Refined sugar and natural sugar.

Mary Jo · 09-17-2007, 06:31 PM

Hello All,

Accidentally I posted these questions in the herceptin/tykerb thread but didn't know how to get it over here so I retyped it.

My questions are these..............how many grams of refined sugar is ok in a persons daily diet? I remember seeing Dr. Oz on an Oprah episode a while back and he said to read your label and if a product had 4g. of sugar or less it was ok to eat. Above that you should avoid it. How many grams of refined sugar would be considered alright in a diet in a day? Also, what about natural sugar like in fruit and fruit juices. I hate to buy the light versions as they have chemicals in them. The regular juice, even those that say, no sugar added are listed at 34 g. of sugar for an 8 oz. glass. I realize that this is natural sugar but that still seems ridiculous to even think about ingesting? Is it alright to drink that? How much natural sugar is ok in a person's daily diet? Also, does the refined sugar react differently in the body than natural sugar does or do they react the same?

Thanks for your help once again.

Mary Jo

Faith in Him · 09-17-2007, 06:44 PM

Thanks for posting this Mary Jo. I was wondering the same thing. Hopefully, someone will come along and answer it for us.

CLTann · 09-17-2007, 07:00 PM

I will comment on the intake of sugar strictly from a scientific point of view. Narrowly defined, it is a view by a chemist. Basically, refined sugar contains the same molecule as unrefined sugar. In the refining process, some colored matter and impurities are removed. Therefore, there should be no difference how refined sugar and brown sugar in biological sense will cause cancer to propagate. I don't believe there is a finite quantity of sucrose (sugar) one's body will find it a danger. Just like anything else, each person has a different tolerance for each chemical. Perhaps a good way to determine the "safe" amount as the quantity of glucose in the blood that all food convert into through the insulin process. If the blood sugar is higher than 110 (fasting), it is a warning sign. Of course, we were frequently told that cancer cells "like" sugar; therefore, sugar should be avoided. I am not too sure there is concrete proofs to show the relationship. As to "natural" sugar in fruits, these sugars are not the same as sucrose but a mixture of other sugars including fructose. Whether fructose is worse than sucrose, I have not seen any publication to say one way or the other toward cancer.

fullofbeans · 09-18-2007, 02:52 AM

Although referred as sugars there are different types: mainly glucose, fructose and galactose. The glucose itself can have various structure. Glucose can be absorbed by every cells whereas fructose has to be metabolised by the liver first. the liver will drop everything it is doing to metabolise fructose. Refined sugar (sucrose=glucose+fructose) are 'absorbed' quickly produces and as a result produces a sharp rise in your blood sugar and impact on insuline production; Their Glycemic Index reflect this.

However the GI index is not really appropriate to see the effect of fructose on the blood sugar (since GI is standardised for glucose). However studies have shown that fructose increases the blood sugar by almost as much as glucose:

A good paper to read to understand the fructose vs glucose:
http://www.obesityresearch.org/cgi/c...2/suppl_2/124S

Another interesting paper:

http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/abstract/49/4/658

Basically if you think that refined sugar is poison and feeds cancer then perhaps you should extend this to fruits, .., except that at least with fruit you are getting anti oxidant & enzymes that are good for you.

The quoted 110mg is first thing in the morning (before breakfast) which is often referred as the fasting blood sugar, the lowest blood sugar level of the day. But it is not trully the fasting (absence of food) amount (which occur after 24hr after the last meal, once your liver has use its stock of glycogen). The fasting blood sugar is then around 50-70.

Anyhow since we talking about sugars I now use what I think is a better alternative for sugar than Stivia (which I do not like so much ): Xylitol which taste great is natural and comes with an array of good side effect from being tooth friendly& prevent weakening of the bone

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xylitol

Hope this help

R.B. · 09-18-2007, 04:41 AM

Everything the body does is complicated. From my reading I would make the following points.

Refined sugars would seem to have negative influences at a number of levels on the optimal functioning of the body.

Sugars in fruits honey etc would have been in the intake of distant ancestors but in much more limited quantities then we have access to today. Is that good or bad, and at what level, that is not an easy question to answer. When sugar comes with fruit, you are also getting all of the benefits that come with the other nutrients.

My own experience is that cutting out processed sugar, and cutting down on high natural sugar sources such as excessive fruit juices (carton the day), high intakes of dried fruits etc will improve and facilitate digestion. I also now would not choose as a first choice sweet apple juices etc. The digestion is key to good health.

It is frequently stated that sugar blocks the conversion by the body of the mother fats to the long chain fats. So sugar will stop you making the long chain omega threes DHA and EPA.

I cannot answer how much in exact quantities as I have never seen it specified in any trial.

Thank you fullofbeans for your interesting posts and useful links. I will read them in more detail in due course.

As pointed out in the posts above there are different types of sugar. Sugar [sucrose] is broken down in the body to fructose and glucose. So essentially there is no difference between the sugar is found in fruits and the sugar in a packet.

The difference is what additional nutrients the sugar comes with and how concentrated it is. From everything I read we have been increasingly the sweetness levels in the foods we eat both grown and manufactured. Sweet apples are an example. I have read they have quite high levels of fructose. Fruit juice is obviously another source of sugars. Refined sugar is very concentrated to pure sucrose (depending on type) with little / no additional nutrients,

As pointed out in the post by fullofbeans above fructose may pose particular problems as it is digested differently to other sugars. Fructose is used as a sweetener in many prepared food products.

Sugar is also a very big issue in terms of a healthy digestion. Undigested sugar produces unfriendly bacteria in the gut. Unfriendly bacteria in the gut produces gut inflammation and mucus. Gut inflammation and mucus produces poor digestion, and more inflammation, all of which in time leads to IBS etc. Poor digestion might compromise absorption of fats and so exacerbate any shortage of omega threes in the diet.

I do not know anything about xytol. Stevia also is a subject on its own.

Please discuss dietary change with your doctors. This information is given to inform only and should in no way substitute for medical advice.

R.B. · 09-18-2007, 05:02 AM

Complex but thought provoking, moderation in all things, and I have not looked at either of these so have no idea what they do or how they work in the body at a wider level.

Xylitol - Fullofbeans thanks for the wikipedia link - V interesting.

Xylitol inhibits inflammatory cytokine expression induced by lipopolysaccharide from Porphyromonas gingivalis.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/en...RVAbstractPlus

Anti-Inflammatory and Immunomodulatory Activities of Stevioside and Its Metabolite Steviol on THP-1 Cells.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/en...ubmed_RVDocSum

Abstract

"Stevioside, a natural noncaloric sweetener isolated from Stevia rebaudiana Bertoni, possesses anti-inflammatory and antitumor promoting properties; however, no information is available to explain its activity."

Margerie · 09-18-2007, 05:40 AM

marejo

I had a pretty good diet going into bc, but did have a wicked sweet tooth. I grew up with homemade desserts (including to die for hot fudge sauce) EVERY day! If I cut back to one sweet a day, that was an accomplishment. I really had a craving- it is like a drug I tell ya!

I have really been working on it for the past 6 months. I find the less sugar I eat, the less I crave. I gave up juice entirely. A glass of apple juice has as much sugar as 3-4 apples. I only eat fruit with a meal, as opposed to a snack on it's own-to help lessen the spike in blood sugar. Only eat organic from the farmer's market. Really good fruit- yumm. And some dried blueberries. I eat a small treat once a week. I chew xylitol gum. This is a happy medium for me.

Also look out for high fructose corn syrup- the evil of all sugars and it is added to a lot of processed foods.

fullofbeans · 09-18-2007, 11:18 AM

Thanks R.B great articles about Xylitol and Stevia! any anti inflamatory effect is good news.

Also wanted to add about sucrose that it damages proteins:bad.
Fruits in moderation, I reckon fruits should be seen as God's lollipops!

For those in the UK a bag of Xylitol can be bought for £2.5 at Waitrose! (much more expensive online).

Margerie you can cater for your sweet tooth by making them with this type of alternative. I have such a sweet tooth too! Sucrose is addictive so yep the less you eat it the less you will crave it. What is the brand of chewgums you have? I want some xylitol chewy!

R.B, Even when I am travelling and not so good with my diet/vitamins intake I always make sure to take my fish oil and I reckon that is thanks to you!

hutchibk · 09-18-2007, 11:59 AM

I love Stevia - I have used it religiously for about 2 years to sweeten all my beverages and cereal. I recently found a cookbook called "Baking with Stevia" - but I haven't tried any recipes yet. I do still eat occasional sweets with sugar, but not regularly. NO high fructose corn syrups ever, no artificial sweeteners ever... either honey, maple, real cane sugar, or stevia!

Rich66 · 01-18-2009, 03:20 PM

1: Bioorg Med Chem. 2008 Dec 6. [Epub ahead of print]

Links

Cancer preventive agents. Part 8: Chemopreventive effects of stevioside and related compounds.

Takasaki M, Konoshima T, Kozuka M, Tokuda H, Takayasu J, Nishino H, Lee KH.
Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Chiba Institute of Science, Choshi, Chiba 288-0025, Japan.
In a search for potential cancer chemopreventive agents from natural resources, stevioside (1), a sweetener, and six related compounds, including two aglycones steviol (6) and isosteviol (7), were screened in an in vitro assay for inhibitory effects on Epstein-Barr virus early antigen activation. Compounds 1, 6 and 7 showed significant activity in this assay and also exhibited strong inhibitory effects in a two-stage carcinogenesis test using mouse skin induced by 7,12-dimethylbenz[a]anthracene (DMBA) and 12-O-tetradecanoylphorbol-13-acetate (TPA). The inhibitory effects of these three compounds were greater than that of glycyrrhizin. Furthermore, these three compounds significantly inhibited mouse skin carcinogenesis initiated by peroxynitrite and promoted by TPA. Their activities were comparable to that of curcumin. These results suggested that 1, as well as 6 and 7, could be valuable as chemopreventive agents for chemical carcinogenesis.