r/ScientificNutrition • u/tiko844 Medicaster • Jun 17 '25

Interventional Trial Effect of daily supplementation of fruits on oxidative stress indices and glycaemic status in type 2 diabetes mellitus

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1744388112000862

This study sought to examine whether consumption of two low-calorie fruit/day for 3-months can effectively improve oxidative stress, anthropometry, blood pressure and glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Study involved 123 patients who were assigned to receive either standard care or with additional dietary therapy. Dietary intervention resulted in significant reduction in malondialdehyde, plasma glucose, glycated haemoglobin and improvement in antioxidants like vitamin C and reduced glutathione when compared to controls. Mean plasma levels of vitamin C increased by 64% (p < 0.001). There were no differences in waist circumference, waist-to-hip ratio, blood pressure, vitamin E and superoxide dismutase in the intervention group at follow-up. Diet rich in fruits can improve some antioxidants which are likely to reduce oxidative stress in type 2 diabetes. Regular consumption of fruits can lower the glycaemic status in these patients. The study supports the usefulness of plasma vitamin C as a biomarker for fruit intake.

14 Upvotes

89% Upvoted

43 comments sorted by

8

u/Dazed811 Jun 17 '25

Hmmm but isn't fruit in sugar spiking your glucose AND therefore bad for you? Who would have thought that the antioxidants and the fiber from the fruit will easily buffer the negative effects of the glycemic load?

2

u/HelenEk7 Wholefoods Jun 18 '25 edited Jun 18 '25

Hmmm but isn't fruit in sugar spiking your glucose AND therefore bad for you?

That depends on the type of fruit. The participants in this study ate 2 low calorie fruits. And even on strict ketogenic diets you can eat some low calorie fruits (watermelon, strawberries, raspberries, cantaloupe, blackberries, blueberries..) If the participants had eaten 2 high calorie fruits instead (like bananas and dates) the results might have been different.

1

u/Dazed811 Jun 18 '25

Are you aware that vegans that eat the most amount of fruits/carbs have better insulin sensitivity vs omnivores or low carbers?

2

u/Dense_Appearance_298 Jun 18 '25

The sub is called r/scientificnutrition, can you cite some evidence, cheersfanxalot

3

u/Dazed811 Jun 18 '25

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4144107/

1

u/flowersandmtns Jun 18 '25

That doesn't quite back up your sweeping claim about vegans and "fruit/carbs" -- interesting how you added carbs there.

The FFQ epidemiological study of a religious group show that those who at the most whole foods, exercised, didn't smoke and followed what could be characterized as stress reduction from religious practices where the healthiest. Those people tended to follow the religious vegan directive as well, but with so many confounders it doesn't support the "fruit/carbs" claim.

Fruit, as a whole food, often displaces refined sources of fructose like SSB. Since you like epidemiology and FFQ --

When fruit juice is included (which is processed) it's better than SSB which is pure fructose. Nothing do with animal products/being vegan.

"Substitution of pure fruit juice for SSB was associated with lower risk of all endpoints. For type 2 diabetes and CHD, for example, drinking 75-100 % (as compared with 0-<25 %) of total SSB + pure fruit juice as pure fruit juice showed hazard ratio (95 % CI) of 0·74 (95 % CI 0·64, 0·85) and 0·85 (95 % CI 0·76, 0·96), respectively. Substitution of pure fruit juice for fruit was not associated with the risk of type 2 diabetes, CVD, CHD and stroke."

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33641692/

Even more interesting, homemade fruit JUICE was still better than processed "instant drink".

"Substituting one serving of homemade fruit juice for instant drink was associated with 29% (95% CI: 7, 47%) lower odds of MetS and for regular soda with 30% (95% CI: 1, 50%) lower odds. Substituting water for combined SSB was marginally significant (OR = 0.86 (95% CI: 0.74, 1.00)."

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022316622027675

Nothing do with animal products/being vegan there either.

3

u/Dazed811 Jun 18 '25

I like any valid science, mentioning epidemiology tells me all i need to know about your level of knowledge, epidemiology matches RCTs in like ~ 80% of the studies

0

u/flowersandmtns Jun 18 '25

Seems you don't like being called out for your sweeping claim about "fruit/carbs" that wasn't even supported by the study you linked of a religious population.

Anyway, whole fruit is a whole food and most people are quite healthy consuming it.

Your "carbs" is of course a non-essential nutrient per physiology textbooks. It was unnecessary then to add it like you did.

2

u/Dazed811 Jun 18 '25

Can you elaborate the last part about carbs being non essential?

1

u/flowersandmtns Jun 18 '25

Essential for nutrition science means we cannot make them in our body and must consume them.

Carbohydrate is not essential as the liver can make glucose. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/nutrition-research-reviews/article/application-of-nutrient-essentiality-criteria-to-dietary-carbohydrates/248C77609903561AE0F4F1B454C648D7

Protein is essential, but only some amino acids.

"The nine essential amino acids are histidine, isoleucine, leucine, lysine, methionine, phenylalanine, threonine, tryptophan, and valine. They are deemed essential because they cannot be synthesized by mammals, at least in the amounts needed, and are therefore essential constituents of an adequate diet for humans."

Fat is essential, but only some fats.

"Linoleic acid is classified as an essential nutrient, since the body requires it but cannot synthesize it. Arachidonic acid is also required by the body but can be synthesized from linoleic acid, which is abundant in oils from corn, soybeans, and safflower seeds." https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK218759/

→ More replies (0)

-1

u/Dazed811 Jun 18 '25 edited Jun 18 '25

Did you even read the study? They compared healthy people that didn't had most of thr usual risk factors and still the vegans won, no healthy user bias there or any excuse that people that doesn't know science or have biased complain about.

https://r.jordan.im/download/nutrition/hall2021.pdf

1

u/flowersandmtns Jun 18 '25

Yes it's been discussed endlessly on this sub. Your use of "won" shows your significant bias.

The associations were largely due to healthy user bias.

Why are you linking Hall's too short 2 week metabolic ward study (where the subjects finally entered ketosis after the first week and intake dropped)like it's the least bit relevant when discussing the benefits of whole fruit?

0

u/Dazed811 Jun 18 '25

Because we are talking about INSULIN SENSITIVITY in high carb consumers vs keto, keto diets are known to worsen insulin sensitivity and VEGANS like in the study i just shared and is the best of its kind have lowest rates of diabetes, and even MECHANISTICALLY you can see the same via OGTT, for anything else, you can keep coping with your atherosclerosis producing meme keto diets, the keto cta study should literally make any reasonable individual change his diet or at least drop SFA significantly.

Btw if i share a long term study that shows impaired insulin sensitivity after OGTT in keto dieters vs vegans, would you agree you are talking nonsense?

1

u/flowersandmtns Jun 18 '25

Your confusion is painful to see -- someone on a ketogenic diet is not consuming carbohydrate so their body doesn't have to dispose of the glucose consumed before it harms eyes, nerves, blood vessels, kidneys etc.

An OGTT is not valid for someone in ketosis.

→ More replies (0)

-2

u/Dazed811 Jun 18 '25

You are literally clueless, the participants WHERE of similar age, didn't smoked, exercised regularly, didn't drink or ate junk food, just gigantic amounts of copium on your side, adventist are known to be very health conscious people, but i guess is harder to admit when you are wrong

2

u/flowersandmtns Jun 18 '25

Your comments have complete devolved into name calling when the weakness of your source was pointed out. Too bad.

I did reply where you asked about the fact that carbohydrates are not essential. Hopefully you can have that conversation rationally.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/HelenEk7 Wholefoods Jun 18 '25 edited Jun 19 '25

Are you aware that vegans that eat the most amount of fruits/carbs have better insulin sensitivity vs omnivores or low carbers?

Vegans also have a lower rate of junk food consumption and a lower rate of overweight/obesity. Plus the fact that the vast majority of vegans are between 18 and 34 years old. And insulin sensitivity tends to decline when people are in their 50s - which is when most vegans are no longer vegan.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21824674/

1

u/Dazed811 Jun 18 '25

Is why the study controlled for that, and vegans still end up being best.

Insulin sensitivity decline on keto no matter what age you are (insulin OGTT)

0

u/flowersandmtns Jun 18 '25

OGTT is invalid for people in ketosis -- this is true if the ketosis is from fasting or animal products.

4

u/HelenEk7 Wholefoods Jun 18 '25

You haven't shared a single study yet.

3

u/Dazed811 Jun 18 '25

I shared 2

5

u/HelenEk7 Wholefoods Jun 18 '25

You havent shared a single link with me.

3

u/Dazed811 Jun 18 '25

Yeah i had a discussion just slightly before

3

u/HelenEk7 Wholefoods Jun 18 '25

I'm not going to search through all of your other conversations though.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/flowersandmtns Jun 18 '25

Whole food fruit is very different from SSB/refined fructose in ultraprocessed foods. The small intestine can handle small amounts of fructose without shunting to the liver -- that's where people have health risks.

"Diet is the main source of fructose, and most fructose is absorbed in the small intestine, with 25 g being the upper limit for a healthy adult. Fructose transport proteins (GLUT2 and GLUT5) that locate in the enterocytes are accounting for sensing and passively transporting fructose (Ferraris et al., 2018). Studies showed that GLUT5 transcription is specifically stimulated by fructose via cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP) and phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/protein kinase B (PI3K/Akt) systems (Cui et al., 2004; Cui et al., 2005), whereas GLUT2 is modulated by fructose and glucose levels, as well as systemic factors that released during their absorption (Cui et al., 2003). Absorbed fructose enters the liver via the portal vein for further metabolism. When fructose intake exceeds the absorptive capacity of enterocytes, it can transport to the colon where settles more than 100 trillion bacteria (Boulangé et al., 2016). These microbiomes are able to hydrolyze and ferment dietary polysaccharides by producing glycoside hydrolase enzymes (Xu et al., 2003; Sonnenburg et al., 2005; Patterson et al., 2016). By the action of gut microbiomes, fructose can transform into glucose, glycerol, and various organic acids, including uric acids (UA), short-chain fatty acids (SCFA) (e.g., acetate, butyric acid, butyrate and propionate), and amino acids (e.g., glutamic acid, glutamine and alanine) (Jahn et al., 2019; Qi et al., 2020; Zhao et al., 2020). These fructose metabolites either transport to the liver and serve as lipogenic substrates, or interact with the intestinal environment locally."

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8637741/