High fructose corn syrup vs pure fructose

[leaana]

um, it's not just the fructose but that they put so much in it. western drinks is like swallowing candy. the sugar content is way too high. just a little bit of sugar enough to make it subtly sweet is lost on most americans and the palate is unsophisticated. i'm sorry but this is the truth.

[AONE]

HFCS still has no nutritional value no matter how you serve it up. we would be far better off to not have it added to foods. Kind of like Aspartame, and Olestra.... Im sorry but when you have to warn eating this product may result in "anal dripping" this is not a good thing.
How about keeping foods simple, like nature made them.
I'm thinking the hormones animals are fedd might be changing the development of us... seems people are going bald in high school.. puberty is happening for everyone in elementary school. Why do we think we can engineer better than nature?
Rates of diabetes, cancer, stroke, heart attacks, and so many oter illnesses have gone through the roof in the last 100 years... hmm what could have caused this?

[geos]

The junk food industry in peddling a propaganda campaign to try and overcome the negative publicity of HFCS. There's simply no reason to consume this poison when there are so many healthy alternatives. Here's an excerpt from Dr. Robert Rowen an alternative medicine MD:

In the first study, researchers followed 443,960 African-American women. They found that the incidence of type-2 diabetes was higher among those who drank both sugar sweetened soft drinks and fruit drinks. Consuming just two soft drinks per day causes a 24% increase in risk for type-2 diabetes. And consuming just two fruit drinks per day increases your risk by 31%. Why are fruit drinks worse? Another study will show you.

This second study involved six healthy subjects (four men and two women). They had an average age of 28 years and an average body mass index of 24.3. The researchers gave the participants drinks with various combinations of two sweeteners. The two sweeteners were fructose (a sugar found in honey, fruits, and sweet vegetables and grains like corn) and glucose (the sugar your body makes from food).

The participants started by drinking a soft drink containing 75% fructose and 25% glucose. Then they drank soft drinks containing either 100% glucose or a 50% glucose/50% fructose combination. The 75% fructose drink caused the greatest fat buildup compared to the other drinks.

But that’s not all. The mostly fructose drink led to greater fat generation in the liver than the other drinks. In fact, the high fructose drinks caused an increase of 200% greater than glucose. Furthermore, post-lunch triglyceride levels were 11-29% higher after drinking either of the drinks containing fructose compared to the 100% glucose drink.

[David Alleyne]

So Geos, why is this stuff being allowed? Is it me or is it stupid that we have to pay more for natural stuff as opposed to the altered stuff? HFCS is in cookies, bread, juice, etc but I have been looking for it to avoid eating it (juicer, breadmaker, etc). It's all about the dollar, right?

[jayrandom]

Alternative medicine typically means alternative to scientifically proven (otherwise, it would just be medicine) so I have to take any studies presented by a doctor of alternative medicine with a healthy dose of skepticism (especially one with only six subjects that was clearly not double blind). I'm not familiar with the research, so I won't say one way or the other if HFCS is worse for you than sucrose, but I will agree that neither are great for you.

The simple answer to the question about why its in food is that is cheaper and easier to mask low quality with sugar than it is to start with better quality. That's actually only partially true--the cheapest is often to start with your own fresh ingredients and cook for yourself. There's not nearly as much profit in that, though, so prepared foods are marketed and marketed and marketed and people become convinced they can't cook for themselves or eat more simply.

[ShadowCaver]

Originally Posted by jayrandom

Alternative medicine typically means alternative to scientifically proven (otherwise, it would just be medicine) so I have to take any studies presented by a doctor of alternative medicine with a healthy dose of skepticism (especially one with only six subjects that was clearly not double blind). I'm not familiar with the research, so I won't say one way or the other if HFCS is worse for you than sucrose, but I will agree that neither are great for you.

The simple answer to the question about why its in food is that is cheaper and easier to mask low quality with sugar than it is to start with better quality. That's actually only partially true--the cheapest is often to start with your own fresh ingredients and cook for yourself. There's not nearly as much profit in that, though, so prepared foods are marketed and marketed and marketed and people become convinced they can't cook for themselves or eat more simply.

To the first paragraph - IMHO a person should take ALL studies with healthy doses of skepticism, esp. looking at who is providing the funding, PLUS any agendas, hidden and/or related. lol, even in my own work, two different camps of people could review the same exact data, but draw and present their 'findings' in such manner as to be as if looking at two totally different sets of data.

Regarding your second paragraph - as a fan since a kid of Mrs. Butterworth's syrup , wasn't until relatively recently that, w/ the knowledge of all the added ingredients, etc. [including HFCS as its number one ingredient], that have substituted pure maple syrup for her. She is heartbroken, but better her glass heart than those beating ones in this house... May cost more, but what is the cost of peace of mind, of honest taste, and of health?

[Brian.Pearson]

They can grow new hearts, now.