Thread: Sucrose?

Originally Posted by XcelKrush

Is sucrose the same as table sugar, Ive always though it was and tried to eat as little sucrose as possible, but then I noticed that sucrose is a naturally occuring sugar in foods such as sweet potatoes. So is it all that bad for you?

Sucrose is the same as table sugar and, in that form, it is not healthy for you at all. All it offers is empty high glycaemic calories...

BUT you are right in that it is also found in natural foods such as fruits and vegetables... And these ARE healthy for you. They give you lots of other things such as vitamins, minerals, water, phytochemicals, fibre and other carbs such as starch, glucose, fructose etc. So the way the sucrose is found in these things is such that the effect on your blood sugar is minimal (the glycaemic LOAD you get is very low). Also, the overall the calories you consume is very small and they fill you up and you get a HUGE nutrient boost at the same time.

Plain table sugar is actually lower GI than many starches, since it is essentially half fructose. And fructose needs to be converted through an inefficient process in the liver before it becomes glucose and is available to raise your blood sugar. Starches are pure glucose, aside from fibers, and raise the blood sugar much faster. Ex: Potatoes and white rice are considerably higher GI than plain table sugar. Refined table sugar (pure sucrose) is only "bad" in that it is lacking in micro-nutrient value. It isn't bad for your heath at all. Obviously, eating pure table sugar over sweet potatoes is not a good choice, but people need to understand that adding sucrose to your foods and beverages isn't bad for you at all. Just don't replace whole foods with refined sugars. Who has a side of sucrose with their chicken instead of rice?

Originally Posted by PirateFromHell

Plain table sugar is actually lower GI than many starches, since it is essentially half fructose....

Starches are pure glucose, aside from fibers, and raise the blood sugar much faster. Ex: Potatoes and white rice are considerably higher GI than plain table sugar....

Well - this is only partially true. It depends on what type of starch you are talking about (high amylose v's amylopectin) as to the exact effect it will have on glycaemic index.... You picked two examples of sources of higher-amylose, lower fibre starches and therefore, of course they will effect blood sugar at a faster rate than something that is 50% fructose....

My point was that lot of the natural foodsthat have sucrose in them (which may or may not be high starch as well) will not have the negatives associated with a pure glucose hit as the other substances in these products (water/fibre/resistant starch content) will effect the glycaemic index and, more importantly, the glycaemic load and as such will result in no harm.

Refined table sugar (pure sucrose) is only "bad" in that it is lacking in micro-nutrient value. It isn't bad for your heath at all. Obviously, eating pure table sugar over sweet potatoes is not a good choice, but people need to understand that adding sucrose to your foods and beverages isn't bad for you at all. Just don't replace whole foods with refined sugars. Who has a side of sucrose with their chicken instead of rice?

I am a huge adovocate of removing as much refined product out of a diet as possible. So for me (personally, you may be different), I see the negatives of a pure glucose/fructose blend such as table sugar as a pretty big negative. It is my opinion that the micronutrients, fibre, water, phytochemical, antioxidants and many other substances found in natural foods have a greater effect on our health/body composition and fitness goals than many people think and, as such, I always suggest people limit the empty calories presented in these types of thing and go for the whole-food forms instead.

Sucrose is sucrose regardless of the source. If you were to put table sugar on something that has every other nutritent that fruit contains, you would essentially react the same way to both. Problem is, who puts sucrose on something that is comparable to a fruit.