Fruits for weight loss

[Deleted member 23558]

A person who eats the same calories as fruit will be thinner than one eating the same calories as starch. Fruit has, on average, about one fructose molecule for every one glucose molecule (the banana is the common exception); the potato on the other hand, is essentially all glucose. Fructose and glucose are metabolized differently, with the former being converted more into lipids and the latter more into glycogen. The saturated fatty acids our body produces from fructose takes-up less space than glycogen: a starch-like molecule stored not only in the liver and muscle, but also in extracellular spaces around the midsection. In fact, glycogen is so similar to amylopectin that it has historically been debated whether-or-not amyloid deposits found in the brain are actually amylopectin or glycogen—they both stain with iodine nearly the same shade and differ only in the extent of branching. Not only are fatty acids more dense than glycogen molecularly, but this difference becomes more pronounced in an aqueous environment: Branched polysaccharides adsorb a good deal of water all the way along the entire length, something you can prove yourself at home by mixing potato starch with water at 98°F). Hence: I don't think it would be unreasonable to assume that preferentially eating starch over fruit would lead to a greater body surface area, greater body mass, and greater water retention. The glycogen-promoting effect of eating starch can perhaps work to the benefit of certain athletes, but for most inactive people it should lead to a rounder form (noticeable at high levels of consumption).