Studies suggest otherwise. See above. There are more if you wish to look at them on pubmed.

My daily blood sugars trump studies. I can eat a whole bunch of fruit and take my blood sugar, or drink a glass of juice. My sugars will spike harder and faster with juice... Every. Single. Time.

That study also says it examined beverages. I was talking about fruit vs. fruit juice. Not sure how your study applies.

Of course it will. That doesn't mean it's making you fat or that it's unhealthy.

don't know about all of Silock's test etc but do the test on yourself

eat until full with a meal without a bunch of cheap(sugar)
note how long before you feel hungry again

next day(or whenever)
eat same meal only add a dessert(candy,donuts ... you know the deal)
note the time before you get hungry again

for me if i have the dessert i will get hungry again in an hour NO MATTER how much i've eaten for dinner. I keep getting hungry every hour until i resist eating the sugar(dessert). My stomach feels bloated and i know i've eaten enough but i still crave more dessert stuff. It seems like i can even feel it when i sweat after eating a bunch of sugar food, my sweat feels 'sticky'. Same way you can tell when you sweat after drinking the night before. :)


just sayin'

of course it does because when his sugar spikes he craves more food

For a diabetic, yes it does. That's pretty much exactly what it means.

It was talking about fructose vs. sucrose. The delivery system was selected simply because it's a common delivery system.

I addressed GI earlier and why it's not the huge deal everyone makes it out to be when you control for daily intake.

Craving doesn't mean you have to eat.

When your sugar spikes and you have excess glucose it triggers fat storage. Thus, sugar spikes = more fat storage than the even release when sugar from fruit is metabolized.

I didn't know we were talking about diabetics. That's the first time it's come up in this discussion.

As for the sugar argument.... you can eat nothing but sugary sweets and lose weight.

This guy (a nutrition professor) did a test to prove to his students the calorie in vs. calorie out. He ate nothing but Hostess sweets for 10 weeks and lost 27 pounds. Limited himself to 1,800 calories.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08...sor/index.html

So what? Fine, that energy gets stored as fat. But if you don't eat later, what was stored will be burned off for energy. It's just a matter of shifting around when the energy gets burned. It might be immediately because it doesn't get stored, in which case, you have to eat again. Or it might be later, in which case your body will dip into the fat stores to cover energy needs.

I was talking about me. Why else would someone take daily blood sugar measurements (serious question)? I thought that was implied, but certainly could be wrong.

now you're just be silly

of course you don't have to eat but sugar spikes cause cravings which are very difficult to resist and overrides the bodies natural 'i'm full' signal.

a lot of these people who are obese probably wouldn't have that problem without the cravings that simple sugars cause.