I note that the anti-fruit/low-carb crowd similiarly routinely select studies which focus on the damage done by refined fructose and then, ridiculously and arbitrarily, claim that the same applies to raw, unrefined fruit as well.
Yes absolutely
As I suggested above, IMO it is even definitively meaningless to try to correlate the dietary intake of a single natural food component at molecular level such as fructose with health issues. The question asked in this kind of studies is the wrong question to ask. A much better question to ask is not whether or not we should eat glucose or fructose but whether or not we should eat fruits, pasta, bred or other foods such as liver ( or lol, sperm for fructose
) containing them and in which quantities and seasons.
Heh, I assumed you were providing evidence for your massive fruit intake during summer months. I tried this out myself yesterday consuming just under 1kg of cherries yesterday in about 15 minutes and then immediately passing out. They tasted soooo gooood. But thanks to the study, I now know that my uric acid levels are in a safe range and have even likely decreased! Time for more cherries...nom nom nom nom
Raw fruits such as cherries or other berries or honey are seasonal products. Our ancestors gorged on them when available i.e. overate them just as we tend to do so today. Yet their diet was nevertheless nicely balanced over a whole year period in contrast to modern "civilized countries" where such foods are available the whole year round in supermarkets.
I indeed occasionally gorge on cherries in June and July but eat none during the remaining 10 months or so and overall very little or no fruit during winter season. I could not observe any related adverse effect up to now.
