# Fructose, and honey information



## soupcan (Jan 2, 2005)

*Re: 50% losses*

Humm.
The Huffington Puffington Post.
Real easy to write a paper with your " thoughts " in this country in this day & age!!!
I would love to see the research paperwork to support his claims.


----------



## WoolheaterFarms (Jan 20, 2010)

*Re: 50% losses*



soupcan said:


> Humm.
> The Huffington Puffington Post.
> Real easy to write a paper with your " thoughts " in this country in this day & age!!!
> I would love to see the research paperwork to support his claims.


Here you go:

Experimental Physiology June 1, 2009; 94: 648-658
http://ep.physoc.org/content/94/6/648.abstract

American Journal of Nephrology August 21, 2009; 30 (5): 399-404
http://content.karger.com/ProdukteDB/produkte.asp?Doi=235731

American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, November 2000; 72: 1128-1134
http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/ful...INDEX=0&sortspec=relevance&resourcetype=HWCIT

Journal of Nutrition, December 2000;130:3077-3084
http://jn.nutrition.org/cgi/content...NDEX=0&volume=130&issue=12&resourcetype=HWCIT

British Medical Journal February 9 2008;336:285-286
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/extract/336/7639/285

I stop citing at 5 when it comes to informal discussions.


----------



## Kieck (Dec 2, 2005)

*Re: 50% losses*



> Some may not like the site but the medicine is reliable. I'd bullet point the good parts and have that laminated where customers can see it.
> 
> "...And fructose in any form -- including high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) and crystalline fructose -- is the worst of the worst!" -WoolheaterFarms


I wouldn't. There's an old saying about speaking, advertising, PR, etcetera: "Know your audience." I wouldn't go in front of milk producers and tell them they should post signs warning that milk might be bad for your health. I wouldn't ask wheat producers to post signs about the potential dangers of gluten.

And I wouldn't advise a bunch of beekeepers to post signs advising against consuming their product.

(Honey consists in large part of fructose. Maybe you didn't know that?)


----------



## alpha6 (May 12, 2008)

*Re: 50% losses*



Kieck said:


> (Honey consists in large part of fructose. Maybe you didn't know that?)


I don't know about a large part...I think it's 37 or 39 percent..somewhere around there. I agree with you that negative advertising isn't as productive, it would be something I would bring up as to why honey would be better for a person (lower fructose levels) if it came up in conversation.


----------



## Kieck (Dec 2, 2005)

*Re: 50% losses*



> I don't know about a large part...I think it's 37 or 39 percent..somewhere around there. -alpha6


Right. And probably a poor choice of wording with the "large part" in my post. A range of 37 to 39 is about right for liquid honey.

By contrast, the percentage of fructose in HFCS used in foods (HFCS 42) is 42 percent.

Honey and HFCS don't differ all that much. You would have a hard time convincing me that the fructose in HFCS is bad, but roughly the same concentration of fructose in honey is good.


----------



## WoolheaterFarms (Jan 20, 2010)

*Re: 50% losses*

t: Again... My apologies to the original poster, beemandan. I now regret not putting this in it's own thread.

"(Honey consists in large part of fructose. Maybe you didn't know that?)"

I actually did, and to meet the number of additional grams from HFCS (58mg / day) that the average person consumes, they would need to have 6 TBsp of an "average" honey, 3/8th of a cup a day (or more than two and a half cups per week), in addition to the regular fruits they should be eating. I don't know anyone who consumes that much honey in a day, everyday. 

As part of a discussion about "knowing your foods", I would recommend that they also mention that honey contains: B6, thiamin, niacin, riboflavin, pantothenic acid, and certain amino acids; important micronutrients such as calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, potassium, sodium and zinc; and that honey wasn't an overly processed product stripped of most of it's nutritional value.

If I were standing in front of a dairy association and their products were being out sold and market share diluted by soy milk manufacturers while the public was consuming 5 times more than recommended healthy amounts, I'd ask them to educate their direct and local consumers as to the benefits of drinking milk from, preferably grass fed, cows and the problems with drinking too much "milk" from another source. 

To paraphase an organic chemist I knew, there is no greater chemist than what you can find in nature.


----------



## Kieck (Dec 2, 2005)

*Re: 50% losses*



> . . . and to meet the number of additional grams from HFCS (58mg / day) that the average person consumes, . . . -WoolheaterFarms


I believe you mean 58g, not 58mg. Fifty-eight milligrams isn't much. One can of soda pop contains more than 40g.



> I don't know anyone who consumes that much honey in a day, everyday. -WoolheaterFarms


But that's not the point here. The flat statement was made that "Fructose in any form. . . is the worst of the worst!" That lump statement includes honey, more than in many other products.


----------



## RDY-B (May 20, 2007)

*Re: 50% losses*

I thought that fructose-(in honey)- had to bind to a protein -and for that reason it gives you a even burn -with no peak then a crash-like refined sugar-thats what my Diabetic customers tell me-is there a truth in there some place
 RDY-B


----------



## jjgbee (Oct 12, 2006)

I am confused. Saw the news article on how bad fructose is for you.EVEN in honey. Tupelo honey is sold in health food stores all over the country because it is so digestable. It is 44.4% fructose (levulose) as sampled by the florida food lab. It is recomended as the best sugar subsitute for diabetics because it is so digestable and does not create a sugar high. I have sold my Black sage with the same recomendations which is 42.7 fructose. Socker and track coaches use honey as a booster for their players because it gives instant energy with no sugar high. What's up ????


----------



## Kieck (Dec 2, 2005)

Everything in moderation. Salt is absolutely necessary for survival, yet too much can be lethal. Same sort of thing with sugars: they can be good, but too much can pose health risks.


----------



## WoolheaterFarms (Jan 20, 2010)

Kieck said:


> I believe you mean 58g, not 58mg. Fifty-eight milligrams isn't much. One can of soda pop contains more than 40g.
> 
> But that's not the point here. The flat statement was made that "Fructose in any form. . . is the worst of the worst!" That lump statement includes honey, more than in many other products.


Definitely a units issue there, I did mean grams. And I agree that when I haphazardly copied I should have been more focused on the crystallized and HFCS. 

Despite the fact that honey has fructose in it, there is research that shows it to be the healthiest sweetener for those with Type II Diabetes and/or high cholesterol. There is something about how the composition of honey, which includes fructose, that has a positive effect on LDL cholesterol. Meanwhile, fructose alone will increase LDLs.

Journal of the American College of Nutrition
http://www.jacn.org/cgi/content/abs...INDEX=0&sortspec=relevance&resourcetype=HWCIT

That abstract indicates: "It shows that honey has a variety of positive nutritional and health effects, if consumed at higher doses of 50 to 80 g per intake."

That's between 2.23 Tbsp (33ml) and 3.5 Tbsp (53ml).

While it doesn't seem to be well accredited, the research was presented at the International Symposium on Honey and Human Health, which is sponsored by "Committee for the Promotion of Honey and Health" and ultimately co-sponsored by these large institutions

National Honey Board
Western States Honey Packers and Dealers Association
National Honey Packers and Dealers Association

http://www.prohoneyandhealth.com/UserFiles/Image/Symposium Report.pdf

Makes me wish I still had online access to journals through USF.


----------



## Kieck (Dec 2, 2005)

> Meanwhile, fructose alone will increase LDLs. -WoolheaterFarms


Now you've got me really curious. Given that pure fructose is just that -- sugar -- and that it's quickly and easily burned in the body, how would it lead to higher cholesterol levels?


----------



## WoolheaterFarms (Jan 20, 2010)

Sorry for the delay in responding, I got distracted with the girls these past few months. From what I can tell, the research is showing that fructose is often metabolized into fat by the liver and the increase of fats can lead to the formation of low denisty balls of fats in the blood stream often referred to LDL cholesterol. Unfortunately, I don't know that they are actually drawing a direct metabolic link to production of sterols from increased fructose metabolism, I think they are just pointing to increases in LDL. 

Biochemistry was oh, so long ago.


----------

