Page 1 of 1

HFCS

Posted: Wed Mar 24, 2010 6:51 pm
by teflor the ranger
http://www.princeton.edu/main/news/arch ... /91/22K07/
I think some of you guys will appreciate this.

Re: HFCS

Posted: Wed Mar 24, 2010 7:09 pm
by Sarvis
For those with Teffie on ignore, it's actually a good article on a Princeton study showing High Fructose Corn Syrup contributes to obesity.

Re: HFCS

Posted: Wed Mar 24, 2010 8:57 pm
by kiryan
Interesting, seems to indicate a pretty substantial relationship.

Re: HFCS

Posted: Wed Mar 24, 2010 9:03 pm
by Sarvis
kiryan wrote:Interesting, seems to indicate a pretty substantial relationship.


Don't worry, it's science so you don't have to care.

Re: HFCS

Posted: Wed Mar 24, 2010 10:43 pm
by kiryan
good thing science doesn't apply to health care reform.

Re: HFCS

Posted: Thu Mar 25, 2010 12:21 am
by teflor the ranger
Sarvis wrote:For those with Teffie on ignore, it's actually a good article on a Princeton study showing High Fructose Corn Syrup contributes to obesity.

Feel free to repost the link Sarvis. I'm not asking that anyone turn off the ignore for even a minute! Never take a man's crutch, I say!

In other news, I wish they would have tested this on isolated fructose as well. I want to know exactly what it is about HFCS that gets such negative press.

Re: HFCS

Posted: Thu Apr 01, 2010 10:23 pm
by teflor the ranger
It turns out the Princeton researchers were feeding the lab rats the human equivalent of 0.75 kg of sweetener a day, or about 1.65 pounds of sugar. That would cause immediate and catastrophic health conditions for humans no matter what kind of sweetener was used. That could limit the implications of this study, but I still find it interesting in terms of rats that they could get significantly different results from different sweetener types.

Re: HFCS

Posted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 3:36 pm
by Tanras
stop the presses. calories lead to obesity?

Re: HFCS

Posted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 3:40 pm
by Sarvis
"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."

Re: HFCS

Posted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 4:35 pm
by kiryan
I think the most educational part of the article talks about sugar as a combination of fructose and glucose. Then it demonstrates that rats eating diets high in frutcose gained more weight than rats eating the same calories in glucose. It suggests that glucose may be more likely to be transformed into energy while frutcose may be more likely to be transformed into fat.

I made the switch to primarily drinking the mountain dew "throwback" last year, a promotional product based on retro formulas and cans and is made with real sugar. I actually do notice a difference when I run out of my stash and switch back to regular mountain dew. I actually feel slightly healthier and I believe slightly more energetic... Its very slight if its there and could definitely be placebo, but I didn't start drinking it because I thought it might be healthier, I like the taste of mountain dew from the 80s better than today and always have.

Re: HFCS

Posted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 4:48 pm
by Corth
FYI - Coke that is sweetened with sugar instead of HFCS is available now during the Passover holiday in areas with dense Jewish populations. Look for 2 liter bottles with yellow caps that have hebrew lettering on it. I just stocked up on a few bottles. You can definitely perceive a taste difference.. you get a rich sugar aftertaste in place of the sticky corn syrup flavor. It's weird at first but it grows on you - and probably a bit healthier than normal.

Re: HFCS

Posted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 4:51 pm
by Sarvis
I tend to stick with calorie-free, cancer causing chemicals these days, but I think Pepsi Throwback has been consistently available since they first came out with it. A couple of my coworkers always seem to have some...

Re: HFCS

Posted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 5:38 pm
by kiryan
echo on hating that sticky corn syrup taste...

Alta bought me 100, 12 packs of the throwback last time she found it. Its a different can than the first set of throwbacks I bought, the first set had the can from the 80s, this can is white and has a hillbilly on it so I assume its older (from before they rebranded it as a hip drink... you know when it was "doing the country cool, mountain dew" and advertised on teh dukes of hazzard instead of at the X games?)

Re: HFCS

Posted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 6:24 pm
by Tanras
Sarvis wrote:"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."


Yeah, I didn't actually read it :)

calories = more weight. True of sugar. . .I guess a little more true of high fructose corn syrup. People should eat less and jog more.

Re: HFCS

Posted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 6:25 pm
by Todrael
Jones Soda uses real cane sugar, though it's a bit more expensive, and of course not the same taste as the major brands.

Re: HFCS

Posted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 6:25 pm
by Tanras
Todrael wrote:Jones Soda uses real cane sugar, though it's a bit more expensive, and of course not the same taste as the major brands.


And also bankrupt and being sold to the highest bidder right now (not very high numbers I might add)

ps. hi Tod - go liches

Re: HFCS

Posted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 6:35 pm
by Corth
I tried all of the Jones soda flavors. I wanted to like it, but it didn't work.

Also I generally dislike pepsi. But I didn't try the throwback. Will give it a shot if I see it.

Re: HFCS

Posted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 6:36 pm
by Sarvis
Tanras wrote:
Sarvis wrote:"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."


Yeah, I didn't actually read it :)

calories = more weight. True of sugar. . .I guess a little more true of high fructose corn syrup. People should eat less and jog more.



Potentially you could calculate the right number of calories, eat within the weight loss range and still gain weight because of how HFCS is processed differently. It's not quite as simple as calories in vs. calories out.

Re: HFCS

Posted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 6:39 pm
by Corth
Oh.. also, if you are ever in Mexico, generally their sodas use cane sugar. Corn and corn products are more expensive there because of the demand for tortillas. So it's actually cheaper for them to use sugar in their soda.

Re: HFCS

Posted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 7:24 pm
by Ragorn
Throwback soda is awesome. I drink almost exclusively diet soda because I can't stand the HFCS taste, but even throwback Mt. Dew was fantastic.

Re: HFCS

Posted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 7:45 pm
by kiryan
Sarvis, the reason we use corn syrup in the USA is because of the farm subsidies for corn and the import taxes on sugar cane. Its protectionism of the US corn industry and the US sugar industry (which realyl doesn't exist, but there are some plantations).

Also, the article theorizes that frutcose may be naturally more inclined to become fat than glucose based on the statistical evidence, the science is not there to really have a serious discussion about frutcose metaboliziation vs glucose... so be careful. They are seeing something, but they don't know really have any clear idea on why. I think it specifically mentioned that the difference in the diets was like 55%/45% frutcose/glucose vs 45%/55% frutcose/glucose so in both situations the rats were getting both sugars.

I look forward to more scientific research and statistical studies on this. I never have liked corn syrup or any of the artificial sweetners. diet soda seriously makes me sick and leaves a chalky taste in my mouth.

Re: HFCS

Posted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 8:06 pm
by avak
kiryan wrote:Sarvis, the reason we use corn syrup in the USA is because of the farm subsidies for corn and the import taxes on sugar cane. Its protectionism of the US corn industry and the US sugar industry (which realyl doesn't exist, but there are some plantations).

You must be talking about strictly sugarcane because the US is one of the top global producers of sugar....both natural and hfcs

Re: HFCS

Posted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 8:21 pm
by kiryan
I think specifically sugar cane which as I understand to basically be sugar. I don't consider HFC as "sugar" despite it being the most common sweetener.

I thought the caribean countries were the dominant suppliers of sugar cane and produce it so cheap and abundantly that there could be no american sugar cane industry without the protectionist policies... but I really don't know a lot about htis, just the occasional article every 2 or 3 years. I'm almost positive HFC dwarfs sugar cane by many orders of magnitude in terms of production and use.

Re: HFCS

Posted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 8:26 pm
by avak
Yeah, I think you are right about that. You are just forgetting sugar beet production; which is a pretty substantial source of 'natural' sugar.

Re: HFCS

Posted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 9:00 pm
by kiryan
I've heard of sugar beets, but never really read anything about them. Didn't realize they were a source of sugar.

Re: HFCS

Posted: Fri Apr 02, 2010 9:50 pm
by Adriorn Darkcloak
Sugar beets were the USA's response to the massive sugar cane production in the Antilles and Americas in the late 1890s and beyond. It proved to be good competition.

Re: HFCS

Posted: Sat Apr 03, 2010 12:39 pm
by Todrael
Tanaras wrote:[Jones soda is] also bankrupt and being sold to the highest bidder right now (not very high numbers I might add)

Damn :(

We produce too much (heavily subsidized) corn. They've had a few segments on the Colbert Report recently about cat litter made entirely from corn and baby diapers made from corn.

Re: HFCS

Posted: Sat Apr 03, 2010 5:42 pm
by teflor the ranger
Corth wrote:FYI - Coke that is sweetened with sugar instead of HFCS is available now during the Passover holiday in areas with dense Jewish populations. Look for 2 liter bottles with yellow caps that have hebrew lettering on it. I just stocked up on a few bottles. You can definitely perceive a taste difference.. you get a rich sugar aftertaste in place of the sticky corn syrup flavor. It's weird at first but it grows on you - and probably a bit healthier than normal.

I've also spotted imported mexican coke in glass bottles that utilize sugar instead of corn syrup at Costco for those of you that have them.

Re: HFCS

Posted: Sun Apr 04, 2010 1:58 am
by Corth
I heard about the Mexican coke at costco too.. but also that it's pretty expensive. Do you recall what it sold for?

Re: HFCS

Posted: Sun Apr 04, 2010 5:25 am
by teflor the ranger
Something in the area of $0.75 per 12 ounce bottle. But I considered that a good thing on a couple levels... I only had one every couple of days and the novelty of drinking out of a glass bottle was somewhat entertaining.

Re: HFCS

Posted: Tue Apr 06, 2010 4:59 am
by teflor the ranger
Sarvis wrote:Potentially you could calculate the right number of calories, eat within the weight loss range and still gain weight because of how HFCS is processed differently. It's not quite as simple as calories in vs. calories out.

Sorry, where did you pull this bullshit out of? Because that wasn't in the study.

Re: HFCS

Posted: Tue Apr 06, 2010 3:32 pm
by kiryan
The premise of his observation is in the study, the actual finding/application he makes might be creative.

The coke bottles were too expensive for my tastes. I do like a glass bottle once in a while. The throwback is within a couple of pennies per can of the alternative.