-90, is sometimes used in natural and ‘light’ foods, where very little is needed to provide sweetness. Syrups with 90% fructose will not state high fructose corn syrup on the label , they will state ‘fructose’ or ‘fructose syrup’.”

187 Recs

Corporatists LIE. It's what they do.

[DeSwiss]

19. Yeah, they got turned down for ''corn sugar.''

- Which was too blatant a load of shit even for the FDA. These people are sick. They don't give a shit about anything nor anyone but themselves.

[Exhibit A]

9. Neither sucrose nor fructose is toxic.

Biologists should know better.

[Major Nikon]

11. Even water can be toxic

The dose is the determining factor as to whether any ill effects can be observed.

[Exhibit A]

12. That's not toxicity as an inherent property of water.

Water is not toxic. Having too much in your system can be dangerous, but that still does not make water itself toxic.

[Major Nikon]

15. ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_intoxication

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1770067/

Toxicity is the degree to which a substance can damage an organism. Toxicity can refer to the effect on a whole organism, such as an animal, bacterium, or plant, as well as the effect on a substructure of the organism, such as a cell (cytotoxicity) or an organ such as the liver (hepatotoxicity). By extension, the word may be metaphorically used to describe toxic effects on larger and more complex groups, such as the family unit or society at large.

A central concept of toxicology is that effects are dose-dependent; even water can lead to water intoxication when taken in too high a dose, whereas for even a very toxic substance such as snake venom there is a dose below which there is no detectable toxic effect. Toxicity is species-specific, making cross-species analysis problematic. Newer paradigms and metrics are evolving to bypass animal testing, while maintaining the concept of toxicity endpoints.[1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxicity

[uppityperson]

17. +++++

[Exhibit A]

24. That still does not mean that water is toxic.

What is toxic is the condition of too much of it in the body. That is not the same thing as water being a toxic substance.

[Major Nikon]

25. What makes anything toxic is the condition of too much of it in the body

So yeah, that's exactly what it means when anything is toxic.

Reading on in what I've already provided to you...

Physical toxicants are substances that, due to their physical nature, interfere with biological processes. Examples include coal dust, asbestos fibers or finely divided silicon dioxide, all of which can ultimately be fatal if inhaled. Corrosive chemicals possess physical toxicity because they destroy tissues, but they're not directly poisonous unless they interfere directly with biological activity. Water can act as a physical toxicant if taken in extremely high doses because the concentration of vital ions decreases dramatically if there's too much water in the body. Asphyxiant gases can be considered physical toxicants because they act by displacing oxygen in the environment but they are inert, not toxic gases.

The point is calling anything "toxic" is utterly meaningless unless dosage is considered.

[merrily]

35. I've had water poisoning. It's no joke.

I had never heard of water poisoning. It was an unexpectedly hot day. Seemed too early for AC and my preference is ambient temperature anyway.

The heat had destroyed my appetite and increased my thirst. As a rule, I keep my salt low, except for the occasional potato chip binge. Yadda yadda, bizarre symptoms. As I tried to figure out what was happening with what was left of my ability to think, I thought, "What could possibly be wrong? I've been doing nothing all day but drinking water."

Light dawned and I googled water poisoning. I began having bits of salt at a time and I soon recovered. Scary surprise, though!

[DeSwiss]

20. I noticed you deftly omitted uttering the words......

...HIGH. FRUCTOSE. CORN. SYRUP. Now why is that? Is it because you KNOW that it is toxic? Because it's been proven to contain mercury and other toxic substances particularly when heated (as all HFCS is as part of the process of making it requires) as the above scholarly articles and studies have proven?

- And which is what this whole thread's article is about?

Nah.........

[Exhibit A]

23. Give me a break.

I didn't say "high fructose corn syrup" because that isn't what I was talking about. I was talking about fructose. It's absurd to claim that fructose and sucrose are toxic, and although apparently there are people who have difficulty distinguishing between toxic substances and toxic conditions, my point is valid. But since you bring it up . . . if HFCS were toxic, I would be dead by now, because I consume extremely high amounts of it. In reality, I am very much alive, not obese, not diabetic, and probably not suffering from any other health condition that has been falsely blamed on HFCS. I find this hysteria about sugars in general, and HFCS in particular, laughable.

[DeSwiss]

37. Then your beef is with the people who wrote the article and entitled it.

And apparently with science. But not with me. And yet you chose to express your distaste for their use of ''loose language'' in the title, in my thread. Even though I provided a link in the thread wherein you might have issued your complaints directly with the source. The article isn't claiming that fructose nor sucrose is toxic, but then you'd have to have read the thing to know that.

- Thanks a lot.


PUBLIC NOTICE: This thread's article is about high-fructose corn syrup.......

[Major Nikon]

10. The study defeats its own conclusions

Male rats weren't affected differently so one can just as easily conclude both sugars are equally as toxic to all humans which would agree with pretty much all studies done on actual humans.

[Trillo]

14. Mildly interesting topic to me, I use invert syrup sometimes

which is sucrose split into fructose and glucose. Anyway, from Wikipedia, "... gastric acidity converts sucrose to glucose and fructose during digestion."

From OP's article

The study found no differences in survival, reproduction or territoriality of male mice on the high-fructose and sucrose diets. The researchers say that may be because both sugars are equally toxic to male mice.
...
The new study found no differences in males on the two diets in terms of survival, reproduction or ability to compete for territory. But Potts said the 2013 study showed male mice were a quarter less likely to hold territory and reproduce on the fructose-glucose mix compared with starch. That, combined with the new findings, “suggests sucrose is as bad for males as high-fructose corn syrup,” he says.

[DeSwiss]

21. Our bodies evolved as hunter-gatherers.....

...they were designed to intake all kinds of nutrients, in different forms including sugars, depending upon our geographical location and the seasons of the year which determined availability. And we consumed those sugars in their more natural forms -- and while walking. Walking. Every. Damned. Where. That's what hunters and gatherers do.

Now none of that matters. We sit on our butts most of the time (compared to prehistory, remember?) and eat things that we have no idea what's in it. We process, poison and genetically modify the food we grow. We add petrochemical additives for color and flavor and texture and in some cases much of the volume of the ''food'' itself (Cool Whip comes to mind) is manufactured rather than grown or raised. Drilled from the earth, yes.

We've created well over 50,000 chemical compounds and added them to our food, our air and our water. And we still have no idea exactly what they do to us (the EPA's been trying to find out since 1997) -- we do know some (BPA for example) of it's reducing the species ability to reproduce, causing sterility and testicular cancer, though].

- So it amazes me that people wonder why there's so much illness and a perceived need for health insurance. When what we need is to stop eating, breathing and drinking the poisons, first.

Let's see if that helps.....

[Trillo]

28. Invert syrup is basically pancake syrup

for example. Note the source is cane sugar, not corn starch which is made into corn syrup. An alternative might be Aunt Jemima's. Note both "corn syrup" and "high fructose corn syrup." The labels are much different, while I'm certain the products are much the same when considered at monosaccaride glucose & fructose levels. They cannot have sucrose, as it would crystallize in the jars long before it reached the consumer.

As a retail customer, I can't find a source of regular corn syrup! I can only find "light corn syrup" in the grocery stores here in SoCal. The corporate manufacturers buy products that are different from what I can buy as a consumer in the typical grocery store. I have also never seen HFCS 42, 55, or 90, none of them, in grocery stores, though the manufacturers seem to have no troubles sourcing them, as they are in a lot of products. Invert syrup would be between HFCS42 and HFCS55 when ranked by fructose to glucose ratio, which is 50:50, but it is not made from corn.

Both sources of sugar are Much different from a hunter gatherer diet. The hunter portion of those diets are not "kind to animals." There are so many different ideas of what is healthy, and is the health concern selfish or about others' health.

I wish I knew where the truth was.

[Bluenorthwest]

30. Pancake syrup comes out of tapped maple trees. That other stuff, that's for flapjacks.

nt

[Liberal_in_LA]

16. it is getting confusing. all these claims about diffkinds of sugar

[Major Nikon]

18. Not as much as some suggest

Both controversy and confusion exist concerning fructose, sucrose, and high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) with respect to their metabolism and health effects. These concerns have often been fueled by speculation based on limited data or animal studies. In retrospect, recent controversies arose when a scientific commentary was published suggesting a possible unique link between HFCS consumption and obesity. Since then, a broad scientific consensus has emerged that there are no metabolic or endocrine response differences between HFCS and sucrose related to obesity or any other adverse health outcome. This equivalence is not surprising given that both of these sugars contain approximately equal amounts of fructose and glucose, contain the same number of calories, possess the same level of sweetness, and are absorbed identically through the gastrointestinal tract.

http://advances.nutrition.org/content/4/2/236

[DeSwiss]

22. The best advice was in the last sentence above:

James Ruff, the study’s first author and a postdoctoral fellow in biology, says, “Our previous work and plenty of other studies have shown that added sugar in general is bad for your health. So first, reduce added sugar across the board. Then worry about the type of sugar, and decrease consumption of products with high-fructose corn syrup.”

[Liberal_in_LA]

29. good general advice

[merrily]

26. Gee, and they kept telling us, Gertrude Stein-like, that sugar is sugar is sugar.

"first reduce sugar across the board. Then worry about the type of sugar." Why in that order? Why not do the easier elimination of a harmful thing first first?

I've already reduced sugar as much as I am ever realistically likely to reduce it. If you tell me I should not move on to eliminating fructose until I reduce it even more, realistically, I may never get to the second step.

[DeSwiss]

32. The BEST advisor you have lives inside your head.

- Listen to what it says. Otherwise you're just living someone else's perspective of life.


HFCS is made from GMO, pesticide-ridden corn. Nuff said.......

[merrily]

34. I am not sure of that, but I do know that ingredients are added to addict us.

Example: Coca Cola's secret addictive ingredient was, of course, cocaine. When someone put an end to that, they added caffeine, also addictive, but without the high. At one time, they bought caffeine from Sanka. I don't know if they still do. Probably cheaper to use an articificial form.

Anyway, I always had the feeling that the reason for high fructose, rather than table sugar had something to do with addiction. Of course, I could be wrong, but I did try to stay away from it

[DeSwiss]

36. From the Princeton study:

High-fructose corn syrup and sucrose are both compounds that contain the simple sugars fructose and glucose, but there at least two clear differences between them.

First, sucrose is composed of equal amounts of the two simple sugars -- it is 50 percent fructose and 50 percent glucose -- but the typical high-fructose corn syrup used in this study features a slightly imbalanced ratio, containing 55 percent fructose and 42 percent glucose.

Larger sugar molecules called higher saccharides make up the remaining 3 percent of the sweetener.

Second, as a result of the manufacturing process for high-fructose corn syrup, the fructose molecules in the sweetener are free and unbound, ready for absorption and utilization.

In contrast, every fructose molecule in sucrose that comes from cane sugar or beet sugar is bound to a corresponding glucose molecule and must go through an extra metabolic step before it can be utilized.

This creates a fascinating puzzle. The rats in the Princeton study became obese by drinking high-fructose corn syrup, but not by drinking sucrose. The critical differences in appetite, metabolism and gene expression that underlie this phenomenon are yet to be discovered, but may relate to the fact that excess fructose is being metabolized to produce fat, while glucose is largely being processed for energy or stored as a carbohydrate, called glycogen, in the liver and muscles.

In the 40 years since the introduction of high-fructose corn syrup as a cost-effective sweetener in the American diet, rates of obesity in the U.S. have skyrocketed, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In 1970, around 15 percent of the U.S. population met the definition for obesity; today, roughly one-third of the American adults are considered obese, the CDC reported. High-fructose corn syrup is found in a wide range of foods and beverages, including fruit juice, soda, cereal, bread, yogurt, ketchup and mayonnaise. On average, Americans consume 60 pounds of the sweetener per person every year.

https://www.princeton.edu/main/news/archive/S26/91/22K07/

[merrily]

39. Thanks (and ugh)

[B2G]

27. Chocolate is toxic to dogs, therefore

it must be toxic to humans.

Same reasoning. I'm getting sick of all of these 'studies'.

[benz380]

31. Laboratory mice cause cancer and are toxic to humans. nt

[DeSwiss]

38. Laboratory Mouse sez: ''You'll be hearing from my lawyer!''