With every fruit you get healthy dose of fiber that helps digestive system to push residuals out. 3 bananas that will make you full equals 2 cans of 330ml cola and i bet you still will want to eat after that.
The parent poster is right in that pure fructose is probably worse for you than an equivalent amount of pure sucrose. But the way that fructose is delivered to your body by digesting fruit - slowly, and in conjuction with other materials, in a way that we have evolved to tolerate - is entirely different from eating the pure chemical.
The amount of fruit you’d have to consume to ingest unhealthy levels of fructose is astronomical. Worrying about whether fruit is unhealthy is most likely causing you more harm than the fructose in fruit. Don’t worry about eating fruit.
What exactly do you mean by "this topic"? Fruits being bad for you, which is the comment you're replying to?
This is the only mention of fruit in the linked paper:
> Fructose is a simple sugar that is the primary nutrient in fruit and honey. However, in the western diet, its main source is table sugar (sucrose), which consists of fructose and glucose bound together, and high fructose corn syrup (HFCS), which consists of a blended mixture of fructose and glucose, often with slightly higher concentrations of fructose as testing has suggested humans prefer slightly more fructose as it is sweeter than glucose. Today these ‘added sugars’ account for ≈15% of overall energy intake, with some groups ingesting as much as 20% or more.
> Fructose is also generated in the body from glucose. This occurs when glucose levels (i.e. the substrate) are excessive, such as in diabetes, following the ingestion of high glycaemic carbohydrates, and by high carbohydrate diets.
Similarly, the grandparent comment "Fructose (the sugar that comes from fruits)" should read like this: "Fructose (the sugar that comes from fruits, but these days it's primarily from table sugar and processed foods)"