For normal-weight women, eating fructose doesn't quiet hunger hormones as much as glucose does—so you might feel hungrier and eat more after having fructose.

What we've found so far is that the evidence leans toward fructose suppressing hunger less than glucose in normal-weight women. Our analysis of the available research suggests that fructose may not reduce hunger signals as much as glucose does in this group. We reviewed 59.0 assertions from studies, and all of them support the idea that fructose doesn’t quiet hunger hormones as effectively as glucose in normal-weight women [1]. This means that after consuming fructose, these women might feel less full and could be more likely to eat more later. The evidence we’ve reviewed focuses on how the body’s hunger signals respond differently to fructose compared to glucose. Since hunger hormones aren’t as strongly suppressed with fructose, the feeling of fullness may be weaker. Our current analysis shows a consistent pattern across the data we’ve examined. However, we base this only on the assertions provided, and we don’t have information about study size, design, or long-term effects. We also don’t know how this might change over time or under different conditions, like physical activity or different meal compositions. We can’t say for sure what will happen in every situation, and we don’t have enough evidence to make broader claims about weight gain or overall diet quality. But based on what we’ve reviewed so far, the pattern is clear in one direction: fructose appears to have a weaker effect on hunger suppression than glucose in normal-weight women. Practical takeaway: If you're trying to feel full after eating, glucose may help more than fructose. Foods with more glucose and less fructose—like whole grains or starchy vegetables—might keep hunger at bay better than those high in fructose, such as some sweetened fruits or processed snacks.