Do treatments to preserve OJ kill phytochemicals & enzymes?

This indeed boils down to a type of knowledge that is not concrete, it’s called intuition which spans over the course of thousands of different aspects of human life besides diet. We’ll see who lives longer and healtheir, me, the one who actually eats real food, and some of you, who ingest processed, preserved, refined, pill-form, enriched, heat-treated “food” because you see no proof that it isn’t any less healthy.

Ask yourself this question: If I had to bet my life’s savings on one or the other, who would it be?

And another: Do I want to bet my future well-being on unknown assumptions, just so I can eat better tasting foods, be less inconvenienced by food preperation, ect.? You only get one life (as far as we know), why choose the risky default?

BTW, I don’t think I need 40+ g’s of fiber a day, so yes, I spit some pulp out thank you very much!

The problem with this theory is that you started three other threads at the same time as this one, all of which indicated that you know nothing about nutrition, digestion, health or fitness.

So who are we supposed to believe - you or your own words? :smiley:

I’d bet it on not eating enormous amounts of sugar to get the probably nonexistent benefits of chemicals in orange juice.

Like that there are magical chemicals in orange juice that somehow make up for the unhealthy amount of sugar it contains?

Besides, who are you to imply that we’re all eating awful food? You’re the one spitting out parts of an orange - if you’re into natural foods, shouldn’t you be eating the orange naturally? Whether it’s processed in a machine or in your mouth due to some bizarre superstition, you’re not eating the whole natural fruit.

Besides, you should be getting 40+ grams of fiber a day.

I’m really quite curious - you obviously have your mind made up about the subject, and don’t seem particularly willing to listen to other peoples’ viewpoints, so why exactly did you start this thread?

For support for my theory that natural living is healthy. Yes, I have already made up my mind what philosophy to live my life by, I am merely seeking support from the scientific side to support what philosophy has already told me. I still seek to know how to apply my philosophy soundly, but the natural approach will certainly not change. Diet is only one aspect of this natural lifestyle approach. It’s fairly simple application too… eat real food while having the rest of my life in balance (I can eat plenty of sugars as long as I am active cardio-wise, for instance).

For instance, I think that indoors (offices, homes) with dust and mold is slightly unnatural so I seek to both spend much time outdoors and keep the indoors fairly clean too. Trust me, if you choose a non-scientific approach to health and stay consistent, you will be wrong about many things along the way, but on the whole you will avoid many crucial mistakes that the stiff-necked “Show me the proof… I see no reason to believe …” types will make. Stopping your sweat glands from producing sweat? What the hell? I avoid anti-perspirant because its just a weird thing to do. And I didn’t need science to tell me that a little sunlight every day is healthy even though I have fair skin.

Proper application of a sound doctrine with consistency is the key. I’ll see you guys at the gym in 50 years… I’ll be the one running past you as you are hanging on for dear life taking a whole slew of meds because you lived a life governed by current scientific understanding. My approach is timeless and doesn’t depend on being right every single time about every single health issue. Besides, what is better, someone who has a valid and consistent approach to their health AND uses science, or someone who merely uses current scientific understanding as their sole source of health?

I supposed I can’t go on talking like this in this specific forum, sorry. I am just defending myself.

And yet you advocate drinking processed orange juice that’s removed nearly all the natural fiber of the unprocessed orange, pushing the nutritional value down dramatically, while enabling you to take in far more sugar at once than nature intended. Meanwhile your detractors are emphasizing the natural fiber of whole oranges. Tell me exactly why you think you’re on the “real food” side of things and everyone else is on the pill-popping processed food side?

My “take a vitamin” comment above was more a snarky aside than anything - most Americans eat so much food, they typically get sufficient vitamins and minerals by accident if not design. If someone’s that worried about losing a few extra milligrams of vitamins, they know how to easily make up any perceived (and likely inaccurate) deficit.

hauss, as an alternative health person myself, I can understand how you got put into a defensive position. The majority of the board’s posters are not supportive of anything that hasn’t been subjected to a very specific type of scientific testing.

That being said…think about it.

Whole foods are best.

Whole foods often (but not always) contain micronutrients and phyto compounds which act synergistically. A whole plant extract of St. John’s Wort is more effective than a standardized extract of hypericin. Why? Well, because hyperforin’s needed too. So standardize both? Well, that doesn’t work as well as whole plant either. There’s other unrecognized chemicals (as well as, in my humble and oh-so-unscientific opinion, “energy”) from the whole plant that we can’t mix together in a dish.

Eat the whole orange. It’s better for you. Regardless of whether or not fruit juices are healthy (and most alt practioners agree that unless you’re fresh juicing and readding the pulp to your juice, they’re mostly sugar water), the fresh whole fruit is healthier. It’s carefully balanced between sugars and fibers to prevent your blood sugar from getting a whack with the ugly stick. Fruit juice, without the fiber, isn’t balanced.

BUT, there was a question in the OP. And that question was: Do treatments to preserve OJ kill phytochemicals & enzymes?

The answer is yes. Orange juice sold in the store is pasteurized with heat. Heat alters the structure of enzymes, effectively rendering them unable to interact with the proteins they are meant to break down. Other phytochemicals are rendered innert not just by heat, but by the exposure to light in the supermarket, oxygenation, and just plain getting old during storage.

Eating just the juice of the orange is marginally better, if only because the peel has protected it from the light and much of the oxygen. But it does still leave you open to an imbalance in the optimal* sugar/fiber ratio. The fiber in a orange is a very gentle one, and not one which should lead to intestinal blockage. There’s really no logical reason to go to the effort of spitting it out, even if you don’t feel like you “need” the extra fiber. In addition, some of those enzymes and phytochemicals you want and not present in the juice (which is the energy source intended to attract eating and subsequent spreading of seed in feces, hence all the sugar) but in the cells themselves, which remain in the pulp.

*Why do I say “optimal”? Because in nature, we wouldn’t waste the food. Our bodies developed and evolved to run best with foods that evolved around us. Therefore, barring abnormalities, our bodies run best on whole, minimally processed foods, with their evolved ratios of nutrients, eaten in variety.

Eat the whole orange.

Is this because there’s no dust or mold outdoors?

(bolding mine)

I noticed that the OP, and whynot, referred to the ingestion of enzymes in OJ as being somehow desirable. I was wondering if anyone could shed light on this, is the human body capable of recruiting an enzyme from a foodsource and using it in any type of metabolic process?

It sounds faintly ridiculous to my ears, but then if you consider toxins like ricin, which is a fairly large protein and capable of integrating with, and disrupting cellular machinery, it may not be so far fetched.

A google search turned up some spurious pages on “the food enzyme concept”, but they’re not worth linking to.

Oh, I have no idea if plant enzymes are useful or not in digestion. (Obviously, our own digestive enzymes are rather important!) But I was simply noting that the OP is looking for them but wouldn’t get them from store bought OJ. S/he wasn’t asking if they are useful, just stating that s/he was trying to get them from oranges, and wondered if they’re changed in store bought OJ. They most likely are.

I don’t know nothin’ bout no enzymes 'cept that they’re damaged by heat. Please don’t lead the lynch mob to my doorstep! :stuck_out_tongue:

Enzymes are proteins, plain and simple. Unless a protein is specifically adapted to working in the very high acid environment of the human digestive system, it’s not going to do a thing inside you. They’ll get chopped up into their component amino acids, which will then be absorbed, just like any other protein.

I have to admit that when I saw the OP, I mentally inserted “Simpson” after OJ.

Well, I got a chuckle out of it anyway, sorry to interrupt. :wink:

Yeah, me too! When I see a sentence with “OJ” and “Kill” I just put the two together. 'Course he was innocent. :rolleyes:

Hope I’m not dragging this one too far back from the dead, but I just discovered it when reading the related pit thread.

Qadgop, how well established is this, that fruit juice isn’t as good as Mom thought, and how long has this been known? I try to stay healthy, but I also avoid following every new unsubstantiated study*, so I don’t keep changing the direction of my life like a ping-pong ball in a dryer and make myself crazy[er].

*<Channel 5 HealthBeat>DOES SALIVA CAUSE CANCER WHEN SWALLOWED IN SMALL AMOUNTS OVER A LONG PERIOD OF TIME? FIND OUT TONIGHT AT 11!</Channel 5 HealthBeat>

The question is more whether it’s been well-established that there are ancillary benefits to drinking orange juice. This is not the result of a single study, as there’s nothing to suggest that orange juice is particularly nutritious. It’s extremely sugary, if you read the label, and most of the vitamins in it are in fairly small quantities.

Eating fruit and drinking juice are entirely different things. Fruit supplies fiber, and you simply can’t eat anywhere near as much of it as you can drink. And it’s got a lot of sugar. According to the government (FoodData Central) orange juice and cola have pretty comparable amounts of sugar. So the question is more whether there’s other ingredients in orange juice that have the potential to make up for the high sugar content.

This isn’t the result of any recent research - there’s never been much evidence that fruit juice is particularly good for you. It supplies some vitamins, which is good, but there are other sources that have far less sugar and fewer calories. The question is more why it’s the standard wisdom that fruit juice is all that good a beverage.

What Excalibre said, essentially.

There’s really no data that suggests it’s any better for you than an equal amount of sugar and water, a la “soda pop”. There is evidence that giving it to children in large amounts has led to an increase in childhood obesity, higher rates of tooth decay, and that it may contribute to the alarming increase in the early development of diabetes type II (now being seen in pre-teens).

My beverage hierarchy for otherwise healthy adults runs like this:

  1. Water
  2. non-caloric & non-carbonated flavored beverage
  3. Skim milk (may rank higher if the individual needs the calcium, lower if they don’t)
  4. Vegetable juice (watch the salt load, tho!)
  5. non-caloric carbonated flavored beverage
    (I’d also consider 1-5 above to all be basically healthy or neutral)
  6. 1 or 2% milk
  7. Fruit juices
  8. fruit juices or “punches” with added sugar
  9. Carbonated sodas with sugar
    (6-9 above may be ok in the proper amounts but too many folks consume enough of them to turn them into liabilities rather than assets)
  10. Whole milk (waaay too much sat fat for most)
  11. Maple syrup (when used as a beverage)

Now there are many exceptions depending on the person, their personal medical status, nutritional needs, activity levels, and amounts consumed, and the above scale is not meant to fit all. And different juices may be more appropriate in different situations too. So, as regards my list, take what you think you can use from it and discard the rest.

He makes a good point. It’s nice to come home from work and have a tall cool glass of maple syrup at the end of the day, but it’ll cost you in the waistline.

Wow, I would have assumed that vegetable juice would have scored higher.

Hey, I put it in the top tier, whadda ya want? As I noted, the sodium load can be a concern.

But frankly, the human animal was designed to drink mother’s milk after birth until weaned, then switch over to water.

Oh dear. Can I ask why the preference for non-carbonated over carbonated? As I pretty much live on (flavoured, non-sweetened) selzer. That and sugar free ginger ale.