HFCS and sugars of all types: The dose makes the poison

[HuckleB]

Why does High Fructose Corn Syrup spook ‘health-conscious’ eaters, parents and nutritionists alike?
http://drpullen.com/2010/09/01/high-fructose-corn-syrup/

"If you have listened to the mainstream media you may have been misinformed. HFCS has been labeled “the Devil‟s candy,” a “sinister invention,” and “bad for you, crud.”

But is it really all that bad?

Simply stated, the answer is “NO.” Actually, most people fail to realize that HFCS is composed of the exact same sugar combination found in table sugar and honey (fructose and glucose) in virtually the exact same ratios. The name “high fructose corn syrup” simply distinguishes it from other forms of corn syrup, meaning it isn‟t any higher in fructose than sugar is. I say it was a bad name choice; maybe they should have named it, “Bob?” Regardless, many credible studies have been published clearing up a lot of the misinformation on HFCS. The American Medical Association concluded, “There is no difference in how the body metabolizes high fructose corn syrup, table sugar or honey. They are indistinguishable once they reach the bloodstream. High fructose syrup does not appear to contribute to obesity more than other caloric sweeteners.”
As a derivative of corn, this alternative sweetener was created in the late 1960‟s in order to be used in foods and beverages because of the many benefits it offers. HFCS is what makes our ‘moist’ breakfast and energy bars moist. It keeps food fresh, enhances fruit and spice flavors, retains moisture in bran cereals, maintains consistent flavors in beverages and keeps ingredients evenly dispersed in condiments. Over the last 30 years it has become a hard-to-avoid staple of the American diet. HFCS provides the sweet zing in everything from Coke, Pepsi and Snapple iced tea to Dannon yogurt and Chips Ahoy cookies. It also lurks in unexpected places, like Ritz crackers, Wonder bread, Wishbone ranch dressing and Campbell‟s tomato soup.

The news media and a myriad of web sites and blogs continue to mistakenly report that obesity and diabetes rates have climbed at a remarkably similar rate to that of HFCS consumption. Yet, the nutrition science community reports that if the consumption of HFCS has increased in America, then so has all the other food categories. In other words, we are eating more, 24% more total food intake to be exact. We are not eating disproportionately more HFCS; we are eating more of everything! HFCS can only contribute to weight gain when it is eaten as excessive calories, regardless of the food source. Replacing HFCS with sugar, in our processed foods, will not reduce obesity or improve health.

..."


A similar, but more thorough piece, can be found here:

High Fructose Corn Syrup: Tasty Toxin or Slandered Sweetener?
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=6501

--------------------------------------------------------------


I admit that I had bought into the story that HFCS is an all-encompassing evil. I've discovered that I was wrong. The issue is that we eat too much sugar and/or calories in general.

:hi:

On the other hand, I do find the corn producers' desire to change the name from HFCS to corn syrup quite silly and foolish. Also, I do think we should stop subsidizing corn, or at least corn that goes into making HFCS. Further, we would be wise to spend the energy we spend demonizing HFCS by teaching each other how to eat fewer calories, and fewer sugars in general.

[Codeine]

1. I wish they'd ban it for one simple reason;

so that people would see that they're still obese and diabetic just like before, but they wouldn't be able to blame some mythical demon-syrup.

[TNDemo]

4. I'm skinny and diabetic.

What can I blame?

[Codeine]

8. Loki.

He's a tricksy fucker, that one.

[TNDemo]

14. Damn Loki.

Leave my pancreas alone.

[salvorhardin]

35. Wow

Loki looks a lot less fey than I imagined. Does the World Wrestling Federation know he's got their belt?

[MineralMan]

2. Good information. Thanks for posting the facts.

Now, duck....incoming! :rofl:

[HuckleB]

3. My guess is this will just be ignored and unrecced to an early archive.

:hi:

[Mz Pip]

5. The problem is

that HFCS seems to be added to just about every processed food out there. Why does it have to be in salad dressing fercrissake?

If manufacturers switch to cane sugar it would be the same result - empty calories that can drive up the overall calorie intake of someone who eats a lot of processed foods.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

6. I don't see how that's a problem at all.

I mean, I keep seeing people complaining "Oh my god! This loaf of bread has HFCS in it!"

Have they never baked a loaf of bread before? Done any cooking at all?

[mjane]

34. Bingo. When the market demands it, the producers will comply

I consider that when I was a kid, we ate a lot of yogurt. Yogurt was a niche food back then. It was hard to find in some areas. Our local grocery store didn't carry it. We made our own.

Eventually a market opened up for it, and now it's EVERYWHERE.

There has never been a time in our country where we have had a greater access to variety of foods. Lots of overprocessed crap out there, but still way more really good stuff. Lots of farmer markets, ethnic food stores, etc. where you could find food you could never find around here 40 yrs ago

But there are people who would rather buy, for example, tater tots vs. potatoes. The latter are levels of magnitude cheaper, and depending on how you cook them - far healthier.

My father in law starting baking his own bread with spelt as a grain. It's really good, and way better for you than almost all store bought breads, FAR cheaper, and no preservatives.

A little can do goes a long way.

Same thing with soups. It's hard to find some really nutritious soups, and that aren't sodium laden, etc. But is soup really that hard to make? And it stores great in your freezer.

As long as there are tons of consumers who choose to buy the crap, the crap will be on the shelves.

[HuckleB]

7. It's a merry-go-round that doesn't stop, it seems.

A lot of us will have to work to adapt our taste buds to a diet that might be a little less sweet. If we don't, nothing will change, as you note.

[trotsky]

11. "If manufacturers switch to cane sugar it would be the same result"

And that's the problem. Manufacturers don't just add HFCS because they feel like it - they do it because products that are sweeter SELL BETTER. Consumers prefer sweeter items. We are our own worst enemy.

[BadgerKid]

17. If you can't buy it without, make it without?

Balsamic vinegar and olive oil, for example.

[Mz Pip]

18. I do.

I make my own salad dressing - lemon juice, a bit of brown mustard, a garlic clove, a bit of salt and pepper and olive oil. Blend and it's done.

[Codeine]

22. A dash of vinegar added to that

would be divine.

[MineralMan]

26. Some dressings have a strong sweet note. That comes from

some sugar or another. Whichever one is chosen, the results are the same. If you don't like sweet dressings, you won't have the problem. If you like Thousand Island or Russian dressing, you get sugar. You can't make them without it. Which sugar doesn't matter.

The other answer is to make your own salad dressings. That way you can control whats in them. A search for "salad dressings" will bring up a wealth of recipes.

People buy what they like, and they don't take the time to learn to make it themselves. You can't fix other people's tastes. You can deal with your own, though.

[MattBaggins]

9. Stop the subsidies for corn and let farmers grow cane sugar

That would allow people to buy what they want.

As a diabetic I will continue to use that other toxic swill known as sucralose.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

10. How well does sugar cane grow in the midwest?

[Codeine]

12. Why didn't anyone think of this before?!

Waving fields of sugarcane and breadfruit stretching across America's Heartland.

[MattBaggins]

16. Must be a mid-western smart ass.

The Midwest is as every one knows; the only region in the entire US that grows shit. The entire rest of the Country should STFU and continue to be held hostage and send barrels of cash to Iowa at the expense of our own; I don't know, Brothers-in Law perhaps?

Heartland my ass.

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Codeine]

23. Just a generic smartass, actually. nt

[MattBaggins]

15. Not well at all

Subsidizing corn in those states however; creates an unfair advantage against other regions that might wish to use cane, beet, grape or other sources.

I have no pony in the fight as I avoid all sugar as much as possible, but the subsidies should stop.

[qb]

28. Very well, except we call it "sugar beets" up here.

;-)

[Codeine]

29. Beet sugar smells like dirty feet.

Gah, I hate that stuff.

[qb]

30. Are you referring to unrefined beet sugar?

I can't tell the difference between refined beet & cane sugar.

[trotsky]

41. Don't worry, no one can - because they're the same.

Sucrose.

[trotsky]

13. Thank you for this.

I, too, bought into the anti-HFCS hysteria initially. If you don't scratch the surface and understand a bit about chemistry, metabolism, and overall diet, it's very easy to get confused and blame HFCS.

[HuckleB]

25. You're welcome, and you're exactly right. -eom-

[Skink]

20. Does anybody know what this toxic concoction looks like.

it seems to be in every freshly prepared supermarket item. Do they have vats of the stuff by the used fyryolator oil?

[Codeine]

24. Looks just like regular corn syrup.

Clear and viscous.

[stuntcat]

21. to me the biggest problem on HFCS is the farming of it

we also subsidize all the corn that's grown to feed animals for us to eat. 7 or 8 lbs of animals food equals 1 lb of meat. People who don't care how much forest is lost for their unhealthy diets scare me.

I got an article while ago saying they're gonna start calling hfcs "corn sugar" which might make some people happy with it, but it doesn't change how clear it is that it's corn and that it's sugar.

I feel good not buying that stuff.

[OHdem10]

27. I have a different theory. We have become a much more sedentary

society. All of our appliances, cars etc make it so
we are not as physically active. They have cut physical
education and just about any form of exercise out of
schools. I am not saying sugar is good for you--I am
saying jumping on thing and making it responsible
totally for obesity in the long run will not be that
effective. Our bodies are designed to burn off calories
and if not given the opportunity, this can be unhealthy.

No I am not an exercise freak. It takes a combination
of things to solve any problem. Food Police, Exercise
Police are an absolute turn off and can become the butt
of jokes.

[HuckleB]

31. And into the dungeon we go!!!

[Abq_Sarah]

32. Paging Dr Pullen....

He stated: “There is no difference in how the body metabolizes high fructose corn syrup, table sugar or honey

Technically, that's not true.

The fructose in cane/beet sugar is bound to a glucose molecule. Table sugar must be broken down by the body into glucose and fructose before it can be absorbed. HFCS is unbound and required no extra metabolic steps before it can be utilized.

[trotsky]

33. The breaking down of sucrose happens in the stomach.

That's not a metabolic step, it's a chemical one. The same fructose and glucose then enter your bloodstream from the small intestine, just as they would as if you had consumed HFCS instead.

[salvorhardin]

36. Of late, I've been saying the body makes HFCS. It *really* irritates people.

It's true. Within a couple of seconds of ingesting HFCS, enzymes in your saliva and gut break sucrose down into fructose and glucose; i.e. HFCS. Thus your body makes HFCS out of sugar!

[Igel]

38. I'd take the next sentence as a restating of the one you quote.

"They are indistinguishable once they reach the bloodstream."

[lib_wit_it]

37. Cancer cells slurp up fructose, US study finds

Study shows fructose used differently from glucose * Findings challenge common wisdom about sugars WASHINGTON Aug 2 (Reuters) -

Pancreatic tumor cells use fructose to divide and proliferate, U.S. researchers said on Monday in a study that challenges the common wisdom that all sugars are the same.

Tumor cells fed both glucose and fructose used the two sugars in two different ways, the team at the University of California Los Angeles found.

They said their finding, published in the journal Cancer Research, may help explain other studies that have linked fructose intake with pancreatic cancer, one of the deadliest cancer types.

"These findings show that cancer cells can readily metabolize fructose to increase proliferation," Dr. Anthony Heaney of UCLA's Jonsson Cancer Center and colleagues wrote.

"They have major significance for cancer patients given dietary refined fructose consumption, and indicate that efforts to reduce refined fructose intake or inhibit fructose-mediated actions may disrupt cancer growth."
(Continued:http://www.reuters.com/article/idAFN0210830520100802)

There's a difference for ya.

[Igel]

39. There's not a difference for you.

I'll take wiki for a couple of facts not directly related to your post:

"The most widely used varieties of high-fructose corn syrup are: HFCS 55 (mostly used in soft drinks), approximately 55% fructose and 42% glucose; and HFCS 42 (used in many foods and baked goods), approximately 42% fructose and 53% glucose.<6>" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-fructose_corn_syrup


In other words, not all HFCS is the same. Point one: That's a difference. Some are higher in fructose than in glucose, some are lower in fructose than glucose.

"Sugar," which most people take to mean sucrose, splits fairly easy in the stomach to 50% glucose and 50% sucrose. Each that HFCS Zinger and wash it down with a HFCS Coke, and you're just about where you'd be with a cane-sugar Zinger and a cane-sugar Coke. Some difference.

Except that HFCS is actually a bit sweeter than cane sugar because for every sucrose molecule you get a slightly less sweet glucose molecule and a much sweeter fructose molecule, so with the cane sugar you wind up with a few more calories and therefore actually more fructose. Ooh, now *there's* a difference.

The "high-fructose" bit is just to distinguish it from plain corn syrup, which is all glucose.

[trotsky]

40. Just a nitpick correction in your post...

"Sugar," which most people take to mean sucrose, splits fairly easy in the stomach to 50% glucose and 50% sucrose.

I'm certain you meant to say 50% glucose and 50% fructose. Just didn't want anyone to get confused.

[Dorian Gray]

42. I agree

that the main issue with HFCS (or corn sugars, lol) is the ubiquitousness of it in foods. It's everywhere, which means we get a lot more sugar than we realize in our diet.

And too much sugar leads to diabetes and other health problems.

I also agree that changing the name is stupid. People are turning against it, and for a variety of reasons, I am happy to see that. But I hate when people think "pure cane sugar" is a "health food." That's laughable, as well.

[HuckleB]

43. Indeed. -eom-

[GoneOffShore]

44. OK- Good article - but I'm still avoiding products with HFCS.

Not because of the product itself - but rather because most of the things it's in are over-processed crapola.

And I don't like to subsidize the corn producers - actually I don't like to subsidize the sugar cane growers either, but I wouldn't cook with HFCS and hence use sugar from cane.

In addition, Mrs GoS and me have moved onto eating a lot less animal protein. That that we do eat comes from local sources. Yes, more expensive and so we eat less.

[HuckleB]

45. Well, it's basically good practice to do so.

It's just that one shouldn't think a product made with something else is necessarily better. That is the mistake too many consumers are going to make, as marketers push the "No HFCS" labeling as a way to sell more processed crap.

As for local meat products, we're with you there!

Cheers!

[Crunchy Frog]

46. leaps tall buildings in a single bound, and unties women from railroad tracks.

[HuckleB]

47. Kick for accuracy.