Plain sugar is sucrose which consists of equal number of glucose and fructose molecules. It is absorbed from your gut as glucose and fructose. Starch, by the way, is basically a polymer of glucose (technically, a polysaccharide) and is absorbed from your gut mostly as glucose, though your gut flora is an active participant in the process.
Dried apricots are largely sugar (53% by weight is sugars), carrots are mostly water with some fiber and a bit of starch, not much, and with hummus it depends, but it’s a mix of carbs, proteins, and fat.
It doesn’t make sense to call things good or bad without the context of the person’s diet. Certainly the average person could stand to eat less sugar. Some people are on very low carb diets though and could stand to eat a bit more.
Without going into personal recommendations which should be personal—the rules for an 8%-body-fat marathoner are different from the rules for a couch potato who is a potato both in activity levels and in shape—I still don’t think it’s a good idea to get into the habit of treading tiredness and low energy with sugary snacks.
It may have worked well in the preindustrial times when we had to run ten miles in the snow uphill both ways just to get to our shoes. But nowadays when there is a noticeable surplus of tasty sugar and a noticeable shortage of physical exertion, getting used to snacking on carbs for a boost of energy doesn’t sound wise to me.
I object to the framing. I suggested that someone who did not currently eat the recommended 5 servings of fruits to up their fruit intake. They did so and felt better. But we’ve already had this argument.
That was about fructose, this one is about glucose :-D
By the way, why do you consider the whole “recommended servings” things to be anything more than nonsense? As far as I know these recommendations are written by the agriculture and food industry lobby with the idea of shaping consumption preferences.
I only care about servings to the extent that they are used as the increments in studies on health. They are then used as recommendations because food packaging is sold in those units, making it easier on the end user. Most people don’t want to weigh their food.
Glucose != sugar. Romeo recommended dried apricots and carrots w/ hummus.
Plain sugar is sucrose which consists of equal number of glucose and fructose molecules. It is absorbed from your gut as glucose and fructose. Starch, by the way, is basically a polymer of glucose (technically, a polysaccharide) and is absorbed from your gut mostly as glucose, though your gut flora is an active participant in the process.
Dried apricots are largely sugar (53% by weight is sugars), carrots are mostly water with some fiber and a bit of starch, not much, and with hummus it depends, but it’s a mix of carbs, proteins, and fat.
It doesn’t make sense to call things good or bad without the context of the person’s diet. Certainly the average person could stand to eat less sugar. Some people are on very low carb diets though and could stand to eat a bit more.
Although I don’t know the context of your original recommendation, using sugar rushes as pick-me-uppers really doesn’t sound like a good idea to me.
Snacking on fruits doesn’t induce sugar rushes unless you have a completely messed up insulin response.
Without going into personal recommendations which should be personal—the rules for an 8%-body-fat marathoner are different from the rules for a couch potato who is a potato both in activity levels and in shape—I still don’t think it’s a good idea to get into the habit of treading tiredness and low energy with sugary snacks.
It may have worked well in the preindustrial times when we had to run ten miles in the snow uphill both ways just to get to our shoes. But nowadays when there is a noticeable surplus of tasty sugar and a noticeable shortage of physical exertion, getting used to snacking on carbs for a boost of energy doesn’t sound wise to me.
I object to the framing. I suggested that someone who did not currently eat the recommended 5 servings of fruits to up their fruit intake. They did so and felt better. But we’ve already had this argument.
That was about fructose, this one is about glucose :-D
By the way, why do you consider the whole “recommended servings” things to be anything more than nonsense? As far as I know these recommendations are written by the agriculture and food industry lobby with the idea of shaping consumption preferences.
I only care about servings to the extent that they are used as the increments in studies on health. They are then used as recommendations because food packaging is sold in those units, making it easier on the end user. Most people don’t want to weigh their food.
Huh? Fruits and vegetables are sold in serving-size units..? What are you talking about?
Fruit comes in discrete units. It’s generally advisable to give people an idea what 5 servings per day looks like.
I agree if you’re thinking of apples or oranges, but ADBOC if you mean all fruit, including cherries or watermelons.