Paul Saladino· MD
fructose does not lead to the massive degree of nova lipogenesis in humans that it does in animals don't be misled by that
The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
fructose does not lead to the massive degree of nova lipogenesis in humans that it does in animals don't be misled by that
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
so many of the studies fructose that say that it's harmful for you are animal studies isolated fructose feeding studies which don't really you know recapitulate what's happening in actual human biology
if you look at someone who's trying to make a case that fructose is harmful invariably they will site studies in animals who don't have the same biochemistry they do much higher rates of denova lipogenesis when they presented with fructose meaning if you give fructose to a rat it's making much more of that into body fat than than we do as a human we do 1% you give a human 1% of fructose goes to Fat via denova lipogenesis most of it goes to glucose it goes to um you know glycogen it goes to lactate like glucose I mean fructose doesn't turn into fat in humans anywhere near like it does in animals so you can't look at animal studies for fructose metabolism because it's completely different right it's completely different