My daughter is the cafeteria staff in a small preschool in Bakersfield. A while back I was talking to her about her job, and the difficulties of feeding kids that age. During uor conversation she told me that the authorities who decide such things have decided that fresh fruit servings should be curtailed and veggies proffered, even though the kiddies won’t eat them. Strict guidelines have been established, and the school follows them.
Ok, I’m diabetic, and I realize that fruit does contain a lot of sugar. I like fruit (mangoes. mmm) a lot and it’s dificult to limit myself. But as an alternative to candy, which is very often the case, does it make sense to pull the bananas?
I know there are some nutrition experts on the SDMB. What say you all?
Peace,
mangeorge
Fruit contains Fructose, which has the same empirical formula as Glucose, but has a structure which does not allow it to be metabolized the same way. Fructose is metabolized in the liver and is preferentially converted into fat. Fructose also does not cause a signifigant rise in blood sugars and other appetite supressing hormones such as leptin.
I realize that the above doesn’t explain too much. I would imagine that research and current thinking tends to make peoplefeel it is better to get the vitamins and other micronutrients the body needs from vegetables that don’t contain fructose. What with rises in obesity in children, perhaps the nutritional feels it is important to find alternatives to foods that get stored as more fat. (and rises in LDL levels)
Really? then why are diabetics warned away from full servings of fruits and especially juices?
Maybe I’d better re-check my guidelines. I am one of those people who tend to exaggerate. “limit your mango intake” reads as “don’t eat mangoes”. 
“My kingdom for a pancreas.”
Cite?
Huh? Fructose is a handy substrate for the liver to convert to either glucose via gluconeogenesis, or to turn directly into glycogen!
Well, fruit juices (apple juice, orange juice…) are a lot like thick sugar-water with some vitamins etc sprinkled in. Diabetics need to watch that kind of thing.
IIR, apple juice might have the sugars of two apples, and hits the bloodstream fast. Chewing up one apple is more filling, provides more health factors, and doesn’t abruptly bump up the blood-sugar.
Last I heard, eating fruit as fruit was better. So I don’t get it.
C’mon, doc.
I dunno, but I have had me some serious glycemic responses from mangoes. Other fruits, not so much.
I’ve never heard the bit about fructose being preferentially converted to fat.
There I go again!
I checked the diabetes food chart again. What’s reccommended is 3-4 servings of one medium fruit a day, not just one fruit. The good thing is that I rarely follow advice, so I have pretty much been eating the reccommended amount. Trouble is that it’s not as much fun when it’s not a sin. 
Oh well, off to the USDA site. The topic is child nutrition, not diabetes.
Cites:
Same chemical formula: http://home.howstuffworks.com/food2.htm
Fructose is preferentially converted into fat in the liver:
http://www.drkaslow.com/html/fructose.html
I have more cites if you want em. Hey, I just report em as I read em. I have cites to other doctors saying the same thing too, so I dunno.
Here is a couple more cites: (how come when I ask for a cite in IMHO I get a bunch of crap, but you all can ask away? huh)
http://www.mercola.com/2002/jan/5/fructose.htm
http://www.mercola.com/2002/nov/13/fructose.htm
http://ific.org/publications/qa/fructoseqa.cfm
And even here:
http://www.touchtmj4.com/4whatson/lauriemeyer/meyer030904.asp
Somehow I get the feeling these cites aren’t even going to get read though. That seems to be the trend.
Also from the IFIC-
Epimetheus, all those cites just say that it’s easier to make triglycerides out of fructose than out of glucose. That doesn’t mean the body turns fructose into fat rather than into glucose or glycogen. Just that when the body finds it necessary to turn sugar into fat precursors, it expends less energy doing so with fructose.
Tho I see by reading your original post that you may not have been implying such in the first place, and I may have mistaken your point. I’m not sure if we’re arguing the same thing or not. My point, which I did not make too clearly, was that fructose, while having a better glycemic index than some other sugars, still ends up being metabolized pretty much like other sugars once in the cell, and thus isn’t that much better than other sources of carbs.
Which is why I tell my patients to knock off the fruit juices, and just eat the fruit. One gets less fructose and more fiber and a few other nutrients by doing so. I’ve ranted against the practice of embracing juice as a “healthy” alternative to soda for kids and others in a number of threads here before.
As for vegetables being better than fruit, maybe they are. But I’m a pragmatist. Just getting people to move from candy to fruit would be a true milestone of positive change. I wouldn’t expect in a million years to get people to give up apples, cherries, strawberries, etc. in preference for more broccoli, cauliflower and brussels sprouts.
Are we on the same page now? I’m honestly not sure.
thank you for your effort to clarify.
Fructose is metabolizd to glucose, and glucose raises insulin. Your cites contradict their own thesis (and each other).
QtM has already covered the semantic nonsense underlying the fat claim, but I’ll second him.
Got the straight dope. Here’s what the kiddies, in preschools in general, were eating; mac & cheese, bananas, and flavored (and sweetened) apple juice. Juice of choice being that stuff in the neat little boxes. Other stuff was offered, but largely not eaten. Many kids would fill up on bananas and “juice”.
So they were advised to offer water, varied main dishes, and a variety of fruits and veggies. They hide brocoli on the pizza. They also have healthy hot dogs, and the kids love them.
My daughter makes up fake “lunchables”.
Of course fruit is bad for you. Fruit contains…
CARBS!
:eek: :eek: :eek:
Nametag:
My cites support what I say*. They don’t contradict themselves. You just have to read them. I did not say that all fructose is converted into fat. I said it was preferentially metabolized into fat. They also say that fructose does not cause as signifigant a rise in insulin as glucose.
My cites are from valid and from good sources (like the American Journal of clinical Nutrition). If you think they are in “error” perhaps you would care to provide cites of better authority?
*rather than what you think I am saying, no doubt.
The cites say it is preferentially converted into triglycerides. Since the body itself is not a thinking being, I would assume it is predominately converted into fat because it is easier. Just as my cites claim, fructose is metabolized differently than glucose- in the liver. It is easier in this process to convert the fructose into fat. Some of this will no doubt be metabolized into glucose. Depending on the amount It is also more likely to replentish the livers glycogen stores than actually make it out into the blood stream as well.
But only one sugar is metabolized in the cell, am I not correct? Glucose. All other carbohydrates are first broken down into glucose. I was taught that the only sugar that enters the Krebs cycle was glucose.
I agree, fruits juices are bad. I wouldn’t say that an apple or bannana is necessarily bad. The amount of fructose in natural fruilts is low.
I assume so.