All sugars are not created equal when it comes to how our bodies metabolize the sweeteners, a new study suggests.
People who drank beverages sweetened with fructose, but not glucose, showed an increase in intra-abdominal fat and blood lipid levels and decreased sensitivity to the hormone insulin, researchers reported in this week’s issue of the Journal of Clinical Investigation.
The findings suggest that fructose-sweetened beverages can interfere with how the body handles fat, leading to medical conditions that increase susceptibility to heart attacks and strokes.
The results could be important given that in 2005, the average American consumed 64 kilograms of added sugar, a sizeable proportion of which came through drinking soft drinks, said study author Peter Havel of the University of California at Davis and his colleagues.
Consumption of sugars and sweeteners in the U.S. went up by 19 per cent between 1970 and 2005, according to a commentary accompanying the study.
Increased use of high-fructose corn syrup as a sweetener in pop in the last few decades has been proposed as one dietary change fueling obesity in developed countries, Matthias Tschöp and Susanna Hofmann of the University of Cincinnati-College of Medicine noted in their commentary.
These sorts of posts and articles bring the HFCS PR folks out of the woodwork to debunk all these studies. It’s fun to watch them scramble.
Found by Tom Hofstatter.
#27–Fusion==”While a generally good post, I have one thought I would like to comment on.” /// Meetsy’s post was long and boring with an excellent message==the stuff is REALLY artificial. Nothing in the processing of chickens into nuggets makes the same point. If your point is that it is “a bloody mess” well then so is C-Sections. You aren’t against C-Sections are you Fusion? Think of the Kiddies.
Also, while I east very little processed garbage, I’ll bet McNuggets have HFCS in it==like it the batter somewhere. Its really is in “everything.”
To our experts: point was made that HFCS is processed in the liver making it sound “dangerous.” Yet others say that “sugar is sugar” and the danger is simply that we eat too much of the HFCS. Now, are simple sugars (fructose alone?) broken down by the liver as well or somewhere else in the body? Alcohol is broken down by the liver as well==so the simple fact of the liver being the organ of digestion does not bother me. So “on point” what is the real danger of HFCS OTHER THAN overconsumption?
HFCS is in our food because of one single reason. GREED. Its cheap stuff, and even though sugar is ridiculously cheap, HFCS is cheaper, so manufacturers decided awhile back that taste is less important than profits.
Ever see french pastry chefs say “now you take 1/2 cup of HFCS”… when making desserts? NO! Of course not, because they care about taste.
America and its famous greed is why we are poisoning our citizens with HFCS.
#33: no, the French chef would say “now you take 1/2 cup of corn syrup,” because the stuff has been in recipes for decades (at least my mom used it during the 50s when I was a kid). You may know it by the name Karo, but there are generic brands also..
#32–Pedro==”none” I think is mostly right. I think the animus against HFCS may be scientifically based and about 3-5% “bad” while simple overconsumption comprises 95% of the problem.
I formed this conclusion after reading from these two websites. Not authoritative, just low tolerance on most health issues as most such issues come down to eat less, exercise more no matter what the issue is.
http://history.com/encyclopedia.do?articleId=223333
http://blogs.roanoke.com/rtblogs/fridgemagnet/2009/02/18/the-war-against-hfcs/
#7, “I, myself, don’t buy the hype from either side, the truth is surely someplace in the middle.”
This is why the liars win. I say 2+2 = 4, they say 2+2 = 6, everyone assumes it is 5.
#31, “Alcohol is broken down by the liver as well”
Alcohol can also be poisonous.
#34, Karo and other corn syrups available in the store are not the same thing as HFCS. High Fructose Corn Syrup, the sweetener used in the majority of processed food, is not available in the supermarket. It is the “high fructose” part introduced through the manufacturing process that appears the be the problem.
Good luck trying to avoid HFCS, since it is now in almost every processed product. HFCS is used mostly to save money, and partly because we have been subtly conditioned over the years to think that everything must have a sweet taste. The last can of peas I bought had sugar added to it! Check out the steak sauce, relish, ketchup, BBQ sauce, even the Rye Bread in your fridge for HFCS, even the high-end name brands.
If you eat out, restaurant food is some of the most highly processed, with an absolute priority for the bottom line. I would bet that almost everything off that SYSCO truck has HFCS in it.
The advent of High Fructose Corn Syrup does coincide with the obesity epidemic we are in.
I am more inclined to believe this study then most of the yahoo’s here trying to sound smart.
Overweight study participants showed more evidence of insulin resistance and other risk factors for heart disease and diabetes when 25% of their calories came from fructose-sweetened beverages compared to glucose-sweetened beverages.
Both groups gained weight during the 10-week study, but the fructose group gained more of the dangerous belly fat that has been linked to a higher risk for heart attack and stroke.
The study showed clear differences in how fructose and glucose are metabolized by the body, nutrition researcher and principal investigator Peter J. Havel, PhD, of the University of California at Davis
mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmh! Syrup.
Who would want to mate with a big fat ugly HFCS user?
No one
Thus, cus we all want sex with the skinny people, who obviously cannot digest HFCS, our children are all dieing early from heart attacks & diabeties etc
However, some will like those huge bingo women, 32 stones of momma etc
These people are the fature!
This is why I don’t drink soda. Only beer.
#31, maddmaxx, Nick Danger would never use HFCS. “MORE SUGAR!”
I get my Dr. Pepper from Dublin, Texas, where real sugar is still an ingredient.
Maybe you should remove all the HFCS for no other reason than taste. After a visit to the USA I was appalled by the taste of most foods. Even staples like bread are crammed with the stuff. If you live there, visit another country and discover what you’ve been missing.
Isn’t corn sugar part of the beer making process?
Eeek, HFCS is everywhere!
#46, Pedro,
Dublin is a small TX town, but I’m sure they have their share of fat people. After all, soda is just one staple of the day.
I have 1 sugar Dr. Pepper a day, and I’m not overweight. But that’s about all the sugar I get, since I don’t eat fast or processed food more than once a week. I cook and so does my wife. It must be that delicious beer that will get to ya’. Gotta watch out for that.
#32, Bobbo,
#27–Fusion==”While a generally good post, I have one thought I would like to comment on.” /// Meetsy’s post was long and boring with an excellent message==the stuff is REALLY artificial. Nothing in the processing of chickens into nuggets makes the same point. If your point is that it is “a bloody mess” well then so is C-Sections. You aren’t against C-Sections are you Fusion?
Normal people don’t eat C-Sections. Maybe George Bush and Dick Cheney do, for health reasons I suppose, along with the dead babies. But normal people don’t so I miss your simile.
Next time you happen to be in a poultry processing plant, take a look at their process of making Chicken Nuggets. It ain’t pretty. Beer is also artificially produced. So is cane and beet sugar, jerky, kippers, bacon, and breads.
one of the main reason -aside from being vastly cheaper to use than sugar cane, that you find HFCS’s in almost *everything* these days is because fructose (unlike glucose) in simple terms,
inhibits the “I’m Full stop eating” switch.
-thus you get people to eat more than they need to.
which of course, leads to more food sales.
glucose, (which is what plain corn syrup is) has the opposite effect.
ofc, the larger (real?) reason is politics and subsidies. USDA tariffs on sugar imports makes sugar in the US 5x-10x more expensive. (the US is basically a hostile environment to grow sugar in) sugar is very cheap on the world market.
now, add in our infamous corn subsidies that make producing all corn products UBER cheap and you have
main reason why HFCS’s have replaced sugar in almost every processed food. -the fact that it keeps you hungry and buying more food is a bonus
this is also why you find the huge majority of soft drinks sold outside the US are made with sugar and not HFCS.
there has been an agrowar going on for decades because of our subsidies..
imo, i think the recent backlash of anti GM foods in Europe coupled with huge increase in GM soy subsidies
is why you now find a soy by-product replacing traditional ingredients in almost everything.
ffs, it’s hard to find canned albacore tuna in *water* without “contains soy” on the label.
-i’ve switched to wild salmon.
-and also..i think many may agree, this is why in the last 2-3yrs, *many* foodstuffs taste different, if not like crap.. for instance, Hellman’s mayonnaise now uses soybean oil and as such, taste like a cheap knockoff. (i confirmed by calling them and asking if they changed the formula, they did. -although they would say how)
i’ve always been a “stinking American capitalist pig” -however, i think the concept has been completely compromised by greedy bastards and ultimately, corrupt politicians in charge of the regs. -they are ruining our food supply.
#51–soundwash==thanks for another excellent comment.
Must be nice to be rich and afford wild salmon, or poor and have the time to fish for it?
Standard operating procedure in the USA economy..
IF we can make it cheaper in ANY WAY, we will.
We WONT change the price,
We might even raise it, and call it SPECIAL/NEW and make you THINK you are getting something.
Insted of using that $0.20 part that makes a electronic device LAST longer, we will put/use the $0.19 part and make it FAIL in 1 year.
Health and nutrition? HA!
Insted of using a few Spoons full of oil in Mayo we will make it 1/3 OIL.
Peanut oil is worth BUCKS, think you will get much in peanut butter?? NOT!! Unless you buy it in RAW form..and pay 2-3 times the price..
Who remembers when a product was made with Tolerances PLUS protection.
When a BUMP on the road didnt KILL your car??
When you killed your transmission MENT that you REALLY F$%#$% UP BAD. (PS. transmissions SHOULDNT DIE unless you REALLY SCREW UP) So, that 10 year drive trane warranty SHOULD BE CRAP(but isnt).
Who remembers when a $2000 radio WASNT a stock item?? ANY radio wasnt a STOCK item??
Car Tech?? If we could install all the GOOD things that SHOULD be in/on a car?? It wouldnt/shouldnt cost any more then a CHEAP CAR.
I always wonder about Aluminum in cars..
It takes MORE aluminum to support and protect you, then the same weight in STEAL.. Steel is CHEAPER. but where did all the Steel factories GO??
FINE lets ship it all over seas, and become a nation of CLEAN, info maniacs and developers. LET the world pollute itself at our whim. Making things IT THINKS we want..
But AT LEAST, require some QUALITY/options/durability in the GOODS that are sold in this nation..
#45….George Tirebiter would, on the other hand, consume HFCS
#55, meetsy, yes, he would. Wasn’t he voted in as Dogkiller? To persecute you to the full extent of the law?
LA was a mud river by now, and there I was, listening to the stacatto drum of rain on my desktop and reading my name on the office door, “regnaD kciN.”
HFCS is probably just like that name on the door.
WE WILL MAKE SUGAR ANYWAY we want to and SELL it to ANY bastard that wants it…
There is either a lie of omission or complete ignorance here.
“Fructose” is not the same as HFCS. If you look at the composition of HFCS, it’s very close to 50/50 Fructose/Glucose…the same as a sucrose molecule (i.e. “real sugar”); in fact, HFCS typically has *LESS* fructose, percentage wise, than sucrose. It’s called “high” fructose corn syrup to distinguish it from plain corn syrup, which is nearly pure glucose.
The study in question looked at *PURE* fructose-sweetened beverages, not HFCS. You can read for yourself at http://www.jci.org/articles/view/37385
http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/76/5/911
From the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.
there have been numerous studies of the effects of Fructose and HFCS, both are bad. The fact that HFCS is in everything these days means there is no moderate consumption, it’s in Cereals, Breads and Bagels, Yogurt, Soda and Sports Drinks. Everything, but I have stopped buying products that contain HFCS and it is difficult.
I know many of you are well meaning, but the facts presented here and elsewhere are more than a little deficient. I have no agenda, but will try to set things straight. At one time I developed a process to make HFCS.
HFCS is not a sufficiently descriptive term, in fact there are at least two types of HFCS, HFCS55 and HFCS90, the number indicating how much of G and F are in each on a percent weight basis in the mixture.
Most commercial plants that make HFCS55 which is what is blended into food, use HFCS55 because it is approximately the same perceived sweetness as cane or beet (sucrose) sugar on a weight basis.
But they make the HFCS55 by taking a HFCS90 product (that they create from purifying HFCS42 through a step called adsorptive separation) and blending the HFCS90 with HFCS42 back to the HFCS55 concentration for sweetness as stated above.
But this blending step creates some issuesthat I have not seen reported anywhere and I believe is the real problem. Let me explain.
The HFCS90 is sweeter than sucrose and could be used in soft drinks in lower quantities, but is it not. Why? Because the folks at ADM and AE Staley Corn Sweetners would rather sell more product on a weight or volume basis by diluting this HFCS90 back to HFCS55 with the unsaleable HFCS42.
Note that the HFCS55 has approx 45% glucose and the HFCS90 has approx 10% glucose. Also note that fructose and glucose are equal in caloric value. So if one used LESS HFCS90 than HFCS55 the Coke or whatever would be lower in calories, first. And more importantly the Coke would have less glucose. Read on.
Glucose is NOT great for the body, since it metabolizes FAST and goes right to the bloodstream where it supposed to be used. Once there, when ingested all at once, it can cause BIG problems especially in diabetics and those prone to diabetes, since the body needs to call out the pancreas to make insulin to process it. If the insulin is not there or slow to come, the glucose can destroy nerve tissue, in the limbs and retina. NOT GOOD.
If the ADM’s and AE Staley’s of the world would sell and if Coke/Pepsi/7-Ups would insist on buying HFCS90, the soft drinks and other products would have less glucose and more (on a percentage basis, but less on an absolute basis) of the slowly metabolizing fructose.
This would reduce the calorie content of the food, and prevent a large slug of the raw glucose from being ingested.
But that would be more costly on a pennies per can basis, and the companies that make the HFCS55 and the Coke et al would not like that.
So we are “blessed” with HFCS55, which causes obesity and diabetes. And NONE of the so-called experts that wright about this have commented on this point. Why?
I suspect that Coke, ADMs and AE Staley et al are silent on this since they want to have it their way and maximize profits. They will come clean but only if and when the FDA gets the story right and forces them to. Unlikely.
http://www.highfructosecornpoison.com