Fructose syrup and Fruit fructose.... not the same

When it comes to dieting for fat loss, fruits have a bad rap. All thanks to HFCS (high fructose corn syrup) and its wreck havoc on the American waistlines. It's no wonder since the standout word in that term is "fructose".

When you ask a bodybuilder if he or she ever eats fruits, and you will most likely get a reply of no, preceded by a 4 letter word starting with the letter H, depicting a high temperature after world. But ask a type II diabetic that same question, and the answer is completely & adamantly opposite. Why is it OK for a diabetic to eat fruits when controlling their blood sugar is a matter of life or death. Yet a bodybuilder would avoid it like a plague, even though their diets revolve around controlling blood sugar as well.

Bodybuilders aren't dunces when it comes to the subject of blood sugar control. But their knowledge of it stems from hand me down information rooted in strong practical knowledge, polka-dotted with scientific backing. Yes, fruits do contain a monosaccharide called fructose. And this fructose has a similar effect on blood sugar as sucrose, also known as table sugar which is fructose bonded with glucose. When combined together to form fructose syrup, it becomes a whole new issue on blood sugar. The pathways each sugar type takes within the body to be converted into blood sugar, or glucose, their effects greatly differ.

But what is really important is how quickly all sugars (whether from a monosaccharide "sugar" or multi chain carbohydrates) break down into glucose (blood sugar) and enter the bloodstream. The quicker this occurs, the quicker and higher blood sugar rises thus increasing insulin release into the bloodstream, in direct proportions and speed. Insulin then tells excess glucose to go into 3 places; fat cells, glycogen (glucose in storage form, mainly in muscles and the liver) or the cells that are needing immediate energy. If needy cells are not in use, some glucose enters the glycogen stores. If glycogen stores are full, the glucose gets converted into fat and stored.... well, in fat cells. This is how it is supposed to go.

This is where the different types of sugars differ as well as the "situation" of the fructose molecule. What I mean by situation is free floating fructose, as it is in HFCS or regular syrup, and encased fructose, as it is within the actual flexh of fruit. Fructose when combined with sucrose to form fructose syrup, gets converted into glucose very rapidly then dumped into the bloodstream rapidly, alarming the body and causing a directionally proportionate amount of insulin to prevent the blood from becoming sticky or syrupy. Studies have shown that an equal mixture of Fructose and glucose as sucrose is (50/50), which is the majority of HFCS (45/55 to 80/20), gets absorbed into the bloodstream the fastest (1). Both have equal absorption rates. It just happens that HFCS is derived cheaply from corn, an abundant crop in the US. But sucrose is derived mainly from beets; which is not as abundantly grown in the US. Therefore, HFCS is the most commonly used sweetener in the US. And look at all the damage it has done!

With that in mind, do you see where people might assume "fructose", as it lies in the flesh of fruit, might be mistaken for HFCS? The truth actually is that fructose has a lighter effect on insulin production. Fructose has a very low glycemic index of 19. Glucose is what all sugars and carbohydrates are compared against on the Glycemic Index scoresheet; it has a score of 100. Sucrose is 68. (These of course are numbers that don't depict margin of error).

One could say that this difference could be due to the fact that in HFCS, the glucose is kicking it with the fructose (which is almost entirely metabolized by the liver on its own) and therefore gets dragged into the bloodstream kicking and screaming. Fructose within fruit, must be digested to release the fructose, then must travel to the liver before it's broken down into glucose. Unfortunately, too much of it gets converted into triglycerides and eventually fat.

The difference between fructose consumption via fruit or HFCS, lies simply in the math. There is 4.2 calories in 1 gram on sucrose or HFCS. A tablespoon of either contains roughly 12 g of carbohydrates (46-48 calories). To consume its equivalent in apple flesh, you'd have to consume 3.25 ounces which is the equivalent of extra small apple 2.5 inches in diameter or 14 grapes. A typical can of soda contains about 154 calories or 41.5 grams of HFCS. Thus it's upper 40's caloric equivalent is a mere 3.75 oz or almost 1/3 of a 12 oz can!

Interesting facts about Fructose and HFCS
- consuming 120 calories of HFCS can result in approximately 40 calories of stored fat
- The lower freezing point of high fructose corn syrup allows the frozen beverage to be easily thawed and mixed with water
- Calling HFCS high in fructose" is a misnomer, since the content of fructose is similar to that of table sugar or honey
- It is the fructose that make HFCS taste sweeter than table sugar
- Sugars that are claimed to be "natural" are actually not. All sweeteners require some degree of processing, but they all are derived from natural sources. Just because it's "natural" doesn't mean its healthy or non-fattening.












(1) "Intestinal absorption of fructose in the rat". Gastroenterology 101: 360–367. PMID 206591 Fujisawa, T; Riby J, Kretchmer N (1991).