PUFA’s combined with Sugar = AGEs?
I've been thinking a lot lately about sugar. And I'm not so sure sugar is the enemy in some cases. I've read that PUFAs can disturb thyroid hormones and in so many steps inhibit your ability to deal with sugar.
I've noticed that when I eliminate all vegetables from my diet except for sweet potatoes and potatoes and keep the fruit that I can put sugar in my tea, put sugar in my coffee, eat ice cream and not notice a change in how I feel or my weight; in fact I've leaned out even more.
But when I add plants back to my diet like broccoli or spinach and onions and tomatoes and other crap along those lines I can't eat any sugar without gaining a bit of weight.
[I eat a shit load of fat in the form of coconut oil and butter and about .8 to 1 grams of protein per kg and eat maybe a half to a whole sweet potato a day and a portion of grass fed beef most days, couple eggs here and there, cheese here and there, milk here and there; along those lines. No nuts or avocados]
So I'm beginning to wonder if perhaps maybe dealing with sugar has more to do with the type of fat you are filling your body with rather than the sugar itself.
... most studies seems to be done with HFCS and not massive amounts of fruit, unless someone can show me a study? I haven't seen one... well I saw one with pregnant mothers and apple juice and how it relates to fetal development but not any others.
Any thoughts on this?
asked byEdward_J__Edmonds (3748)
Get FREE instant access to our Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!
on March 26, 2011
at 04:00 AM
Sugar and polyunsaturated fat were described by Bary Sears as "the perfect nutritional storm" in that the combination is more deadly than the sum of each in isolation. When we look at the way sugar interacts with the body, we note that the first place it goes is the liver where it must meet a fork in the road, and when the liver isn't so hot, its capacity to cope with the sugar and turn it into glycogen (good) will be impaired and it will turn more of it into triglycerides (bad). That is the ticket to fibrosis, so if you ever know anyone who just hates their liver, tell them to slug pepsi and corn oil.
As for fruit on a high good fat fat diet (or fat on a high fruit diet), they don't appear to mix very well. For whatever reason, it seems like more fructose gets converted to triglycerides than would be the case otherwise. I don't have any references to back that up, but they just don't seem to mesh. Listen to low carbers complain about how fruit is the devil and makes them fat, and listen to fruitarians who are afraid to go over 10% fat as calories or they feel like hell. Both have demonstrated the ostensible incompatibility. But which is healthier on its own? High fat with some starch and a bit of fruit seems like the better choice. I use it to flavor food rather than as a significant source of calories.
My hypothesis is that it is an evolutionary survival mechanism that causes the accumulation of body fat. The combination of fat and fruit signifies warm temperatures and may create a pattern of gene expression that is responsible for accumulating adipose tissue in preparation for the winter.
I would love to see someone with more biochemical knowledge grapple with the issue. (Stay tuned!)