I was recently listening to a radio host who was talking about high fructose corn syrup, which can be found in most food products. Back in the 1980’s soda pop manufacturers began replace the natural grain sugar with high fructose corn syrup. Recent studies have shown that high fructose corn syrup (for my sake we’re gonna call it HFCS) is digested differently and may cause obesity more readily than the sugar that foods were originally made of. Soda pop manufacturers started using HFCS for several reasons: It was cheaper (go figure huh?), It was easier to transport than sugar, and it has a longer shelf life. Coke and sprite for one month out of the year make Passover, or kosher coke, which is made with sugar instead of HFCS. Apparently, I say this because I am not Jewish, but apparently, HFCS is not one of the foods, that Jews can eat during Passover (If someone Jewish could verify this for me that would be great). The only reason I brought this up is I wanted your reaction.
HFCS is made through an industrial process, which means IT IS NOT FOUND IN NATURE. The first process uses bacteria to ferment the corn meal to get I dark thick liquid. It is then put in vats where it is not uncommon to see balls of fungi floating around on the top. Just thought this piece of information may be of use.
Something else: State legislatures are pushing to have soda pop taking out of schools and be replaced by fruit juices, which are almost purely HFCS.
One more fact: Americans consume FIVE times more HFCS than the do sugar.
[ March 26, 2004, 01:14 PM: Message edited by: Ayelar ]
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
"HFCS is made through an industrial process, which means IT IS NOT FOUND IN NATURE."
Well, no. It's found in nature, but only once created by industrial processes.
[ March 26, 2004, 01:13 PM: Message edited by: TomDavidson ]
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
This time science has gone too far.
*shakes fist angrily at science*
Posted by Ayelar (Member # 183) on :
Peter, you've presented a lot of facts about HFCS, some positive and some negative, but without presenting a thesis. How are we supposed to feel about HFCS after reading your post, and why?
Edit: Okay, I missed the sentence about it being linked with obesity. Perhaps your argument could be presented in a more coherent manner?
[ March 26, 2004, 01:19 PM: Message edited by: Ayelar ]
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
quote: Something else: State legislatures are pushing to have soda pop taking out of schools and be replaced by fruit juices, which are almost purely HFCS.
Well, if it is %100 fruit juice, then it only has regular the regular fruictos found in nature. I think that fruictos is supposed to be better processed by diabetics, but it is still sugar.
This thought that HFCS is worse than other sugars reminds me of the findings on trans-fatty acids. They are not found in nature either. They are made by taking a unsaturated fatty acids that is normally liquid at room temperature and causing it to be partially-saturated (I think, or is it hydrogenated?) so that it is solid or near-solid at room temp. Food manufacturers now have to state trans-fatty acids on their nutrition info. It is supposed to be very, very bad for you.
Posted by Ayelar (Member # 183) on :
[ March 26, 2004, 01:48 PM: Message edited by: Ayelar ]
Posted by Papa Moose (Member # 1992) on :
Where can one get kosher Coke? Rivka Ela Corwin et al, do you know of a place? I've always been disappointed by "Classic Coke" because I could very easily tell the difference between it and old coke, precisely because they replaced the sugar with the HFCS crap. I might be willing to give it a shot (of Jack Daniels probably, or maybe Hennessey) if I were to find it with sugar again.
--Pop
Posted by Robespierre (Member # 5779) on :
The reason why they switched is clear. To 'save' the jobs of corn growers in the midwest, congress enacted tariffs of the import of sugar, making HFCS a cheaper ingredient than pure grain sugar. Corporate welfare at its most crass. Thanks ADM!
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote: HFCS is made through an industrial process, which means IT IS NOT FOUND IN NATURE.
Same thing with grain sugar. Posted by Robespierre (Member # 5779) on :
Rattlesnake venom is found in nature, perhaps we should just use that.
Posted by Ayelar (Member # 183) on :
Pop, we've got a huge population of Jewish folks here in Ithaca, and it shows up at some supermarkets this time of year. Give it another week, and check around for regular 2-liter bottles of Coke with little Hebrew characters on yellow caps. They look like contest bottles without a contest.
I'm willing to bet that they're only manufactured in the Northeast, but I could be wrong.
Edit: Actually, check this out!
quote:Kosher Coke is now available (made with sugar rather than yukky corn syrup). The Ralph's market in the Miracle Mile district of L.A. has tons of it. You can usually find it until the end of Passover. The 2-liter bottles usually will have a different color cap with a kosher symbol on it. The Ralph's in L.A.has it in their passover display. Last time I checked it was 5 for $4.00 with a Ralph's Club Card. Granted, it's not in a glass bottle but it really tastes the way Coke used to taste.
And I think it's really funny that a Google search for "kosher coke" has my friend's site as the fourth and fifth results. Last year we tipped him off on where to find it, but he arrived too late.
[ March 26, 2004, 02:22 PM: Message edited by: Ayelar ]
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
I got some by accident the other day - it had the kosher symbol right under the NCAA tourney game they're running.
I didn't notice at first but I thought there was less of an aftertaste.
Dagonee
Posted by KarlEd (Member # 571) on :
quote: The reason why they switched is clear. To 'save' the jobs of corn growers in the midwest, congress enacted tariffs of the import of sugar, making HFCS a cheaper ingredient than pure grain sugar. Corporate welfare at its most crass. Thanks ADM!
Not only that, but corn is one of the highest subsidized crops in the US. An enormous amount of tax money goes to paying farmers to produce corn which helps keep the price down. HFCS, as stated above, is one of the cheapest ways to store/ship the processed grain. So there is a huge incentive to both produce it and for companies to use it in their products.
Wouldn't it be wonderful if the government subsidized fresh fruits and veggies like that. I'd love to pay less than $5 a quart for strawberries or $3-4 a pound for bell peppers.
Posted by skrika03 (Member # 5930) on :
Or maybe we could be using the corn to make biodiesel , lessing our dependence on foreign oil
Posted by Professor Funk (Member # 5608) on :
You know what's healthier than Coke with no HFCS?
WATER!
Posted by Hobbes (Member # 433) on :
I have one word, are you ready? Annie.
No wait, that's a good word but not the one I meant. Excercise. Ahh, there we are.
Not to say eating healthy isn't vitally important, but things like having coke frequently is easily offest by some good excersice. It's more fun than most people seem to think it is.
Hobbes Posted by Peter (Member # 4373) on :
John L: I'm not trying to make this sound bad or unnatural, I heard this thought it sounded intersting, did some research and though i should share it.
Hobbes: Exercise is always fun. I don't want anyone to get the imperssion that I'm complaining, because I'm not. I have no excuse to do so. The fact that weigh 150ish is something that has bugged me only because i dont think I weigh enough. Many people think I'm dumb for this, but who cares what other people think, right?
Professor Funk: Good point, i suppose.
Dagonee: There is less of an aftertaste, but what there is tends to be a sweeter aftertaste, more like honey.
Ayelar: good point, i thought i proofread it but i apparantly didnt do a very good job, sorry about that.
I'm not sure why I'm replying to this, maybe just shameless self promotion, but these are my thoughts. and to put out the thesis thing, i was linking the HFCS to partially causing obesity. Now, let's sit back and wait till someone files a law suit about this.
Posted by Peter (Member # 4373) on :
John: is there something you have against me? *tear*
j/k
edit: spelling, stupid me
[ March 27, 2004, 12:56 PM: Message edited by: Peter ]
Posted by Ayelar (Member # 183) on :
Peter, it's not a matter of proofreading (checking for spelling and grammar mistakes). It's that your argument is not as well organized as it could be.
It would be more persuasive and understandable if you wrote it more like this:
"HFCS is a major health concern. Americans started using it X number of years ago, for reasons A, B, and C. However, research has shown that it causes problems D, E, and F. Thus, HFCS is bad for people, and we should switch to solution Y."
This clearly states what your position is (HFCS is a major health concern), how it came to exist, why exactly it's a problem, and what you think we should do about it.
And while it's interesting, facts like the Kosher Coke are irrelevant to your argument. Unless Jews avoid HFCS during Passover because it's been linked to obesity, or unless you can show that Kosher Coke is less likely to cause health defects than HFCS Coke, it doesn't really fit in with the rest of your facts.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
quote:searching on the internet does not equal "research."
Don't knock internet searches. The internet is a research medium, just like a magazine, book, or article. As you know, those sources can show bias as well.
The internet simply makes it easier to find biased opinions.
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
And so the question becomes, what did you find about the information and websites presented by this thread's originator that qualifies as misleading or lying?
The links Peter presented all contained the opinions of experts:
Link 1, Gabe Mirkin, M.D., as well as several medical journals.
Link 2 referenced information on a study done by the Agriculture Department's Human Nutrition Research Center.
Link 3 quoted two more doctors from the Human Nutrition Research Center.
Link 4 presented possibly the most biased information from what could be considered a dubious source-- however, she makes a very convincing argument.
What problems do you have with the links Peter set up? Do you have any information contrary to what these folks state?
quote:The only way to effectively do it is to promote the factual list of benefits to the individual to avoid them.
In fact, that is what the sites listed by Peter do-- report on why consumers should avoid corn syrup.
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)