Total Posts:4|Showing Posts:1-4
Jump to topic:

High Fructose Corn Syrup

Lithestarlite
Posts: 1
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2013 11:28:57 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Maybe I'm beating a dead horse with a stick on this one, but I feel that the decision to decline the name change from high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) is more confusing to the general public than anything. People are generally unaware of the process by which normal table sugar is formed (bleached, among other things). Both HFCS and granulated sugar are derived from "natural" plants, and table sugar can alternative be called "High sucrose cane sugar."

If you're not familiar with the terminology, HFCS have a higher fructose to glucose ratio (approximately 55% to 45% respectively), where as table sugar has an equal amount of fructose to glucose ratio. The main point being that so many scientist and nutritionist agree that both glucose and fructose react the same metabolic pathways in the body and produce similar results; they also contend that the key to a healthier life style is moderation. If that's not enough for you, honey also is high in frutose and has a calorie content identical to HFCS.

I get the technicality that a "syrup" is not a "sugar" by our current definition (i.e granulated, solid sugar crystals), but then why not call it "Corn Syrup"?

Online Sources -

http://www.cbsnews.com...

http://en.wikipedia.org...

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com...

http://nutrition.about.com...
slo1
Posts: 4,318
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2013 3:43:39 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/19/2013 11:28:57 AM, Lithestarlite wrote:
Maybe I'm beating a dead horse with a stick on this one, but I feel that the decision to decline the name change from high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) is more confusing to the general public than anything. People are generally unaware of the process by which normal table sugar is formed (bleached, among other things). Both HFCS and granulated sugar are derived from "natural" plants, and table sugar can alternative be called "High sucrose cane sugar."

If you're not familiar with the terminology, HFCS have a higher fructose to glucose ratio (approximately 55% to 45% respectively), where as table sugar has an equal amount of fructose to glucose ratio. The main point being that so many scientist and nutritionist agree that both glucose and fructose react the same metabolic pathways in the body and produce similar results; they also contend that the key to a healthier life style is moderation. If that's not enough for you, honey also is high in frutose and has a calorie content identical to HFCS.

I get the technicality that a "syrup" is not a "sugar" by our current definition (i.e granulated, solid sugar crystals), but then why not call it "Corn Syrup"?



Online Sources -

http://www.cbsnews.com...

http://en.wikipedia.org...

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com...

http://nutrition.about.com...

Some simple facts of the matter.
1. Glucose and Fructose are metabolized completely different. Glucose can be used directly by cells. Fructose has to be converted by the liver to glucose and waste product that has to be expelled from the body.

2. Fructose maybe implicated in insulin resistance and other negative impacts due to how it is handled in the body.

3. Corn Syrup "naturally" has no fructose in it. The fructose in it gets manufactured by using an enzyme that converts the glucose to fructose, which is how they get 90% fructose to glucose ratio. That 90% high fructose syrup gets mixed together with regular 100 glucose corn syrup to create the 42/58 or typical 55/45 fructose to glucose ratio.

4. The 55/45 ratio of HFCS is similar to the ratio of table sugar which is 50/50. Does the extra 5% of fructose have an adverse affect if one was consuming the same volume of sweeteners? Anyone claiming to know that answer has a bias and does not really know.

5. Both sweeteners since they have zero nutritional value and only energy value are extremely bad if over consumed.

I think they should both be renamed as sugar poison, but let's let the people decide. I just don't buy into the argument that since table sugar is just as bad we should give HFCS a sweeter name. (forgive me for the bad pun).
R0b1Billion
Posts: 3,730
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/19/2013 10:11:29 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I am two-months removed from eating any refined sugar or HFCS. The only sugar I consume comes from fresh fruit, with a few minor exceptions like an occasional yogurt or something.

I have been a heavy sugar-consumer my whole life. Until recently it was alien to me to consider eating a meal without a sugary beverage to wash down every bite. My perspective is not the only thing that's changing; my biology is also. Now that my tolerance has returned to normal, sugar is a full-fledged poison to me, and it is dangerous for me to consume it.

A few weeks ago, I went bar-hopping and, although I'm careful not to drink mixers (alcohol with a sugary soda or juice) I did take two cherry-bombs. They weren't that big (although they were very sweet) so I didn't take much notice and it was an isolated incident so I didn't feel like I was breaking from my diet. An hour later while I was dancing I suddenly was overcome with an incredible lethargy accompanied by hunger. I could barely move. I went out to my car to get some change to use on a vending machine there for some chips, and every step to my car felt like I was taking my last dying step. After I mowed down some pretzels I returned to normal a half-hour later, but it was a real eye-opener about what refined sugar actually does to the body. Just as alcoholics can consume enormous amounts of alcohol without feeling ill-effects, we as Americans can consume these substances without feeling anything wrong because of increased tolerance. But our pancreas and other organs are still being stressed and we just don't know it. The incredible calorie-load of these substances is another issue entirely. I would still eat HFCS before artificial sweeteners any day though...
Beliefs in a nutshell:
- The Ends never justify the Means.
- Objectivity is secondary to subjectivity.
- The War on Drugs is the worst policy in the U.S.
- Most people worship technology as a religion.
- Computers will never become sentient.
RoyLatham
Posts: 4,488
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/2/2013 5:43:45 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I doubt the name makes any difference to consumption of the product. The people who worry about high fructose corn syrup would be just as worried about it if it were called corn sugar.

I think it would help if labeling requirements grouped all the sugars into a sugar category that was put in the ingredients list according to the total amount. Now manufacturers list sugar, high fructose corn syrup, dextrose, sucrose, fructose, molasses, maple syrup, and concentrated pear juice as separate ingredients, so that something other than a sugar will appear as the primary ingredient. There are many other synonyms (demarara, muscovado, turbinado) and it don't know which are allowed as separate names.

I think the individual types should be put in parenthesis after the category, per

sugars (dextrose, fructose, maple sugar) ...

The individual types may be important to people with allergies or special dietary restrictions.