I believe this is one of the reasons that HFCS was banned in Canada - the U.S. should do the same, if we care about the health of our citizens. However, food companies are happy that consumers do not feel full and therefore consume more. I always read labels and refuse to buy anything that contains HFCS, but I made an exception last week-end when the only remaining eggnog that I could find had some fructose in it. I will be very careful to ration how much of this I drink at a time - normally no more than two servings. I guess it is good that eggnog is not in stores all year, and I will not bother to make it myself, knowing all the ingredients that go into it.

Lars

Not that I don't wish it wasn't, but HFCS is very much a legal staple of the Canadian food processing industry. They just don't call it that here. On ingredient labels it is called "fructose-glucose" and is exactly the same stuff.

High-fructose corn syrup, as I understand it, copies the proportion of glucose and fructose in regular table sugar (sucrose). Plain corn syrup is almost all glucose.
Sucrose is a disaccharide: a molecule of sucrose breaks down into a molecule of glucose and a molecule of fructose.
So wouldn't ordinary sugar have the same effect as HFCS?

Maybe. But after HCFS was introduced in the US, sweetener consumption increased substantially. It didn't merely replace sugar. I'm not sure why that is, perhaps HCFS being inexpensive and easy to use was a factor. In 2008 the average American consumed something like 38 lb of HCFS and 47 lb of sucrose. Wow.

That's 1.67 ounces per day of HFCS and 2.06 ounces per day of sucrose.

Does that seem a lot?

Jim

It seems like a lot to me.

A sugar cube is 0.15 oz of sugar. So that 3.73 oz is by weight equivalent to about 25 sugar cubes (combining the sugar and the HFCS).

Seems to me that in an average day, I have 3 cubes a day, in coffee. I can't think of any other sugar I have, other than what is naturally in fruit and some vegetables. (Pastries, candy, or cooking with sugar are pretty occasional things, maybe 1 x week - err, except for Christmas.)

But I guess that is only 3 cans of coke (one 12 oz can is about 10 cubes, though it is HFCS not sugar), so if one drinks soda, then it is pretty easy to have that much sugar daily.

CC, Britannica's definition....

disaccharide, also called Double Sugar, any substance that is composed of two molecules of simple sugars (monosaccharides) linked to each other. Sucrose, which is formed following photosynthesis in green plants, consists of one molecule of glucose and one of fructose

Rita

Here is a link that might be useful: Britannica

Here again you run into so much misinformation and bad information and people run off with nearly hysterical conclusions. Between the over-used myth that HFCS is "banned" in Canada and elsewhere. OK, technically perhaps it can be so claimed in that the *name* "high fructose corn syrup" isn't used (even if that's stretching it pretty far), however, the end product *is* perfectly legal and used in Canada and other countries albeit under different names.

The next myth is that all soft drinks contain HFCS. Nope. Not true. Some use sugar, some use other sweeteners.

The problem for me is that the credibility flies out the window when the exaggerations and hysteria come into play. People get an email and automatically believe the fallacies therein especially when it's something they want to believe! If people would just do some basic, simple research they'd find out that most everything in an email is not true to start with but it does show how the $250 cookie recipe and the Nigerian General can prosper to this day.

I am not convinced that HFCS is the sinister evil that some plainly feel it is. However, I'm not convinced it's the best thing for us either and I do try to avoid some of it but I don't break down and cry if something contains it. I don't have enough information to make an intelligent and rational decision on it. The *facts* are simply not there.

I do know this, given the powerful sugar lobby, I'm pretty comfortable speculating they're doing everything they can to try to find some real evidence of it being harmful, but it hasn't come forward yet. Ironic too, since I remember how beet sugar was put in the same class as HFCS is today. So in the meantime the best battle plan for them is through speculation and bank on exaggerations, misinformation and gullibility accomplishing their goals. Not much different than the as yet totally unfounded claims that aluminum is evil too even though the plastic sellers can't get any facts to back up their desires. Now if someone puts HFCS in an aluminum pan, there's bound to be some college professor somewhere to claim the world will instantaneously implode. But I won't have to wait for the email on it if that happens so I'll be able to sleep tonight.

Well, fructose does have plenty of disadvantages for the many people with diabetes genetics. However those disadvantages occur with HFCS, cane sugar, honey, fruit, agave syrup, and so on and so forth. Overconsumption of caloric sweeteners is a problem. If you eat a lot of packaged and fast food (likely not most of the people in this forum), you are eating a lot of sweeteners even in food that you would not think is sweetened.

A bit of sugar in your coffee is fine, but mindless consumption of sweeteners whether through a diet of Paula Deen homemade food or packaged food is going to get a lot people into trouble. Substituting "natural" sweeteners won't help. Worrying about whether the sweetener is 50% fructose (sugar) or 55% fructose (HFCS, agave syrup) is silly. Even fruit may be a problem, if you have particularly hard to control diabetes. Certainly fruit should only be consumed whole rather than juiced.

Artificial sweeteners don't have the same affect on lipids, blood sugar, and weight gain that caloric sweeteners have, but they do enhance taste. If you are trying to lose weight, making food taste better is not a good strategy.

Here is a link that might be useful: Robert Lustig, MD

"It seems like a lot to me."

I guess I have to agree when considering examples like the ones you gave. The numbers don't look large but I don't eat sweets much except for breakfast pastries such as muffins and donuts. And I don't eat those every day and not more than one. That casts a somewhat objective light on it for me.

As with you John, Christmas is an exception. :-)

Jim

And for those who don't have an hour to watch Dr. Lustig, here is a ten minute version although the original is definitely worth the watch. I don't believe for a second a calorie is a calorie anymore. Not all food metabolizes the same as is the case with high fructose foods.

Here is a link that might be useful: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdMjKEncojQ

Fructose is metabolized quite differently from glucose, but this is equally true for the fructose that comes from sucrose as it is for the fructose in high-fructose corn syrup.

If you are trying to lose weight, making food taste better is not a good strategy."

Interesting thought! And here we are in the cooking forum, where the highest goal is to make food taste better. CF may be contributing to obesity more than I ever realized.

Jim

If you are trying to lose weight, hanging around on food blogs and forums isn't such a great idea either.

I dunno, I think it's a great strategy, as long as your computer is not in your kitchen.

The problem really is how much sugar we are consuming from all sources and how prevalent it is in processed foods...they add sugar to just about everything including ketchup and peanut butter and even french fries. Then the whole low-fat stuff came in so they removed the fat and added more sugar to enhance the taste. HFCS is mostly relevant because it is subsidized by the government so is very inexpensive making it even more prevalent in our foods.

The chart below is from the article whose conclusion of 100% sugar is just ridiculous, but the historical trend is significant.

Then add in portions and it's no wonder obesity is epidemic. I have my DH's grandmother's china set, and her dinner plates are the size of my current luncheon plates. And now, when you go to a restaurant, dinner is served in a serving platter and dessert is served on a dinner plate!

Add to that the increase in the % of calories coming from foods not prepared at home, and there's no wonder why we are the size we are.

Here is a link that might be useful: Sugar consumption

This post was edited by AnnieDeighnaugh on Sun, Jan 6, 13 at 11:24

Funny, I was just discussing with Jerry about how the best way not to stick to a diet is to make the food unpalatable.

Too much of anything is bad for you, and the trouble is, as others have pointed out, there is just way too much sugar of all kinds in our food these days, especially HFCS. I read a while back that due to the bad reputation HFCS has gotten, they were going to change the name to corn sugar. I've looked for that ingredient on packages of processed food, but have yet to see it.

I've heard diet doctors on programs such as The People's Pharmacy criticize all forms of sugar as bad, and equate fruit juice with sodas as being just as bad. I have a hard time going along with that, but I understand that eating the whole fruit, rather than just the juice, is much better for you. Maybe we should eat sugar cane to get our sugar, lol.

Sally

"I read a while back that due to the bad reputation HFCS has gotten, they were going to change the name to corn sugar. I've looked for that ingredient on packages of processed food, but have yet to see it."

The FDA rejected that proposal, in a good ruling.

Here is a link that might be useful: Corn syrup can't change name

A large apple has about the same amount of sugar and calories as 8 oz of apple juice. I guess the apple has some fiber and the juice gets its calories almost all from sugar. But they seem fairly equivalent to me. I suppose that a thirsty person can drink three or four 8 oz glasses of apple juice without blinking - an 8 oz glass looks comically small today - while you're likely to feel kind of full, or at least to pause, after two large apples.

I've noticed two things in the American diet. First is the amount of soda consumed by many people. Regular soda, as opposed to diet, contains an appalling amount of empty calories. See link below for numbers.

Second thing is the size of portions. When DH and I would go for an ice cream cone in Massachusetts, I'd ask for a kiddie scoop which is what I regard as a normal portion. I would guess it at about 4 oz. The scoops most adults eat are about the size of a cauliflower. Once we measured the large scoop which DH can easily eat. It was almost a quart. That is impressive! The movie Supersize Me shows the effect of humongous portions. I can't imagine getting the Big Gulp down without exploding, but apparently this is normal for a lot of people.

Perhaps HFCS turns off the brain's sense of being full, or perhaps people have gotten used to consuming huge amounts of empty calories. But how did we get to this state? Surely no-one grows up drinking a half-gallon of soda or eating a quart of ice-cream at a time?

BTW DH is a jock, and manages his weight and health with lots of physical exercise and plain hard work. That's his story.

Cheryl

Here is a link that might be useful: soda consumption

Oh, I find it very easy to eat a quart's worth of Blue Bell ice cream, which, by the way, does have HFCS. I was sorry to read that in it's list of ingredients. I used to eat tons of ice cream, but now only have it a few times a year. When I do, I have trouble eating only a little. Maybe it's because my favorite flavor is Tin Roof, which has salty peanuts in it.

Thanks for the update, Shushipup.

I suspect that when eating the whole fruit, you get, obviously, more fiber, but maybe more nutrients too. With oranges, the white parts have Riboflavin, which helps with the absorption of vitamin C.

Sally

If you want to get some really good insights into why people overeat, the work done by behavioral economist Brian Wansink is fascinating stuff....

Here is a link that might be useful: External cues and eating