Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

High Fructose Corn Syrup

Posted by on Aug. 25, 2009 at 1:28 PM
  • 6 Replies
  • 392 Total Views

I was wondering if anyone else had seen this commercial.  I find it distrubing.  Not only are they trying to sell us an ultra-processed product, but they are basically calling us dumb for not knowing why HFCS is bad.  It is a shame that most Americans can't tell you why, but the fact is that people were starting to figure out that avoiding it was a good idea, and now, well, who knows what kind of effect commercials like this will have.

by on Aug. 25, 2009 at 1:28 PM
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Replies (1-6):
awooding
by Group Admin on Aug. 28, 2009 at 7:49 PM

Oh, I've seen them and the first time I ever saw this commercial I was horrified. The very idea of using the vulnerability and naivete of many U.S. citizens who simply don't know how to weed out the truth as a way to sell processed foods...disgusting. My husband actually had no clue that HFCS was bad. He thought there was no big deal. I explained the effects it has on the body's ability to recognize fullness and he was kinda surprised.

I HATE HFCS. It's in EVERY THING. Why? I have no clue. Most of the things it's used in would taste just the same with an alternate sweetener (nectars, pure cane sugar, honey etc). I feel compelled to make EVERYTHING from scratch just to avoid the stuff (Plus I'm trying to keep my daughter off of foods that contain dyes. She has issues with hyperactivity and even though nothing has been diagnosed I figured staying away from additives would help).

                                                                        ~~~

                               Money may help you get by in life,

                              but it can't teach you how to enjoy it.

norwegianwood
by Group Owner on Aug. 29, 2009 at 1:38 AM

Well, let's read up on it:

http://www.healthline.com/blogs/diet_nutrition/2009/06/sugar-vs-high-fructose-corn-syrup.html

http://archives.chicagotribune.com/2009/jun/25/health/chi-high-fructose-corn-syrup-25-jun25

http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2008-12-08-fructose-corn-syrup_N.htm 

New data: High-fructose corn syrup no worse than sugar

Updated 12/8/2008

 

By Elizabeth Weise, USA TODAY
In 2004, three researchers published a paper in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition suggesting the rise in obesity might be linked to the rise in consumption of high-fructose corn syrup. The paper led to a wave of research and a chorus of popular concern over the cheap, ubiquitous liquid sweetener.

The hypothesis was controversial and launched a backlash against the corn-based sweetener, which because of agricultural subsidies for corn in the USA was much cheaper than cane or beet sugar. It became nutritional dogma in some circles that sugar was healthy, and high-fructose corn syrup was not.

 

 

Now, the tide of research, if not public opinion, has shifted. This week, five papers published in a supplement to Clinical Nutrition find no special link between consumption of high-fructose corn syrup and obesity. One paper was written by Barry Popkin, a co-author on the original 2004 paper.

"It doesn't appear that when you consume high-fructose corn syrup, you have any different total effect on appetite than if you consume any other sugar," he says.

The kind of high-fructose syrup that sweetens almost all soft drinks in the USA is made from corn and consists of 55% fructose and 42% glucose, both of which are slightly different sugars. Table sugar, which scientists call sucrose, is made from sugar cane or sugar beets and consists of 50% fructose and 50% glucose.

"People think high-fructose corn syrup is the devil and table sugar is natural," but that's not necessarily true, says Elizabeth Parks, a professor of clinical nutrition at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas. She was not part of the research.

Though high-fructose corn syrup makes up about 50% of the sweeteners used in the USA, worldwide it's only about 10%, says John White, an independent researcher whose paper was published in the supplement to the journal.

"But obesity isn't just a U.S. problem," he says.

At high levels of consumption, fructose, whether from high-fructose corn syrup or from table sugar, increases triglycerides (fat) in the bloodstream, which could be a risk factor for cardiovascular disease, says Peter Havel, an endocrinologist at the University of California-Davis who co-wrote one of the papers.

Thus far, the research appears to show that sucrose and high-fructose corn syrup are not that different, Parks says. She believes there's some evidence that the way they are metabolized in the liver is different, but not in a way that makes the calories from high-fructose corn syrup more likely to be stored as fat.

 

Thoughts?

P

Groovy-flor
by on Aug. 29, 2009 at 9:32 AM

My big problem with HFCS isn't necessary the health benefits, but the amazing amount of processing that goes in to making it.  It may be just as effective (if not more effective) at sweetening our food as natural sweeteners, but it requires large amounts of corn which requires large amounts of pesticide and land, and it requires large amounts of gas to move it around. 

Of course, the large amounts of gas are going to be a problem with practically anything with HFCS, since it is almost never a locally made product. 

(Sorry if that sentence makes no sense...I'm up way to early for a Saturday!)

norwegianwood
by Group Owner on Aug. 29, 2009 at 11:42 AM


Quoting Groovy-flor:

My big problem with HFCS isn't necessary the health benefits, but the amazing amount of processing that goes in to making it.  It may be just as effective (if not more effective) at sweetening our food as natural sweeteners, but it requires large amounts of corn which requires large amounts of pesticide and land, and it requires large amounts of gas to move it around. 

Of course, the large amounts of gas are going to be a problem with practically anything with HFCS, since it is almost never a locally made product. 

(Sorry if that sentence makes no sense...I'm up way to early for a Saturday!)

I don't know that growing one product versus another will involved more or less land, pesticides or use of trucking to transport and long hours of running machinery to produce:

http://www.crystalsugar.com/products/products6.sprocess.asp

http://www.westonaprice.org/motherlinda/cornsyrup.html

(yeah, the title sounds biased,but if you read the article, I don't see anything unnatural about enzymes which are natural whether they can be manufactured or not and fungus is too...so, I still don't get the 'unnatural' claims being made.

Corn is used for MORE than just feed for animals and HFCS-corn meal is used in all manner of cereals, breads, foods; corn oil is/can be used for many things; growing up there were lots of recipes, I recall, that called for corn syrup--including mixing with water to help babies with collic--plus the fructose. So, it seems to me that the variety of uses of one over the other, might support its continuance over others.

I've never lived--to my knowledge--near a HFCS processing plant, but I HAVE lived near a beet processing plant. Ever smell that? Yeah. Lovely. hahaha

Anyway, I still don't get the argument.

P

Raintree
by on Sep. 1, 2009 at 4:14 PM

It's mercury laden.

 

 

When one tugs at a single thing in nature,

he finds it attached to the rest of the world.

– JOHN MUIR

norwegianwood
by Group Owner on Sep. 2, 2009 at 2:41 PM

anymore than any other crop would be or many fish?

P

Quoting Raintree:

It's mercury laden.


Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)