Partiality towards something shouldn’t make a person oblivious to its shortcomings. Constructive criticism is natural, healthy, and necessary in order to gain a balanced perspective. Be that as it may, a major shortcoming of natural healthcare is its lack of scholarship. This means that—unlike big pharma and its constituents—natural healthcare does not have stringent academic standards, or governing bodies that help give structure and direction to its practices and philosophies. This is largely due to the fact that the earth provides a number of ways to address a single condition. For example: garlic, beets, and ginger can be used singularly or in conjunction to address blood pressure issues. And the same applies to burdock, oregano, and basil when it comes to kidney issues. Essentially, Mother Nature affords liberty to her students, but an unfortunate side-effect of such liberties is that the unlearned and unqualified are free to erect themselves as her practitioners, experts, and spokespersons.

As a result, certain natural healing spaces have become plagued with misinformation. For instance, the idea that ‘the body cannot differentiate between the sugar from fruit, and the sugar from candy’. This has gained traction in recent years. But, if there was any truth to this claim, fruit would be a leading cause of diabetes, obesity, and other metabolic disorders. Sure, some fruits are packed with enough sugar to rival junk food, but it is well known that the presence of other nutrients—common to fruits—helps to offset these effects.

The gist of the matter is this: blood sugar is unavoidable due to the fact that it is the body’s preferred source of energy. Sugar converts into glucose, and then insulin transfers that glucose into various cells throughout the body. What tends to separate healthy food from unhealthy food is the rate in which the sugar enters into the bloodstream. A slow entry—normally triggered by healthy foods—provides a steady source of energy, while a fast entry—normally triggered by unhealthy foods—causes a short burst of energy followed by a crash. The quickest and simplest way to assess which is which is to observe the food’s texture and consistency. Food that melts in the mouth is likely to do the same within the digestive tract. And, outside of the obvious sugary snacks, simple carbs, and other generally unhealthy foods, fruits does indeed fit this criteria.

But, what separates fruit from the rest is—as previously stated—nutrients. Junk food is junk because it is nutrient deficient. Due to the fact that it has little to no vitamins and minerals, the body will have to borrow resources just to get rid of it. It is, essentially, a biological thief. Fruit, on the other hand, is not only packed with vitamins and minerals, but fiber and water as well, which are critical to blood sugar control. You see, fiber helps to slow down digestion—thus slowing the entry of sugar into the bloodstream—and water dilutes the blood, which helps the kidneys get rid of excess sugar. (the body will have to rob

It is disrespectful and disingenuous to the craft of natural healthcare to simply lump fruit in with foods that incite metabolic disorders. One could argue that fruit helped set the precedent for how blood sugar and insulin is understood and controlled. Because, it is common for the insulin resistant to consume fiber and water before high carb meals in order blunt sugar spikes. Essentially, fruit has never and will never cause metabolic disorders. Instead, fruit is nature’s bio-hack for metabolic disorders.