I don't know much about high fructose corn syrup. I know that it is suppose to be bad for you and that it is used in almost every packaged product in the store. I know it is a bi-product so it is really cheap and company's use it to cut costs. My husband and I were talking with my in-laws the other day about high fructose corn syrup. They wanted to know what was so bad about it. My father in law thinks it is important to support american industry by supporting American sugar. He said we are relying on others for our sugar when we can grow our own here in the form of corn. I explained that I knew it was a biproduct and that techically it isn't natural. They wanted to know why. I said because even if you sat down, and ate 5 ears of corn, you wouldn't be getting that much sugar. When they consentrate it down that is what makes it unhealthy. My mother in law said that she didn't see the difference between that and maple sugar (which we eat a lot of). The discussion kind of ended there. I respect both of my husbands parents. They are very intelligent people. Does anyone have any information or suggested reading for me. So, I can give them an intelligent answer.
HFCS vs Maple Syrup
- Thread starter Homemaker
- Start date
Boogity
Almost Self-Reliant
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2010
- Messages
- 742
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 158
Marianne
Super Self-Sufficient
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2011
- Messages
- 3,269
- Reaction score
- 355
- Points
- 287
- Location
- rural Abilene, KS, 67410 USA
They used to say that there was more risk of obesity if you consumed hfcs instead of sugar. And boom, everyone started saying that it was bad for you. I thought the latest research showed it wasn't any 'worse' than consuming cane or beet sugar.
A quick google search gave me this - http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2008-12-08-fructose-corn-syrup_N.htm
Personally, I'm not afraid of it and never have been. I usually don't care what tests on lab rats have shown as I weigh a lot more than a lab rat and don't consume pounds and pounds of sugar or HFCS every day.
A quick google search gave me this - http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2008-12-08-fructose-corn-syrup_N.htm
Personally, I'm not afraid of it and never have been. I usually don't care what tests on lab rats have shown as I weigh a lot more than a lab rat and don't consume pounds and pounds of sugar or HFCS every day.
Wifezilla
Low-Carb Queen - RIP: 1963-2021
Ok...making maple syrup is pretty straight forward. Tap tree, collect sap, boil it down. HFCS is a mad scientists dream!
"High-fructose corn syrup is produced by milling corn to produce corn starch, then processing that starch to yield corn syrup, which is almost entirely glucose, and then adding enzymes that change some of the glucose into fructose. The resulting syrup (after enzyme conversion) contains approximately 42% fructose and is HFCS 42. Some of the 42% fructose is then purified to 90% fructose, HFCS 90. To make HFCS 55, the HFCS 90 is mixed with HFCS 42 in the appropriate ratios to form the desired HFCS 55. The enzyme process that changes the 100% glucose corn syrup into HFCS 42 is as follows:
Cornstarch is treated with alpha-amylase to produce shorter chains of sugars called oligosaccharides.
Glucoamylase - which is produced by Aspergillus, species of mold, in a fermentation vat breaks the sugar chains down even further to yield the simple sugar glucose.
Xylose isomerase (aka glucose isomerase) converts glucose to a mixture of about 42% fructose and 5052% glucose with some other sugars mixed in.
While inexpensive alpha-amylase and glucoamylase are added directly to the slurry and used only once, the more costly xylose-isomerase is packed into columns and the sugar mixture is then passed over it, allowing it to be used repeatedly until it loses its activity. This 4243% fructose glucose mixture is then subjected to a liquid chromatography step, where the fructose is enriched to about 90%. The 90% fructose is then back-blended with 42% fructose to achieve a 55% fructose final product. Most manufacturers use carbon adsorption for impurity removal. Numerous filtration, ion-exchange and evaporation steps are also part of the overall process."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-fructose_corn_syrup
A couple of issues. One being that this chemical process tends to leave mercury contamination in the syrup...
"Almost half of tested samples of commercial high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) contained mercury, which was also found in nearly a third of 55 popular brand-name food and beverage products where HFCS is the first- or second-highest labeled ingredient, according to two new U.S. studies. "
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/26/AR2009012601831.html
Second is he amount of fructose...
"A new study from the Childhood Obesity Research Center reports that sugar content in many popular sodas and sweetened beverages may be much higher than what is reported on the nutrition label, and that fructose levels may be nearly 20% higher than popularly assumed. Although the additional calorie intake from sugar consumption is concerning, the higher level of fructose in these beverages is especially worrisome as higher fructose consumption has been associated with a higher risk for metabolic disease."
http://goranlab.com/research_news/index.html
Which brings us to this...
"Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW:
Fructose, a naturally found sugar in many fruits, is now commonly used as an industrial sweetener and is excessively consumed in Western diets. High fructose intake is increasingly recognized as causative in development of prediabetes and metabolic syndrome. The mechanisms underlying fructose-induced metabolic disturbances are unclear but are beginning to be unravelled. This review presents recent findings in this field and an overall mechanistic insight into the metabolic effects of dietary fructose and its role in metabolic syndrome.
RECENT FINDINGS:
Recent animal studies have confirmed the link between fructose feeding and increased plasma uric acid, a potentially causative factor in metabolic syndrome. Advanced glycation end products are also implicated because of their direct protein modifications and indirect effects on inflammation and oxidative stress. Human studies have demonstrated fructose's ability to change metabolic hormonal response, possibly contributing to decreased satiety.
SUMMARY:
There is much evidence from both animal models and human studies supporting the notion that fructose is a highly lipogenic nutrient that, when consumed in high quantities, contributes to tissue insulin insensitivity, metabolic defects, and the development of a prediabetic state. Recently evidence has helped to decipher the mechanisms involved in these metabolic changes."
"Abstract
Obesity and related diseases are an important and growing health concern in the United States and around the world. Soft drinks and other sugar-sweetened beverages are now the primary sources of added sugars in Americans' diets. The metabolic syndrome is a cluster of common pathologies, including abdominal obesity linked to an excess of visceral fat, fatty liver, insulin resistance, hyperinsulinemia, dyslipidemia, and hypertension. Trends in all of these alterations are related to the consumption of dietary fructose and the introduction of high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) as a sweetener in soft drinks and other foods. Experimental and clinical evidence suggests a progressive association between HFCS consumption, obesity, and the other injury processes. However, experimental HFCS consumption seems to produce some of the changes associated with metabolic syndrome even without increasing the body weight. Metabolic damage associated with HFCS probably is not limited to obesity-pathway mechanisms."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20424937
"Because fructose is digested in your liver, it is immediately turned into triglycerides or stored body fat. Since it doesnt get converted to blood glucose like other sugars, it doesnt raise or crash your blood sugar levels. Hence the claim that it is safe for diabetics.
But it isnt.
Thats because fructose inhibits leptin levels the hormone your body uses to tell you that youre full. In other words, fructose makes you want to eat more. Besides contributing to weight gain, it also makes you gain the most dangerous kind of fat.
This has been verified in numerous studies. The most definitive one was released just this past year in the Journal of Clinical Investigation. The full study is available online, but for the sake of space Im including Stephans (of Whole Health Source fame) summary here:
The investigators divided 32 overweight men and women into two groups, and instructed each group to drink a sweetened beverage three times per day. They were told not to eat any other sugar. The drinks were designed to provide 25% of the participants caloric intake. That might sound like a lot, but the average American actually gets about 25% of her calories from sugar! Thats the average, so there are people who get a third or more of their calories from sugar. In one group, the drinks were sweetened with glucose, while in the other group they were sweetened with fructose.
After ten weeks, both groups had gained about three pounds. But they didnt gain it in the same place. The fructose group gained a disproportionate amount of visceral fat, which increased by 14%! Visceral fat is the most dangerous type; its associated with and contributes to chronic disease, particularly metabolic syndrome, the quintessential modern metabolic disorder (see the end of the post for more information and references). You can bet their livers were fattening up too.
The good news doesnt end there. The fructose group saw a worsening of blood glucose control and insulin sensitivity. They also saw an increase in small, dense LDL particles and oxidized LDL, both factors that associate strongly with the risk of heart attack and may in fact contribute to it. Liver synthesis of fat after meals increased by 75%. If you look at table 4, its clear that the fructose group experienced a major metabolic shift, and the glucose group didnt. Practically every parameter they measured in the fructose group changed significantly over the course of the 9 weeks. Its incredible."
http://www.foodrenegade.com/agave-nectar-good-or-bad/
So where does that leave you?
HFCS, honey, maple syrup, agave, table sugar etc are ALL BAD FOR YOU. Sorry. BUT the damage caused by sweeteners will not be serious if used VERY sparingly. Also some people are way more sensitive to the problems caused by sweeteners (like me) while others show no ill effects at all. If you have a family history of heart disease, obesity, hypertension, etc... avoid sweeteners of any kind as much as possible.
Now as a ranking, I put Agave syrup, high fructose corn syrup and sugar as the worst. All three are highly refined. Using honey or maple syrup on occasion will support local producers and these items aren't quite as toxic as the other three.
"High-fructose corn syrup is produced by milling corn to produce corn starch, then processing that starch to yield corn syrup, which is almost entirely glucose, and then adding enzymes that change some of the glucose into fructose. The resulting syrup (after enzyme conversion) contains approximately 42% fructose and is HFCS 42. Some of the 42% fructose is then purified to 90% fructose, HFCS 90. To make HFCS 55, the HFCS 90 is mixed with HFCS 42 in the appropriate ratios to form the desired HFCS 55. The enzyme process that changes the 100% glucose corn syrup into HFCS 42 is as follows:
Cornstarch is treated with alpha-amylase to produce shorter chains of sugars called oligosaccharides.
Glucoamylase - which is produced by Aspergillus, species of mold, in a fermentation vat breaks the sugar chains down even further to yield the simple sugar glucose.
Xylose isomerase (aka glucose isomerase) converts glucose to a mixture of about 42% fructose and 5052% glucose with some other sugars mixed in.
While inexpensive alpha-amylase and glucoamylase are added directly to the slurry and used only once, the more costly xylose-isomerase is packed into columns and the sugar mixture is then passed over it, allowing it to be used repeatedly until it loses its activity. This 4243% fructose glucose mixture is then subjected to a liquid chromatography step, where the fructose is enriched to about 90%. The 90% fructose is then back-blended with 42% fructose to achieve a 55% fructose final product. Most manufacturers use carbon adsorption for impurity removal. Numerous filtration, ion-exchange and evaporation steps are also part of the overall process."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-fructose_corn_syrup
A couple of issues. One being that this chemical process tends to leave mercury contamination in the syrup...
"Almost half of tested samples of commercial high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) contained mercury, which was also found in nearly a third of 55 popular brand-name food and beverage products where HFCS is the first- or second-highest labeled ingredient, according to two new U.S. studies. "
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/26/AR2009012601831.html
Second is he amount of fructose...
"A new study from the Childhood Obesity Research Center reports that sugar content in many popular sodas and sweetened beverages may be much higher than what is reported on the nutrition label, and that fructose levels may be nearly 20% higher than popularly assumed. Although the additional calorie intake from sugar consumption is concerning, the higher level of fructose in these beverages is especially worrisome as higher fructose consumption has been associated with a higher risk for metabolic disease."
http://goranlab.com/research_news/index.html
Which brings us to this...
"Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW:
Fructose, a naturally found sugar in many fruits, is now commonly used as an industrial sweetener and is excessively consumed in Western diets. High fructose intake is increasingly recognized as causative in development of prediabetes and metabolic syndrome. The mechanisms underlying fructose-induced metabolic disturbances are unclear but are beginning to be unravelled. This review presents recent findings in this field and an overall mechanistic insight into the metabolic effects of dietary fructose and its role in metabolic syndrome.
RECENT FINDINGS:
Recent animal studies have confirmed the link between fructose feeding and increased plasma uric acid, a potentially causative factor in metabolic syndrome. Advanced glycation end products are also implicated because of their direct protein modifications and indirect effects on inflammation and oxidative stress. Human studies have demonstrated fructose's ability to change metabolic hormonal response, possibly contributing to decreased satiety.
SUMMARY:
There is much evidence from both animal models and human studies supporting the notion that fructose is a highly lipogenic nutrient that, when consumed in high quantities, contributes to tissue insulin insensitivity, metabolic defects, and the development of a prediabetic state. Recently evidence has helped to decipher the mechanisms involved in these metabolic changes."
"Abstract
Obesity and related diseases are an important and growing health concern in the United States and around the world. Soft drinks and other sugar-sweetened beverages are now the primary sources of added sugars in Americans' diets. The metabolic syndrome is a cluster of common pathologies, including abdominal obesity linked to an excess of visceral fat, fatty liver, insulin resistance, hyperinsulinemia, dyslipidemia, and hypertension. Trends in all of these alterations are related to the consumption of dietary fructose and the introduction of high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) as a sweetener in soft drinks and other foods. Experimental and clinical evidence suggests a progressive association between HFCS consumption, obesity, and the other injury processes. However, experimental HFCS consumption seems to produce some of the changes associated with metabolic syndrome even without increasing the body weight. Metabolic damage associated with HFCS probably is not limited to obesity-pathway mechanisms."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20424937
"Because fructose is digested in your liver, it is immediately turned into triglycerides or stored body fat. Since it doesnt get converted to blood glucose like other sugars, it doesnt raise or crash your blood sugar levels. Hence the claim that it is safe for diabetics.
But it isnt.
Thats because fructose inhibits leptin levels the hormone your body uses to tell you that youre full. In other words, fructose makes you want to eat more. Besides contributing to weight gain, it also makes you gain the most dangerous kind of fat.
This has been verified in numerous studies. The most definitive one was released just this past year in the Journal of Clinical Investigation. The full study is available online, but for the sake of space Im including Stephans (of Whole Health Source fame) summary here:
The investigators divided 32 overweight men and women into two groups, and instructed each group to drink a sweetened beverage three times per day. They were told not to eat any other sugar. The drinks were designed to provide 25% of the participants caloric intake. That might sound like a lot, but the average American actually gets about 25% of her calories from sugar! Thats the average, so there are people who get a third or more of their calories from sugar. In one group, the drinks were sweetened with glucose, while in the other group they were sweetened with fructose.
After ten weeks, both groups had gained about three pounds. But they didnt gain it in the same place. The fructose group gained a disproportionate amount of visceral fat, which increased by 14%! Visceral fat is the most dangerous type; its associated with and contributes to chronic disease, particularly metabolic syndrome, the quintessential modern metabolic disorder (see the end of the post for more information and references). You can bet their livers were fattening up too.
The good news doesnt end there. The fructose group saw a worsening of blood glucose control and insulin sensitivity. They also saw an increase in small, dense LDL particles and oxidized LDL, both factors that associate strongly with the risk of heart attack and may in fact contribute to it. Liver synthesis of fat after meals increased by 75%. If you look at table 4, its clear that the fructose group experienced a major metabolic shift, and the glucose group didnt. Practically every parameter they measured in the fructose group changed significantly over the course of the 9 weeks. Its incredible."
http://www.foodrenegade.com/agave-nectar-good-or-bad/
So where does that leave you?
HFCS, honey, maple syrup, agave, table sugar etc are ALL BAD FOR YOU. Sorry. BUT the damage caused by sweeteners will not be serious if used VERY sparingly. Also some people are way more sensitive to the problems caused by sweeteners (like me) while others show no ill effects at all. If you have a family history of heart disease, obesity, hypertension, etc... avoid sweeteners of any kind as much as possible.
Now as a ranking, I put Agave syrup, high fructose corn syrup and sugar as the worst. All three are highly refined. Using honey or maple syrup on occasion will support local producers and these items aren't quite as toxic as the other three.
FarmerChick
Super Self-Sufficient
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2008
- Messages
- 11,417
- Reaction score
- 14
- Points
- 248
I am not scared of hfcs either. I eat it. I just don't 'live on it' like some people do...lol
it is when you pig out constantly on processed/boxed/fast food etc that problems start.
I say this alot and I live by this --moderation in what you eat is key
it is when you pig out constantly on processed/boxed/fast food etc that problems start.
I say this alot and I live by this --moderation in what you eat is key
I happened to watch "King Corn" a movie on Hulu last night. First of all HFCS is not a byproduct it is an end product that much corn is grown for. It is also NOT really cheap; it is more expensive than table sugar outside of the US. Your father-in-law is partly right and 'supporting American Sugar' Is US policy. This policy includes steep tariffs on imported sugar and payments to US cane and beet growers. This makes imported sugar more expensive than the real price of HFCS so naturally industrial users switched everything they could over to HFCS.Homemaker said:
To try to explain the differences will require some chemistry and I will shorten the names of the different sugars as follows S=Sucrose common table sugar which is really two sugars linked in one molecule, Fructose (F) + Glucose (G) Therefore S=50%F +50% G.
The HFCS process is. Mill corn to corn starch, convert to corn syrup (mostly G), enzyme conversion to 42%F + 58%G=HFCS 42, Some of this is converted to 90% F. The 90% is then mixed back to the 42% to produce the HFCS 55 which is what most users want. It would seem that the difference between cane sugar S and HFCS 55 is only 5%, but the S is bonded and this bond has to be broken inside the body to free the two sugars F and G where the two sugars are already free in HFCS. I am a chemist and will not comment on the health effects of the difference. But I am a citizen and I will point out that the policy failed because the sugar price was too high which lead to producers to switch out of sugar into HFCS which undercut the sugar use and US sugar is declining in production.
PS maple sugar is about 90% S with the rest split between free F and G. ~gd
