[mrcode007]

Indirectly saying lower sugar intake had higher risks and so on but we know you can live just fine without any added sugar consumed without any risks. Some comments above asked if that is the correct reading and the science provided us the answers to this question a long time ago and the answer is no; eating no added sugar is healthy and you will be fine.

You don’t have to take my word for it; you can take one of UCSF professor Lustig.

https://robertlustig.com/metabolical/

Edit: yes of course, glucose is the energy of life but you don’t need to consume it. I think all(?) carbohydrates break down into glucose; ergo you can get it from broccoli. Simple test is blood glucose finger prick test after eating.

But I did mean that there are people that argue that you need added sugar for proper nutrition. These people exist.

[shlant]

> You don’t have to take my word for it; you can take one of UCSF professor Lustig.

the guy who claims fructose is poison? I won't be taking that source at face value. You are revealing your bias very plainly (which was already pretty obvious with your initial smug comment)

> These people exist.

If they do, they are such a small group they are not worth mentioning let alone claiming "it may come as a shocker to many (most?) people."

[mrcode007]

To start: https://www.aatbio.com/resources/toxicity-lethality-median-d...

To finish: there are already numerous studies documenting that fructose is not that good for you; it is, after all part of high fructose corn syrup…

[shlant]

you reference "numerous studies" while sharing none of them and instead post the LD50 of fructose? you can't be serious. With that logic, everything is poison and you aren't making any point at all.

[mrcode007]

Is this good enough for you mister smarty pants?

Published: 04 December 2024

Dietary fructose enhances tumour growth indirectly via interorgan lipid transfer

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-08258-3

Edit: for what it’s worth if you’re curious you can google most of these things yourself unless you don’t know how to but it is neither my responsibility nor my job to find these things for you or convince you. It is your job to convince yourself. If you pay me enough, I can work trying to convince you. In general I was trying to raise awareness of a fact as a form of „public service”. You are welcome to believe what you want and don’t have to agree with anything I say. But you’re are not welcome to be lazy and expect me to find things online for you.

[shlant]

> Is this good enough for you mister smarty pants?

lol a study on rats? for someone who sees themselves as doing a "public service" and telling everyone to "do their own research", you sure don't add much to the conversation. It's ok, I knew that to be the case from the get go. Good luck on your crusade.

[mrcode007]

It’s not a crusade :) but you do start sounding like a sugar industry shill. You can’t possibly justify, in good faith, giving humans cancer as a precondition for a study that the main thing to check is if sugar accelerates it?

If you want human studies here’s one:

The negative and detrimental effects of high fructose on the liver, with special reference to metabolic disorders:

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6549781/

As I said earlier, learn to google yourself.