GREAT STUFF!
Posted on 05/30/2019 11:03:27 AM PDT by Red Badger
Many of us believe some kinds of sugar are somehow healthier.
High-fructose corn syrup has been a scapegoat for American obesity for the past decade and a half, so you might be surprised to learn that sugar and honey both have more fructose than high-fructose corn syrup.
Let’s break down the numbers here. Despite its misleading name, the most commonly used form of HFCS only has 42 percent fructose in comparison to table sugar’s 50 percent. Honey, the beloved natural sweetener, has 49 percent. Standard corn syrup doesn’t have any fructose because it’s 100 percent glucose, which explains how HFCS got its name: it was a kind of corn syrup with more fructose than normal.
This is true for every form of natural sugar you see advertised on organic food because sucrose, the molecule you know as sugar, is made up of one fructose molecule and one glucose molecule. Honey is a bit different, as its fructose and glucose molecules aren’t bound together, but instead are free-floating—much more like HFCS.
“People say you should use honey, but what’s interesting about honey is that because the sucrose is split apart [into glucose and fructose], you can fit a lot more of those molecules into a tablespoon,” says Andrea Giancoli, a registered dietician and consulting expert on dietary policy. “A tablespoon of honey has more calories than a tablespoon of table sugar.”
Now, it is true that your body metabolizes fructose differently from glucose, and products made with only fructose can cause metabolic issues as well as digestive problems. Pure fructose more directly impacts blood sugar, and eventually can lead to decreased insulin sensitivity and high triglycerides. But as a 2008 review of HFCS notes, those differences are irrelevant when talking about the health impacts of any of these commonly used sugars: “Sucrose, HFCS, invert sugar, honey, and many fruits and juices deliver the same sugars in the same ratios to the same tissues within the same time frame to the same metabolic pathways.”
Maybe the most confusing thing about the whole HFCS controversy is that there isn’t actually much scientific debate. Though there are still some questions as to how the body might process different types of sugar in distinct ways, the research thus far shows that the metabolic effects are exactly the same.
The confusion stems from a 2004 study that correlated HFCS consumption with obesity rates in the U.S., which at the time were fairly closely aligned. More and more food companies were using table sugar’s syrupy cousin because it has properties that make it ideal for making processed foods like soda and candy. Around the same time, Americans were growing fatter. The researchers were careful to note that, as always, correlation doesn’t imply causation. Perhaps the rise of HFCS coincided with an increase in processed food consumption or simply in total calories consumed, and the shift in sugar use had nothing to do with it.
But that didn’t stop other people, both scientists and journalists, from drawing much broader conclusions. Many parties took the paper to mean that there was something unique about HFCS that contributed to obesity. But the study never claimed to prove that, and subsequent research has shown exactly the opposite. As a 2014 review in the journal Diabetes Care put it: "the belief that sucrose is metabolized differently than HFCS is a myth. No study has shown any difference between the two when each is given [in the same caloric values], nor is there any difference in sweetness or caloric value."
In the time since that study, sugar consumption overall (including that of HFCS) has declined, even as obesity rates have continued to climb.
Of course, this is not to say that you should feel fine eating food with HFCS in it. Just remember that it’s the nature of those products—the fact that they’re often sugary drinks and processed foods—that make them bad for you. An equivalent product made with real cane sugar is just as bad. In fact, one review paper points out that soda’s acidity actually causes sucrose to split apart into its constituent molecules, meaning the can starts out containing common sugar but looks quite different, at the molecular level, by the time you drink it. The authors note, “It is a sweet irony that purists who must have their sucrose-sweetened sodas end up drinking a sweetener composition more similar to HFCS and have been doing so since the first cola was formulated in the 1880s.”
The message here is that you should absolutely avoid HFCS. But you should also be avoiding all forms of sugar equally. You should really only be getting six to nine teaspoons a day at a maximum, according to federal guidelines, but Americans consume close to 20 on average. If we all focused on sugar as one lump category rather than “natural” versus “unnatural,” we’d be better at making healthy choices. Even the sugar found in fruits is unhealthy if you eat too much of it. Go ahead and drizzle some honey on your toast because you like the taste—but don’t fool yourself into thinking the natural sources of sugar don't count as sweet treats.
Tags:
sugar high fructose corn syrup food Diet Health
I stopped eating canned anything. Peas are much better when purchased frozen in a bag.
GREAT STUFF!
Alcohol is the only form of sugar I haven’t given up. And I don’t intend to.
Yes. American-made Pepsi.
Yawn. So sick of all the chicken-little food nonsense.
it doesn’t come like that from the cane.
Did you ever try Vietnamese ‘mia’ (IIRC), sugarcane?
Short chunks of fresh sugarcane, peel it, cut a chunk off and chew. Chew until the sweetness is gone, spit the fibers.
Safe! no con chao(dog meat), or con ki(monkey).
Judy Collins, I always cook with honey:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=crUfbSrNMv8
I don’t drink a dozen sodas in a year, but when I do is with pure cane sugar.
It’s simply tastes much better
Way too much MSG.
Marco’s seems a lot milder in that regard.
Centauri Prime.
I’ll have to look into that.
Stevia tastes kind of funny to me. Maybe it being cut with honey would help me handle the taste.
Thanks for posting. The key is timing, I have learned, and I am so thankful for Richard and Rachael Heller because their book, The Carbohydrate Addicts Diet has helped me so much. I have lost possibly 50 pounds (40 sure) and kept it off two and a half years, without dieting and all the while eating all the foods I love. So thankful for Dr. Fung and his very helpful work on intermittent fasting.
I have no cravings. I am never hungry. I eat cholesterol and my cholesterol is perfect. I eat fat and I am not fat!
Never tried it in Nam. Had some here in the states though.
Processed sugar manufacture is interesting to watch but
enough to make me eat as little as possible.
High fructose corn syrup comes from corn. Corn that has had it’s DNA changed to resist Round-Up weed killer, which has been found to be carcinogenic and also alters your gut microbes. That is what makes it a dangerous substance.
Read all labels before you buy processed food. If you must buy processed food, that is.
Some of you speak the truth. Some of you are full of sh!t.
Eat less, do more.
Swerve or erythritol is a zero calorie, zero carb alternative. I actually use NOW brand erythritol because it comes from organic corn. Swerve package says no GMO though. It bakes like sugar, doesn’t have the slight aftertaste of stevia and is easy to find. It is made from corn alcohol, so it is not an artificial sweetener like Splenda.
Thank you for the tip.
There’s no funny taste.
Properly extracted Stevia has a great taste. But this stuff tastes just like honey with half the calories.
Their sauce is also loaded with sugar.
In the last few years I've noticed that a lot of food has a lot of sugar, salt or both. I guess the thinking is that sugar and salt equals flavor and more is better.
Yes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.