Yeah, the commercial completely ignores the political and economic shenanigans behind HFCS. I do agree it doesn't taste as good as sugarcane, and i do have some mild suspicions about it being less healthy. However, the real issue for me is economic. I despise the fact that it is so artificially propped up by my taxes and import controls. That is not a free market.

HFCS leads to increased triglyceride levels compared to sucrose. This causes diabetes.

Besides, drinks with real sugar in them taste better.

In reply to this comment by Structure:
Is that some Red Drink she's having?

HFCS-55 and HFCS-42 are "made from corn" but so are some forms of plastic.

And "doesn't contain any artificial ingredients" is hilarious. It's made using a genetically modified enzyme and requires a huge amount of processing that refines it down to the point it no longer has anything to do with corn.
Due to the FDA having no definition of "natural", a product would have to be made of 100% ground ghosts to stop being natural. At least we can be assured it contains no supernatural ingredients.
I know, I hate their lies. "natural," thanks for the laugh!

>> ^rychan:
Don't post "seem to remember"; post clinical trials, or else it's just FUD.


Here ya go. It even cites sources.

I just watched a show a week or so ago, sorry but I don't remember what the show was, it was either Discover Channel, History Channel or PBS. It had segment on obesity, and they showed a study done with mice. The mice were given equal amounts of food, some were containing sugar, others HFCS. The mice that received food with HFCS were very fat while the mice that received sugar looked like normal mice.

Is that some Red Drink she's having?

HFCS-55 and HFCS-42 are "made from corn" but so are some forms of plastic.

And "doesn't contain any artificial ingredients" is hilarious. It's made using a genetically modified enzyme and requires a huge amount of processing that refines it down to the point it no longer has anything to do with corn.
Due to the FDA having no definition of "natural", a product would have to be made of 100% ground ghosts to stop being natural. At least we can be assured it contains no supernatural ingredients.

agreed. thanks for the info. have you read The Fluoride Deception, by Christopher Bryson " He lays out the whole story on fluoride in great detail (especially its links to the manhattan project)

qruel

In reply to this comment by marinara:
It's not about freaks like me calling foul.
It's really about cash money.

Floride is big business and we've invested in the myth of floride ever since the Manhattan project. Why the manhattan project? Well, besides floride being a byproduct of aluminum smelting, not to mention teflon/and florocarbons(refrigeration medium) which are now: HCFCs or HFCs. Floride was also a large byproduct of uranium enrichment.

I challenge anyone to find a website which says: "floride is safe." It's a moot point.

It's not about freaks like me calling foul.
It's really about cash money.

Fluoride is big business and we've invested in the myth of Fluoride ever since the Manhattan project. Why the manhattan project? Well, besides Fluoride being a byproduct of aluminum smelting, not to mention teflon/and florocarbons(refrigeration medium) which are now: HCFCs or HFCs. Fluoride was also a large byproduct of uranium enrichment.

I challenge anyone to find a website which says: "Fluoride is safe." It's a moot point.

The real problem is high fructose corn syrup (HFCS). It's new like fast food places (introduced in the 80's) but far more difficult to avoid. Almost all drinks consist of water, HFCS, and a flavoring chemical. Most of the "healthy all natural fruit juice drinks" advertised have "Contains 10% juice" (or sometimes even 0% juice) written in tiny writing on the back.

Unhealthy drinks and food are also much cheaper then the high priced real stuff so many poor people can't afford to live healthy (especially when you work 2 low wage jobs and don't have time or energy to cook your own meals).

umm... aren't most "canned air" bottles like that difluoroethane, or similar HFCs? I've never seen a can like that of CO2...

while I don't doubt the heat/cold change can get the dent out, I would worry about the paint.

"Simple sugars include sucrose, fructose, glucose, galactose, maltose, lactose and mannose."

Disaccharides
sucrose = glucose + fructose
lactose = glucose + galactose
maltose = glucose + glucose

Simple Carbohydrate Sources
--------------------------
Sucrose - Table sugar, brown sugar, confectioners sugar, raw sugar and turbinado
Glucose - Dextrose, corn syrup and glucose syrup or tablets
Fructose – Honey, fruits and vegetables
Lactose - Milk products
Maltose, Dextrose – Cereals, flour and many baked goods
Alcohol Sugars - Sorbitol, mannitol, xybitol

Complex Carbohydrate Sources
-------------------------
Insoluble Fiber - Wheat bran, cabbage, beets, carrots, brussel sprouts, turnips, cauliflower and apple skin (pectin)
Soluble Fiber -: oat bran, oats, legumes (beans), citrus fruits, strawberries, apple pulp, psyllium, rice bran and barley
Starches - Flour, bread, rice, corn, oats, barley, potatoes, carrots, corn, legumes, fruits and vegetables.


HFCS is getting a bad name. You'll start seeing P&G and our chemical manufactured food overlords switching to other things, like galactose.

Diabetes is the fifth deadliest disease in the United States. High blood sugar is among the most costly health problems in America. Health care and other costs directly related to diabetes treatment, and the cost of lost productivity, are $98 billion annually. Forget Big Tabacco, Big Sugar will be the next target for class actions

Yes, sucrose is di-saccharide, but is chemically bonded glucose and fructose. HFCS is a chemical product of a vat of some corn byproduct and enzymes to either convert glucose, or strip apart natural sucrose. But HFCS just means high fructose content and it is a liquid, so we're comparing dry sugar by weight (and it absorbs moisture) to liquid HFCS..

Wikipedia:

Common commercial grades of high fructose corn syrup include fructose contents of 42%, 55%, or 90%. The 55% grade is most commonly used in soft drinks and equivalent to caster sugar.

Unlike sucrose, HFCS consists of a mixture of glucose and fructose, which doesn't require an enzymatic step to break it down before absorption in the intestine.

Correct me if I'm wrong. Sucrose is basically glucose and fructose. If in the video, the 39g of sucrose were equal to aprox. 8 teaspoons, then the amount of HFCS will be between 12 and 15 teaspoons in a 12 oz can?

Sorry for downvote. But I'm sick of the orwellian adverts. Coca-Cola is so evil. They take a popular video game, and steal it's imagery for their message, and then make it viral ad, then make some bulls&@t happy-save-the-world song..

Is Coca-Cola giving a little bit of love? How's their selling Atlanta municipal water at $1 a 20oz bottle working? You know how much gasoline is wasted shipping freaking water from one city to another cities grocery stores? Let alone their HFCS. Sorry, but f@#k Coke.

I used to be skeptical, but I'm starting to buy into the HFCS line of argument. Exercise is key, but I'm hardly convinced that levels of caloric intake vs. exercise have changed that dramatically in the time period in question. Eat right is a lot harder when the foods available have been engineered to make them fundamentally problematic.