Talk:Fructose malabsorption
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is supported by the WikiProject on Medical Genetics, which gives a central approach to Medical genetics and related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article Fructose malabsorption, or visit the project page for more details on the projects. |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at the doctor's mess. |
| Start | This page has been rated as start-Class on the quality assessment scale |
| Mid | This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance assessment scale |
Contents |
[edit] Fructose Table
A note in the USDA Matthews et. al. (1987) report on the Sugar Content of Selected foods indicates that the values in the report are superceded by the USDA Nutrition Database SR16 and SR16 has now been superceded by SR20. The values in the modified table are taken from SR20 and show the values of fructose and glucose. Food items with no values were removed as they are now mentioned elsewhere (see the Dietary section) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.11.51.185 (talk) 16:48, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Spelt
Sue Shepherd (scroll down) researches Fructose Malabsorbtion and informed me (in a group session for people with the disorder) that spelt has a similar fructans content to wheat and should be avoided. Is there a reference stating that spelt is ok, or is my information otherwise out of date?
Fructose malabsorption is also called dietary fructose intolerance. University of Iowa - Health Care has more information about this disorder.[1]
Why dont you incorporate this info into the article? Could become more than a stub this way. Dbach 12:54, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
They are not the same thing. They have different causes, different symptoms, and different medical diagnosis. However, I'll add a link as I recall their information is still useful. --Couttsie 01:29, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Fructose-Free Products?
I've had a hard time pinpointing foods that have fructose. One source said wheat flour was alright as long as it wasn't whole grain wheat flour. But this site says wheat flour has fructose. Anyone know of a comprehensive list of fructose-free foods? It would be a great link to add here!
A good source of fructose content is Nutrient Data Laboratory Home Page http://www.ars.usda.gov/main/site_main.htm?modecode=12354500
The link in the previous enter is no longer valid. Try http://www.uihealthcare.com/topics/medicaldepartments/foodandnutrition/dfi/index.html
[edit] Coconut Milk
Cocunut milk is listed as a high fructose containing food. The National Public Health Institute of Finland (http://www.fineli.fi/food.php?foodid=29014&lang=en) does not support this observation.
Can some please provide a reference that supports the high fructose content of coconut milk?
Medical Observer in Australia lists a reference to coconut milk http://www.medicalobserver.com.au/displayarticle/index.asp?articleID=6260&templateID=108§ionID=0§ionName=
Unfortunately the author of the Australia article appears to be some what misinformed. Under 'Other' wheat is listed. According to the USDA database 100 grams of whole wheat flour has about 0.4 grams of sugar AND enriched white flour has 1.12 grams of sugar of which 0.03 grams free glucose and 0.3 grams of free fructose. Wheat is definitely not a high fructose food compared to 100 grams of honey which has 82 grams of sugar of which 36 grams is free glucose and 41 grams of free fructose OR 100 grams of pears contains 9.8 grams of sugars of which 2.8 grams is free glucose and 6.2 gram is free fructose. (by free I mean glucose and fructose and bounded together in equal amounts in the form of sucrose).
A search of the research literature using the ISI database revealed nothing that supports fructans as a problem in fructose malabsorption. Also, there is no mention of fructans in relationship to IBS in Skoog, S. M. and A. E. Bharucha, 2004: Dietary Fructose and Gastrointestinal Symptoms: A Review. American Journal of Gastroenterology, 99, 2046-2050. http://www.bashaar.org.il/files/101022005111814.pdf
[edit] Fructans
I am a fructose malabsorber. If you read the papers in which Sue Shepherd is listed as a co-author, in particular the latest one titled "Review article: fructose malabsorption and the bigger picture", you will read in the abstract "Restricting dietary intake of free fructose and/or fructans may have durable symptomatic benefits in a high proportion of patients with functional gut disorders, but high quality evidence is lacking." Not all fructose malabsorber have difficulty with fructans. Putting this in another context in the paper "Fructan and Free Fructose Content of Common Australian Vegetables and Fruit" it says "Nevertheless, we have recent evidence to suggest that doses (10-20 g/day) [fructans] may exacerbate symptoms in patients who suffer from irritable bowel syndrome (IBS)". A slice of white bread (65 grams) contains just less than 2 grams of fructans (see Shepherd 2006 dietary guidelines). If white bread was the only dietary source of fructans then the lower limit of 10 grams would not be exceed until more than 5 slices of bread had been eaten. There may be individual tolerance differences to free fructose and fructans. It is important not to isolate wheat as a culprit but to put into the perspective of moderating its consumption along with other high fructan containing foods such as onions and Jerusalem artichokes that contain 9-12 grams/100 gram serving.
As a clinically diagnosed sufferer, I have been advised by a professional dietician that Fructans ARE a problem for sufferers of Fructose Malabsorption. dacoutts —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.14.223.10 --Couttsie 02:57, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
The article is not very clear on this point as part of it says fructans are not a problem, but then talks about avoiding wheat based breads. I assume because they are high in fructans. Sue shephard has recently published a couple of articles based on a study she has done which indicate fructans are a problem and should be avoided.Skeuu 22:33, 28 March 2007 (UTC) Jeremy.
I think this is clear that there is evidence that wheat should be avoided. Here is more evidence.
I will remove the assertion that there is no evidence that wheat is a problem. --Couttsie 00:54, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] glucose/dextrose
The lead section says that eating glucose helps, but there's no reference and no follow-up in the article itself. Is there a reference or at least more information on this point? Jonathan Tweet 14:30, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] some thoughts
A clue: looking at structural formula on the fructan page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fructan , fructans are fructose complexes. This page also says fructans are "Chains of fructose molecules". It sounds like fructans are fructose analogs of starches, which are complexes, or chains, of glucose molecules. If this is true, fructans would digest, at least partially, to fructose similar to the way starches digest to glucose and fructans would therefore be contributory to fructose malabsorption issues. Other molecules that digest to fructose, such as the sugar alcohol, sorbitol also would contribute to these issues.
A suggestion: Nomally, a fructose molecule "piggy backs" across the basolateral membrane of the small intestine with a glucose molecule in 1:1 ratio via GLUT-5, though this seems to be in some dispute or not generally acknowledged. It seems to be generally thought that glucose facilitates fructose absorption. http://jn.nutrition.org/cgi/reprint/125/8/2156.pdf Though this report is on rat intestine, the experimants are definitive. See page 2161 for a graph of glucose facilitation and page 2163 in the discussion for comments relating to human absoption. It should be made clear in the article that glucose facilitates fructose consumption and simultaneous ingestion of glucose and its precursors, such as starches, facilitate absorption.
A thought: Fructose is a non-essential molecule. No known requirements exist for its consumption. See the dietary reference intakes at the NAS, http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10490&page=265 There is, in fact, no need for any carbohydrates at all beyond infancy. In my view, fructose "malabsorption" is really a protective mechanism, since fructose is a very potent endogenous AGE-former ranging from 6 to 15 times more active than glucose, depending on the report. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7599353?dopt=Abstract http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3132203?dopt=Abstract http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2675027?dopt=Abstract http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15343583?dopt=Abstract Fructose is strongly linked to obesity and many age-related chronic diseases. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12399260?ordinalpos=9&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18051988?ordinalpos=3&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum http://www.cmi.ustc.edu.cn/3/5/351.pdf http://glycob.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/15/7/16R and there are thousands more references linking fructose and human illnes/dysfunction. Interestingly, this article http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1521691803001070 suggests that "There are no known defects of fructose absorption." For the above reasons I think this wiki article's focus should be shifted from pathological, i.e. "malabsorption" to a simple informational point of view like "incomplete fructose absorption," or some such title. It could then be a redirect from "malabsorption" for people searching for that.
Jwanderson (talk) 21:00, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
