0

votes

Daily honey ?

Commented on February 20, 2014
Created February 17, 2014 at 11:24 PM

I am talking local, raw honey here. I like to have a bit of a sweet most days of the week. Usually this includes apple with nut butter, a banana with some 100 dark chocolate, some healthy brownies made with squash, hone, and coconut flour... ext.

I love honey and use some most days of the week, around a TBSP. I also have honey with the pollen and use it.

I am 16yo, 5'5.5", around 110lbs, around 14%BF. I strength train 5x a week, power yoga 2x, HIIT 2-3 times. I want to loose/at least maintain fat and gain muscle.

What is your take on honey and using it daily? I know your body NEEDS sugar and honey is so good for you. I know many healthy people who eat 1/3 cup daily. Here is an article from one of my favorite blogs about it.

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 20, 2014
at 03:49 PM

Thank you good sir. I wholeheartedly agree, there might be things in honey that are good (miscellaneous vitamins and minerals) but clearly the issue is whether its macronutrient composition (predominantly various sugars in an aqueous solution) is conducive to weight loss.

96440612cf0fcf366bf5ad8f776fca84

(19413)

on February 20, 2014
at 03:39 PM

In this case, TheGastronomer is right. So +1. Yes, we can produce glucose from the glycerol backbone of fats (albeit a very small amount) as well as through gluconeogenesis. This doesn't mean that good raw honeys don't contain other good things in very small amounts, but the fructose/glucose is indeed not magically different from what you'd get in soda.

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 20, 2014
at 03:23 PM

I consider all factors, including insulin which is one of the most important ones. I've never read Taubes by the way. I should though. What about you, are you reading Jaminet right now? Worshipping his effigy? Munching on those "safe starches" lol.

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 20, 2014
at 03:20 PM

If you don;t think glucose is a poison, ask a diabetic what happens when his blood glucose goes above 300 mg/dl. You'll learn something. Hormesis works with minute amounts of a toxin (a few carbs in veggies, fruits, nuts, etc), not with several hundred grams (rice, bread, sugar, potatoes, etc.) Hyperinsulinemia in the presence of sufficient glucose causes adiposity in all populations, this is a physiological fact, your ignorance of physiology doesn't make you immune to its implications.

Eed7dabde3d61910685845e04605267f

(2934)

on February 20, 2014
at 03:19 PM

doesn't look like pretty place sometimes..., but okay... as does your last statement... 'me versus the three of you'.. who is competeing here exactly... - (I know you're trying to, but with who, what exactly? Again i urge you to look in mirror and consider 'why', look at the big picture here and more broadly with respect to honey insulin, etc...

You mistake my attidude i think, and arguments actually as said, but okay... I'm not really here to convince you, have an argument in the tone you might want, or are using...

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 20, 2014
at 03:17 PM

I've cited papers above, just scroll up and you'll see them right there, and depicted physiological mechanisms regarding the body's utilization of glucose, known to be factually correct. Your inability to notice this is your fault not mine. It's not my fault you only see what you want to see.

Eed7dabde3d61910685845e04605267f

(2934)

on February 20, 2014
at 03:16 PM

That's not my case... if i've ever had one it's one that glucose or fructose is not absolutele, without qualificaiton bad. that insulin is not posion... I am not here to 'win' anything. i write in spirit of engagemnt... you ahve a different spirit seemingly, that's fine. you can commentate on toughness etc, paraphsreas all you like, as i can 'pyschoanalyse' as you say. It shows your udnerstanding,frame of mind...

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 20, 2014
at 03:00 PM

You want to stay on topic here? Talk about the issue at hand, i.e. honey and weight loss. If you can't make an argument for your case that glucose or fructose is good, so be it. I don't see why there's any need to try to psychoanalyze anything. Once again, you bring no evidence to the table to corroborate your argument, only a huge rant to basically say that I'm mean and insensitive. Toughen up, if you want to have an argument with someone and win, try to actually back up what you say instead of just complaining the whole time. Funny it's me versus three of you, yet you're the one whining.

Eed7dabde3d61910685845e04605267f

(2934)

on February 20, 2014
at 02:50 PM

th eonly one on your radar..? not reading taubes at the moment are you?

Eed7dabde3d61910685845e04605267f

(2934)

on February 20, 2014
at 02:50 PM

like i say it's good to have differnt opinions, presents learning opporuntiites etc... if you think glucose is a poison, great, act whatever way you want... i'm interested in what you think of hormesis btw... If you think glucose is a toxin, is it aboslutely a problem for you to have some? yagian you said insulin causes adpisopody... i guess after that workout all those body builders won't want to spike it? iNlsuin causes adiposity in majority of poopulation... maybe.. but maybe not... what about all the other factors? is insulin

Eed7dabde3d61910685845e04605267f

(2934)

on February 20, 2014
at 02:49 PM

You're right, you did contribute to some nerves of mine being hit... Those in my side. And it keepers getting better... (or worse?). like i say and allude to in previous comment, we must be speaking different languages about idea ofs 'proof', 'evidence' etc... I can't see much that you've brought to the table here alongside the loaded langauge... anyone can do this if they want to (including me...) so too can anyone be willing to consdier other views, not be dogmatic (as you appear to be somewhat to me here...) not a porblem...

Eed7dabde3d61910685845e04605267f

(2934)

on February 20, 2014
at 02:42 PM

I replied to your comment here in the other thread, if you're interested please take a look.

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 20, 2014
at 02:41 PM

Glad you enjoy the intellectual discussions, pardon the heated dialog; some of us are perhaps too passionate about these topics, myself included. Do look into the citations and analyze them critically, regardless of who they come from. Like a famous physicist once said: "Blind belief in authority is the greatest enemy of truth."

Eed7dabde3d61910685845e04605267f

(2934)

on February 20, 2014
at 02:38 PM

do (I'm happy to respond to your guesses by the way..) but in the face of contrary points, you do little to indicate that you shouldn't read up on cognitive dissonance and have a look in the mirror. Maybe you're putting one up already and making an exhbitino here with your attitude already...

Eed7dabde3d61910685845e04605267f

(2934)

on February 20, 2014
at 02:38 PM

It might be good for community here if things were come at with a different tone, but hey, different strokes for different folks. Your

experience adds to the picture I am sure (and allow opporutnity to debate. I think you should consider though that there are many ways to think and do things though mate, many expeireinces, many studies that can be used to support this or that - you may present yours as 'right' and need to tell why guessing away as you

Eed7dabde3d61910685845e04605267f

(2934)

on February 20, 2014
at 02:38 PM

that implies prescrbing anyone eating a large amount of fructose, incuding obese people? If you can point me to anything that even resembles a statement that you could make this inference from, I'd appreciate it... My surprise will continue. You are twisting and turning like a slippery sweet potato being peeled in the hands of a gastronmer... You are not a gastronmer though, are you, really...?

Keep guessing mate, and hearing what you like. And 'believing'. I don't want to change your mind - you're welcome to do as you please.

Eed7dabde3d61910685845e04605267f

(2934)

on February 20, 2014
at 02:37 PM

Re the (apparent) substance of what you are saying, you didn't say why it is prblematic on its own. You pointed to the bigger picture in which ingesting fructose can be sitauted... I agree, it can be problematic in some contexts. And relatively unproblematic in others. You are arguing now that it may be unwise for obese to 'shove fructose into their mouths'. Aside from being a slightly unpleasent, needless charaterisation of people, who has presented anything

Eed7dabde3d61910685845e04605267f

(2934)

on February 20, 2014
at 02:36 PM

(While I'm surprised, there, I must say I am less surprised too, at the little bit of hostility you seem to be exhibiting...I have to wonder mate, wheter if,like some people who contact Colpo, you are suffering some sort of hypoglycamia or other condition relating to your personal reaction to not eating carbs... Or perhaps, whether you are somewhat unhappy with your own bodily situation and projecting hostility onto others...? Are you one of these 'majority' supposedly 'shoving food into their mouths' Your hostility, reactiveness, quick assumption making, inability to )

Eed7dabde3d61910685845e04605267f

(2934)

on February 20, 2014
at 02:32 PM

Some nuance in the picture, differentiating between effects of insulin and or fructose on people doing different things in the population... Great… You are finally saying something that isn't a simple a causes be... I'm surprised for someone projecting such famiiliaty with various literature and concepts that it's taken until now really for that to be exhibited...

3f1f6d5d00e4a2078a99a07e0a6b2aea

(170)

on February 20, 2014
at 02:22 PM

Most interesting. Learning a lot from the back and forth (the citations and such). Thanks.

141c6b3d5e9506dd93881e3f9737f297

(55)

on February 20, 2014
at 06:04 AM

if you are on a fructose free diet...best not to swallow semen then.....

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 19, 2014
at 09:24 PM

How do I have enough protein left over to stimulate protein synthesis? Easy, I eat protein to the degree where I see my muscles are not wasting away and remain essentially the same size. I eat the way I do because I'm avoiding weight gain, degenerative diseases, cancer, etc while staying healthy and trying to live to an old age. I don't care for vanity muscles, I'm not trying to impress anyone or become a bodybuilder. I have a good body mainly because of exercise and good genetics but I don't plan on placing looks above health any time soon. That's some teenager low self-esteem bullshit.

Eb87941a669017dfb288d296cc672130

on February 19, 2014
at 08:56 PM

It says that now after you edited it Okay, so provided you're meeting your glucose needs via gluconeogensis, how do you have enough protein left over to stimulate protein synthesis (muscle building), especially when you eat a low protein diet for the "health benefits." Also, I thought the who idea of becoming fat adapted was so taht you don't use protein for energy? Isn't gluconeogensis the conversion of protein into energy? Doesn't add up for me unless your sole goal is weight loss and live an extremely sedentary life. Not if you want to be active, lean, athletic, and healthy

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 19, 2014
at 06:50 PM

If a person is trying to lose weight, it doesn't help when fat oxidation is inhibited (fat burning is weight loss). Unless you want people to stay fat. And when glucose oxidation is increased so is lipogenesis. I will quote your own source:

"carbohydrate are disposed of by high carbohydrate-oxidation rates and substantial de novo lipid synthesis"

This is your own source, not even mine. Read your own shit before calling me dishonest.

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 19, 2014
at 06:46 PM

Haha! Really? Wow. Can't argue with that logic....

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 19, 2014
at 06:44 PM

The side effects are mostly anecdotal. Some people think an excessive protein steak-only diet is the right way to do Paleo low-carb (when in reality it isn't) and when they feel like garbage, they complain that low-carb is a flawed concept. You won't find solid proof in such accusations however, mostly hearsay.

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 19, 2014
at 06:42 PM

I guess you are not familiar with obesity. I'm glad to hear that everyone you know is a world-class athlete that burns off every ounce of glucose/fructose they consume, however, for the vast majority of people, "some fructose going to liver glycogen" builds up over time until hepatic insulin resistance, steatohepatitis, hypertriglyceridemia, and obesity develop. Many of these people exist, believe it or not, and many of them became Paleo to undo this, not to shove more fructose into their mouths.

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 19, 2014
at 06:38 PM

I provided sufficient evidence to substantiate my claims, you seem to be unable to refute them or even to cite a shred of evidence of your own. I guess I must have hit a nerve, that was quite a long rant. Looking forward to any scientific proof you might have to support your argument, I won't hold my breath though, doesn't look you'll deliver anytime soon.

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 19, 2014
at 06:34 PM

Good God kid, of course they are not the same a s glucose! They are released by the adrenal glands during biological stress (i.e. exercise) in order to promote glucose release. You always have glucose in your blood, if you didn't you'd be dead. You fuel glycolytic activities without dietary glucose by consuming fats and proteins and your body converting the gluconeogenic amino acids from protein and the glycerol from fats into glucose. That's what I wrote, gluconeogenesis, look it up. Are you blind?

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 19, 2014
at 06:30 PM

If I'm a goldfish, I can only speculate as to what that makes you....a rock perhaps. You are citing articles which directly contradict your assertions. Do better research next time and stop complaining about having your inconsistencies pointed out.

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 19, 2014
at 06:25 PM

You are dense. A little bit of insulin release is not the same as a lot of insulin release. Does your brain understand this? Insulin release from carbs > insulin release from protein > insulin release from fat. The more insulin is released, the greater the propensity to store the consumed energy. Secreting just a little insulin when you eat is normal and will not make you fat as you will store a little of what you eat, releasing a lot of insulin however will make you store a lot of what you eat, thereby promoting obesity in the presence of sufficient glucose.

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 19, 2014
at 06:15 PM

If you're not sure what I'm saying, you're severely lacking in reading comprehension. 2000 cals is not easily burned at all, but is easily consumed. Better to avoid it altogether and not eat carbs, than to eat them and have to to either run around to burn it off, starve yourself, or just take it and get fat. And it never said 500g a day, you made up that number, it says 500g maximum glycogen storage in the human body, period. It says nothing there about per day.

2eb1b3e896624be5506029e3fec3e9e2

(10)

on February 19, 2014
at 06:00 PM

not sure exactly what you're saying here, but it doesn't matter. 500g of carbs is 2000 calories, which is easily burned by a mildly to moderately active person. so it is not likely that glycogen stores would be saturated, especially since most humans consume less than 500g of carbs a day.

Eb87941a669017dfb288d296cc672130

on February 19, 2014
at 05:54 PM

You don't know how to take a whole paragraph into context do you? You repeatedly find one little nugget of information and totally dismiss how it fits into the context of everything else that was written prior to and after. It's like arguing with a Goldfish.

Eb87941a669017dfb288d296cc672130

on February 19, 2014
at 05:52 PM

I know what catecholamines are. They are not a substitute for glucose. They are released as part of a sympathetic response, during which glucose is dumped into the blood stream for immediate use as energy. Your link and what you inferred by it still doesn't answering my question. How do you fuel glycolytic activities without glucose?

Eed7dabde3d61910685845e04605267f

(2934)

on February 19, 2014
at 05:48 PM

Fruitarians are generally lean, feel free to think otherwise…

What exactly does the study you posted mean in relation to the claims you are making, also? If you can clairfy how it relates to the insulin is the deveil thesis, that would be great…

Eed7dabde3d61910685845e04605267f

(2934)

on February 19, 2014
at 05:47 PM

You wrote: ‘Fat does not raise insulin and thereby does not cause adiposity’ – implying, I think, that a nutrient that leads to secretion of insulin ‘causes adiposity’ . Therefore proteins, eliciting as they do an insulin response, cause people to get fat. I did not assume that you thought that protein does not make people fat – I suggested that according to your logicanyone who secretes insulin (ie eating proteins, or carbs), should be fat… As this is not the case, there is clearly some nuance in the picture you’re trying to make being left out…

Eed7dabde3d61910685845e04605267f

(2934)

on February 19, 2014
at 05:45 PM

Anyone you disagree with must be 'fooling him/herself' about 'the truth' and 'facts', is that an accurate characterisation do you think...?I don't claim to know answers or be elegant. You seem to present your views with an authority though... Do you need certainty and facts, to be right? To characterise another as a fool for making a claim that they did not make (nor will I comment on right now. If you didn't understand what I wrote that's okay, and if you need to be dogmatic about it also okay... Go for it...

Eed7dabde3d61910685845e04605267f

(2934)

on February 19, 2014
at 05:45 PM

I will not try and patronise you by suggesting why... But I will suggest that you seem to lack a willingness to try and see another point of view that does not mesh with your own, and seem to want to make assumptions an identify me as 'high carb camper', or as 'not caring' about this or that, etc, even while failing to provide evidence for your own claims (and asking me to provide something for my suggesion in the comment...?) Okay lol.

Eed7dabde3d61910685845e04605267f

(2934)

on February 19, 2014
at 05:39 PM

But I will try to reason with you here, because if anything else, You’ve been somewhat good for my sides, Gastronomer, truly, thank you... 'High carb camp' - please save your labelling and assuming (and dogmaticness...) You might like to consider that some people have more nuanced views than 'good' and bad', this camp and that. 'Harmless'... Where did I say or even imply that exactly...? You are taking liberties my friend... And talking of 'facts on my/your side...', okay, I see you did not or could not or were simply unwilling to address what I wrote. That's okay...

Eed7dabde3d61910685845e04605267f

(2934)

on February 19, 2014
at 05:39 PM

You're right, it's my addiction to glucose talking here, lol.Gastronomer mate, have you thought about what you are saying?How can you possibly think you can coherently make such assumptions about my eating and thinking habits? You may know what cognitive dissonance looks like,but to attribute me with it here...? On what basis do you say this?

I am beginning to think that for all the claims you are making about logic, reasoning etc that you don’t really udnersatnd what they mean. Or, if you do, the coginitve dissonance here is so much that you have a need to be right or to argue as you r

De1095b2ba29c1035f00428cbfe3cc7c

(777)

on February 19, 2014
at 05:33 PM

What are these bad side effects you've heard about? I'm curious as the more keto-adapted I am the better I feel, I generally eat VLC but i cheat about once a week & eat crap like ice cream or French fries, so technically I haven't actually gone long term low carb. In no way can I consider those carb cheats as helping me in anyway as they make me feel like crap after, and make me gain fat. I know if I eat a load of quinoa my muscles swell up & look nice, but it doesn't mean it's doing me any good.

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 19, 2014
at 05:32 PM

Gluconeogenesis. And catecholamines (epinephrine/norepinephrine) released during physical activity. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catecholamine#Effects

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 19, 2014
at 05:32 PM

That's hilarious. Your first study states the following:

"...fructose-sweetened beverages seem to increase visceral adiposity and stimulate hepatic lipid accumulation and progression into non-alcoholic steatohepatitis..."

And yet you say it's not sugar that causes the problem. Do you enjoy contradicting yourself? By the way, Mediterranean diets are lower in carbs and higher in monounsaturated fat than regular SAD diets, so of course there is going to be an improvement. Lower carbs and higher good fats? Doesn't take a genius to figure out why it's beneficial.

Cf08ad26759fdd206a2c9f9385080a57

(995)

on February 19, 2014
at 05:29 PM

If you have to enjoy your honey by first diluting it into a glass of water and taking that on an empty stomach in place of corn syrup, you're doing it wrong. Lemon and water for your liver, I might buy. (why not both? lemonade.)

Random idea: someone should sell a pack of tiny assorted organic honey samplers like a box of chocolates. I love the unique flavors you get from the local plants.

Cf08ad26759fdd206a2c9f9385080a57

(995)

on February 19, 2014
at 05:26 PM

Very interesting stuff, I hadn't thought about the extent to which fructose might be endogenously produced.

Everytime sugar / honey / fructose comes up, I'm like reading through the comments.

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 19, 2014
at 05:25 PM

The Mediterranean is a calorie restricted lower-carb, higher-fat diet than the standard calorie restricted low-fat diet. Note that the low-carb diet is not calorie restricted and still performed better for weight loss, I noticed you neglected that little fact there....might want to read it again. Or stop trying to mislead people.

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 19, 2014
at 05:17 PM

I don't cherry-pick anything, unless you think basic physiology is a cherry orchard.

Cf08ad26759fdd206a2c9f9385080a57

(995)

on February 19, 2014
at 05:17 PM

Your first bold quote is from webmd... not a good start, haha.

Interesting stuff at the end.

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 19, 2014
at 05:17 PM

So you're saying that over the course of a few days a person cannot accumulate 2000 calories worth of glycogen? Really? So if someone eats 200 calories from carbs extra per day for 10 days (or 100 cals for 20 days) as an example, they will reach said threshold. Very easy to do. After that, it gets stored as fat. If a person is already overweight or sedentary, their glycogen supplies are likely topped off already. Athletes might be burning off said glycogen but a regular John Doe isn't running a marathon everyday. Use your critical thinking skills, your profound ignorance is showing.

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 19, 2014
at 05:11 PM

You're way off. What is says is once the body's glycogen levels reach 500 g, you begin to accumulate any excess glucose as fat. Not in one day, but over time. If you go over by 50 g carbs on average for 10 straight days, you will reach said limit and additional glucose thereafter will result in fat storage. Read your own source again.

Eb87941a669017dfb288d296cc672130

on February 19, 2014
at 04:59 PM

"A well-nourished adult can store approximately 500 grams or 2000 kcal of carbohydrates. Of this, approximately 400 grams are stored as muscle glycogen, 90-110 grams as liver glycogen, and 25 grams circulate in the blood as glucose".... So you can eat 2000 calories from carbs before de novo lipid synthesis even begins to occur. That's a huge amount of carbs. Your cherry picking information while leaving out the most important and relavant facts is laughable and you're lowing the IQ of the entire internet with the amount of disinformation you spew.

2eb1b3e896624be5506029e3fec3e9e2

(10)

on February 19, 2014
at 04:57 PM

i really don't understand why you're being deliberately obtuse. it says 'substantial de novo lipogenesis' doesn't occur until you consume almost 500g of carbs a day. guess who consumes that much? almost nobody. my god what is wrong with you? the only thing i proved is that you need to be right no matter what any paper says.

Eb87941a669017dfb288d296cc672130

on February 19, 2014
at 04:53 PM

Do you know what the mediterranean diet is according to NEJM? It's not a low carb diet. It's a diet consisting of lean meats/fish/low fat dairy/nuts/whole grains/fruits/beans/and legumes. That study does not illustrate that carbs generally make you fat, as the meditrraneat diet had a more favourable outcome on glycemic control than the low carb diet. In other words, a meditteranean diet is more effective at improving glycemic control than a low-carb diet according to the study you just linked.

2eb1b3e896624be5506029e3fec3e9e2

(10)

on February 19, 2014
at 04:51 PM

now you're being outright dishonest, you were saying it causes DNL, not that it inhibits fat burning. of course it does, because in that very same sentence "glucose oxidation is increased". ie glucose is used as energy instead of fat. that fits perfectly with calorie balance. looks like i'm not that one who needs better reading comprehension.

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 19, 2014
at 04:48 PM

You make this very easy.

"When the glycogen stores are saturated, massive intakes of carbohydrate are disposed of by high carbohydrate-oxidation rates and substantial de novo lipid synthesis"

So after one just pound of glycogen is stored in the body, the rest of the consumed carbohydrate becomes fat? Thank you for proving my point.

2eb1b3e896624be5506029e3fec3e9e2

(10)

on February 19, 2014
at 04:47 PM

once again, no support for your claims. i cited papers that explicitly state that DNL does not occur at significant levels in a eucaloric diet. your papers explain fatty acid synthesis and vaguely claim that glucose contributes to DNL but does not say to what extent it occurs, and no comparison on what it has on fat maintenance relative to high fat diets. furthermore, metabolic ward studies (where macronutrient ratios and total calories are very closely monitored) show high carb diets are not uniquely fattening. that's all that matters here. have a nice day :)

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 19, 2014
at 04:43 PM

Nice job omitting the next part, since it supports my argument:

"The intake of dietary carbohydrates mainly has the effect of inhibiting fat oxidation while glucose oxidation is increased"

In other words, eating carbohydrates prevents fat loss. Keep reading next time.

Eb87941a669017dfb288d296cc672130

on February 19, 2014
at 04:38 PM

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24251710

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24529325

Eb87941a669017dfb288d296cc672130

on February 19, 2014
at 04:37 PM

That's not exactly true. Do you know how they induce diabetes in lab rats? They give them a high fat diet. Also, as far as we know, it's HYPERCALORIC diets "especially rich in trans/saturated fat and cholesterol, and fructose-sweetened beverages" that cause NAFDL. If it were sugar that caused fatty liver disease like you suggest, why does the mediterranean diet seem to reverse it? Last time I checked that diet consists of lean meats, fish, fruits (sugar), vegetables, and whole grains (sugar). It's an unhealthy lifestyle that causes illness, not "sugar" which completely ignores context

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 19, 2014
at 04:37 PM

And from the third source:

"Three hormonal signals determine the state of FA

metabolism. Glucagon and epinephrine inhibit FA synthesis

and favor oxidation, whereas insulin is anti-lipolytic and

stimulates FA biosynthesis."

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 19, 2014
at 04:36 PM

And from the second source:

"In liver:

  • Fatty Acid Synthase expression is stimulated by insulin, a hormone produced when blood glucose is high. Thus excess glucose is stored as fat. Transcription factors that that mediate the stimulatory effect of insulin include USFs (upstream stimulatory factors) and SREBP-1."

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 19, 2014
at 04:34 PM

Well if you refuse to read them and close your eyes. Here, I did the work for you:

"...fatty acids decrease lipogenesis by suppressing gene expression in liver, including that of fatty acid synthase, spot14 and stearoyl-CoA desaturase. Conversely, a diet rich in carbohydrates stimulates lipogenesis in both liver and adipose tissue, leading to elevated postprandial plasma triglyceride levels...."

2eb1b3e896624be5506029e3fec3e9e2

(10)

on February 19, 2014
at 04:30 PM

well, lying is inconvenient for me, so you are right. i took the easy way out :)

Eb87941a669017dfb288d296cc672130

on February 19, 2014
at 04:29 PM

Tell me. How do fuel glycolytic activities without glucose?

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 19, 2014
at 04:28 PM

Except fats don't cause diabetes and fatty liver disease unlike sugar, you conveniently left out that little detail.

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 19, 2014
at 04:26 PM

I'm sure he does, he's a Doctor, I'm not. That is his profession and he is quite good at it. His argument is indeed very strong an convincing, unlike people such as yourself in the high-carb camp. You honestly don't care if glucose is good or bad, you're going to continue eating it. And honestly that's fine, just don't fool yourself and others by claiming that it is harmless when it is entirely detrimental to human health. By the way, I notice you provide no evidence for your claims, not a very elegant way of arguing your point. I'm sure it must be hard when the facts aren't on you side.

86c97b2779feab3c330f5e1c5fea7e25

(2312)

on February 19, 2014
at 04:25 PM

Well said my friend

2eb1b3e896624be5506029e3fec3e9e2

(10)

on February 19, 2014
at 04:21 PM

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/48/2/240.full.pdf+html

"...Glycogen storage capacity in man is ~15 g/kg body weight and can accommodate a gain of ~500 g before net lipid synthesis contributes to increasing body fat mass. When the glycogen stores are saturated, massive intakes of carbohydrate are disposed of by high carbohydrate-oxidation rates and substantial de novo lipid synthesis (150 g lipid/d using ~475 g CHO/d) without postabsorptive hyperglycemia"

2eb1b3e896624be5506029e3fec3e9e2

(10)

on February 19, 2014
at 04:18 PM

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/59/3/682S.full.pdf

"Carbohydrates are the main energy source of the human diet. The metabolic disposal of dietary carbohydrates is direct oxidation in various tissues, glycogen synthesis (in liver and muscles), and hepatic de novo lipogenesis. This latter pathway is quantitatively not important in man because under most conditions the rate of de novo lipogenesis does not exceed the concomitant rate of lipid oxidation in the whole body. Thus, dietary carbohydrates do not appear to increase an individual’s fat content by de novo lipogenesis"

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 19, 2014
at 04:16 PM

Sadly, your evidence is mostly anecdotal, saying things like "vegans are skinny" is pathetic. Ever seen a fat vegan? I have. Coke and Doritos are vegan too. How about backing it up with some real scientific proof and controlled clinical trials like this one from the New England Journal of Medicine which illustrates the point I just made: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa0708681. Please provide evidence, talk is cheap.

2eb1b3e896624be5506029e3fec3e9e2

(10)

on February 19, 2014
at 04:16 PM

none of those sources support what you claim.

much better support here

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10365981

"Eucaloric replacement of dietary fat by CHO does not induce hepatic DNL to any substantial degree. Similarly, addition of CHO to a mixed diet does not increase hepatic DNL to quantitatively important levels, as long as CHO energy intake remains less than total energy expenditure (TEE)[...] It is concluded that DNL is not the pathway of first resort for added dietary CHO, in humans"

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 19, 2014
at 04:09 PM

The body needs fuel in some form, you can fuel it with glucose or fat, that's it. Without fuel it dies. Many fats are essential and cannot be produced by the human body (Omega 3s and Linoleic acid are two examples). Fat is superior because is causes less degeneration, less oxidation and less fat gain. Your logic is absent.

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 19, 2014
at 03:59 PM

Fat however has a tremendously low if not negligible effect on insulin and it's consumption neither raises insulin nor IGF-1. It is a highly catabolic fuel source, which promotes weight loss and fatty acid oxidation, unlike carbohydrates which do the reverse (fatty acid synthesis) by increases in insulin. What you fail to understand is that while insulin promotes adiposity (medical term for fatness, if you didn't know what it means), the human body still cannot perform magic and a frutarian consuming carbs still needs to fulfill at least the minimum caloric requirements.

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 19, 2014
at 03:51 PM

Proteins are only mildly insulinogenic, see insulin index here (http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/66/5/1264.full.pdf) so you can compare proteins like eggs (score 31) with carbs like potatoes (score 121). While it is true that proteins are insulinogenic, I never said that they weren't so your assumptions that I believe that eating proteins will not make you gain weight are ridiculous. Numerous times I have debated the validity of protein restriction due to protein's anabolic effects and stimulation of insulin and IGF-1.

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 19, 2014
at 03:45 PM

I usually eat just one serving of fruit a day, usually a small guava or a lemon mainly for the vitamin C, I'm not interested in either getting frequent colds or scurvy for that matter. But it's not because I "need sugar", that's not why I do it; I need it for the Vitamin C (and I don't do supplements, I eat real food so that means fruits and veggies are the only source).

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 19, 2014
at 03:40 PM

You want sources? Open a physiology textbook. Too much work? Then here you go, now do some reading and educate yourself:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1083868/

http://www.rpi.edu/dept/bcbp/molbiochem/MBWeb/mb2/part1/fasynthesis.htm

http://www.csun.edu/~jm77307/Fatty%20Acid%20Biosynthesis.pd

If you're too lazy to actually read it just Ctrl+F and look up insulin, then read.

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 19, 2014
at 03:33 PM

One serving of fruit is perfectly fine, just try to go for the ones that have the most nutrition for the least carbs, like avocados, lemons/limes, tomatoes, peppers, squashes, olives, blackberries, raspberries, cucumbers, etc. These fruits are very low on the carbs and you can eat them until you're green in the face. The really sweet ones like mango, bananas, apples, etc. you should limit to no more than one a day if you're trying to lose weight.

Eb87941a669017dfb288d296cc672130

on February 19, 2014
at 02:58 PM

Because according to Gastronomer, carbs are always and everywhere more obesigenic than fatts- fats are perfectly elastic and there is no point of diminishing returns. Sweet potatoes elicit the same metabolic response as white bread. A carb is a carb. That's what's wrong with sweet potatoes.

Eed7dabde3d61910685845e04605267f

(2934)

on February 19, 2014
at 06:49 AM

If ‘insulin causes adiposity’ (what does this mean exactly wouldn’t it be expected that anyone who eats protein (like anyone eating high fat, low carb, moderate protein, who also has a functioning pancreas, will be fat…? Proteins are very insulinogenic, particularly some. If insulin causes adiposity, why aren't low carb high fat, moderate protein eaters fat? Might there be more going on in the picture, a bigger, more complex picture, that that which you are trying to frame…?

There is more to the picture than you suggest with the simple argument you have made mate.

Eed7dabde3d61910685845e04605267f

(2934)

on February 19, 2014
at 06:49 AM

Are people who eat high carb necessarily ‘adipose’ then, all those vegans and fruitarians and bodybuilders refeeding…?They are all fat? Or are there other things going on...? If insulin 'causes' adiposity (what does mean?), I would expect anyone who has a functioning pancreas who eats carbs to be a blimp by now... Does a higher carb diet not work for you...? Is this to say it won't work for someone else?

Eed7dabde3d61910685845e04605267f

(2934)

on February 19, 2014
at 06:30 AM

Why is some fructose going to liver glycogen necessarily problematic? Whose point by the way? This was a conventinoally promoted view by many 'paleo' people a few years ago maybe, but now...? That isn't to say you can't make the argument (of course, go for your life...)- but I'm interseted in what sort of stuff you are reading...?

Eed7dabde3d61910685845e04605267f

(2934)

on February 19, 2014
at 06:25 AM

The effects of that glucose with respect ot voeral health and subsequently metabolism might be different because it is coingested with a lot of micronutrients, fibre in the sweet potato package... Maybe the body doesn't know the difference between the isolated molecules - but why does this matter? If you're trying to argue that glucose is a toxin go and read Ron Rosedale. He makes the argument more elegantly than you currently seem to be...

Eed7dabde3d61910685845e04605267f

(2934)

on February 19, 2014
at 06:21 AM

While carbs aren't essenital like some fats and amino acids are, one could make a counterargument here that the body doesn't need fat because it can be produced by de novo lipogenesis. But it doesn't make the conclusion compelling. Your logic is faulty...

Eed7dabde3d61910685845e04605267f

(2934)

on February 19, 2014
at 06:13 AM

What's wrong with eating a shit ton of sweet potatoes?

2eb1b3e896624be5506029e3fec3e9e2

(10)

on February 19, 2014
at 04:43 AM

no, he's right. honey is roughly equal parts glucose and fructose, just like corn syrup. but if they're bad, it's only because they are both devoid of nutrients. just like most added fats.

543a65b3004bf5a51974fbdd60d666bb

(4493)

on February 19, 2014
at 02:16 AM

"Isn't it just a hypothetically good amount to receive the benefits of other nutrients that fructose may be coming together with" if you are referring to the Jaminet reference @moors , then that may have been the case in his first book, but in the 2nd/current book he actually refs some benefits of fructose, here are 2 refs he cites in the book, Catalytic' doses of fructose may benefit glycaemic control... , The relation of low glycaemic index fruit consumption to glycaemic control...

F92f0b6a3fe3d45a489e020076904f2f

(50)

on February 19, 2014
at 01:21 AM

I agree with you... one spoon of honey a day won't kill anyone, but the original question was about losing weight at an already low body fat.

7163e886634e71777acad417e676a614

on February 18, 2014
at 11:32 PM

I agree. Sometimes I just get scared to eat sugar. But honestly, our bodies need it. What about fruit? What is your view on consuming fruit daily (one serving)?

7163e886634e71777acad417e676a614

on February 18, 2014
at 11:29 PM

I know that low carb will cause fat loss. It works for nearly everyone... at least at first. Recently I've been reading into some studies, and also have personally experienced and read about experiences, of people who have had very bad side effects from going low carb for long term. Evidently, our bodies need to ingest carbs to function properly. Not having the carbs/sugar/glucose in an easy fashion for our bodies to convert to energy causes it to reach for our fat storages for energy. While this sounds great at first, it puts lots of stress on the body... What is your opinion on this?

2eb1b3e896624be5506029e3fec3e9e2

(10)

on February 18, 2014
at 11:25 PM

several pounds wouldn't be too much. just avoid fruit juice as it's easy to get a lot of excess calories from that.

2eb1b3e896624be5506029e3fec3e9e2

(10)

on February 18, 2014
at 10:57 PM

doesn't mean de novo lipogenesis actually occurs at significant levels at normal feeding levels. also i can't help but notice that section is entirely unsourced.

2eb1b3e896624be5506029e3fec3e9e2

(10)

on February 18, 2014
at 10:47 PM

that doesn't mean de novo lipogenesis actually occurs at normal feeding levels.

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 18, 2014
at 09:34 PM

Lipogenesis: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lipogenesis#Control_and_regulation notice the little part there about "high insulin level leads to an overall increase in the levels of malonyl-CoA, which is the substrate required for fatty acids synthesis". Fat does not raise insulin and thereby does not cause adiposity, at least no where near the level that carbohydrates do.

2eb1b3e896624be5506029e3fec3e9e2

(10)

on February 18, 2014
at 09:33 PM

agreed, it has nothing to do with weight gain. ;)

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 18, 2014
at 09:31 PM

Surely insulin, being the primary anabolic hormone in the body responsible for lipogenesis, whose release is triggered predominantly by consumption of glucose-containing carbohydrates has nothing to do with weight gain.

86c97b2779feab3c330f5e1c5fea7e25

(2312)

on February 18, 2014
at 09:16 PM

TheGastronomer was mad at me =)

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 18, 2014
at 08:39 PM

I agree. A spoon of it isn't going to kill anyone, but you know how some people are, they want to hear confirmation that what they're doing is fine even when they know it isn't, and so one spoonful every few days turns into a spoonful everyday and then half a cup instead of a spoon, and so on.

2a6025992746ff6cd4ffb6ccf0aa03fc

(60)

on February 18, 2014
at 07:57 PM

why has this been downvoted? sounds like sensible advice to me.

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 18, 2014
at 07:26 PM

Please provide scientific evidence that honey can "clean the liver". Looking forward to it, thanks.

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 18, 2014
at 05:06 PM

The best people to take advice from: strangers on the internet who claim to "eat a shit ton of sweet potatoes".

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 18, 2014
at 05:03 PM

Does your body know the difference between the glucose molecule from white bread and the glucose molecule from sweet potato? Because if you can prove that it does, your smart ass could win a nobel prize. Too bad you can't.

86c97b2779feab3c330f5e1c5fea7e25

(2312)

on February 18, 2014
at 05:00 PM

Uhhhh the point of Paleo is not to run your body in a keto state...it's to eat a healthy, natural diet (with some restrictions). I eat a shit ton of sweet potatoes...no keto state, still fully Paleo.

86c97b2779feab3c330f5e1c5fea7e25

(2312)

on February 18, 2014
at 04:58 PM

Comparing raw, local honey with Mountain Dew? That's like comparing a sweet potato with white bread.

47cbd166d262925037bc6f9a9265eb20

(55)

on February 18, 2014
at 02:35 PM

Isn't it just a hypothetically good amount to receive the benefits of other nutrients that fructose may be coming together with ? I suppose so.

F92f0b6a3fe3d45a489e020076904f2f

(50)

on February 18, 2014
at 05:07 AM

Hmm, interesting, I'll look into that... my understanding was that your body doesn't need fructose, the way it needs fats, proteins, and other macro/micronutrients. It can deal with fructose, but there is no biological need, I thought. That is why fructose exists in such small amounts in nature

543a65b3004bf5a51974fbdd60d666bb

(4493)

on February 18, 2014
at 03:48 AM

interestingly, Jaminet' fructose recommendations in his latest book is,

'15 to 25 grams p/d. At most 10 grams per meal'

543a65b3004bf5a51974fbdd60d666bb

(4493)

on February 18, 2014
at 03:45 AM

"...fructose is damaging to the liver, especially large amounts" agree with that bit.

"Your body needs exactly zero fructose" not so sure about that bit...yes we do not need to ingest fructose, the body can make it. fructose does exist in/is used by various parts of the body in small amounts.

Frontpage book

Get FREE instant access to our Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!

12 Answers

0
089dd41b18fbb95ebb5347cded708d98

(5635)

on February 20, 2014
at 12:56 AM

i've been eating 1 tbsp of raw honey a day for months now. i blend it in kefir and really enjoy it. it feels decadent and i know it's good for me. i mainly eat it because i keep my diet low fiber and that tends to be low carb. i don't necessarily feel that great eating low carb. since honey has about 17 grams per tbsp, that's how i get my carbs in. it doesn't weigh me down like a fruit smoothie does.

0
543a65b3004bf5a51974fbdd60d666bb

(4493)

on February 19, 2014
at 02:48 AM

since fructose is mentioned in a few answers, i thought i would post up a few pieces of info/thoughts/ramblings that may indicate that a little bit of fructose is a good thing (and like glucose, fructose can also be produced by the body without the requirement to ingest it, some refs for this below, i know one is a study on rats i think),

...A copy of a comment i put beneath the seesaw14 answer...

"Isn't it just a hypothetically good amount to receive the benefits of other nutrients that fructose may be coming together with" if you are referring to the Jaminet reference @moors , then that may have been the case in his first book, but in the 2nd/current book he actually refs some benefits of fructose, here are 2 refs he cites in the book, Catalytic' doses of fructose may benefit glycaemic control... , The relation of low glycaemic index fruit consumption to glycaemic control...

...Some thoughts...

there could be a relationship/link between fructose ingestion (fruit) and libido/sexual function/reproduction. ie. abundant fruit season=times are good=mating season/time to multiply and bring up young.

Here's a conclusion from a "Female reproductive parameters and fruit availability" study in Japanese macaques (i know this ones on female monkeys, but still);

"...the onset of estrus is strongly affected not only by the survival of infants through the mating season, but also by fruiting conditions, especially the availability of high-quality food"

And, may be its more specifically related to the fructose in the fruit.

Fructose does seem have a link to reproduction, some of the places fructose is found in the human body are; seminal fluid, placenta, umbilical cord, (ovaries?).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semen_analysis#Fructose_level

According to webmd "The fructose provides energy for the sperm"

...It would seem that fructose is indeed necessary, at least for males wishing to reproduce...

Tho it would also seem that we do not actually need to source fructose from our diet; According to the article ref below, the (male) body can produce fructose from blood glucose. Having said that, it looks like that particular gem of information comes from a study on rats.

I found a few studies/articles that talked about the source of fructose in semen originating from the seminal vesicles and to a lesser extent from the ampullary glands. But only the one below mentioned how the fructose was produced.

Ref: "The impact of proteins, glycoproteins and fructose in blood and seminal plasma on sperms concentration In infertile men (pdf)"

"The main site of fructose formation is the seminal vesicle yet; an additional small amount comes from the ampullary glands. Fructose synthesis is hormone dependent process, it disappeared almost completely within 2 weeks after castration, while was prevented or restored by implantation of testoterone, since seminal vesicle are testosterone dependent (7).

The seminal fructose concentration is primarily an indicater of the size, storage and secretary capacity of the seminal vesicles and of human androgenic activity (8).

Biosynthesis of seminal sugar involves the conversion of blood glucose into seminal fructose (9)"

Another ref source: "The biochemistry of semen"

Looking at some studies on pregnant women (did i need to specify women?), it looks like we may all have the capacity to produce fructose endogenously.

here are a few refs:

Fructose in fetal cord blood and its relationship with maternal and 48-hour-newborn blood concentrations

"Fructose production by the sorbitol pathway, present in the fetus and newborn, is an alternative pathway in glucose metabolism probably used to maintain redox balance in the fetus.

We suggest that endogenous fructose, similar to dietary ingested fructose, under physiological conditions produces the backbone for triacylglycerol and lipid synthesis in the fetus and newborn. Therefore the route for metabolizing fructose is already present in the early steps of human development."

The Transport Of Fructose By Human Placenta (pdf)

Studies Of The Mechanism Of Fructose Production By Human Placenta (pdf)

Cf08ad26759fdd206a2c9f9385080a57

(995)

on February 19, 2014
at 05:17 PM

Your first bold quote is from webmd... not a good start, haha.

Interesting stuff at the end.

Cf08ad26759fdd206a2c9f9385080a57

(995)

on February 19, 2014
at 05:26 PM

Very interesting stuff, I hadn't thought about the extent to which fructose might be endogenously produced.

Everytime sugar / honey / fructose comes up, I'm like reading through the comments.

141c6b3d5e9506dd93881e3f9737f297

(55)

on February 20, 2014
at 06:04 AM

if you are on a fructose free diet...best not to swallow semen then.....

0
7163e886634e71777acad417e676a614

on February 18, 2014
at 11:17 PM

Thanks for the responses guys. What about fruit? Is a daily serving of fruit (like one apple, or one banana) a day considered too much?

2eb1b3e896624be5506029e3fec3e9e2

(10)

on February 18, 2014
at 11:25 PM

several pounds wouldn't be too much. just avoid fruit juice as it's easy to get a lot of excess calories from that.

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 19, 2014
at 03:33 PM

One serving of fruit is perfectly fine, just try to go for the ones that have the most nutrition for the least carbs, like avocados, lemons/limes, tomatoes, peppers, squashes, olives, blackberries, raspberries, cucumbers, etc. These fruits are very low on the carbs and you can eat them until you're green in the face. The really sweet ones like mango, bananas, apples, etc. you should limit to no more than one a day if you're trying to lose weight.

0
7163e886634e71777acad417e676a614

on February 18, 2014
at 11:17 PM

Thanks for the responses guys. What about fruit? Is a daily serving of fruit (like one apple, or one banana) a day considered too much?

0
2eb1b3e896624be5506029e3fec3e9e2

on February 18, 2014
at 09:24 PM

sugar won't make you any fatter calorie-for-calorie than fat, and the human body metabolizes it very well without problems. just remember it can be over consumed, yada yada.

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 18, 2014
at 09:34 PM

Lipogenesis: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lipogenesis#Control_and_regulation notice the little part there about "high insulin level leads to an overall increase in the levels of malonyl-CoA, which is the substrate required for fatty acids synthesis". Fat does not raise insulin and thereby does not cause adiposity, at least no where near the level that carbohydrates do.

7163e886634e71777acad417e676a614

on February 18, 2014
at 11:32 PM

I agree. Sometimes I just get scared to eat sugar. But honestly, our bodies need it. What about fruit? What is your view on consuming fruit daily (one serving)?

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 18, 2014
at 09:31 PM

Surely insulin, being the primary anabolic hormone in the body responsible for lipogenesis, whose release is triggered predominantly by consumption of glucose-containing carbohydrates has nothing to do with weight gain.

3f1f6d5d00e4a2078a99a07e0a6b2aea

(170)

on February 20, 2014
at 02:22 PM

Most interesting. Learning a lot from the back and forth (the citations and such). Thanks.

0
5890e9f25cd201f3915ad8b9d3bbad71

on February 18, 2014
at 08:43 PM

Honey is a natural food! Sure, it's high in sugar/fructose, but you are young AND active so I can imagine your body can handle a single spoonful. Eating it everyday is okay, but try and vary your foods too!

0
2a6025992746ff6cd4ffb6ccf0aa03fc

on February 18, 2014
at 08:01 PM

Guys, we're talking about a spoon of honey here. now i don't personally think that honey is either (a) a magical superfood that will cure all that ails you or (b) a terrible evil sugar bomb that will kill you if you even have a small lick of it.

If you have around a tablespoon several days of the week and you aren't gaining weight or having blood sugar problems I say do it. Eating isn't just about numbers and nutrients - it's about pleasure too. I don't see the problem as long as you don't find yourself eating spoon after spoon or NEEDING to have it absolutely every day otherwise you can't function.

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 18, 2014
at 08:39 PM

I agree. A spoon of it isn't going to kill anyone, but you know how some people are, they want to hear confirmation that what they're doing is fine even when they know it isn't, and so one spoonful every few days turns into a spoonful everyday and then half a cup instead of a spoon, and so on.

0
478ce00386126f5209408160608d6961

on February 18, 2014
at 06:13 PM

Honey is fine in pure water on an empty stomach 1tsp - 1 tbsp. Paleo neglects cleaning the liver which honey can do and Corn syrup can't do. If your have high sugar problems go ahead and mix 1 tbsp honey with 1-2 tbsp acv and this will neautralize it for you. Then continue the paleo diet for the rest of the day.

Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 18, 2014
at 07:26 PM

Please provide scientific evidence that honey can "clean the liver". Looking forward to it, thanks.

Cf08ad26759fdd206a2c9f9385080a57

(995)

on February 19, 2014
at 05:29 PM

If you have to enjoy your honey by first diluting it into a glass of water and taking that on an empty stomach in place of corn syrup, you're doing it wrong. Lemon and water for your liver, I might buy. (why not both? lemonade.)

Random idea: someone should sell a pack of tiny assorted organic honey samplers like a box of chocolates. I love the unique flavors you get from the local plants.

0
86c97b2779feab3c330f5e1c5fea7e25

(2312)

on February 18, 2014
at 05:06 PM

If you have a tbspn of raw local honey every day and you are functioning fine without any unwanted weight gain then I would say go ahead. No your body doesn't "need" fructose but, if you lead an active lifestyle, having that honey shouldn't do any harm.

2a6025992746ff6cd4ffb6ccf0aa03fc

(60)

on February 18, 2014
at 07:57 PM

why has this been downvoted? sounds like sensible advice to me.

0
Be157308a0438e382b88d9db4c12ab30

on February 18, 2014
at 01:55 PM

The human body does not need to eat sugar or glucose. You are wrong on that. The body does use some glucose to keep the brain functional, however this glucose can be manufactured by your body from certain amino acids and from glycerol found in triglycerides (fat). So no you don't need to eat glucose or sugar at all, your body can make its own from protein and fat. Now if you have a sweet tooth, that's a different matter, however it is not healthy. Don't assume that honey is good for you, it's just a sugary syrup like high fructose corn syrup or molasses, just because it comes from bees doesn't make it good for you, honey is sugar. If honey is good for you, then so is Mountain Dew.

86c97b2779feab3c330f5e1c5fea7e25

(2312)

on February 18, 2014
at 04:58 PM

Comparing raw, local honey with Mountain Dew? That's like comparing a sweet potato with white bread.

Eed7dabde3d61910685845e04605267f

(2934)

on February 19, 2014
at 06:21 AM

While carbs aren't essenital like some fats and amino acids are, one could make a counterargument here that the body doesn't need fat because it can be produced by de novo lipogenesis. But it doesn't make the conclusion compelling. Your logic is faulty...

96440612cf0fcf366bf5ad8f776fca84

(19413)

on February 20, 2014
at 03:39 PM

In this case, TheGastronomer is right. So +1. Yes, we can produce glucose from the glycerol backbone of fats (albeit a very small amount) as well as through gluconeogenesis. This doesn't mean that good raw honeys don't contain other good things in very small amounts, but the fructose/glucose is indeed not magically different from what you'd get in soda.

0
05c651655a99befc2f01be733df44f49

on February 18, 2014
at 01:36 PM

It seems to me that everyone is forgetting the point? Paleo is to run your body in a ketogenic state. Sugar is sugar. Hit your gut & converts to glucose & fructose. Fructose bypasses insulin receptors & goes straight to Liver "Bad" & too much glucose will change our body out of being a fat burner back into a sugar burner.

So the bottom line I'm guessing? Is how much glucose can we safely consume to stay a ketogenic fat burner while avoiding Fructose as much as possible!

7163e886634e71777acad417e676a614

on February 18, 2014
at 11:29 PM

I know that low carb will cause fat loss. It works for nearly everyone... at least at first. Recently I've been reading into some studies, and also have personally experienced and read about experiences, of people who have had very bad side effects from going low carb for long term. Evidently, our bodies need to ingest carbs to function properly. Not having the carbs/sugar/glucose in an easy fashion for our bodies to convert to energy causes it to reach for our fat storages for energy. While this sounds great at first, it puts lots of stress on the body... What is your opinion on this?

86c97b2779feab3c330f5e1c5fea7e25

(2312)

on February 18, 2014
at 05:00 PM

Uhhhh the point of Paleo is not to run your body in a keto state...it's to eat a healthy, natural diet (with some restrictions). I eat a shit ton of sweet potatoes...no keto state, still fully Paleo.

Eed7dabde3d61910685845e04605267f

(2934)

on February 19, 2014
at 06:30 AM

Why is some fructose going to liver glycogen necessarily problematic? Whose point by the way? This was a conventinoally promoted view by many 'paleo' people a few years ago maybe, but now...? That isn't to say you can't make the argument (of course, go for your life...)- but I'm interseted in what sort of stuff you are reading...?

0
F92f0b6a3fe3d45a489e020076904f2f

on February 17, 2014
at 11:51 PM

Your body needs exactly zero fructose. You need, glucose, yes, but there is no need for fructose. Sugars are some combination of fructose and glucose. The way your body digests fructose is damaging to the liver, especially large amounts.

543a65b3004bf5a51974fbdd60d666bb

(4493)

on February 18, 2014
at 03:45 AM

"...fructose is damaging to the liver, especially large amounts" agree with that bit.

"Your body needs exactly zero fructose" not so sure about that bit...yes we do not need to ingest fructose, the body can make it. fructose does exist in/is used by various parts of the body in small amounts.

543a65b3004bf5a51974fbdd60d666bb

(4493)

on February 18, 2014
at 03:48 AM

interestingly, Jaminet' fructose recommendations in his latest book is,

'15 to 25 grams p/d. At most 10 grams per meal'

Answer Question


Get FREE instant access to our
Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!