Part 3 of Taxes, Chemistry, and Advertising or HFCS

If you haven't already, read Part I and Part 2 first. Now, Part 3 will address the the issue of mercury and HFCS.

Let's go backward a bit. Corn syrup is made of only glucose. If corn syrup is treated with an enzyme called glucose isomerase, some of the glucose converts to fructose, which produces HFCS (incidentally I just read that in Canada HFCS is called glucose-fructose). Somewhere in the production of HFCS caustic soda is used. Caustic soda can contain mercury though most US sources of HFCS do not use mercury-cell technology (The Minneapolis Star Tribune did report that there are four plants in the US that still use the mercury-cell technology).

According to the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registy, mercury, in all forms, can cause permanent damage to the brain, kidneys and to developing fetuses. Young children are especially sensitive to mercury. It can store up in their small bodies and cause damage. Mercury can pass through breast milk.

Two recently published studies, one in the January 2009 issue of Environmental Health, and one published by the Institute for Agriculture Trade Policy(IATP), found mercury in common. The Environmental Health study used FDA info from 2005. It found detectable mercury in 9 of 20 products. The IATP study used products taken off the shelf in autumn of 2008. They tested 55 products and found mercury in 17 products. Tested products containing mercury included items such as Yoplait strawberry yogurt, Hunt's tomato ketchup, Hershey's chocolate syrup, Smucker's strawberry jam, Minute Maid berry punch and Nutri-Grain strawberry cereal bars.

Researchers concluded that HFCS was the probable common ingredient that could be the source of the mercury. The Corn Refiners Association had the data reviewed by an expert. They concluded that the studies did not follow proper scientific procedure and that even if there was mercury present, it falls well below standards set by our government. The full response of the Corn Refiners Association can be found here. Even the authors of the two studies caution that the studies are just a sample in time and cannot be used by consumers as a definitive reasons to avoid HFCS.

I suspect producers of HFCS will quickly remedy this bad press by making certain all sources of HFCS are mercury free. Since some of the HFCS used is not from this country, this might take some time. But for a year or two, pregnant women and nursing mothers might seriously consider avoiding the ingredient just to be safe. Unless you go 100% organic, you might find avoiding HFCS difficult to do.

A few marketers are hoping to profit from the public's fear of HFCS. The media has successfully portrayed HFCS as a horrible ingredient and the marketers have found some benefit in advertising products as HFCS-free. Around here, all of Aunt Millie's breads say, "No high fructose corn syrup." And for an additional four days (it started on April 20), in large cities, you will still be able to buy Pepsi Throwback and Mountain Dew Throwback, made with real sugar instead of HFCS. And just for kicks, here's a not-so-scientific video about sugar and Coke.

After all my reading, I'm less likely to worry about HFCS and more likely to go nuts trying to decrease the sugar of any kind in my girls' diets. We have 4-5 events weekly where some well-intentioned planner thinks it would be fun to give the kids a treat. Before the soccer tournament, my husband who is the coach, warned parents to bring only healthy snacks for the team tent. There was lots of fruit, and a box of donuts and a bag of twizzlers!

I suspect that in every single snack we serve our kids, there is sugar. And most of us are hardwired to seek out sugar. Maybe, long ago, such an instinct helped us eat the right things, like fruit, when it was in season. But with the constant availability of all food, I think our sweet tooth changed into sweet teeth followed eventually by sweet dentures. Good luck on your quests to eat healthy and thanks for reading.
sources:
http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/tfacts46.html#bookmark05
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/26/AR2009012601831.html
http://www.webmd.com/food-recipes/news/20090127/mercury-in-high-fructose-corn-syrup
http://www.sweetsurprise.com/news-and-press/hfcs-mercury
http://www.pepsithrowbackhub.com

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