Fructose causes obesity rather than the fact that people consume more calories than they burn? The things some people will believe.
The way fructose is metabolized, it becomes fat in the body.
You don't have any idea how fructose is metabolized in the body but you want us to believe that it is instantly converted to depot fat? Good grief, does Lustig also buy into this ignorance? Anyone completing a graduate level course in biochemistry knows this is utter nonsense. I can't imagine this is something Lustig would attempt to justify.
Yes, but not HFCS. It is the quantity of increased sugar consumption, powered by HFCS that is the problem.
It's increased sugar consumption, rather than the consumption of calories, that's responsible for all the maladies cited by Lustig? And HFCS is the culprit even though HFCS has replace sucrose on nearly a one-for-one basis since the early 70's? Does Lustig know that the formula of HFCS used in most processed foods only contains 42% fructose while sucrose is comprised of 50% fructose? You'd think Lustig would be singing the praises of this formulation of HFCS rather than condemning it. I guess consistency isn't important to him.
Fructose is capable of promoting hepatic and skeletal muscle insulin resistance, hyperinsulinemia, dyslipidemia, hepatic lipid deposition, and inflammation; similar to the dose-dependent toxic effects of ethanol. Furthermore, fructose is capable of promoting hypothalamic leptin resistance and activation of the reward pathway, resulting in an abnormal drive to continuous consumption
Do you have any understanding of what you're writing or are you just copying and pasting? What a pantload. Does Lustig realize that drinking too much water can be deadly?
The metabolic and central similarities between fructose and ethanol are striking.
Yet he offers no details. This is a fairly complicated subject. You'd think he would explain. Ethanol is already a 2-carbon unit and it is quickly converted to acetyl-CoA. Fructose has its own pathway to becoming acetyl-CoA but it involves many more steps than ethanol. Fructose is not broken down in your liver just like alcohol nor does it produce the same side effects as alcohol (without the buzz). I don't know why he claims they are identical but anyone with his training should know better.
Big Sugar and Big Corn have the money.
Then I suggest you invest in them. How many research grants have you applied for?
Do you work for either?
If you wanted to learn about corn or sugar would you go to someone in the industry or to someone who has no experience with either?
Think about it - he is promoting the drinking of water and eating real food.
Good for him. How does he define "real food?" Beer is bad, fruit juice is bad, soda is bad, lemonade is bad, wine is bad and so on.....Anyone following this guy's advice must be boring as hell. This is no way to live your life.
Maybe he works for Big Water.
Maybe he's just another idiot like Michael Jacobson at CSPI? An educated idiot, that is.
This is exactly the point. HFCS has been substituted into the food supply, so they are consuming more. And the way the body processes fructose, a calorie is not a calorie. Lustig goes through the science. Vatch the video. HFCS is everywhere. Lustig cites a source that went shopping for bread - 32 or so different types, only one with no HFCS. He also talks to the way fructose supresses the "I'm full" digestive process, causing people to overeat. It is not an either/or. I really suggest you watch his video.
As an ancedote, I exercise every day. I eat a healthy diet. Real food, ie, no processed stuff. Yet, when I changed yogurt to one with no HFCS, I dropped an additional 4 lbs. None of the criticism I've seen challenges his basic science - it questions things like the amount of sugar in the Japanese diet.
http://www.alanaragonblog.com/2010/02/19/a-retrospective-of-the-fructose-alarmism-debate/