The unprecedented doubling of childhood asthma prevalence from 1980 to 1995, its continued climb and 2013 plateau, mainly due to plateauing prevalence among non-Hispanic black children, has been described by the US Center for Disease Control (CDC) as mysterious. Given these results, prior research and case-study evidence, it is reasonable to suggest that the two-fold higher asthma risk associated with 100% juice consumption is due to apple juice’s high fructose-to-glucose ratio, and that the ~ 2.5/~ 3.5 times higher risk associated with soda/sports/fruit drinks intake is with the excess-free-fructose in HFCS. Greater consumption of 100% juice, soda/sports/fruit drinks, and any combination, was associated with ~two ( P = 0.001), ~ 2.5 ( P = 0.001), and ~ 3.5 times ( P < 0.0001) higher asthma incidence. Intake frequencies for soda/sports/fruit drinks, and 100% juices were used for analyses. MethodsĬox regression models were used to analyze prospective early childhood data (12–30 months of age) from the National Children’s Study. Therefore, we tested the hypothesis that excess-free-fructose intake is associated with childhood asthma risk. Studies with longitudinal childhood data are lacking.

Unabsorbed excess-free-fructose in the gut may react with dietary proteins to form immunogens that bind asthma mediating receptors, and/or alter the microbiota towards a profile linked to lung disorders. Thus, children have received high excess-free-fructose doses, the fructose type associated with fructose malabsorption. Apple juice naturally contains a high (≥2:1) fructose-to-glucose ratio. This coincides with a preference shift from orange to apple juice among young children. The HFCS used in soft drinks has been shown to contain a higher fructose-to-glucose ratio than previously thought. So, whether your preference is for clear or cloudy, the good news is there’s every reason to continue enjoying a glass of 100% apple juice.Recent research provides consistent evidence that the unexplained doubling of childhood asthma prevalence (1980–1995), its continued climb and 2013 plateau, may be associated with the proliferation of high-fructose-corn-syrup (HFCS) in the US food supply. What’s more, a study in the Journal of the American College of Health concluded that there were no significant risks for poor glucose control or cardiovascular markers in healthy young adults following consumption of two daily servings of clear apple juice. However, there's still a nutritional benefit to be gained from the bioactives in clear apple juice, which you don’t find in sugary soft drinks or energy drinks. The natural sugars in clear apple juice may be higher than in cloudy apple juice or whole apples. However, apple juice may constitute a convenient and easy way to increase fruit consumption and improve overall quality of the diet when consumed in moderation.”Īdditionally, pressed or cloudy apple juice tends to contain a small amount of fibre, while clear apple juice has none, as all of the pulp and peel has been removed. It is likely that whole apples are superior to apple juice. In their concluding remarks, the authors said: “The beneficial effects of apple juice are more apparent with cloudy apple juice than clear apple juice, probably due to its lower nutritional density. Most of the included trials focused on health markers, such as oxidative stress, inflammation, blood lipids, and blood glucose control. The authors said these signs could also be relevant to brain health.

The scientific evidence suggests a range of potential health benefits associated with consuming apples, including 100% juice.īut does it matter whether we’re drawn towards the cloudy or clear varieties when it comes to our choice of apple juice? Read on to compare apples with apples.Ī 2022 review of human trials in Nutrients found an association between cloudy apple juice and signs of cardiovascular health.

Apple juice vs orange juice popularity