CBS reports that — brace yourself, here — those new, strangely compelling ads that chuckle sardonically at the idea that there could possibly be anything wrong with high fructose corn syrup are based on nutritional research funded by the industry itself.
Of the six studies CBS News looked at on the association’s Web site that “Confirm High Fructose Corn Syrup [is] No Different From Sugar,” three were sponsored by groups that stand to profit from research that promotes HFCS. Two were never published so they’re [Sic; holy crap, CBS… What’s next, apostrophes in your plurals? Thank’s alot!] funding sources are unclear. And one was sponsored by a Dutch foundation that represents the interests of the sugar industry.
Pepsi funded one study, so did a D.C. based lobbying group that gets their [A+, guys!] money from food, chemical and drug companies. And the American Beverage Association gave a grant for another.
As per usual, the ancient question “Cui bono?” is key to a skeptical interpretation of the research that the high fructose folks are leaning upon. Kudos to CBS (if not its copy desk) for doing a bit of digging, even if we had to learn the following horrifying high fructose corn syrup-related fact:
“The average American consumed 56 pounds of HFCS in 2007.”
OLD NEWS.
Sorry James, no value added here.
See the monster topic: http://chowhound.chow.com/topics/554304
This ad campaign is by far the most insulting, irritating pile of malarky EVER! If HFCS were the same as sugar, it would be called SUGAR. Of course fructose is in some ways equivalent, but the word HIGH is attached to the front for a reason. And as far as I know, getting from a corn kernel to HFCS is a highly complicated and energy intensive process. Those of us who’ve not yet weaned off of HFCS should do so now out of spite!
CBS has a copy desk?
Well, the ad campaign worked on me…in a very circuitous way. The ad itself is obviously propaganda, making use of totally irrelevant information (”Oh, it’s made from corn? Well, I guess it must be okay then.”) and appealing, fundamentally, to conformity (”HFCS. If you object, people might think you’re stupid. Just keep your head down, okay?”). But before watching it, I, like a lot of other people, believed that HFCS is far worse for you than, say, table sugar (i.e. sucrose). Now, after doing some research, I don’t. As far as I can tell, the issue really should come down to the question of whether sucrose breakdown is significantly regulated by your body and the answer to that seems to be a no.
Of course, this is all kind of besides the point. This is all just saying that HFCS is no worse (or better) than sucrose. But that doesn’t mean that HFCS isn’t bad for you because, hey, sucrose is bad for you. (It’s not helped that CBS puts nonsense on the air talking about the “benefits” of HFCS. Being equally as bad as something else is not a benefit.) If you want to switch to sucrose sweetened soda because it tastes better (and it does), go for it. But don’t think you’re making a healthier choice.
1. Research has found that diets high in fructose can accelerate the aging process. The fructose interferes and alters the metabolic process in our cells, which causes oxidative damage. The fructose breaks down collagen (based on studies done on rats), and plays a larger part in this breakdown than glucose does.
2. For women using oral contraceptives, fructose interacts with them and actually elevates insulin levels in the body. If the level of insulin in the body is high, it can lead to high blood pressure. High insulin levels also contribute to the retention of sodium, which in turn leads to water retention. This can also attribute to high blood pressure, and even congestive heart failure.
3. Fructose causes a deficiency in copper in our bodies and inhibits its metabolism. When we are deficient in copper, this leads to: “bone fragility, anemia, defects of the connective tissue, arteries, and bone, infertility, heart arrhythmias, high cholesterol levels, heart attacks, and an inability to control blood sugar levels.”
4. If your motivation comes more so from weight loss, HFCS contributes to weight gain since it stops our brain from getting the signal that we are full. HFCS inhibits the production of ghrelin (the hormone of hunger) and increases the production of leptin (the hormone of satisfaction).
5. “HFCS can be manufactured to either contain equal amounts of fructose and glucose, or up to 80 percent fructose and 20 percent glucose.” Fructose and glucose are metabolized differently in the body. “Glucose is metabolized in every cell in the body, however all fructose must be metabolized in the liver.”
When the fructose is dumped directly in the liver to be metabolized, this creates fatty deposits and results in a “fatty liver”. The liver also develops cirrhosis, a disease that is normally seen in alcoholics. A person who has not had a alcoholic beverage in their life, but who eats a diet high in HFCS ends up having a liver that is similar to that of an alcoholic.
There have been studies done on today’s children and found that they actually have fatty livers because of all of the HFCS they are ingesting. Most of this is ingested in the form of soda and fruit juices as they contain HFCS.
This information is from an article written by Bill Sanda (BS, MBA), as well as the book “You On A Diet” (HFCS, ghrelin, and leptin) and the DVD “Super Size Me” (fast food, most of it contains HFCS, fatty livers of today’s children).