High Fructose Corn Syrup is perfectly healthy

This commercial parody is pretty funny on its own, but it's hilarious if you've seen the original commercial:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gl9vZYj-aJ4
vaire2ubesays...

The "Your body can't tell the difference" ad for corn sugar reminds me of the "I'm not a witch" ad...

Why bother bringing it up if there is no merit, etc...

Plus its been proven HFCS "corn sugar" is bad for you, and is just used because its a cheap thickening agent which is why you find it in products that don't even need it.

It's about money over your health, but "your body can't tell the difference".


. .. "in high-fructose corn syrup, the fructose molecules in the sweetener are free and unbound, ready for absorption and utilization. In contrast, every fructose molecule in sucrose that comes from cane sugar or beet sugar is bound to a corresponding glucose molecule and must go through an extra metabolic step before it can be utilized."

Source: http://www.princeton.edu/main/news/archive/S26/91/22K07/"

A Princeton University research team has demonstrated that all sweeteners are not equal when it comes to weight gain: Rats with access to high-fructose corn syrup gained significantly more weight than those with access to table sugar, even when their overall caloric intake was the same.

In addition to causing significant weight gain in lab animals, long-term consumption of high-fructose corn syrup also led to abnormal increases in body fat, especially in the abdomen, and a rise in circulating blood fats called triglycerides. The researchers say the work sheds light on the factors contributing to obesity trends in the United States."



Go to http://www.cornsugar.com and let them know you dont believe their ad.


Sugar is BETTER for you than "Corn Sugar", and always in moderation.

notarobotsays...

Fructose is linked to heart disease, glucose is not.

This is due to the two different types of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) formed in the blood as the body metabolizes sugars. LDL formed by metabolizing glucose is large and buoyant, thus floating harmlessly through the blood. LDL formed by metabolizing fructose is smaller and denser, and more likely to get caught in the walls of the arteries, causing plaque buildup and leads to heart disease.

The only proper treatment for fructose intake is oddly the one thing abundant in all natural sources of the toxin: fibre.

http://videosift.com/video/Sugar-The-Bitter-Truth

blankfistsays...

Parody of this very first ad:


peggedbeasays...

hey, this is something my dude and i were wondering about while we were in the netherlands last year...

in the US most sodas are made with hfcs, but in europe they mostly use real sugar... so we were reading all the soda cans there and none of them listed the sodium content but here they always list the sodium content and it's pretty well known that sodas are high in sodium...

so do they not put the sodium in sodas in europe? or do they just not have to list the sodium content on the nutrition labels?

does the sodium content have something to do with the hfcs content? or are they just adding it to our sodas over here to make us thirstier so we'll drink more soda?

dagsays...

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

I thought that sodium was only high in diet soda.

BTW, cane sugar is also used in soft drinks here in Australia - mainly because we have lots of cane farmers and few corn farmers - so it's cheap. It would probably be cheaper in the US today if there weren't massive government subsidies to corn farmers.

>> ^peggedbea:

hey, this is something my dude and i were wondering about while we were in the netherlands last year...
in the US most sodas are made with hfcs, but in europe they mostly use real sugar... so we were reading all the soda cans there and none of them listed the sodium content but here they always list the sodium content and it's pretty well known that sodas are high in sodium...
so do they not put the sodium in sodas in europe? or do they just not have to list the sodium content on the nutrition labels?
does the sodium content have something to do with the hfcs content? or are they just adding it to our sodas over here to make us thirstier so we'll drink more soda?

peggedbeasays...

nope, we didn't even think to look at diet drinks, but in regular US coca cola, pepsi and dr. pepper there's about 35mg (or micrograms, maybe. been a while and i don't keep soda in the house)... dr. pepper may be a little higher, i think grape soda was a little lower.

they don't list the values on the cans in the netherlands, i was just wondering if thats because they just dont have to or because they don't put sodium in their drinks. >> ^dag:

I thought that sodium was only high in diet soda.
BTW, cane sugar is also used in soft drinks here in Australia - mainly because we have lots of cane farmers and few corn farmers - so it's cheap. It would probably be cheaper in the US today if there weren't massive government subsidies to corn farmers.
>> ^peggedbea:
hey, this is something my dude and i were wondering about while we were in the netherlands last year...
in the US most sodas are made with hfcs, but in europe they mostly use real sugar... so we were reading all the soda cans there and none of them listed the sodium content but here they always list the sodium content and it's pretty well known that sodas are high in sodium...
so do they not put the sodium in sodas in europe? or do they just not have to list the sodium content on the nutrition labels?
does the sodium content have something to do with the hfcs content? or are they just adding it to our sodas over here to make us thirstier so we'll drink more soda?


Paybacksays...

>> ^peggedbea:
they don't list the values on the cans in the netherlands, i was just wondering if thats because they just dont have to or because they don't put sodium in their drinks.


Maybe the Dutch just figured out sugar-inundated drinks are bad for you, all by themselves, without their government's intervention.

Ryjkyjsays...

>> ^peggedbea:

hey, this is something my dude and i were wondering about while we were in the netherlands last year...
in the US most sodas are made with hfcs, but in europe they mostly use real sugar... so we were reading all the soda cans there and none of them listed the sodium content but here they always list the sodium content and it's pretty well known that sodas are high in sodium...
so do they not put the sodium in sodas in europe? or do they just not have to list the sodium content on the nutrition labels?
does the sodium content have something to do with the hfcs content? or are they just adding it to our sodas over here to make us thirstier so we'll drink more soda?


I'm doing a report on salt right now (seriously) and I think we can be pretty sure that an overabundance of sodium in your diet is a bad thing. But don't forget that sodium chloride is what makes shit taste good. Sweet things are always better with a little bit of salt to set them off. I'm pretty sure that sodium is added to pretty much any soda you can buy, including the ones in Europe. The content is higher in diet soda but it's there in regular soda as well. One thing you can be sure of: an excess of sugar in any form is WAY worse for you than an excess of sodium.

Ekleksays...

@peggedbea
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-fructose_corn_syrup
"In the U.S., HFCS is among the sweeteners that have primarily replaced sucrose (table sugar) in the food industry. Factors for this include governmental production quotas of domestic sugar, subsidies of U.S. corn, and an import tariff on foreign sugar; all of which combine to raise the price of sucrose to levels above those of the rest of the world, making HFCS less costly for many sweetener applications."
So there are politico-economical reasons sodas in Europe contain beet sugar.

rychansays...

>> ^vaire2ube:

The "Your body can't tell the difference" ad for corn sugar reminds me of the "I'm not a witch" ad...
Why bother bringing it up if there is no merit, etc...
Plus its been proven HFCS "corn sugar" is bad for you, and is just used because its a cheap thickening agent which is why you find it in products that don't even need it.
It's about money over your health, but "your body can't tell the difference".

. .. "in high-fructose corn syrup, the fructose molecules in the sweetener are free and unbound, ready for absorption and utilization. In contrast, every fructose molecule in sucrose that comes from cane sugar or beet sugar is bound to a corresponding glucose molecule and must go through an extra metabolic step before it can be utilized."
Source: http://www.princeton.edu/main/news/archive/S26/91/22K07/"
A Princeton University research team has demonstrated that all sweeteners are not equal when it comes to weight gain: Rats with access to high-fructose corn syrup gained significantly more weight than those with access to table sugar, even when their overall caloric intake was the same.
In addition to causing significant weight gain in lab animals, long-term consumption of high-fructose corn syrup also led to abnormal increases in body fat, especially in the abdomen, and a rise in circulating blood fats called triglycerides. The researchers say the work sheds light on the factors contributing to obesity trends in the United States."

Go to http://www.cornsugar.com and let them know you dont believe their ad.

Sugar is BETTER for you than "Corn Sugar", and always in moderation.


There is not a scientific consensus about whether HFCS is worse than cane sugar. That Priceton paper is making big waves, but there are contrary viewpoints.

Reddit's AskScience forum had this discussion, which involves several relevant scientists:
http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/djo8a/whats_the_deal_with_hfcs_vs_real_sugar/

vaire2ubesays...

indeed.

here is another way to consider the situation...


Q) Why Use Corn Sugar?
A) It's cheaper

Q) Do for-profit corporations exist for profit?
A) Yes

Q) If a corporation was a person, would they be a sociopath?
A) Yes.

now ask,

Should we trust the push for a cheaper ingredient which increases profits, with the cessation of such an ingredient not being as profitable, because we're told be the researchers paid for by the corporations that "our body can't tell the difference?" ... or should we be rightfully suspect.

i dont think the jury is still out, i think there is more data to come that will prove the obvious...

cane juice as a sweetener is my preference

vaire2ubesays...

"Researchers at the Harvard School of Public Health '...have re-created the mysterious Colony Collapse Disorder in several honeybee hives simply by giving them small doses of a popular pesticide, imidacloprid.' This follows recently-reported studies also linked the disorder to neonicotinoid pesticides. What is really interesting is the link to when the disorder started appearing, 2006. 'That mechanism? High-fructose corn syrup. Many bee-keepers have turned to high-fructose corn syrup to feed their bees, which the researchers say did not imperil bees until U.S. corn began to be sprayed with imidacloprid in 2004-2005. A year later was the first outbreak of Colony Collapse Disorder.'"

http://science.slashdot.org/story/12/04/07/167230/colony-collapse-disorder-linked-to-pesticide-high-fructose-corn-syrup

So I guess it wasn't exactly in anyones best interest to have this substance, except for the bottom line. Clear example of greed trumping sanity. We are all in danger when stuff like this is allowed to happen, but we fight the turrrists!

Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists




notify when someone comments
X

This website uses cookies.

This website uses cookies to improve user experience. By using this website you consent to all cookies in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

I agree
  
Learn More