Thursday, July 14, 2011

What the Iranians can teach us about fructose

Aaah the old 'sorry I've not blogged for ages' blog post. I've been on limited internet for a while due to the whole packing-moving-unpacking thing. And to be honest, I've also felt like I don't have anything new to share. Maybe writing about going sugar-free isn't blog worthy. I mean, it seemed like such a big step, a topic which would keep me writing for ages. But turns out that, once past the initial withdrawal and so on, and after trying a few recipes and finding that glucose is nearly as easy to work with as sucrose, it's not such a big deal. It's actually really easy. I've lost nearly 8kg so far, and it keeps going slowly down.

But then again, I do love to write, and so I find myself back here. I was inspired tonight by a study which David Gillespie posted to the Sweet Poison Facebook group. The original study is here. In a nutshell this study showed that high levels of fructose in the diet of men and women in Tehran, Iran was associated with an increased risk of metabolic syndrome, including higher body mass index and abdominal obesity.

Yeah, so? you might be saying. Isn't that the point of this blog, that fructose is bad, bad, bad, and that there is research to prove it? Well, yes, of course. But remember that most of the previous published research in this field has been in rats. And it's easy to dismiss this- a rat is (by definition) not a human. And while there have been other studies on people which showed that the rats were on the right track, they were limited, and open to criticism, for example that they fed people an unrealistic amount of fructose. A 2010 review of research published in the same journal as the new one concluded that "No fully relevant data account for a direct link between moderate dietary fructose intake and health risk markers".

So what we have now is one of the first human (ie, non rat) studies to show strong links between dietary fructose (the fructose that actual humans actually ate as part of their actual normal everyday diet) and metabolic syndrome, independent of age, physical activity, energy intake, dietary intake of other nutrients (eg fat) and BMI (all of which the researchers controlled for in their analysis).

The levels of fructose that this study suggest leads to problems seem quite high: >50g per day. At first glance it may seem like most of us are ok- surely I don't eat more than 50g fructose (100g sucrose), you might say. That's a heck of a lot of sugar. Visualise 22 teaspoons if you can, because that's how much it is. But consider that the average intake of fructose in this study was around 50g. So around half those studied (normal, everyday people) were eating over 50g per day. In their usual diet. And in case you think this only applies to Tehranian Iranians, US figures suggest that on average, Americans eat 55g of fructose per day- again, meaning that around half eat more than this. The data for Aussies is sketchy. In 1995 an Australian Bureau of Statistics survey showed that 20% of Australian energy intake came from sugar (in processed foods, fruit and veg, honey and other sweeteners). 20% of energy intake for a male aged 31-50 is between 104g and 185g per day (in fructose terms, 52-92.5g per day). More current figures are sparse to nonexistent because the ABS no longer conducts this particular survey, but a study being conducted with staff at the Epworth hospital (the SWEET study) may provide more answers (if and when it is published- will be looking out for that one). Preliminary data collected from participants showed that they ate 17 teaspoons per day in added sugars alone. Add in your fruit and veg (these are counted in the fructose total, even if they are healthy!) and I'll bet we are close to averaging the magic (in a bad way) 22 teaspoons.

I can't help but feel that this new study means that David Gillespie and others sounding the warning on fructose like Dr Robert Lustig should take some time out this week to give themselves a little pat on the back and maybe just send a little 'told you so' email to the nay-sayers who have insisted that fructose is fine and dandy like sugar candy. Like the university professors interviewed for this article reassuring the public that sugar is no threat, and that the National Health and Medical Research Council draft nutrition guidelines are being ridiculous for daring to suggest that Australians limit added sugars.


The bottom line is that we (most of us) eat a LOT of sugar. And we can now be more confident that this sugar may be doing us, the humans, and not just the rats, a lot of harm. 

6 comments:

  1. Jemma, I love your blog! I haven't read it all yet, but I have read enough to know that we are of the same mind about many things.

    I have recently embarked upon precisely the same fructose-free life that you have. Although I am taking it one step further, and also trying to be simple carb-free as well for a few months, to see if Gary Taubes theory of retraining fat cell storage will work for me. I am also trying to shift some post-baby kgs (have lost 6 so far in about 6 weeks! Yay!)

    I found your blog when I was trying to find out if anyone has successfully made fructose free chocolate! I've been wanting to share my new knowledge with some of my friends... but I am sooo bad at explaining the why's and wherefores etc, that I have nearly given up, and just told them all to buy 2 books: Sweet Poison Quit Plan, and the Gary Taubes book. So thanks for putting those 2 books in a nutshell along with your own thoughts and discoveries! I will just send all my friends over here!

    Thanks again! Jynni

    ReplyDelete
  2. It's sooo silly for people (corporations) to say "but those are RATS, not humans" when you can see for yourself and by looking around at others, and also watching TV shows like The Biggest Loser, what sugar and saturated fat does to us. Sugar is in EVERYTHING, but what is even harder is the "oh, but everything in moderation, right?" mindset that people spout off.

    What they probably don't realise is how addicted they themselves are. It's only until you try to give up sugar for 30 days is when you realise that a) sugar is in everything and b) you are addicted to it. But to get people to give up sugar in the first place is damn near impossible because they don't believe that it does any harm.

    Your baby boy is so cute! I'm also planning on raising my children to be fructose-free - with my children only having sugar on their birthday, Easter and Xmas, preferably only dextrose recipes, if I can help it. The absolute worst ad is the Jalna one on TV with the little baby girl in a high-chair eating basically a whole tub of the high sugar "natural" yogurt. Nope, my kids can have BD Farms unflavoured yogurt with cinnamon, lol.

    How do you approach the subject and ensure that well-meaning relatives and friends don't give your child sugar?

    Also, where can I buy Dextrose?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thank you Jynni and Anonymous for your comments! I love comments.

    Anon- to answer your questions...

    Dextrose powder- the only place I can reliably buy this (in Vic) is at Big W in the brewing section. A home brew supply store might have it, or other general grocery stores that have good home brew sections.

    I totally agree about that Jalna ad- the other one that makes me cringe is the Milky Way one where they equate play, fun and even having an imagination with having a chocolate!

    I think the hardest part about keeping kids away from sweet stuff is other people's expectations, as 'treats' have become such an everyday part of our lifestyles. At the moment he is still young (not quite 2) and most people ask me before offering him anything. I think there is an understanding that I might not want him to have certain things at his age, and also that he might have allergies etc (he doesn't but people are quite wary). I can usually get away with saying something like 'thank you but he'd be happy with a...(piece of fruit, savoury cracker, whatever snack I have packed for him)'. I know this strategy will have to change as he gets older and starts to actively participate in choosing his food, especially when it is offered to him (in front of him) by someone well-meaning! It's probably going to take 99% bravery (to look like the over-protective, non-treat-giving, mean mother), and 1% compromise (letting him have the very ocassional Tiny Teddy or chocolate Santa or whatever when offered to him, but refusing or redirecting him to something healthier whenever I can).

    In a perfect world, I would go the hard line and say no sugar ever (and dextrose sweets only), but I honestly don't think that is possible unless you are surrounded by a community (friends, family) of like-minded anti-sugar-ites. So a 99% sugar free tot is my aim.

    Maybe I am being defeatest about it though...

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thank you for your answer, Jemma. I don't have kids yet but plan to raise them as sugar free as possible. I think that your approach is a good one in that treats should be occasional (birthdays and christmas are for indulging after all). It's hard though because family and friends, me included, equate sugar = love. Think about it.

    But I think you have a very balanced approach. Thanks for your blog and recipes! I'm going to but some brewers dextrose from Coles.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Oooh. I have seen the Milky Way ad yet, but I think the reason why the Jalna ad gets to me is because they baby is so cute, and there is soooo much fructose in that one jar - thinking that a helpless baby is eating jars of fructose at a time is yuck!

    ReplyDelete
  6. I just want to thank you for this blog. I have a fructose intolerance. Finding foods I can eat has been difficult you are helping a lot. Thanks.

    ReplyDelete