[quote]Oleena wrote:
^^^lol. You went on the “olde English autumn bulk”, a bushel of apples per day to prepare for winter.[/quote]
I know, it was an utter disaster lol. The inches I added to my love handles negated the millimeters I added to my arms. In my defense though, it was my first bulk and we all make mistakes:)
Now I try to keep a comment I read from Bonez in mind “no one interested in bodybuilding should have a roll over their belt”. Simple and keeps me in line.
[quote]Oleena wrote:
Here’s something to think about- from an evolutionary perspective people were eating fruits LOONNNGGGGG before they were eating either rice, oatmeal, or potatoes. Wouldn’t it make sense, then, that our bodies are more adapt at handling them? Quite a few fruits are specifically produced by plants to be eaten by other creatures. From a scientific perspective, you’d have to assume that many fruits have evolved to be eaten by animals and animals have developed better strategies for handling them over a longer period of time than many of the other current carb sources.
I think there’s more to the story than “they are just sugar”. It seems very weird to me that after hundreds of thousands of years of consumption, they are now reduced to a slightly elevated desert food.[/quote]
The context of this thread is physique/performance enhancement. Not evolutionary biology.
boom swoned.
[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
[quote]Oleena wrote:
Here’s something to think about- from an evolutionary perspective people were eating fruits LOONNNGGGGG before they were eating either rice, oatmeal, or potatoes. Wouldn’t it make sense, then, that our bodies are more adapt at handling them? Quite a few fruits are specifically produced by plants to be eaten by other creatures. From a scientific perspective, you’d have to assume that many fruits have evolved to be eaten by animals and animals have developed better strategies for handling them over a longer period of time than many of the other current carb sources.
I think there’s more to the story than “they are just sugar”. It seems very weird to me that after hundreds of thousands of years of consumption, they are now reduced to a slightly elevated desert food.[/quote]
The context of this thread is physique/performance enhancement. Not evolutionary biology. [/quote]
Yeah, we know, thanks.
my 2 cents here
I just lost 60 lbs in 72 days while losing around 5% BF and I never ate less than 5-7 pieces of fruit(apples-Oranges-Bananas-Guavas-Pears) a day. Its great for cravings, provides short term satiety(great for the time you’re passing a pizza parlour after a ten day 50gm carbs/day stint). Dude eat all the fruit you want but stay off Mango Fig dates
[quote]Malchir wrote:
Considering 30-40% of all people are fructose intolerant/malabsorbant, that kinda throws that theory out of the water doesn’t it.
[/quote]
Could you link something that supports your assertion? 40 % of people, eh? Interesting - would like to see the studies you’re pulling the number from.
it does occur when someone ingests a large amount of fructose, but this study shows that when someone ingests sucrose which is 50/50 glucose/fructose…they had no issues…
most fruits resemble sucrose…so, i wouldn’t be worried…
whats funny is soluble fiber goes through the same exact process as malabsorbed fructose…gets fermented in the large intestine and then is broken down into short chain fatty acids…
[quote]VikingsAD28 wrote:
[quote]zraw wrote:
Fruits arent the devil, but I wouldnt use it as my main carb source, as you seem to be preaching…[/quote]
This plus everything Bonez said in this thread.[/quote]
Like “Fruit is 100% sugar.”?
I know you guys like Bonez and all, but, really, he was incorrect there.
[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
[quote]Oleena wrote:
Here’s something to think about- from an evolutionary perspective people were eating fruits LOONNNGGGGG before they were eating either rice, oatmeal, or potatoes. Wouldn’t it make sense, then, that our bodies are more adapt at handling them? Quite a few fruits are specifically produced by plants to be eaten by other creatures. From a scientific perspective, you’d have to assume that many fruits have evolved to be eaten by animals and animals have developed better strategies for handling them over a longer period of time than many of the other current carb sources.
I think there’s more to the story than “they are just sugar”. It seems very weird to me that after hundreds of thousands of years of consumption, they are now reduced to a slightly elevated desert food.[/quote]
The context of this thread is physique/performance enhancement. Not evolutionary biology. [/quote]
And you don’t see how those things might be related?
[quote]Oleena wrote:
[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
[quote]Oleena wrote:
Here’s something to think about- from an evolutionary perspective people were eating fruits LOONNNGGGGG before they were eating either rice, oatmeal, or potatoes. Wouldn’t it make sense, then, that our bodies are more adapt at handling them? Quite a few fruits are specifically produced by plants to be eaten by other creatures. From a scientific perspective, you’d have to assume that many fruits have evolved to be eaten by animals and animals have developed better strategies for handling them over a longer period of time than many of the other current carb sources.
I think there’s more to the story than “they are just sugar”. It seems very weird to me that after hundreds of thousands of years of consumption, they are now reduced to a slightly elevated desert food.[/quote]
The context of this thread is physique/performance enhancement. Not evolutionary biology. [/quote]
And you don’t see how those things might be related?[/quote]
Related, but not dispositive of anything.
Your claims/arguments are a logical nightmare. Im not going to explain bit by bit why the things you say fail.
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
[quote]VikingsAD28 wrote:
[quote]zraw wrote:
Fruits arent the devil, but I wouldnt use it as my main carb source, as you seem to be preaching…[/quote]
This plus everything Bonez said in this thread.[/quote]
Like “Fruit is 100% sugar.”?
I know you guys like Bonez and all, but, really, he was incorrect there.[/quote]
How many calories are there in fiber and water? (rhetorical question)
[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
[quote]Oleena wrote:
[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
[quote]Oleena wrote:
Here’s something to think about- from an evolutionary perspective people were eating fruits LOONNNGGGGG before they were eating either rice, oatmeal, or potatoes. Wouldn’t it make sense, then, that our bodies are more adapt at handling them? Quite a few fruits are specifically produced by plants to be eaten by other creatures. From a scientific perspective, you’d have to assume that many fruits have evolved to be eaten by animals and animals have developed better strategies for handling them over a longer period of time than many of the other current carb sources.
I think there’s more to the story than “they are just sugar”. It seems very weird to me that after hundreds of thousands of years of consumption, they are now reduced to a slightly elevated desert food.[/quote]
The context of this thread is physique/performance enhancement. Not evolutionary biology. [/quote]
And you don’t see how those things might be related?[/quote]
Related, but not dispositive of anything.
Your claims/arguments are a logical nightmare. Im not going to explain bit by bit why the things you say fail. [/quote]
Thinking that I was trying to make a claim based on evolutionary biology is where you’re going wrong. I’m not. What I’m asking is “Is there more to the story that fruits are on par with desert/table sugar for a body builder, based on our longer relationship with them?”. Asking a question doesn’t = making a claim. The truth is, based on your statements, you don’t know the whole story about fruits. I readily admit that I don’t either, which is why it would be wise for both of us to ask questions instead of assuming we know everything.
[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
[quote]VikingsAD28 wrote:
[quote]zraw wrote:
Fruits arent the devil, but I wouldnt use it as my main carb source, as you seem to be preaching…[/quote]
This plus everything Bonez said in this thread.[/quote]
Like “Fruit is 100% sugar.”?
I know you guys like Bonez and all, but, really, he was incorrect there.[/quote]
How many calories are there in fiber and water? (rhetorical question)[/quote]
All of the calories in fruit come from sugar =/= Fruit is 100% sugar.
[quote]Oleena wrote:
[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
[quote]Oleena wrote:
[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
[quote]Oleena wrote:
Here’s something to think about- from an evolutionary perspective people were eating fruits LOONNNGGGGG before they were eating either rice, oatmeal, or potatoes. Wouldn’t it make sense, then, that our bodies are more adapt at handling them? Quite a few fruits are specifically produced by plants to be eaten by other creatures. From a scientific perspective, you’d have to assume that many fruits have evolved to be eaten by animals and animals have developed better strategies for handling them over a longer period of time than many of the other current carb sources.
I think there’s more to the story than “they are just sugar”. It seems very weird to me that after hundreds of thousands of years of consumption, they are now reduced to a slightly elevated desert food.[/quote]
The context of this thread is physique/performance enhancement. Not evolutionary biology. [/quote]
And you don’t see how those things might be related?[/quote]
Related, but not dispositive of anything.
Your claims/arguments are a logical nightmare. Im not going to explain bit by bit why the things you say fail. [/quote]
Thinking that I was trying to make a claim based on evolutionary biology is where you’re going wrong. I’m not. What I’m asking is “Is there more to the story that fruits are on par with desert/table sugar for a body builder, based on our longer relationship with them?”. Asking a question doesn’t = making a claim. The truth is, based on your statements, you don’t know the whole story about fruits. I readily admit that I don’t either, which is why it would be wise for both of us to ask questions instead of assuming we know everything.[/quote]
I dont need to know the whole story about fruits to confidently say that fruits are not valuable to a person seeking physique/performance enhancement.
This isnt a ‘deep’ subject. And Im done with it.
[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
[quote]Oleena wrote:
[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
[quote]Oleena wrote:
[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
[quote]Oleena wrote:
Here’s something to think about- from an evolutionary perspective people were eating fruits LOONNNGGGGG before they were eating either rice, oatmeal, or potatoes. Wouldn’t it make sense, then, that our bodies are more adapt at handling them? Quite a few fruits are specifically produced by plants to be eaten by other creatures. From a scientific perspective, you’d have to assume that many fruits have evolved to be eaten by animals and animals have developed better strategies for handling them over a longer period of time than many of the other current carb sources.
I think there’s more to the story than “they are just sugar”. It seems very weird to me that after hundreds of thousands of years of consumption, they are now reduced to a slightly elevated desert food.[/quote]
The context of this thread is physique/performance enhancement. Not evolutionary biology. [/quote]
And you don’t see how those things might be related?[/quote]
Related, but not dispositive of anything.
Your claims/arguments are a logical nightmare. Im not going to explain bit by bit why the things you say fail. [/quote]
Thinking that I was trying to make a claim based on evolutionary biology is where you’re going wrong. I’m not. What I’m asking is “Is there more to the story that fruits are on par with desert/table sugar for a body builder, based on our longer relationship with them?”. Asking a question doesn’t = making a claim. The truth is, based on your statements, you don’t know the whole story about fruits. I readily admit that I don’t either, which is why it would be wise for both of us to ask questions instead of assuming we know everything.[/quote]
I dont need to know the whole story about fruits to confidently say that fruits are not valuable to a person seeking physique/performance enhancement.
This isnt a ‘deep’ subject. And Im done with it. [/quote]
Ok.
For anyone interested in the research, this is from precision nutrition by Chris Shugart’s team:
Originally Posted by markcoughlan
Ok I know its a sugar but its a very low glycemic carb and some bodybuilders even know is low GI but still avoid fruits when dieting?
There’s a misconception in the bodybuilding world that the fructose in fruit will hamper body fat loss. As Carter explains here, it is likely not a concern if you are not consuming truck loads of fruit a day.
The only time I can see completely eliminating fruit as beneficial would be for those who are already at an extremely low bodyfat, just weeks out from a physique contest (or following something like the GSD), and trying to get even more shredded. In this case, they have likely eliminated most of everything (carbs, fat, etc…)… so fruit is no exception.
Fruit is more carb dense than vegetables, so one has to factor in their carb content. Generally speaking, for those who are not carb tolerant, a 4:1 ratio of vegetables to fruits is best, with morning and during the post workout period as the optimal time for fruit consumption.
For more info, check out All About Fruits and Veggies and take a look here at all of the benefits you’ll be getting with high intakes of fruits and veggies.
Posted By:
Kate Kline
BIS, PICP, CPT, Precision Nutrition Certified, BioSignature Certified
Lean Eating Coach
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,844
There are a couple assertions in there that make me want to call Phil and have him add a caution sign to the smiley list. Specifically, the notion that fructose only serves to replenish liver glycogen and that fruit is essentially being looked at only in terms of it’s fructose content.
But first things first, why are you carb cycling outside of the nutrient timing laid out by PN? Or am I reading into your approach incorrectly?
Back to the somewhat faulty (or at least too absolute sounding) assertions -
Fructose can and does replenish more than liver glycogen - it’s preferential “target” is the liver however. (read: it can replenish muscle glycogen it just takes a longer route and makes sure the liver is looked after. Which by the way, needs to be looked after if you are glycogen depleted - you can’t be depleted and then just “refill” your muscles. The liver needs to be filled too). Moreover, it’s been shown that fructose can potentiate glycogen synthesis when combined with other sugars (albeit this is questionable). And if that weren’t enough, it’s also been shown to have a glycogen sparing effect. Now of course the positives stop when we’re talking about artificially copious amounts (read: non fruit).
Take home point though - fructose is metabolized into glyceraldehyde and dihydroxyacetone phosphate and these can readily enter the the glycolytic pathway. From there, some dancing around occurs but some of the fructose will end up as glucose and glycogen. Eat too much and yes, the liver gets stuffed and you get fat because of the propensity for a lipogenic effect. But that’s why you’re avoiding high-fructose corn-syrup. If you’re not consuming high fructose corn syrup or 1000g+ of fruit per day, you’re not triggering this propensity for lipogenesis. Or rather, it wouldn’t be the fruit intake that’s triggering it. Which brings me to my next point.
Fruit isn’t just fructose. Clearly there’s a huge upside in the phyto and micro nutrient departments - an upside people far too often downplay because they’re fixated on the often inconsequential finite details of caloric composition. But additionally, the carb content isn’t entirely, or with some fruits, even primarily fructose. And I’m not just talking about the fiber found in fruits. I’m talking specifically about the fact that many fruits have an appreciable amount (% wise) of other sugars. Primarily glucose.
And let’s not forget that per 100g of fruit, generally speaking we’re looking at 10g or less of total sugar content with fructose making up 33-66% (so 3-6g). That’s not a lot. Especially when one is looking to load glycogen.
So to answer your question, a combo of fruit and starchy carb sources is your best approach. But how much and when will depend on whether you’re following proper nutrient timing while doing this carb cycling or whether it’s some non-optimized carb intake system (meaning carbs all day).
Carter Schoffer
Senior Advisor, Precision Nutrition
Chief Body Transformation Architect,
Body Transformation Inc.
Last edited by Carter Schoffer; June 2nd, 2007 at 09:08 AM.
“Fruit isn’t just fructose. Clearly there’s a huge upside in the phyto and micro nutrient departments - an upside people far too often downplay because they’re fixated on the often inconsequential finite details of caloric composition”
Gasp. How dare he.
Fruit evolved to be healthy to humans.
[quote]Brotha123 wrote:
Hey guys what are your takes on fruit? Is it okay to eat or not…i train mma 4-5 days aweek and lift weight wendlers 5/3/1 4days a week…just confused about them and fructose [/quote]
This train wreck has spiraled away from the original question. Dude, go ahead and eat the fruit. It has its benefits and as long as you are not eating a ton of it you will be fine. Small amounts of fructose from fruit sources along with other smart carb sources will help with glycogen stores.
[quote]Mateus wrote:
[quote]Brotha123 wrote:
Hey guys what are your takes on fruit? Is it okay to eat or not…i train mma 4-5 days aweek and lift weight wendlers 5/3/1 4days a week…just confused about them and fructose [/quote]
This train wreck has spiraled away from the original question. Dude, go ahead and eat the fruit. It has its benefits and as long as you are not eating a ton of it you will be fine. Small amounts of fructose from fruit sources along with other smart carb sources will help with glycogen stores. [/quote]
I agree.
I eat a piece of fruit almost everyday. I would not recommend that to someone looking to drop bodyfat. Cutting fruit may be a very easy way to tighten up a diet and the lost micro nutrients and phytochemicals can be made up for with vegetables.
edited
[quote]Lover95 wrote:
Fruit evolved to be healthy to humans.[/quote]
wut?