The demonisation of fructose

By Adam Cunliffe, PhD

There has been much demonisation of fructose as a carbohydrate source for some time. Complex forms of glucose based carbs being the standard public health recommendation. Fructose is metabolised in the liver first to glycogen, then when liver stores are replete, into fat. Given that throughout evolution (excepting the last few hundred years, essentially irrelevant to our metabolic evolution) this sequence of metabolic steps would seem ideal. Ensuring blood sugar control via hepatic glucose release, with the storage of excess calories for any times of famine ahead. I would suggest therefore that the criticisms of these processes only apply to hypercaloric diets and therefore should explicitly state such, before the so called ‘problems’ of fructose are highlighted. As our evolutionary ancestors would have accessed carbohydrates mainly from fructose, it is perhaps not surprising that we deal with it so elegantly in the body (no hyperglycemia/hyperinsulinemia and problems with IGFs) compared to glucose. It seems that excess food, not fructose is a dietary problem. We should be clear about this. Fructose does not tax the pancrease, nor irritate the circulatory system as does glucose, yet remains a source of glucose via the liver as required. The sugar industry is a major sponsor of pro glucose propaganda. I rather suspect however that a peach, an orange or some grapes, remain healthier options than granulated refined sucrose.