The Sugar Industry - The Next "Big Tobacco"
I couldn't think how else to word this one. So here is the explanation.
Uh-huh.
Now bring in the sugar/corn refinement companies.
OK... where do you see the lies here?
Wait! There's more:
Overconsumption of sucrose has been linked with some adverse health effects. The most common is dental caries or tooth decay, in which oral bacteria convert sugars (including sucrose) from food into acids that attack tooth enamel. Sucrose, as a pure carbohydrate, has an energy content of 3.94 kilocalories per gram (or 17 kilojoules per gram). When a large amount of foods that contain a high percentage of sucrose is consumed, beneficial nutrients can be displaced from the diet, which can contribute to an increased risk for chronic disease. It has been suggested that sucrose-containing drinks may be linked to the development of obesity and insulin resistance. Although most soft drinks in the USA are now made with high fructose corn syrup, not sucrose, this makes little functional difference, since high fructose corn syrup contains fructose and glucose in a similar ratio to that produced metabolically from sucrose.
The rapidity with which sucrose raises blood glucose can cause problems for people suffering from defects in glucose metabolism, such as persons with hypoglycemia or diabetes mellitus. Sucrose can contribute to development of the metabolic syndrome. In an experiment with rats that were fed a diet one-third of which was sucrose, the sucrose first elevated blood levels of triglycerides, which induced visceral fat and ultimately resulted in insulin resistance. Another study found that rats fed sucrose-rich diets developed high triglycerides, hyperglycemia, and insulin resistance."
Critics of HFCS point out a correlation between increased usage of HFCS in foods and obesity rates in the United States over three decades. Some allege that HFCS is in itself more detrimental to the health than table sugar (sucrose); others claim that the low cost of HFCS encourages overconsumption of sugars. The Corn Refiners Association claim has launched an aggressive advertising campaign to counter these criticisms, claiming that high fructose corn syrup "is natural" and "has the same natural sweeteners as table sugar". Both sides point to studies in peer reviewed journals that allegedly support their point of view.
Elliot et al., implicate increased consumption of fructose (due primarily to the increased consumption of sugars but also partly due to the slightly higher fructose content of HFCS as compared to sucrose) in obesity and insulin resistance. Chi-Tang Ho et al. found that soft drinks sweetened with HFCS are up to 10 times richer in harmful carbonyl compounds, such as methylglyoxal, than a diet soft drink control. Carbonyl compounds are elevated in people with diabetes and are blamed for causing diabetic complications such as foot ulcers and eye and nerve damage.
A study in mice suggests that fructose increases obesity. Large quantities of fructose stimulate the liver to produce triglycerides, promotes glycation of proteins and induces insulin resistance. According to one study, the average American consumes nearly 70 pounds of HFCS per annum, marking HFCS as a major contributor to the rising rates of obesity in the last generation.
A 2007 study fed rats a diet high in fat and HFCS and kept them relatively sedentary for 16 weeks in an attempt to emulate the diet and lifestyle of many Americans. The rats were not forced to eat, but were able to eat as much as they wanted; they consumed a large amount of food, suggesting that fructose suppresses the sensation of fullness. Within four weeks, the rats showed early signs of fatty liver disease and type II diabetes. Shapiro et al. fed rats a high-fructose diet for six months and compared them to rats that had been fed a fructose-free diet. Although the rats that had consumed high levels of fructose showed no change in weight, fat or levels of leptin in the blood when compared to the rats that had consumed no fructose, they were shown to have developed leptin resistance. When the rats were switched to a high-fat diet, the leptin-resistant rats gained more weight than those who had not developed the resistance.
Heh, heh, heh.
I rest my case.
Do you remember when Big Tobacco lost that lawsuit? Billions in reparations (that, naturally, will never get paid), sanctions and of course, the false advertising campaigns by the tobacco companies to tout how bad smoking really is for anyone.
Uh-huh.
Do you believe for a moment that Philip Morris actually gave up its dream of tobacco-use world domination? Don't bet on it. I certainly wouldn't place that bet. I know how corporations think all too well - get 'em hooked, and do it while they are young to make it all the harder to stop later.
Now bring in the sugar/corn refinement companies.
I was leafing through People Magazine, my guilty pleasure. (I gravitate to National Geographic and Discover, so admitting to reading People seems rather plebian... but I can honestly say I read it for the valuable articles, not the "dirt" on famous and/or rich people.) While looking through the one dated 19 January 2009, I came across this advert:
Two people from the upper lip up (is this artistic liscense to cut off people's bodies? Who knows...), the first one saying, "High fructose corn syrup made me fat." The second person replies, "No, going back for thirds made you fat."
OK... where do you see the lies here?
Wait! There's more:
Under the two talking upper 2/3 heads: "There's a lot of misinformation out there about sugars made from corn. Truth is, high fructose corn syrup is nutritionally the same as table sugar. The same number of calories, too. As registered dietitians recommend, keep enjoying the foods you love, just do it in moderation. We welcome a healthy discussion. Get the facts. You're in for a sweet surprise."
This was done by the Corn Refiners Association; how completely unsurprising. Who wants that cash cow to disappear? Kids are addicted to high fructose corn syrup at a far younger age than smokers. Now, how do you think that happened? Oops, they were fed the rare food that has this insidious ingredient?
Take a look at the ingredients list on the things you eat. On a great many things, you will see this as the first or second ingredient. Shocking! And there are just a few million comments I have on this advert:
Yes, going for multiple servings contributed to my current panoramic size. But it is not the only thing and not even the biggest thing. When I cut down my general food intake, very little happened. I might have taken off seven to 10 pounds. Big deal. I went from 205 to 195lbs (approximately). When I cut my sugar intake down to about 10% of what I originally ate in October 2007 I dropped from 195 to 177 in four months. Over the rest of the year I've gotten down to 165. It is definitely the sugar that was the culprit for me.
Naturally occuring sugar was lowered but high fructose corn syrup came off the list of approved foods. And wow, watch the weight melt off! If I could get my butt back to the gym, I'd be amazing! But that is a different topic.
Let's take a look at table sugar. That is not healthy, either - it is refined sugar, which is another poison pill. Wikipedia notes:
"In human nutrition:
Sucrose is an easily assimilated macronutrient that provides a quick source of energy to the body, provoking a rapid rise in blood glucose upon ingestion. However, pure sucrose is not normally part of a human diet balanced for good nutrition, although it may be included sparingly to make certain foods more palatable. Large crystals are sometimes grown from aqueous solutions of sucrose on a string (or other nucleation surface) to form rock candy, a confection.
Sucrose is an easily assimilated macronutrient that provides a quick source of energy to the body, provoking a rapid rise in blood glucose upon ingestion. However, pure sucrose is not normally part of a human diet balanced for good nutrition, although it may be included sparingly to make certain foods more palatable. Large crystals are sometimes grown from aqueous solutions of sucrose on a string (or other nucleation surface) to form rock candy, a confection.
Overconsumption of sucrose has been linked with some adverse health effects. The most common is dental caries or tooth decay, in which oral bacteria convert sugars (including sucrose) from food into acids that attack tooth enamel. Sucrose, as a pure carbohydrate, has an energy content of 3.94 kilocalories per gram (or 17 kilojoules per gram). When a large amount of foods that contain a high percentage of sucrose is consumed, beneficial nutrients can be displaced from the diet, which can contribute to an increased risk for chronic disease. It has been suggested that sucrose-containing drinks may be linked to the development of obesity and insulin resistance. Although most soft drinks in the USA are now made with high fructose corn syrup, not sucrose, this makes little functional difference, since high fructose corn syrup contains fructose and glucose in a similar ratio to that produced metabolically from sucrose.
The rapidity with which sucrose raises blood glucose can cause problems for people suffering from defects in glucose metabolism, such as persons with hypoglycemia or diabetes mellitus. Sucrose can contribute to development of the metabolic syndrome. In an experiment with rats that were fed a diet one-third of which was sucrose, the sucrose first elevated blood levels of triglycerides, which induced visceral fat and ultimately resulted in insulin resistance. Another study found that rats fed sucrose-rich diets developed high triglycerides, hyperglycemia, and insulin resistance."
And for high frutose corn syrup? "Health effects
The neutrality of this section is disputed. Please see the discussion on the talk page. (October 2008) Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved.
The neutrality of this section is disputed. Please see the discussion on the talk page. (October 2008) Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved.
Critics of HFCS point out a correlation between increased usage of HFCS in foods and obesity rates in the United States over three decades. Some allege that HFCS is in itself more detrimental to the health than table sugar (sucrose); others claim that the low cost of HFCS encourages overconsumption of sugars. The Corn Refiners Association claim has launched an aggressive advertising campaign to counter these criticisms, claiming that high fructose corn syrup "is natural" and "has the same natural sweeteners as table sugar". Both sides point to studies in peer reviewed journals that allegedly support their point of view.
Elliot et al., implicate increased consumption of fructose (due primarily to the increased consumption of sugars but also partly due to the slightly higher fructose content of HFCS as compared to sucrose) in obesity and insulin resistance. Chi-Tang Ho et al. found that soft drinks sweetened with HFCS are up to 10 times richer in harmful carbonyl compounds, such as methylglyoxal, than a diet soft drink control. Carbonyl compounds are elevated in people with diabetes and are blamed for causing diabetic complications such as foot ulcers and eye and nerve damage.
A study in mice suggests that fructose increases obesity. Large quantities of fructose stimulate the liver to produce triglycerides, promotes glycation of proteins and induces insulin resistance. According to one study, the average American consumes nearly 70 pounds of HFCS per annum, marking HFCS as a major contributor to the rising rates of obesity in the last generation.
A 2007 study fed rats a diet high in fat and HFCS and kept them relatively sedentary for 16 weeks in an attempt to emulate the diet and lifestyle of many Americans. The rats were not forced to eat, but were able to eat as much as they wanted; they consumed a large amount of food, suggesting that fructose suppresses the sensation of fullness. Within four weeks, the rats showed early signs of fatty liver disease and type II diabetes. Shapiro et al. fed rats a high-fructose diet for six months and compared them to rats that had been fed a fructose-free diet. Although the rats that had consumed high levels of fructose showed no change in weight, fat or levels of leptin in the blood when compared to the rats that had consumed no fructose, they were shown to have developed leptin resistance. When the rats were switched to a high-fat diet, the leptin-resistant rats gained more weight than those who had not developed the resistance.
Labeling as "natural"
In May 2006, the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) threatened to file a lawsuit against Cadbury Schweppes for labeling 7 Up as "All Natural" or "100% Natural", despite containing high-fructose corn syrup. Although the U.S. FDA has no general definition of "natural", CSPI claims that HFCS is not a “natural” ingredient due to the high level of processing and the use of at least one genetically modified (GMO) enzyme required to produce it. On January 12, 2007, Cadbury Schweppes agreed to stop calling 7 Up "All Natural". They now label it "100% Natural Flavors"."
In May 2006, the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) threatened to file a lawsuit against Cadbury Schweppes for labeling 7 Up as "All Natural" or "100% Natural", despite containing high-fructose corn syrup. Although the U.S. FDA has no general definition of "natural", CSPI claims that HFCS is not a “natural” ingredient due to the high level of processing and the use of at least one genetically modified (GMO) enzyme required to produce it. On January 12, 2007, Cadbury Schweppes agreed to stop calling 7 Up "All Natural". They now label it "100% Natural Flavors"."
Heh, heh, heh.
I rest my case.
One note: don't go to their Website (www.sweetsurprise.com) as the simple fact there is they are just a weensy bit biased. Not where you want to get reliable information - stick with better sources. Unless, of course, you are looking to substantiate your obesity and addiction to sugar, in which case, you are going to love that site.
Comments
My google alert picked up your article. Well written and informative; however, I disagree that HFCS is nutritionally the same as table sugar. Yes they both
have 4cal/gram and they both contain fructose and glucose, but that's where the similarities end.
I am sure you are well aware that
sucrose is a disaccharide where as
HFCS is just a mixture of the monosaccharides, fructose and glucose. It takes the regulatory enzyme, sucrase, to cleave the disaccharide into its component sugars. Not only does the enzyme split the molecule but it serves as a metabolic checkpoint, how fast and how much sugars enter the bloodstream. When you ingest HFCS, sucrase is not required, so there is no regulatory control. HFCS-55 (55%fructose:45% glucose)sweetens all national brands of soda, lemondaes, flavored teas, and ironically, most sports quenchers. While the ratio appears to be similar to the 50:50 ratio of table sugar, sucrose, it is not. 55/45=1.22. That means that everytime you chug a Coke or Pepsi (bottled in the US) your liver is receiving the health "benefits" of 22% more fructose, compared to glucose. As you have elegantly written, it is the fructose moiety that leads to long term health hazards. Ditch the HFCS, especially in sweetened beverages. Try StopHFCS.com for an extensive list of HFCS-free foods and beverages.
To your health