HFCS and the Three-Pronged Critique
HFCS isn't healthy, but there's no reason to believe it's any worse for you than cane or beet sugar; HFCS is just as "natural" as any other sweetener, at least according to the U.S. government; and while HFCS seems to have a slightly different taste from pure sucrose, many people prefer it. So why are we abandoning high-fructose corn syrup? It doesn't matter how weak each claim is on its own terms; together, they seem irrefutable. You can win over hypochondriacs with one argument, environmentalists with another, and gourmands with a third. That's the beauty of the three-pronged critique: It's customizable.
Add a comment:
Previewing your comment:
HTML Hints
Some HTML is OK: <a href="URL">link</a>, <strong>strong</strong>, <em>em</em>
Comment Guidelines
Post whatever you want, just keep it seriously about eats, seriously. We reserve the right to delete off-topic or inflammatory comments. Learn more at our Comment Policy page.
If you see something not so nice, please, report an inappropriate comment.
11 Comments:
"at least according to the U.S. government"
That's one pretty big caveat right there.
I don't buy this argument. There are many reasons why HFCS sucks. And they are all legit.
simon at 5:42PM on 05/01/09
All I know is that when I drink a soda with HFCS vs a soda with sugar, the HFCS one makes me crash harder, faster. Plus it doesn't taste as good in my opinion.
Beanalicious1 at 5:44PM on 05/01/09
Sometime hopefully stevia will be allowed by the USDA to be considered a sweetener, so our diet soda drinking buddies won't die of...whatever unnatural sweeteners do to you :D
Beanalicious1 at 5:47PM on 05/01/09
I think the problem of HFCS is the fact that it's so cheap. Maybe when companies can't use HFCS, they may reduce the amount of sweeteners in processed foods and drinks.
In my opinion, everything is overly sweet in the US. It's scary that I'm getting used to it. Fortunately regular yellow cake with regular frosting is still waaay too sweet to me. whew.
@Beanalicious1- stevia has been around in Japan for a long time, and it has a weird, lingering aftertaste.
hmw0029 at 6:15PM on 05/01/09
@hmw0029
It tastes kind of like licorice, unless you get an extremely pure extract. But I think that is better than a chemical aftertaste that I get from aspartame, saccharin, or even sucralose. Although working in a health food store during my teen years may have swayed me a bit.
Beanalicious1 at 6:27PM on 05/01/09
I thought the original anti-HFCS argument was that it was in almost everything processed.
jboylan at 7:33PM on 05/01/09
I thought the original anti-HFCS arguement was that it allegedly busted into a Kuwaiti maternity ward, took babies out of their incubators and let them die on the cold floor.
SqueezeBottle at 8:02PM on 05/01/09
Wasn't the original reason HFCS got blamed for obesity the fact that it blocks the production of leptin, leading people to mindlessly eat more?
(http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/abstract/79/4/537)
That and the fact that it's used in everything from your sandwich bread to your sports drinks makes the slightly higher fructose levels significant when taken into account as part of your entire diet. Fructose is the stuff we get from fruits, glucose from sweeteners, altering that balance is what leads to the health concerns.
dj816 at 1:40PM on 05/02/09
Yeah... the reason I don't care for it is that it is used in EVERYTHING. If I can avoid it I will, because I'm sure there are other situations where I really can't.
comicsan at 8:39AM on 05/03/09
I think this article breaks down both sides of the whole debate very well in an unbiased way (unbiased doesn't mean he can't take a side, just means he doesn't distort either side of the argument). I did a blind test with some friends between HFCS and cane sugar mountain dews. Half of us could not tell the difference (served 8 cups, 4 HFCS, 4 Cane, if you get 2-6 of them wrong, then you can't tell the difference, if you get 0, 1, 7, or 8 wrong, then you could tell the difference, but maybe you don't know what's what). Of the 4 of us that did distinguish them (either correctly chosen cane sugar ones as cane sugars ones or mistaken HFCS ones as cane sugar ones consistently) 2 of us liked the HFCS ones better and one didn't mind either way. I think a lot of "cane sugar tests better" sentiments are just psychological.
Either way I refuse to drink soda, call me crazy, but it is just way too sweet, no matter what the sweetener (no artificial of course, ie aspartame). Only time I would drink soda is when I can dilute it 50/50 with soda water, and I do the same thing with orange juices and others (yes I'm weird).
As for the problems with it being everywhere, if you make your own salad dressing and sauces, you can avoid much of it. As for cakes and desserts, well, if you are going to eat these very often, I don't think you should worry too much about whether its HFCS or sugar on the inside...
claypot at 11:49AM on 05/03/09
@claypot- you're not weird! soda's too sweet to me too.
Cold sweet drinks is full of sweeteners because temperatures affect sweetness (the lower the temp, the less sweet); cold drinks and foods tend to have a lot of sweeteners to compensate for the low temperature effect.
I think fructose monosaccharide keeps its sweetness better than sucrose/glucose at lower temp though. To achieve the same sweetness of free fructose, more calories have to be put in if regular sugar or old fashioned corn syrup (glucose) are used.
hmw0029 at 4:50PM on 05/03/09