Off the top of my head, a large part of his problem seems to be the need to overdramatize issues like this.
If he's that biorythmically dependant upon sugar, then the likely problem is that he's not getting sufficient sugar elsewhere in his diet. He could reduce the sugar in his tea while adding fruit and likely achieve the same end more effectively (while upping fibre intake, for example).
But phrasing this as a problem of addiction to a "poison" is a loaded approach that closes off less dramatic and likely much more effective measures. And honestly, if his weight's not a problem, then relax and enjoy your addiction--you could have it a lot worse :)
Just a sidenote: fruits are carby, so you still have the same problem if you replace wheat/sugar with fruit. They are slightly better for you because of the balance of fiber, but if you just replace wheat and sugar for fruit you are likely to end up similar health issues.
Even though an apple might have up to half the sugar of a 12-oz can of Coca-Cola, somehow it affects my body completely differently.
From a Coke, you feel the stimulation and then the drop in energy afterwards.
An apple just makes me feel good. There's no over-stimulation like sugar, and no drop in energy afterwards.
It's well known that the body processes sugars in foods very differently (sodas, honey, fruits, etc.). Unfortunately, not much is known about why or how, from what I know.
But something to keep in mind: humans have been eating fruits, presumably as long as we've existed. Drinks and desserts with concentrated cane sugar is a new thing. It wouldn't be surprising if evolution has adapted us well to the former (in moderation), but not that latter.
Yes, it is harder to overeat or get addicted on natural fresh fruits, and there's less of a negative effect. But if you do, you're still back to square one: significant insulin spikes, a tendency to turn those calories to fat just like pure sugar, and some of the detrimental health effects mentioned in the article.
You mentioned honey, and I don't know which group you assigned it to, but many people make this mistake: honey is "natural", but it is every bit as pure and unhealthy a sugar as high fructose corn syrup, or similar.
Definitely not -- a Coke stimulates for maybe an hour, then leaves you with less energy for around an hour. Like everything else with lots of processed sugar.
Whereas caffeine stimulates for several hours, and I never feel less energy afterwards with caffeine.
The fiber present in fruit blunts the impact of the sugars they contain (addressing the "quality" issue I mentioned elsewhere). Fruits differ strongly in their glycemic indices (apples are low, grapes tend to be high), so they're not all the same. That said, whole fruit (as opposed to juice, in which much of the fiber is removed) is a reasonably good food choice. Especially for breakfast or post-workout.
>The fiber present in fruit blunts the impact of the sugars they contain (addressing the "quality" issue I mentioned elsewhere).
Some, but not enough to discount the fact that it is essentially sugar you're eating.
>That said, whole fruit (as opposed to juice, in which much of the fiber is removed) is a reasonably good food choice. Especially for breakfast or post-workout.
I think that's problematic though. People use fruit as a food choice, a mainstay of their diet, thinking it's healthy because it's "natural" or a similar line of reasoning. But it's still sugar and needs to be eaten sparingly just like candy or cake. A lot of fruits have a GI of candy bars, and almost all are in the blood sugar disrupting range of starches, refined wheat, etc, that should be eaten in very limited quantifies. For breakfast, that depends, if you are eating it with a lot of protein and fat, and it's a small amount, sure. But just eating mostly fruit for breakfast is a bad idea.
"Some, but not enough to discount the fact that it is essentially sugar you're eating."
I have to respectfully disagree with you about fruits. Fruit is more than just sugar, it's a source of vitamins and minerals and it should not intentionally be limited from your diet. Of course you need to eat a variety of different fruits (and vegetables).
"A lot of fruits have a GI of candy bars..."
Can you give some examples?
A piece of fruit and a candy bar are not nutritionally equivalent even if they share the same GI. In fact, most fruits are low in GI. See for yourself by going to the University of Sydney GI database.
We all need to eat fruit and vegetables daily as part of a healthy diet. It's misleading to claim that fruit can cause health issues or should be limited in your diet without providing evidence to back it up.
Even people with Type 2 diabetes are not discouraged from eating fruits. See the advice here for example from Diabetes UK (a charity). They are a credible and trustworthy source of advice for people with diabetes in the UK.
One final link, a 2011 report from Cancer Research UK found that over 40% of cancers diagnosed in the UK were from avoidable lifestyle choices. For men, the number one culprit was tobacco. Number two culprit? Lack of fruit and vegetables in the diet.
> Fruit is more than just sugar, it's a source of vitamins and minerals and it should not intentionally be limited from your diet.
You can dump a bunch of vitamins into a bottle of coke, that doesn't mean you can eat it without limit and remain healthy. The carbs are still there, and if fruit makes up a significant number of the calories you intake, you are going to have all the same problems you have when you eat a large number of carbs per day from other sources like candy and pasta, just to a somewhat lesser degree. With fruit, you still don't want to go over the daily number of carbs (~40).
>Even people with Type 2 diabetes are not discouraged from eating fruits. See the advice here for example from Diabetes UK (a charity). They are a credible and trustworthy source of advice for people with diabetes in the UK.
First of all, the site you listed is fairly low quality and significantly out of date:
>All fruit and vegetables are low in fat and calories and a good source of vitamins and minerals.
This isn't the nineties. Fat isn't considered bad for you according to any modern scientific theory except to some degree in relationship to heart disease, and for diabetes patients, is beneficial because it helps stabilize your blood sugar.
Secondly, yes, you should eat small amounts of fruit per day and large amounts of vegetables a day. I never claimed otherwise but the site simply fails to point out that fruit should be taken in significantly lesser quantities than vegetables.
>A piece of fruit and a candy bar are not nutritionally equivalent even if they share the same GI. In fact, most fruits are low in GI. See for yourself by going to the University of Sydney GI database.
Searching for individual foods is a terrible way to compare GI levels. And no, most fruit is not "low in GI", most are high and compare to starchy foods and even candy, as I stated earlier. Fruits like tomatoes that are not sugary/starchy are considered vegetables btw.
>Number two culprit? Lack of fruit and vegetables in the diet.
That's somewhat irrelevant. It's the combination of fruits and vegetables that keeps you healthy, and honestly, you probably could do without sugary fruits entirely if you ate enough quantity and variety of vegetables. It's the fresh plant material rich in minerals/vitamins that's good for you. In any case, small amounts of fruit should be sufficient to add nutritional value and not pose a risk, just as small amounts candy shouldn't pose a risk if eat in very small doses.
If he's that biorythmically dependant upon sugar, then the likely problem is that he's not getting sufficient sugar elsewhere in his diet. He could reduce the sugar in his tea while adding fruit and likely achieve the same end more effectively (while upping fibre intake, for example).
But phrasing this as a problem of addiction to a "poison" is a loaded approach that closes off less dramatic and likely much more effective measures. And honestly, if his weight's not a problem, then relax and enjoy your addiction--you could have it a lot worse :)