Posted on 05/12/2008 10:22:56 PM PDT by neverdem
Dr. John White is the founder & president of White Technical Research, a consulting firm serving the food and beverage industry for nearly 15 years. He has worked with high fructose corn syrup for more than 25 years, and his expertise has been quoted by numerous news outlets. Organizations such as the American Council on Science and Health in Washington, D.C., the Institute of Food Technologists in Atlanta, and most recently the Corn Refiners Association have turned to him and his expertise on the sweetener for answers. Now, QSR talks with him to set the record straight about the similarities and differences between sugar and the contested HFCS.
Can you explain how high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) was developed? What was on the market before its creation? We’re going back into the 1970s. At that time sucrose was the dominant sweetener. It has a composition that is half fructose and half glucose. Those are two monosaccharides. In sucrose there’s a bond between them. So sucrose is called a disaccharide, but in composition it is half fructose and half glucose.
The other dominant or common caloric sweetener was honey, and it has roughly the same composition but is mostly monosaccharides. So it’s about half fructose and half glucose and its monosaccharous, so there’s no bond between them. So those were the two common caloric sweeteners at the time.
There was a little bit of fruit juice concentrate that also happens to have the same composition, half fructose, half glucose, depending on the fruit that is being concentrated.
So how did HFCS come into the picture? The driving force was twofold for the development of HFCS. One was that it was not always easy to use sucrose in food applications where you had to dissolve the sugar to use it in...
(Excerpt) Read more at qsrmagazine.com ...
Fructose, insulin resistance, and metabolic dyslipidemia
Fructose consumption as a risk factor for non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.
BACKGROUND/AIMS: While the rise in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) parallels the increase in obesity and diabetes, a significant increase in dietary fructose consumption in industrialized countries has also occurred. The increased consumption of high fructose corn syrup, primarily in the form of soft drinks, is linked with complications of the insulin resistance syndrome. Furthermore, the hepatic metabolism of fructose favors de novo lipogenesis and ATP depletion. We hypothesize that increased fructose consumption contributes to the development of NAFLD. METHODS: A dietary history and paired serum and liver tissue were obtained from patients with evidence of biopsy-proven NAFLD (n=49) without cirrhosis and controls (n=24) matched for gender, age (+/-5 years), and body mass index (+/-3 points). RESULTS: Consumption of fructose in patients with NAFLD was nearly 2- to 3-fold higher than controls [365kcal vs 170kcal (p<0.05)]. In patients with NAFLD (n=6), hepatic mRNA expression of fructokinase (KHK), an important enzyme for fructose metabolism, and fatty acid synthase, an important enzyme for lipogenesis were increased (p=0.04 and p=0.02, respectively). In an AML hepatocyte cell line, fructose resulted in dose-dependent increase in KHK protein and activity. CONCLUSIONS: The pathogenic mechanism underlying the development of NAFLD may be associated with excessive dietary fructose consumption.
Great Post. Thanks.
I am a compulsive label reader, have been for decades.
Some of the things I look for most often are MSG; high in sodium; HFCS; and long strings of unintelligible additives. If I can’t pronounce it then I don’t want to eat it.
We are now eating more fresh vegetables, salads, brown rice, and broiled, poached, or grilled beef, chicken, and fish - all cooked sodium free with little or no added fat. I use canola or olive oil and we rarely drink hard liguor, instead sipping a small glass of wine with our evening meal.
I suspect we’ll all live longer. Now, if I can only get my teenager away from fried bean burritos!
It’s getting very hard to buy many kinds of foods without HFCS. That and partially hydrogenated oil are ubiquitous.
The horrible significance of HFCS is almost beyond the scope of normal human consciousness. It is my assumption that most of the metabolic-related degenerative diseases (heart disease, solid tumor cancers, strokes, Alzheimer’s, Huntington’s, MS, and many others all share a common causation in the form of iron over-load (which is exascerbated by HFCS).
BUMP
HFCS is no less dangerous than MSG.
We consumers MUST use our purchasing power to inform the USDA, Kraft, Pepsico, CocaCola, etc that we want REAL, CANE sugar in our foodstuffs!
Key words there.
Fructose is by far a healthier sweetener than refined white sugar. (glucose) which is the real monster behind diseases like diabetes.
Of course, anything in excess isn't healthy for you, doesn't matter what it is. Too much water can kill you.
We are fortunate today to have the Internet for research. We are otherwise pretty much on our own to determine safety in our foods.
I drink very little soda these days, and then only the brands Jones, from Canada, or Polar Classics from the USA, both bottled only in glass and with sugar.
I read labels of everything and won't touch anything with HFCS.
Even the FDA, which is normally in bed with the chemical companies that now make the ingredients our foods are riddled with, says “Products containing high fructose corn syrup cannot be considered ‘natural’ and should not be labeled as such, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has said. “
But if the truth and wide spread warnings follow the norm, it will be another 20 years, and many ill-effected lives, before anything is done to curb it...or until the chemical moguls come up with another profitable chemical...
Sucrose is split to fructose and glucose. Glucose is used directly by the body, but is implicated in Type II diabetes and other protein-sugar related diseases. Fructose has to be metabolized by the liver, going into several energy pathways. Too much of that can overload your liver, and too much of some of the downstream radicals might cause other problems.
Don't drink too much alcohol, either, although fructose primes the enzyme pathway to metabolize ethanol. Drink fruity cocktails!
High fructose corn syrup used in most foods is about 55% fructose and 45% glucose. Sucrose (cane sugar) is 50% fructose and 50% glucose. The only difference is the rate of absorption.
I personally think you’re out of your mind regarding sucrose v HFCS.
To put it simply: the human race has consumed sugar (sucrose) for literally THOUSANDS of years, with only a few unfortunate souls being subject to the ravages of diabetes.
Now, today, we have literally millions of children who are insulin dependant. There are millions of adults who have DEVELOPED insulin dependant diabetes SINCE the advent of HFCS as the primary sweetener in commercial food products.
I think that it is in the HFCS supporter’s court to show that there really is NO correlation between its product and our sugar related difficulties, since NONE of them were evident until HFCS took over from cane/beet sugar (sucrose).
Thank you for the great post!
Useful & needed information.
It's a good practice to NOT add salt when cooking. I've always cooked that was as well, and don't miss it at all. There is enough salt present naturally in foods to meet your bodies needs.
As far as cooking oil goes, even olive oil in excess isn't good for you, and can be just as bad as any other cooking oil if heated.
It is the over heating of cooking oils which turns them into saturated trans fats, so even though canola oil says it's trans fat acid free, soon as you turn your deep fryer on and heat it up to 375 to cook those fries or chicken, you begin changing it into a trans fatty acid chain. Change your deep fryer oil after every use if you really want to minimize your trans fat intake on those occasional deep fried foods. They more you use it, the higher in transfatty acid it becomes.
corn, vegetable and peanut oil is really the best oil to use in a deep fryer, but it's more expensive, especially if you change it after every use.
There's nothing tastier than a deep fried turkey in peanut oil, but it will cost you.
Everything in moderation, and you'll live a long time.
“Exactly - there is a reason some countries ban HFCS - wish we did - but the criteria is not what a substance will do to the consumer but how will it make money for the producer...”
(Awaits arrival of free-choicers/govt. has not right to ban crowd)
This is one of the few very useful applications of govt. if you ask me, especially as there are plenty of available and affordable alternatives out there.
"Ellis: No. … Of course, you know that that abundance of cheap corn benefits the HFCS industry. The reason that industry is so successful is they’re able to sweeten things much less expensively than sugar. The reason they’re able to do that largely is because the raw material in HFCS is incredibly cheap. Our one acre of corn could have sweetened 57,000 cans of soda. We grew 10,000 pounds of corn and it took us about two hours of labor and a couple hundred dollars of input and that’s just incredible. That’s unbelievably cheap, and the reason it’s so cheap is that the subsidies system keeps everybody there growing corn. "
Table sugar is the disaccharide sucrose which is hydrolyzed to glucose and fructose. Check the second link in comment# 1, Fructose, insulin resistance, and metabolic dyslipidemia. Scroll way down to "Figure 2 Hepatic fructose metabolism: A highly lipogenic pathway." Enlarge it. Fructose is quickly metabolized into the glycerine, aka glycerol, spine of triglycerides.
I used to think glucose and fructose were essentially the same. Don't feel bad. My major in college was chemistry with a course in biochem and a research course in biochem during another semester, besides what I took in med school.
White refined sugar (white death) is the worst thing there is.
Even nuclear waste decays faster than refined white sugar. Even though your body does absorb it, you deplete your bodies calcium, minerals, vitamins and amino acids doing so, and weakens your imune system.
It is the bad part of corn syrop. For that reason, corn sugar/syrop is only half as bad as white sugar.
Pure fructose should always be your first choice of sweetener, it is the natural sweetener found in fruits.
http://naturalmedicine.suite101.com/article.cfm/sugars__the_bad
The Internet is such a great multicultural and diverse tool for research nowadays, that you can find support for whatever position that you can dream of taking.
I see so many parents handing out goldfish crackers and the like to their babies, thinking that they are giving them some kind of food/snack, and not absolute poison.
99% of crackers, soups, packaged rice dishes, etc. contain it.
Here is a link giving some of the most known euphemisms, as MSG hides under MANY names. http://www.truthinlabeling.org/hiddensources.html
Other than what they ate in fruit and vegetables. From forever.
Thanks for the information.
Must be doing something right - I’ve never owned a deep fat fryer, mainly because I don’t like fried food. My kid buys his fried burritos at Taco Time, near the local high school (naturally). It is his once-a-week treat!
If that was from the economics section of the original article, that's the one I didn't read.
Are you saying that there were no evidence of diabetes before HFCS? Thats the way I read your statement above.
Yes, it was, "The Economics of Corn", page 6.
Corn no longer is cheap, as it’s being subsidized for ethanol production!
Cane sugar is the ultimate poison however.
Some white table sugars are as you say, contain both sucrose/glucose and fructose because the plant they are are refined from contain them as well. (beets, sweet potatoes, parsnips, onions).
Honey, tree fruits, melons, berries etc. also contain amounts of glucose/ sucrose, but are mostly fructose. Generally they are considered healthy, unless of course you over indulge, like anything else.
I agree with that, and in addition to that, the scarcity is possibly causing increases in the prices of other basic foods.
Prior to that, tooth decay wasn't much of a problem either.
Another little article from Mr. Ian Cheney; I’ll look for the other guy in a second:
http://www.yalealumnimagazine.com/issues/01_07/comment.html
I’d like to ask Ian if he sold his corn crop by the “pound”...what an idiot.
I misspoke, as I meant that the sugar problems so evident today were much rarer when we DIDN’T use HFCS. Both diabetes and obesity were quite UNcommon then, yet today these unfortunate maladies are running rampant.
Thank you for bringing my erroneous wording to my attention. I really MUST remember to be far more clear in my opinions and assertions.
Thank you again, and good night.
Uh, no. The consumed natural sugars (fructose), mostly from fruits. Cane sugar (sucrose) is a relatively "new" development which came along with sugar cane plantations. That's when problems began.
I agree with that, and in addition to that, the scarcity is possibly causing increases in the prices of other basic foods.
Then you'd be wrong. Two different types of corn are used for ethanol and human foods.
The corn used for ethanol is an animal feed type, which is indigestible for humans. The starch removed from that corn is then converted to sugars which are then used for ethanol. The rest of the corn goes on to be used for animal feed, so if anything, increased ethanol production also results in increased animal feed production.
The human variety of corn is an entirely different type of corn, and only represents less than 1% of corn grown in the USA. THAT corn is and continues to be the corn used to make corn syrop and other goods for human consumption.
While increased ethanol production MAY result in commodity price increases, the main factor in commodity price increases to date are the increased fuel and fertilizer costs. Fuel has doubled and fertilizer has tripled in costs over last year.
As far as commodity prices go, those minor increases have LITTLE effect on food prices. Take wheat prices for example. Wheat has gone from 4 - to about 8$ a bushel. One bushel of wheat makes about 90 loafs of bread. That's about 10 cents a loaf. Gee, something ELSE must be driving up the costs of bread.
In the 60's wheat sold for closer to 14 dollars a bushel. Yet bread only cost the consumer about 10 cents a loaf. Why is that? Must be something else that effects food prices, like the high costs of GASOLINE perhaps?
Frankly, I have no problem with folks questioning the use of HFCS; I do have a problem with the opinions of a little Yale "greenie" being given any type of serious consideration.
The idea that they grew 10,000 pounds (LOL) of corn, and are considered "experts" is simply offensive.
I’m curious . . . what about maple syrup? What kind of sugar is that? (I just bought a bottle — had a crazving for pancakes.)
That comment defies logic.
If it's being subsidized, then it would be even cheaper.
Subsidies cause commodity prices to remain artificially low. I'd rather commodity prices reflect the actual cost plus profit of growing a crop and stop this government give away of billions of taxpayers dollars to supply the markets (and thus oil rich turd world countries) with cheap commodities.
Mono-sodium glutamate.
I never said it wasn’t a processed additive, only that it’s made from a simple -single- salt. The reason for this is because it tastes less salty, not that it is any better or good for you.
depends what kind it is.
Pure maple syrup is made from Maple tree sap. I doubt that’s what you have however. It’s very expensive and hard to come by in the USA. More likely you have a bottle of maple flavored corn syrup in your hand, or a blend (less than 10% maple syrup) of maple and corn syrup.
That comment defies logic.Not at all. Think about it for a second. *Ethanol production* is subsidized. Not regular production. It's effectively a market control, which screws up the natural level of pricing(arable land that would otherwise go for human consumption is going for ethanol, making regular corn more expensive).If it's being subsidized, then it would be even cheaper.
Subsidies cause commodity prices to remain artificially low. I'd rather commodity prices reflect the actual cost plus profit of growing a crop and stop this government give away of billions of taxpayers dollars to supply the markets (and thus oil rich turd world countries) with cheap commodities.
It's also driving up the cost of hops. Ethanol corn is more profitable that hops so the amount of hops produced is shrinking driving up the price.
Glutamine also activates the “savory” taste buds, which is why it’s used as a flavor enhancer. Glutamine is also a neurotransmitter. That’s why it can cause headaches and other problems in people sensitive to it.
No, since the development of white table sugar. The mother of all posion. (white death) Pure (crystaline)Fructose is actually much better for you.
Crystalline fructose and high-fructose corn syrup are often mistakenly confused as the same product. The former is simply pure (100%) fructose. The latter is composed of nearly equal amounts of fructose and glucose (cane sugar). Crystalline fructose is held to offer many unique benefits such as improved product texture, taste and stability. Specifically, when combined with other sweeteners and starches, crystalline fructose is said to boost cake height (in baked goods) and mouth-feel of foods and beverages and to produce a pleasing brown surface color and pleasant aroma when baking.
Fructose (crystalline) is often recommended for, and consumed by, people with diabetes mellitus or hyperglycemia, because it does not raise blood glucose or insulin concentrations since it is metabolized without the need of insulin.
crystalline fructose can also be made from corn. It is the sugar that remains after the starches extracted from the corn are converted. It's used a lot in beer and whiskey brewing.
Perfecting An Artificial Pancreas
Balloons 'bombard' North Alabama landfill to collect data, improve tornado warnings
FReepmail me if you want on or off my health and science ping list.
""Corn no longer is cheap, as it’s being subsidized for ethanol production!"
Not ethanol. And it's only plant construction and development that is being subsidized.
Note he was talking about Corn being subsidized.That may be true. But it's entirely unrelated to your previous, economic, argument. You might be able to argue with his premises, but his logic was sound.""Corn no longer is cheap, as it’s being subsidized for ethanol production!"
Not ethanol. And it's only plant construction and development that is being subsidized.
Corn prices today STILL do not reflect actual COST of growing it, because there are STILL corn subsidies in effect.
Corn is around $4 a bushel right now. About $2 cheaper than it actually costs to grow it.(because subsidies depress market prices) The main cause of corn prices increasing are strictly fuel machinery and fertilizer costs. As are all commodity price increases.
The maple syrup I bought claims to be pure and “organic.” (Grade A) As you can tell, I’m a bit of a foodie.
Anyway, I wondered what it contained.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.