GlucoseDespite its absolute necessity for life (see chapter 10), dietary glucose isn’t perfect. When it exists in nature without fructose, it’s called “starch,” and it truly does supply “empty calories,” energy for either storage or burning.
FructoseFructose is never found alone in nature. Rather, it is always partnered with its more benign sister molecule, glucose.
Robert Lustig, Fat Chancep.154, 156
Well, I got my paws on Lustig's new book. In addition to it being virtually unreadable, it is so chock full of the sort of distortions, hyperbole and flat out errors I don't think I could make it through a full read or review.
So I'll probably give you a few tidbits here and there when I can summon up the motivation to read.
I included the glucose quote to "set up" the fructose quote. If one reads later in the fructose paragraph, he discusses a glass of OJ and the sucrose it contains. While the above quote could be interpreted as fructose never being present in a food without glucose, in context, and using the word "partnered", Lustig is saying that fructose is not found in nature in "free form". This also implies that the "natural" ratio of fructose:glucose is 1:1.
Below are a number of screen shots of various foods from nutritiondata.com. Clearly, from these screenshots below, free fructose is present (as is free glucose and sucrose) in different quantities and proportions in various foods. I wonder if Lustig likes tomatoes! I hesitate to post these lest I contribute to any greater fructophobia in the IHC.