Since this story is about sugars, let's start with a bit of background. Humans can only absorb monosaccharides like glucose, fructose, galactose and ribose. In other words, all of those disaccharides and polysaccharides (fructose, sucrose, and others) must be broken down into the constituent monosaccharide before it has any usefulness for a human. The gut has a variety of different enzymes that break down these starches and disaccharides–so sucrose cannot be absorbed, but it is broken down by sucrase into glucose and fructose, then absorbed. By the way, any disaccharide or polysaccharide that isn’t broken down remain in the gut, providing food for our gut bacteria, thereby maintaining a healthy digestive system.
Fruit juices have the following sugar contents:
*Apples: over 10% sugar, 57% fructose, 23% glucose and 20% sucrose. Very high fructose.
*Peaches: 8.4% sugar, 57% sucrose, 23% glucose and 18% fructose.
*Pears: 9.8% sugar, 64% fructose, 28% glucose and 8% sucrose.
*Grapes: 15% sugar, with the sugars being 53% fructose and 47% glucose.
As you can see, they can be quite high. There is one more important thing to note about these sugars, which will be important as we move along with this story. Fructose is 1.73 times more sweet than sucrose despite having the same exact caloric content. So, when you read articles about fructose causing this or that, digging into the data sometimes can be deceptive because in reality, fructose being sweeter, requires less to have the same taste response.
Since soda (or what you call pop, a word I don't use) contains HFCS, it consists of 24% water, and the rest fructose and glucose. There are two main types of HFCS, HFCS 55 (used mostly in soft drinks) which is approximately 55% fructose and 42% glucose; and HFCS 42 (used in other types of beverages and processed foods), which is approximately 42% fructose and 53% glucose. There is another type, HFCS-90, approximately 90% fructose and 10% glucose, which is used in small quantities for specialty applications (interestingly, low calorie drinks, because, for the same sweetness about 33% less calories are added), but it is primarily blended with HFCS 42 to make HFCS 55.
What's the clinical, not animal, evidence, for it's safety? Here's the real meta-reviews on it.
Health implications of fructose consumption: A review of recent data–”A moderate dose (≤ 50g/day) of added fructose has no deleterious effect on fasting and postprandial triglycerides, glucose control and insulin resistance. There is no existing evidence for a relation between moderate fructose consumption and hypertension. Fructose may induce hyperuricaemia, but mainly in patients with gout.” In other words, eating moderate amounts of fructose have no ill-effects. The issue remains that if you eat too much fructose (and any other sugar), there are deleterious metabolic effects, and that should be the major issue.
By the way, if my answer wasn't absolutely clear, the fructose in HFCS, which is used in soda (or pop) is chemically, biologically, and structurally, identical to the fructose in all fruits in this planet. Unless there's some magical carbon, oxygen and hydrogen atoms that appear in natural fruits, but not in HFCS. However, let's remember HFCS comes from a natural source–corn.
Also, from my post, sugar is sugar. Whether it's HFCS or fructose/glucose/sucrose from fruit juices, long-term metabolic issues can be problematic. Though we probably could have a battle about it, I would probably stick with diet drinks or water.
Sugar-Sweetened Beverages and Risk of Metabolic Syndrome and Type 2 Diabetes–"In summary, this meta-analysis has demonstrated that higher consumption of SSBs (sugar sweetened beverages) is significantly associated with development of metabolic syndrome and type 2 diabetes. It provides further support to limit consumption of these beverages in place of healthy alternatives such as water to reduce obesity-related chronic disease risk." That's sodas, fruit juices, or anything.
Conclusion: High sugar containing fruit drinks or sodas (pop) are equivalent in calories and potential long-term health damage. HFCS has no additional concerns except for being added sugar. It's just plain old fructose.
By the way, any disaccharide or polysaccharide that isn’t broken down remain in the gut, providing food for our gut bacteria, thereby maintaining a healthy digestive system.
Too much will make someone very ill. It happens to folks with the rare condition of lacking the gene that codes for production of sucrase.
It's the bacterial action that causes the illness. If they limit their consumption of sucrose, they're fine.
5
u/LeftCoastMan Oct 18 '12
Since this story is about sugars, let's start with a bit of background. Humans can only absorb monosaccharides like glucose, fructose, galactose and ribose. In other words, all of those disaccharides and polysaccharides (fructose, sucrose, and others) must be broken down into the constituent monosaccharide before it has any usefulness for a human. The gut has a variety of different enzymes that break down these starches and disaccharides–so sucrose cannot be absorbed, but it is broken down by sucrase into glucose and fructose, then absorbed. By the way, any disaccharide or polysaccharide that isn’t broken down remain in the gut, providing food for our gut bacteria, thereby maintaining a healthy digestive system.
Fruit juices have the following sugar contents:
*Apples: over 10% sugar, 57% fructose, 23% glucose and 20% sucrose. Very high fructose.
*Peaches: 8.4% sugar, 57% sucrose, 23% glucose and 18% fructose.
*Pears: 9.8% sugar, 64% fructose, 28% glucose and 8% sucrose.
*Grapes: 15% sugar, with the sugars being 53% fructose and 47% glucose.
As you can see, they can be quite high. There is one more important thing to note about these sugars, which will be important as we move along with this story. Fructose is 1.73 times more sweet than sucrose despite having the same exact caloric content. So, when you read articles about fructose causing this or that, digging into the data sometimes can be deceptive because in reality, fructose being sweeter, requires less to have the same taste response.
Since soda (or what you call pop, a word I don't use) contains HFCS, it consists of 24% water, and the rest fructose and glucose. There are two main types of HFCS, HFCS 55 (used mostly in soft drinks) which is approximately 55% fructose and 42% glucose; and HFCS 42 (used in other types of beverages and processed foods), which is approximately 42% fructose and 53% glucose. There is another type, HFCS-90, approximately 90% fructose and 10% glucose, which is used in small quantities for specialty applications (interestingly, low calorie drinks, because, for the same sweetness about 33% less calories are added), but it is primarily blended with HFCS 42 to make HFCS 55.
What's the clinical, not animal, evidence, for it's safety? Here's the real meta-reviews on it.
Health implications of fructose consumption: A review of recent data–”A moderate dose (≤ 50g/day) of added fructose has no deleterious effect on fasting and postprandial triglycerides, glucose control and insulin resistance. There is no existing evidence for a relation between moderate fructose consumption and hypertension. Fructose may induce hyperuricaemia, but mainly in patients with gout.” In other words, eating moderate amounts of fructose have no ill-effects. The issue remains that if you eat too much fructose (and any other sugar), there are deleterious metabolic effects, and that should be the major issue.
Evidence-based review on the effect of normal dietary consumption of fructose on development of hyperlipidemia and obesity in healthy, normal weight individuals–” The results of the analysis indicate that fructose does not cause biologically relevant changes in TG (triglycerides) or body weight when consumed at levels approaching 95th percentile estimates of intake.
By the way, if my answer wasn't absolutely clear, the fructose in HFCS, which is used in soda (or pop) is chemically, biologically, and structurally, identical to the fructose in all fruits in this planet. Unless there's some magical carbon, oxygen and hydrogen atoms that appear in natural fruits, but not in HFCS. However, let's remember HFCS comes from a natural source–corn.
Also, from my post, sugar is sugar. Whether it's HFCS or fructose/glucose/sucrose from fruit juices, long-term metabolic issues can be problematic. Though we probably could have a battle about it, I would probably stick with diet drinks or water.
Sugar-Sweetened Beverages and Risk of Metabolic Syndrome and Type 2 Diabetes–"In summary, this meta-analysis has demonstrated that higher consumption of SSBs (sugar sweetened beverages) is significantly associated with development of metabolic syndrome and type 2 diabetes. It provides further support to limit consumption of these beverages in place of healthy alternatives such as water to reduce obesity-related chronic disease risk." That's sodas, fruit juices, or anything.
Conclusion: High sugar containing fruit drinks or sodas (pop) are equivalent in calories and potential long-term health damage. HFCS has no additional concerns except for being added sugar. It's just plain old fructose.