A recent study using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has allegedly
suggested that compared with glucose consumption, fructose consumption
resulted “in a distinct pattern” of cerebral blood flow (CBF) in brain regions
linked to appetite and reward pathways, and “a smaller increase in systemic
glucose, insulin, and glucagon-like polypeptide 1 levels.” Kathleen Page, et
al., “Effects of Fructose vs Glucose on Regional Cerebral Blood Flow in Brain
Regions Involved With Appetite and Reward Pathways,” JAMA, January 2013.
Researchers relied on 20 adult volunteers who underwent to MRI sessions
“together with ingestion of either a fructose of a glucose drink in a blinded,
random-order crossover design.”

The MRIs evidently showed that within 15 minutes, “glucose significantly
reduced hypothalamic CBF, whereas fructose did not.” As the authors
explained, “[I]ngestion of glucose but not fructose reduced cerebral blood
flow and thus activity in specific regions that regulate appetite and reward
processing. In keeping with these data, ingestion of glucose but not fructose
produced increased ratings of satiety and fullness.”

“Not only did fructose fail to diminish hypothalamic activity, but it instead
induced a small, transient increase in hypothalamic activity, a response
similar to insulin-induced decrements in levels of circulating glucose,” they
concluded. “These findings suggest that ingestion of glucose, but not fructose, initiates a coordinated response between the homeostatic-striatal network that regulates feeding behavior.”

About The Author

For decades, manufacturers, distributors and retailers at every link in the food chain have come to Shook, Hardy & Bacon to partner with a legal team that understands the issues they face in today's evolving food production industry. Shook attorneys work with some of the world's largest food, beverage and agribusiness companies to establish preventative measures, conduct internal audits, develop public relations strategies, and advance tort reform initiatives.

Close