Quote: Bangers
This thread makes no sense to me.
I intentionally take dextrose after a ride/workout - it has the highest GI giving the quickest and biggest insulin boost to halt the catabolic phase and begin anabolism or repair.
Dextrose/glucose/fructose are all simple sugars. Sucrose is two of them put together ie, essentially the same thing. Sucrose is typically glucose + fructose, so to be ok with sucrose but not fructose doesn't make sense to me.
I don't think they should have sugar at all, I like to choose what I eat. But then they would taste like ass.
Yep, that's what we're saying. Glucose/dextrose is what we want. Sucrose (ie glucose & fructose) is what we don't want and that's what they've just added to the formula. Hopefully if they get enough complaints or loss in sales they'll revert back to the previous formula without the sucrose in it.
Fructose, which is half of sucrose, may very well be the main cause of the obesity epidemic as well as countless other medical problems including high cholesterol, tooth decay, fatty liver disease, gout, arthritis, type 2 diabetes, hypertension, kidney and heart disease. Plus it's well known to play havoc with our natural appetite control mechanisms and it's addictive. As endurance athletes, sugar is a terrible energy source because it's well known to give a short term rush followed by a bigger crash. Basically our bodies just haven't evolved to deal with fructose properly. Glucose on the other hand is fine.
David Gillespie has rounded up heaps of research at http://www.sweetpoison.com.au/ or just google "fructose" + any of the abovementioned diseases for masses of data backing it up. There really does seem to be a "big sugar" conspiracy.
