Too much fruit?

giveitholly

Just wondering if I am eating too much fruit in the day,trying to eat healthier and I love fruit,I have blueberries,some strawberries and grapes with some weetabix for breakfast and a banana soon after,I would eat an apple,pear and orange in the afternoon and then late evening would have another orange along with some more blackberries and strawberries,I know fruit contains sugar so I wonder am I having too much!? Thanks in advance for any advice

silverharp

it depends , it wouldn't be for me, if you are above your ideal weight or tend to feel hungry all the time in between meals then I'd say yep. I'd look up the GI of different fruits and try to select lower ones. Also the breakfast cereal wont be very satiating and probably wouldn’t tide you over to lunch so you will be in a cycle of craving something sweet every couple of hours.

Tar.Aldarion

There is no evidence I'm aware that shows any upper limit for whole fruit intake whatsoever in an otherwise healthy diet. Large amount of servings (20+ per day) have been tested with no negative (and some positive) affects. When the sugar is in whole fruit it doesn't matter, it's added sugar to things that gets you. Even type 2 diabetics have been tested and told to not restrict fruit https://nutritionj.biomedcentral.com/track/pdf/10.1186/1475-2891-12-29

twowheelsonly

I've always looked on fruit as being 'Natures Sweets' and accordingly I'd only eat fruit in moderation but I'd imagine that it would be hard to overdo it anyway. I don't like any berries as it happens, or even grapes. Pears and Bananas would be my usual go to fruits for no reason other than they're my favourites !!

iguana

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

There is no evidence I'm aware that shows any upper limit for whole fruit intake whatsoever in an otherwise healthy diet. Large amount of servings (20+ per day) have been tested with no negative (and some positive) affects. When the sugar is in whole fruit it doesn't matter, it's added sugar to things that gets you. Even type 2 diabetics have been tested and told to not restrict fruit https://nutritionj.biomedcentral.com/track/pdf/10.1186/1475-2891-12-29

Do you know if that include dried fruit? Or overripe fruit like browning bananas?

RebelButtMunch

It's possible to over do it if you want to loose weight. There's nearly 100cals in a banana.

twignme

iguana wrote: »

Do you know if that include dried fruit? Or overripe fruit like browning bananas?

I believe the advice is to restrict dried fruit. That’s because the drying process concentrates the sugars, and because they don’t have the bulk and fibre of fresh fruit, there is a tendency to eat more.

trik

I'd be more worried about the weetabix than the fruit.

bladespin

trik wrote:

I'd be more worried about the weetabix than the fruit.

I wouldn't.

Alf Veedersane

trik wrote: »

I'd be more worried about the weetabix than the fruit.

If Weetabix in your diet is the main thing you're concerned about then congratulations on your diet.

Mellor

twignme wrote: »

I believe the advice is to restrict dried fruit. That’s because the drying process concentrates the sugars, and because they don’t have the bulk and fibre of fresh fruit, there is a tendency to eat more.

Per fruit, I can't see dried fruit has any less fibre then fresh fruit. Where has the fibre gone.
The only difference between the two would be water content, and maybe some vitamins degrading.
The issue with dried fruit is that's its much easier to eat 10 dried apricots than 10 fresh ones. And the calories are largely the same

paleoperson

You cannot eat too much fruit, no way. There are airy-fairy anti-sugar diets going around and they get so mixed up they tell you to reduce fruit... forget it. You could eat 100% fruit. Fruit juices perhaps need a little more thought and deliberation put into them but certainly not what could be considered a bad thing.

And yes dried fruit has all the fibre. Like fruit juice, requires a little more care.

Mellor

paleoperson wrote: »

You cannot eat too much fruit, no way.

That really depends on what your dietary goals are. If you are trying to lose weight, especially if you are a smaller statured. Then eating a lot of fruit could be counter productive. Regardless of how "healthy" you think calories are, they are still calories.

You could eat 100% fruit.

That would be an awful diet. Completely devoid of protein and fat.

Fruit juices perhaps need a little more thought and deliberation put into them but certainly not what could be considered a bad thing.

Fruit juice is a good way to get 20-30g sugar into you quickly. So is a glass of fanta. There is a very clear "bad thing" associated with to that tbh.

paleoperson

Mellor wrote: »

That really depends on what your dietary goals are. If you are trying to lose weight, especially if you are a smaller statured. Then eating a lot of fruit could be counter productive. Regardless of how "healthy" you think calories are, they are still calories.

For all but people who are already medium/thin, they shouldn't watch their fruit intake. If they're already fairly thin and want to get thinner for some reason then monitor intake of certain fruits like bananas. You won't feel like eating that much of them.

Mellor wrote: »

That would be an awful diet. Completely devoid of protein and fat.

Completely false, there can be plenty of protein and fat in all-fruit diets.

Mellor wrote: »

Fruit juice is a good way to get 20-30g sugar into you quickly. So is a glass of fanta. There is a very clear "bad thing" associated with to that tbh.

You're talking to someone who has eaten almost nothing but fruit with some vegetables and nuts thrown in for years. I'm a complete oddball when it comes to eating so I know what I'm talking about - saying that fanta and fruit juice are in any way similar is part of the simplistic thinking that has done a lot of damage over the years. That's the old way of thinking, the idea that sugar = poison, pushed by people like Dr. Atkins and more recently by Dr. Lustig. Animal studies show that those theories are no longer tenable and were mostly all garbage.

Now I never said that you could chug fruit juice as much as and whenever you want. Everyone should monitor their intake of fruit juice, you can't go crazy with it like you can with complete raw fruit. However it is quite a good thing to consume if for some reason no other type of fruit is available.

Mellor

paleoperson wrote: »

For all but people who are already medium/thin, they shouldn't watch their fruit intake. If they're already fairly thin and want to get thinner for some reason then monitor intake of certain fruits like bananas. You won't feel like eating that much of them.

Not just thin people.
A shorter female, might only have a maintenance of 1200 calories. There's very little scope for a deficit there. So a few extra pieces of fruit could easily prevent weight loss.

Completely false, there can be plenty of protein and fat in all-fruit diets.

Any evidence or examples to back that up?
What's a typical day of eating fruit only, and how much protein and fat do you get in?

You're talking to someone who has eaten almost nothing but fruit with some vegetables and nuts thrown in for years. I'm a complete oddball when it comes to eating so I know what I'm talking about - saying that fanta and fruit juice are in any way similar is part of the simplistic thinking that has done a lot of damage over the years.

They are very similar sugar contents. That's a fact.
Pointing out that they have similarities isn't saying they are exactly the same.

That's the old way of thinking, the idea that sugar = poison, pushed by people like Dr. Atkins and more recently by Dr. Lustig. Animal studies show that those theories are no longer tenable and were mostly all garbage.

I never said anything about poison. None of my points have anything to do with sugar being toxic.

Now I never said that you could chug fruit juice as much as and whenever you want. Everyone should monitor their intake of fruit juice, you can't go crazy with it like you can with complete raw fruit. However it is quite a good thing to consume if for some reason no other type of fruit is available.

Why would anyone need to monitor their intake is there is nothing bad about fruit juice or sugar. That's quite the contraction.

Either there are no negative aspects, and can be consumed without limit.
Or there certain negatives, so over consumption should be kept in check.

silverharp

I notice in work there are some people who have a banana on toast mid morning , I don’t know if this is their breakfast or “second breakfast” but I do sigh a little inside. A problem I would see is that sedentary people snack too often and most people use fruit as a snack and not incorporated into their meals. To reiterate Mellor’s point, if you have a low maintenance point you ought not really be snacking even if its healthy

paleoperson wrote: »

You're talking to someone who has eaten almost nothing but fruit with some vegetables and nuts thrown in for years. I'm a complete oddball when it comes to eating so I know what I'm talking about - saying that fanta and fruit juice are in any way similar is part of the simplistic thinking that has done a lot of damage over the years. That's the old way of thinking, the idea that sugar = poison, pushed by people like Dr. Atkins and more recently by Dr. Lustig. Animal studies show that those theories are no longer tenable and were mostly all garbage.

Now I never said that you could chug fruit juice as much as and whenever you want. Everyone should monitor their intake of fruit juice, you can't go crazy with it like you can with complete raw fruit. However it is quite a good thing to consume if for some reason no other type of fruit is available.

That’s an ironic handle you have there ;-) , when in human history did humans have access to all kinds of fruit all year round? Did they have access to highly cultivated fruit or GMO frankenfruit which marketeers will have directed to be as sweet as possible. The modern banana I believe barely resembles the ancestral versions of the fruit.

Your “old way of thinking” point doesn’t stand up as its only in the last couple of years that the issue is beginning to get into the public and going by walking around a supermarket, outside of soft drinks I don’t see food sold as “sugar free” or “low sugar”, low fat is this the mark of “quality”. As for “animal studies” at best they are potentially useful to generate a hypothesis but I wouldn’t go basing my food intake on them. Unfortunately good quality studies are very expensive when using people so you tend to end up with a lot of dodgy questionnaire based ones asking people what they have eaten in the previous 5 years or some such. Its clear the sugar consumption rise in processed food particularly has coincided with the post 1970’s rise in metabolic issues.

Macy0161

silverharp wrote: »

I notice in work there are some people who have a banana on toast mid morning , I don’t know if this is their breakfast or “second breakfast” but I do sigh a little inside. A problem I would see is that sedentary people snack too often and most people use fruit as a snack and not incorporated into their meals. To reiterate Mellor’s point, if you have a low maintenance point you ought not really be snacking even if its healthy

I'd say it depends on what it's replacing, and overall goals really. In our office, the banana on toast is quite often the alternative to pastries and donuts so many of the rest of them are having. Banana or a mars bar? I don't see how you can judge on one choice you see people make tbh.

silverharp

Macy0161 wrote: »

I'd say it depends on what it's replacing, and overall goals really. In our office, the banana on toast is quite often the alternative to pastries and donuts so many of the rest of them are having. Banana or a mars bar? I don't see how you can judge on one choice you see people make tbh.

Less unhealthy versus more unhealthy isn’t a perfect solution surely? As for goals its not like everybody thinks through this stuff on a daily basis, I assume a lot of people gently slide , panic at some stage find a routine for a while and then gently slide again, rinse and repeat. Sure its only one choice but if its every day I can judge on the basis that firstly its eating between meals combined with the fact that they are not training and have a sedentary job and they are more likely to be overweight or obese .

Macy0161

silverharp wrote: »

Less unhealthy versus more unhealthy isn’t a perfect solution surely?

Probably the disagreement is really seeing bananas as unhealthy. Or toast/ bread. Niether of which I view as inherently unhealthy tbh.

silverharp

Macy0161 wrote: »

Probably the disagreement is really seeing bananas as unhealthy. Or toast/ bread. Niether of which I view as inherently unhealthy tbh.

I wouldn’t necessarily see bananas as unhealthy, it is a whole food which is good and certainly is fine for anyone training or doing energetic activity, the combining with bread I'd see as problematic. I do have a dim view of bread as it’s a processed food with a high GI index and not terribly filling.

paleoperson

The only comment I have to make is that Mellor's question of where you get your protein is the very first thing clueless people always ask people who don't eat meat and it's laughed at in those communities. Honestly I don't like the attitudes being given to me here and have lost interest in this discussion. It's clear I'm not going to learn anything here.

Alf Veedersane

paleoperson wrote: »

The only comment I have to make is that Mellor's question of where you get your protein is the very first thing clueless people always ask people who don't eat meat and it's laughed at in those communities. Honestly I don't like the attitudes being given to me here and have lost interest in this discussion. It's clear I'm not going to learn anything here.

To be fair and by the same token, if you want people to understand your viewpoint, you have to back it up. That goes for whatever side you're on. He questioned where the protein and fat comes from and you didn't answer but yet say it's a question that's laughed at.

Why is it laughed at? What is the basis for laughing at it. Genuine question(s).

Mellor

paleoperson wrote: »

The only comment I have to make is that Mellor's question of where you get your protein is the very first thing clueless people always ask people who don't eat meat and it's laughed at in those communities.

It was a straight forward and simple question. Pretending to take the high ground and opting for insults over answers is pretty transparent. I can't help but feel if you could answer you would.

And it's nothing to do with not eating meat. I never mentioned meat. There are plenty of vegetarian sources of protein. I can think of dozens - none are fruit.


Edit: For the sake of completeness, I am aware of some fruit sources of dietary fat. I'm not suggesting none exist, I'm questioning if they make up a high enough proportion of a whole fruit diet to supply adequate fat.

bladespin

paleoperson wrote: »

The only comment I have to make is that Mellor's question of where you get your protein is the very first thing clueless people always ask people who don't eat meat and it's laughed at in those communities. Honestly I don't like the attitudes being given to me here and have lost interest in this discussion. It's clear I'm not going to learn anything here.

A little precious there, it's an honest question, I wouldn't have a clue apaort from guessing at some kind of soya thing. If you have knowledge and believe it's good then be prepared to share, there is no such thing as a stupid question but there are lots of stupid answers.

paleoperson

bladespin wrote: »

A little precious there, it's an honest question, I wouldn't have a clue apaort from guessing at some kind of soya thing. If you have knowledge and believe it's good then be prepared to share, there is no such thing as a stupid question but there are lots of stupid answers.

That doesn't seem fair. So no questions can be stupid, yet if someone gives answers they certainly may be stupid? It seems to me like there can be stupid questions and there can be stupid answers.

I'm not saying all these questions were stupid but it's an environment I don't feel comfortable answering in. I also feel like as I'm trying to explain it, that it's going to be thrown in my face with completely flawed logic. I don't get anything out of it and will certainly not be thanked or anything by the sounds of things. So good luck with that but if you expect me to sit around and answer questions and then being treated so ludicrously think again. It happens sometimes, not every question that is asked should be answered or we would never get anything done and I've made up my mind and am not changing it. I also resent this "if you could answer you would", that's so insulting and childish, forget it.

paleoperson

Your sense of entitlement that a person who knows something has to "be prepared to share" is staggering. That's not how the world works.

You wouldn't go up to someone in real life, especially someone with expertise, and expect them to answer all your questions with thinly veiled insults about how they must not know if you they don't answer. I tell you what, paypal me €10 I'll answer all questions on it otherwise forget it.

bladespin

paleoperson wrote:

You wouldn't go up to someone in real life, especially someone with expertise, and expect them to answer all your questions with thinly veiled insults about how they must not know if you they don't answer. I tell you what, paypal me €10 I'll answer all questions on it otherwise forget it.

Lol, you've given me every answer there.

Btw bad form soliciting on a public forum, the rest of are here to share knowledge, not try to profit from it, off to bananaland with ye.

paleoperson

bladespin wrote: »

Lol, you've given me every answer there.

Btw bad form soliciting on a public forum, the rest of are here to share knowledge, not try to profit from it, off to bananaland with ye.

Now you are really just being a troll.

I'm not trying to do "soliciting" at all and I do not think people are going to take me up on it. I was making a point about how unreasonable your expectations were and offering a suggestion on if you really wanted to get answers from me.

I already shared what I wanted to share, I gave good advice. That's good advice. You can search into it more if you want, you can not believe me if you want. I then decided some of the questions were a bit rude for me or I did not see good things coming from them, it was not worth it for me and was gone from the board before you decided to bring my name up again seven days later. A person eating an unusual diet in the small minority is bound to face a lot of abuse and I didn't want to face that, it's basically discrimination.

If you really wanted me to not stay here, you shouldn't have brought up my name again seven days later and had a go at me. Now I suggest leaving me go again without making insults at me again.

adox

You made a statement as fact and were asked to back it up and failed to do so.

It’s as simple as that really.

bladespin

paleoperson wrote:

Now I suggest leaving me go again without making insults at me again.

Off to bananaland so, bye.

paleoperson

adox wrote: »

You made a statement as fact and were asked to back it up and failed to do so.

This is completely false.

Stating that there is plenty of protein in fruit is not making "a statement as fact".

If you're using the word "plenty" you're objectively not making a factual statement.

Even if I did make a statement of fact, which I did not, that wouldn't shed any light on how true it was and neither would it cause there to be a burden of proof on me.

If anyone made a factual statement it was that poster, stating fruit is "devoid of protein", devoid = nothing? I mean, come on, I'd like to assume they know more than thinking it's 0% protein but that was their factual statement.

If someone is too far beneath the level of understanding to know and lookup basic things, then there can in no way be any statement, such as yours, legitimately made that causes clear and intentional prejudice against the claims made.