An obvious question that isn’t answered (in this article - not sure about the paper itself) is whether feeding fructose results in MORE tumor growth than feeding glucose (or other sources of calories)
Without knowing this, it doesn’t make any sense to assume that there is anything inherently bad about fructose, at least other than the mechanistic arguments mentioned in the article (which are weak if not backed up by empirical evidence)
Without knowing this, it doesn’t make any sense to assume that there is anything inherently bad about fructose, at least other than the mechanistic arguments mentioned in the article (which are weak if not backed up by empirical evidence)