Its not that similar. Their digestive tracts are especially different. The fruit chimps eat in the wild are so high in fiber they'd be inedible to most people
That is a known fact, there are even books or diet advices that work around fiber to slow down the metabolism of especially short chained (simple) carbohydrates like sugars. You might want to look into the book 'glucose revolution' by Jessie inchauspe, it helps to grasp some basics about the scientific background and shows some data from some experiments that changed glucose levels in the bloodstream.
However there are some changes in botanics and food processing and many people 'prefer' sweet things to eat so there are many fruits that have been crossed or modified over the years to have higher fructose levels compared to their fibres and many microwave dishes sweets or drinks include lots of sugar, way more then recommended. I think one of the better and more recent papers in that field (that received funding not from shady sugar lobbies) was recommending no more then 25 g of daily sugar intake for adults, which is way less than most government health recommendations.
How is this new information? This is why wholemeal is better than white bread and why carrot cakes/courgette brownies are more healthy than their lower fibre counterparts.
>trusting information on your health from something that wants you dead
It's a bad idea when it's your government and it's also a bad idea when it's a computer.
Your intestinal wall will be blocked by fiber in the case of fruit or other fibrous carb sources like oats or legumes. The wall is what absorbs your food. As the food is moving through your intestine it will naturally expose digestible matter in a gradual way, whereas with no fiber it will be more rapidly absorbed.
If you eat a snickers bar and then down some psyllium husk you may get some reduction in absorption. However, because there is virtually no fiber in the structure of the snickers bar, you should expect less surface area of the chewed bar to be covered with non-digestible fiber. It might be a different story if you mash up a snickers bar in a bowl of something very fibrous to better distribute the fiber
are you schizo? Why are you doing all this BS instead of just eating fruit like a normal person, are you moronic?
>critical thinking and problem solving skills le bad
fpbp, op needs to start fruitmaxxing
i find it really cool just how similar chimps and humans bodies are
he has the same muscles as me, isn't that crazy?
Its not that similar. Their digestive tracts are especially different. The fruit chimps eat in the wild are so high in fiber they'd be inedible to most people
it's for rare occasions when you want to eat some pie or candy
Or Candy's pie.
Fiber supplements don't prevent herpes.
unironically the "blood sugar queen" or whoever basically advocates for eating how you want as long as you do protein/fiber first
>Eating fruit does contain natural sugars
So this is the power of artificial intelligence.
Are you an idiot
Fruit contains natural sugars. Eating fruit is an activity. Now have a nice day.
That is a known fact, there are even books or diet advices that work around fiber to slow down the metabolism of especially short chained (simple) carbohydrates like sugars. You might want to look into the book 'glucose revolution' by Jessie inchauspe, it helps to grasp some basics about the scientific background and shows some data from some experiments that changed glucose levels in the bloodstream.
However there are some changes in botanics and food processing and many people 'prefer' sweet things to eat so there are many fruits that have been crossed or modified over the years to have higher fructose levels compared to their fibres and many microwave dishes sweets or drinks include lots of sugar, way more then recommended. I think one of the better and more recent papers in that field (that received funding not from shady sugar lobbies) was recommending no more then 25 g of daily sugar intake for adults, which is way less than most government health recommendations.
>believing all info from chat bots unconditionally
Lol, lmao even
How is this new information? This is why wholemeal is better than white bread and why carrot cakes/courgette brownies are more healthy than their lower fibre counterparts.
>trusting information on your health from something that wants you dead
It's a bad idea when it's your government and it's also a bad idea when it's a computer.
I doubt added sugar is gonna be regulated by added fiber. Sugar stuck in fruit bonded with fiber will be slow to absorb, obviously.
how does your stomach know the difference
Your intestinal wall will be blocked by fiber in the case of fruit or other fibrous carb sources like oats or legumes. The wall is what absorbs your food. As the food is moving through your intestine it will naturally expose digestible matter in a gradual way, whereas with no fiber it will be more rapidly absorbed.
If you eat a snickers bar and then down some psyllium husk you may get some reduction in absorption. However, because there is virtually no fiber in the structure of the snickers bar, you should expect less surface area of the chewed bar to be covered with non-digestible fiber. It might be a different story if you mash up a snickers bar in a bowl of something very fibrous to better distribute the fiber
The sugar in fruit is stuck in the cells of the fruit. Added sugar is pure purified molecules of fricking sugar. You gotta digest the fruit
If fiber stops sugar absorption why does bread make you fat
It doesn't stop absorption
doesn't work. the sugar needs to be contained within the fiber. if you consume them separately, you'll just absorb the sugar instantly.
You’re wrong
https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZT8sXrojk/
Ketolard logic
moron, fiber is in everything why would you supplement something like that