• Please Remember: Members are only permitted to share their own experiences. Members are not qualified to give medical advice. Additionally, everyone manages their health differently. Please be respectful of other people's opinions about their own diabetes management.
  • We seem to be having technical difficulties with new user accounts. If you are trying to register please check your Spam or Junk folder for your confirmation email. If you still haven't received a confirmation email, please reach out to our support inbox: support.forum@diabetes.org.uk

banana

  • Thread starter Thread starter Owen
  • Start date Start date
Status
This thread is now closed. Please contact Anna DUK, Ieva DUK or everydayupsanddowns if you would like it re-opened.
The sugars in OJ are sucrose, half glucose, half fructose.
The glucose content in the OJ treats the hypo and registers on the meter. The fructose doesn't treat the hypo, or registers. It has to be metabolised by the liver, like alcohol and turned to fat.
480px-Fructose-triglyceride.jpg
I think I understand, this is good to know. I admit I had assumed that all the sugar in fruit was fructose. A table I found says that apple juice is 56% fructose, so in that case it's not a very efficient hypo treatment, but my experience is that it works! When I drink 100 ml apple juice (10 g sugar) it seems to behave just like 10 g Dextrosol tablets, but a bit quicker. If I am only getting 5g of hypo treatment I am surprised at the effect!
 
Bilbie, are you suggesting that the primary cause of NAFLD is from fructose. In the same way that alcohol causes liver disease?
It's very much a part of it. as well as the videos above. Professor Taylor and fatty liver and NC diet.

pick up the video at the 5 minute mark, a near 30% increase in liver fat in just 3 weeks of extra Sucrose, a small bag of lollies, a soft drink and a fruit juice
http://www.fend-lectures.org/index.php?menu=view&id=94
 
Last edited:
Is there some debate on wether the fructose is processed or from natural fruits. I understand that the juicing fad may be causing some possible risks.

Certainly the trend for HFCS is dangerous.
 
Certainly the trend for HFCS is dangerous.
Agreed...... It was a disaster for nutrition when they invented the stuff.....

I advocate made from scratch wherever possible (helps that I enjoy cooking).... Sounds familiar doesn't it, kinda the way our Mothers & Grandmothers fed us.
 
Gobbledegook to me. What the hell is a polyol pathway when it's at home? Can someone explain it in simple terms.
Thanks Matt, I was thinking it was just me!
 
I've been thinking about this a lot. It is a huge revelation to me that fructose doesn't raise blood glucose and it has made me wonder a few things: all my ratios for insulin dosing for fruit (and veg containing fructose) must be wrong, assuming fructose is included in the carbs shown in nutritional info. I now feel I need to know the carbs excluding fructose in foods so I can dose correctly, can anyone point me to a reliable source of this info please? I am also wondering why I haven't noticed that I've been overdosing insulin for fruit for the past 10 years since I've been carb counting?
Also if fructose and alcohol are both turned straight into fat, does that mean they are basically bad for us full stop?

Very interested in others' observations and wondering why I have never been told this by dietitians who have advised me!
 
I've been thinking about this a lot. It is a huge revelation to me that fructose doesn't raise blood glucose and it has made me wonder a few things: all my ratios for insulin dosing for fruit (and veg containing fructose) must be wrong, assuming fructose is included in the carbs shown in nutritional info. I now feel I need to know the carbs excluding fructose in foods so I can dose correctly, can anyone point me to a reliable source of this info please? I am also wondering why I haven't noticed that I've been overdosing insulin for fruit for the past 10 years since I've been carb counting?
Also if fructose and alcohol are both turned straight into fat, does that mean they are basically bad for us full stop?

Very interested in others' observations and wondering why I have never been told this by dietitians who have advised me!
Haven't looked into this too closely, but I'm sceptical about this theory already. As you say, your carb counting has worked for years by accounting for the fructose as carbs that will raise levels, so need to be injected for - exactly the same for me, and since I've never heard this as a problem from anyone else here over the past 8 years it I find it difficult to believe 🙄
 
Together as sucrose they are 58 GI. I did put up the GI of fructose by itself, it's 19, about the same as a peanut. Glucose by itself is 100,
 
Status
This thread is now closed. Please contact Anna DUK, Ieva DUK or everydayupsanddowns if you would like it re-opened.
Back
Top