• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
- - - - -

How giving up sugar can take 20 years off your looks

sugar glucose skin collagen elasticity aging

  • Please log in to reply
58 replies to this topic

#31 rwac

  • Member
  • 4,764 posts
  • 60
  • Location:Dimension X

Posted 07 December 2012 - 10:54 PM

complex carbs = good, at least not so bad, but
fructose and sucrose (dextrose+fructose) = bad
PUFA = bad
MUFA = bad, neutral or good, depends on your genetically determined metabolism

moderation in all things - Herodotus
all generalities are false, including this one - Voltaire

I do still think 200g of sucrose will be detrimental in the long run. because another substance also causes glycation, does not mean the first is harmless.


High levels of insulin can cause damage too. So triggering an insulin spike by ingesting carbs (starch = glucose) may not be the best thing either.

Hyperinsulinemia, circadian variation of blood pressure and end-organ damage in hypertension.

#32 maxwatt

  • Guest, Moderator LeadNavigator
  • 4,947 posts
  • 1,623
  • Location:New York

Posted 08 December 2012 - 03:34 AM

complex carbs = good, at least not so bad, but
fructose and sucrose (dextrose+fructose) = bad
PUFA = bad
MUFA = bad, neutral or good, depends on your genetically determined metabolism

moderation in all things - Herodotus
all generalities are false, including this one - Voltaire

I do still think 200g of sucrose will be detrimental in the long run. because another substance also causes glycation, does not mean the first is harmless.


High levels of insulin can cause damage too. So triggering an insulin spike by ingesting carbs (starch = glucose) may not be the best thing either.

Hyperinsulinemia, circadian variation of blood pressure and end-organ damage in hypertension.


Yeah, but pasta doesn't cause such a sudden sharp spike in blood glucose as something sugary like orange juice. They don't give glucose tolerance tests with a bowl of pasta; they give you orange juice. But even adding a little fiber and more polyphenols by eating an orange instead of drinking the juice, reduces the spike and the delays absorbtion and blood level rise.

The glycemic index alone does not tell what actually happens in the body when those foods are consumed.
  • like x 2

sponsored ad

  • Advert
Click HERE to rent this advertising spot for AGELESS LOOKS to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#33 rwac

  • Member
  • 4,764 posts
  • 60
  • Location:Dimension X

Posted 08 December 2012 - 04:10 AM

just from stopping a stressful low carb diet.


LoL....


I assume this is meant in the literal form of increased catecholamine concentration and not in the popular notion of stress.


Oh, absolutely. low carb diets are associated with higher levels of cortisol. Also CRP, but that's another topic entirely.

Twenty-four hour urinary cortisol excretion, a hormonal measure of stress, was highest with the very low-carbohydrate diet. Consistent with this finding, Stimson et al31 reported increased whole-body regeneration of cortisol by 11β-HSD1 and reduced inactivation of cortisol by 5α- and 5β-reductases over 4 weeks on a very low- vs moderate-carbohydrate diet.

http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1199154

#34 Heh

  • Validating/Suspended
  • 302 posts
  • -24
  • Location:USA

Posted 08 December 2012 - 05:46 AM

Turn your life into a permanent juice fast, eating meat only once a week, and you'll feel like God everyday. Look younger. Exercise, meditate, eliminate worry, and embrace happiness to take it to an even higher level.

Many supplements help with blood sugar control (ALCAR, Resveratrol, etc), but being on this forum you probably already know that.

Edited by Joel, 08 December 2012 - 05:49 AM.

  • dislike x 4

#35 rwac

  • Member
  • 4,764 posts
  • 60
  • Location:Dimension X

Posted 08 December 2012 - 07:41 AM

Yeah, but pasta doesn't cause such a sudden sharp spike in blood glucose as something sugary like orange juice. They don't give glucose tolerance tests with a bowl of pasta; they give you orange juice. But even adding a little fiber and more polyphenols by eating an orange instead of drinking the juice, reduces the spike and the delays absorbtion and blood level rise.

The glycemic index alone does not tell what actually happens in the body when those foods are consumed.


So what are you basing your preference for pasta over OJ on, then?
Or complex carbs over sugars ?

#36 JBForrester

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 348 posts
  • 147
  • Location:Auckland, NZ

Posted 08 December 2012 - 08:00 AM

Oh, absolutely. low carb diets are associated with higher levels of cortisol. Also CRP, but that's another topic entirely.


Can we actually say that from the study you cited, however? Results can differ drastically depending on the length of the study.

#37 nupi

  • Guest
  • 1,532 posts
  • 107
  • Location:Switzerland

Posted 08 December 2012 - 09:06 AM

Turn your life into a permanent juice fast, eating meat only once a week, and you'll feel like God everyday. Look younger. Exercise, meditate, eliminate worry, and embrace happiness to take it to an even higher level.


And die because next to all that simple sugar, you neither get enough protein nor essential fatty acids...
  • like x 2
  • Ill informed x 1

#38 Heh

  • Validating/Suspended
  • 302 posts
  • -24
  • Location:USA

Posted 08 December 2012 - 02:39 PM

Turn your life into a permanent juice fast, eating meat only once a week, and you'll feel like God everyday. Look younger. Exercise, meditate, eliminate worry, and embrace happiness to take it to an even higher level.


And die because next to all that simple sugar, you neither get enough protein nor essential fatty acids...


Simple sugar? You'd be juicing mostly vegetables, not fruits. You would also be using herbs, fish oil, nuts, other supplements, and you'd still eat meat (though much less frequently).

Juice fasting is a great way to get to know the variety of vegetables that most miss out on or fail to consume frequently enough. Even if someone ends up having juice only once per day, while maintaining their regular (good) diets, they can still find themselves much better off than those that don't bother.

If I drink nothing but juice all day, and eat things like oranges, and nuts, and high quality oils (virgin coconut oil, virgin olive oil, etc) and take the supplements/nootropics discussed on this site, and all the others things I mention in my original post, then I'm living the high life. I don't subscribe to veganism or vegetarianism, so I don't have a problem eating meat, but I would do so only once a week. After a cleanse (or water fast) and a short time juice fasting almost all cravings go away, so I would be eating meat once a week just to be well-rounded and to ensure there aren't any gaps in my new lifestyle.

Of course, I do this after bulking up a bit, because it's easier/quicker to bulk up the old fashion way, but once that's done juicing is more than sufficient to maintain what I have. I can adjust my hormones such that they are optimized for health and life extension (based on the research), and I can live longer while looking good, rather than like some walking skeleton CR fanatic.

I also believe in 16/8 intermittent fasting. Perhaps because it's similar to what I already do (lunch at 1pm, dinner at 8pm), but that doesn't matter. If I'm juicing, then I could probably extend the feeding window by an hour or two (14/10) due to the speed at which juice travels through the system, but I would have to measure and see.

Edited by Joel, 08 December 2012 - 02:50 PM.


#39 maxwatt

  • Guest, Moderator LeadNavigator
  • 4,947 posts
  • 1,623
  • Location:New York

Posted 08 December 2012 - 06:20 PM

Yeah, but pasta doesn't cause such a sudden sharp spike in blood glucose as something sugary like orange juice. They don't give glucose tolerance tests with a bowl of pasta; they give you orange juice. But even adding a little fiber and more polyphenols by eating an orange instead of drinking the juice, reduces the spike and the delays absorbtion and blood level rise.

The glycemic index alone does not tell what actually happens in the body when those foods are consumed.


So what are you basing your preference for pasta over OJ on, then?
Or complex carbs over sugars ?

Pasta, unlike OJ, contains considerable amounts of protein and is always eaten with a sauce containing olive oil or sometimes butter, another mostly saturated fat. This greatly reduces the glycemic index and load without increasing your fat calories by too much. As I pointed out previously, OJ has been separated from the fruit, which increases glycemic index. Though fruit contains large amounts of fructose, the polyphenols and fibers in fruit protect against the lipid raising effects, and some inhibit glycation.

Fructose, whether in corn syrup or in sucrose, goes not into energy, but to the liver which turns it into triglycerides that deposit as plaque in your arteries. Bad news for your lipid levels. Stick to a few pieces of fruit a day, hold the juice. Hydration energy drinks are engineered, and the best of them are no more than 10% calories frm fructose, and 94% water. ( A banana and some water are remarkably successful at filling this function.)

Higher blood sugar levels induce protein glycation (as may MUFA's ) some polyphenols may be protective, therefore fruit, and lower peak levels. Humans have AGE receptors, and we have probably evolved to deal with a certain amount, put peak glucose spikes from sugar likely overwhelm these defences.


"Don't want no sugar in my coffee. Makes me mean, oh Lord, it makes me mean."

Traditional work song
  • like x 1

#40 nowayout

  • Guest
  • 2,946 posts
  • 440
  • Location:Earth

Posted 08 December 2012 - 08:17 PM

Simple sugar? You'd be juicing mostly vegetables, not fruits.


Without the fiber (which slows release) I believe the glycemic index of many vegetable juices is quite high.

#41 Heh

  • Validating/Suspended
  • 302 posts
  • -24
  • Location:USA

Posted 08 December 2012 - 08:53 PM

Simple sugar? You'd be juicing mostly vegetables, not fruits.


Without the fiber (which slows release) I believe the glycemic index of many vegetable juices is quite high.

I'm talking about actually juicing raw (organic?) vegetables. You puree everything in a Vitamix, then drink all of what comes out.

#42 nowayout

  • Guest
  • 2,946 posts
  • 440
  • Location:Earth

Posted 09 December 2012 - 12:04 AM

Simple sugar? You'd be juicing mostly vegetables, not fruits.


Without the fiber (which slows release) I believe the glycemic index of many vegetable juices is quite high.

I'm talking about actually juicing raw (organic?) vegetables. You puree everything in a Vitamix, then drink all of what comes out.


Still, it is much more broken down, and so will be much faster release than chewed vegetables.

#43 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 09 December 2012 - 12:15 AM

rwac, are you monitoring your HbA1C and glucose levels? (particularly post-prandial, but also fasting)

#44 Heh

  • Validating/Suspended
  • 302 posts
  • -24
  • Location:USA

Posted 09 December 2012 - 02:02 AM

Simple sugar? You'd be juicing mostly vegetables, not fruits.


Without the fiber (which slows release) I believe the glycemic index of many vegetable juices is quite high.

I'm talking about actually juicing raw (organic?) vegetables. You puree everything in a Vitamix, then drink all of what comes out.


Still, it is much more broken down, and so will be much faster release than chewed vegetables.

Yes, it digests faster, but in a good way. You also get more nutrients from juicing raw vegetables than chewing raw vegetables.

The key to having this work is using a Vitamix (a blender, not juicer, so you get everything, not just the juice) and sticking mainly to vegetables. You can add solid vegetables whenever you'd like, or nuts, or oils, or rarely fruits and meat, and you'll still be in business.

#45 maxwatt

  • Guest, Moderator LeadNavigator
  • 4,947 posts
  • 1,623
  • Location:New York

Posted 09 December 2012 - 02:16 AM

Cooking vegetables also releases more nutrients than you can get from raw. And some veg,, like potatoes and eggplant, and most mushrooms, you don't want to eat raw.

#46 rwac

  • Member
  • 4,764 posts
  • 60
  • Location:Dimension X

Posted 09 December 2012 - 02:54 AM

Pasta, unlike OJ, contains considerable amounts of protein and is always eaten with a sauce containing olive oil or sometimes butter, another mostly saturated fat. This greatly reduces the glycemic index and load without increasing your fat calories by too much. As I pointed out previously, OJ has been separated from the fruit, which increases glycemic index. Though fruit contains large amounts of fructose, the polyphenols and fibers in fruit protect against the lipid raising effects, and some inhibit glycation.

Fructose, whether in corn syrup or in sucrose, goes not into energy, but to the liver which turns it into triglycerides that deposit as plaque in your arteries. Bad news for your lipid levels. Stick to a few pieces of fruit a day, hold the juice. Hydration energy drinks are engineered, and the best of them are no more than 10% calories frm fructose, and 94% water. ( A banana and some water are remarkably successful at filling this function.)

Higher blood sugar levels induce protein glycation (as may MUFA's ) some polyphenols may be protective, therefore fruit, and lower peak levels. Humans have AGE receptors, and we have probably evolved to deal with a certain amount, put peak glucose spikes from sugar likely overwhelm these defences.


"Don't want no sugar in my coffee. Makes me mean, oh Lord, it makes me mean."

Traditional work song


Generally Pasta has about 20% protein/carb ratio and OJ has about 8% protein/carb.
Plant protein isn't all that great generally, and you are going to need some animal protein anyway.
Besides, OJ will have whatever polyphenols that Oranges have.
Additionally gluten resists digestion and is hard to absorb generally. So don't count on that protein from pasta.

Again, the link between sugars and glycation isn't that strong. In addition, fiber mostly protects against lipid raising by reducing absorption of fats, a problem which wouldn't be there if you weren't consuming fats (PUFA) to begin with. Additionally, lowered cholesterol is itself associated with an increased risk of death, so you want to be careful of that.

Bananas aren't that great, they have too much fiber and too little sugar (it's hard to get ripe bananas). They will mostly feed your gut bacteria and not feed you enough.

As for AGE receptors, ALEs trigger them too. Even antibodies ...
Immunochemical crossreactivity of antibodies specific for "advanced glycation endproducts" with "advanced lipoxidation endproducts".

I bet the sugar crash can be mean if you were doing physical labour, and no way they would get enough sugar to keep them going, just enough for a quick pick-me-up and then a crash.

Orange juice or fructose intake does not induce oxidative and inflammatory response.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

We have previously shown that 300 kcal from glucose intake induces a significant increase in reactive oxygen species (ROS) generation and nuclear factor-kappaB (NF-kappaB) binding in the circulating mononuclear cells in healthy normal subjects. We hypothesized that the intake of 300 calories as orange juice or fructose, the other major carbohydrate in orange juice, would induce a significantly smaller response than that of glucose.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS:

Four groups (eight subjects each) of normal-weight subjects were given a 300-cal drink of glucose (75 g), fructose (75 g), or orange juice or water sweetened with saccharin (control group) to drink, and then blood samples were collected.
RESULTS:

There was a significant increase in ROS generation by mononuclear cells (by 130 +/- 18%, P < 0.001), polymorph nuclear cells (by 95 +/- 22%, P < 0.01), and in NF-kappaB binding in mononuclear cells by 82 +/- 16% (P < 0.01) over the baseline after 2 h of glucose intake. These changes were absent following fructose, orange juice, or water intake. There was significantly lower ROS generation and NF-kappaB binding following orange juice, fructose, and water compared with glucose (P < 0.001 for all). Furthermore, incubation of mononuclear cells in vitro with 50 mmol/l of the flavonoids hesperetin or naringenin reduced ROS generation by 52 +/- 7% and 77 +/- 8% (P < 0.01), respectively, while fructose or ascorbic acid did not cause any change.
CONCLUSIONS:

Caloric intake in the form of orange juice or fructose does not induce either oxidative or inflammatory stress, possibly due to its flavonoids content and might, therefore, represent a potentially safe energy source.


Nutrition. 2005 Feb;21(2):240-8.
Changes in lipid metabolism and antioxidant defense status in spontaneously hypertensive rats and Wistar rats fed a diet enriched with fructose and saturated fatty acids.
Girard A, Madani S, El Boustani ES, Belleville J, Prost J.
OBJECTIVE:
Larger doses of fructose and saturated fat have been associated with oxidative stress and development of hypertension. The effects of modest amounts of fructose and saturated fatty acids on oxidative stress are unknown.
METHODS:
To increase knowledge on this question, 10-wk-old spontaneously hypertensive rats and Wistar rats were fed for 8 wk with a control diet or an experimental diet enriched with fructose (18%) and saturated fatty acids (11%; FS diet). The total antioxidant status of organs and red blood cells was assayed by monitoring the rate of free radical-induced red blood cell hemolysis. Sensitivity of very low-density lipoprotein and low-density lipoprotein (VLDL-LDL) to copper-induced lipid peroxidation was determined as the production of thiobarbituric acid-reactive substances. Antioxidant enzymes and vitamins were also measured to establish the oxidative stress effect.
RESULTS:
The FS diet did not affect blood pressure in either strain, but it increased plasma insulin concentrations only in Wistar rats without affecting those of glucose of either strain. The FS diet significantly enhanced plasma and VLDL-LDL triacylglycerol concentrations without affecting concentrations of VLDL-LDL thiobarbituric acid-reactive substances. The decreased content of arachidonic acid and total polyunsaturated fatty acids in VLDL-LDL by the FS diet may have prevented lipid peroxidation in this fraction. Moreover, FS consumption by both strains was accompanied by a significant increase in total antioxidant capacity of adipose tissue, muscle, heart, and liver. This may have resulted from increased tissue ascorbic acid levels and glutathione peroxidase and glutathione reductase activities in tissues.
CONCLUSIONS:
These findings clearly indicate that the FS diet did not alter blood pressure of spontaneously hypertensive rats and Wistar rats. The FS diet resulted in hypertriglyceridemia but increased the total antioxidant status, which may prevent lipid peroxidation in these rats.
In 1963 and 1964, experiments (Carroll, 1964) showed that the effects of glucose and fructose were radically affected by the type of fat in the diet. Although 0.6% of calories as
polyunsaturated fat prevents the appearance of the Mead acid (which is considered to indicate a deficiency of essential fats) the “high fructose” diets consistently add 10% or more corn oil or other highly unsaturated fat to the diet. These large quantities of PUFA aren’t necessary to prevent a deficiency, but they are needed to obscure the beneficial effects of fructose.
-Ray Peat, PhD



#47 rwac

  • Member
  • 4,764 posts
  • 60
  • Location:Dimension X

Posted 09 December 2012 - 04:01 AM

rwac, are you monitoring your HbA1C and glucose levels? (particularly post-prandial, but also fasting)


I was monitoring it a while ago before starting Peat, but I kinda stopped, test strips got expensive.
My strips are all expired now.
I should be able to get a few strips and an A1C test tho.

#48 Heh

  • Validating/Suspended
  • 302 posts
  • -24
  • Location:USA

Posted 09 December 2012 - 05:47 AM

Cooking vegetables also releases more nutrients than you can get from raw. And some veg,, like potatoes and eggplant, and most mushrooms, you don't want to eat raw.

Obviously not all vegetables can be eaten raw, but for those that can be it's often better to juice vs. chew or cook. Cooking can still work, and can add some variety to the routine, but the temperature has to be kept low and everything has to be consumed (a lot of nutrients are released into the water that's usually thrown away).

#49 maxwatt

  • Guest, Moderator LeadNavigator
  • 4,947 posts
  • 1,623
  • Location:New York

Posted 09 December 2012 - 01:47 PM

Clin Dermatol. 2010 Jul-Aug;28(4):409-11.


Nutrition and aging skin: sugar and glycation.

Danby FW.



Source

Department of Medicine, Section of Dermatology, Dartmouth Medical School, Hanover, NH 03104, USA. fwdljm@tds.net



Abstract

The effect of sugars on aging skin is governed by the simple act of covalently cross-linking two collagen fibers, which renders both of them incapable of easy repair. Glucose and fructose link the amino acids present in the collagen and elastin that support the dermis, producing advanced glycation end products or "AGEs." This process is accelerated in all body tissues when sugar is elevated and is further stimulated by ultraviolet light in the skin. The effect on vascular, renal, retinal, coronary, and cutaneous tissues is being defined, as are methods of reducing the glycation load through careful diet and use of supplements.

Copyright 2010. Published by Elsevier Inc.



PMID: 20620757



Glycation occurs with elevated sugar levels. The less sugar, the less glycation. Certain lipids speed the process, and may even be necessary for it to occur but without sugar, no glycation. Fructose consumption in excess elevates blood lipids. Double trouble.

The fiber in bananas would spread out sugar absorption in the gut over time, making them good fuel for endurance sports. Even power bars and their competitors contain fiber.

#50 rwac

  • Member
  • 4,764 posts
  • 60
  • Location:Dimension X

Posted 09 December 2012 - 02:47 PM

Glycation occurs with elevated sugar levels. The less sugar, the less glycation. Certain lipids speed the process, and may even be necessary for it to occur but without sugar, no glycation. Fructose consumption in excess elevates blood lipids. Double trouble.

The fiber in bananas would spread out sugar absorption in the gut over time, making them good fuel for endurance sports. Even power bars and their competitors contain fiber.


Again, you're mixing up sugar intake and blood glucose. Elevated blood glucose is generally due to insulin resistance.
A certain level of blood glucose is essential, if it went below some level you would go into a coma and die.

A better target would be to reduce systemic PUFA levels.
Fructose is mainly bad in the presence of PUFA.

1. I don't know that much about endurance sports, and wouldn't consider it a good guide for general living. It's not generally that healthy anyway, and increases the risk of heart damage.
2. Power bars have fiber because most people need fiber to move their bowels, and we've been told that fiber is essential to the process.

#51 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 09 December 2012 - 06:09 PM

Glycation occurs with elevated sugar levels. The less sugar, the less glycation.


Again, you're mixing up sugar intake and blood glucose.


But what about the fructose levels? A few years ago, this came up in the context of in vitro glycation reactions being ten times faster with fructose than with glucose. That generated a lot of anti-fructose sentiment. I think that's subsided to some extent, providing that the fructose is coming from whole fruits, preferably berries, because the other components of the fruit are so helpful. However, what about the paper that maxwatt just posted, which I'll copy here for emphasis:

Clin Dermatol. 2010 Jul-Aug;28(4):409-11.
Nutrition and aging skin: sugar and glycation.
Danby FW.
Department of Medicine, Section of Dermatology, Dartmouth Medical School, Hanover, NH 03104, USA. fwdljm@tds.net

The effect of sugars on aging skin is governed by the simple act of covalently cross-linking two collagen fibers, which renders both of them incapable of easy repair. Glucose and fructose link the amino acids present in the collagen and elastin that support the dermis, producing advanced glycation end products or "AGEs." This process is accelerated in all body tissues when sugar is elevated and is further stimulated by ultraviolet light in the skin. The effect on vascular, renal, retinal, coronary, and cutaneous tissues is being defined, as are methods of reducing the glycation load through careful diet and use of supplements.

PMID: 20620757


It's that "and fructose" part that worries me here.

#52 sthira

  • Guest
  • 2,001 posts
  • 404

Posted 09 December 2012 - 06:25 PM

I'm talking about actually juicing raw (organic?) vegetables. You puree everything in a Vitamix, then drink all of what comes out.


Blending? Works fine. But you'll do it for a while, then get bored with it, then move on. Just keep consuming fruits and vegetables -- blend them or chew them with your own teeth, you'll be fine, just don't eliminate all that fiber.

#53 Hebbeh

  • Guest
  • 1,524 posts
  • 682

Posted 09 December 2012 - 07:30 PM

Again, you're mixing up sugar intake and blood glucose. Elevated blood glucose is generally due to insulin resistance.


Blood glucose will always be elevated after carb intake independent of any insulin resistance. Insulin resistance only relates to chronic elevated blood glucose in the presence of excessive carb intake. The more carbs you ingest, the higher the postprandial blood glucose spike independent of insulin resistance. And assuming you have functional insulin sensitivity, insulin will lower blood glucose over time by storing all those excess carbs in the tissues precisely where all the damage is done....independent of the elevated blood glucose. The more carbs consumed...the more carbs stored...the more AGE formed.

A certain level of blood glucose is essential, if it went below some level you would go into a coma and die.


And it doesn't take very much carb to maintain healthy blood glucose levels. Nobody that isn't diabetic goes into diabetic coma. That's just a lame excuse to justify your sweet tooth.
  • like x 1
  • Unfriendly x 1

#54 maxwatt

  • Guest, Moderator LeadNavigator
  • 4,947 posts
  • 1,623
  • Location:New York

Posted 10 December 2012 - 03:48 PM

Glycation occurs with elevated sugar levels. The less sugar, the less glycation. Certain lipids speed the process, and may even be necessary for it to occur but without sugar, no glycation. Fructose consumption in excess elevates blood lipids. Double trouble.

The fiber in bananas would spread out sugar absorption in the gut over time, making them good fuel for endurance sports. Even power bars and their competitors contain fiber.


Again, you're mixing up sugar intake and blood glucose. Elevated blood glucose is generally due to insulin resistance.
A certain level of blood glucose is essential, if it went below some level you would go into a coma and die.

No, but they are correlated. Like Hebbeh said, you eat carbs your glucose level goes up. With insulin resistance, it stays elevated and doesn't drop, like you said. But frequent hits of sugar (especially fructose as in corn syrup and sucrose) kicks it up quickly to high levels. This accelerated hit, and the feast/famine nature of glucose blood levels with continued sugar consumption will lead to insulin resistance and eventually diabetes. When you are still young you might not notice, but it will catch up to you, usually by your forties.

A better target would be to reduce systemic PUFA levels.
Fructose is mainly bad in the presence of PUFA.

I'll grant PUFA levels are unhealthy, I've avoided them for years. Trans-fat forms of PUFAs especially bad. And yes, they make the problem worse. But just because we have an alternate mechanism that compounds the problem, does not mean we can safely ignore the first cause. Fructose is not mainly bad in the presence of PUFA, it is bad period. It is even worse in the presence of PUFA.

1. I don't know that much about endurance sports, and wouldn't consider it a good guide for general living. It's not generally that healthy anyway, and increases the risk of heart damage.
2. Power bars have fiber because most people need fiber to move their bowels, and we've been told that fiber is essential to the process.


1.) Endurance sports? Everything in moderation. (FWIW, the Tarahuarama Indians routinely run hilly ultra-marathons even into old age, and they live to a healthy old age. Interesting diet too. The heart damage during exercise I suspect is due to extended periods of sitting, which cancels out many of the cardiac benefits of exercise, but that'a a whole 'nother topic.) I brought endurance sports up in the context of consuming sugar in drinks like orange juice. The carb levels needed during such events are perhaps the only excuse to consume simple sugars. Burning the carbs as fast as you imbibe them allows you to function without much of the damage you'd get from drinking a Big Gulp soda in front ot the keyboard, though glycation is still problematic -- if the systemic exposure is brief as during exercise, perhaps not so bad.

2.) Power bars' fiber was intended to modulate absorption. I doubt they were considering your bowel function when they formulated the things, and if you eat them outside the context of energy supplementation during extended exercise, you are a nutritional nincompoop.

Glycation occurs with elevated sugar levels. The less sugar, the less glycation.


Again, you're mixing up sugar intake and blood glucose.


But what about the fructose levels? A few years ago, this came up in the context of in vitro glycation reactions being ten times faster with fructose than with glucose. That generated a lot of anti-fructose sentiment. I think that's subsided to some extent, providing that the fructose is coming from whole fruits, preferably berries, because the other components of the fruit are so helpful. However, what about the paper that maxwatt just posted, which I'll copy here for emphasis:

Clin Dermatol. 2010 Jul-Aug;28(4):409-11.
Nutrition and aging skin: sugar and glycation.
Danby FW.
Department of Medicine, Section of Dermatology, Dartmouth Medical School, Hanover, NH 03104, USA. fwdljm@tds.net

The effect of sugars on aging skin is governed by the simple act of covalently cross-linking two collagen fibers, which renders both of them incapable of easy repair. Glucose and fructose link the amino acids present in the collagen and elastin that support the dermis, producing advanced glycation end products or "AGEs." This process is accelerated in all body tissues when sugar is elevated and is further stimulated by ultraviolet light in the skin. The effect on vascular, renal, retinal, coronary, and cutaneous tissues is being defined, as are methods of reducing the glycation load through careful diet and use of supplements.

PMID: 20620757


It's that "and fructose" part that worries me here.


As well it should.

Edited by maxwatt, 10 December 2012 - 03:54 PM.


#55 JohnD60

  • Guest
  • 540 posts
  • 70
  • Location:Colorado

Posted 11 December 2012 - 04:11 AM

2.) Power bars' fiber was intended to modulate absorption. I doubt they were considering your bowel function when they formulated the things, and if you eat them outside the context of energy supplementation during extended exercise, you are a nutritional nincompoop.

Guilty. Twenty years ago I used to eat a power bar for breakfast, five days a week. I did that for about two years. Doh! I was doing triathalons at the time and had a very low body fat, so that may have moderated some of the damage.

Edited by JohnD60, 11 December 2012 - 04:12 AM.


#56 catrinac

  • Guest
  • 18 posts
  • 2
  • Location:here

Posted 15 January 2013 - 08:40 PM

That study says reducing blood sugar will improve skin.
The title on the other hand claims that "giving up sugar can take 20 years off your looks".

But never actually makes that link between sugar consumption and elevated blood sugar.

In fact, the two haven't actually been connected except via body fatness.
http://wholehealthso...nce-part-v.html


Yes, sugar doesn't raise blood sugar. Blood sugar is destabilized by chronic dieting and PUFAs (vegetable oils, nuts, seeds salmon, etc) in the diet which is far more aging than eating sugar.

Read this artcile on the Randle Cycle:
http://www.functiona...s-randle-cycle/

#57 The Immortalist

  • Guest
  • 1,462 posts
  • 323
  • Location:.

Posted 03 April 2013 - 07:52 PM

complex carbs = good, at least not so bad, but
fructose and sucrose (dextrose+fructose) = bad
PUFA = bad
MUFA = bad, neutral or good, depends on your genetically determined metabolism

moderation in all things - Herodotus
all generalities are false, including this one - Voltaire

I do still think 200g of sucrose will be detrimental in the long run. because another substance also causes glycation, does not mean the first is harmless.


How do you know if MUFA's are personally bad for you or not?

#58 maxwatt

  • Guest, Moderator LeadNavigator
  • 4,947 posts
  • 1,623
  • Location:New York

Posted 04 April 2013 - 12:23 AM

complex carbs = good, at least not so bad, but
fructose and sucrose (dextrose+fructose) = bad
PUFA = bad
MUFA = bad, neutral or good, depends on your genetically determined metabolism

moderation in all things - Herodotus
all generalities are false, including this one - Voltaire

I do still think 200g of sucrose will be detrimental in the long run. because another substance also causes glycation, does not mean the first is harmless.


How do you know if MUFA's are personally bad for you or not?

IF you gain wait on a mediterranean diet with lots of olive oil, more than 30 to 40 pct of calories then MUFAs are not for you.
Or you can get a genetic test from 23andme (I think the curent price is $99) and it should be possible to find the information in your results. Possibly more information can be found earlier in this thread, if not another.

#59 Kevnzworld

  • Guest
  • 873 posts
  • 298
  • Location:Los Angeles

Posted 04 April 2013 - 04:45 AM

Re: PUFA's, peroxidation and glycation.
Since PUFA's are known to oxidize easily, it's beneficial to supplement with substances that mitigate PUFA oxidation if supplementing with them.
" Coenzyme Q10 Protects From Aging-Related Oxidative Stress and Improves Mitochondrial Function in Heart of Rats Fed a Polyunsaturated Fatty Acid (PUFA)-Rich Diet"
According to that, previously reported positive effects of coenzyme Q supplementation on the life span of rats fed a PUFA-rich diet might be a consequence, at least in part, of a lower oxidative stress level and perhaps, to a minor extent, of a smaller decrease in mitochondrial function.
http://biomedgeronto.../60/8/970.short
" Astaxanthin limits fish oil-related oxidative insult in the anterior forebrain of Wistar rats: putative anxiolytic effects?"
" Upon fish oil supplementation, the downregulation of superoxide dismutase and catalase activities combined to increased "free" iron content resulted in higher levels of lipid and protein oxidation in the anterior forebrain of animals. Such harmful oxidative modifications were hindered by concomitant supplementation with ASTA despite ASTA-related antioxidant protection was mainly observed in plasma."
http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/21619892

Edited by Kevnzworld, 04 April 2013 - 04:46 AM.






Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: sugar, glucose, skin, collagen, elasticity, aging

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users