3

votes

If sugar so bad why does it raise metabolism?

Answered on August 19, 2014
Created January 27, 2012 at 5:31 PM

Sucrose substitution in prevention and reversal of the fall in metabolic rate accompanying hypocaloric diets

Hypocaloric diets cause a fall in resting metabolic rate that interferes with weight loss. To evaluate the mechanisms underlying this phenomenon, resting metabolic rate was measured sequentially in six healthy obese women on a weight maintenance diet (more than 2,300 kilocalories), after 15 days of an 800 kilocalories carbohydrate-free diet, and after isocaloric sucrose replacement for an additional 15 days. The carbohydrate-free diet produced a 21 percent decline in resting metabolic rate (p <0.005) as well as a decrease in circulating triiodothyronine (41 percent, p <0.02) and insulin (38 percent, p <0.005) concentrations. Plasma norepinephrine levels also tended to decline (10 percent, 0.05> p <0.1). However, when sucrose was substituted, resting metabolic rate rose toward baseline values even though total caloric intake was unchanged and weight loss continued. The sucrose-induced rise in resting metabolic rate was accompanied by a rise in serum triiodothyronine values, but not plasma insulin or norepinephrine concentrations. Throughout, changes in resting metabolic rate correlated with changes in serum triiodothyronine levels (r = 0.701, p <0.01). In four obese women, a hypocaloric sucrose diet was given at the outset for 15 days. The fall in both resting metabolic rate and triiodothyronine concentration was markedly reduced as compared with values during the carbohydrate-free diet. It is concluded that carbohydrate restriction plays an important role in mediating the fall in resting metabolic rate during hypocaloric feeding. This effect may, at least in part, be related to changes in circulating triiodothyronine levels. Incorporation of carbohydrate in diet regimens may, therefore, minimize the thermic adaptation to weight loss.

http://www.amjmed.com/article/0002-9343%2886%2990264-0/abstract

685e3c967e63b4eacccf02628fd9a3ac

(1026)

on May 01, 2012
at 07:46 AM

Just Mike - COMPLETELY agree. *Critique the content, not the poster.* is an awesome quote. Can I use it on my website?

685e3c967e63b4eacccf02628fd9a3ac

(1026)

on May 01, 2012
at 07:44 AM

@PrimalDanny - what about hormesis. Too much of a good thing is possible, IMO.

9e20abb05f3f6e3cc4bb107f8980aecd

(5939)

on February 05, 2012
at 01:49 PM

Insulin is not evil.

67f3387f0308b570c61944addedd183e

(112)

on February 05, 2012
at 01:20 AM

Read it and then what?

67f3387f0308b570c61944addedd183e

(112)

on February 05, 2012
at 01:12 AM

If the low-carber view that Insulin=evil is true wouldn't the carbohydrate that increases insulin the least be the best? (All other things being equal)

9e20abb05f3f6e3cc4bb107f8980aecd

(5939)

on February 03, 2012
at 11:50 PM

Hi Just Mike, some gut pathogens eat starch but not fructose/pectin, others eat fructose or pectin but not starch / starch fiber. Which you're infected with determines which food gives you trouble.

543a65b3004bf5a51974fbdd60d666bb

(4493)

on February 03, 2012
at 02:55 AM

i seem to be the opposite to you at the moment Just Mike, but i'm still testing. could be the fruit type or time of day or amount...or...other. I seem to be fine with bananas tho

543a65b3004bf5a51974fbdd60d666bb

(4493)

on February 03, 2012
at 02:53 AM

i seem to be the opposite you at the moment Just Mike, but i'm still testing. could be the fruit type or time of day or amount....or...

Cf4576cbcc44fc7f2294135609bce9e5

(3125)

on February 03, 2012
at 12:19 AM

my goal is to get everybody to read the link. you dont have to like the link but it will go down with a spoonful of sugar.

Ccacf7567273244733bc991af4ac42ed

(5198)

on February 02, 2012
at 09:30 PM

It depends what you mean by toxic of course. I'm pretty sure you won't freeze to death from lack of fruit though.

23f79c5241be763ac583fc68d58ee02c

(250)

on February 01, 2012
at 07:55 PM

That's like saying because protein is bad for people in kidney failure protein CAUSES kidney failure in healthy people. I don't have a system infection or chronic pain (natural-pain-relief?)

23f79c5241be763ac583fc68d58ee02c

(250)

on February 01, 2012
at 07:53 PM

Thank you for remembering the "dose-dependent" part. Everyone else seems to forget that part. The dogmatic, like PrimalDanny, don't seem to acknowledge that fruit is as paleo as meat.

23f79c5241be763ac583fc68d58ee02c

(250)

on February 01, 2012
at 07:50 PM

How about people like me who did the low-carb Paleo schtick and went from having a high body temperature (hotter than average my whole life) to having cold hands and having to bundle up. Starch? Makes me tired for 30-60 minutes after anything more than 1/4 cup. Fruit? No problems, since adding it I've been getting warmer, and my appetite has decreased. But any amount of fructose is toxic...right?

23f79c5241be763ac583fc68d58ee02c

(250)

on February 01, 2012
at 07:46 PM

Thank you for being a voice of reason!!

23f79c5241be763ac583fc68d58ee02c

(250)

on February 01, 2012
at 07:45 PM

As opposed to your ad hominem attacks? Critique the content, not the poster.

23f79c5241be763ac583fc68d58ee02c

(250)

on February 01, 2012
at 07:36 PM

The difference? If I eat a bowl of rice or more than a single medium size potato I feel high and sleepy afterwords and can't function for 30 minutes. If I eat 2-3 pieces of fruit I feel great. Perhaps not everyone is the same?

D12142c8cafb16d9af10b3362cb8fb62

(1590)

on January 29, 2012
at 01:50 PM

Sugar crystals are as natural as butter...

96440612cf0fcf366bf5ad8f776fca84

(19413)

on January 29, 2012
at 01:28 PM

http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2012/01/what-causes-insulin-resistance-part-v.html "(update 1/20/12: fructose intake has just been associated with insulin resistance in adolescents." as you well know sucrose is disaccharide composed of glucose and fructose.

543a65b3004bf5a51974fbdd60d666bb

(4493)

on January 29, 2012
at 09:19 AM

Goldilocks metabolism....that's what we want, not too low, not too high

96440612cf0fcf366bf5ad8f776fca84

(19413)

on January 28, 2012
at 11:40 PM

Riiight, "might" indeed! So that's why we don't see any 350lbs+ obese people out there in the wilds of America, because thermogenesis from a sucrose-rich versus fat-rich diet has prevented their conversion to a mastodon like build. What obesity epidemic? This paper proves it cannot exist! Must have just been our imagination. And spiny mice and humans are interchangeable.

543a65b3004bf5a51974fbdd60d666bb

(4493)

on January 28, 2012
at 10:35 PM

as i do not have full access to this study. could someone who does tell me; did the study mention if any of the triiodothyronine (T3) results exceeded the normal clinical range in any of the subjects?

C7fa1bf712d466cf7e9f2a404d5f0e34

(40)

on January 28, 2012
at 07:31 PM

@cliff - butter?? But it lacks n6...

Ccacf7567273244733bc991af4ac42ed

(5198)

on January 28, 2012
at 03:14 PM

It's a universal truth that you can never have too much of a good thing.

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 28, 2012
at 03:11 PM

"The sucrose-rich diet might exert an adaptive thermogenesis-mediated defense mechanism, protecting against excessive weight gain and disruptive pancreatic islet lesion. After 18 months maintenance on sucrose-rich versus fat-rich diets the number of animals surviving was significantly higher on the sucrose diet whereas on the fat diet a significant number of animals succumbed to expansive islet cell disruption and diabetes." http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10751749

Ccacf7567273244733bc991af4ac42ed

(5198)

on January 28, 2012
at 03:11 PM

Not to mention the fact that observing a correlation between genetics and longevity does not make a very strong argument for artificial accelerating the metabolism with drugs.

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 28, 2012
at 03:06 PM

Show me one study showing sugar causes insulin resistance, sugar cures insulin resistance and makes you more insulin sensitive as long as you don't eat it with a cup of soy oil or butter.

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 28, 2012
at 03:04 PM

What longevity studies? That theory hasn't been proven at all in fact there is a theory that directly contradicts it. "Individuals with high metabolism were therefore more uncoupled, had greater resting and total daily energy expenditures and survived longest - supporting the 'uncoupling to survive' hypothesis." http://www.mendeley.com/research/uncoupled-surviving-individual-mice-high-metabolism-greater-mitochondrial-uncoupling-live-longer/

Ccacf7567273244733bc991af4ac42ed

(5198)

on January 28, 2012
at 01:00 PM

You do nothing *but* provide studies! Hundreds of them, each as unhelpful as the last. You're still missing the point massively but it's ok, you've done your proselytizing now and people are indeed able to draw their own conclusions.

96440612cf0fcf366bf5ad8f776fca84

(19413)

on January 28, 2012
at 12:46 PM

@Cliff, Sarcasm off: I did read the abstract, but not the paper. I feel the question is silly. Lots of things may raise metabolism, and they're not all "good" or "bad". The reason that sugar is viewed as bad in a VLC Paleo diet context is because when enough of it is taken over a long period, it can cause insulin resistance. That is what makes the rest of it irrelevant. I could have said the cocoa leaf, and that would have been a natural plant, or cocaine, as both raise metabolism, but according to our governments both are bad. :) Natural or manmade doesn't play into it.

96440612cf0fcf366bf5ad8f776fca84

(19413)

on January 28, 2012
at 12:22 PM

Right because white sugar crystals occur in nature, all by themselves, and aren't man made at all.

6120c989fd5b69f42a0834b69b87955b

(24553)

on January 28, 2012
at 07:57 AM

You make the assumption that a raised metabolism is a good thing. In longetivity studies a reduced metabolism is pointed to as being a positive thing.

543a65b3004bf5a51974fbdd60d666bb

(4493)

on January 28, 2012
at 01:59 AM

on the sugar vs starch topic, does one raise triiodothyronine (T3) more than the other? and can either raise T3 too much (more than desirable), ie. doesn't a high (excessive) T3 mean (result in?) hyperthyroidism

C7fa1bf712d466cf7e9f2a404d5f0e34

(40)

on January 28, 2012
at 01:17 AM

@Cliff - my temps is pretty much always 97.3. Lately I've been adding in more fruit though, so I'm curious to see what kind of changes (if any) I'll see.

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 28, 2012
at 01:05 AM

Broda barnes thought 98.7 was the optimal body temp in regards to thyroid function and general health, you can use body temp to test how sugar, starch and meal frequency effect your body temp and therefore thyroid function. Personally I was eating very high carb potato based diet with some IF'ing and my temps were always in the 97s, drinking oj instead of potatoes and my temps are always in the optimal range. Maybe others are different but that's my experience.

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 28, 2012
at 01:00 AM

Figured I might as well break it down how I understand it, go and read rays articles/newsletters/podcast now to get the science and research behind it.

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 28, 2012
at 12:59 AM

If you don't eat fructose or galactose your body will produce inflammatory lactic acid from carbohydrates to refill glycogen or convert your muscles into glycogen. If you eat thyroid glands like traditional cultures this probably isn't that big of a deal.

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 28, 2012
at 12:58 AM

..and people in a unhealthy or stressed state need to eat more frequently to combat stress hormones.

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 28, 2012
at 12:56 AM

The reason why it(The liver) needs to be continually replenished is because you are constantly using glucose for fuel, your liver can only hold ~150g which can be used relatively fast doing basic stuff. In a stressed state you lose a lot more glucose as well creating even more of a need for liver glycogen, I would say the average person is in a stressed state constantly. You don't necessarily have to keep it full constantly either but eating small frequent meals has been shown to have the best benefits in regards to insulin function and nutrition storage...

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 28, 2012
at 12:51 AM

DNP doesn't even seem to be bad necessarily either, the only reason its bad is because people can take too much and over heat.

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 28, 2012
at 12:49 AM

Meth and DNP are both man made compounds unlike sugar

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 28, 2012
at 12:48 AM

methamphetamine raise T3? Do you realize what raised metabolic rate even means in this context?

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 28, 2012
at 12:46 AM

I'm not interested in providing a study for everything I say, you can go read ray peat and make your own conclusions. Personally eating small frequent meals that include OJ has been one of the best things I've done for my health. I feel provided more than enough info for you, its up to you to do the rest of the work if you skeptical.

1a98a40ba8ffdc5aa28d1324d01c6c9f

(20378)

on January 27, 2012
at 11:20 PM

Thanks for posting Paul!

Medium avatar

(10611)

on January 27, 2012
at 10:26 PM

So eating an all-candy starvation diet for 15 days boosted their BMR by 15%. guessing that for these obese women BMR might be 1500, so they got an added 200 kcal/day burn over the 15 days. An extra pound of weight loss compared to ordinary starvation. What a way to train a person for healthy eating. Viva the junk food diet!

96440612cf0fcf366bf5ad8f776fca84

(19413)

on January 27, 2012
at 10:12 PM

@Cliff Meth-Amphetamine, as well as 2,4-Dinitrophenol also raise metabolic rate, but they are certainly not something you'd want to take. Why do you feel that if something raises metabolic rates is an indicator of it not being bad? The insulin effect is still there after you go past a certain threshhold.

66e6b190e62fb3bcf42d4c60801c7bf6

(12407)

on January 27, 2012
at 08:14 PM

I'm still waiting for the study showing that your liver needs to be full of glycogen at all times. Yes, the liver is a regulator. I said that. Now tell me in plain terms why does it need to be continually replenished at the rate that copious amounts orange juice would do it? Those studies you keep posting DO NOT show that. Now show me one that does. And I won't even get into the efficacy or health benefits of hard-charging exercise that requires that level of glycogen and frequency of replenishment.

Ccacf7567273244733bc991af4ac42ed

(5198)

on January 27, 2012
at 08:04 PM

So what those studies are saying is that adding orange juice lowers your HDL and increases your triglycerides. Oh, there's also a coorelation that habitual OJ drinkers tend to be healthier individuals, and that if you're deficient you may improve some markers by adding the juice of a fresh fruit to your otherwise poor diet. I'm not seeing anything that suggests I should spend all my time desperately trying to convince people that OJ is the best thing ever and absolutely necessary for health.

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 27, 2012
at 07:32 PM

http://conference.ifas.ufl.edu/citrus/presentations/Wednesday/PM/0335%20Cesar.pdf Lots of long term and short term studies on Orange Juice being GOOD for you.

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 27, 2012
at 07:31 PM

Hard Charging exercise depletes liver glycogen fast and makes T3 go to basically zero. Even easy exercise depletes liver glycogen pretty fast and makes T3 go to zero. You either need carb or protein(to convert to carb) to make T3 go back up. Sucrose being half fructose and half glucose is the optimum ratio to get T3 revved up. Revving the metabolism too high only exists if nutrient deficiencies start taking place which is a nutrient problem not a too high metabolism problem.

Ccacf7567273244733bc991af4ac42ed

(5198)

on January 27, 2012
at 07:29 PM

Still, from an objective viewpoint, if your aim is to educate/convert people then you don't seem to be going about it in the best way. There's so little rigour and so much assumption that it really is very easy for people to dismiss your points if they have a mind to whether they are valid or not. You never seem to listen or actually respond to what other people have to say if it's critical - that might be a good place to start.

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 27, 2012
at 07:27 PM

The liver glycogen store isn't an overflow. The liver glycogen store is your bodies source of blood and brain glucose. You need liver glycogen to convert T4 into active T3. Without enough T3 you can't create enough energy to replace cells fast enough so errors start accumulating and disease/aging happens.

Ccacf7567273244733bc991af4ac42ed

(5198)

on January 27, 2012
at 07:26 PM

With *your* truth.

Ccacf7567273244733bc991af4ac42ed

(5198)

on January 27, 2012
at 07:25 PM

I'm sorry, but that says essentially nothing. Are you trying to argue that grains are therefore good? Are you trying to qualify your original 'question'? Can't you start a blog to post cryptic non-statements about abstract biology and links to carefully selected studies?

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 27, 2012
at 07:19 PM

I don't want to argue with anyone I want to expand people's realities to be more in line with truth.

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 27, 2012
at 07:19 PM

I don't want to argue with anyone I want to expand people's realties to be more in line with truth.

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 27, 2012
at 07:18 PM

allergens in certain grains which among other things can create estrogen like effects doesn't make grains bad but certain grains arn't that bad except being pure starch which isn't always completely broken down and can be found in blood and can block up the whole body

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 27, 2012
at 07:15 PM

@PrimalDanny- Any amount of carbohydrate will raise metabolism vs zero carb because T4 needs liver glycogen to convert to T3 among other reasons

Ed983a42344945b1ff70fd9597a23493

on January 27, 2012
at 07:14 PM

Well said for a non science-y type!

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 27, 2012
at 07:14 PM

@Ratiocinative- Where is your study supporting your statement that eating 2400 calories once every 3 days will keep metabolism at baseline levels?

Ccacf7567273244733bc991af4ac42ed

(5198)

on January 27, 2012
at 07:00 PM

If grains are so bad, why do they raise metabolism?

324bf94d3d6f9322d6e4dba4becfaab1

on January 27, 2012
at 06:56 PM

I'm not saying sugar is bad, but eating 800 calories a day means the study is flawed from the start. If they're so worried about the metabolism slowing down then they should be fasting. Eat a large 2400 once every 3 days, instead of 800 everyday.

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d

(17969)

on January 27, 2012
at 06:50 PM

It is good to cite sources for claims, this article isn't a verifiable source and provides no citations. Luckily I know of the paper that people who say this refer to http://www.ajcn.org/content/26/11/1180.full.pdf+html It does appear that after sucrose phagocytosis is less effective than after starch. Not by 75% though, that's an arbitrary number. I don't know a lot about this stuff, there could be other factors at play that make this not so. I asked Paul to take a look at the issue but he has a lot to do already so I don't have any answers yet.

Ccacf7567273244733bc991af4ac42ed

(5198)

on January 27, 2012
at 06:47 PM

I'm sorry if you found this answer unhelpful, but as I said, you're just begging the question, seemingly because you want to argue with everybody. Raising the metabolism burns through resources faster. With limited resources, this may be a bad idea. I realise you may have very strong beliefs to the contrary, but that doesn't meanyou have to be blind to another point of view. Why is raising metabolism good?

Ccacf7567273244733bc991af4ac42ed

(5198)

on January 27, 2012
at 06:43 PM

I think he downvotes a lot so I'm guessing it must be good for him.

66e6b190e62fb3bcf42d4c60801c7bf6

(12407)

on January 27, 2012
at 06:38 PM

my first downvote in a long time. was it as good for you as it was for me??? yeah baby...

66e6b190e62fb3bcf42d4c60801c7bf6

(12407)

on January 27, 2012
at 06:37 PM

Cliff, the way I've read the biology of it, the liver acts as an overflow storage unit and regulator of blood glucose. I'm skeptical that the purpose of the liver and it's glycogen mechanisms is to be topped off as much as possible as much as it is to regulate blood glucose levels and store the excess. That would fit into the thinking that fructose is shuttled to the liver as glycogen because that's a safe way to handle it- not because it's so beneficial as a source to top off glycogen in the liver.

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 27, 2012
at 06:37 PM

You linked me to a whole bunch of opinions.

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 27, 2012
at 06:36 PM

Why do people upvote this? he clearly didn't even read my post.

66e6b190e62fb3bcf42d4c60801c7bf6

(12407)

on January 27, 2012
at 06:34 PM

Hey PD. If losing bodyfat is the goal, I believe that- and I've done it and watched others do it- constant, low-level movement and occasional strength training is the best prescription. Hard charging, metabolism- raising exercise that requires high amounts of glycogen refilling of the liver just ain't the way to do it. I don't believe it's a prescription for longevity either.

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 27, 2012
at 06:34 PM

How do you know starch works just as well as sugar?? Do you have studies showing this?

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 27, 2012
at 06:33 PM

How is raising metabolism(thyroid) bad?

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 27, 2012
at 06:33 PM

Glucose(starch) doesn't really fill liver glycogen stores all that good, search the glucose paradox on google.

Ccacf7567273244733bc991af4ac42ed

(5198)

on January 27, 2012
at 06:29 PM

I get the impression that a lot of this comes from different ends of the spectrum - elevating metabolism may be good for those struggling to build lean mass or performing at a high level. From the historical perspective this would be during summer when sugar is naturally available and you have a lot of daylight to do your hunting and get a net weight gain. When trying to lose weight however, you're talking low activity/stimulation, scarce food and long winter nights. The body is happy to use up its reserves efficiently, but if you're revving too hard it's not going to play ball.

32f5749fa6cf7adbeb0b0b031ba82b46

(41757)

on January 27, 2012
at 06:25 PM

And what do this have to do with the question at hand?

Ccacf7567273244733bc991af4ac42ed

(5198)

on January 27, 2012
at 06:18 PM

Is this a question or just the abstract of an article?

D10ca8d11301c2f4993ac2279ce4b930

(5242)

on January 27, 2012
at 06:13 PM

There is also the part about it being a dose dependent hepatoxin but I don't think that's going to be a huge freaking issue in the context of a nutrient rich diet.

Medium avatar

(39831)

on January 27, 2012
at 06:00 PM

"The sucrose-induced rise in resting metabolic rate was accompanied by a rise in serum triiodothyronine values, but not plasma insulin or norepinephrine concentrations."

  • E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

    asked by

    (12857)
  • Views
    11.4K
  • Last Activity
    1281D AGO
Frontpage book

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

7 Answers

17
9e20abb05f3f6e3cc4bb107f8980aecd

on January 27, 2012
at 06:14 PM

Cliff, you have to distinguish between the effects of carbs on the one hand, and the differential effects of sugar v starch on the other.

As I've blogged (eg http://perfecthealthdiet.com/?p=4383), zero-carb diets invoke a glucose conservation program that downregulates T3 thyroid hormone level and metabolism. Restoring carbs in any form will restore T3 levels and metabolic rate. Starch works as well as sugar. That effect is all this study shows.

In this case "raising metabolism" was beneficial but not every dietary change that raises metabolism will be. Excess calories / overfeeding will raise the metabolism but is not a healthy practice over any extended period of time.

None of this supports a preference for fructose-bearing sugars over other types of carbohydrate.

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 27, 2012
at 06:34 PM

How do you know starch works just as well as sugar?? Do you have studies showing this?

1a98a40ba8ffdc5aa28d1324d01c6c9f

(20378)

on January 27, 2012
at 11:20 PM

Thanks for posting Paul!

Ccacf7567273244733bc991af4ac42ed

(5198)

on January 28, 2012
at 03:14 PM

It's a universal truth that you can never have too much of a good thing.

543a65b3004bf5a51974fbdd60d666bb

(4493)

on January 28, 2012
at 01:59 AM

on the sugar vs starch topic, does one raise triiodothyronine (T3) more than the other? and can either raise T3 too much (more than desirable), ie. doesn't a high (excessive) T3 mean (result in?) hyperthyroidism

23f79c5241be763ac583fc68d58ee02c

(250)

on February 01, 2012
at 07:36 PM

The difference? If I eat a bowl of rice or more than a single medium size potato I feel high and sleepy afterwords and can't function for 30 minutes. If I eat 2-3 pieces of fruit I feel great. Perhaps not everyone is the same?

543a65b3004bf5a51974fbdd60d666bb

(4493)

on February 03, 2012
at 02:53 AM

i seem to be the opposite you at the moment Just Mike, but i'm still testing. could be the fruit type or time of day or amount....or...

9e20abb05f3f6e3cc4bb107f8980aecd

(5939)

on February 03, 2012
at 11:50 PM

Hi Just Mike, some gut pathogens eat starch but not fructose/pectin, others eat fructose or pectin but not starch / starch fiber. Which you're infected with determines which food gives you trouble.

543a65b3004bf5a51974fbdd60d666bb

(4493)

on February 03, 2012
at 02:55 AM

i seem to be the opposite to you at the moment Just Mike, but i'm still testing. could be the fruit type or time of day or amount...or...other. I seem to be fine with bananas tho

67f3387f0308b570c61944addedd183e

(112)

on February 05, 2012
at 01:12 AM

If the low-carber view that Insulin=evil is true wouldn't the carbohydrate that increases insulin the least be the best? (All other things being equal)

9e20abb05f3f6e3cc4bb107f8980aecd

(5939)

on February 05, 2012
at 01:49 PM

Insulin is not evil.

685e3c967e63b4eacccf02628fd9a3ac

(1026)

on May 01, 2012
at 07:44 AM

@PrimalDanny - what about hormesis. Too much of a good thing is possible, IMO.

9
66e6b190e62fb3bcf42d4c60801c7bf6

on January 27, 2012
at 06:17 PM

hmmm...maybe so you can burn it off quicker to get it out of the body?

I think something's being lost in the big picture here. I'm not a sciencey type which puts me at a disadvantage in some ways, but it also gives me a more simplistic bigger picture view. I'm a fan of keeping things that are blatantly toxic out of the body, however, there are many things that fall into a gray are of being toxic at high doses- granted that doseage may be higher or lower for individuals. I put fructose in that category. From where I stand, the body can deal with it in small and even moderate amounts- particularly from fruit where it's usually attached to glucose. When we start talking about ingesting large amounts of juices from fruit- much more than we can find in nature- my first question is why? I'm not asking that rhetorically, I really want to know the benefit of doing so. I've heard the argument that it takes care of the morning cortisol spike. Why would I want to do that? I've heard that it replaces liver glycogen. Well so does excess glucose from starches after your muscles have been loaded up with glycogen. These arguments just aren't strong. Yes, I know that PUFA's compound the problem but I'd like to see at the least an epidemiological study of a group of people living on a high fructose diet and thriving. Outside of that, I would proceed with caution with the biohackers claiming that fructose in high doses is benign...

Edit: I also want to challenge the assumption that an elevated metabolism is always a good thing. From where I stand, metabolism is something that varies for a reason- it regulates the energy balance. Is there a reason I would want my truck idling at 2500rpm? I wouldn't want my body to either.

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 27, 2012
at 07:32 PM

http://conference.ifas.ufl.edu/citrus/presentations/Wednesday/PM/0335%20Cesar.pdf Lots of long term and short term studies on Orange Juice being GOOD for you.

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 27, 2012
at 06:33 PM

Glucose(starch) doesn't really fill liver glycogen stores all that good, search the glucose paradox on google.

66e6b190e62fb3bcf42d4c60801c7bf6

(12407)

on January 27, 2012
at 06:38 PM

my first downvote in a long time. was it as good for you as it was for me??? yeah baby...

Ccacf7567273244733bc991af4ac42ed

(5198)

on January 27, 2012
at 06:43 PM

I think he downvotes a lot so I'm guessing it must be good for him.

Ed983a42344945b1ff70fd9597a23493

on January 27, 2012
at 07:14 PM

Well said for a non science-y type!

66e6b190e62fb3bcf42d4c60801c7bf6

(12407)

on January 27, 2012
at 06:34 PM

Hey PD. If losing bodyfat is the goal, I believe that- and I've done it and watched others do it- constant, low-level movement and occasional strength training is the best prescription. Hard charging, metabolism- raising exercise that requires high amounts of glycogen refilling of the liver just ain't the way to do it. I don't believe it's a prescription for longevity either.

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 27, 2012
at 07:27 PM

The liver glycogen store isn't an overflow. The liver glycogen store is your bodies source of blood and brain glucose. You need liver glycogen to convert T4 into active T3. Without enough T3 you can't create enough energy to replace cells fast enough so errors start accumulating and disease/aging happens.

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 27, 2012
at 07:31 PM

Hard Charging exercise depletes liver glycogen fast and makes T3 go to basically zero. Even easy exercise depletes liver glycogen pretty fast and makes T3 go to zero. You either need carb or protein(to convert to carb) to make T3 go back up. Sucrose being half fructose and half glucose is the optimum ratio to get T3 revved up. Revving the metabolism too high only exists if nutrient deficiencies start taking place which is a nutrient problem not a too high metabolism problem.

66e6b190e62fb3bcf42d4c60801c7bf6

(12407)

on January 27, 2012
at 06:37 PM

Cliff, the way I've read the biology of it, the liver acts as an overflow storage unit and regulator of blood glucose. I'm skeptical that the purpose of the liver and it's glycogen mechanisms is to be topped off as much as possible as much as it is to regulate blood glucose levels and store the excess. That would fit into the thinking that fructose is shuttled to the liver as glycogen because that's a safe way to handle it- not because it's so beneficial as a source to top off glycogen in the liver.

Ccacf7567273244733bc991af4ac42ed

(5198)

on January 27, 2012
at 06:29 PM

I get the impression that a lot of this comes from different ends of the spectrum - elevating metabolism may be good for those struggling to build lean mass or performing at a high level. From the historical perspective this would be during summer when sugar is naturally available and you have a lot of daylight to do your hunting and get a net weight gain. When trying to lose weight however, you're talking low activity/stimulation, scarce food and long winter nights. The body is happy to use up its reserves efficiently, but if you're revving too hard it's not going to play ball.

Ccacf7567273244733bc991af4ac42ed

(5198)

on January 27, 2012
at 08:04 PM

So what those studies are saying is that adding orange juice lowers your HDL and increases your triglycerides. Oh, there's also a coorelation that habitual OJ drinkers tend to be healthier individuals, and that if you're deficient you may improve some markers by adding the juice of a fresh fruit to your otherwise poor diet. I'm not seeing anything that suggests I should spend all my time desperately trying to convince people that OJ is the best thing ever and absolutely necessary for health.

66e6b190e62fb3bcf42d4c60801c7bf6

(12407)

on January 27, 2012
at 08:14 PM

I'm still waiting for the study showing that your liver needs to be full of glycogen at all times. Yes, the liver is a regulator. I said that. Now tell me in plain terms why does it need to be continually replenished at the rate that copious amounts orange juice would do it? Those studies you keep posting DO NOT show that. Now show me one that does. And I won't even get into the efficacy or health benefits of hard-charging exercise that requires that level of glycogen and frequency of replenishment.

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 28, 2012
at 12:46 AM

I'm not interested in providing a study for everything I say, you can go read ray peat and make your own conclusions. Personally eating small frequent meals that include OJ has been one of the best things I've done for my health. I feel provided more than enough info for you, its up to you to do the rest of the work if you skeptical.

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 28, 2012
at 12:59 AM

If you don't eat fructose or galactose your body will produce inflammatory lactic acid from carbohydrates to refill glycogen or convert your muscles into glycogen. If you eat thyroid glands like traditional cultures this probably isn't that big of a deal.

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 28, 2012
at 12:56 AM

The reason why it(The liver) needs to be continually replenished is because you are constantly using glucose for fuel, your liver can only hold ~150g which can be used relatively fast doing basic stuff. In a stressed state you lose a lot more glucose as well creating even more of a need for liver glycogen, I would say the average person is in a stressed state constantly. You don't necessarily have to keep it full constantly either but eating small frequent meals has been shown to have the best benefits in regards to insulin function and nutrition storage...

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 28, 2012
at 12:58 AM

..and people in a unhealthy or stressed state need to eat more frequently to combat stress hormones.

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 28, 2012
at 01:00 AM

Figured I might as well break it down how I understand it, go and read rays articles/newsletters/podcast now to get the science and research behind it.

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 28, 2012
at 01:05 AM

Broda barnes thought 98.7 was the optimal body temp in regards to thyroid function and general health, you can use body temp to test how sugar, starch and meal frequency effect your body temp and therefore thyroid function. Personally I was eating very high carb potato based diet with some IF'ing and my temps were always in the 97s, drinking oj instead of potatoes and my temps are always in the optimal range. Maybe others are different but that's my experience.

C7fa1bf712d466cf7e9f2a404d5f0e34

(40)

on January 28, 2012
at 01:17 AM

@Cliff - my temps is pretty much always 97.3. Lately I've been adding in more fruit though, so I'm curious to see what kind of changes (if any) I'll see.

Ccacf7567273244733bc991af4ac42ed

(5198)

on January 28, 2012
at 01:00 PM

You do nothing *but* provide studies! Hundreds of them, each as unhelpful as the last. You're still missing the point massively but it's ok, you've done your proselytizing now and people are indeed able to draw their own conclusions.

23f79c5241be763ac583fc68d58ee02c

(250)

on February 01, 2012
at 07:45 PM

As opposed to your ad hominem attacks? Critique the content, not the poster.

685e3c967e63b4eacccf02628fd9a3ac

(1026)

on May 01, 2012
at 07:46 AM

Just Mike - COMPLETELY agree. *Critique the content, not the poster.* is an awesome quote. Can I use it on my website?

8
Medium avatar

on January 27, 2012
at 05:40 PM

If I'm not mistaken, the activity of hepatic deiodinase (which converts T4 to T3) is downregulated when liver glycogen drops below a particular threshold. As such, carbohydrate restriction behaves in a very similar manner to a selenium deficiency, with the result being far less active thyroid hormone, even if T4 is at a normal level.

23f79c5241be763ac583fc68d58ee02c

(250)

on February 01, 2012
at 07:46 PM

Thank you for being a voice of reason!!

5
Ccacf7567273244733bc991af4ac42ed

on January 27, 2012
at 06:24 PM

If sugar is so bad, why does it raise metabolism?

Because raising metabolism is bad? This seems to beg the question, not to mention take a grossly simplified approach that will likely confuse many people. There's so many other questions that could be asked to try and clarify the point that it would be easier if you could be mroe specific about the problem you're needing help with.

Ccacf7567273244733bc991af4ac42ed

(5198)

on January 27, 2012
at 06:47 PM

I'm sorry if you found this answer unhelpful, but as I said, you're just begging the question, seemingly because you want to argue with everybody. Raising the metabolism burns through resources faster. With limited resources, this may be a bad idea. I realise you may have very strong beliefs to the contrary, but that doesn't meanyou have to be blind to another point of view. Why is raising metabolism good?

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 27, 2012
at 07:19 PM

I don't want to argue with anyone I want to expand people's realities to be more in line with truth.

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 27, 2012
at 07:19 PM

I don't want to argue with anyone I want to expand people's realties to be more in line with truth.

Ccacf7567273244733bc991af4ac42ed

(5198)

on January 27, 2012
at 07:26 PM

With *your* truth.

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 27, 2012
at 06:33 PM

How is raising metabolism(thyroid) bad?

Ccacf7567273244733bc991af4ac42ed

(5198)

on January 27, 2012
at 07:29 PM

Still, from an objective viewpoint, if your aim is to educate/convert people then you don't seem to be going about it in the best way. There's so little rigour and so much assumption that it really is very easy for people to dismiss your points if they have a mind to whether they are valid or not. You never seem to listen or actually respond to what other people have to say if it's critical - that might be a good place to start.

543a65b3004bf5a51974fbdd60d666bb

(4493)

on January 29, 2012
at 09:19 AM

Goldilocks metabolism....that's what we want, not too low, not too high

23f79c5241be763ac583fc68d58ee02c

(250)

on February 01, 2012
at 07:50 PM

How about people like me who did the low-carb Paleo schtick and went from having a high body temperature (hotter than average my whole life) to having cold hands and having to bundle up. Starch? Makes me tired for 30-60 minutes after anything more than 1/4 cup. Fruit? No problems, since adding it I've been getting warmer, and my appetite has decreased. But any amount of fructose is toxic...right?

Ccacf7567273244733bc991af4ac42ed

(5198)

on February 02, 2012
at 09:30 PM

It depends what you mean by toxic of course. I'm pretty sure you won't freeze to death from lack of fruit though.

5
96440612cf0fcf366bf5ad8f776fca84

(19413)

on January 27, 2012
at 05:49 PM

Simple. It triggers insulin after a certain level in the blood, beyond which it becomes toxic to nerves, eyes, etc. Insulin, in turn, triggers storage of nutrients to fat.

Medium avatar

(39831)

on January 27, 2012
at 06:00 PM

"The sucrose-induced rise in resting metabolic rate was accompanied by a rise in serum triiodothyronine values, but not plasma insulin or norepinephrine concentrations."

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 27, 2012
at 06:36 PM

Why do people upvote this? he clearly didn't even read my post.

96440612cf0fcf366bf5ad8f776fca84

(19413)

on January 27, 2012
at 10:12 PM

@Cliff Meth-Amphetamine, as well as 2,4-Dinitrophenol also raise metabolic rate, but they are certainly not something you'd want to take. Why do you feel that if something raises metabolic rates is an indicator of it not being bad? The insulin effect is still there after you go past a certain threshhold.

96440612cf0fcf366bf5ad8f776fca84

(19413)

on January 28, 2012
at 12:22 PM

Right because white sugar crystals occur in nature, all by themselves, and aren't man made at all.

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 28, 2012
at 12:51 AM

DNP doesn't even seem to be bad necessarily either, the only reason its bad is because people can take too much and over heat.

96440612cf0fcf366bf5ad8f776fca84

(19413)

on January 29, 2012
at 01:28 PM

http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2012/01/what-causes-insulin-resistance-part-v.html "(update 1/20/12: fructose intake has just been associated with insulin resistance in adolescents." as you well know sucrose is disaccharide composed of glucose and fructose.

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 28, 2012
at 03:11 PM

"The sucrose-rich diet might exert an adaptive thermogenesis-mediated defense mechanism, protecting against excessive weight gain and disruptive pancreatic islet lesion. After 18 months maintenance on sucrose-rich versus fat-rich diets the number of animals surviving was significantly higher on the sucrose diet whereas on the fat diet a significant number of animals succumbed to expansive islet cell disruption and diabetes." http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10751749

96440612cf0fcf366bf5ad8f776fca84

(19413)

on January 28, 2012
at 11:40 PM

Riiight, "might" indeed! So that's why we don't see any 350lbs+ obese people out there in the wilds of America, because thermogenesis from a sucrose-rich versus fat-rich diet has prevented their conversion to a mastodon like build. What obesity epidemic? This paper proves it cannot exist! Must have just been our imagination. And spiny mice and humans are interchangeable.

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 28, 2012
at 03:06 PM

Show me one study showing sugar causes insulin resistance, sugar cures insulin resistance and makes you more insulin sensitive as long as you don't eat it with a cup of soy oil or butter.

C7fa1bf712d466cf7e9f2a404d5f0e34

(40)

on January 28, 2012
at 07:31 PM

@cliff - butter?? But it lacks n6...

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 28, 2012
at 12:49 AM

Meth and DNP are both man made compounds unlike sugar

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 28, 2012
at 12:48 AM

methamphetamine raise T3? Do you realize what raised metabolic rate even means in this context?

96440612cf0fcf366bf5ad8f776fca84

(19413)

on January 28, 2012
at 12:46 PM

@Cliff, Sarcasm off: I did read the abstract, but not the paper. I feel the question is silly. Lots of things may raise metabolism, and they're not all "good" or "bad". The reason that sugar is viewed as bad in a VLC Paleo diet context is because when enough of it is taken over a long period, it can cause insulin resistance. That is what makes the rest of it irrelevant. I could have said the cocoa leaf, and that would have been a natural plant, or cocaine, as both raise metabolism, but according to our governments both are bad. :) Natural or manmade doesn't play into it.

D12142c8cafb16d9af10b3362cb8fb62

(1590)

on January 29, 2012
at 01:50 PM

Sugar crystals are as natural as butter...

3
D10ca8d11301c2f4993ac2279ce4b930

(5242)

on January 27, 2012
at 06:12 PM

Sugar raises metabolism because it bypasses the most important control points in glycolysis (Glucokinsae and PFK-1. The product fructose turns into for glycolysis Fructose 1,6 bis phosphate stimulate the one remaining pathway). Whether the rise of metabolism is a good or a bad thing is dependent on many factors but most importnatly nutritional status. If people aren't nutritionally replete, they may not have the nutrients necessary for a high metabolism but the consumption of fructose will cause them not to be able to regulate energy production as tightly which will call for the use of precious nutrients.

D10ca8d11301c2f4993ac2279ce4b930

(5242)

on January 27, 2012
at 06:13 PM

There is also the part about it being a dose dependent hepatoxin but I don't think that's going to be a huge freaking issue in the context of a nutrient rich diet.

23f79c5241be763ac583fc68d58ee02c

(250)

on February 01, 2012
at 07:53 PM

Thank you for remembering the "dose-dependent" part. Everyone else seems to forget that part. The dogmatic, like PrimalDanny, don't seem to acknowledge that fruit is as paleo as meat.

2
Cf4576cbcc44fc7f2294135609bce9e5

on January 27, 2012
at 05:39 PM

the amount of sugar in just one can of coke is enough sugar to lower the metabolism of infection fighting blood cells by 75 percent. http://www.natural-pain-relief-guide.com/sugar-immune-system.html

Be1dbd31e4a3fccd4394494aa5db256d

(17969)

on January 27, 2012
at 06:50 PM

It is good to cite sources for claims, this article isn't a verifiable source and provides no citations. Luckily I know of the paper that people who say this refer to http://www.ajcn.org/content/26/11/1180.full.pdf+html It does appear that after sucrose phagocytosis is less effective than after starch. Not by 75% though, that's an arbitrary number. I don't know a lot about this stuff, there could be other factors at play that make this not so. I asked Paul to take a look at the issue but he has a lot to do already so I don't have any answers yet.

32f5749fa6cf7adbeb0b0b031ba82b46

(41757)

on January 27, 2012
at 06:25 PM

And what do this have to do with the question at hand?

E5c7f14800c5992831f5c70fa746dc5c

(12857)

on January 27, 2012
at 06:37 PM

You linked me to a whole bunch of opinions.

23f79c5241be763ac583fc68d58ee02c

(250)

on February 01, 2012
at 07:55 PM

That's like saying because protein is bad for people in kidney failure protein CAUSES kidney failure in healthy people. I don't have a system infection or chronic pain (natural-pain-relief?)

Cf4576cbcc44fc7f2294135609bce9e5

(3125)

on February 03, 2012
at 12:19 AM

my goal is to get everybody to read the link. you dont have to like the link but it will go down with a spoonful of sugar.

67f3387f0308b570c61944addedd183e

(112)

on February 05, 2012
at 01:20 AM

Read it and then what?

Answer Question


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