"Fruits are great for you!". Really?

Doug Freyburger wrote:
The idea that fruits are good is fine for someone who's never gotten fat
in the first place. It's a load of nonsense for those of us have gotten
fat.

I highly doubt that people have actually gotten fat from fruit as their only
carbohydrate source. Most people get fat from eating refined sugars, flour and
high starch root vegetables.

What's a fruit? It's a vegitable that grew a fancy outfit and
added sugar to itself.

Which seems entirely natural in terms of evolution.

Fruits are great for folks who think french fries count against their
daily 5 servings of veggies. Have you even seen what a serving is? The
salads I often have with dinner are tiny but they count as 2 servings!
I come closer to 10 servings of veggies per day than to 5 when I take
into account the tiny size of a serving. To think that some folks eat a
medium serving of fries at Burger King and count it as their 5 servings
for the day, no matter even something as bad as a banana is supposed to
be beneficial. But it isn't compared to real food. Bananas are candy
without being called that.


I resent the implication that a naturally occurring phenomenon such as fruit is
in your opinion not real food. Strictly speaking, real food is food intended by
Nature to be eaten. There is no other purpose fro fruit besides human and
animal consumption, which is why it rots when left on trees for too long.
Animal flesh, milk, eggs and their byproducts, in contrast, take all manner of
processing to be consumed by humans. Nearly all cultures agree that fruit is
the most nutritious food group found in nature and entirely consumable raw. You
seem to be focused on fruit's sugar content, which I understand as a fellow
low-carber. But trust me, our obesity epidemic is not due to people eating too
many bananas, watermelons, pineapples or other high glyceride fruits.

Orlando