[nordsieck]

> The sugar amount in fruit has a direct impact on the overall calories you consume but since fruit are also high in fibre, the contained sugar is not comparable to, say, a chocolate bar.

I think a more precise way to say this is:

Due to the water and fiber in fruit, they tend to be more satiating than eating something like a chocolate bar on a calorie normalized basis.

[darkerside]

My understanding is that the fiber literally prevents absorption of fructose, so parent's comment is accurate

[scythe]

Fructose is almost always absorbed; fructose malabsorption causes SIBO. Fiber reduces the glycemic index and makes fruit more satiating. Glucose aids the absorption of fructose preventing SIBO.

But in the case of fruit w.r.t. gout, the missing variable here is that while fructose increases the production of uric acid, potassium promotes the excretion of uric acid [1], and fruits are generally an excellent source of potassium while soft drinks contain little to none. The net effect of fruit on gout risk seems to be inconclusive [2] but it's clear that fruits are much less concerning than foods with added fructose. Since a significant fraction of Westerners do not consume enough potassium [3], and potassium is key to preventing hypertension and stroke [4,5], it is bad advice to suggest reducing fruit consumption for most people, unless you're already eating like Steve Jobs.

1: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S008525381...

2: https://academic.oup.com/rheumatology/article-abstract/58/7/...

3: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S02709...

4: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%252Fs11906-011-019...

5: https://www.thieme-connect.com/products/ejournals/abstract/1...

[kleiba]

True, but what I was actually trying to get at was that sugar is also metabolized differently in the presence of fibre.