Pro high fructose corn syrup TV ads

9-08-2008 @10:38PM sheila said... Dr. Weil has a great explanation about how HFCS affects the body and the planet.


A Answer (Published 9/1/2008)

High fructose corn syrup (HFCS) is definitely bad for you. It is also bad for the planet, and I believe that it is a major driver of the obesity epidemic, despite the position taken in June 2008 by the American Medical Association. The AMA concluded that HFCS isn't any worse than other caloric sweeteners and that there is "insufficient evidence" to restrict its use or require a warning label on products that contain it.

Related Weil Products
Dr. Weil on Healthy Aging for Healthy Eating - Dr. Weil on Healthy Aging for Nutrition - Looking for easy, healthy ways to eat? The Dr. Weil on Healthy Aging online guide has an exclusive version of Dr. Weil's Anti-Inflammatory Food Pyramid, hundreds of recipes, eating guides, and more. Don't miss out - join today and get 14 days free!
HFCS is a relatively recent invention for sweetening soft drinks, juices and foods - the production process was developed in Japan in the late 1960s, and the new sweetener entered the American food system in the early 1970s. It tastes sweeter than regular corn syrup, blends well with other foods, maintains a longer shelf life and is cheaper. You'll also find it in processed foods ranging from salad dressings and ketchup, to jams, jellies, ice cream and many others - even bread. HFCS contains 14-percent fructose, much more than regular corn syrup. I'm concerned that it has disruptive effects on metabolism, because the body doesn't utilize fructose well, and humans have never before consumed it in such quantity.

Of course, HFCS isn't solely to blame for the obesity epidemic. The AMA correctly pointed out that as consumption of HFCS rose, Americans were also consuming more calories (of all kinds) and becoming less active. All told, however, consumption of HFCS in the United States increased by more than 1,000 percent between 1970 and 1990, and a study published in the April 2004 issue of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, concluded that Americans over the age of two consume more than 300 calories daily from caloric sweeteners, one-sixth of their average daily calories. HCFS may also promote weight gain because it behaves in the body more like fat than glucose, the blood sugar derived from other sweet foods. Some evidence suggests that fructose may disturb liver function, and unlike glucose, doesn't appear to trigger the process by which the body tells us it is full. What's more, in men (not in women) HFCS appears to elevate triglycerides, blood fats that increase the risk of heart disease.

advertisement

As far as HFCS being "natural," this was a recent FDA decision based on whether or not HFCS constituents come into contact with a synthetic fixing agent during manufacturing. If not, the FDA said, products containing HFCS can be labeled "natural." The other side of this argument, advanced by the sugar industry and the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a consumer group, is that HFCS can't be considered "natural" because its chemical bonds are broken and rearranged during manufacturing. I don't much care if it's called natural or not; it's not good for us.

And then there's the environmental impact, a serious concern. Journalist and agriculture industry critic Michael Pollen points out that growing all the corn needed for HFCS depletes soil nutrients, which increases the need for pesticides and fertilizer. In March 2008, the Washington Post quoted Pollan as saying that a dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico where "virtually nothing will live" has been starved of oxygen by the fertilizer runoff coming down the Mississippi from the corn belt. Pollan also notes that federal corn subsidies keep prices of products containing HFCS low, and that - plus the sweetness - feeds the public demand for these foods.

Giving up products containing HFCS will benefit your health, help control your weight, and if enough people get the message, protect the planet as well.

Andrew Weil, M.D.


Reply

9-08-2008 @11:50PM Bernie B said... It's getting so that you have to ask "What doesn't have HFCS in it anymore"? It's actually really scary just how much HFCS has penetrated into everything. Gordon Food Service may as well have a banner saying "Sponsored by HFCS".
Reply

9-09-2008 @12:51PM Jason21 said... In the "Ask the Doctors" column in the newsaper recently, two doctors stated that studies involving HFCS showed HFCS caused an increase (or failed to cause a decrease, depending on how you look at it)of a hormone which causes you to think you are not full and another hormone which causes you to think you are hungry. So it's a double whammy.

Also, see this excerpt from an article in the SF Chronicle:

"Other studies by researchers at UC Davis and the University of Michigan have shown that consuming fructose, which is more readily converted to fat by the liver, increases the levels of fat in the bloodstream in the form of triglycerides.

And unlike other types of carbohydrate made up of glucose, fructose does not stimulate the pancreas to produce insulin. Peter Havel, a nutrition researcher at UC Davis who studies the metabolic effects of fructose, has also shown that fructose fails to increase the production of leptin, a hormone produced by the body's fat cells.

Both insulin and leptin act as signals to the brain to turn down the appetite and control body weight. And in another metabolic twist, Havel's research shows that fructose does not appear to suppress the production of ghrelin, a hormone that increases hunger and appetite.



Reply

9-09-2008 @2:16PM Angela Bennett said... The thing no one in this thread has addressed is the main reason HFCS is BAD is that it's mostly produced from GENETICALLY ENHANCED corn (see http://www.westonaprice.org/motherlinda/cornsyrup.html for some interesting information about the actual process).

If all the ADD, ADHD, autistic, and diabetic children being born in the United States today (yes, the United States) are not a direct result of all the genetically altered food items and components thereof, I'll be greatly surprised...
Reply

9-10-2008 @5:11PM Chris said... I'm trying to minimize highly processed foods in my diet, a la Michael Pollan. I'm not a zealot about it, and I eat plennnnty of stuff that's bad for me.

That said, this campaign is offensive because it so blatantly misrepresents anyone who might think twice about HFCS as ill-informed, judgmental, herd-following jerks.

THE CRA didn't just create a campaign to combat negative perceptions about HFCS. They created ads to combat the people who think negatively about HFCS. It's an ugly tactic, and it will probably, sadly, work.

More thoughts at:
http://notchweiner.com
Reply

9-11-2008 @1:30PM paunchiness said... This is incredible. I posted some of the corn refiners tv commercials on my site and now I’m running google ads for them? Not on purpose of course.

http://www.paunchiness.com/2008-09-high-fructose-corn-syrup-is-bad-for-you/
Reply

9-11-2008 @4:27PM wlsgini said... I was shocked to see this ad. I come from a long family line (as in 4 generations) of Type 2 diabetics. About 5 years ago I read an article about HFCS and sat fats and their link to type 2 diabetes and went on a quest to eliminate both from my diet. I was not easy. I had to start baking my own bread, making my own salad dressing, etc. My roommate at the time thought I was nuts. Interestingly enough 5 years later I am still diabetes free and the roommate (with no family history of the problem) is now a type 2 diabetic and is taking meds to regulate his blood sugar, cholesterol, and blood pressure. I realize this is only anecdotal information. However, my physician and every nutritionist I have ever known all agree that HFCS is NOT a natural product; it causes the pancreas to hyper-produce insulin (thereby leading to insulin resistance) and is in general something to be avoided. Perhaps the ad agency who thought of this is the same one that tired telling us that cigarettes are not addictive.
Reply

9-15-2008 @10:29PM Hala said... Frutcose, is like, and just as bad for you as sugar. It increases stomach acidity, it's food to all the wrong bacteria and yeasts in the stomach, and it has none of the anti-oxidants, amino acids, or minerals the body needs. Those same yeasts cause women several disorders. D-mannose on the other hand nourishes the beneficial bacteria in the stomach and allows it to out-compete the harmful ones. The ad sneaks in the words "it's ok in moderation", but that exactly it, fructose is included, and not in moderation, in too many products. Chugging fructose syrop infused juice has nothing to do with moderation!
Reply

9-16-2008 @2:59PM Cheryl said... UGH, I didn't know whether to laugh or scream when I saw the commercials. Like Splenda, HFCS is a chemical! It's not even made from healthy corn but a chemicaly altered and sprayed non-corn. I feel as if 'The Powers that be' think we are stupid and lazy so we'll sit in front of our leader the T.V. and believe whatever it tells us ... let's hope we are not! It's very simple, eat what God put on the earth as close to natural as this earth allows. EASY.
Reply

9-16-2008 @2:24PM Mesakel said... The woman in the Popsicle ad spoke the truth: It's OK IN MODERATION (as with anything short of cyanide). OK, Einsteins... you've successfully infused EVERYTHING with this non-metabolizing chemical. How the heck do we partake in moderation? It's like saying a little se>< and violence on TV is OK... when there's A LOT of it... and it's infused into every show's plot. I guess it's the same logic chemical plants use: we only put the legal amount into the water supply... but so did the other thousands of pollution producing plants!
Reply

9-22-2008 @12:20PM Brad Thompson said... Natural foods are minimally processed. Enzymatic conversion using an insoluble glucose isomerase enzyme preparation followed by liquid chromatography does not constitute minimal processing. If its production requires technologies that didn't exist until the 1970s, I don't consider it natural.

http://www.foodcrusader.com/2008/09/high-fructose-propaganda.html
Reply

9-30-2008 @10:20PM Angel P said... Its not the same I can eat sugar and I dont end up in the hospital, I eat HFCS I am so sick I end up in the Emegency room!! there is a big differance to how a bodt reacts to natural and man made or changed foods
Reply

10-12-2008 @12:49PM midwestern nature girl said... High fructose corn syrup may be derived from corn, but the chemical process that creates the finished product makes it a new beast. If the natural "parent" and the newly created "child" were compared side by side in a lab one would see they have different components, different effects, different side effects. Another easy comparison is aspirin and white willow bark. Aspirin was originally derived from white willow, but the aspirin you buy in bottle is now structurally different. It is chemically synthesized to create a certain target effect, such as eliminating a headache. It comes with a list of side effects such as causing bleeding ulcers. White willow may also help with the headache and other symptoms, but because it is whole and from nature, it contains a whole host of nutrients that work together, rather than one chemically derived fraction. These multiple nutrients within the whole herb are the reason that it does not create the negative side effects of the isolated chemical known as aspirin.

Back to high fructose corn syrup. The commercials offend my better judgement. It is a highly addictive substance. The commercials are the equivalent of saying that if you use Meth in moderation that you won't get addicted and it won't ruin your your life. Southwest College of Naturopathic Medicine in Tempe Arizona has a professor and department chairperson of nutrition named Dr.Mona Morstein (N.D.). Mona has led much research on diabetes, obesity, and other gastrointestinal problems related to nutrition. The findings of the research indicate a clear correlation of high fructose corn syrup in the explosive growth of these national crisises of diabetes, obesity, even learning disorders such as ADHD. She has been a guest speaker on CNN discussing this very thing. High fructose corn syrup is addictive, from the first taste. It is the reason other sweeteners such as sugar don't taste as sweet to us. The reason it is used is not just the cost factor in manufacturing. If it wasn't addictive, you wouldn't have an overwhelming desire to go out and buy more. If it wasn't addictive, you wouldn't find it in 80-90% of food products, not just sodas. Why does healthy yogurt need HFCS in it? So you buy more. Why do frozen blueberry waffles have it? So you buy more. The idea that it is cheaper to produce is somewhat controversial. If it is being derived from corn, and corn produced ethanol gas is supposed to help our gas prices go down and be better for the environment, why are we continuing to use the corn supply for HFCS when the corn is really needed for our fuel supplies?

Side effects of HFCS that is chemically derived from corn: diabetes, insulin resistance, weight gain to the point of the obesity crisis being experienced; effects the nervous system/brain including ADHD, Parkinsons disease, Autism; quickly advancing tooth decay and gum disorders; negatively affects a person's ability to smell and taste (why do you think there are warnings to not give it to dogs or cats, because they would kill themselves licking it when they can't taste it); food sensitivities and allergies; fibromyalgia and chronic fatigue. The FDA and the allopathic medical community would argue that there is no clear causation between HFCS and many of these problems. However, many individual people who have those problems and no pharmaceutical relief, have eliminated HFCS and their symtoms either decreased in severity and frequency, or their symptoms disappeared all together, only to restart upon reintroducing HFCS back into their routine. It doesn't take a scientist to figure out that it is having some negative effect on their physiology.

Bottom line: don't buy in to this foolish advertising campaign. I would be surprised if the FTC doesn't get involved and curtail this ad campaign, as it is deceptive. The very principle of the ads is that when someone is asked why NOT high fructose corn syrup, the person can't come up with anything solid, making viewers believe that it is merely gossip giving it a bad name, not truth or fact. Afterall, think back to the previous "glory days" of cigarette advertising on tv. Cigarettes are derived from something natural too, so does that make it healthy for us in moderation?
Reply

11-07-2008 @11:43AM Lance said... HFCS - is definitely not good for you. Anything chemically made is not good for you. Too many people get caught up in the "Oh, they said it's okay, so I'll use it" studity. How many times have they said things and turn around and change their position on it. Giving it to your family is re-responibility. You should be teaching them how to eat, live, and learn correctly in life. So to me why even consider HFCS. If they have to put out campaigns to tell you how good it is. That just tells me it is not good for you. When will people really start to think for themselves. By giving HFCS you are condemning yourself and your family to problems down the road. The medical field will love you, because they will have to take care of you and cover the symptoms, but will not cure it. Add this to all the others things we are too lazy to do and you see why we have the health problems we do today. The vast majority of them are from processed foods. Think

Reply