Almanac A1C

Beyond the Marketing: Scientific Evidence on Juice Consumption and Metabolic Impact

Posted

by

dr. Karunia Valeriani Japar

Table of Contents
Keywords: , , , , , ,

Introduction

The Ubiquity and Appeal of Juice

Juice remains a central staple in non-alcoholic beverages worldwide, with a market that surpassed USD 313 billion in 2025 and is projected to robust expansion over the next decade, reflecting its universal appeal across demographics, regions and socioeconomic strata. Global consumption volumes are notable: total at-home juice intake is forecast to reach over 32 billion liters in 2025, while out-of-home consumption will approach 3.4 billion liters, underscoring the beverage’s high penetration in daily routines. Asia-Pacific now represents nearly a quarter a total global revenue, with China, Japan, India, and South Korea each making multi-billion-dollar annual sales, driven by urbanization, health trends, and innovation in product offerings [1,2,3,4].

Boxed and conventionally packaged juice-including those processed via heat-based and centrifugal methods-continues to dominate mainstream retail due to affordability, long shelf-life, and convenience. Packaged beverage segments contribute approximately 40% of total juice market revenues, propelled by urban households seeking rapid nutrition and the wide supermarket availability of branded as well as private-label options. Orange juice alone accounts for nearly half of fruit juice consumption globally, highlighting consumer preference for familiar flavor profiles and established safety. Despite growing scrutiny of sugar content, conventional boxed juice remains widely favored for pediatric consumption and rapid refreshment, especially where access to fresh or premium variants may be limited [1,2].

Cold-Pressed and Premium Juice Innovations

The juice industry has witnessed significant innovation and premiumization, with cold pressed juices- produced through high-pressure extraction and lacking heat treatment-emerging as a fastest-growing global segment. Cold-pressed juices accounted for nearly 80% market share among new premium offerings in 2023, reflecting their perceived health advantage: higher retention of vitamins, minerals, antioxidants, and phytochemicals compared to normal centrifugal juices. Modern distribution emphasizes bottled formats (42.5% of share in 2023), supported by high-pressure processing that preserves nutritional integrity and shelf stability while accommodating ready-to drink convenience for busy consumers [5,6,7,8].

Fiber-Enriched Juice: Dual Appear for Nutrition and Function

The market for fiber-enriched juices is rapidly expanding as health-conscious consumers seek functional beverages that support metabolic health, satiety, and gut function. Recent studies have demonstrated that orange juice fortified with citrus-derived dietary fiber preserves organoleptic properties while delivering meaningful physiological benefits, such as attenuating postprandial glucose spikes and promoting digestive health. Leading manufacturers now incorporate added fiber, plant extracts, vitamins, and minerals, alongside clean-label strategies, positioning these products as everyday aids for wellness and disease prevention [1,9,10,11].

The global juice market is dynamically shaped by evolving consumer preferences for convenience, nutrition, and sustainability. While boxed and conventional juices remain deeply embedded in daily diets worldwide, expanding premium segments- such as cold-pressed and fiber-enriched varieties- are redefining the category toward greater health functionality, cleaner labeling, and ecological responsibility. Continued innovation will likely reinforce juice’s foundational role as both a cultural staple and a vehicle for metabolic disease prevention in modern health paradigms [1,2,6,11].

The Myth of Juice As A “Healthy“ Drink

The notion of juice as a universally “ healthy” drink is a longstanding dietary myth, rooted in its association with natural fruit sources and its appeal as a convenient means of nutrient delivery. However, critical examination of current evidence demonstrates that the health profile of juice nuanced, depending on its sugar content, processing method, and consumption context [12].

Nutrient Density Versus Fiber Deficiency

100% fruit juice provides vitamins (notably vitamin c and folate), minerals (such as potassium), and bioactive phytochemicals comparable to whole fruits. Yet, juice is consistently lower in dietary fiber, which is largely removed during processing, leading to diminished benefits for satiety, glycemic modulation and gut health. This fiber deficiency means that, metabolically, juice behaves more like a sugary beverage than a whole food, quickly delivering sugars to the bloodstream, and promoting glycemic spikes-especially in large servings [13,14,15,16].

Metabolic Risks: Sugar Content and Glycemic Load

Even 100% fruit juice represents a concentrated source of free sugars (fructose, glucose, sucrose) similar in magnitude to that found in many soft drinks. Recent epidemiological and mechanistic studies consistently show that “drinking your sugar,” regardless of whether it originates from soda or pure fruit juice, is associated with a significantly higher risk of metabolic disorders, including type 2 diabetes and metabolic syndrome, compared to consuming sugar as part of whole fruit. This elevated risk is attributed to rapid intestinal absorption and hepatic overload, in the absence of buffering fiber and other macronutrients that would slow sugar uptake [13,14,15,17].

Potential Benefits and the Dose-Response Controversy

Meta-analytic reviews reveal that moderate juice consumption (typically 75-224 mL/day) in adults does not increase the risk of obesity, poor glycemic control, or cardiovascular disease and may confer vascular benefits linked to polyphenols and potassium. However, risk rises in a dose-dependent manner: higher intakes (>250-300mL/day) are, in observational cohorts, linked to increases in incident diabetes, CVD mortality, and some cancers, though absolute risk increments are small and cofounded by lifestyle variables [12,13,16,17,18].

Dietary Guidance: Juice as a Supplement, Not a Substitute

Current expert consensus frames juice as a complementary component within dietary guidelines-appropriate in modest servings for micronutrient support when whole fruit intake is insufficient, particularly among children and older adults with restricted chewing, but not as a primary beverage or daily hydration source. Regular substitution of juice for water or whole fruit is not recommended, as excess caloric and sugar load with minimal fiber may undermine metabolic health over time [12,14,15,16,17].

The myth of juice as an inherently “healthy” drink likely derives from its natural origins but fails to account for the metabolic drawbacks of liquid sugar and the critical loss of fiber through processing. The scientific evidence underscores that moderate 100% juice consumption can be safely included as part of balanced diet but should not be misconstrued as equivalent to whole fruit, nor consumed in open-ended quantities [12,13,14,15].

Nutritional and Biochemical Pitfalls of Boxed and Processed Juice

Boxed and processed juices, while offering convenience and extended shelf-life, are subject to significant nutritional and biochemical drawbacks compared to fresh fruit or freshly pressed juices. These pitfalls affect their contribution to health and metabolic outcomes.

Nutritional Pitfalls: Sugar Load, Vitamin Degradation, and Fiber Loss

Processed juices generally have elevated sugar concentrations, often comparable to soft drinks, primarily due to removal of fiber and, in some cases, addition of extra sugars to enhance flavor and shelf stability. Without fiber, these sugars are rapidly absorbed, contributing to postprandial glycemic spikes and increased metabolic disease risk [19].

Heat-based processes- thermal pasteurization and sterilization-are central to boxed/processed juice manufacturing, but they degrade heat-sensitive micronutrients, most notably vitamin C (ascorbic acid). Vitamin C declines progressively during both processing and storage, driven by thermal, oxidative, and enzymatic degradation, with up to 90% loss reported in some commercial juice products before purchase. Polyphenols, flavonoids, and carotenoids also decrease through these mechanisms, reducing the antioxidant capacity and functional health properties of the final products [20,21,22].

Dietary fiber is almost entirely eliminated, since juicing removes insoluble fractions and most soluble fiber, dramatically reducing benefits for satiety, glycemic control, and gut microbiota diversity [23].

Biochemical Changes: Additives, Browning, and Storage Effects

To preserve taste and prevent spoilage, boxes and processed juices frequently rely on additives-preservatives (e.g., sodium benzoate), flavor enhancers and colorants- that may have adverse effects if consumed habitually or in large quantities. The presence of these compounds is associated with occasional allergic responses and uncertain long-term safety.

Biochemical changes, such as non-enzymatic browning (Maillard rection), occur during processing and storage. These changes not only alter flavor and appearance but can further degrade vitamins (especially vitamin C), and create byproducts such as hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF), which has been investigated for potential cytotoxicity and mutagenicity. Storage leads to additional biochemical changes: sugar may hydrolyze into simpler compounds (glucose/fructose), and acid hydrolysis affects overall profile and palatability [22].

Functional Properties Compromised

The cumulative effects of processing-depletion of bioactive compounds, loss of fiber, and reliance on chemical stabilizers-diminish the overall nutritional quality and functional capacity of boxed juices. High-pressure processing methods (HPP) do offer improvements in retention of some bioactive ingredients relative to conventional heat treatment, but are costly and less commonly used for mass-market boxed juices [20].

The nutritional and biochemical pitfalls of boxed and processed juice include excessive sugar load (in form of high fructose corn syrup), dramatic reduction in fiber and essential vitamins, degradation of bioactive compounds, and reliance on preservatives and additives for shelf stability. These changes undermine the purported health benefits and shift boxed juice nearer to sweetened beverages from a metabolic health perspective [19,20,21,22,24].

The Problem with Non-Cold Pressed and “Fiber-Enriched” Juices

Non-cold pressed juices, which are typically manufactured using centrifugal extraction and pasteurization, present several key limitations regarding health benefits and nutritional value. The processing methods used in these juices expose the liquid to significant heat and oxygen, accelerating the loss of sensitive micronutrients such as vitamin C, along with important polyphenols and flavonoids. These antioxidant compounds are substantially more abundant in freshly pressed juices but can be reduced by 30% to 50% or more in non-cold pressed varieties. This degradation continues during storage, further diminishing the juice’s antioxidant potential and overall health value. Crucially, both processing methods almost entirely remove insoluble fiber from fruit, depriving the final product of the satiety and glycemic buffering effects that whole fruits provide.  As a result, these juices commonly produce higher postprandial glucose and insulin spikes, which may increase metabolic risk over time [25,26,27].

In response to criticism over the lack of fiber, many manufacturers now offer “fiber-enriched” juices, formulated by adding isolated dietary fiber back into the juice after processing. However, this practice only partially addresses the deficiencies associated with processed juice. The fiber used in fiber-enriched juices is often not structurally identical to the fiber matrix found naturally in whole fruits. This means it may not provide the same effects on satiety, intestinal transit, or the fermentation profile within the gut microbiome. More specifically, the physiological actions of added fiber are typically muted compared to fiber that is integrated into the natural plant structure. For example, some studies show that fiber additions can slightly blunt postprandial glucose spikes, but these benefits rarely match those of eating whole fruit or consuming less-processed plant foods [12,28,29,30].

Another emerging issue with fiber-enriched juice is micronutrient bioavailability. Newly added fiber, especially soluble types, can bind to beneficial pant compounds such as polyphenols and carotenoids, ultimately lowering their intestinal absorption. This reduces the nutritional payoff of the juice, even if the label advertises additional fiber content. Furthermore, technical challenges in production mean that relatively low amounts of fiber are often added, or highly processed forms are used, to preserve palatability and shelf stability. The outcome is a beverage that, while slightly improved over non-enriched juice, still falls far short of the metabolic and digestive benefits associated with consuming whole fruit [8,10,25,27,30,31].

Overall, both non-cold pressed and fiber-enriched juices remain limited in their capacity to deliver genuine health benefits compared to whole fruits. These products are best viewed as convenient, palatable sources of energy and some micronutrients, but they do not replicate the full nutritional, glycemic, and functional advantages of unprocessed fruits [8,10,25,27,30,31].

Juicing, Glycemic Response, and Metabolic Dysfunction

Juicing, particularly when it yields beverages with low fiber and high free sugar content, is closely tied to enhanced glycemic response and may contribute to the development of metabolic dysfunction when consumed habitually over the long term.

Immediately following ingestion, juices-regardless of fruit variety, are rapidly absorbed in the gastrointestinal tract due to their liquid form and lack of fiber. This results in accelerated elevations of postprandial blood glucose and insulin levels compared to whole fruit. For example, orange, apple, and papaya juices all exhibit low to moderate glycemic indexes, but still cause greater glycemic excursions than their whole food counterparts, and mango juice in particular may drive higher glycemic and glycemic load scores. Acute studies confirm that 100% fruit juice increases postprandial blood glucose and insulin; while fiber fortification using pomace can modestly blunt these responses, conventional juices without fiber have substantially less metabolic buffering [32,33,34].

Postprandial glycemic spikes from juice especially high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS)  drive excessive insulin secretion, which over time, desensitizes insulin receptors and culminates in systemic insulin resistance. This impairment slows cellular glucose uptake, contributing to chronic hyperglycemia- a hallmark of metabolic dysfunction. Simultaneously, the liver converts excess fructose from juice into fatty acids via de novo lipogenesis, elevating triglyceride synthesis and storage. This process leads progressively to hepatic fat accumulation, known as non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), further exacerbating insulin resistance and lipid dysregulation. All these factors feed into a vicious cycle, where chronic hyperglycemia and hyperinsulinemia, rising triglycerides, and NAFLD mutually reinforce each other. Ultimately, this biochemical interplay increases the risk of developing metabolic syndrome and type 2 diabetes mellitus [35,36,37,38].  

The relationship between juice intake and insulin resistance is similarly concerning. Systematic reviews of randomized trials indicate that higher juice intakes do not significantly improve fasting glucose or insulin in healthy adults, with some studies actually reporting detrimental effects at higher intakes, especially in populations at risk for metabolic syndrome or type 2 diabetes. Juice lacks the fiber and plant matrix that slow digestion and glucose uptake, resulting in an accelerated glycemic load, increased hepatic fat production, and higher long-term risk for insulin resistance and impaired glucose homeostasis. While some unique fruit juices containing specific bioactive (e.g., golden berry, tomato, guava) may offer modest glucose-lowering effects in controlled experimental settings, these findings are not generalizable to processed, sugar-rich commercial juices [36,37,38,39,40].

In conclusion, the regular consumption of juices, particularly those low in fiber and high in free sugars, promotes rapid glycemic spikes and favors metabolic pathways leading to increased blood triglycerides, hepatic fat accumulation (NAFLD), sustained hyperglycemia and insulin resistance. These metabolic consequences are most evident when intake exceeds moderate levels or substitutes for whole fruits in the long term [32,33,35,37,38,39].

Figure 1. Association Of Fruit Intake And The Risk Of Type 2 Diabetes [38]

Debunking Detox and Weight Loss Myths: Evidence Against Juice Cleanses

            The scientific consensus is clear: juice cleanses do not ’detox” the body or lead to sustainable weight loss, despite persistent commercial and social media claims. The premise that juice can purge toxins is a misconception unsupported by medical physiology. The liver and kidneys continuously remove metabolic waste and environmental toxins; no specific diet, including juice cleanses, enhances this process beyond what a balanced diet achieves [41,42,43].

            Juice cleanses primarily produce rapid, temporary weight loss due to calorie restriction rather than any unique metabolic effect. The initial, drop is mostly water weight, resulting from depletion of glycogen stores, increased diuresis, and reduced gut contents from the lack of solid food. Studies show that up to 72% of this lost weight returns within days after resuming normal eating, and at six months, most individuals experience net weight gain because of compensatory metabolic changes-such as lowered basal metabolic rate and increased appetite- set off by the restrictive regimen [44,45].

            Further, juice cleanses lack essential nutrients such as protein, healthy fats, and fiber. Juicing strips fruit and vegetables of their natural fiber, which is crucial for blood sugar regulation, cholesterol management, and gut health. High sugar content in juices leads to rapid blood glucose spikes, increasing the risk for weight gain, obesity and metabolic dysfunction- especially worrisome for individuals with glucose intolerance or insulin resistance. Clinical studies reveal that exclusive juice diets can disrupt the gut microbiome, promoting the growth of inflammatory and permeability-associated bacteria, which is linked to higher risk of inflammation and potential cognitive decline [43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50].

            The supposed “ cleansing” effects some users report are often due to the laxative action and reduced intestinal bulk, not toxin elimination. This effect is temporary and can result in gastrointestinal discomfort, nutrient deficiencies, and even metabolic acidosis with repeated, extreme use. No randomized controlled trials support claims that juice cleanses result in meaningful detoxification or long-term improvements in body composition, and a recent meta-analysis found no significant changes in weight or waist-to-hip ratio with juice interventions in healthy populations [18,41,43,49,51].

            In summary, the evidence refutes the myth of juice cleanses as effective detox or sustainable weight loss strategies. Their short-term effect are driven by energy deficit and water loss, while their long-term outcomes predispose to weight regain, gut and metabolic dysfunction, and nutrient deficits. Balanced eating and healthy lifestyle remain the foundation for safe, lasting.

Why Fruit Is Not Always Healthy: The “No Juice/ No Fruit” Rationale

         While fruit is often promoted as “healthy”, emerging research and clinical guidelines reveal that not all fruits- and especially fruit juices- should be regarded as universally beneficial, particularly for individuals seeking to prevent or manage metabolic diseases. The “No Juice/ No Fruit” rationale is based on the metabolic risks associated with fruit’s sugar content, glycemic properties, and modern consumption patterns.

            First, whole fruits contain natural sugars, including glucose, sucrose and fructose. When consumed in excess-especially from high-glycemic fruits such as grapes, bananas, or mangoes, or when eaten as juice- these sugars are rapidly absorbed, causing sharp increases in blood glucose and insulin levels. The liquid form of juice, devoid of fiber and cellular matrix, accelerates sugar delivery and glycemic spikes, aggravating postprandial hyperinsulinemia which, over time, can contribute to insulin resistance and increased risk of type 2 diabetes. Indeed, prospective cohort studies show that fruit juice intake, in contrast to whole fruit is directly associated with higher incidence of diabetes, even after accounting for other lifestyle factors [52,53,54,55].

            Second, the glycemic index and insulinemic response of certain fruits are comparable to traditional refined carbohydrates, particularly when consumed in large amounts or as juice. Diets high in glycemic and insulinemic load may promote excess caloric intake, impair appetite, regulation, and drive body fat accumulation. In individuals with obesity or insulin resistance, research demonstrates a preference for sugar-sweetened foods, including fruits and juices, which can perpetuate impaired glucose and insulin regulation and hinder effective dietary intervention [52,53,54,56].

            While multiple meta-analyses confirm that moderate whole fruit consumption-particularly low-glycemic varieties such as berries and citrus-correlates with lower risk of metabolic syndrome, hypertension, and cardiovascular disease in general populations, these benefits are not uniformly observed with fruit juices or higher glycemic fruits, especially in those with established metabolic dysfunction. The relationship is further complicated by modern dietary environments where fruit is often consumed in excess, as juice or in dried/ concentrated forms, resulting in caloric overload and elevated sugar intake without the compensatory benefits of fiber, micronutrients, and plant bioactive [55,57,58,59]

            Consequently, the “No Juice/No Fruit” rationale-especially in population at risk for obesity, diabetes, NAFLD, and insulin resistance- emphasizes limiting or excluding fruit juices, high-glycemic fruits and processed fruit products. This approach prioritizes the metabolic neutrality of non-starchy vegetables, fiber-rich foods, and low sugar plant sources over potentially harmful glycemic contributors. Whole fruit can remain part of a balanced diet for many, but caution is warranted in those vulnerable to metabolic disease, and fruit juice should be strictly limited or avoided [53,55,56,57].

Berries and Avocado: The Exception To The Rule

Berries and avocadoes stand out as notable exceptions among whole fruits with regard to their metabolic impact and health-promoting properties, representing unique low-risk options for metabolic health and disease prevention.

Berries-including blueberries, blackberries, raspberries, strawberries, and cranberries-are characterized by a low glycemic index, high fiber content, and exceptional concentrations of polyphenols, flavonoids, and other bioactive compounds. Numerous epidemiological interventional studies demonstrate that regular berry consumption is inversely associated with the risk of obesity, insulin resistance, type 2 diabetes, dyslipidemia, and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Mechanistically, their polyphenol constituents modulate key metabolic pathways through antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, and lipid-lowering effects, and favorably influence vascular function and endothelial health. Randomized controlled trials have shown that berry rich diets improve serum lipid profiles, increase HDL cholesterol, decrease LDL cholesterol and triglycerides, and may improve insulin sensitivity, all without provoking significant glucose excursions. Acute feeding studies reveal that berries blunt postprandial hyperglycemia and hyperinsulinemia due to their fiber and polyphenol matrix, which slows gastric emptying and carbohydrate absorption. While the effects are more modest on anthropometric measures and fasting glucose, the cumulative scientific evidence supports berries as an optimal fruit group in dietary strategies for metabolic disease prevention management [60,61,62,63,64].

            Avocado is another exception, offering a unique nutritional profile distinct from that of most fruits. Avocados are low in carbohydrate and sugar but rich in monounsaturated fatty acids, dietary fiber, plant sterols, carotenoids, and antioxidants. Multiple systematic reviews and meta-analyses indicate that regular avocado intake favourably alters major components of metabolic syndrome: reductions in total and LDL cholesterol, triglycerides, fasting blood glucose, and blood pressure, along with increases in HDL cholesterol. Avocado consumption also promotes satiety and weight regulation due to its high fiber and healthy fat content, further supporting glycemic and lipid control. Clinical trials have observed improvements in markers of inflammation and vascular health, as well as potential benefits in hepatic function. Importantly, these effects occur without the excessive glycemic or insulinemic responses linked to higher glycemic fruits and fruit juices [65,66,67,68,69].

In summary, both berries and avocados exhibit a distinct advantage over typical fruit choices by providing low glycemic load, high fiber, and a wealth of bioactive phytochemicals with demonstrated capability to mitigate obesity, insulin resistance, dyslipidemia, NAFLD, and other metabolic risk factors. Their regular inclusion in the diet- contrasted against high-sugar fruits and juices- offers a strong evidence-based approach for metabolic health.

Recommendations for Metabolic Disease Prevention: Whole Foods Only

The prevention of metabolic disease is anchored in a dietary paradigm that prioritizes whole food over processed and refined products. Landmark clinical guidelines, systematic reviews, and prospective cohort studies consistently link whole foods-nutrient rich plants, minimally processed grains, lean proteins, and healthy fats- to reductions in risk and incidence of obesity, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and related metabolic disorders [70,71,72,73,74,75].

Whole foods retain their natural fiber, micronutrients, and bioactive phytochemicals, all of which play crucial roles in glycemic control, lipid regulation, anti-inflammatory signaling, and satiety. The intact cellular structure of whole grains, legumes, vegetables, and root crops leads to slower and more regulated digestive kinetics, dampening postprandial glycemic spikes and supporting a healthy gut microbiome. This contrasts sharply with ultra-processed foods, which are high in added sugars, salt, unhealthy fats, and refined flours-and are strongly associated with increased rates of obesity, metabolic syndrome, and chronic inflammation [70,75,76.

Current recommendations for metabolic disease prevention include:

  • Building the diet around non-starchcy vegetables, low-glycemic fruits (berries, avocadoes), legumes, nuts, seeds, intact whole grains, and healthy fats such as extra virgin olive oil and fatty fish [71,77,78].
  • Strictly limiting highly processed foods, sweetened beverages, fruit juices, refined carbohydrates, and industrial trans fats [73,76].
  • Favoring plant-based proteins, with moderate intake of fish, eggs, and minimally processed dairy [71,73]
  • Including high-fiber foods in every meal for sustained insulin sensitivity and reduced hepatic lipid accumulation [72].
  • Using culinary herbs, spices, and minimally processed condiments for antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, and metabolic benefits [70,72].

Mediterranean and DASH dietary patterns, which exemplify whole food principles, show strong efficacy in randomized and observational studies for lowering blood pressure, improving lipid profiles, reducing insulin resistance, and promoting weight control [72,79].

In summary, whole foods form the cornerstone of metabolic disease prevention, acting through multifactorial mechanisms including improved nutrient density, balanced macronutrient ratios, prebiotic support for gut health, and attenuation of glycemic and lipidemic stress. Processed foods, in contrast, are associated with greater adverse risks and should be minimized [70,76].

Conclusions

In conclusion, juice despite its cultural ubiquity and appeal- cannot be regarded as a universally healthy beverage within the context of modern metabolic disease prevention. While it offers convenience and delivers certain micronutrients, its standard forms (boxed, non-cold pressed, processed, and even fiber-enriched) come with critical nutritional and biochemical pitfalls such as excessive free sugar, diminished fiber, reduced antioxidant content, and reliance on additives. Habitual juice consumption has been tied to rapid glycemic spikes, increased insulin demand, hepatic fat accumulation, and a greater risk of metabolic dysfunction, including obesity, type 2 diabetes, and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.

Detox and weight-loss claims surrounding juice cleanses are wholly debunked by clinical evidence, which finds no meaningful benefits beyond transient water loss and highlights potential risk such as nutrient deficiencies and adverse metabolic changes. Not all fruits is in excess, particularly in vulnerable populations. The exceptions-berries and avocados-stand out for their low glycemic load, high fiber, and wealth of bioactive compounds, offering meaningful protective effects against metabolic diseases.

Robust recommendations for metabolic health center on whole foods: unprocessed vegetables, low-glycemic fruits, legumes, nuts, intact grains and healthy fats. Whole foods consistently outperform processed foods and juices with regard to glycemic control, lipid management, anti-inflammatory effects, and the prevention of chronic disease. Juices may be safely included in modest, supplemental quantities only in the absence of contraindications and should never replace water or whole fruit in daily diet. Embracing whole foods as a dietary foundations remains the most evidence-based strategy for the prevention of metabolic syndrome and related disorders.

References

  1. Fruit And Vegetable Juice Market | Global Market Analysis Report – 2035 [Internet]. Futuremarketinsights.com. 2025 [cited 2025 Sep 23]. Available from: https://www.futuremarketinsights.com/reports/fruit-and-vegetable-juice-market
  2. Team W. Juice Industry Statistics: Reports 2025 [Internet]. WifiTalents. 2025 [cited 2025 Sep 23]. Available from: https://wifitalents.com/juice-industry-statistics/
  3. Cognitive Market Research. The global Fruit Juice market size will be USD 155362.6 million in 2025. [Internet]. Cognitive Market Research. 2022. Available from: https://www.cognitivemarketresearch.com/fruit-juice-market-report
  4. Statista. Juices – Worldwide | Statista Market Forecast [Internet]. Statista. 2024. Available from: https://www.statista.com/outlook/cmo/non-alcoholic-drinks/juices/worldwide
  5. Bouchard-Tousignant L. Why drink cold-pressed juice vs. regular juice? [Internet]. LOOP Mission. 2023 [cited 2025 Sep 23]. Available from: https://loopmission.com/blogs/news/why-drink-cold-pressed-juice-vs-regular-juice
  6. Grand View Research. Cold Press Juice Market Size, Share & Growth Report, 2030 [Internet]. Grandviewresearch.com. 2023. Available from: https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/cold-press-juice-market-report
  7. Cold-pressed juice trend in the United States | Zumex [Internet]. Zumex.com. 2025 [cited 2025 Sep 23]. Available from: https://www.zumex.com/en/blog/cold-pressed-juice-trend/
  8. Khaksar G, Assatarakul K, Sirikantaramas S. Effect of cold-pressed and normal centrifugal juicing on quality attributes of fresh juices: do cold-pressed juices harbor a superior nutritional quality and antioxidant capacity? Heliyon. 2019 Jun;5(6):e01917.
  9. Ignatia F, Kezia Meivira, Irvan Setiadi Kartawiria, Gunawan-Puteri MDPT. Review: Nutrient, Fiber, and Bioactive Content of Fruit Pomace, Major By-product of Juice Industry. Advances in biological sciences research/Advances in Biological Sciences Research. 2022 Jan 1;
  10. Bosch-Sierra N, Marqués-Cardete R, Gurrea-Martínez A, Grau-Del Valle C, Talens C, Alvarez-Sabatel S, et al. Effect of Fibre-Enriched Orange Juice on Postprandial Glycaemic Response and Satiety in Healthy Individuals: An Acute, Randomised, Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind, Crossover Study. Nutrients. 2019 Dec 10;11(12):3014.
  11. Global juice market. Functional health claims and functional ingredients [Internet]. Innovamarketinsights.com. 2025 [cited 2025 Sep 23]. Available from: https://www.innovamarketinsights.com/trends/global-juice-market/
  12. Beckett EL, Flávia Fayet-Moore, Cassettari T, Starck C, Wright J, Blumfield M. Health effects of drinking 100% juice: an umbrella review of systematic reviews with meta-analyses. Nutrition reviews. 2024 Apr 29;
  13. Mavadiya HB, Roh D, Ly A, Lu Y. Whole Fruits Versus 100% Fruit Juice: Revisiting the Evidence and Its Implications for US Healthy Dietary Recommendations. Nutrition Bulletin. 2025 May 7;
  14. Sundborn G, Thornley S, Merriman TR, Lang B, King C, Lanaspa MA, et al. Are Liquid Sugars Different from Solid Sugar in Their Ability to Cause Metabolic Syndrome? Obesity. 2019 May 4;27(6):879–87.
  15. Gill S. Rethinking sugar: BYU study shows food source is key to understanding diabetes risk [Internet]. News. 2025. Available from: https://news.byu.edu/intellect/rethinking-sugar-byu-study-shows-food-source-is-key-to-understanding-diabetes-risk
  16. Ruxton CHS, Myers M. Fruit Juices: Are They Helpful or Harmful? An Evidence Review. Nutrients. 2021 May 27;13(6):1815.
  17. Sugary Drinks [Internet]. The Nutrition Source. 2013. Available from: https://nutritionsource.hsph.harvard.edu/healthy-drinks/sugary-drinks/
  18. Rossi I, Mignogna C, Rio DD, Mena P. Health effects of 100% fruit and vegetable juices: evidence from human subject intervention studies. Nutrition Research Reviews [Internet]. 2023 Sep 1;37(1):1–45. Available from: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/nutrition-research-reviews/article/health-effects-of-100-fruit-and-vegetable-juices-evidence-from-human-intervention-studies/F2E7246B748741828885E76AA42A774B
  19. Barclay E. Fruit Juice Vs. Soda? Both Beverages Pack In Sugar, Health Risks [Internet]. NPR.org. 2014. Available from: https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2014/06/09/319230765/fruit-juice-vs-soda-both-beverages-pack-in-sugar-and-health-risk
  20. Gemechu W. Review on Changes in Bioactive Composition of Fruits during Juice Processing. Food Science & Nutrition Technology. 2020 Sep 30;5(5):1–9.
  21. E.F A, E.O E, A.M K, M.M A. Kinetic Modeling of Vitamin C (Ascorbic Acid) Degradation in Blanched Commonly Consumed Salad Vegetables Using Computer Simulation Analysis. IOSR Journal of Applied Chemistry [Internet]. 2017 Apr [cited 2022 Apr 9];10(04):59–66. Available from: https://www.iosrjournals.org/iosr-jac/papers/vol10-issue4/Version-1/H1004015966.pdf
  22. Abubakari A, Osei-Djarbeng SN, Larbi JA, Frimpong EH. Presence of Chlamydia Infection among asymptomatic Female Commercial Sex-workers (CSWs) in the Kumasi Metropolis, Ghana. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences. 2016 Jan 10;5(1):342–9.
  23. Merz B. Are fresh juice drinks as healthy as they seem? – Harvard Health Blog [Internet]. Harvard Health Blog. 2016. Available from: https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/fresh-juice-drinks-healthy-seem-2016072910044
  24. Burdurlu HS, Koca N, Karadeniz F. Degradation of vitamin C in citrus juice concentrates during storage. Journal of Food Engineering. 2006 May;74(2):211–6.
  25. Khiralla G, Ali HM. Bioavailability and antioxidant potentials of fresh and pasteurized kiwi juice before and after in vitro gastrointestinal digestion. Journal of Food Science and Technology [Internet]. 2020 Apr 29 [cited 2021 Dec 2];57(11):4277–85. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7520475/pdf/13197_2020_Article_4467.pdf
  26. Khaksar G, Assatarakul K, Sirikantaramas S. Effect of cold-pressed and normal centrifugal juicing on quality attributes of fresh juices: do cold-pressed juices harbor a superior nutritional quality and antioxidant capacity? Heliyon. 2019 Jun;5(6):e01917.
  27. Zhang X, Liao X, Wang Y, Rao L, Zhao L. Health effects of fruit juices and beverages with varying degrees of processing. Deleted Journal. 2023 Nov 1;13(5).
  28. Bosch-Sierra N, Marqués-Cardete R, Gurrea-Martínez A, Grau-Del Valle C, Talens C, Alvarez-Sabatel S, et al. Effect of Fibre-Enriched Orange Juice on Postprandial Glycaemic Response and Satiety in Healthy Individuals: An Acute, Randomised, Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind, Crossover Study. Nutrients. 2019 Dec 10;11(12):3014.
  29. Hyson DA. A Review and Critical Analysis of the Scientific Literature Related to 100% Fruit Juice and Human Health. Advances in Nutrition. 2015 Jan 1;6(1):37–51.
  30. Tomas M. Effect of dietary fiber addition on the content and in vitro bioaccessibility of antioxidants in red raspberry puree. Food Chemistry. 2022 May;375:131897.
  31. van het Hof KH, West CE, Weststrate JA, Hautvast JGAJ. Dietary Factors That Affect the Bioavailability of Carotenoids. The Journal of Nutrition. 2000 Mar 1;130(3):503–6.
  32. Huang Y, Park E, Replogle R, Boileau T, Shin Jin-E, Burton-Freeman BM, et al. Enzyme-treated orange pomace alters acute glycemic response to orange juice. Nutrition & Diabetes. 2019 Aug 28;9(1).
  33. Verboven K, Ryckeghem LV, Ralf Schweiggert, Steingass CB, Tin Gojevic, Ruxton CHS, et al. Acute glycaemic response of orange juice consumption with breakfast in individuals with type 2 diabetes: a randomized cross-over trial. Nutrition and Diabetes [Internet]. 2025 Jul 9 [cited 2025 Jul 20];15(1). Available from: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41387-025-00385-8?_gl=1
  34. Kouadio YH, Yapo BF, Gbakayoro JB, Diabagate HMF, Farman OA. Impact of fresh orange, apple, mango and papaya fruit juices on postprandial glycemia in apparently healthy young adults. NFS Journal [Internet]. 2024 Dec 14;38:100205. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352364624000440
  35. Naomi ND, Ngo J, Brouwer-Brolsma EM, Marion, Soedamah-Muthu SS, Carmen Pérez Rodrigo, et al. Sugar-sweetened beverages, low/no-calorie beverages, fruit juice and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease defined by fatty liver index: the SWEET project. Nutrition & Diabetes. 2023 Apr 21;13(1).
  36. Basaranoglu M, Basaranoglu G, Bugianesi E. Carbohydrate intake and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: fructose as a weapon of mass destruction. Hepatobiliary Surgery and Nutrition [Internet]. 2015 Apr 1;4(2):109–16. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4405421/#:~:text=Fructose%20can%20induce%20NAFLD%20by
  37. Murphy MM, Barrett EC, Bresnahan KA, Barraj LM. 100 % Fruit juice and measures of glucose control and insulin sensitivity: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Journal of Nutritional Science. 2017;6.
  38. Seino Y, Iizuka K, Suzuki A. Eating whole fruits, not drinking fruits juice, may reduce the risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Journal of Diabetes Investigation. 2021 Jul 28;
  39. Wang B, Liu K, Mi M, Wang J. Effect of Fruit Juice on Glucose Control and Insulin Sensitivity in Adults: A Meta-Analysis of 12 Randomized Controlled Trials. Manzoli L, editor. PLoS ONE. 2014 Apr 17;9(4):e95323.
  40. Larasati Sekar Kinasih, Kis Djamiatun, Al-Baarri AN. Golden Berry (Physalis peruviana) Juice for Reduction of Blood Glucose and Amelioration of Insulin Resistance in Diabetic Rats. Jurnal Gizi dan Pangan. 2020 Mar 28;37–44.
  41. Harvard Health Publishing. The dubious practice of detox – Harvard Health [Internet]. Harvard Health. Harvard Health; 2008. Available from: https://www.health.harvard.edu/staying-healthy/the-dubious-practice-of-detox
  42. Alexander H. 4 detox myths: Get the facts [Internet]. MD Anderson Cancer Center. 2020. Available from: https://www.mdanderson.org/cancerwise/the-facts-behind-4-detox-myths-should-you-detox-your-body.h00-159385890.html
  43. Burrows S. Do Juice Cleanses Detox the Body? [Internet]. URMC Newsroom. 2025. Available from: https://www.urmc.rochester.edu/news/publications/health-matters/do-juice-cleanses-detox-the-body
  44. Nall R. Juice cleanse: Benefits, risks, and effects [Internet]. www.medicalnewstoday.com. 2022. Available from: https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/323136
  45. Juice Cleanses for Weight Loss: Scientific Evidence & Effects [Internet]. Rumen. 2025. Available from: https://www.rumen.com.au/article/juice-cleanses-impact-weight-scientific-evidence-long-term-effects/
  46. Levi A. Here’s Why You Really Don’t Need to Do a Juice Cleanse This Month—or Ever [Internet]. Health.com. Health; 2019. Available from: https://www.health.com/nutrition/cleanse-dangers
  47. O’Mary L. Juice Cleanses May Disrupt Gut Bacteria [Internet]. WebMD. 2025. Available from: https://www.webmd.com/diet/news/20250210/juice-cleanses-may-disrupt-gut-bacteria
  48. Juicing may harm your health in just three days, new study finds [Internet]. Northwestern.edu. Northwestern Now; 2025. Available from: https://news.northwestern.edu/stories/2025/02/juicing-may-harm-your-health-in-just-3-days-new-study-finds
  49. Larkin M. Juice Cleanses Likely Good for Nothing, Bad for Much [Internet]. Medscape. 2025. Available from: https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/juice-cleanses-likely-good-nothing-bad-much-2025a1000dgz
  50. Devje S. Should You Try a Juice Cleanse? Benefits, Downsides, Safety [Internet]. Healthline. 2022. Available from: https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/juice-cleanse
  51. National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health. “Detoxes” and “Cleanses”: What You Need to Know [Internet]. NCCIH. 2019. Available from: https://www.nccih.nih.gov/health/detoxes-and-cleanses-what-you-need-to-know
  52. National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health. “Detoxes” and “Cleanses”: What You Need to Know [Internet]. NCCIH. 2019. Available from: https://www.nccih.nih.gov/health/detoxes-and-cleanses-what-you-need-to-know
  53. Elliott SS, Keim NL, Stern JS, Teff K, Havel PJ. Fructose, weight gain, and the insulin resistance syndrome. The American journal of clinical nutrition [Internet]. 2002;76(5):911–22. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12399260
  54. Brand-Miller JC, Holt SH, Pawlak DB, McMillan J. Glycemic index and obesity. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 2002 Jul 1;76(1):281S285S.
  55. Bazzano LA, Li TY, Joshipura KJ, Hu FB. Intake of fruit, vegetables, and fruit juices and risk of diabetes in women. Diabetes care [Internet]. 2008;31(7):1311–7. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18390796
  56. Epstein LH, Biondolillo MJ, Rizwan A, Ghanim H, Dandona P, Bickel WK, et al. Insulin Resistance and Glycated Hemoglobin in Obesity Are Associated With Preference for Sugar-Sweetened Yogurt: A Pilot Study. Psychosomatic Medicine [Internet]. 2023 Jan 28 [cited 2025 Mar 14];85(3):289–93. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10528876/
  57. Bondonno NP, Davey RJ, Murray K, Radavelli-Bagatini S, Bondonno CP, Blekkenhorst LC, et al. Associations Between Fruit Intake and Risk of Diabetes in the AusDiab Cohort. The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism [Internet]. 2021 Jun 2;106(10):e4097–108. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8475213/
  58. Lee M, Lim M, Kim J. Fruit and vegetable consumption and the metabolic syndrome: a systematic review and dose–response meta-analysis. British Journal of Nutrition. 2019 Sep 13;122(07):723–33.
  59. Lampe JW. Health effects of vegetables and fruit: assessing mechanisms of action in human experimental studies. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 1999 Sep 1;70(3):475s490s.
  60. Crummett LT, Grosso RJ. Postprandial Glycemic Response to Whole Fruit versus Blended Fruit in Healthy, Young Adults. Nutrients. 2022 Oct 30;14(21):4565.
  61. Kowalska K, Olejnik A. Current evidence on the health-beneficial effects of berry fruits in the prevention and treatment of metabolic syndrome. Current Opinion in Clinical Nutrition & Metabolic Care. 2016 Nov;19(6):446–52.
  62. Pap N, Fidelis M, Azevedo L, do Carmo MAV, Wang D, Mocan A, et al. Berry polyphenols and human health: evidence of antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, microbiota modulation, and cell-protecting effects. Current Opinion in Food Science [Internet]. 2021 Dec 1;42:167–86. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214799321001028
  63. Venturi S, Marino M, Cioffi I, Martini D, Cristian Del Bò, Perna S, et al. Berry Dietary Interventions in Metabolic Syndrome: New Insights. Nutrients. 2023 Apr 14;15(8):1906–6.
  64. Yang B, Kortesniemi M. Clinical evidence on potential health benefits of berries. Current Opinion in Food Science [Internet]. 2015 Apr 1;2:36–42. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2214799315000387
  65. Natural Therapies: Avocado Consumption for Metabolic Syndrome [Internet]. Endocrinology Advisor. 2017 [cited 2025 Sep 23]. Available from: https://www.endocrinologyadvisor.com/news/natural-therapies-avocado-consumption-for-metabolic-syndrome/
  66. Tabeshpour J, Razavi BM, Hosseinzadeh H. Effects of Avocado (Persea americana ) on Metabolic Syndrome: A Comprehensive Systematic Review. Phytotherapy Research. 2017 Apr 10;31(6):819–37.
  67. Avocados can help to treat metabolic syndrome, says review [Internet]. Medicalnewstoday.com. Medical News Today; 2017. Available from: https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/316885
  68. Tabeshpour J, Razavi BM, Hosseinzadeh H. Effects of Avocado (Persea americana ) on Metabolic Syndrome: A Comprehensive Systematic Review. Phytotherapy Research. 2017 Apr 10;31(6):819–37.
  69. Zhang X, Xiao D, Guzman G, Edirisinghe I, Burton-Freeman B. Avocado consumption for 12 weeks and cardio-metabolic risk factors: a randomized controlled trial in adults with overweight or obesity and insulin resistance. The Journal of Nutrition. 2022 Jun 14;
  70. Jiménez-Cortegana C, Iglesias P, Ribalta J, Vilariño-García T, Montañez L, Arrieta F, et al. Nutrients and Dietary Approaches in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Cardiovascular Disease: A Narrative Review. Nutrients. 2021 Nov 19;13(11):4150.
  71. Heart Foundation. Heart healthy eating pattern | Heart Foundation [Internet]. Heartfoundation.org.au. 2018. Available from: https://www.heartfoundation.org.au/healthy-living/healthy-eating/heart-healthy-eating-pattern
  72. O’Keefe JH, Abuannadi M. Dietary Strategies for the Prevention & Treatment of Metabolic Syndrome. Missouri Medicine [Internet]. 2024;107(6):406. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6188237/
  73. Metabolic Syndrome Diet: What to Eat and What to Avoid [Internet]. Cleveland Clinic. 2021. Available from: https://health.clevelandclinic.org/metabolic-syndrome-diet
  74. Pérez-Martínez P, Mikhailidis DP, Athyros VG, Bullo M, Couture P, Covas MI, et al. Lifestyle recommendations for the prevention and management of metabolic syndrome: an international panel recommendation. Nutrition Reviews. 2017 May;75(5):307–26.
  75. Song X, Zhang X, Ma C, Hu X, Chen F. Rediscovering the nutrition of whole foods: the emerging role of gut microbiota. Current Opinion in Food Science. 2022 Dec;48:100908.
  76. Lane MM, Gamage E, Du S, Ashtree DN, McGuinness AJ, Gauci S, et al. Ultra-processed food exposure and adverse health outcomes: umbrella review of epidemiological meta-analyses. BMJ. 2024 Feb 28;384(8419):e077310.
  77. Mayo Clinic. Diabetes diet: Create your healthy-eating plan [Internet]. Mayo Clinic. 2024. Available from: https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/diabetes/in-depth/diabetes-diet/art-20044295
  78. Diabetes and healthy nutrition [Internet]. International Diabetes Federation. 2024. Available from: https://idf.org/about-diabetes/diabetes-management/healthy-nutrition/
  79. Reynolds A, Mitri J. Nutritional Recommendations for Individuals with Diabetes [Internet]. Nih.gov. MDText.com, Inc.; 2024. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK279012/