Tuesday, January 18, 2011

Follow Up On HFCS and Doughnuts

Had a follow up question yesterday that prompted the following.

As you recall, the topic was fructose and the different way it is suspected of creating injury when overconsumed - primarily, by taxing the liver in a way that accelerates metabolic syndrome, and by providing what might be a unique fuel for cancer cells (many of which are fueled by fermentation). 

I finished with a tongue in cheek comment about skipping the HFCS laden 'recovery' drinks for kids, and just giving your kids a doughnut, since the metabolic injury would be the same, but the kids would like the doughnuts more.  This point bears a tiny bit of elaboration.

HFCS is not significantly different than regular table sugar.  It has slightly more fructose content.  The reason HFCS is being 'targeted' for bad press has to do with how much of it we Americans consume.  HFCS is in many, many processed foods, and in gatorade types of drinks, as well as sugared sodas like Coke and Pepsi.  I recall one estimate that we've increased fructose consumption from less than 5% of total caloric intake to over 30%.  It's not important to me what the actual numbers are, but the point is that as HFCS refining has reduced the cost of bring processed products to market, and in conjunction with the impact of people's misguided search for low fat products, we're eating more fructose (and sugar) than ever.  Taubes quotes a stat from Good Calories Bad Calories that we're eating on average 150 pounds per year of sugar, compared to less than 20 pounds per year a hundred years ago - and I suspect those folks they were probably eating more sugar than the generations before them. 

In short, we're eating a toxic dose of sugars in all forms, and the irony of it is we may be choosing more sugar while trying to 'eat healthy.'  Nutragrain and other types of low fat food bars, low fat products with bread, rice etc (which have the same metabolic impact as sugars), large servings of juice, pasta, breakfast cereals, etc; I meet people daily who say "I eat a very healthy diet", but what they mean is "I think pounding down 200-400g/day of carbohydrate based processed foods, without much fat, is healthy." 

There are only a few people who can function well on that much sugar/carbohydrate, and most of them are in college!

"What to do?"
If you are trying to get healthy, trying to get on top of your metabolic injury, trying to establish a new pattern of eating that is sustainable for the rest of your life, be very particular about sugar and carbohydrate consumption in the early going - the less, the better.  If you hold sugar consumption to 25g/day, you will be at about 20 pounds per year, and there's some reason to believe that is a safe, sustainable dose.  There are those who have sustained enough metabolic injury, through a lifetime of "POWER CARB CONSUMPTION," that they many not be able to eat 25g/day of sugar and 'heal.'  These folks may have to restrict sugar to a lower level, and total carbs to a lower level, to get their metabolism to run like it was designed to.

Don't want to do the math as regards your diet, and counting grams of carbs and sugar?  Then try this approach by William Davis (http://heartscanblog.blogspot.com/2010/12/i-lost-37-lbs-with-fingerstick.html).  Measure your blood glucose when you eat, and one hour later, and see just which meals result in toxic glucose levels (<100 = good, <85 = very good, 70 = paleo model awesome).  I love this method if for no other reason than it gives the lie to the old 'simple carbs' v. 'complex carbs' nonsense! 

And this brings us full circle - a big slug of gatorade or Dr. Pepper may not kick the glucose as high, as fast, as a subway sandwich's bread but the fructose is still working your liver over when "over consumed."

In closing, I have to give Gatorade some credit - they have a new, smaller size product with "only" 7g of sugar - thankfully, other parents have started bringing these to soccer and flagball games for the post-game snack.  Propel is also relatively low in sugar, so at least there are a couple of options that may survivable.

No comments:

Post a Comment