Part 2 of Taxes, Chemistry, and Advertising

A quick review from part I. Sweetener consumption in the the US has increased in the last 20 years. So has the obesity rate. HFCS has essentially the same make-up as table sugar (sucrose)--that means both have similar amounts of fructose and glucose.

So, scientists and doctors observed the trends. They noticed that our drinks are bigger, our intake of processed foods is greater and obesity and heart disease are bigger problems. They followed the scientific process and made some hypotheses. They published studies in medical journals. What has filtered down to us is a general idea that HCFS is really bad for us, but the average shopper has no idea why.

To understand the demonization of HFCS, you need to know more about fructose. First, our intake of fructose is increasing. Barry Popkin, PhD, and George Bray, MD, used data from the federal government and determined that Americans consumed 158.5 calories of fructose in 1970. They also reported that we consumed 228 calories from fructose in 1995---a 30% increase.

Second, you need to know a bit about the differences in how our bodies use fructose and glucose. The glucose part of sugar is our basic building block for energy. Starch is broken down into glucose. Fructose is the sugar found in fruit. The two molecules are not used in our body in the same way. Fructose does not trigger the pancreas to make insulin, and it does not enter the blood stream. Glucose does. Our bodies can use less fructose than glucose. If you consume your maximum amount of fructose, the body will start converting the excess into triglycerides (fat), which over time will lead to health issues and obesity. Glucose (the sugar component of all starches) feeds muscle cells. It does not get converted into fat molecules.

Studies make it pretty clear that fructose is a large player in the obesity epidemic but glucose is more of a bench warmer. Reliable, published studies indicate that diets with glucose as the main sweetener seem to have no measurable ill-effects. Diets with fructose as the main sweetener appear to induce lepitin resistance. Lepitin helps to keep weight in check. Multiple studies confirm this idea. And excess fat, leads to all kinds of other health issues. There are other studies linking diets high in fructose to increased levels of uric acid. High levels of uric acid can lead to heart disease, artery inflammation, kidney disease, stroke and more. But whether uric acid is really the cause is still debatable. (The uric acid link is the focus of the book The Sugar Fix: The High Fructose Fallout that is Making You Fat and Sick, by Richard Johnson, MD)

We are fatter. We eat more high fructose corn syrup. We eat more sugar. Fructose can be really bad for you. We eat more fructose than we did in the past. The use of HFCS has increased, partially due to government interference. All true statements. So should you avoid HFCS?

Perhaps it is HFCS that is causing us to eat more fructose since we eat more processed foods and since HFCS is so affordable, manufacturers have added it to all kinds of food to make us love them more. Perhaps. But HFCS is too similar to sugar for me to buy this hypothesis. I think we just need to consume less sugar. Period.

HFCS isn't worse for our health than sugar as far as the current studies indicate. There are, of course, many more studies out there. And the corn grower's association has a fascinating ad campaign to tell you why HFCS is good and natural. Their website is full of studies supporting their case, but I didn't mention those studies. They don't add to the argument much and CBS news did their research and found several of the studies to be funded by industries with a stake in the outcome. Really, more independent research needs to be done.

So....I won't recommend avoiding all HCFS because it is worse than sugar--there is no conclusive evidence to warrant such a stance. There might be a different reason to avoid it though, depending on your food convictions..but that's part 3.

sources: http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=93621
Goldstein, Jennifer. "High Fructose Corn Syrup" in May 2009 issue of Prevention.
Johnson, Richard and Timothy Gower. The Sugar Fix: The High Fructose Fallout that is Making You Fat and Sick. Published in 2008 by Rodale.
http://diabetes.webmd.com/news/20070625/fructose-sugars-dark-side,
http://blogs.webmd.com/healthy-recipe-doctor/2008/01/high-fructose-corn-syrup-new-bad-boy-in.html
http://www.askmen.com/sports/foodcourt_150/182_eating_well.html
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 86 (2007):899-906. American Society for Nutrition.
http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/trends.html
www.sweetsurprise.com

Taxes, chemistry and Advertising or High Fructose Corn Syrup, Part I

Now complete, this post has three parts. Part one, below explains HFCS and its popularity, part two discusses the link (or lack of link) between HFCS and obesity , part three discusses mercury and HFCS and offers a conclusion. 

High Fructose Corn Syrup. There, I did it. I wrote the first word of this post that has plagued me for months. It's not that I didn't want to research and write about HFCS. I did. I do, sort of. After months of reading here and there, I 'd read both sides of every issue and was still confused. But writing brings me clarity, and I've reached a conclusion--if I can find a big enough chunk of time to write it all down. This baby will have two parts and it's all for Amanda.

Do you know that hymn with line in it "On Christ, the solid rock I stand, all other ground is sinking sand" ? I didn't find a way to connect Christ and HFCS (somebody has probably seen Christ's profile in a spilled bit of HFCS and tried to sell it on E-bay though). Seriously though, most of what I read, no matter what side of this issue it supported, felt like sinking sand. So much of the research can't prove cause so to me their conclusions are interesting, at best. And their funding: dubious. I know, enough silly analogies.

Chemistry or fructose/glucose
To begin, let's have a chemistry lesson. Table sugar, the white stuff most of you bake with is 50% fructose and 50% glucose. Table sugar is also called sucrose. Brown sugar is sucrose mixed with molasses. Confectioner's sugar is another form of sucrose. High Fructose Corn Syrup has many different forms. The most commonly used types are HFCS 55 which is 55% fructose and 45% glucose and HFCS 42 which is 42 % fructose and 58% glucose. Really, the name high fructose is misleading because HFCS and sucrose have very similar compositions. Honey generally has a similar fructose/glucose ratio as sucrose.
Calorie for calorie, HFCS and sugar are essentially the same.

The sweetener you choose varies in sweetness. Fructose is the sweetest sugar of all. Glucose is about 50-60% as sweet as fructose and table sugar is about 70-85% as sweet.

Why HFCS is Popular
I've read that most cola in Mexico is made with real sugar. In the United States, most of it is made with HFCS. I know why now.

The process of taking corn syrup and turning it into high fructose corn syrup was invented in 1957. In 1971, Japanese scientists found a way to reuse one the enzmyes used to made HFCS, dramatically decreasing the cost of this sweetener. Several tariffs on sugar imposed in the late 1970s made sugar prices increase. Government subsidies on corn, and new agricultural technologies leading to higher and higher yields, decreased the price of corn. In the US, it became cheaper to use HFCS than sugar, especially after the US put limits on sugar imports in 1982.(Here's an interesting article about Archer Daniels, a major producer of HFCS and ethanol and their role in these government policies) Accountants began to love HFCS, food producers liked HFCS's traits: it dissolves more readily in liquid than sucrose and it doesn't crystallize like sugar in cold temperatures (if you buy ice cream made with sugar, you've seen the freezer burn crystals).And HFCS is cheaper and easier to transport than sugar because it is a liquid.

Now for the all-important alarming facts. In 1976, the percentage of obese people in America was 14.5%. In 2007, that percentage was around 25%. In 1970, according to the USDA, the average person in American consumed
72.5 lbs of refined sugar a year and 0.4 lbs of HFCS. In 2004, the average person consumed 44 lbs of refined sugar and 42.3 lb of HFCS. So clearly, sugar use has gone down and HFCS has gone up.

That's enough for today. I don't like blog posts that are too long and I'm guessing you can't either. Stay tuned for part two, coming in the next two days, where I'll explain all the medical research, the mercury issue, and the conclusion.
sources: http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=93621
Goldstein, Jennifer. "High Fructose Corn Syrup" in May 2009 issue of Prevention.
Johnson, Richard and Timothy Gower. The Sugar Fix: The High Fructose Fallout that is Making You Fat and Sick. Published in 2008 by Rodale.
http://diabetes.webmd.com/news/20070625/fructose-sugars-dark-side,
http://blogs.webmd.com/healthy-recipe-doctor/2008/01/high-fructose-corn-syrup-new-bad-boy-in.html
http://www.askmen.com/sports/foodcourt_150/182_eating_well.html
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 86 (2007):899-906. American Society for Nutrition.
http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/trends.html