No, just high fructose corn syrup (hfcs). This was somewhat of a tongue-in-cheek comment, as I have seen no definitive medical studies showing that hfcs is a health issue, but anecdotal evidence has been presented asserting that the growth in the use of hfcs (since it was introduced in the 1970s) ties closely with the growth of obesity in the US.
I think that in time there will be peer-reviewed articles demonstrating the correlation, and that at that time they will be pulled off the market amid class action lawsuits brought against the manufacturers/distributors involved. However, that time is not today.
That's because there's no legitimate research showing HFCS is a health issue. I've always wondered how it's possible HFCS can be bad for you while and sugar (sucrose) isn't since they're both made up of the same two ingredients (glucose and fructose) in almost identical proportions. If one is bad for you then the other has to be just as bad. No way around it.
but anecdotal evidence has been presented asserting that the growth in the use of hfcs (since it was introduced in the 1970s) ties closely with the growth of obesity in the US.
I saw a study once that showed a direct correlation between the amount of rainfall in Fiji and the price of peanuts in Georgia. Just goes to show that correlations may be indicative but they don't prove a thing. Any research showing HFCS as being harmful, while sugar is not, has been thoroughly disproved. The growth in the rate of obesity is caused by people consuming more calories than they burn. England and Mexico are experiencing the same problems with obesity that we are yet they use very little HFCS in their diets.
..and that at that time they will be pulled off the market amid class action lawsuits brought against the manufacturers/distributors involved
Anything is possible when people stop caring about the truth. This article is a great example of that occurring. It's unfortunate we're so willing to give up our freedom in the name of junk science.