HFCS, why the hate?

[AFI82]

This isn't a thread about why HFCS is bad or good for you. This is a thread about why HFCS is bad in comparison to equal amounts of sugar.

What prompted this was me noticing that the Fat Free Chocolate Milk I drink PWO is sweetened with HFCS. I think it's to the tune of somewhere around 40g sugar and 10-15g protein per 8oz serving. So about 180-220 calories. I saw a lot of people here suggesting Choc milk instead of a whey/dextrose mix. It was cheaper, so I gave it a whirl.

What is it about this stuff that makes it evil incarnate when compared to plain old sugar? In a situation where I want the carbs (PWO) does it really matter?

EDIT: I did read this post HFCS
But I felt like it ended before I was able to satisfy my curiosity.

[UConnJulie]

Because it is a super-processed food item ... there is lots of info out there if you google it ...
http://www.westonaprice.org/modernfo...hfructose.html
http://ezinearticles.com/?The-Danger...Syrup&id=28535
http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?sec...lth&id=5421423

[RobLL]

In all the discussions I have read the bottom line comes to the fact that HFCS has been horrible for Americans because of the huge amount of sugar it has dumped into the American diet. The sheer number of calories is overwhelming. As to whether it is worse than other sugars, that remains to be proven. I don't particularly avoid it, but in my 20-40 grams of carbs a day I am not about to waste any of them on HFCS.

[cycomiko]

its jsut fructose and glucose, nothing special.

The remainder of the world hardly uses it and still suffer all of the same health issues.

[Hunter]

I recall hearing that because it is so highly refined, it gives you no sense of fullness or satisfaction, so you are more likely to ingest large amounts of high GI carbs, which has obvious and documented results.

[Lost Dog]

Originally Posted by Hunter

I recall hearing that because it is so highly refined, it gives you no sense of fullness or satisfaction, so you are more likely to ingest large amounts of high GI carbs, which has obvious and documented results.

I'd heard that too, but I haven't seen any studies or evidence about it. I think I might have actually posted about that a few years back, so hopefully you're not going by that post from me.

I did ask several highly respected nutrition gurus (and Alan Aragon :p) and none thought that it was actually true. Only a myth.

By the way, here's another thread on the HFCS thing, which seems to conclude that sugar and HFCS are virtually the same, once in the body. It's in the food manufacturer's pocket books where the differences are.

[FrankG]

Here's a pertinent news article:

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/79969.php

[milkman21]

Originally Posted by cycomiko

its jsut fructose and glucose, nothing special.

The remainder of the world hardly uses it and still suffer all of the same health issues.

Originally Posted by Lost Dog

I'd heard that too, but I haven't seen any studies or evidence about it. I think I might have actually posted about that a few years back, so hopefully you're not going by that post from me.

I did ask several highly respected nutrition gurus (and Alan Aragon :p) and none thought that it was actually true. Only a myth.

By the way, here's another thread on the HFCS thing, which seems to conclude that sugar and HFCS are virtually the same, once in the body. It's in the food manufacturer's pocket books where the differences are.

YESS!!!!

I knew I wasn't crazy when I brought this up!!

[Cynic]

Yeah, it's about the prevalence in our diet. We consume too much of the stuff because it's cheap and everywhere.

However, I use Hershey's Choco Syrup in skim milk as an addition to the PWO drinkie's whey and dex/malt. Have it PWO and it's nothing to worry about.

[RacerBill]

FWIW, some people (my sister, for example) are allergic or highly sensitive to corn products. HCFS's prevalence in all sorts of food products is always a problem for her. Allergies to cane sugar aren't (to my knowledge) as common as corn allergies.

[RobLL]

http://www.healthcentral.com/diabete...king-calories/

The above link asserts that the body's satiation signaling is not as affected by liquids as it is by solids. Again read it for whatever it is worth, I am not in a position to judge the science.

[AFI82]

A lot of you then seem to think that the issue is over-indulging in it, but not necessarily in the product itself. Eating a pound of it a day isn't healthy, but neither would it be healthy to eat a pound of sugar.

Regarding the lack of satiety that it provides, at some point you have to tell yourself that 32 oz of soda is too much. Unless of course you're still thirsty for more (I kid, I kid!).

The article about the link to diabetes is disturbing.

[Leigh P.]

If you look at this as a source of information...

http://www.westonaprice.org/modernfo...hfructose.html

You can't trust it as all of the references that point to the real important and altering information aren't backed up by study. The most important one, at least to me, about nutrient uptake leads back to here.

http://www.mcvitamins.com/cornsyrup.htm

The only real relavant study that shows any difference between HFCS and regular sugar is Ho's Soda study that talks about reactive carbonyls. Still it isn't conclusive on some things but brings up some interesting points about the stability or lacking of the compound of HFCS.

What should the real drive home point be? Perhaps not so much that HFCS syrup is so evil, but just that is there isn't good. The lack of something good can be just as instrumental as the presence of something bad.

You choose a product that contains HFCS and it is likely to contain ingredients that aren't good for you OR that is lacking anything that IS good for you. So to choose something that is more natural and formed of the earth means you are likely to stumble upon nutrients that will provide good.

When you can only eat so much food in a day you need to make sure you are getting your bang for your caloric buck. Dangerous or not, there isn't anything worth consuming, so why bother? That is more of why I have the hate. As for a scientific aspect I have that feeling there is something there that hasn't been proven, but as of yet nothing has been found of how it is dangerous to me that is trustworthy.

[Lost Dog]

^^ That was one good post. ^^

I think it's weird that you can go to a store like Whole Foods and find quite a few products containing HFCS, but very few containing artificial sweeteners.

When I asked the manager, he said High Fructose Corn Syrup is natural and Splenda, Equal, etc. aren't.

[RobLL]

Originally Posted by Lost Dog

^^ That was one good post. ^^

I think it's weird that you can go to a store like Whole Foods and find quite a few products containing HFCS, but very few containing artificial sweeteners.

When I asked the manager, he said High Fructose Corn Syrup is natural and Splenda, Equal, etc. aren't.

I know I am unfairly cynical regarding Whole Foods, but I think their business model is about as open and honest as their CEO, which is to say, NOT.

foot note: their ceo, the secret blogger, emailer

[SpacecityPaula]

Originally Posted by Lost Dog

When I asked the manager, he said High Fructose Corn Syrup is natural and Splenda, Equal, etc. aren't.

Having grown up in the middle of the corn fields of Iowa, I don't think that HFCS is a natural product. you can't process corn in ways that sugar cane juice and beet juice are processed, to get the sugar.

[OldGuy]

As with anything, in moderation HFCS is not going to kill you. If you can't find chocolate milk without try to limit it in other foods.

If you want to read a good book on food science read Twinkie, Deconstructed.