How Could You Recommend Eating Sugar? (Plus Sugar Intakes for Diabetics and Other Sugar Questions) : Exclusive Renegade Health Article

Thursday Aug 18 | BY |
| Comments (43)

sugar diet relax
Relaxing your black and white views on health may transform your health…

My articles about sugar have created quite a stir…

There’s been a lot of great discussion on the blog the last few days that has encompassed many sides and many opinions.

It seems sugar or no-sugar is just as heated as Republican and Democrat for some. It elicits an emotional response that can cause people to start name-calling and putting others down.

It’s kind of shocking to me, but I guess that’s just how it is. (It can also bring the best out of some people as well!)

So today, I’m going to answer a handful of sugar questions and over the weekend I’ll do the same to ensure that I’ve addressed all of the relevant issues that were brought up. These questions include why sugar isn’t bad for everyone, why I don’t think high fruit is the way to go for cancer (for the majority), and what I think about sugar for diabetics.

Let’s start with this one…

“How could you recommend sugar? Sugar is bad for your health…”

I disagree. For 80-90% of the health population (who is reading this blog) you should not have to worry too much about your natural sugar consumption as long as you’re monitoring your blood or using other testing markers to guide you. I can’t stress this enough.

This is the only way you’ll learn what works for you or not – you won’t get the answers at a lecture or by reading a book or two.

In my own experience, the high sugar diet did not work. My blood tests confirmed things we starting to get out of whack. Particularly my hormones. My teeth also were starting to hurt significantly and my acne was getting worse. This was medical and physical confirmation that I needed to switch things up.

Now, here’s the thing. After that, I didn’t conclude that all sugar was bad or completely flip to another extreme – I realized that there is a gray area here that needs to be explored.

Annmarie and I eat about 5-10 fruits on any given day. Yesterday, after our workout I ate 2 plums and 4 kiwis (dipped in banana powder, LOL!) in about 2 minutes. So I’m hardly against eating some sugar. I’m not anti-fruit, but I do think the high fruit diet works short term for more than it does long term (based on my contacts with people on these diets) and I think that cancer patients (and diabetics) need to watch their sugar intake.

The bottomline is that there’s no reason to demonize natural sugar when it has been shown to provide energy and nutrients to a well tuned body.

“How could you say that sugar shouldn’t be used for cancer patients. There’s plenty of evidence that shows otherwise.”

I actually haven’t seen this “plenty of evidence.” If anyone could provide it to me other than sending me to references based on theory, then I’m completely open to listen.

I’ve interviewed doctors who see hundreds and hundreds of cancer patients every year and have talked to them about this. If high sugar worked the best, they’d be using it. I think what we’re dealing with is the fact that many things work for many people and some things work better than others.

In fact, for some cancers, chemotherapy works. By “works” I mean that people survive – whether it was the chemo or not.

But again, those who go that route may not have the best survival rate overall.

So I think when you say something works, it definitely needs to be identified and qualified. There will be people who heal from cancer by laughing, others who heal by drinking green juice, others who heal with drugs and surgery – all these methods can work, but the question is which one is best over the long run. The other question is which on of these treatments (or combination) is the one that creates the best results.

I’m sure there are some people who have healed cancer themselves eating just fruits, but the statistics I’ve seen from some of the natural cancer doctors and their level of professional credibility is not something I’m going to overlook just because one or two people are doing it differently and claim amazing, undocumented results.

I was going to end my answer here, but I do want to say one more thing. I’m in this work for you. I want you to get the best of the best information. I hear a lot of things that I’d never share with you because I just don’t think it would help you in anyway to get the best health, the best care and the best information.

Of course, I’m human and make mistakes from time to time, but the overriding theme for me when making decisions on what I talk about, sell or publish is “would I recommend this to my mom?”

If it passes the Mom test, then you eventually read about it. If not, you won’t hear about it here.

If my mom were to have cancer again, I wouldn’t send her to a doctor using high fruit. I’m not convinced based on the evidence and conversations I’ve had that this is the best for someone I love.

“What about sugar for diabetics?”

Great question!

This is where it gets sticky as well.

I mentioned that for 80-90% of the population, sugar should be fine – just make sure you test your blood. For 5-10% of the health population that has cancer, I said they need to examine their sugar intake. So if you’re sharp, you’ll realize we’re missing an extra 5-10%.

This other 5-10% is those who have diabetes, pre-diabetics and other blood sugar related issues.

There are two sides of the issue here. (Maybe 3 or 4!)

Dr. Gabriel Cousens has shown in preliminary studies that you can lower blood sugar and reverse diabetes in 30 days or less. His diet includes low sugar, ample fat and ample protein.

Other doctors and health teachers have shown that diabetics can lower their blood sugar as well on a high fruit, low fat diet as well.

In fact, the Raw Food Challenge is a high natural sugar program and diabetics have reported a drop in their blood sugar while on it. You would think that the opposite would happen, but it didn’t. Their blood sugar levels dropped.

Those on the high fruit, low fat side also will tell you with accuracy that once you start to increase the amount of fat in the diet, the blood sugar will rise. So there is a link between the amount of sugar in the blood and the amount of fat in the diet.

Clearly, there are some considerations here that need to be sorted out, since both seem to at least work to some degree.

What I’ve found from talking to those practitioners who are seeing clients and patients is that while both diets lower blood sugar, the low sugar diet tends to lower blood sugar faster. I’ve also found that in the long term, a high fruit diet isn’t the best for everyone. But to be fair to this side, eating a high concentration of nuts and seeds, doesn’t really make for a great diet either – long term.

So in the short run, they both seem to have redeeming qualities, but long term, it’s up to you to decide what works best for you – as you continue to monitor your blood tests and work with a practitioner who can help guide you.

I think the overall conclusion you can gather from of all these questions (and the answers that follow) is that multiple things work – and as much of a brain-twister that is – it makes me realize that things can’t be read as black and white in the health world. Once you start to put nutrients into their respective corners to organize them (separate them as well), you find that they don’t always fit where you think they should be or they do contradictory things.

In order to make any sense of this, we need to understand that each nutrient and diet and health condition has its negatives and positives. For instance, kale, which I consider a superfood, in very large quantities my slow thyroid function. How could something so good be so bad for some people? It’s because everything has place and works in harmony with all the other factors influencing your health. Once we start to understand this we also can view our health opinions on a scale instead of as dogmatic rights or wrongs.

Natural sugar is fine, it just depends on the amount and the person. Exercise is great, it just depends on the amount and the person. Supplements? Fats? Proteins? All the same. The quantity you take in depends on the amount and the person.

The more you embrace the uncertainty and use testing to confirm what you’re doing is working, the better your health will be.

I want to know your thoughts: Why do you think sugar is such an emotional topic?

Yes, Virginia, It’s OK to Eat Some Natural Sugar…

With all this back and forth about sugar, I need to explain that for most people having low to moderate amounts of fruit is good for you!

One option we have is our new Red Banana Powder, which is the powder of ripe, dried bananas. It’s one of the best tasting foods I’ve ever had.

If you want to try some, here’s where you can go now…

Live Awesome!

Kevin Gianni

Kevin Gianni is a health author, activist and blogger. He started seriously researching personal and preventative natural health therapies in 2002 when he was struck with the reality that cancer ran deep in his family and if he didn’t change the way he was living — he might go down that same path. Since then, he’s written and edited 6 books on the subject of natural health, diet and fitness. During this time, he’s constantly been humbled by what experts claim they know and what actually is true. This has led him to experiment with many diets and protocols — including vegan, raw food, fasting, medical treatments and more — to find out what is myth and what really works in the real world.

Kevin has also traveled around the world searching for the best protocols, foods, medicines and clinics around and bringing them to the readers of his blog — which is one of the most widely read natural health blogs in the world with hundreds of thousands of visitors a month from over 150 countries around the world.


Comments are closed for this post.

  1. Ed Hirsch says:

    Hi Kevin,

    Since the brain runs on glucose, a type of sugar, we seem to be hard-wired to be oriented to sugar, or at least it is going to be a topic we have some passion about.

    I didn’t see you mention Dr. Douglas Graham, of the 80-10-10 diet, who has a lot to say about sugar. And also, what about green smoothies? They seem to provide enough fiber to balance the sugar. They seem to work for me, energetically.

    thanks for focusing on this topic.


  2. Tammie says:

    I believe the topic of sugar is emotional because we ALL have emotion attached to it (or the foods that contain high levels of it), be it from childhood or adulthood. As my dad always said, “Moderation is the key to success.” I think, unless we have a severe reaction to something, it is all good within a balance, which is what I think Kevin is trying to say. Each individual’s chemistry is different, and just as a medication dosage will work differently for each individual, nutrients respond differently within the body, based on the individual chemistry of that body.

  3. Cheryl says:

    I just know that cancer cells live on sugar. So I have decided to go w/o sugar altogether.
    I’ll get tested soon. Thanks.

  4. Susan says:

    I agree, Moderation is the key. Moderation is not a green light but education and conscious decision making.

  5. Barbra says:

    The confusion arises in the word ‘sugar’. Table sugar(sucrose) is two molecules – one of glucose and one of fructose that is easily broken down in the mouth into the most elemental glucose. Glucose is the only fuel the brian uses. So when you say “sugar” you are using a misnomer. For clarity and to help your public, a brief course in carbohydrates would be beneficial to clear up the confusion. Fruit is NOT sugar – it is a God-made food that has mostly fructose in it, fiber, vitamins, minerals and phytochemicals and smaller amouts of glucose. Blood ‘sugar’ really refers to blood glucose. When you keep saying ‘sugar’ referring to fruit (not sugar), it adds to the confusion because white table sugar DOES feed cancer cell growth! It’s all about keeping blood GLUCOSE levels stable. Fruit, because of its fiber content does not affect blood sugar to the degree that table sugar (sucrose) does.

  6. Janet Kent says:

    I live in Scotland UK so do not havw access to Kevins online shop but,like most people, I do like a little sweetness in my life. I do not like sugar as such but find that “Sweet Freedom ” , a brand available to me, is a good alternative or I use date syrup (which I make myself from Medjool dates and coconut water) .Sweet freedom is a syrup made from carob,apples and grapes and nothing more.100% natural and can be used for pretty well everything. It is also ok for diabetics (my son is a diabetic)and has 25% less calories than cane sugar. I think that “a little of what you fancy does you good” Just don’t overdo anything.If we gave up everything that we are told is bad for us lif e would be pretty dull.Moderation is the key. I am a recovered cancer victim and have been recovered for 6 years now and at 73 yrs old I feel fantastic.
    Kevin you do a fantastic job and I love the fact that you always listen to other points of view..Blessed Be.

  7. Carrie says:

    Oh, Kev! No offense but the above article is so lazy and biased. Did you even bother to look any studies up on PubMed?? Or, did you just rest on the biases of some health practitioners and your own experiences?

    The only unbiased way to answer whether fruit is good for people with cancer is to look up studies on PubMed. It took me 5-10 minutes, and I looked through several studies.

    About 70% of the studies should that higher fruit consumption correlates with less cancer or less disease progression once a person has cancer. Moreover, affect appears to be non-linear: the more fruit you eat, the results keep getting better and better.

    About 30% found no affect. Of course, it all depends on the type of cancer. And some correlate (in a good way!) in with fruit consumption and some do not.

    BUT I couldn’t find a single study that indicated fruits are associated with higher rates of cancer. NOT ONE….NADA….ZILCH.

    So before you go prescribing people to no eat fruit or to limit your fruit consumption, do your homework. Stop with reckless with prescribing advice that contradicts the scientific literature.

    Some example articles (cohort studies):

    (Studies on the biological mechanisms of fruit against cancer cells)

  8. Carrie says:

    Apologies for the multiple typos! Eek.

  9. Velda says:

    Kevin, you are a prince among men!! To me it is obvious that you do this because you care about giving the best information to people so they can make good choices about their health. You and Annmarie make a marvelous team and I hope you continue this work for a very long time.

    I have no idea why the sugar topic is so emotional. When I’m at work it just hurts me to see all of the refined sugar that people continually eat – however, I realize we are not talking about refinded sugar here. I believe that food was created to nurture out bodies on a celular level. If we use it wrong, then it has the potential of doing harm. If we balance what we do, the potenial is for thriving. Either way, an individual has the ability to know what works for them. If that is different from someone else, I am not sure why that could evoke an emotional negative response. We are human, indeed 🙂

    Thank you again, Kevin, for a great article and great information!!

  10. Sam says:

    This blog has opened my eyes to the fungus connection, and in looking further, the pH connection. High sugar = acid forming = yeast and fungus = disease.

    My only constructive input on this blog entry (and others) is that specific blood tests and ranges aren’t referenced. Is it better to measure via A1c or a home blood glucose test? What would you consider to be good ranges? What would you consider to happen to someone as they clean up their diet?

  11. LynnCS says:

    It’s the old story. “Follow the money!” Our food has been taken over by industry for so long now that as generations grow up hearing all the opinions. It is taken as truth. Do we even know what is meant by a balanced diet, anymore? Why do we think in terms of 3 meals a day? Advertising effects our thinking and we have no idea what the body is doing with what we put in it. It has become clear to me that there is not always a direct corolation of what we put in our mouths to it’s effect on the body. If we are young and in shape, it’s one thing and if we are already in need of making some corrections, it’s another. I sure am glad to have some where to get a balanced overview of all points of view. Right now I am not going to either extreme. All or nothing hasn’t worked well for my life to this point. Morning smoothie gets me lots of greens;celery,kale,mixed salad greens; chia seed gel, an apple, sometimes pineapple; and I am still using brown rice protein pdr.and supplements. I am trying to understand it all and hopefully get all my nourishment from the food and how it works in my body. Our bodies are miraculous things and can provide for us if we do the right things, most of the time. Kevin. thank you so much for all the time and energy you put in to this site. I get a lot to think about and put in to making a decision as to how best to procede. I take responsibility for what I use from what I hear. Much gratitude. Lynn

  12. Anna says:

    I agree with Velda, who said quote “Kevin, you are a prince among men!!”

    You & Annemarie are 2 of the most balanced & thoughtful people I have come across in the often confusing world of nutrition.

    And you are so right to explain that everyone has a different tolerance-some can tolerate more sugar w/o issues, some can tolerate more protein or fat, etc. We should use nutritional info as a guideline, not black & white dogma, get regular blood tests & listen to our bodies.

  13. Barbara says:


    I agree that multiple things do work. That being said, which is healthier overall – a high fruit, low fat diet vs. a high fat high protein low fruit diet? We need to keep in mind here that the body is a synergistic whole and not just a pancreas or any other organ. The reason a high fruit low fat diet works for regulating blood sugar is that insulin and its partner – glucose cannot penetrate through the fat on the vessel wall to enter exit the blood and enter into the cell where it is needed for energy.

    The low sugar, high fat & protein diet works because there is very low glucose produced hence “low blood sugar.” But in this scenario there is a lack of glucose for cell energy. Without ample glucose the cell will eventually die. Human cells get energy from glucose and not from fat or protein as many may think. Protein is for building, repairing and growing, fat is for hormone balance such as vitamin D synthesis etc. Of course this is not all these macro nutrient due but you get the idea…

    So, again which diet is better in the long run for optimal body function and health?

    Balance! I say, balance! Our bodies need lots of glucose for energy and quite a bit less protein and fat for us to be healthy adults. Of course children need more protein (according to their size and activity level) because they are still growing, and athletes need a bit more (not a lot) of protein for building and repair. But overall we all need plenty of glucose for energy. There are several scientific studies that show that it is indeed too much FAT in our diets that cause diabetes, not SUGAR!

    So for me, I would rather limit fat and protein and eat my fruits than to limit my fruits to keep my blood sugar down due to eating more fat than my body can use…

    No name calling please! This should be a civil discussion amongst “heath nuts.” And remember we are all different! So embrace the differences and make your own choices.

    Barbara Holdeman NC, MH, HHP, CHS

  14. sharon says:

    Wow, is the issue of sugar ever emotionally charged!!! Just notice when the waitress asks if anyone wants dessert. There are usually all kinds of reactions…guilty “yeses,” pious “noes,” and lots of giggles all around.

    I cut sugar out of my diet because I was totally addicted to it. I didn’t like the feeling of craving sugar. Of course, I’m talking about agave, maple syrup, yacon, etc. Fruit is different. I eat some, but I can take it or leave it.

    Thanks for all the work you do on teaching us nutrition, Kevin. It’s a LOT of work, because as you say there is no definitive answer as to what is good for everyone. I still don’t know what is good for me, so I just eat a varied diet of fruits, vegetables, grains, legumes, nuts and seeds and hope that I’m covering my bases.

  15. Rocio says:

    I am reading a great book, if anyone is interested “Made to Crave” by Lysa Terkeurst, It has open my eyes, even more, to my issues with food- healthy food of course!- like my ex-dear nuts..well I have not been eating them and I feel very free..the only problem!! what to eat for protein? no that the nuts had that much anyway. I don’t eat sugar and really there is life after sugar, but if you don’t have a problem with it..why make it a problem?
    I love you comment LynnCS and like you said..with much gratitude, to both of you, Kevin and Annmarie . I don’t get into any blogs and websites but to this one I am faithful! I enjoy and learn a lot! I am from Colombia S.A. and I love you pictures from Peru and Costa Rica..There is a lot to learn once we go somewhere beyond what we know, physically, mentally and spiritually.
    And please overlook my typos, just one more human among many 😉

  16. sarah says:

    Hi Kevin,
    Several people have asked about the Glycemic index of the red banana powder. Please answer this question. Apparently ripe bananas have a Glycemic index ranging from 46 to 70. An average of 52 is usually assigned to bananas.
    So if the banana is dried, then the Glycemic index must be even higher. Is that correct???

  17. Josephine says:

    I believe that people become addicted to sugar, training their bodies to frequently anticipate the sugar load. Getting off of this requires some steps that seem extreme to the people who believe that two desserts a day, plus a bunch of other refined carbs, are NORMAL.

  18. bill says:

    No thank you.

  19. Lynn says:

    Just to clarify:

    It is UNHEALTHY fats (such as animal & processed) that attach to the lining of blood vessels & cells & thus prevent insulin from carrying nutrition (glucose) into our cells (as well as other problems, such as high cholesterol.) This is a major factor in the cause/symptoms of diabetes.
    However, this is not true of HEALTHY fats, such as Omega 3 fatty acids, unprocessed flax oil, walnuts, etc. In fact, such healthy fats help to reverse that process by removing cholesterol from vessel & cell walls.
    So, while a person can eat any type of fat & not have an immediate rise in blood sugar, if it is unhealthy fat, it will eventually worsen the symptoms of diabetes by layering more cholesterol on the cells, thereby preventing even more glucose from entering cells, resulting in even higher blood sugar levels overall.
    Thus, I would bet my bottom dollar, the increased blood sugar levels resulting from increased fat intake (as you referred to aove) did not result from the AMOUNT of fat they ate but the TYPE of fat they ate.

  20. Mary J.Khalilian says:

    I think that the problem is related to ones lifestyle. For me I struggle daily with wanting to cut my sugar intake. And on some days I do. One teaspoon of raw sugar in my morning cup of Joe is what I try to stick to. But the reality is, some people live stressful lives…and although working through that stress is what they need to do. It doesn’t always happen as quick as you’d like it to. So sugar unfortunately is a comfort food. I do believe when I cut down on sugar I feel better. But you have to be happy and surrounded by people who share your desire to get better.
    Thanks for all the insightful information you give.

  21. Carrie says:

    Hey Kevin,

    Thanks for your reply 🙂

    I did read your other article.

    I think the problem is two-fold.

    First, that you recommend not eating a lot of fruit above (and then substantiate that by giving a example of eating only a little bit of fruit. The 4 kiwis plus 2 plums comes out to only about 2.8 NLEA servings of fruit. I consider that on the low side, especially because it matches the I’m sure how much fruit you eat varies, but that gives the impression that you support low fruit consumption. I’m not saying that you should be relying to the cause of 80-10-10 or all-fruit diets (the latter is a total disaster), but I think that really encouraging people not to limit their fruit consumption is the goal (in order to counter the crazy Atkins, high-fat approaches out there).

    Second, is the article above is confusing, as you use the exact same word “sugar” to mean more than one thing. So I agree with the poster “Barbra” that the confusion arises in the word ’sugar’. It seems that some people in the comments think that you are always including “fruit” in the sugar category (like the couple of comments on the last post from people who say they mostly avoid fruit and that they support you in that stance), and someone people (like myself) who think that you are sometimes referring to fruit when you say sugar, but who are confused about when exactly you mean what.

    I’m been following what you post for a long-time, and I know that sometimes when you use the word “sugar” you mean “carbohydrate”, sometimes you mean “simple carbohydrates”, and other times you mean “refined sugar”. It gets very confusing! Even in this article, you use the term “sugar” to refer to at least two different things…yikes!

    I think it would help tremendously if you were clearer and never used just the term “sugar”, but used the terms “carbohydrate”, “simple carbohydrates”, “refined sugar”, etc.

    Then perhaps I wouldn’t have mis-interpreted what you are saying, just as others have, too….

    All the best.

  22. Carrie says:

    Gosh, I am terrible with the typos!

    Just to be clearer, so that we’re not talking past each other, I would consider something like

    * Low fruit to be 3 servings a day
    * Moderate fruit to be 4 – 8 servings a day
    * High fruit: 8+ servings a day
    * 80-10-10 to be 20-40+ servings a day
    * All fruit (an uncontroversally terrible idea)

    I’m just saying that it would be good to make sure that you’re not steering people to the low-end, but instead are steering people to the higher end of the spectrum (not 80-10-10, but just higher in fruit than what it seems like you are suggesting). And I think any advice given should be carefully researched first, hence why I provided links to PubMed studies and felt like this article was being sloppy. Not that you shouldn’t write, but rather that things should be substantiated, not anecdotal, when giving generic advice.

    Regardless, it would be helpful if you were more concrete about what high fruit and low fruit specifically means to you. It’s very easy to misinterpret things otherwise.

    Finally, you said that no one is healing cancer on a “high-sugar diet”…did you mean carbs, simple carbs, fruit, or refined sugar here? Again, it’s not easy to follow what you are saying…

  23. jules says:

    I understand that sugar and sweets are anti-nutrients and also suppress the immune system for several hours after consuming.

  24. viola says:

    fat blocks insulin production, therefore the high carbs meals should be eaten separately from high fat food. Either way is healthy (high-carbs/low-fat or low-carbs/high-fat) as long as you don’t mix them together at a same meal. When I say carbs I mean starchy food, not so much fruits -based on my experience eating more than 2 servings of fruits every day is NOT healthy, too much fructose eventually will raise fasting blood sugar. Table sugar is half fructose half glucose, and the reason it’s so much unhealthy is the fructose content.

  25. Dr. Gerson used plenty of apples, fruit and carrots in his cancer curing treatment. Sugar is not the villain. After all, carbohydrates are broken down into their basic sugars in the gut.

    Perhaps the villain is the 17 teaspoons of white sugar and GMO fructose in sodas fed to kids, along with tons of other sugars in their lunchables and processed chemicalized colored fake foodery.

    Thank you for this great article.

  26. shine says:

    one of the reasons i love this site is becase its so balanced and not just eat raw and eat it this way

    i was going to say sugar is an emotive subject..guess its because its sweet and addictive and people get plugged in and defensive and dont want to give it up..i notice the same thing happens around raw chocolate and agave ( which is suger of course)

    glad you raised this

  27. dan says:

    Well, I have been eating hight fruit diet (7 lbs a day, few vegetables, 15 percent fat)since about 2 years as a result of reading Frederic Patenaude.
    I must say, my weight has stabilized to 120 lbs (I am 5.10 ft)
    I am not a heavy guy, but I feel in a very good shape, sleep good, have a good mood, have removed all the toxines I had in the hands that I could not longer move…yes !!
    I think this is all due to this diet

    Moreover, I never got my blood tested, don’t know if I ought to ??
    Is this possible to feel so great and to have sth wrong with the blood ???

  28. Lorraine says:

    Fruit is a powerhouse of nutrients. How can an yone question this??????

  29. Angie says:

    Barbra (& anyone else confused by the use of the word “sugar): In scientific & nutrition-related vocabulary, the words ending in -ose (glucose, fructose, etc.) are all types of sugars, just as words ending in -ol are alcohols even though they are not rubbing alcohol, wine, or vodka. Glucose is a sugar measured in the blood. Lactose is milk sugar. Fructose is fruit sugar. Sucrose is the white one that most people just call “sugar.” Nutrition labels put all these into the “sugar” category, so a glass of milk fresh from the cow is labelled as containing several grams of “sugar” even though nothing sweet has been added to it, and if you look up the “nutrition facts” for a fresh banana, it will list sugar content. Becoming aware of this can help clear some of the confusion when reading things like this article, food labels, etc.

  30. Carol says:

    My husband went to a Chinese doctor. She said something interesting about sugar. She said that the reason children crave sugar is because their muscles are growing and muscles need sugar.

  31. bob says:

    Thanks all for your responses re: fruit. No real scientific data in my comment. I believe that fruits are better than refined “sugars” for the reason many have sited. gotta satisfy the sweet desire. I have used fruit to get me off of refined sugars.

    For me, any sugar is mildly dehydrating (fruits included) so I balance with drinking water.

    Also, move and exercise to utilize whatever sugar or carbohydrate/starch (complex “sugars”) I eat and circulate/ metabolize the energy I ingest. We all have individual needs at different times. Education and conscious choice, I believe, while not everybodys practice, is the key for me. Thanks!

  32. Carrie says:

    Ah, Angie, I think Barbra and I (I won’t speak for others) know what sugar means in the scientific sense. After all, Barbra talked about nuances between fructose, glucose, and sucrose, so I doubt she is confused about what chemical compounds constitute sugars. And in speaking for myself, I majored in biology, can read articles on PubMed with the best of them, and I can cite you the chemical formulas of the most common simple sugars by heart (Organic Chem, baby!).

    If you re-read our posts carefully, you’ll see that what we were confused about is not the scientific definition of sugar, but rather which of the many sugars Kevin is referring to. He clearly uses more than one definition/usage of the term sugar, sometimes referring to carbs in general, other times referring to refined sugar, etc., without providing enough context for us to know which definition/usage he is using. Now that is what is confusing!

  33. Heather says:

    To Carrie – Re your comment –

    “So before you go prescribing people to no eat fruit or to limit your fruit consumption, do your homework. Stop with reckless with prescribing advice that contradicts the scientific literature.”

    Slow down with the reckless comments girl, if you had really read what Kevin said, he PRESCRIBED NOTHING in his article. Jeez.

  34. Treeplanter says:

    I would like to make a few points here.

    First, there is a world of difference between fruits such as blueberries and goji berries, which are loaded with polyphenol antioxidants, and fruits such as dates and bananas, which are low in antioxidants.

    Berries are some of the most nutrient-packed foods on earth, and everyone, yes, everyone, will benefit from eating them. Berries actually have less sugar and more fiber per pound than just about any other fruits. Great nutrition, anti-cancer properties, and low sugar — they are the best fruits on earth.

    So, if I had cancer, the first thing I would do would be to increase my consumption of berries.

    Kevin, when talking about subject like sugar, please make these kinds of distinctions. Some fruits and much more nutritious than others, so don’t just lump them all into one category.

    Second, cancer cells need more than sugar to grow. Like any other human cell, they also need protein and fat. I believe grape fasts work as cancer cures partly because grapes are very low in protein and fat, and if the body is starving for protein and fat, cells can’t divide very well. Also, organic grapes contain resveratrol, a polyphenol antioxidant with anti-cancer effects. Some berries also contain resveratrol.

    Also, I have heard that wild blueberries have much higher levels of antioxidants than cultivated blueberries. So, here is another reason to forage for your fruits.

    Basically, there are two kinds of fruits, the kind where you eat the skin and the kind where the skin is not edible. Berries, of course, are the first kind, where the skins are eaten. And the skins of fruits contain almost all of the polyphenol antixodants. So, a general guidance would be, if you can eat the skin, that fruit is better for you than one where you don’t eat the skin.

    Along with berries, this would include cherries, plums, figs, peaches, etc.

    And technically, skins of fruits such as lemons and oranges are edible, but you are not likely to eat that much of them. They are more of a seasoning than a food. Only eat organic citrus peels, otherwise they are spayed with toxic chemicals.

    Also, the smaller the fruit, the better. Smaller fruits have more skin surface per unit of sugar. And the skin is the part you want for maximum nutrition.

    I hope this information is helpful.

    Michael T.

  35. Satori says:

    That is because people love fruits!

    There are 5 tastes, but only sweetness makes people happy:) I think nobody would find bitterness, sourness, saltiness, or umami to be pleasurable!

  36. Michele says:

    For me personally, i try not to overthink things. In general and when it comes to health i think people look for that “magic pill” or that “perfect diet” that will give them perfect health and long life, but i think true health is so much more than that. It’s probably easier to cling to something tangible like food though. I’m curious as to why the powers that be (whatever you think that is) would put naturally sweet foods on the planet and give us a sweet tastebud if it wasn’t hard coded into us that we need this. I also think our tastebuds have been corrupted over time with the creation of processed foods, GMO’s and cross breeding. I wonder, in a perfect world (i know i know what is perfect) if we were clean and functioning the way we were truly meant to function, if the true sweet would actually taste like the sweet we are used to today. i’m not so sure it would. Have an awesome day!

  37. HopandSkip says:

    Jane Kent,

    What a precious you are! 🙂 Bless Abba that you are feeling good and cancer free! :0)

  38. Carrie says:

    Hey Heather,

    Actually, Kevin made recommendations in his post–both directly and indirectly. Some of these are good, others may not be. Some examples of direct and indirect recommendations that Kevin makes in this article include ” I don’t think high fruit is the way to go for cancer”, “For 80-90% of the health population (who is reading this blog) you should not have to worry too much about your natural sugar consumption as long as you’re monitoring your blood or using other testing markers to guide you”, “I’m not anti-fruit, but I do think the high fruit diet works short term for more than it does long term (based on my contacts with people on these diets) and I think that cancer patients (and diabetics) need to watch their sugar intake”, and “the overriding theme for me when making decisions on what I talk about, sell or publish is ‘would I recommend this to my mom?’ If it passes the Mom test, then you eventually read about it. If not, you won’t hear about it here. If my mom were to have cancer again, I wouldn’t send her to a doctor using high fruit.” These are all recommendations or statements that will directly influence people’s decision-making, and hence Kevin should (and I’m sure is) taking fully responsibility for this. So you’re wrong that Kevin has made no prescriptions in this article.

    But I used the word “reckless” to refer to recommendations that are made against high fruit (I don’t mean 80-10-10, but rather lots of fruit in the diet) that CONFLICT with peer-reviewed scientific research. Kevin, having a large blog audience, has a RESPONSIBILITY to research and provide evidence whenever he makes recommendations regarding diseases. If you re-read the article, you will see that Kevin does make such recommendations. Now, it’s no longer clear to me what exactly Kevin meant and that I may have misunderstood Kevin, since he sometimes used the word sugar to refer to carbs, other times to fruit, and other times to mean refined sugar. But I had thought that Kevin said that he recommended lower fruit consumption for cancer, and if you look at the scientific literature, you will see that this claim is flat out wrong. So I didn’t use the term “reckless” lightly.

    Also, you accused me of reckless comments–according to the definition of the word, that’s a misuse. I’ve been the only person on this page who actually supported the statements they are making with studies from PubMed. Even Kevin failed to do that…

    Anyhow, I may have misinterpreted what Kevin means, and I only now realize that. But honestly the problem is that Kevin is not using precise enough language for us to follow exactly what he means. If you will notice, at least two other people in the comments have also pointed out that Kevin’s use of the word sugar is ambiguous since he uses it to mean more than one thing! If he were at least consistent, we could follow what we mean.

    I hope this explains things better.

  39. Barbara says:


    You are correct, it is bad fats that “stick” to the vessel walls. But keep in mind that if you eat a high (healthy) fat diet with lots of fruit you will have the blood sugar rising because even the healthy fats cannot be penetrated by the insulin/glucose molecules. It actually takes about 24 hours for the body to remove fat from the blood. This is not to say we should not eat any fat; but a high fat diet, even if it is all “healthy” fats is not a balanced approach. When we change from a SAD and go veggie we tend to try to replace meat with other forms of protein. When a veggie goes raw we tend to increase the fats because our sources of protein tend to be from nuts and seed which can also be very high in fat. Many raw foodists do not realize how much fat they actually consume because they count it as protein instead. So, for instance we use lots of cashews and almonds and nut butters, etc for calories instead of fruits.

    As far as the posts about cancer and fruit consumption. I have to agree with Carrie on that. There is study after study being done that show fruits (especially the berries) fight against cancer not cause or even exacerbate it. In my practice I speak with many cancer patients each day and berries are at the top of the list for foods that I suggest they consume along with herbs and lots of veggie juicing. I believe we were made to eat fruit and fruit is not “sugar.” Sugar has no nutritional value, it has been stripped clean of any nutrients. Fruits on the other hand have a plethora of nutrients, fiber, disease fighting chemicals, pure water and give us fuel for our cells.

    So, don’t be so afraid of such a perfect food. Eat your fruit, paint your plate with color and enjoy your meals. It’s all about balance here. A little fat goes a long way, as does protein, but we all need fuel for the cells. Beside, our body converts all “carbs” to glucose, not just fruit!

  40. viola says:

    according to Mercola fructose has 7 times damaging (glycation) properties than glucose

  41. Hats off to you to analyse and poke your brain into the details of everything !
    No offense and without prejudice !
    WHITE SUGAR which is added to Ayurvedic medicines IS 100% poison.
    Medicine and drug mfrrs have not, as much insight and analysis as you have. They are all commercial whether Big Pharma or Big Ayurveda!
    GOING THE RIGHT PATH – The western science and philosophy breaks down knowledge and objects for analysis into too many fragmentation and ultimately
    gets confused. Natural LifeStyle in its authentic style does away with all complications. I AM SURPRISED AT THE ALLEGED EFFECT OF SUGAR IN
    In my presence it all happened in the last 25 to 30 yrs. Cancer patients were given a diet of 5 bananas + half coconut at 9am and similar quota at 6pm and nothing
    else, strictly nothing else. And they progressed in one month with intermittent fastings on lemon + water + honey if needed. They progressed very well. Brain
    tumour was reduced. And breast cancer tumours were reduced. They should have aggravated but they did not at all. I am first hand witness to it all. HAD THE
    I dare to think, that, in contrast but not in contradiction, that SUGAR IN FRUITS OR COCONUTS is NOT HARMFUL TO CANCER PATIENTS.
    But all processed sugars from all sources is POISON to all including cancer patients.
    I dare to think that if sugarcane juice with high %age of sugar is given to cancer patients WHO ARE ON NATURE DIET, their cancerous growth will not
    SWELL. But if they are on cooked diet, the effect of sugar might be DIFFERENT!
    I recommended and got it in evidence that carrot juice for cancer patients is essential as it clears and thins blood and helps in cancer recovery. I always start cancer
    patients with a routine as below:
    1.cleansing intestine 2.fruit diet.3.clearing up all the nine holes in thebody to clean;4.nutritious juices/soups to support health instead of starving; 5. a diet of juices
    from carrots, dates, banana stem, drumstick leaves, papaya leaves (for increasing the platelette count) and some herbs to enhance the WBC. IT WORKED AS
    One year back, a diabetic man, 75y old cried to me saying his Allop Dr has told him to cut his diabetic leg! I saw to it that that sickening leg was restored to beautifulhealth in just 15 days. No worms, No sores!
    Just now, another case is under my observation
    and guidance. He was about to loose his feet to amputation due to diabetic wounds. They mercilessly scraped off his bottomskin of foot and scooped a little from inside ! I can send his recouping video. I put him on nature diet, fruits, fasting, and my colleague Nat Dr helped him up. I told him to eat not less than 50 BEL fruits/ dark violet berries,with their seeds also, and hedid it. His big swollen foot is now thinned and his wounds are healing. Surprising to me, is his age and the fast trend of recovery. Because of his nature of job as a SHEPERD. He is modest and disciplined. He came crying with pain and now is smiling with happiness having got back his foot. Now THAT BEL FRUIT CONTAINS A LOT OF SUGAR BUT WHY THAT SUGAR DID NOT INTERCEPT RECOVERY!
    You are generating positive support for the factthat sugar in fruits is GOOD AND GOOD AND GOOD ONLY FOR ALL.
    Thanks to Kevin for your wonderful work for all. It helps a great deal and the comments are soaring with total involvement and integrity!


  42. Ninya says:

    Thank you D PARAMESWARAN & Carrie for pointing out that processed sugar & fruits are two entirely different things. At least you two dared to take a stand than further confuse human beings!

    So, once & for all, please could any one inform me whether green smoothies made with whole sweet fruits are healthy or not? They do taste very sweet without any added sugar or honey, after all? And I am a teenager who have just weaned myself off McDonald milkshakes & KFC milk mango smoothies…I was able to do this because green smoothies taste delicious too! Now, I am confused whether i am supposed have them with only greens & vegetables! It will be difficult, I think….but I will appreciate the truth though hard to digest!!! Please do help if you have personal experience with green FRUIT smoothies!


    Comments are closed for this post.