PDA

View Full Version : Bodybuilding and cutting out fruit



Scheerfitness
10-09-2015, 08:54 PM
I don't understand why so many body builders will cut out fruit from their diet because the "sugar content" while they still eat plenty of potatoes,rice, and other carbs. Yes I know those are starches but both fruit and starches will ultimately be broken down to the same thing: glucose. Any input?

EjnarKolinkar
10-09-2015, 09:12 PM
People do foolish things. Makes so much more sense to have diversity of intake, to include fruit.

ErikTheElectric
10-09-2015, 09:24 PM
Would you also like to share with us what else you do not understand?

PsyLadX
10-09-2015, 09:27 PM
lol at the poster above.


I don't understand why so many body builders will cut out fruit from their diet because the "sugar content" while they still eat plenty of potatoes,rice, and other carbs. Yes I know those are starches but both fruit and starches will ultimately be broken down to the same thing: glucose. Any input?
Eating both, cooked & raw food is advisable.
The fiber content is raw foods is admirable.
More specifically, fruits offer essential micro-nutrients known as phytochemicals.
Strange, my browser is giving me a word correction heads up on phytochemicals, suggesting petrochemicals.
Welcome to modern times.

Mrpb
10-09-2015, 09:40 PM
I don't understand why so many body builders will cut out fruit from their diet because the "sugar content" while they still eat plenty of potatoes,rice, and other carbs. Yes I know those are starches but both fruit and starches will ultimately be broken down to the same thing: glucose. Any input?

Because they are misinformed, on many subjects.

desslok
10-09-2015, 11:38 PM
Could be old wives tales. Could be they believe the anti sugar extremist propoganda. Old habits die hard. Or could be they are trying to maximize micros.

Mrpb
10-09-2015, 11:41 PM
If this is OP, she's quite fit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xF2CI5cR7xk

Gxp23
10-09-2015, 11:52 PM
If this is OP, she's quite fit.

[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xF2CI5cR7xk[/rl]
I am guessing legs and abs.

levis2
10-10-2015, 01:29 AM
There are certain metabolic pathways in the chemical transition of fructose, which is the main sugar component of fruit, a monosaccharide being different from glucose, into glucose that lends itself very well to lipogenesis, ie. fat generation from fructose, and all of consumed fructose is metabolised through these pathways in the liver.

Yes, most will be turned to glucose, and most will very likely be used to replenish liver glycogen stores, but it is "easier", if one were to put it very simply, to turn fructose into fat than it is to turn glucose into fat, because the metabolic pathway for doing so is more accessible, and the conversion happens at high concentrations in a confined, local area (all of it being metabolised in the liver, so eating 50g of fructose does for a high concentration of lipogenic reactants in the liver tissue) than with glucose, since glucose is metabolized in all bodily tissue, making for a lower reactant concentration and a more balanced distribution to all bodily tissues.

the metabolization of fructose in the liver only, and the conversion of fructose to fats is also one of the reasons that fructose elicits a far lower insulin response to the same dose of carbs (ex. 50g fructose/ 50g glucose), since not all of it is turned into glucose, which is the only monosakkaride/sugar that requires insulin.

Does that shed some light on the subject? It is not so much of a matter that fructose is "unhealthy", its just glucose, especially starches due to slower release and all, is better: so why not choose the better one? potatoes, sweet potatoes and vegetables all have high phyonutrient, micronutrient and antioxidant content aswell, so there is nothing "essentiel" in fruits that cannot be had from other sources, that do not contain fructose. I personally do not eat fructose.

It has also been shown in statistical meta analysis that high fructose consumption is associated with both insulin resistance, metabolic syndrome and greater fat gain / poorer glucose clearance than eating starches, so why not just eat your starch and veggies and not fruit? unless you really like fruit, ofc :D :D

Mrpb
10-10-2015, 02:37 AM
I am guessing legs and abs.

And pecs.

EjnarKolinkar
10-10-2015, 04:03 AM
It has also been shown in statistical meta analysis that high fructose consumption is associated with both insulin resistance, metabolic syndrome and greater fat gain / poorer glucose clearance than eating starches, so why not just eat your starch and veggies and not fruit? unless you really like fruit, ofc :D :D


Nobody is talking about high fructose consumption in this thread. Just some fruit.

If somebody posts they are lip locking 4-2 liters of Dr. Thunder a day I might just use this as a copy pasta though.

levis2
10-10-2015, 07:00 AM
Nobody is talking about high fructose consumption in this thread. Just some fruit.

If somebody posts they are lip locking 4-2 liters of Dr. Thunder a day I might just use this as a copy pasta though.

i know, but lets take a banana as an example: a banana has 15g of carbohydrate, 7,5 of these being fructose in free form: i would not say it is uncommon to eat 2-3 bananas during the day, would you? that is around 20-25g of fructose. say you eat an apple and stuff on top, you add 20 more g of fructose = 45g fructose, a substantial amount id say. Not saying you will die, but i would argue it is better to hit these 50g of carb from a starch source, even if those were white rice (and the complementary veggies, to make up for micronutrient and antioxidative chemical loss if one substitutes with an "empty" starch such as pasta or rice)

Gxp23
10-10-2015, 07:26 AM
i know, but lets take a banana as an example: a banana has 15g of carbohydrate, 7,5 of these being fructose in free form: i would not say it is uncommon to eat 2-3 bananas during the day, would you
Yes, for those of who realise this already and in general.

nakkiz
10-10-2015, 07:56 AM
Yes, for those of who realise this already and in general.

But not if you're a monkey.

desslok
10-10-2015, 08:00 AM
i know, but lets take a banana as an example: a banana has 15g of carbohydrate, 7,5 of these being fructose in free form: i would not say it is uncommon to eat 2-3 bananas during the day, would you? that is around 20-25g of fructose. say you eat an apple and stuff on top, you add 20 more g of fructose = 45g fructose, a substantial amount id say. Not saying you will die, but i would argue it is better to hit these 50g of carb from a starch source, even if those were white rice (and the complementary veggies, to make up for micronutrient and antioxidative chemical loss if one substitutes with an "empty" starch such as pasta or rice)

So because your example person has to eat 4 pieces of fruit, then other people can't possibly eat less than that? And what is wrong with 45 gm fructose?