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.
The fact of the matter is that the concentrations of fructose in fruit are so low that unless someone is consuming a lot of fruit, or they're consuming a lot of fruit on the backdrop of a highly processed diet or a diet that has a lot of other stuff that they might not want to be ingesting, you can't really say that fructose is fattening.
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.
It's worth pointing out that the concentrations of fructose in fruit is quite low compared to the concentrations of fructose in high fructose corn syrup. Typically, the amount of fructose fructose I I think is the proper pronunciation that people are always correcting me. Fructose is anywhere from 1% to about 10%. Now, high fructose corn syrup is a different issue. And too much consumption of anything, but fructose included, can be a problem for the ways that it impacts the neural circuits that process sugar.