Healthy eating has had a sizable enemy for quite some time, according to a variety of news sources and public advocacy groups. It's called High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS). The onslaught against it has been so great that its producers have been attempting to rebrand it, corn sugar, in an attempt to avoid the bad reputation and increase profitability. Researchers at Princeton University released a paper indicating that Americans consume about sixty pounds per year, per person, of HFCS. They also highlight the concurrent rise in usage of HFCS and the rise in obesity rates. I have studied a wide variety of research from both sides of the argument. I will attempt to answer the question, is HFCS worse than sugar?
The FDA allows HFCS' use in just about everything. It is always found in very poor-quality foods with limited nutrition and can contain high levels of other negative substances, including fat, sodium, and other chemicals, even mercury. High-fructose corn syrup is a common sweetener in sodas and fruit-flavored drinks as well as salad dressings, breads, and breakfast cereals.
High Fructose Corn Syrup has some similarities to common table sugar as well as some differences. From a chemical standpoint, table sugar is half fructose and half glucose while HFCS carries a ratio of 55% to 45%, respectively. It is sweeter than sugar and carries a higher glycemic index (GI). One of the major issues with HFCS is that it is highly processed. None of the fructose in it is naturally occurring. It is added in significant quantities during the processing.
In a study completed three years ago, researchers gave subjects a diet that provided 25% of daily energy needs in sweetened beverages. There were three groups: glucose; fructose, and HFCS. Those volunteers in the latter two groups had notable increases in bad cholesterol in just two weeks while the control group, those receiving glucose, saw no negative changes.
The body absorbs table sugar and HFCS differently, but they both digest rapidly, leaving little difference in blood sugar levels. But because fructose is added to the glucose (as is typical in HFCS production) and not naturally bonded, it allows the fructose to mainline directly to the liver, causing a domino effect: lipogenesis, a fatty liver, and ultimately, diabetes. It is also believed by many scientists that HFCS does not stimulate insulin production, meaning your body will not know it's full and can lead to overeating.
Although research is still being conducted, it appears as if there is a notable difference when comparing the negative impacts between HFCS and sucrose. However, it should be noted that sugar is not a super food. It is only the better of the two. Both ingredients are tied to obesity, diabetes, and poor cardiovascular health, as well as a variety of other serious conditions.
Some people believe this evidence should be extrapolated to avoiding naturally-occurring sugars, like fruit. You've probably heard the saying, "fruit makes you fat". It does not appear to be true. Fruit does garner most of its nutrition from sugar, but the body appears to digest natural sugars dramatically differently than added sugar in a soda or other processed food. Naturally-occurring sugar in fruit is healthy and necessary for your body. Added sugar and artificial sweeteners are not.
The FDA allows HFCS' use in just about everything. It is always found in very poor-quality foods with limited nutrition and can contain high levels of other negative substances, including fat, sodium, and other chemicals, even mercury. High-fructose corn syrup is a common sweetener in sodas and fruit-flavored drinks as well as salad dressings, breads, and breakfast cereals.
High Fructose Corn Syrup has some similarities to common table sugar as well as some differences. From a chemical standpoint, table sugar is half fructose and half glucose while HFCS carries a ratio of 55% to 45%, respectively. It is sweeter than sugar and carries a higher glycemic index (GI). One of the major issues with HFCS is that it is highly processed. None of the fructose in it is naturally occurring. It is added in significant quantities during the processing.
In a study completed three years ago, researchers gave subjects a diet that provided 25% of daily energy needs in sweetened beverages. There were three groups: glucose; fructose, and HFCS. Those volunteers in the latter two groups had notable increases in bad cholesterol in just two weeks while the control group, those receiving glucose, saw no negative changes.
The body absorbs table sugar and HFCS differently, but they both digest rapidly, leaving little difference in blood sugar levels. But because fructose is added to the glucose (as is typical in HFCS production) and not naturally bonded, it allows the fructose to mainline directly to the liver, causing a domino effect: lipogenesis, a fatty liver, and ultimately, diabetes. It is also believed by many scientists that HFCS does not stimulate insulin production, meaning your body will not know it's full and can lead to overeating.
Although research is still being conducted, it appears as if there is a notable difference when comparing the negative impacts between HFCS and sucrose. However, it should be noted that sugar is not a super food. It is only the better of the two. Both ingredients are tied to obesity, diabetes, and poor cardiovascular health, as well as a variety of other serious conditions.
Some people believe this evidence should be extrapolated to avoiding naturally-occurring sugars, like fruit. You've probably heard the saying, "fruit makes you fat". It does not appear to be true. Fruit does garner most of its nutrition from sugar, but the body appears to digest natural sugars dramatically differently than added sugar in a soda or other processed food. Naturally-occurring sugar in fruit is healthy and necessary for your body. Added sugar and artificial sweeteners are not.
About the Author:
Please see my website for additional information at reading food label ingredients or my blog at what's bad about processed foods
