I think you bring up really good questions, and I'm sure that they are being addressed by those who study it. The main thing that's important about this research is that it shows that there is an undeniable link between refined sugar consumption and type II diabetes; I think that most earlier studies had similar conclusions but always left too many unanswered questions. This one appears to be very exhaustive. And to your point about fruit, the authors control for fruit intake, which due to all of the good stuff in fruits is considered a positive by most doctors, and conclude that the refined sugar is the problem. Also, for comparison, a can of Coke has 39g of sugar, while an apple has 3g. So even if the sugars are equal, one would have to consume 13 apples to get the same effect. This could be quite problematic for the corn syrup industry. In the past when companies are found to have been peddling a dangerous product, even in cases where the effects were unknown, they have been held civilly liable for their actions. Tobacco, asbestos, silicone implants, dioxin, and the list goes on and on. One wonders if diabetes patients can sue Yum, or Coke, or McDonald's for pain and suffering from their condition. Could be a huge can of worms, but hopefully it will get Congress talking about real, impactful changes to the farm bill.
Double-checking your numbers says it's actually 23g. They might be wrong, but 3g sounds awefully low...while an apple has 3g
WTF? I have no idea where the first source I checked got that number. I didn't make it up, but certainly its not correct. Looking into it further, I can't imagine why I believed that in the first place. I think 3g represents the fiber (indigestible sugar) content of an apple. Thanks.
The obese and diabetic would have grounds to sue if they can prove that the companies knew about the hazard of their product, but continued to peddle it or make it more addictive yet in spite of the knowledge. I understand this was instrumental in the massive tobacco lawsuits of the 90s, but IANAL and are not sure if you can win damages without this argument. Some fruits are better than others, even with equal sugar content, if they have a lower glycemic index. The lower the index, the slower the sugars are absorbed into the body. So cherries and avocados are considered good for diabetics and pre-diabetics, while orange juice is not. BTW: thanx for linking to the publication it's based on.