Why is real fruit not a problem but HFCS is? Dates sugar content is mostly sucrose which is broken down in the small intestine very rapidly into 50/50 glucose/fructose while HFCS is typically 45/55 glucose/fructose.

Once one sucrose is metabolized by sucrase it hits the bloodstream as glucose and fructose no different than HFSC.

Doesn't only matter in the end how much fructose you consume regardless of whether enters your body bound as sucrose or not as HFCS?

Can you point to some more information are the differences?

Industrial sugar contains no fiber vs. the fiber in many fruits complementing the fructose and ameliorating potentially harmful effects meanwhile slowing digestion [1]. My guess is this leads to a more sustained energy boost and relatively mild to nonexistent crash depending on how well your body reacts to carbohydrates.

One may need to be somewhat more moderate with dates as they contain little fiber to sugar content - hinting at the importance of varying your fruit diet.

[1] https://nutritionfacts.org/video/if-fructose-is-bad-what-abo...

So based on that it looks like nothing to do with sucrose vs HFSC, only that the berries have some other properties like binding the sugar up in fiber that slow down metabolism.

It would seem if you bound HFSC up with fiber it would have the same effect.

That's why I said "unbound" fructose.

Sucrose is glucose and fructose with a chemical bond between. HFCS is a slurry; there's no chemical bond connecting the two.

"Broken down in the small intestine very rapidly into 50/50..." ignores the fact that it takes a while to make it down as far as the small intestine.

I can't speak more to the differences personally because I'm not the one with the PhD and I'm not going to interrupt my wife from grading papers just to correct some rando on the Internet. :)

Both sucrose and HFSC must make it to the small intestine to be metabolized, the only difference is the chemical bond is broken by sucrase in the intestinal wall. Both are metabolized quickly and into the same components in the bloodstream.

I am still not seeing the difference?

edit

Perhaps I misunderstood what you meant by "unbound" I thought you where referring to the chemical bond in sucrose, vs being bound up physically with fiber in fruit.

> Why is real fruit not a problem but HFCS

Two things, people just don't eat that much fruit, usually. And whole fruits/vegetables when eaten release glucose and fructose slowly as the digestive enzymes slowly break it down. I think the idea is not to force your body to deal with a big slug of glucose and fructose all at once.

> Why is real fruit not a problem but HFCS is?

Fruit has loads of fiber, although less than what our ancestors gathered, and in less quantity. Fiber is what produces satiety. For the same reason fruit juice is not good for you.

Again seems like that has nothing to do with HFSC or sucrose, only whats its mixed with.