High-Fructose Corn Syrup, Its Place In The Obesity Epidemic
HFCS in the Big Picture
Companies that manufacture goods heavily laden with high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) contend that it is just as good for you as regular sugar (”in moderation”). HFCS is not “the villain“.
It’s true, replacing sugar with HFCS is neither the primary nor the exact cause of the increase in obesity. Blaming just HFCS for the rise in obesity seems a little shortsighted. I wager that the better correlation is between the industrialized food system built on cheap, subsidized corn, which has ballooned along with America’s waistlines.
Since 1981, the price of fruits and vegetables has risen 130%. At the same time, cereals and grains have crept up to 115% of the 1981 cost. But, somehow the price of non-alcoholic beverages and other less than healthy corn-derived products (dairy from corn-fed cows, other corn-fed meats) has actually dropped. Meats, soda, and dairy are thus cheaper and more plentiful than ever while fruits and vegetables are both scarcer and more expensive.
I find myself agreeing with the statement produced by the Nestle Nutrition Institute after reviewing a clinical study by a Dr. Anderson:
Dr Anderson concludes that the hypothesis that the replacement of sucrose with HFCS in sodas is a cause of increased obesity is not supported by experimental or clinical studies. For most individuals, energy imbalance continues to be due to energy intake exceeding energy expenditure. An attempt to redress this imbalance by focusing on one food, or one component of the food supply, is likely to be unsuccessful.
In this statement, the Nestle Nutrition Institute is basically saying, ‘Look HFCS makes our food cheap and tasty; it’s not our fault if you eat too much and don’t exercise’.
HFCS as Part of the Problem
Maybe we can’t hold Nestle or any individual company totally responsible for the high-calorie, low-nutrient environment we find ourselves in today. But, we should be able to hold them accountable for manipulating food in a way that nearly makes eating it addictive, and for marketing to children, who are the real victims of the obesity epidemic.
For all these and other reasons (the recent scare with mercury, it’s “unnaturalness”) the public has been turning away from HFCS products. Even a $30 million multimedia campaign by the Corn Refiners Association has not stemmed the flow of public outcry. The rather misleading advertisements about the healthiness of HFCS probably do not bolster positive PR:
Besides that they make the opposition to HFCS look hopelessly stupid and slightly bitchy, the commercial is full of non-truths. That high-fructose corn syrup “made from corn” is a blatant attempt to disguise the actual healthiness of it. The process of getting and making HFCS completely obliterates any residue of the vitamins and minerals that were once in the corn. Gratefully, someone made an appropriate spoof on those commercials.
Add to that the new scientific evidence that high-fructose corn syrup really is a silent danger. From the press release:
Fructose Sets Table For Weight Gain Without Warning
Common sweetener found in many foods leads to leptin resistance and exacerbates obesity when paired with high-calorie, high-fat diet.
BETHESDA, Md. (Oct. 16, 2008) Eating too much fructose can induce leptin resistance, a condition that can easily lead to becoming overweight when combined with a high-fat, high-calorie diet, according to a new study with rats.
Although previous studies have shown that being leptin resistant can lead to rapid weight gain on a high-fat, high-calorie diet, this is the first study to show that leptin resistance can develop as a result of high fructose consumption. The study also showed for the first time that leptin resistance can develop silently, that is, with little indication that it is happening.
This study should be compared to the one presented by the Nestle Nutrition Institute which found no increase in obesity due to various sugars. However, that study was “designed to test the effects of HFCS and sucrose on the feeling of satiety, or fullness, in comparison with milk and a diet drink” and did not look at specific biological factors that accompanied the consumption of various sweetners. Granted, the leptin study used rats as the subjects, but 1) those studies are well-founded and 2) a study about obesity that looks at what’s actually happening inside the body makes a lot more sense than judging feelings of satiety.
***
We stand at a crossroads of health, science, and corporate interests. Corporate is listening to the public and advertising Pepsi Throwback. Science is conducting further studies on the matter. But, will the government heed the call for change and help alter the industrial corn landscape?
May 8, 2009
Tags: fast-food, Health, innovation, marketing, obesity, subsidies, sugar Posted in: Health, Science & Technology
5 Responses
I’m viewing the price chart and understand the need for a food category called ‘other’. But what in the world is FoodAway?
Ah, good catch. That is food away from home, meaning anything from fine dining to fast food. It’s amazingly steady. Maybe the lack of vegetables at fast food restaurants helps keep prices low. Any ideas?
Here is a link to the USDA’s Consumer Price Index (CPI) forecast for 2009:
http://www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/CPIFoodAndExpenditures/Data/cpiforecasts.htm
Water Water Everywhere, But Everyone’s Drinking Soda | Food Bubbles - May 13, 2009
[...] This is a second inquiry into the links between drinking soda and obesity rates. It follows High-Fructose Corn Syrup, Its Place in the Obesity Epidemic: [...]
Another danger about HFCS is that it also contains trace amounts of Mercury. This is clearly just an attempt top keep population numbers down and to keep the public stupid by Mercury poisonin through the use of eugenics.
Yes it sounds scary, but is actually quite true.
You can find more information about this and other related stories through Infowars.com
Clearly, companies would want to poison their customers because the best consumer is a dead consumer.
I have to agree with my go-to guru for food safety and nutrition, Marion Nestle, when she cautions that more tests are needed to verify the links/effects of HFCS and mercury. The little bit of data from these first studies do not warrant such hysteria (Not So Sweet: Missing Mercury and High Fructose Corn Syrup see pdf: http://www.healthobservatory.org/library.cfm?refid=105026).
Importantly, “…these studies did not compare the amounts of mercury found in HFCS to those typically found in foods that do not contain HFCS.” Adding, “My guess is that most foods contain low levels of mercury because mercury is prevalent in air, water, and soil, especially around coal-burning power plants.”
As it stands right now, the science does not warrant a distrust of HFCS because of mercury contamination. People that get rallied by fear-mongering about eugenics are probably already avoiding HFCS like it harbors the plague.
Level-headed, science-backed argumentation wins over more converts than pure paranoia.
You can find Marion Nestle’s whole comment at http://www.foodpolitics.com/2009/01/mercury-in-high-fructose-corn-syrup/
Leave a Reply