I’m a pediatrician. The job you’re doing is great. The way you explain this complex issue should help even doctors to understand the significance of nutrition on our health!
I’m a biochemist… I think the most interesting part of the fructose story is the evolutionary genesis. Why did this happen and why are we different than other mammals. It’s a starvation survival tool that promotes foraging and fat storage. Tell that story in a follow up video. It’ll be a popular one if you do it in the same way you did this one. Good job.
Considering sources of fructose (I.e. fruits) were historically seasonal, it would make sense for your body to want to store as much of this energy as possible during the short window when this food resource is available.
the fact that no human exists with a working uricase gene seems to suggest that if it weren’t for that mutation, we may not have made it at some point in the distant past… And we’re paying for that now, thousands of years later! Amazing.
That's an easy one. Except for Yogi the Bear, wild animals don't have McDonalds and Taco Bell to eat at every day! Plus, the fruit causes that negative feed back that self perpetuates the hunger for more fructose!
Human sperm cells mitochondria use’s fructose instead of glucose for its fuel when all other somatic cells use glucose. The absence of insulin is evidence of the sperm introducing this sugar into the cell. I believe this is the root cause of metabolic syndrome. This question of why sperm use’s fructose has remained unanswered and until we understand what’s going on here we won’t conquer obesity and diabetes.
Thank you so much. While watching and admittedly not finishing the original video about fructose I had wished someone could create a video helping me understand. That video was definitely above my pay grade and I really appreciate you making it understandable!
great video, young man! I frequently "listen" to UA-cam health videos as I fall to sleep and I am a devoted fan of dr attia --- as you have indicated... dr attia's style is generally not for the ''lay person' (ME!) -- so mentally digesting (especially as I am in bed falling to sleep) is next-to-impossible -- i just try to glean one or two useful facts to bolster my heallth... YOUR video is OUTSTANDING in making ... things... simple ... Do MORE please!!!
THe only thing you missed here is that most of this Phosphorylation due to fructose happens in the LIVER, and is the primary cause of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, which is a problem on its own due to congestive dysfunction of other processes.
The best explanation of fructose I've heard. Hope you'll do more on this and similar topics a) because I'm interested in the subject and b) because you're quite nice to look at !
*NICE!* Direct, concise, and focused. Point by point, item by item, boom-boom-boom. I wish that more health-related videos were like Will’s. Many of other people’s videos ramble for an hour or more without saying much. SUBSCRIBED.
At 5:00, I don't think the fructose goes to cells as only the liver can process it. The liver metabolizes the fructose and something coming from the metabolisation goes to the cells. That's how I understand it. I think he skips the details here on purpose to simplify. I don't see how it could be the fructose that could do this effect directly as it's the whole problem of the fructose that only the liver can process it. So the muscles and other cells in our body never receive fructose themselves.
Important point! the fructose metabolism described here is indeed in the liver cells specifically. When you say only the liver metabolizes fructose, you are correct, but it is in the liver CELLS.
@@WillPeterson Interesting: so fructose would only promote fattening locally in the liver, since it never leaves the liver? And the rest of the overall fattening would just result from the increase in hunger and other nutrients (regular lipids and glucose)?
I am very happy with this video. But the number one point that I try to make with people, either Will Peterson did not mention or I missed it from not listening carefully. That point is, the sugar in fruit is identical to table sugar. Everything that Will Peterson said about fructose applies to eating fruit. Fruit can make you fat. Fruit can drive metabolic syndrome. Fruit can lower your energy output. Fruit can make you eat more than you really need to eat.
Good video Will. I heard Dr Johnson on the Dr Mercola podcast back about 9 years ago talking about fructose and how it helps animals gain weight for survival during winter, hibernation and migration. I knew he was right even back them because his theory of weight gain is the one which makes evolutionary sense. Although there are other factors in weight gain and metabolic disease, the fructose theory seems to be basically true. Dr Johnson may soon be a household name and I have been talking about him for a long time. It's good to see his work finally catching on, and thanks for the video!
I also really loved the historical and evolutionary explanations in his newest book. It all just makes so much sense. I feel like other authors and scientists (Gary Taubes, Jason Fung) have been circling this for years, but Dr. Johnson has truly solved it.
@@WillPeterson I have been telling everybody I know about Richard Johnson for about 8 years now, and even all of the low carb community but they never listen to me. Maybe they will now!
Excellent explanation. I listened intently to the Attia episode yet your diagrams and explanations were extremely helpful in crystalizing these reactions. Many thanks.
Thanks for this breakdown. My question has always been what about the fructose in fruit? Is it 100% fructose? Is this fructose as bad for you as High Fructose Corn Syrup? Are fruit drinks that are 100% fruit juice (from concentrate) as bad as drinking the high fructose corn syrup in soda? Can eating raw fruit/fructose be bad/too much? Thx for answering.
Here's my thought on fruit. Homo sapiens evolved in a nutrient scare environment. It was a challenge for us to even obtain our baseline calories. Fruit would only be ripe for a few weeks in the fall, and the fruit was less sweet than modern artificially selected fruit is. Even then, that fruit might have been fattening, but it was a GOOD thing. When a hungry hunter gatherer tribe stumbled upon some ripe fruit or honey in the fall, that is exactly what they wanted. If it fattened them up for winter, that improved their survivability. Nowadays, we have fat juicy ripe fruit available to us all the time. We have mutant medjool dates, which have 16 grams of sugar IN A SINGLE DATE. You can literally see the sugar crystals encrusting it. We have packaged fruit juice which allows us to drink four apples worth of juice in 5 minutes, without any of the fiber that normally comes in an apple to make us feel full, slow us down, and dampen the speed at which all that sugar gets into our blood stream. So are fruits evil? No. Is it ok for an other-wise healthy person to have a few fruits a day? probably. But should we be wise and selective about our fruit intake, preferring whole fruits over juices, and aiming for lower-sugar fruits (e.g. berries instead of bananas and dates)? YES.
I dig the seed oil hypothesis, but I recon there is some mechanistic overlap. Maybe involved with the conversion of glucose to fructose. That conversion I was unaware of.
Calories in Calories out is not a good model for humans . Type 1 diabetics will lose weight until death despite eating normally because they have no insulin . Humans will need considerably more calories when living in freezing conditions like the Arctic than they do in more temperate environments . The body is clever - if you restrict calories long term your body will just lower metabolism to compensate . Hence you get rebound obesity in calorie restricting dieters when they inevitably fall off the dietary wagon .
Totally agree. T1 diabetics are a great example, so is pregnancy. Pregnant women put on 30+ lbs without "trying". The body just subconsciously eats more and burns less. The caloric surplus is "true", but not very helpful. Calories in and calories out are more dependent variables than independent variables that we can control at will.
@@WillPeterson Thank you for your comment. I hadn't thought of the pregnancy situation before . Obviously calories count in the sense that no calories would lead to death and 10000calories would lead to morbid obesity and then death , but appetite , satiety, and type of calories are what really affect weight ( and health ) . Watching Professor Bickman recently I was reminded of the eating disorder amongst T1D's called Diabulimia where they lose weight by not injecting insulin . He mentions that even at 5000 kcal a day they do not put in weight . Obviously this is a dangerous disorder because the resulting high blood sugars will be catastrophic.
Yes CICO is irrelevant if you want to live a healthy life and achieve a good weight. You have to control something that is not in your direct control - hunger. Avoiding the evil white powders is the way to do that. Embrace the FAT.
It's both! Fructose is specifically metabolized in the liver... By the liver cells! So in the diagram of the cell processing fructose, this is specifically a liver cell.
@@WillPeterson thank you! 🙏 After your video, I went and watched the original podcast and was super impressed at your analysis, conclusion, and explanation.
A more detailed discussion would have been informative about the control of liver cell's "choice" to process ADP either to AMP > uric acid vs. rephosphorylation to a the ATP "full battery." Thanks - good explanation.
I don't know about this theory on salt. I don't see the Bears trying to eat potato chips before the winter. I can see dehydration but I don't think it is salt... I think sugar / fat production is what sucks up all the water in your body, but you don't know it. I say that because whenever I eat sugar.. I don't have to go to the bathroom, but get on Keto, I am on the toilet every 5 minutes.
I was wondering the same thing. I bet you are right about the fat production creating the high osmolality by taking water out of circulation. You can get the same effect by not drinking water, which raises the salt concentration. I think he says the high salt concentration is primarily a reflection of dehydration.
You know that chips are not part of the natural diet of bears dont you? Dehydration is the misnomer. Johnson is just saying that other things in the blood, salt amongst them has been shown to cause fructoneogenesis; which requires glucose to be in the blood. So sugars plus salt leads to lipogenesis. You have to ask if you are going to the bathroom because you are thirsty and drinking more, or because some provess is generating water from the burning of say glucose.
I am from greece and we have the best fruits in the world i believe ,i am eating up 2 kgs different fruit everyday and i have 12 %fat when i am cutting grains i am loosing more,fruits dosnt make u fat its a lie😂
I did research on fructose and metabolic syndrome, this is misleading. Those studies used too high fructose content in liquid form and usually above balanced energy intake. So in excess you will see adverse effect. And we could also see this effect due to modern diet that uses a lot of sugar containing fructose - full of processed oils with inflammatory effect due to its excess omega-6 content. So no, it isn't just fructose the main driving factor. It is several factors together that include fructose, while lacking essential nutrients that help our body functioning properly. Stop cherry picking and misleading people. There are frutarians who don't show metabolic diseases due to their fructose consumption in larger amounts, their health is negatively affected from the lack of other nutrients.
@1:46 High fructose corn syrup. Think about how prolific HFC is used in ultra processed and prepared foods. A single 12oz can of Coke contains 39 gr of fructose. Now picture a gamer sitting down for a 4-hour session while swilling down a liter of Mountain Dew and do the math.
Unfortunately to many see snippets. Fructose from fruit is NOT = High fructose sources aka added to drinks etc The alternative health groups do a poor job of defining proteins carbs and fats. Whole food is not Franken Foods too
Some say the dose makes the poison, but fructose is like an addictive drug to me. Just a taste triggers me to want more. It takes days for the cravings to stop after that. Too much glucose causes some conversion to fructose to help get the glucose out of the circulation. The entire 6 quarts of our bloodstream only wants 1 teaspoon of glucose in it at any given time. Any more has to be removed via insulin, stored as glycogen, or it is shunted through the polyol pathway to fructose. The body can easily make the 1 teaspoon of glucose it needs thru gluconeogenesis. Eating carbohydrates is unnecessary. We are designed to get all our nutritional needs from the meat and associated fat from ruminant animals. Our bodies are designed to process and use fat as our fuel. We have 4 organs for this: the liver makes bile (the detergent), a large gallbladder to store it, small intestine (lining cells store fat), and the pancreas (makes lipase enzyme). Small amounts of fructose, glucose, or lactose from dairy is OK, but most people don't or won't just eat a small amount.
It didn't, we did. Basically the entire produce section of the grocery store didn't exist 400 years ago. In fact barring the meat, dairy, and seafood department, almost everything was non existent even as little as 150 years ago. And less than 100 years ago pasturized milk was standard, which has ruined much of the nutriental value of milk and made it highly inflammatory.
@@Mwilke3789 wrong, fruits did existed before (what are u child or what) animals consumed them for spreading seeds, we made these fruits bigger and sweeter maybe, thats all
@@Mwilke3789 wrong, fruits did existed before (what are u child or what) animals consumed them for spreading seeds, we made these fruits bigger and sweeter maybe, thats all
The law of thermodynamics cannot apply to humans. We are an open system, and the law of thermodynamics refers to a closed system. Calories in calories out is not a real thing because calories are a measurement of heat and it’s impossible to burn heat. Plus the so-called calories on packaging can be bylaw up to 20% off up or down. Perhaps you should listen to Bart Kay
This is unnecessary complicated and short sighted. The answer is MODERATION! Fruits, berries etc. have OTHER benefits like anti oxidants. A piece of fruit a day won’t kill you . The other answer is calories in, calories out. Eliminate most forms of simple carbs, eat as much as you burn! And ramping down resting metabolism leads to life extension!
Check out dr. Stephen Gundry for another piece of the puzzle. He describes a whole new mechanism for ‘energy out’ that is also largely controlled by the types of food rather than the caloric quantity you consume.
Calories in - calories out is the 1st Law of Thermodynamics, not the Second. The Second Law says Entropy of the universe increases in all physical processes.
Because sometimes those outside the field of science take the time to learn it and are better at explaining it to others. It took people from outside the field to investigate and expose the fraud of the cholesterol/heart disease hypothesis. Granted there were plenty of scientists that objected to it from the start, but were ignored and often lost their income over it.
It’s amazing how much confusion and lack of information about human biology there is. Anyone see Paul the Carnivore MD stuff himself with fructose? He says fructose is good for you!
It would be interesting if he had a liver ultrasound to check for fatty liver disease. He may think his HbA1c is good, but the test doesn't detect glycosylation from fructose. Fructose is 7x more glycosylating than glucose.
@@lindabirmingham603 woman, check out bears liver with ultrasound for faty liver disease😅 It is natural for most animals to store seasonally fat around not only liver but all organs Humans just need to be more physically active , thats all You better wasting this time not for spamming about ultra sound but doing light push ups or gymnastics Then no ultra sound needed
So your going to tell us what the researchers has found in the latest regarding weight gain and your going to finish it up saying a calorie in IS the same as a calorie out. Isn’t that the notion that everyone had before all the research said that was wrong! No thanks, maybe your just doing a little play on words, but those words are the beginning of why our health has deteriorated. It’s not worth keeping it in our vocabulary. I’ll pass on this video!
Lets face it your talking a load of rubbish MATE , energy in energy out simple fat has twice the calories carbs and protein do that`s what makes one fat too much fat consumption is the problem . cut out fat and eat all the carbs fruit that contain (fructose) and lean protein consume that too , get some exercise and 99% of humans will lose weight easily . Your not making too much sense here...
There are many problems with calories in calories out . As a law of Thermodynamics it is true in a closed system but humans are in a dynamic situation . So if you walked 20 miles in the Arctic you will need a lot more calories than if you walked 20 miles in a moral normal environment. The biggest example of how Cal in Cal out is too simplistic for humans relates to type 1 diabetics . They have no insulin and will go on losing weight until death despite what they eat . Indeed there is an eating disorder amongst type 1 diabetics called Diabulimia where diabetics stop injecting insulin in order to lose weight . Even at 5000kcal a day they don't put on weight . Obviously the high blood sugars that result from this can be catastrophic. Best wishes ✌️
@@michaeldillon3113 Ok if your going to use extreme weather conditions and other factors such as temperature sure there will be other factors to consider here , but the simple facts are calories in calories out whatever the situation is now the golden rule seems to be approx 2000 calories generally speaking , give or take . One can eat a huge bowl of vegies and fruit adding up to that amount and providing total satiety or one can eat those calories in fat and not be full ghrelin still being present and therefore one not feeling full . please look up coach Greg Duecette he has great explanations on this topic.
@@billandmelpateverysinglech2150 If calories in calories out work for you then that's fine. If filling up on veg and fruit works for you then great . I think that ' eat less , move more ' has a success rate of about 5 per cent - which is a great success rate for WW and all the other Diet businesses that thrive on failure . For millions like me counting calories doesn't work and is a very unnatural way of living , and I believe counting calories has a an inaccuracy of about 20 per cent . I prefer the advice of people like Dr Jason Fung who even as a medical student thought it was odd that if calories in calories out was true then why did certain medical conditions like hyper/ hypothyroidism affect weight ? For me as a high wholegrain vegetarian I just got fatter and sicker despite exercising regularly and vigorously. I literally had no satiety . Since lowering my carbs ( particularly bread ) and taking up time restricted eating / IF I sometimes have to remember to eat . So other issues related to satiety and appetite are really important regarding weight control . I could list a stack of doctors - not least Dr Fung , Professor Ben Bickman , Dr Ken Berry , the Diet Doctor Community , the Low Carb Downunder community , amongst many who universally regard calories in / calories out as a failed strategy both for themselves and their patients . Attack insulin resistance and all else will follow . Leptin resistance is highly correlated with insulin resistance. Bringing down insulin reduces appetite . That has been my experience. That works for me . Best wishes .
So what. Few doctors know anything about the metabolism of fructose. They get little to no nutritional training. They believe the outdated hypothesis on fats causing heart disease, and are clueless about the functions of the various types of LDL. He did a great job of simplifying this information. Read some of the comments thanking him for this.
The podcast started great and Peter immediate drug it into the weeds w a non-stop Interrogation surrounding the minutia of his experiments and methods. I understand that it’s important but he lost most of the audience who isn’t interested or capable of following along. Plus it made the interview feel confrontational. I hate when the hosts don’t push back, but this just felt in unfocused grilling. Made for really bad radio.
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
The connection between uric acid and fructose and metabolic disease is fascinating.
I’m a pediatrician. The job you’re doing is great. The way you explain this complex issue should help even doctors to understand the significance of nutrition on our health!
I’m a biochemist… I think the most interesting part of the fructose story is the evolutionary genesis. Why did this happen and why are we different than other mammals. It’s a starvation survival tool that promotes foraging and fat storage. Tell that story in a follow up video. It’ll be a popular one if you do it in the same way you did this one. Good job.
Considering sources of fructose (I.e. fruits) were historically seasonal, it would make sense for your body to want to store as much of this energy as possible during the short window when this food resource is available.
the fact that no human exists with a working uricase gene seems to suggest that if it weren’t for that mutation, we may not have made it at some point in the distant past… And we’re paying for that now, thousands of years later! Amazing.
Until a human mutant that can manufacture vitamin C and degrade uric acid emerge.
That's an easy one. Except for Yogi the Bear, wild animals don't have McDonalds and Taco Bell to eat at every day! Plus, the fruit causes that negative feed back that self perpetuates the hunger for more fructose!
Human sperm cells mitochondria use’s fructose instead of glucose for its fuel when all other somatic cells use glucose. The absence of insulin is evidence of the sperm introducing this sugar into the cell. I believe this is the root cause of metabolic syndrome. This question of why sperm use’s fructose has remained unanswered and until we understand what’s going on here we won’t conquer obesity and diabetes.
Thank you so much. While watching and admittedly not finishing the original video about fructose I had wished someone could create a video helping me understand. That video was definitely above my pay grade and I really appreciate you making it understandable!
Happy to help!
I appreciate you making it understandable!
great video, young man! I frequently "listen" to UA-cam health videos as I fall to sleep and I am a devoted fan of dr attia --- as you have indicated... dr attia's style is generally not for the ''lay person' (ME!) -- so mentally digesting (especially as I am in bed falling to sleep) is next-to-impossible -- i just try to glean one or two useful facts to bolster my heallth... YOUR video is OUTSTANDING in making ... things... simple ... Do MORE please!!!
So important. Thank you for making this more accessible!
THe only thing you missed here is that most of this Phosphorylation due to fructose happens in the LIVER, and is the primary cause of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, which is a problem on its own due to congestive dysfunction of other processes.
I saw the original explanation but did not understand the biochemistry. This battery analogy makes it much easier.
The best explanation of fructose I've heard. Hope you'll do more on this and similar topics a) because I'm interested in the subject and b) because you're quite nice to look at !
Sounds like you also have a great start in the medical field! Great video.
*NICE!* Direct, concise, and focused. Point by point, item by item, boom-boom-boom. I wish that more health-related videos were like Will’s. Many of other people’s videos ramble for an hour or more without saying much. SUBSCRIBED.
Wow, that was a great summary
Thanks for the hard work and effort!
At 5:00, I don't think the fructose goes to cells as only the liver can process it. The liver metabolizes the fructose and something coming from the metabolisation goes to the cells. That's how I understand it. I think he skips the details here on purpose to simplify. I don't see how it could be the fructose that could do this effect directly as it's the whole problem of the fructose that only the liver can process it. So the muscles and other cells in our body never receive fructose themselves.
Important point! the fructose metabolism described here is indeed in the liver cells specifically. When you say only the liver metabolizes fructose, you are correct, but it is in the liver CELLS.
@@WillPeterson Interesting: so fructose would only promote fattening locally in the liver, since it never leaves the liver? And the rest of the overall fattening would just result from the increase in hunger and other nutrients (regular lipids and glucose)?
I am very happy with this video. But the number one point that I try to make with people, either Will Peterson did not mention or I missed it from not listening carefully. That point is, the sugar in fruit is identical to table sugar. Everything that Will Peterson said about fructose applies to eating fruit. Fruit can make you fat. Fruit can drive metabolic syndrome. Fruit can lower your energy output. Fruit can make you eat more than you really need to eat.
True. Negative effects are minimized due to fiber in whole fruit.
Good video Will. I heard Dr Johnson on the Dr Mercola podcast back about 9 years ago talking about fructose and how it helps animals gain weight for survival during winter, hibernation and migration. I knew he was right even back them because his theory of weight gain is the one which makes evolutionary sense.
Although there are other factors in weight gain and metabolic disease, the fructose theory seems to be basically true.
Dr Johnson may soon be a household name and I have been talking about him for a long time. It's good to see his work finally catching on, and thanks for the video!
I also really loved the historical and evolutionary explanations in his newest book. It all just makes so much sense. I feel like other authors and scientists (Gary Taubes, Jason Fung) have been circling this for years, but Dr. Johnson has truly solved it.
@@WillPeterson I have been telling everybody I know about Richard Johnson for about 8 years now, and even all of the low carb community but they never listen to me. Maybe they will now!
Winter in the tropics?.. Do Chimps and bonobos look obese? Do they hibernate?.
A most interesting presentation; thank you.
Fantastic Resume.. Congrats..
Awesome! Please make more videos like this
Excellent explanation. I listened intently to the Attia episode yet your diagrams and explanations were extremely helpful in crystalizing these reactions. Many thanks.
How does the activation of Polyol pathway cause mitochondria to produce ROS resulting in insulin resistance?
Thank you for making this video.
Great video thank you
Great stuff man! Thanks!
Thank you Will! Brilliant!🤗
Thanks for this breakdown. My question has always been what about the fructose in fruit? Is it 100% fructose? Is this fructose as bad for you as High Fructose Corn Syrup? Are fruit drinks that are 100% fruit juice (from concentrate) as bad as drinking the high fructose corn syrup in soda? Can eating raw fruit/fructose be bad/too much? Thx for answering.
Here's my thought on fruit. Homo sapiens evolved in a nutrient scare environment. It was a challenge for us to even obtain our baseline calories. Fruit would only be ripe for a few weeks in the fall, and the fruit was less sweet than modern artificially selected fruit is. Even then, that fruit might have been fattening, but it was a GOOD thing. When a hungry hunter gatherer tribe stumbled upon some ripe fruit or honey in the fall, that is exactly what they wanted. If it fattened them up for winter, that improved their survivability.
Nowadays, we have fat juicy ripe fruit available to us all the time. We have mutant medjool dates, which have 16 grams of sugar IN A SINGLE DATE. You can literally see the sugar crystals encrusting it. We have packaged fruit juice which allows us to drink four apples worth of juice in 5 minutes, without any of the fiber that normally comes in an apple to make us feel full, slow us down, and dampen the speed at which all that sugar gets into our blood stream.
So are fruits evil? No. Is it ok for an other-wise healthy person to have a few fruits a day? probably. But should we be wise and selective about our fruit intake, preferring whole fruits over juices, and aiming for lower-sugar fruits (e.g. berries instead of bananas and dates)? YES.
High fiber in fruits (not juice) helps to neutralize illeffect of fructose in fruits
Thanks for the explanation.
Thanks Will this was really helpful!
Been eating nothing but steak and fruits for the last year and ive leaned out a bit. Following carnivoreMD2s strat
Amazing video ❤ I watched the entire podcast but didn’t understand half of it 😅
What about Lactase btw? ☺️😊
Does it mean that you not supposed to eat any fructose before lifting? If fructose drains ATP it’s probably also not good to drink sports drinks.
You're a legend. First you explain backdoor and mega conversions to me, then when I need someone to explain glucose and fructose to me, there you are!
Ha! thanks bro! 😁
So the source of the fructose is irrelevant? What about fruit?
I dig the seed oil hypothesis, but I recon there is some mechanistic overlap. Maybe involved with the conversion of glucose to fructose. That conversion I was unaware of.
Brilliantly simple explanation!
Fructokinase only exists in liver cells. Other cells don't process fructose.
Yes, very important point!
Calories in Calories out is not a good model for humans . Type 1 diabetics will lose weight until death despite eating normally because they have no insulin . Humans will need considerably more calories when living in freezing conditions like the Arctic than they do in more temperate environments . The body is clever - if you restrict calories long term your body will just lower metabolism to compensate . Hence you get rebound obesity in calorie restricting dieters when they inevitably fall off the dietary wagon .
Totally agree. T1 diabetics are a great example, so is pregnancy. Pregnant women put on 30+ lbs without "trying". The body just subconsciously eats more and burns less. The caloric surplus is "true", but not very helpful. Calories in and calories out are more dependent variables than independent variables that we can control at will.
@@WillPeterson Thank you for your comment. I hadn't thought of the pregnancy situation before . Obviously calories count in the sense that no calories would lead to death and 10000calories would lead to morbid obesity and then death , but appetite , satiety, and type of calories are what really affect weight ( and health ) .
Watching Professor Bickman recently I was reminded of the eating disorder amongst T1D's called Diabulimia where they lose weight by not injecting insulin . He mentions that even at 5000 kcal a day they do not put in weight . Obviously this is a dangerous disorder because the resulting high blood sugars will be catastrophic.
Yes CICO is irrelevant if you want to live a healthy life and achieve a good weight. You have to control something that is not in your direct control - hunger. Avoiding the evil white powders is the way to do that. Embrace the FAT.
That was great thank you 🙏
First video with you and I'm subscribing. Question: what happened to the narrative that the fructose goes to the liver instead of the cells?
It's both! Fructose is specifically metabolized in the liver... By the liver cells! So in the diagram of the cell processing fructose, this is specifically a liver cell.
@@WillPeterson thank you! 🙏 After your video, I went and watched the original podcast and was super impressed at your analysis, conclusion, and explanation.
You are great
Fantastic summary!!
I'll just watch Dr. Attia's podcast
You definitely should! It's great
Damn so good! 😍🤝 This presentation is so damn good and now i just want to start pursuing medical school again! 💯💯💯🔥🔥🔥 More!!!
So is the same with fruit ?, as people do a lot of tests with fructose corn syrup what is totally different !
Top video 💪🔥🔥
Thanks!!!!!!
A more detailed discussion would have been informative about the control of liver cell's "choice" to process ADP either to AMP > uric acid vs. rephosphorylation to a the ATP "full battery." Thanks - good explanation.
awesome - thanks
How can you say calories in equals calories out?
On your diagram some calories stay inside the body and so do not come out.
There is a name for when calories don't come out, it's called getting fat 🙃
@@farhat5325 exactly
Calories in = calories stored + calories out
Great explanation
I don't know about this theory on salt. I don't see the Bears trying to eat potato chips before the winter. I can see dehydration but I don't think it is salt... I think sugar / fat production is what sucks up all the water in your body, but you don't know it. I say that because whenever I eat sugar.. I don't have to go to the bathroom, but get on Keto, I am on the toilet every 5 minutes.
I was wondering the same thing. I bet you are right about the fat production creating the high osmolality by taking water out of circulation. You can get the same effect by not drinking water, which raises the salt concentration. I think he says the high salt concentration is primarily a reflection of dehydration.
You know that chips are not part of the natural diet of bears dont you? Dehydration is the misnomer. Johnson is just saying that other things in the blood, salt amongst them has been shown to cause fructoneogenesis; which requires glucose to be in the blood. So sugars plus salt leads to lipogenesis. You have to ask if you are going to the bathroom because you are thirsty and drinking more, or because some provess is generating water from the burning of say glucose.
OMG, all that good work then you go CICO.
I did the opposite! My conclusion was that CICO may be technically true, but it's causally useless.
@@WillPeterson CICO is BS.
I am from greece and we have the best fruits in the world i believe ,i am eating up 2 kgs different fruit everyday and i have 12 %fat when i am cutting grains i am loosing more,fruits dosnt make u fat its a lie😂
I did research on fructose and metabolic syndrome, this is misleading. Those studies used too high fructose content in liquid form and usually above balanced energy intake. So in excess you will see adverse effect. And we could also see this effect due to modern diet that uses a lot of sugar containing fructose - full of processed oils with inflammatory effect due to its excess omega-6 content. So no, it isn't just fructose the main driving factor. It is several factors together that include fructose, while lacking essential nutrients that help our body functioning properly. Stop cherry picking and misleading people. There are frutarians who don't show metabolic diseases due to their fructose consumption in larger amounts, their health is negatively affected from the lack of other nutrients.
Is this chap 14 years old?
🤣
@1:46 High fructose corn syrup. Think about how prolific HFC is used in ultra processed and prepared foods. A single 12oz can of Coke contains 39 gr of fructose. Now picture a gamer sitting down for a 4-hour session while swilling down a liter of Mountain Dew and do the math.
Another book on this is "Drop Acid" by David Perlmutter.
Brilliant
Elite cyclists take up to 140g sugar per hour in race containing up to 70g fructose per hour and stay lean. So it depends on the energy demand.
100% fruit juice is not a health food.
low-fat yogurt is a joke
Unfortunately to many see snippets.
Fructose from fruit is NOT = High fructose sources aka added to drinks etc
The alternative health groups do a poor job of defining proteins carbs and fats. Whole food is not Franken Foods too
Thank you. Watched the original. Too deep for me
I'm happy it was helpful for ya! Cheers!
10:53 now that’s how you 🍒pick
Get Paul saladino in here 😂
soo fructose always bad. Glucose sometimes good
Some say the dose makes the poison, but fructose is like an addictive drug to me. Just a taste triggers me to want more. It takes days for the cravings to stop after that.
Too much glucose causes some conversion to fructose to help get the glucose out of the circulation. The entire 6 quarts of our bloodstream only wants 1 teaspoon of glucose in it at any given time. Any more has to be removed via insulin, stored as glycogen, or it is shunted through the polyol pathway to fructose.
The body can easily make the 1 teaspoon of glucose it needs thru gluconeogenesis. Eating carbohydrates is unnecessary. We are designed to get all our nutritional needs from the meat and associated fat from ruminant animals. Our bodies are designed to process and use fat as our fuel. We have 4 organs for this: the liver makes bile (the detergent), a large gallbladder to store it, small intestine (lining cells store fat), and the pancreas (makes lipase enzyme).
Small amounts of fructose, glucose, or lactose from dairy is OK, but most people don't or won't just eat a small amount.
Then why nature has created fruits,??
It didn't, we did. Basically the entire produce section of the grocery store didn't exist 400 years ago. In fact barring the meat, dairy, and seafood department, almost everything was non existent even as little as 150 years ago. And less than 100 years ago pasturized milk was standard, which has ruined much of the nutriental value of milk and made it highly inflammatory.
@@Mwilke3789 wrong, fruits did existed before (what are u child or what) animals consumed them for spreading seeds, we made these fruits bigger and sweeter maybe, thats all
@@Mwilke3789 wrong, fruits did existed before (what are u child or what) animals consumed them for spreading seeds, we made these fruits bigger and sweeter maybe, thats all
Sorry to nit pick, but fructose is a 5 sided ring.
Why don´t we all get us some DNP and the fuc... problem is solved?
The law of thermodynamics cannot apply to humans. We are an open system, and the law of thermodynamics refers to a closed system. Calories in calories out is not a real thing because calories are a measurement of heat and it’s impossible to burn heat. Plus the so-called calories on packaging can be bylaw up to 20% off up or down. Perhaps you should listen to Bart Kay
I was thinking the same thing. Especially regarding proteins which are primarily used to synthesize more proteins.
Have you ever seen a youtuber who eats only fruit????? They are NOT fat, but very thin!!!!
This is unnecessary complicated and short sighted. The answer is MODERATION! Fruits, berries etc. have OTHER benefits like anti oxidants. A piece of fruit a day won’t kill you . The other answer is calories in, calories out. Eliminate most forms of simple carbs, eat as much as you burn! And ramping down resting metabolism leads to life extension!
Check out dr. Stephen Gundry for another piece of the puzzle. He describes a whole new mechanism for ‘energy out’ that is also largely controlled by the types of food rather than the caloric quantity you consume.
Gundry is a bit of a fake. Some stuff he says is true, but he tends to bend the facts. Robert Lustig is more reliable and balanced.
Fruit loop
You've cut your pandemic hair!
Calories in - calories out is the 1st Law of Thermodynamics, not the Second. The Second Law says Entropy of the universe increases in all physical processes.
Why would anyone listen to some financial guy talk about science?
I'm not even a financial guy! No one should listen to me about finances either.
Because sometimes those outside the field of science take the time to learn it and are better at explaining it to others.
It took people from outside the field to investigate and expose the fraud of the cholesterol/heart disease hypothesis. Granted there were plenty of scientists that objected to it from the start, but were ignored and often lost their income over it.
It’s amazing how much confusion and lack of information about human biology there is. Anyone see Paul the Carnivore MD stuff himself with fructose? He says fructose is good for you!
Sounds like a nutter
It would be interesting if he had a liver ultrasound to check for fatty liver disease. He may think his HbA1c is good, but the test doesn't detect glycosylation from fructose. Fructose is 7x more glycosylating than glucose.
@@lindabirmingham603 woman, check out bears liver with ultrasound for faty liver disease😅
It is natural for most animals to store seasonally fat around not only liver but all organs
Humans just need to be more physically active , thats all
You better wasting this time not for spamming about ultra sound but doing light push ups or gymnastics
Then no ultra sound needed
Calories in vs out is the 1st law of thermodynamics.
Dang good catch.
Lie....
So your going to tell us what the researchers has found in the latest regarding weight gain and your going to finish it up saying a calorie in IS the same as a calorie out. Isn’t that the notion that everyone had before all the research said that was wrong! No thanks, maybe your just doing a little play on words, but those words are the beginning of why our health has deteriorated. It’s not worth keeping it in our vocabulary. I’ll pass on this video!
Maybe you should do a bit more research yourself before passing on this video. You could check out dr. Johnson's many interviews or his lecture.
Lets face it your talking a load of rubbish MATE , energy in energy out simple fat has twice the calories carbs and protein do that`s what makes one fat too much fat consumption is the problem . cut out fat and eat all the carbs fruit that contain (fructose) and lean protein consume that too , get some exercise and 99% of humans will lose weight easily . Your not making too much sense here...
There are many problems with calories in calories out . As a law of Thermodynamics it is true in a closed system but humans are in a dynamic situation . So if you walked 20 miles in the Arctic you will need a lot more calories than if you walked 20 miles in a moral normal environment.
The biggest example of how Cal in Cal out is too simplistic for humans relates to type 1 diabetics . They have no insulin and will go on losing weight until death despite what they eat . Indeed there is an eating disorder amongst type 1 diabetics called Diabulimia where diabetics stop injecting insulin in order to lose weight . Even at 5000kcal a day they don't put on weight . Obviously the high blood sugars that result from this can be catastrophic. Best wishes ✌️
@@michaeldillon3113 Ok but your comparing apples and oranges here pardon the pun ..
@@billandmelpateverysinglech2150 In what way is this an apple and orange situation ?
@@michaeldillon3113 Ok if your going to use extreme weather conditions and other factors such as temperature sure there will be other factors to consider here , but the simple facts are calories in calories out whatever the situation is now the golden rule seems to be approx 2000 calories generally speaking , give or take . One can eat a huge bowl of vegies and fruit adding up to that amount and providing total satiety or one can eat those calories in fat and not be full ghrelin still being present and therefore one not feeling full . please look up coach Greg Duecette he has great explanations on this topic.
@@billandmelpateverysinglech2150 If calories in calories out work for you then that's fine. If filling up on veg and fruit works for you then great . I think that ' eat less , move more ' has a success rate of about 5 per cent - which is a great success rate for WW and all the other Diet businesses that thrive on failure . For millions like me counting calories doesn't work and is a very unnatural way of living , and I believe counting calories has a an inaccuracy of about 20 per cent . I prefer the advice of people like Dr Jason Fung who even as a medical student thought it was odd that if calories in calories out was true then why did certain medical conditions like hyper/ hypothyroidism affect weight ? For me as a high wholegrain vegetarian I just got fatter and sicker despite exercising regularly and vigorously. I literally had no satiety . Since lowering my carbs ( particularly bread ) and taking up time restricted eating / IF I sometimes have to remember to eat . So other issues related to satiety and appetite are really important regarding weight control . I could list a stack of doctors - not least Dr Fung , Professor Ben Bickman , Dr Ken Berry , the Diet Doctor Community , the Low Carb Downunder community , amongst many who universally regard calories in / calories out as a failed strategy both for themselves and their patients . Attack insulin resistance and all else will follow . Leptin resistance is highly correlated with insulin resistance. Bringing down insulin reduces appetite . That has been my experience. That works for me . Best wishes .
NOOOOO, go back to giving financial advice. you arent a doctor
So what. Few doctors know anything about the metabolism of fructose. They get little to no nutritional training. They believe the outdated hypothesis on fats causing heart disease, and are clueless about the functions of the various types of LDL.
He did a great job of simplifying this information. Read some of the comments thanking him for this.
Doctors know nothing about nutrition. They learn everything from pharmaceutical reps who want to sell pills to fix what the doctors have broken.
The podcast started great and Peter immediate drug it into the weeds w a non-stop Interrogation surrounding the minutia of his experiments and methods.
I understand that it’s important but he lost most of the audience who isn’t interested or capable of following along. Plus it made the interview feel confrontational. I hate when the hosts don’t push back, but this just felt in unfocused grilling. Made for really bad radio.