General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsNo Real Difference Between HFCS and Sugar: Article
A new article published recently in Advances in Nutrition reported findings of no significant metabolic difference between people consuming high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) or sucrose (table sugar). The article also noted that current research shows no unique relationship between consuming HFCS and the rise of U.S. obesity rates.
In an extensive review of available sucrose, fructose and HFCS research, the article concluded there was overwhelming evidence showing that HFCS is nutritionally equivalent to sugar and that the human body metabolizes both equally -- an opinion in line with the American Medical Association and the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, both of which concluded that HFCS isnt a unique cause of obesity. In fact, the article points out that U.S. HFCS consumption rates have fallen 14 percent since 1999, while obesity rates have continued to increase.
Additionally, according to the article, some recent randomized clinical trials have suggested no negative impact on total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol or HDL cholesterol when caloric sweeteners containing fructose, such as HFCS and table sugar, are consumed in moderation.
http://www.progressivegrocer.com/top-stories/headlines/health-wellness/id37637/no-real-difference-between-hfcs-and-sugar-article/
Interesting
djean111
(14,255 posts)Yes. Empty calories.
I don't use either one, just a little plain stevia.
And the time has passed when one article was enough to induce me to eat crap or feed it to my family.
I figure I will see more stuff like this since I am noticing "HFCS Free!" on more and more things at the grocery store.
Oh - and Rippe, the founder of the Rippe Lifestyle Institute and presenter of this information - is a spokesperson for the Corn Refiners Association. Which funded the research.
http://foodidentitytheft.com/corn-refiners-association-experts-hfcs-misunderstood/
TM99
(8,352 posts)It looks like the ASN failed their own 'conflict of interest' edit with this one.
http://www.nutrition.org/about-asn/conflict-of-interest/
Rippe, as you correctly point out, is a spokesperson for the CFA. The CFA funded this research, and now we are supposed to take it at face value as 'good science'.
Is this like the Heritage Institute sponsored research on Climate Change which is 'science' that conflicts with the rest of the scientific community?
Is this like the old research which was 'science' that said smoking was just fine and wouldn't lead to long term health problems. I mean, please, even MD's smoke Marlboro.
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=dangers+high+fructose+corn+syrup&btnG=&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C3
This should get anyone started in the 'science' of the dangers of high fructose corn syrup.
KansDem
(28,498 posts)From UC Davis--
HIGH FRUCTOSE CORN SYRUP: HISTORY, SPREAD, and CONSUMPTION
http://cosmos.ucdavis.edu/archives/2009/cluster7/RASHEED_AYESHA.pdf
soda] contains about 13 teaspoons of sugar in the form of high fructose corn syrup (Helm). This is both unhealthy and potentially dangerous, seeing as the federal dietary guidelines recommend that we limit added sugars to about 8 teaspoons (32 grams) a day for an average 2,000-calorie diet (Helm)
Though some may try to avoid HFCS by opting for natural or genetically modified organism (GMO) free foods, the Corn Refiners Association states that HFCS meets the Food and Drug Administrations requirements for use of the term natural and does not contain measurable amounts of DNA from the GMO corn it is produced from (HFCS Myths). Therefore, HFCS can be marketed as a natural something that many people are not aware of. Also, because of HFCSs versatility as a preservative, the syrup can be found in a myriad of products, ranging from spaghetti sauce to yoghurt to canned and frozen fruit (HFCS Myths). Thus, the average American usually ends up ingesting HFCS from a variety of sources, and therefore, in much larger amounts than the FDA recommends.
Additionally, studies conducted by researcher John White revealed that fructose is rapidly taken up by the liver and bypasses a key regulatory step in glycolysis, which, unlike glucose, which is absorbed directly into the bloodstream (White). Some scientists believe that this key difference between fructose and glucose may be suppressing the bodys sense of fullness, thus allowing people to eat more than they would usually (Helm). This in turn would eventually cause the liver to get clogged up and contract various liver diseases and diabetes.
It's in everything!...(even bread)
It doesn't satisfy the "fullness" factor, causing one to consume more...
It's GMO-based...(I don't know what the FDA's definition of "measurable amounts" is)
I don't know about "progressivegrocer.com" but I'll go with UC Davis...
cyberspirit
(67 posts)sugar doesn't. When you do the research you find HFCS is very different from sugar. Sugar isn't healthy either but HFCS is much worse especially since it is using GMO corn.
I'm tired of industry fueled "studies" that promote HFCS or else diss sugar and/or stevia.
I occasionally eat or drink snacks sweetened with raw cane sugar, beet sugar, or stevia.
No problems.
I avoid high fructose corn syrup like the plague.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)I like the nonsense about the use of HFCS dropping while obesity rises. They fail to show us that the same population that is using it less is gaining the weight, while in reality those who have more money to spend eat less HFCS and those who don't eat lots of it. Which group gains the most weight? Which gains the least? The Prince of the Corn Palace simply avoids all of those important points in order to reach his prepaid conclusion.
Amazing that people like this are allowed to practice medicine.