Why is an orange a healthy nutrient and a cake an unhealthyThere is no question that you need carbs. But the right carbs, not
the wrong ones. Right carbs = fruits, wrong carbs = cakes.
Carbs are carbs are carbs. All carbs are basically poly-glucose chains, or fiber.
What we really mean by "good carbs" are nutrient dense/water-dense plant foods, like salad-type carbs. There's actually very little carb content in these foods, typically less than 5-8% of total weight by volume. Really, we're eating water and fiber mostly with most of these so-called good carbs. And that's why they're good--carb content is minimal (and they often have meaningful nutrient value -- but so do bad "carbs" like most large fruits).
ALL carbs are pro-aging, because glucose is pro-aging. So, I only consider plant foods worthy of eating only if the nutrient value exceeds the negative inflammation, insulin-release (insulin itself is pro-aging), and glycation damage--purely subjective, I know. For example, I consider potatoes a net-negative (too little nutritional value versus the pro-aging effects). I do cheat with potatoes occasionally, but I do consider it a cheat.
one? Both contain carbohydrates. The difference is made by
other substances in the orange that make it perfectly digestable.
(If someone has diffuculty to digest oranges it is not the fruit but
a disturbed metabolism). Oranges have a lot of carbohydrates
or dried figs even more without any water.
I do not agree with your opinion that carbs as a whole are
pro-aging. Take bread for instance. It is very very pro-aging.
Fruits instead are anti-aging because they do not have any
substance that is promoting inflammation and more or less no
lectins or phytates. They have enzymes, fiber, flavonoids.
Potatoes are pro-aging due to their phytate and lectin content.