Wow Bill… that was a rather unpleasant response.
All my replies have been genuine, and my way of thinking through everything you have said, but it looks like you took it the wrong way.
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
justmarvin wrote:But yet you also said “There was no intention of an implication that the muscles can’t use what was once ever fructose someplace else in the body but is glucose now when reaching the muscle.” It sounds like a contradiction but maybe i’m not understanding right, would you please clarify? thanks.
I said the muscles can’t use fructose. They use glucose (in terms of what sugar they use.)
You replied that well they can use fructose because the liver can convert fructose to glucose.
I replied Well they are using glucose then, aren’t they, not fructose, they themselves can’t use fructose. By the way, generally the glucose that had been fructose spends considerable time stored as glycogen before being released as glucose, rather than being promptly delivered.
There was no reason for you to take my statement as supposedly now supporting any belief that consuming fructose results in rapid delivery of similar or large amounts of glucose to the bloodstream relevant to the purposes of a a PWO drink, which is the context we’re talking about. It does not. But instead you post that supposedly I’m contradicting myself.[/quote]
I reread what I posted as it’s been some time now, and apparently – you need to reread it too.
Why are you saying that I said that you are (in your own words:)“supporting any belief that consuming fructose results in rapid delivery of similar or large amounts of glucose to the bloodstream”? I did not say that you are saying that! And that is not the “contradiction” that I questioned you about, and I said it “sounded” to me like a contradiction and was asking if you can “please” clarify. Instead you decide to step on your soap box.
I read my post and the one that sounded like a contradiction to me are the two things I quoted you side by side.
And basically wondering from the start of all of this - why people claim that Fructose is more likely to turn to fat than being used to refill muscle glycogen stores - especially Post Workout if there is a need for the muscles to be replenished, why wouldn’t the body convert fructose to glucose to refill muscle glycogen stores…
And in practical application, the reason I ask, is because I drink a couple tablespoons of raw honey and grape juice with whey protein for my PWO. A good amount of fructose in there apparently. So I am asking not just for debate… but because I want to know because that is what I am taking. But as of yet, I have not heard a clear cut reason to justify the prominent notion that fructose will more likely be turned to fat than to be used for muscle glycogen…
First of all, that is just messed up. “Mistaken assupmtion that [I] am asking questions to try to learn.” Again, I say that all my questions were genuine and my way of thinking through everything you said.
Second of all, I was NOT arguing back about fat conversion, I basically said that every definition I read online has Fat conversion in the definition of gluconeogenesis and was wondering why that was. It was more a question than a statement of fact, that’s why I said “im not sure myself.”
Third of all, why do you say “what value was there to you in my having provided the information?” as if I had no right to inquire about it due to some higly reputable stated information, when your information in this matter was quite frankly, and I quote: “What?!? No, fat cannot. As I said, some amino acids can, some cannot.”
Well the fat-to-glucose is besides the point, it was mentioned in brief passing, clearly not the issue and not the bulk of what i was asking… but it’s not me who is putting it in the limelight right now. Clearly my questioning was on fructose.
[quote]I just don’t know where this is getting.
I’ve explained very adequately I think and as well gave you a link to a quite good article which should answer all your questions.[/quote]
Why can’t you just be straight forward and cut to the chase with your main points and then cite the link url for support? Instead you give me a 18 page study to read. Not to mention, that the study “Fructose, insulin resistance, and metabolic dyslipidemia” isn’t very reader friendly nor interesting to anyone that’s not an MD or enjoys reading medical textbook format. I did look at it, and it has a section that talks about fructose turning to fat (what I was interested in) reduced insulin sensitivity, etc. but that’s not really in the context of the bodybuilder especially Post workout when the muscle is in need of glycogen, is it? So why would fructose still be inclined to be converted to fat?? vs. Glucose for muscle glycogen…
[quote]I’m not trying to be short or dismissive, it’s just that there is no point in being way repetitious particularly when clear statements are being argued with and by means of word play made to be supposedly wrong, e.g., arguing that muscle is able to use fructose contrary to my statement, when in fact it still is glucose that they are using (or fatty acids derived from fructose metabolism, to be more complete.)
You can make that “wrong” if you want on your argument that they are able to use what once was fructose but now it not, or say I am contradicting myself, but really dealing with that is just not the kind of thing I want to do.[/quote]
Again, you are misunderstanding, I am not nitpicking or trying to wordplay…
Anyway, I really don’t like the tone of your reply… but, I won’t take it personally.
JM