Four Reasons To Avoid High Fructose Corn Syrup

CornVia Yahoo News:

By now, you’ve more than likely seen one of the ads put out by the Corn Refiners Association. The ads tell the story of a “natural” sweetener made from corn. They go on to insinuate that high fructose corn syrup has been unfairly portrayed and that this truly American ingredient is fine in moderation.

Lloyd wrote about this massive $30 million ad campaign last year. The campaign claims that high fructose corn syrup has the “same natural sweeteners as table sugar and honey.” Since then, the association has released a number of ads with the same message.

But when push comes to shove, what are the facts about high fructose corn syrup? How is it made? Is it healthy in moderation to the body and the planet? Here are the facts, so that the next time you’re asked, you can confidently dispel any high fructose corn syrup rumors.

1. The process of making high fructose corn syrup is pretty weird

First of all, there’s nothing natural about high fructose corn syrup, and it most certainly does not exist in nature.

The process starts off with corn kernels, yes, but then that corn is spun at a high velocity and combined with three other enzymes: alpha-amylase, glucoamylase, and xylose isomerase, so that it forms a thick syrup that’s way sweeter than sugar and super cheap to produce.

That’s why it’s poured into a huge majority of mass pproduced processed foods.

2. High fructose corn syrup does weird stuff to your body

While the commercials claim that it’s fine in moderation, the truth is that the whole problem with high fructose corn syrup in the first place, is that moderation is seemingly impossible.

The syrup interferes with the body’s metabolism so that a person can’t stop eating. It’s truly hard to control cravings because high fructose corn syrup slows down the secretion of leptin in the body. Leptin is a crucial hormone in the body that tells you that you’re full and to stop eating.

That’s why it’s so closely associated with obesity in this country. It’s like an addictive drug.

3. There might be mercury in your corn syrup

And what about the rumors of mercury being found in corn syrup?

I wrote last year that according to MSNBC in one study, published in the Journal of Environmental Health, former Food and Drug Administration scientist Renee Dufault and colleagues tested 20 samples of high fructose corn syrup and found detectable mercury in nine of the 20 samples.

“We went and looked at supermarket samples where high fructose corn syrup was the first or second ingredient on the label,” Dr. David Wallinga, a food safety researcher and activist at the nonprofit Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy said. These 55 different foods included barbecue sauce, jam, yogurt, and chocolate syrup. “We found about one out of three had mercury above the detection limit,” Wallinga said.

4. The environmental impact of high fructose corn syrup is huge

Most corn is grown as a monoculture, meaning that the land is used solely for corn, not rotated among crops. Large monocultures, which are usually genetically modified, can be riddled with pests.

As a result, monocultures are often dressed with a toxic cocktail of pesticides so that they can survive. Monocultures can deplete the nutrients in soil and lead to erosion.

In addition, the pesticides used to grow them pollute our soil and ground water.

Read More in Yahoo News

, , , , , , , ,

  • Marc

    not to mention tumors feed on the shit

    • Merrittj1

      Guess what tumors feed on sugar and any carbohydrate, fat or protein you eat!

      • StZed

        except the fact the food industry uses HFCS as a filler and additive in basically every processed food. pretty hard for someone to avoid unless they cut out industrial food entirely and although we are ovo-lacto veg and do not eat any processed food, i strongly recognise that option is a great luxury and dependent on budget. it should NOT be a luxury to have access to safe whole foods fruits and veg.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_TYMUQUGCLJIDV6FUCGPDXPXI3I travis

        guess what your heart and brain and your entire body also feed on sugar and any carbohydrate, fat or protein you eat, but your right i’m going to quit eating those things so i don’t get cancer, where are you going with this?

        • The_josh_21

          Not that hard to figure out people. Eat organic food. You get more nutrition for your money over the long run and it supports a good majority of farmers and growers that care.

          • emperorreagan

            Organic food doesn’t necessarily have better nutritional value as compared to food grown with other agricultural techniques. You’re paying extra to limit your exposure to chemicals and to support more sustainable agricultural techniques, not for a better nutritional profile in your apple.

        • Dimitri

          Take a look around people. This is America. Travis you are the epitome of what future generations will laugh at and mock. You are missing the point completely with your arrogance. Wine is great for your heart so does that mean u should drink 10 gallons a day because it is good for you?

          There is alot of information out there that shows that HFCS is not good for you. Common sense along will tell u that maybe u should not have this in everything eat or drink. Why must you make things so complicated. You are the generic stupid American that has got us in this place to begin with.

          While you think your so smart the rest of the world is laughing at you. (that’s right not with you).

          And by the way. Your vaccine comment. I think i hear the dog coming, u should head back to your herd.

          • Sjoy_us4

            Travis’s comments are not stupid, they are in fact correct. The flaw with American’s is thier excessive behavior. Anything eaten in excess is unhealthy for you. Even “All Natural” foods. As a child of the world that hates America I’d like to tell you this, it’s not the arrogance that gets to us as much as the greed.

  • Marc

    not to mention tumors feed on the shit

  • Synapse

    The reasons translated:

    1. It’s not found in nature, so it’s scary. (Unlike everything else we eat/use that is “not found in nature”)
    2. It does something that, outside of moderation, can contribute to obesity. (Called weird for emotional effect)
    3. Your food of choice might kill you, stay tuned at 11. (.0001% mercury was found, not at all a result of bad sampling)
    4. Things not connected to the product itself are also scary an unfamiliar.

    • James J

      do you actually have some kind of argument or commentary, or are you just trying to stop yourself from worrying about this so you can keep drinking soda? I love soda too, I’m drinking it right now, but I’m not going to pretend it’s great for me, and I’m not going to act like science needs to shut up so I can drink my soda in peace. You have no information, you haven’t countered what the article said except with vague, empty-heade speculation, so what were you trying to say exactly?

      • 5by5

        And the larger problem is that it isn’t just in my soda. It’s in my friggin’ VEGETABLE soup. And bread. And salad dressing. And pasta. And every sauce imaginable. And in basically every processed or frozen food there is.

        I had a friend visit from Europe, and her first reaction was simply, “Why does everything in America taste so sweet?” She was shocked that even foods she expected to be savory, to her un-tainted palate, tasted like dessert.

        • emperorreagan

          I think that’s probably a better point – sweeteners are put in many things that simply don’t need it. It doesn’t matter whether it’s sugar or high fructose corn syrup, it’s adding unneeded calories. And for that matter, you can count artificial sweeteners – they might not provide the extra calories, but it’s still a chemical I don’t necessarily need to consume, used too frequently to sweeten things that wouldn’t need to be sweetened.

      • Synapse

        See my additional comments above, the first post was made on my way out. My argument, as with most articles like this, is that they are deliberately trying to manipulate you into being unreasonably afraid of X. I’m sure the people behind HFC have their own propaganda, but that doesn’t excuse false or equally manipulated wording from the other side. Very few points they mention could even be considered objective facts or even directly connected to HFC/Corn. This article isn’t science, just scare tactics dressed up as science.

        I don’t drink that much soda and currently am in a country where HFC is not common (except in imported American products). When I’m living in America, I don’t even think that HFC noticeably makes other things particularly sweeter, and I think it tastes somewhat less sweet than regular sugar, but that is my subjective taste. Personally, I’d rather we left sugars out of stuff entirely. I don’t need any sugar of any kind in my granola bar or what have you.

        • O. Spengler

          This article isn’t science, just scare tactics dressed up as science.”
          If it’s science you prefer, I recommend Sugar: The Bitter Truth, a lecture by Robert H. Lustig MD.

        • James J

          “My argument, as with most articles like this, is that they are deliberately trying to manipulate you”——- So you assume any article about the negative side of a food product is likely to be wrong? What is the intelligent part of that? Where is the informative side of your argument that HFCS is a good thing, which is what you’re saying here? You trust the agribusiness which has been known to skirt the boundaries of food safety for profit, but the villains are scientists who study the food and find problems? What is wrong with you? trying to disprove food safety science without evidence, you are ignorant on all counts.

    • Painfullguts

      1. It doesnt occur in plants or animals in nature. Our bodies have not evolved to process this “man made” product. Unlike food that does occur in plants and animals which our bodies have evolved to LIVE with.
      2 it does something (to the hormone leptin) that stops peoples bodies realising they are full as a ( direct?) result eating HFC = get fat . The point of NO.2 is that most things are fine in moderation but if a food is addictive and its highly unlikely to be eaten like that.
      3. good point. Were other food samples tested eg bread or meat for their possibly similar mercury levels. Perhaps this a normal back ground level of this toxic element which is found disolved in sea water due to geological processes, but i dont want to eat it as it strips the myelin sheaths from brain neurons.
      4. Most corn is GM – connected
      GM corn is generally grown as a mono culture- connected
      Beware the word naturaly, for it is a stupid word

      • Synapse

        1. Neither are most of the foods we eat. There are no cake or bread trees. Bread is essentially a man made product. Some articles I have read indicated that we were able to evolve larger brains due to the fact that somehow we invented cooking, which gave our bodies more direct nutrients. You could argue that our bodies are still evolving to deal with HFC directly.

        2. Being full and being hungry are totally different things. I can physically make myself keep eating if I don’t realize I’m not full, but I don’t have to keep eating if I don’t feel hunger. When I get hungry and eat something with HFC in it, I might not feel as full as I would with regular sugars, but to continue eating past what is a normal amount of food is entirely up to me. The food isn’t addictive, I simply require more awareness of what I’m eating. A call for better discipline or additional education for people on how to eat properly in light of HFC as opposed to reacting in fear and just banning HFC.

        3.The very fact that their sample size was 20, and they simply had “detectable” levels of mercury means a pretty worthless study. I suspect there’s still more mercury in Tuna than in HFC products.

        4. The claim of the article for that reason is that monocultures are the threat, not that it’s corn specifically that messes up the environment. If we were not growing corn, some other monoculture would be more dominant.

        • James J

          1. “Neither are most of the foods we eat. There are no cake or bread trees.”– That is not what Painfullguts was talking about. You’re really missing the point here. Wheat, eggs, salt and yeast exist in nature without chemical adulteration.
          “You could argue that our bodies are still evolving to deal with HFC directly.”– Yeah, and it’s making us obese. What are the health benefits of HFCS? Go ahead, let me know.

          2. “Being full and being hungry are totally different things.”– really now, you don’t say! they’re not the same thing? What insight. “The food isn’t addictive”– I know you don’t want to believe it’s addictive, but there is scientific evidence that HFCS can be addictive because A) people love sugar, and B) it stops you from feeling full. If you’ve got proof those scientists were wrong, let us know, and please don’t offer any more speculation without some evidence.

          3. “they simply had “detectable” levels of mercury means a pretty worthless study”– To someone who is ignorant of science, perhaps. PLEASE GET SOME INFORMATION ON YOUR SIDE AND QUIT SPECULATING.

          4. “If we were not growing corn, some other monoculture would be more dominant.”– Monoculturing is not the only way to farm. Maybe if HFCS weren’t such a popular product, there would be more diverse crops and monoculturing wouldn’t be as prevalent. I would love to know why you are so adamant about disproving everything in this article with no information to support any of your arguments. You claim this article is about ‘scare tactics’; that term would apply if this article were speculating without information as you are. Your tactics are solely of distraction and you’ve contributed nothing informative to the arguments here. Are you a corn farmer?

          • emperorreagan

            If the government didn’t subsidize corn so heavily, we certainly wouldn’t have a corn monoculture. And we’d be rid of both HFCS as well as the poor agricultural practice of feeding livestock corn based feeds.

        • Painfullguts

          1. If our bodies are evolving to metabolise HFC, for americans livers, healthcare and social security sakes we’d better hurry evolution along quick.

          2. We all require more awarness. Hence its worthwhile reading articles about food science.

          In america the portions are so large im guessing if people dont have a hormone switched on which tells them they are full is highly likely to mean they overeat. Couple that with the same industrial foods containing msg which does/also make people feel more hungry and eat more. Eat these things day in day out the results are well documented in obesity statistics.
          If your body felt full youd be less likely to choose to continue eating tasty fatty sweet food.
          If not feeling full and its there for 50cents more well itd be a shame to waste the oportunity.
          It is not an isolated thing. Industrial foods also contain trans fats and aspartame to dull the wits and confuse the bodies finely tuned homeostasis feedback signals.
          From a personal perspectivce ive eaten at fast food joints maybe 15 times max my whole life.and not at all scince 7 years. Still if i see a Micky d ad on telly even now my mouth fills with saliva instantly, its most odd. I havent noticed it with other food type ads. My body reacts to the mere image of fast foods on its own. If i didnt know so much about it i might go out and buy some but i know from 15 times experience i wouldnt feel my hunger satisfied afterwards.

          3 and 4 well ok they are weak points in the article. it could be there to highlight the attached implications of choosing to eat the lowest common denominator industrial food and stimulate further reading around these subjects.

    • Hempdude

      You forgot about the part that said it doesnt allow your body-brain connection to know when you’re full.

  • Synapse

    The reasons translated:

    1. It’s not found in nature, so it’s scary. (Unlike everything else we eat/use that is “not found in nature”)
    2. It does something that, outside of moderation, can contribute to obesity. (Called weird for emotional effect)
    3. Your food of choice might kill you, stay tuned at 11. (.0001% mercury was found, not at all a result of bad sampling)
    4. Things not connected to the product itself are also scary an unfamiliar.

  • James J

    do you actually have some kind of argument or commentary, or are you just trying to stop yourself from worrying about this so you can keep drinking soda? I love soda too, I’m drinking it right now, but I’m not going to pretend it’s great for me, and I’m not going to act like science needs to shut up so I can drink my soda in peace. You have no information, you haven’t countered what the article said except with vague, empty-heade speculation, so what were you trying to say exactly?

  • James J

    do you actually have some kind of argument or commentary, or are you just trying to stop yourself from worrying about this so you can keep drinking soda? I love soda too, I’m drinking it right now, but I’m not going to pretend it’s great for me, and I’m not going to act like science needs to shut up so I can drink my soda in peace. You have no information, you haven’t countered what the article said except with vague, empty-heade speculation, so what were you trying to say exactly?

  • Painfullguts

    1. It doesnt occur in plants or animals in nature. Our bodies have not evolved to process this “man made” product. Unlike food that does occur in plants and animals which our bodies have evolved to LIVE with.
    2 it does something (to the hormone leptin) that stops peoples bodies realising they are full as a ( direct?) result eating HFC = get fat . The point of NO.2 is that most things are fine in moderation but if a food is addictive and its highly unlikely to be eaten like that.
    3. good point. Were other food samples tested eg bread or meat for their possibly similar mercury levels. Perhaps this a normal back ground level of this toxic element which is found disolved in sea water due to geological processes, but i dont want to eat it as it strips the myelin sheaths from brain neurons.
    4. Most corn is GM – connected
    GM corn is generally grown as a mono culture- connected
    Beware the word naturaly, for it is a stupid word

  • 5by5

    The only thing you need to know about high fructose corn syrup is that it was INVENTED in 1972, and that the curve showing its penetration into the marketplace, exactly mimics the rise of morbid obesity in the country. The more corn syrup in food, the more fat people. Period.

    And hello, if it was INVENTED by man in the early 70′s, you’re gonna have a tough time making the case that it’s “natural”.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_TYMUQUGCLJIDV6FUCGPDXPXI3I travis

      @5by5 you’re an idiot! it was invented in 1957 by Richard O. Marshall and Earl R. Kooi. wikipedia dumbass. but lets see when was cake invented or frosting or blow pops or potato chips or crackers, my point being just because it was invented doesn’t mean anything are you also an anti-vaccination advocate too, correlation is not causation

      • Sjoy_us4

        Thats like the first thing that popped into my mind when I read what 5by5 wrote. lol

  • 5by5

    The only thing you need to know about high fructose corn syrup is that it was INVENTED in 1972, and that the curve showing its penetration into the marketplace, exactly mimics the rise of morbid obesity in the country. The more corn syrup in food, the more fat people. Period.

    And hello, if it was INVENTED by man in the early 70′s, you’re gonna have a tough time making the case that it’s “natural”.

  • 5by5

    And the larger problem is that it isn’t just in my soda. It’s in my friggin’ VEGETABLE soup. And bread. And salad dressing. And pasta. And every sauce imaginable. And in basically every processed or frozen food there is.

    I had a friend visit from Europe, and her first reaction was simply, “Why does everything in America taste so sweet?” She was shocked that even foods she expected to be savory, to her un-tainted palate, tasted like dessert.

  • Merrittj1

    Guess what tumors feed on sugar and any carbohydrate, fat or protein you eat!

  • Synapse

    1. Neither are most of the foods we eat. There are no cake or bread trees. Bread is essentially a man made product. Some articles I have read indicated that we were able to evolve larger brains due to the fact that somehow we invented cooking, which gave our bodies more direct nutrients. You could argue that our bodies are still evolving to deal with HFC directly.

    2. Being full and being hungry are totally different things. I can physically make myself keep eating if I don’t realize I’m not full, but I don’t have to keep eating if I don’t feel hunger. When I get hungry and eat something with HFC in it, I might not feel as full as I would with regular sugars, but to continue eating past what is a normal amount of food is entirely up to me. The food isn’t addictive, I simply require more awareness of what I’m eating. A call for better discipline or additional education for people on how to eat properly in light of HFC as opposed to reacting in fear and just banning HFC.

    3.The very fact that their sample size was 20, and they simply had “detectable” levels of mercury means a pretty worthless study. I suspect there’s still more mercury in Tuna than in HFC products.

    4. The claim of the article for that reason is that monocultures are the threat, not that it’s corn specifically that messes up the environment. If we were not growing corn, some other monoculture would be more dominant.

  • Synapse

    See my additional comments above, the first post was made on my way out. My argument, as with most articles like this, is that they are deliberately trying to manipulate you into being unreasonably afraid of X. I’m sure the people behind HFC have their own propaganda, but that doesn’t excuse false or equally manipulated wording from the other side. Very few points they mention could even be considered objective facts or even directly connected to HFC/Corn. This article isn’t science, just scare tactics dressed up as science.

    I don’t drink that much soda and currently am in a country where HFC is not common (except in imported American products). When I’m living in America, I don’t even think that HFC noticeably makes other things particularly sweeter, and I think it tastes somewhat less sweet than regular sugar, but that is my subjective taste. Personally, I’d rather we left sugars out of stuff entirely. I don’t need any sugar of any kind in my granola bar or what have you.

  • StZed

    except the fact the food industry uses HFCS as a filler and additive in basically every processed food. pretty hard for someone to avoid unless they cut out industrial food entirely and although we are ovo-lacto veg and do not eat any processed food, i strongly recognise that option is a great luxury and dependent on budget. it should NOT be a luxury to have access to safe whole foods fruits and veg.

  • emperorreagan

    I think that’s probably a better point – sweeteners are put in many things that simply don’t need it. It doesn’t matter whether it’s sugar or high fructose corn syrup, it’s adding unneeded calories. And for that matter, you can count artificial sweeteners – they might not provide the extra calories, but it’s still a chemical I don’t necessarily need to consume, used too frequently to sweeten things that wouldn’t need to be sweetened.

  • grooveboss

    population control

  • grooveboss

    population control

  • O. Spengler

    If HFCS is fine in moderation, then why do they put it in so many products and in such large quantities when it comes to soft drinks?

    • Andrew

      Sick people are easier to control.

      • Raybutlers

        and fat people are harder to kidnap

      • Hempdude

        Thats a good point.although all they have to say is you’re paranoid.After all made toxins are all part of gods great plan.( refer to Athiests mad at god article).

      • Hempdude

        Correction:I meant to say Man-Made toxins are part of gods great plan.Sarcasm is just so unappreciated these days.

    • Raybutlers

      In short, they are deceiving us. They tell us to eat in moderation, yet they put large quantities of it in nearly everything. It’s a deliberate deception designed to increase sales. Plus, sugar had addictive qualities. Sweet shit is almost as easy to sell as tobacco and booze.

  • O. Spengler

    If HFCS is fine in moderation, then why do they put it in so many products and in such large quantities when it comes to soft drinks?

  • O. Spengler

    This article isn’t science, just scare tactics dressed up as science.”
    If it’s science you prefer, I recommend Sugar: The Bitter Truth, a lecture by Robert H. Lustig MD.

  • Andrew

    Sick people are easier to control.

  • Hadrian999

    why doesnobobdy mention that it makes food taste bad.

    • XxzedleppelinxX

      Because most people don’t think it tastes bad, most people think it makes food better.

      • Hadrian999

        i can’t imagine that. every food i have been able to find without hfcs tastes much better.

        • http://twitter.com/gaylikefxck Christana W.

          What you’re basically saying is: “I can’t imagine that, my subjective experience is that HFCS tastes bad so therefore EVERYBODY must think it tastes bad”

          you do realize you sound ridiculous, right? I know several people who absolutely can’t stand the “throwback” sodas that have real sugar instead of HFCS, because they claim they taste “weird” and “bad”. Just because you don’t like it, doesn’t mean nobody else does. HFCS may be an acquired taste, but it’s one that many Americans have in fact acquired and often prefer.

      • emperorreagan

        I think the real issue is that many people lack a reference point for sugar versus HFCS. You have to actively seek the former in many cases (like buying Kosher Coca Cola, or buying Coca Cola at a Latino shop) versus readily finding the HFCS variant.

  • Hadrian999

    why doesnobobdy mention that it makes food taste bad.

  • acid_kill02

    one day mercury and high fructose corn syrup will be added to the food pyramid.

    • Hempdude

      LOL! For the chubby chasers?

    • Hempdude

      They have to fund my trip back to my home planet somehow.

  • acid_kill02

    one day mercury and high fructose corn syrup will be added to the food pyramid.

  • James J

    1. “Neither are most of the foods we eat. There are no cake or bread trees.”– That is not what Painfullguts was talking about. You’re really missing the point here. Wheat, eggs, salt and yeast exist in nature without chemical adulteration.
    “You could argue that our bodies are still evolving to deal with HFC directly.”– Yeah, and it’s making us obese. What are the health benefits of HFCS? Go ahead, let me know.

    2. “Being full and being hungry are totally different things.”– really now, you don’t say! they’re not the same thing? What insight. “The food isn’t addictive”– I know you don’t want to believe it’s addictive, but there is scientific evidence that HFCS can be addictive because A) people love sugar, and B) it stops you from feeling full. If you’ve got proof those scientists were wrong, let us know, and please don’t offer any more speculation without some evidence.

    3. “they simply had “detectable” levels of mercury means a pretty worthless study”– To someone who is ignorant of science, perhaps. PLEASE GET SOME INFORMATION ON YOUR SIDE AND QUIT SPECULATING.

    4. “If we were not growing corn, some other monoculture would be more dominant.”– Monoculturing is not the only way to farm. Maybe if HFCS weren’t such a popular product, there would be more diverse crops and monoculturing wouldn’t be as prevalent. I would love to know why you are so adamant about disproving everything in this article with no information to support any of your arguments. You claim this article is about ‘scare tactics’; that term would apply if this article were speculating without information as you are. Your tactics are solely of distraction and you’ve contributed nothing informative to the arguments here. Are you a corn farmer?

  • James J

    “My argument, as with most articles like this, is that they are deliberately trying to manipulate you”——- So you assume any article about the negative side of a food product is likely to be wrong? What is the intelligent part of that? Where is the informative side of your argument that HFCS is a good thing, which is what you’re saying here? You trust the agribusiness which has been known to skirt the boundaries of food safety for profit, but the villains are scientists who study the food and find problems? What is wrong with you? trying to disprove food safety science without evidence, you are ignorant on all counts.

  • GoodDoktorBad

    Its all about profit and profit only…..
    Cane sugar used to be the pariah and in comparison it is far superior to HFCS. HFCS is simply cheaper to produce.
    They don’t care about you or your diabetes, your money is all they want from you.

    • Liam_McGonagle

      Yeah, from a business perspective this is what you call a “virtuous circle”–make money by getting people fat by overselling some synthetic food additive, and then make even MORE money treating them for obesity and diabetes.

  • Anonymous

    Its all about profit and profit only…..
    Cane sugar used to be the pariah and in comparison it is far superior to HFCS. HFCS is simply cheaper to produce.
    They don’t care about you or your diabetes, your money is all they want from you.

  • XxzedleppelinxX

    Because most people don’t think it tastes bad, most people think it makes food better.

  • Hadrian999

    i can’t imagine that. every food i have been able to find without hfcs tastes much better.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_TYMUQUGCLJIDV6FUCGPDXPXI3I travis

    there is a lot of missing information with this article, i’m not gonna say one way or another whether HFCS is good or bad but this article is a disgrace.

    i usually like the articles on this site but this one fails miserably, how about you just give the facts, all the facts and i’ll make up my own mind, this article is extremely biased

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_TYMUQUGCLJIDV6FUCGPDXPXI3I travis

    there is a lot of missing information with this article, i’m not gonna say one way or another whether HFCS is good or bad but this article is a disgrace.

    i usually like the articles on this site but this one fails miserably, how about you just give the facts, all the facts and i’ll make up my own mind, this article is extremely biased

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_TYMUQUGCLJIDV6FUCGPDXPXI3I travis

    @5by5 you’re an idiot! it was invented in 1957 by Richard O. Marshall and Earl R. Kooi. wikipedia dumbass. but lets see when was cake invented or frosting or blow pops or potato chips or crackers, my point being just because it was invented doesn’t mean anything are you also an anti-vaccination advocate too, correlation is not causation

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_TYMUQUGCLJIDV6FUCGPDXPXI3I travis

    guess what your heart and brain and your entire body also feed on sugar and any carbohydrate, fat or protein you eat, but your right i’m going to quit eating those things so i don’t get cancer, where are you going with this?

  • The_josh_21

    Not that hard to figure out people. Eat organic food. You get more nutrition for your money over the long run and it supports a good majority of farmers and growers that care.

  • emperorreagan

    If the government didn’t subsidize corn so heavily, we certainly wouldn’t have a corn monoculture. And we’d be rid of both HFCS as well as the poor agricultural practice of feeding livestock corn based feeds.

  • http://blog.sweetsurprise.com Corn Refiners

    Despite what some may think – our efforts are to clear up the misperceptions that some have, and to also address any concerns that are out there. We are all for the discussion on high fructose corn syrup; people are talking about HFCS, they are asking questions, and we could not ask for anything more. As a parent I have various concerns and I know that it is important to ask questions so that I can evaluate all sides and make the best decision for my family.

    I would like to respond to some of the misperceptions listed in this article and respond to questions that any of you may have.

    It has become a popular misconception that HFCS is more ‘processed’ than sugar, fruit juice concentrate, or agave nectar production, when they actually go through remarkably similar production methods. We do have information on our website that shows the similarities of how sucrose (table sugar) and HFCS are processed. You can see more at http://bit.ly/bMywtu and here is another site http://bit.ly/aXNScF that shows how various sugars are made.

    Per the Corn Farmers Coalition, “innovative farmers are growing more corn every year with fewer resources while protecting the environment.” You can also take a glance at http://www.slate.com/id/2218599 which talks about this more.

    Claims that HFCS contains mercury contamination are inaccurate. The IATP report & the journal article it references fail to meet scientific standards for serious research and published literature. Consequently, the mercury levels cited by these reports are far below levels of concern set by the federal government. For example, EPA sets limits for mercury in water at two parts per billion. In comparison, the authors measured levels at parts per trillion in foods with HFCS.

    Please see the report by Woodhall Stopford, MD, MSPH, of Duke University Medical Center at http://duketox.mc.duke.edu/recenttoxissues.htm; he is one of the nation’s leading experts in mercury contamination, and reviewed the results of total mercury testing of samples of HFCS.

    You can also see a video from ChemRisk, Inc. a scientific consulting firm, who examined the report as well. http://bit.ly/hxAYn9

    There is not a difference in how your body recognizes HFCS or sugar; in fact, the American Dietetic Association stated that these two sweeteners are indistinguishable to the human body and are metabolized equivalently. In addition, no credible research has demonstrated that HFCS affects calorie control differently than sugar. You can see more at http://bit.ly/b6PUX0. You can also see 3rd party POV’s in regard to HFCS at http://digg.com/sweetcorn55

    Please feel free to join the conversation at http://www.blog.sweetsurprise.com

    Therese, Social Media Manager, Corn Refiners Association

  • http://www.sweetsurprise.com/ Corn Refiners

    Despite what some may think – our efforts are to clear up the misperceptions that some have, and to also address any concerns that are out there. We are all for the discussion on high fructose corn syrup; people are talking about HFCS, they are asking questions, and we could not ask for anything more. As a parent I have various concerns and I know that it is important to ask questions so that I can evaluate all sides and make the best decision for my family.

    I would like to respond to some of the misperceptions listed in this article and respond to questions that any of you may have.

    It has become a popular misconception that HFCS is more ‘processed’ than sugar, fruit juice concentrate, or agave nectar production, when they actually go through remarkably similar production methods. We do have information on our website that shows the similarities of how sucrose (table sugar) and HFCS are processed. You can see more at http://bit.ly/bMywtu and here is another site http://bit.ly/aXNScF that shows how various sugars are made.

    Per the Corn Farmers Coalition, “innovative farmers are growing more corn every year with fewer resources while protecting the environment.” You can also take a glance at http://www.slate.com/id/2218599 which talks about this more.

    Claims that HFCS contains mercury contamination are inaccurate. The IATP report & the journal article it references fail to meet scientific standards for serious research and published literature. Consequently, the mercury levels cited by these reports are far below levels of concern set by the federal government. For example, EPA sets limits for mercury in water at two parts per billion. In comparison, the authors measured levels at parts per trillion in foods with HFCS.

    Please see the report by Woodhall Stopford, MD, MSPH, of Duke University Medical Center at http://duketox.mc.duke.edu/recenttoxissues.htm; he is one of the nation’s leading experts in mercury contamination, and reviewed the results of total mercury testing of samples of HFCS.

    You can also see a video from ChemRisk, Inc. a scientific consulting firm, who examined the report as well. http://bit.ly/hxAYn9

    There is not a difference in how your body recognizes HFCS or sugar; in fact, the American Dietetic Association stated that these two sweeteners are indistinguishable to the human body and are metabolized equivalently. In addition, no credible research has demonstrated that HFCS affects calorie control differently than sugar. You can see more at http://bit.ly/b6PUX0. You can also see 3rd party POV’s in regard to HFCS at http://digg.com/sweetcorn55

    Please feel free to join the conversation at http://www.blog.sweetsurprise.com

    Therese, Social Media Manager, Corn Refiners Association

    • Painfullguts

      SO does it or doesnt it switch off lepetin? Any one got any peer reviewed articles. Be sceptical of these links povided. Big business has a habit of paying for reaserch and finding the results it wants. It can then be used in arguments to govern public policy ect. (oh its ok to put that soda machine in that school look)
      Maybe it takes a few weeks of drinking hfcs before the hormone lepetins effectiveness become noticeable dampened down. It looks like the reaserch put forward in sweet surprise is done in a short term way eg drink one drink how do you feel?
      The easiest way is to atempt to eat whole foods for a while and feel for yourself which give better health and happiness.

    • GoodDoktorBad

      The effects on my own body is all the research I’ll ever need. I have noticed the effect of being “hungry all the time” long before I ever read anything in the media about it. I have eliminated it from my diet and guess what? My appetite is back to normal… HFCS doesn’t belong in spaghetti sauce, soup or most of the products in which it is found. Its there for a reason and the reason isn’t nutrition. Its a cheap way to make already crappy processed food taste better, and as a filler to avoid putting so much actual real food into food.

      So, “Therese, Social Media Manager, Corn Refiners Association ” take your half assed defense of HFCS and shove it. It’s pretty obvious that you have a biased agenda, considering who you work for. Protecting your job is why your here. I doubt you’ll convince anyone on this site.
      On a slighty positive note, I commend you for your audacity….

    • Lesliefish

      Consider that, now that there’s a growing market for fuel-grade ethanol, farmers don’t have to grow corn for human or livestock feed; they can sell the corn grain — and the corn-stalk, for that matter — to the fuel-ethanol producers. In brief, you don’t have to whitewash the effects of HFCS in order to save your incomes.

      –Leslie < Fish

  • emperorreagan

    I think the real issue is that many people lack a reference point for sugar versus HFCS. You have to actively seek the former in many cases (like buying Kosher Coca Cola, or buying Coca Cola at a Latino shop) versus readily finding the HFCS variant.

  • emperorreagan

    I think the real issue is that many people lack a reference point for sugar versus HFCS. You have to actively seek the former in many cases (like buying Kosher Coca Cola, or buying Coca Cola at a Latino shop) versus readily finding the HFCS variant.

  • emperorreagan

    Organic food doesn’t necessarily have better nutritional value as compared to food grown with other agricultural techniques. You’re paying extra to limit your exposure to chemicals and to support more sustainable agricultural techniques, not for a better nutritional profile in your apple.

  • Painfullguts

    1. If our bodies are evolving to metabolise HFC, for americans livers, healthcare and social security sakes we’d better hurry evolution along quick.

    2. We all require more awarness. Hence its worthwhile reading articles about food science.

    In america the portions are so large im guessing if people dont have a hormone switched on which tells them they are full is highly likely to mean they overeat. Couple that with the same industrial foods containing msg which does/also make people feel more hungry and eat more. Eat these things day in day out the results are well documented in obesity statistics.
    If your body felt full youd be less likely to choose to continue eating tasty fatty sweet food.
    If not feeling full and its there for 50cents more well itd be a shame to waste the oportunity.
    It is not an isolated thing. Industrial foods also contain trans fats and aspartame to dull the wits and confuse the bodies finely tuned homeostasis feedback signals.
    From a personal perspectivce ive eaten at fast food joints maybe 15 times max my whole life.and not at all scince 7 years. Still if i see a Micky d ad on telly even now my mouth fills with saliva instantly, its most odd. I havent noticed it with other food type ads. My body reacts to the mere image of fast foods on its own. If i didnt know so much about it i might go out and buy some but i know from 15 times experience i wouldnt feel my hunger satisfied afterwards.

    3 and 4 well ok they are weak points in the article. it could be there to highlight the attached implications of choosing to eat the lowest common denominator industrial food and stimulate further reading around these subjects.

  • Painfullguts

    SO does it or doesnt it switch off lepetin? Any one got any peer reviewed articles. Be sceptical of these links povided. Big business has a habit of paying for reaserch and finding the results it wants. It can then be used in arguments to govern public policy ect. (oh its ok to put that soda machine in that school look)
    Maybe it takes a few weeks of drinking hfcs before the hormone lepetins effectiveness become noticeable dampened down. It looks like the reaserch put forward in sweet surprise is done in a short term way eg drink one drink how do you feel?
    The easiest way is to atempt to eat whole foods for a while and feel for yourself which give better health and happiness.

  • Liam_McGonagle

    Yeah, from a business perspective this is what you call a “virtuous circle”–make money by getting people fat by overselling some synthetic food additive, and then make even MORE money treating them for obesity and diabetes.

  • Anonymous

    The effects on my own body is all the research I’ll ever need. I have noticed the effect of being “hungry all the time” long before I ever read anything in the media about it. I have eliminated it from my diet and guess what? My appetite is back to normal… HFCS doesn’t belong in spaghetti sauce, soup or most of the products in which it is found. Its there for a reason and the reason isn’t nutrition. Its a cheap way to make already crappy processed food taste better, and as a filler to avoid putting so much actual real food into food.

    So, “Therese, Social Media Manager, Corn Refiners Association ” take your half assed defense of HFCS and shove it. It’s pretty obvious that you have a biased agenda, considering who you work for. Protecting your job is why your here. I doubt you’ll convince anyone on this site.
    On a slighty positive note, I commend you for your audacity….

  • Lesliefish

    I can give you a fifth reason to ban corn syrup. It’s made from corn starch, which — like all starches, as Dr. Adkins pointed out — contains chemicals which signal the body to put on fat. Needless to add, this also contributes to America’s plague of obesity.

    The stuff should be banned.

    –Leslie < Fish

    • J j

      You should maybe just look after yourself before running around banning everything, you fat moron. Quit looking for someone else to manage your life for you. If you don’t like what is in something, don’t eat it or grow your own ingredients and stfu.

  • Lesliefish

    I can give you a fifth reason to ban corn syrup. It’s made from corn starch, which — like all starches, as Dr. Adkins pointed out — contains chemicals which signal the body to put on fat. Needless to add, this also contributes to America’s plague of obesity.

    The stuff should be banned.

    –Leslie < Fish

  • Lesliefish

    Consider that, now that there’s a growing market for fuel-grade ethanol, farmers don’t have to grow corn for human or livestock feed; they can sell the corn grain — and the corn-stalk, for that matter — to the fuel-ethanol producers. In brief, you don’t have to whitewash the effects of HFCS in order to save your incomes.

    –Leslie < Fish

  • Dimitri

    Take a look around people. This is America. Travis you are the epitome of what future generations will laugh at and mock. You are missing the point completely with your arrogance. Wine is great for your heart so does that mean u should drink 10 gallons a day because it is good for you?

    There is alot of information out there that shows that HFCS is not good for you. Common sense along will tell u that maybe u should not have this in everything eat or drink. Why must you make things so complicated. You are the generic stupid American that has got us in this place to begin with.

    While you think your so smart the rest of the world is laughing at you. (that’s right not with you).

    And by the way. Your vaccine comment. I think i hear the dog coming, u should head back to your herd.

  • afhicks

    Recently read about a study where they place pancreatic cancer cells in a petrie glass with regular sugar and some in a glass with fructose. While the sugar kept the cells alive, the fructose made them multiply like crazy! After losing a brother-in-law to PC this fall, I’m reading labels all the time anymore.

    • Greg

      If they are actually cancer cells then they would have multiplied like crazy regardless of the carbon source as long as it was present.

    • http://www.sweetsurprise.com/ Corn Refiners

      @afhicks The UCLA study you are talking about narrowly compared pure fructose to pure glucose, neither of which is consumed in isolation in the human diet.

      Please see what experts have to say about the UCLA study.

      “I have treatments that can cure pancreatic cancer in the Petri dish. We’ve had that for more than 50 years. But they don’t work on pancreatic cancer in humans. That tells me there’s a difference, biologically, between cancer cells in a Petri dish and cancer cells in a person and we have to respect that.” Otis Webb Brawley, M.D., Chief Medical Officer, American Cancer Society, August 8, 2010 http://bit.ly/cwQfRg

      “Both the authors and the press need to retract these alarmist and unsupported claims — especially the authors, since such gross over-interpretation of a lab study is inexcusable among academic scientists. They seem to be grasping for headlines and promoting some anti-fructose political agenda.” Gilbert Ross, M.D., Executive Director and Medical Director of the American Council on Science and Health, HealthFactsAndFears.com, August 4, 2010, http://bit.ly/dnkb7J

      “This is fructose they are talking about, not HFCS specifically. HFCS is not particularly high in fructose compared to table sugar. Both are about 50% fructose and are about equal in their effects. So is honey. Agave has even more.” Marion Nestle, Ph.D., Paulette Goddard Professor of Nutrition, Food Studies and Public Health, New York University, Salon.com, August 4, 2010, http://bit.ly/cHUWj6

      “I hate science press releases that hype a study beyond its importance. I hate it even more when the investigators who published the study make statements not justified by the study and use the study as a jumping off point to speculate wildly.” Orac at ScienceBlogs.com, Respectful Insolence Blog, August 5, 2010, http://bit.ly/b7AUMW

      Also see Fooducate Blog http://bit.ly/cw3kkN: LATimes.com Booster Shots http://bit.ly/a7lTZw: and Reason.com http://bit.ly/aOZw2l.

      As many dietitians agree, all sugars should be consumed in moderation as part of a balanced lifestyle.

      Therese, Corn Refiners Association

  • afhicks

    Recently read about a study where they place pancreatic cancer cells in a petrie glass with regular sugar and some in a glass with fructose. While the sugar kept the cells alive, the fructose made them multiply like crazy! After losing a brother-in-law to PC this fall, I’m reading labels all the time anymore.

  • Greg

    If they are actually cancer cells then they would have multiplied like crazy regardless of the carbon source as long as it was present.

  • Raybutlers

    This is indeed a fairly junky article. Whatever harm comes from HFCS, it’s because it is sugar. There’s no evidence that it is toxic or that it behaves any differently that sugars from a “natural” source. Sugar, however, must be respected and that is the problem. Because it is so cheap (due to subsidies), it is put in nearly all foods. The sinister note comes from the fact that food companies know that sweetness makes us want more sweetness. Therefore, nearly every product in restaurants and in prepared food aisles contain sugar (HFCS perhaps). It makes us overeat. Yes, they are forcing us to overeat (and overbuy) and yes, they know they are doing it. No, willpower is not enough. Personal responsibility fails us when we are being abused and deceived. You can’t act in your best interest when you are being betrayed.

  • Raybutlers

    This is indeed a fairly junky article. Whatever harm comes from HFCS, it’s because it is sugar. There’s no evidence that it is toxic or that it behaves any differently that sugars from a “natural” source. Sugar, however, must be respected and that is the problem. Because it is so cheap (due to subsidies), it is put in nearly all foods. The sinister note comes from the fact that food companies know that sweetness makes us want more sweetness. Therefore, nearly every product in restaurants and in prepared food aisles contain sugar (HFCS perhaps). It makes us overeat. Yes, they are forcing us to overeat (and overbuy) and yes, they know they are doing it. No, willpower is not enough. Personal responsibility fails us when we are being abused and deceived. You can’t act in your best interest when you are being betrayed.

  • Raybutlers

    and fat people are harder to kidnap

  • Raybutlers

    In short, they are deceiving us. They tell us to eat in moderation, yet they put large quantities of it in nearly everything. It’s a deliberate deception designed to increase sales. Plus, sugar had addictive qualities. Sweet shit is almost as easy to sell as tobacco and booze.

  • Don

    If this article cited where it got it’s information concerning HFCS. I’d be more inclined to agree. I think it should be banned from mass production or at the very least heavily reduced. But this article didn’t convince me, it just summoned “facts” out of nowhere to “prove” it’s argument. This article does little to challenge a very important topic that needs to be discussed for the sake of American public safety.

    • http://www.sweetsurprise.com/ Corn Refiners

      Don – Do you have any concerns about high-fructose corn syrup?

  • Don

    If this article cited where it got it’s information concerning HFCS. I’d be more inclined to agree. I think it should be banned from mass production or at the very least heavily reduced. But this article didn’t convince me, it just summoned “facts” out of nowhere to “prove” it’s argument. This article does little to challenge a very important topic that needs to be discussed for the sake of American public safety.

  • http://blog.sweetsurprise.com Corn Refiners

    @afhicks The UCLA study you are talking about narrowly compared pure fructose to pure glucose, neither of which is consumed in isolation in the human diet.

    Please see what experts have to say about the UCLA study.

    “I have treatments that can cure pancreatic cancer in the Petri dish. We’ve had that for more than 50 years. But they don’t work on pancreatic cancer in humans. That tells me there’s a difference, biologically, between cancer cells in a Petri dish and cancer cells in a person and we have to respect that.” Otis Webb Brawley, M.D., Chief Medical Officer, American Cancer Society, August 8, 2010 http://bit.ly/cwQfRg

    “Both the authors and the press need to retract these alarmist and unsupported claims — especially the authors, since such gross over-interpretation of a lab study is inexcusable among academic scientists. They seem to be grasping for headlines and promoting some anti-fructose political agenda.” Gilbert Ross, M.D., Executive Director and Medical Director of the American Council on Science and Health, HealthFactsAndFears.com, August 4, 2010, http://bit.ly/dnkb7J

    “This is fructose they are talking about, not HFCS specifically. HFCS is not particularly high in fructose compared to table sugar. Both are about 50% fructose and are about equal in their effects. So is honey. Agave has even more.” Marion Nestle, Ph.D., Paulette Goddard Professor of Nutrition, Food Studies and Public Health, New York University, Salon.com, August 4, 2010, http://bit.ly/cHUWj6

    “I hate science press releases that hype a study beyond its importance. I hate it even more when the investigators who published the study make statements not justified by the study and use the study as a jumping off point to speculate wildly.” Orac at ScienceBlogs.com, Respectful Insolence Blog, August 5, 2010, http://bit.ly/b7AUMW

    Also see Fooducate Blog http://bit.ly/cw3kkN: LATimes.com Booster Shots http://bit.ly/a7lTZw: and Reason.com http://bit.ly/aOZw2l.

    As many dietitians agree, all sugars should be consumed in moderation as part of a balanced lifestyle.

    Therese, Corn Refiners Association

  • http://blog.sweetsurprise.com Corn Refiners

    Don – Do you have any concerns about high-fructose corn syrup?

  • Mortendg

    Disinformation. Aptly named blog. Full of shit, fits you better.

  • Mortendg

    Disinformation. Aptly named blog. Full of shit, fits you better.

  • Sjoy_us4

    Thats like the first thing that popped into my mind when I read what 5by5 wrote. lol

  • Sjoy_us4

    Travis’s comments are not stupid, they are in fact correct. The flaw with American’s is thier excessive behavior. Anything eaten in excess is unhealthy for you. Even “All Natural” foods. As a child of the world that hates America I’d like to tell you this, it’s not the arrogance that gets to us as much as the greed.

  • straysubg

    Guys, any concerns you have about HFCS can easily be cleared up by our resident Social Media Manager for the Corn Refiner’s Association. Her information is devoid of bias and motivated only by the desire to get the truth out there.

    HFCS is a great product and possibly the wonder food of the 21st century. I won’t have you speaking ill about my HFCS.

  • straysubg

    Guys, any concerns you have about HFCS can easily be cleared up by our resident Social Media Manager for the Corn Refiner’s Association. Her information is devoid of bias and motivated only by the desire to get the truth out there.

    HFCS is a great product and possibly the wonder food of the 21st century. I won’t have you speaking ill about my HFCS.

  • http://twitter.com/gaylikefxck Christana W.

    What you’re basically saying is: “I can’t imagine that, my subjective experience is that HFCS tastes bad so therefore EVERYBODY must think it tastes bad”

    you do realize you sound ridiculous, right? I know several people who absolutely can’t stand the “throwback” sodas that have real sugar instead of HFCS, because they claim they taste “weird” and “bad”. Just because you don’t like it, doesn’t mean nobody else does. HFCS may be an acquired taste, but it’s one that many Americans have in fact acquired and often prefer.

  • Hempdude

    Now lets have some real fun!! Lets get the tobacco loby to lie for these folks so the self-destruction can continue.Love,gary.

  • Hempdude

    Now lets have some real fun!! Lets get the tobacco loby to lie for these folks so the self-destruction can continue.Love,gary.

  • Hempdude

    LOL! For the chubby chasers?

  • Hempdude

    You forgot about the part that said it doesnt allow your body-brain connection to know when you’re full.

  • Hempdude

    Thats a good point.although all they have to say is you’re paranoid.After all made toxins are all part of gods great plan.( refer to Athiests mad at god article).

  • Hempdude

    Correction:I meant to say Man-Made toxins are part of gods great plan.Sarcasm is just so unappreciated these days.

  • Hempdude

    They have to fund my trip back to my home planet somehow.

  • Jakezack

    So, I know this is sorta anecdotal, but where I’m from (I’ll give you a hint: one of the biggest corn-producing states in the U.S.), NOBODY grows monocultures. Not only would a monoculture ruin your farmland after a few years, but all those fertilizers and pesticides are friggin’ expensive. So we try to use them as little as possible. So for basically all the reasons stated in this article, we rotate in soybeans and sometimes alfalfa every other year.

    One more thing: the genetic modification that the writer mentions is usually done either to repel pests or make the plants resistant to pesticides. See, the goal is to get the highest yield possible, and pests reduce yields. So if gm crops had more pests, we wouldn’t grow them, because it kinda defeats the purpose.

    Now I’m not against criticism to the way we grow and eat things, but some of the information in this article is just outright inaccurate.

  • Jakezack

    So, I know this is sorta anecdotal, but where I’m from (I’ll give you a hint: one of the biggest corn-producing states in the U.S.), NOBODY grows monocultures. Not only would a monoculture ruin your farmland after a few years, but all those fertilizers and pesticides are friggin’ expensive. So we try to use them as little as possible. So for basically all the reasons stated in this article, we rotate in soybeans and sometimes alfalfa every other year.

    One more thing: the genetic modification that the writer mentions is usually done either to repel pests or make the plants resistant to pesticides. See, the goal is to get the highest yield possible, and pests reduce yields. So if gm crops had more pests, we wouldn’t grow them, because it kinda defeats the purpose.

    Now I’m not against criticism to the way we grow and eat things, but some of the information in this article is just outright inaccurate.

  • soap.jackal

    pproduced. Is that better than produced?

  • soap.jackal

    pproduced. Is that better than produced?

  • J j

    Junk science.

  • J j

    Junk science.

  • J j

    You should maybe just look after yourself before running around banning everything, you fat moron. Quit looking for someone else to manage your life for you. If you don’t like what is in something, don’t eat it or grow your own ingredients and stfu.

  • Heytheretaylor

    Citations needed… lots of them

  • Heytheretaylor

    Citations needed… lots of them

  • Heytheretaylor

    Citations needed… lots of them

  • Ellhs1948

    i will stick with honey,thank you.

  • Ellhs1948

    i will stick with honey,thank you.