Dextrose vs Fructose

A lot of guys use Dextrose as a "carrier" for creatine ect. I remember being told a couple of years back to rather use fructose. The basic difference seem to be that fructose has a low glycemic index vs dextrose and that its a diffent type of suger as dextrose is cane suger and fructose is a fruit sugar.

I've also read on some US forums thats its advised to mix the two 50/50. Comments?

Basically the question is does any of you use fructose? Any different results?

Never taken fructose but I would imagine the dextrose is better. The reason you add the carb is to get the insulin spike to shuttle in the creatine. Higher more prolonged G.I. means better creatine absorbtion...

I'm with Inja on this one.

You want that insulin spike.

Cool.... And its a lot cheaper!

Sorry, what about waxy maize with creatine? Is this sufficient?

missiondh wrote:

Sorry, what about waxy maize with creatine? Is this sufficient?

You want carbs that cause an instant spike in insulin such as monosaccharides which include fructose, glucose, galactose and dextrose. The spike is what aids in the uptake of creatine, just as any other nutrient. From what i understand, waxy maize starch is a complex carb and thus doesnt spike the insulin but is a slow release carb and therefore wouldn't be sufficient.

I've read a lot about the difference between the 2 and it ends up with personal opinion mostly. Dextrose as a sugar which cause an insulin spike whereas WM is more easily absorbed with low GI and does not cause a high insl spike. Some people mix the 2. Some people prefer WM because it does not cause bloatedness as easily as dextrose.

I got this a while back. Feel free to comment.

i will try my best at describing my personal beliefs about WMS (waxy maize starch) from personal experience as well as research i have done on the subject. WMS really is an extremely unique substance and works on a very different mechanism to the usual malt/dex carbohydrate mix, especially dealing with its response with insulin. most think a higher rate of absorption/assimilation/digestion takes more insulin or a greater insulin response to shuttle nutrients and to replenish glycogen stores, i think WMS is going to prove this wrong. WMS is very different, hence why many have been using this stuff while dieting and not getting the usual dex/malt spill over or bloat many people experience.

WMS differs from malt or dex (especially dex) in 2 main ways... WMS has a significantly greater molecular weight and lower osmolarity of the 2. without going into the science of john dalton, molecular mass, or osmotic pressure, what do these 2 main details mean to us, athletes...

first because of the greater molecular weight, WMS has the ability to quickly bypass much of the harsh digestion process in the stomach and go to the intestines (ileum) for immediate absorption. "yeah so what..." well in theory, this allows this complex carbohydrate to stay in long chain polymer form before being broken down or digested after it has crossed the intestinal wall. which in turn causes a low glycemic response as these polymer chains are virtually untouched as they are still in tact before the stomach had time to break them down and are broken down at a much lower rate. with malt or dex, their glycemic response is very high. dex is basically pure glucose, so the obvious spike in insulin is evident, but even though malt is considered a complex carb, it is broken down extremely fast and causes a very quick spike in insulin.

second, the low osmolarity of this substance makes WMS highly absorbable driving itself across the intestinal wall and into the bloodstream. This low osmolarity allows substance to reach the muscle cells quickly.

i personally believe these 2 actions will increase absorption of many other supplemental aides by signifcant numbers. first the ability of WMS to allow substances to bypass much of the stomachs harsh acids is huge. many substances, like creatines, amino acids, etc. can sit in these acidic environments and degrade and make them useless. and second the low osmolarity of WMS has the ability to take other materials across the intestinal wall fairly easy (absorption) and then materials are driven to various cells (assimilation) to take on their action. i really believe you are going to see WMS in the future as the next "transport system" not only for creatine but for many other aides, and it doesn't work on the high insulin response mechanism for absorption either, which is a plus.

many are talking about "feeling" WMS and mistaking it as a hypoglycemic response. i can not say really what it is from a personal or from med-line searches, but it feels like a hypoglycemic episode is about to happen, but it never really quite takes you to being hypo. it is strange really, i have made myself hypo countless times usually from the over use of ALA and dextrose so i know the feeling. something else is happing here, as the insulin response to WMS is fairly low. i guess only time will tell as well as new theories will arise to what it is.

@ Beesting; Thnx a lot. i would then use a creatine with a transport system like dextrose as you guys mentioned.

missiondh wrote:

@ Beesting; Thnx a lot. i would then use a creatine with a transport system like dextrose as you guys mentioned.

Yep. 40g simple carbs would be sufficient. Other examples of products you could take include energade or powerade (100ml undiluted has approximately 40g carb)and fruit juices. Thats why they recommend grape/apple fruit juice when taking creatine

Beesting wrote:

missiondh wrote:

@ Beesting; Thnx a lot. i would then use a creatine with a transport system like dextrose as you guys mentioned.

Yep. 40g simple carbs would be sufficient. Other examples of products you could take include energade or powerade (100ml undiluted has approximately 40g carb)and fruit juices. Thats why they recommend grape/apple fruit juice when taking creatine

I dont agree with all you're saying.

When buying Waxy Maize I ended up talking to 1 of the guys that was involved in making Powerade and they used Waxy Maize to make it.

Secondly fruit juices are fructose (specially grape juice) not dextrose.

That was why I posed the question in the first place - everyone say you must use dextrose but when asked with liquids to mix it with you get told to use fructose and Waxy Maize :huh:

LSJ wrote:

Beesting wrote:

missiondh wrote:

@ Beesting; Thnx a lot. i would then use a creatine with a transport system like dextrose as you guys mentioned.

Yep. 40g simple carbs would be sufficient. Other examples of products you could take include energade or powerade (100ml undiluted has approximately 40g carb)and fruit juices. Thats why they recommend grape/apple fruit juice when taking creatine

I dont agree with all you're saying.

When buying Waxy Maize I ended up talking to 1 of the guys that was involved in making Powerade and they used Waxy Maize to make it.

Secondly fruit juices are fructose (specially grape juice) not dextrose.

That was why I posed the question in the first place - everyone say you must use dextrose but when asked with liquids to mix it with you get told to use fructose and Waxy Maize :huh:

I understand what you're saying. Those were just altrenatives instead of taking dextrose. At the end of the day they will all sufficiently spike insulin, just some spike it faster than others and with more efficiency but they all get the job done in the end. Obviously you want the most efficient spike for creatine uptake which leads back to your question. I just recommend sticking to any of the monosaccahrides but if one works better than the other such as dextrose vs fructose then take the dextrose.

The point of using carbohydrates + creatine is to cause an insulin spike to shuttle the creatine to the muscles as fast as possible.

Fructose is no good - its excellent at restoring liver glycogen, but doesn't hold a candle when compared to dextrose/ maltodextrin for restoring muscle glycogen. Also, its more likly to be stored as fat once liver glycogen reserves are replenished ( between 30 - 50g if im not mistaken), than it is to restore muscle glycogen.
content.karger.com/ProdukteDB/produkte.a...&filename=177259.pdf

WMS is also damn good at restoring muscle glycogen, but it doesnt cause the much needed insulin spike to do the job quickly enough (3 times slower than dextrose) www.bodybuilding.com/fun/waxy_maize_starch_myth.htm

Vitargo, on the other hand is said to deliver a 168% greater insulin response than dextrose.

Keep in mind, WMS and vitargo are NOT the same carbohydrate. Sure, they're derived from the same source, but apparently are processed very differently leading to different insulin responses and glycogen replenishment.

Honestly, until further studies have been done on the benefits of using vitargo over dextrose/maltodextrin, I would honestly stick to the latter simply because of the costs involved.

Vitargo is a modified starch with patent rights on it and is actually mostly used by cyclists.

But if you take the prices:
1kg Waxy Maize = R50
1kg Dextrose = R25
750grams of unmixed Vitargo = R300
(There is quite a few products out there thats got Vitargo mixed into it)

Dextrose is by far the cheapest. However why does some of the very good companies like BSN still insist on selling Waxy Maize? I understand everyone tries to make money but if I look at US forums allmost everyone uses a combination of Waxy Maize and Dextrose.

Would that not be the ideal?

LSJ wrote:

Vitargo is a modified starch with patent rights on it and is actually mostly used by cyclists.

But if you take the prices:
1kg Waxy Maize = R50
1kg Dextrose = R25
750grams of unmixed Vitargo = R300
(There is quite a few products out there thats got Vitargo mixed into it)

Dextrose is by far the cheapest. However why does some of the very good companies like BSN still insist on selling Waxy Maize? I understand everyone tries to make money but if I look at US forums allmost everyone uses a combination of Waxy Maize and Dextrose.

Would that not be the ideal?

theres a lot more int companies using wms, and lots of ppl on int forums, saying it works, and is excelent, btw, i would never pay that for vitargo, they CAN shove it!!!!

I dont see the benefit of using vitargo over any other carbohydrates as far as endurance sports are concerned. If cyclists are using the stuff, then they are definatley short-changing themselves. Taking it pre or intra race would cause them to become hypoglycemic and hinder performance, and taking it post race would yield the same results as any other carbohydrate source.

You as a bodybuilder will get a greater benefit from the insulin spike than the endurance bunnies would by just replenishing their glycogen.

Why are some companies still insistant on using WMS?
www.musculardevelopment.com/index2.php?o...ent&do_pdf=1&id=1451

One would definatley be hype, If you check that link, Brink (and David Barr somewhere too if I remember correctly) suggests that they applied and cited the Vitargo studies to WMS as if the two were interchangable as both can be derived from barley starch.

Provided that these claims about WMS being a new "slow-carb" are accurate, then I kind of like the idea of using a combination of waxy maize and dextrose/maltodextrin pre-workout plus some fast absorbing proteins and some BCAAs and some creatine. It would make perfect sense.
Dextrose, proteins, BCAAs, creatine to provide a huge insulin spike and signalling hyperaminoglycemia and therefore signalling proteolysis, whilst the waxy maize is utilized more slowly thus preventing blood sugar crashes through-out your workout.

I also see alot of companies doing something simmilar with rice oligodextrin as a carbohydrate source pre-workout.

OK then so it means the mix of the two would be best..... That makes sense. The Waxy Maize I've got is 87% carbs so I KNOW its got a high carb content. Think I'll be mixing the two from now on and see how it goes.

Also read on one of the int forums the guys suggesting you take your Waxy Maize, Dextrose, BCAA & creatine as you walk out of the gym and your protein & Glutamine when you get home.