Talk:Fructose

Presence in semen, and as proof in rape cases

Semen is the only human product that contains any appreciable amount of fructose. For this reason it is a "marker" in rape cases. The logical place in Wikipedia for this information is in this article.38.104.70.30 (talk) 22:47, 24 February 2023 (UTC)captcrisis

Talk topic on contradictory information from EFSA's perspective?

In Potential health effects section, there is a Self-contradictory template that states:

I'm guessing this is the mentioned talk post, which was archived back in Feb 2023, before the Mar 2023 mentioned in the template.

Should a new topic be started, or the existing one unarchived, or the template removed? As a casual user, I found it a bit confusing to figure out where to get more details, with there just being the one topic above that was left unarchived. But also not familiar enough with WP editing to know if it's normal to reference archived talk posts in the article. Pb7280 (talk) 23:10, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

The challenge from the March 2023 talk page about whether a controversy exists within the EFSA opinion was raised by an IP editor whose interpretation was incorrect. There is no controversy.

I removed the "contradicton box" with other minor edits, here. Zefr (talk) 00:19, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Relative sweetness: weight or mole basis?

It is important to say whether sweetness is compared on a molar or weight basis. If the basis is weight as I suspect, the enhanced sweetness of fructose over glucose could be explained by the fact that its molecular weight is about half that of sucrose. Hydrolysis of sucrose would have a smaller effect on sweetness, as only half the weight of sucrose is converted to fructose with greater sweetness, while the other half is converted to glucose with lesser sweetness.Eaberry (talk) 15:47, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Did you mean 'sweetness of fructose over sucrose? That would be logical. However, the following reference says that fructose is twice as sweet on a molar basis:

by DT Cason · 1987 · Cited by 46 — Fructose is a very sweet sugar and on a molar basis is twice as sweet as sucrose ...

I haven't read enough to have confidence in that answer so I haven't edited the article. SciberDoc (talk) 15:08, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Edit of table needed, please help if you have the skill required

Table 1. Sugar content of selected common plant foods (g/100g The headings 'Fruits', 'Vegetables' and 'Grains' need deleting. They are inappropriate and in the wrong places. As the table can usefully be sorted, any division into fruits vegetables and grains is bound to go wrong depending which way it is sorted (unless each section sorted separately which would make comparisons harder between items in different categories).

I attempted to delete the headings but everything I tried broke the table display when I tried it in the sandbox. Help from someone skilled with tables would be appreciated. Thanks. SciberDoc (talk) 14:57, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Absolute sweetness of fructose is identical at 5 °C as 50 °C?

I was not able to find this information in the cited source (Lee, Thomas D. (1 January 2000). "Sweeteners". Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology. doi:10.1002/0471238961.19230505120505.a01.pub2. ISBN 978-0471238966.). Does anyone know where did this information come from? 182.255.32.46 (talk) 04:04, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Ok I found it, but in the "sugars" section, not "sweeteners". In fact I suspect that most of the citations of this source should be "sugars". The sweeteners part barely talked about fructose at all. 182.255.32.46 (talk) 04:10, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

2026 Nature Metabolism review and potential article updates

A recent review article was published in Nature Metabolism:

Johnson RJ, Lanaspa MA, Tolan DR, Rabinowitz JD, et al. Fructose: metabolic signal and modern hazard. Nature Metabolism (2026). DOI: 10.1038/s42255-026-01506-y

This appears to be a broad secondary review of fructose biology and may be relevant to several fructose-related articles.

I’m not proposing broad changes at this stage. Rather, I’d like to discuss whether the review identifies any notable gaps in current article coverage.

One area that stood out to me is endogenous fructose production via the polyol pathway. The current fructose article focuses heavily on dietary fructose, absorption, and metabolism, but appears to contain little discussion of endogenous fructose synthesis.

Would editors consider a brief, appropriately weighted discussion of endogenous fructose production to be due weight for this article?

Before proposing any text, I wanted to get feedback on whether this topic would be considered appropriate coverage. Potentialmotion (talk) 22:56, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

The title ("hazard") gives away the authors' intent with the article to focus on metabolic dysregulation by fructose, which is a developing view in basic research, but one where fructose is not yet accepted as a "hazard" in clinical research or expert guidelines, such as here.

It's a review of lab (mostly in vitro and animal model studies (WP:MEDANIMAL) that used unphysiological fructose concentrations. In general, the theory exists by association - more fructose-containing food products are being consumed, and the incidence rates of liver disease, diabetes, and metabolic syndrome are increasing, leading to the assumption that fructose itself causes diseases: this is not yet a proven cause-and-effect relationship.

In the conclusion, the authors state: "The role of endogenously produced fructose in metabolic disease remains controversial... Interpretation of epidemiological studies is confounded by fruits, which are rich in fructose... there are also only limited studies in humans to determine the contribution of endogenous fructose." It seems the section entitled, Potential health effects, already covers this. Zefr (talk) 04:25, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

Thanks. I agree that the review does not establish clinical consensus regarding disease causation, and that any expansion of health-effect claims would be premature.

My interest is primarily in the underlying biochemistry and metabolic pathways. I’ll take a look through some of the related mechanism-focused articles to see whether the review is more relevant there. Potentialmotion (talk) 05:34, 3 June 2026 (UTC)