278
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Bristlecone@lemmy.world 125 points 1 week ago

RN here, it's because your body has a more difficult time accessing the sugars in fruit form. They are wrapped up in multiple types of fiber which add bulk to your digestive system and serve as kind of a shield for your body to less easily access the sugar. The juice is essentially just the sugar with all the fiber strained out, has others have said this causes a situation where you can drink the calories from like 18 oranges in 45 seconds, and your body can access it immediately and easily. This is also why whole fruit is actually a good thing for diabetics because the glycemic index is actually pretty low.

[-] Maeve@kbin.earth 18 points 1 week ago

Flavonoids and polyphenols. Cleveland Health has articles on both.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] spongebue@lemmy.world 118 points 1 week ago

There is sugar, absolutely. And that's probably where most of the calories come from. But there is also water, cellulose (fiber), and vitamins/minerals - doesn't have much non-sugar caloric value to change that balance, but it's still important. And nobody serious is suggesting you eat only fruit, so you can get non-sugar calories from other sources and it can be balanced in the big picture.

It's kind of like an appropriate amount of dressing on a salad, the good outweighs the bad and makes you more likely to actually eat that nutrition-positive food.

Source: I'm some guy on the Internet. You can trust me.

[-] SatyrSack@quokk.au 84 points 1 week ago

nobody serious is suggesting you eat only fruit

[-] Eggymatrix@sh.itjust.works 50 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Notorious for having lived a long life...

[-] twice_hatch@midwest.social 18 points 1 week ago

56 is long if you were born around 1901

[-] meco03211@lemmy.world 30 points 1 week ago

Is it? I always thought lower life expectancies were dragged down by infant mortality. Basically if you survive the crib you'd likely live into your 70s.

[-] snooggums@piefed.world 7 points 1 week ago

When referring to diseases, yeah, but there was also a lot of death from wars and other violence, severe injuries from dangerous labor, and labor was pretty risky. If one was healthy and avoided injury they were certainly on par with modern life spans.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] spongebue@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago

I thought about that as I wrote it! I stand by what I said.

[-] Buffalox@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

So where's does he claim to only eat fruit?
Are you confusing it with him recommending to use Apple? 😋 (/s)

Also the man was insane. If you based on false beliefs make decisions against professional advice, that are detrimental to your well being, and even put your life in danger, that is AFAIK a very key aspect of being insane.

[-] paraphrand@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

He was someone who was a fruititarian at various points in his life. He was also someone who didn’t shower at certain points in his life. And he went for alternative medicine when he got sick.

[-] TheMadCodger@piefed.social 5 points 1 week ago

My ex- decided to become a fruititarian, with hopes of becoming a breathitarian someday after reading about a yogi who allegedly had done so.

Emphasis on the ex-.

[-] Buffalox@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

OK, that only confirms to me that he was in fact insane. There is no way we are supposed to eat only fruit, it simply doesn't provide any real energy, but consumes as much to digest as it yields, meaning there is no way to survive on fruit alone.

[-] snooggums@piefed.world 13 points 1 week ago

He chose to not listen to medical advice for cancer and instead dragged things out with 'alternative medicine' long enough that real medical treatment wouldn't be successful anymore but still pulled strings to get a transplant.

He was nuts.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] MedicPigBabySaver@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago

1/2 bottle of Ranch an appropriate amount?

[-] GrilledCheese 9 points 1 week ago

For the first half of the meal, yes.

[-] porcoesphino@mander.xyz 7 points 1 week ago

Are you both from the US? It was rough getting used to how much you all like to drown out the food with various sauces

[-] MedicPigBabySaver@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

It's called: "Fatland".

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] SorteKanin@feddit.dk 9 points 1 week ago

Source: I’m some guy on the Internet. You can trust me.

With the amount of AI slop out there, in this day and age this is actually a surprisingly high level of trust.

[-] spongebue@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

Admittedly when I wrote that I had moments like "cellulose is in fruit, right? And that's fiber?" and when I googled with neutral terms I mostly trusted Google's AI slop 🤣

[-] bryndos@fedia.io 80 points 1 week ago

There was some guy on telly did a test. Half the group had to eat oranges. The other half had to drink orange juice. Then swapped them over the next day. I can't remember the exact setup but i think it was like 'eat/drink as much as you want, stop when you feel full'.

Everyone was able to consume far, far more calories in juice form and probably far more sugar than they needed.

I think like even eating enough oranges for 1x300ml glass was hard for many people to do in fruit form. Basically, the rest of the orange filled them up and that's what we're better evolved for: slower digestion of a more varied mush and lots of fibre and stuff like that.

The juice is far too easy for us to eat way more than needed.

[-] Pulptastic@midwest.social 8 points 1 week ago

Juice being bad doesn’t necessarily make the whole fruit good. The glycemic index still has to be considered in the context of the person and their diet.

[-] SoleInvictus 6 points 1 week ago

You're just another shill for big juice, Pulptastic.

/s in case it's not obvious

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] AA5B@lemmy.world 65 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

There’s also quantity. Eating an orange is healthy. Drinking a glass of orange juice is like eating six oranges after removing the fiber: not heslthy

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] harambe69@lemmy.dbzer0.com 57 points 1 week ago

All that sugar is bound up in fiber, making it slower to release and keeping it from spiking your blood sugar into pre-diabeetus. Grind that same fruit down (juice), destroy its fibers, and now you got diabetes in a can.

[-] SchwertImStein@lemmy.dbzer0.com 40 points 1 week ago

They are like 11g of augars in 100g lf berries. They are not mostly sugar

[-] nimpnin@sopuli.xyz 16 points 1 week ago

Well, mostly water. But besides that, it’s mostly sugars and fiber, in that order.

[-] Jimmycrackcrack@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 week ago

I think that seems to be the gist of the answers here, the sugar is all bundled up with other stuff that makes it both difficult to efficiently digest from the surrounding bulk and filling because of that bulk and also a bunch of water.

[-] zxqwas@lemmy.world 34 points 1 week ago

Because it takes quite a lot of effort to eat a huge amount of sugar in the form on fruits and berries. They also have some vitamins, fibers and other stuff in them too.

[-] snek_boi@lemmy.ml 29 points 1 week ago

Fiber. Fiber helps you feel full, so it is harder to over-eat fruit in comparison with chocolate bars, gummy bears, or even fruit juice.

[-] AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.net 28 points 1 week ago

People have spoken a lot about how digestible the sugars are, but in terms of overall healthiness, the fibre is an important component even beyond its impact on sugar absorption. Many people do not get enough fibre in their diets.

[-] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 25 points 1 week ago

Healthy is relative. A handful of fruit is generally fine. Eating a few pounds of grapes in a day is probably a bad choice. There's also a lot of people that conflate fruit with things that have fruit in them as about the same.

[-] dditty@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 week ago

Eating a few pounds of grapes in a day is probably a bad choice

I have IBS and since grapes are FODMAPs (in high quantities) I should only eat like a handful at a time otherwise they can cause uncomfortable stomach cramping and diarrhea for me 😔

[-] Alsjemenou@lemy.nl 24 points 1 week ago

They are not mostly sugar, sugars are just a part of the nutrients. Most fruits don't even have that much sugar in them, it varies wildly though. There is also the way these sugars are intertwined with fiber, that make it much harder for these sugars to be processed in your body. So the sugars are released over a greater period of time giving your body more time to react. as opposed to refined sugars. Fruits are always healthier than candy, cookies, or soda.

There is a lot more in fruits than just sugars, there are proteins, vitamins, minerals, fibers. Which are all necessary for a healthy body. Sugars as well are necessary for your body to function.

It is practically impossible, if you're otherwise healthy, to eat too much fruit. I personally eat at the very least 3 kilos or 5 pounds of various fruits a week. within an otherwise varied (vegan) diet. I've done so for the past 10 years. I make sure to test my blood, and so far had zero issues except low vit. d. Which you can't get from fruit.

Why is it healthy? Well, we evolved next to fruits. Our ancestors always plucked and eaten them for millions of years. Just like we've done with all kinds of plants. Our gi tract is the right length, our body cant make most vitamins itself and completely functions on sugars. Fruit is part of a varied diet.

[-] Skullgrid@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago

Are they? Depends how many you eat.

[-] crypt0cler1c@infosec.pub 8 points 1 week ago

You think this obese monkey was eating raspberries? They probably got into a human garbage. Get real.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Corelli_III@midwest.social 13 points 1 week ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] CannedYeet@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Sugar: THE BITTER TRUTH

https://youtu.be/dBnniua6-oM

Robert H. Lustig, MD, UCSF Professor of Pediatrics in the Division of Endocrinology, explores the damage caused by sugary foods. He argues that fructose (too much) and fiber (not enough) appear to be cornerstones of the obesity epidemic through their effects on insulin. Recorded on 05/26/2009.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Eq0@literature.cafe 12 points 1 week ago

How the sugar is packaged is also important. Standard white sugar is refined to be easier to digest - less gets pooped out. Fruits and berries sugar is (mostly) fructose with fibers and other elements. In the mouth fructose tastes equally sweet but the stomach has more troubles digesting it and converting it into usable energy. So you absorb way less and poop out way more.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] hungryphrog 11 points 1 week ago

Because sugar isn't unhealthy in the first place, you'll die without any sugar.

[-] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 week ago

While there are essential fats and proteins, there are no essential sugars. Your body can work perfectly fine indefinitely without any sugars of any kind.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] 9point6@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago

Whole fruits are pretty healthy in reasonable moderation

if you gorge on 3 boxes of grapes you're still gonna have smashed through over a thousand calories

The big caveat is fruit juices which remove all the fiber that makes you feel full, particularly anything concentrated.

At that point you're getting closer to a soft drink than fruit (though you'll still at least get the vitamins)

[-] Otherbarry@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

A nutritionist will be better able to explain this but I'll give it a try :)

You're maybe overthinking the sugar part of the equation. Berries/fruits contain natural sugar that is a part of the fruit itself. Your body processes that differently since that sugar comes integrated with other nutrients (fiber, Vitamin C, antioxidants, etc.). And you typically won't want to eat say a few buckets of berries in one sitting to equal the same sugar high you get in a processed sugar, all that fiber will feel much heavier and your body is just going to tell you to slow down on its own.

The much worse types of sugars are added sugars e.g. sugars that were processed and now exist separately, then re-added into something else. Take your berry example, process all the sugar out of them so only the sugar exists, then you add those sugars to some other food you wanted to sweeten. Now it's a sugar without any integrated benefits (no fiber/vitamin C/antioxidants/etc/) - your body won't process this processed sugar the same way it used to when it existed as part of the fruit.. you're only getting the bad without anything useful. So you can gobble a whole ton more of those added sugars to get your sugar high without your body getting any indicators to hey, slow down, maybe it's time to stop eating these added sugars.

[-] GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 week ago

The dose makes the poison, really. It's quite hard to reach a harmful amount of sugar by just eating fruit - you're likely to get either full or bored with eating fruit before you start reaching unhealthy levels of sugar. Combine this with fruits and berries generally being a good source of dietary fiber, this makes for a good combination of attributes you want in healthy food.

[-] Fyrnyx@kbin.melroy.org 6 points 1 week ago

Because these are naturally grown sources of sugar that is untainted by the joke of the food industry's idea of processing sugar?

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Lembot_0004@discuss.online 6 points 1 week ago

1st: they are NOT healthy. You just never eat berries in such amounts as you consume sugar in confectionery things.
2nd: there are many different types of sweet substances. Some are worse like sugar, others are safer like fructose.

[-] nimpnin@sopuli.xyz 16 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I don't think no 1 is a valid argument as that applies to all food. Also, fructose is a sugar

load more comments (9 replies)
[-] Teppichbrand@feddit.org 5 points 1 week ago

Please read (or listen to) How not to die. It is a great book, funny and full of cool information, it changed my life a little.

[-] porcoesphino@mander.xyz 7 points 1 week ago

Here's a review focused to some extent on how accurate the science in that book is:

https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/how-not-to-die-review#TOC_TITLE_HDR_2

The author seems pretty focused on pushing a single message so I'd be careful with that message myself. (As someone who aspires to have a diet that's mostly vegetables with a few cheat days for meat.)

[-] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 week ago

I guess it worked if you wrote this.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 06 Oct 2025
278 points (100.0% liked)

No Stupid Questions

43967 readers
629 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS