There has been no greater foe of healthy eating than High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS), also known as corn sugar. Consumer and health advocacy groups have waged war against it. Research has uncovered some dubious links to a host of health issues. According to Princeton, America consumes 60 pounds of HFCS annually, per capita. These researchers believe the rise in U.S. obesity by over a third is directly tied to the increase in HFCS usage. We will go through the case against HFCS and determine whether or not it is any worse than sucrose, or common table sugar.
HFCS can be found in a wide range of foods and drinks, ranging from soft drinks to salad dressings and other sauces, as well as breads and cereals. It is commonly partnered with other unhealthy ingredients and chemicals, such as sodium and saturated fat. Despite significant research suggesting the unhealthiness of HFCS, the FDA allows its usage in almost anything.
HFCS does not differ significantly from sucrose (table sugar) from a chemical standpoint. It has about 5% more fructose and 5% less glucose. It's sweetness level is about the same as honey, while its glycemic index is a fair amount higher than table sugar (75 vs. 60). In order to make HFCS, it must undergo significant processing as all of the fructose contained within the syrup is artificially added. Fructose does not naturally occur in corn starch.
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.
Research indicates that both sucrose and HFCS are digested quickly, meaning a similar impact on blood sugar levels, despite moderate differences in GI. That being said, we digest these two ingredients in different manners. There is one less step needed to absorb HFCS because the fructose does not need to be separated from the glucose as is necessary with table sugar. This causes what is called lipogenesis, which can lead to diabetes. Research also indicates that HFCS is linked to overindulging because it does not trigger the production and release of insulin.
Overall, research seems to suggest that HFCS is worse than sugar by a sizable degree, but it is important to note that sugar is not a health food. While it is the lesser of two evils in this case, it still carries a host of risks if used in moderate to high levels. Both can be very damaging to our bodies, causing obesity, liver damage, and heart disease, among other dangerous health 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.
HFCS can be found in a wide range of foods and drinks, ranging from soft drinks to salad dressings and other sauces, as well as breads and cereals. It is commonly partnered with other unhealthy ingredients and chemicals, such as sodium and saturated fat. Despite significant research suggesting the unhealthiness of HFCS, the FDA allows its usage in almost anything.
HFCS does not differ significantly from sucrose (table sugar) from a chemical standpoint. It has about 5% more fructose and 5% less glucose. It's sweetness level is about the same as honey, while its glycemic index is a fair amount higher than table sugar (75 vs. 60). In order to make HFCS, it must undergo significant processing as all of the fructose contained within the syrup is artificially added. Fructose does not naturally occur in corn starch.
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.
Research indicates that both sucrose and HFCS are digested quickly, meaning a similar impact on blood sugar levels, despite moderate differences in GI. That being said, we digest these two ingredients in different manners. There is one less step needed to absorb HFCS because the fructose does not need to be separated from the glucose as is necessary with table sugar. This causes what is called lipogenesis, which can lead to diabetes. Research also indicates that HFCS is linked to overindulging because it does not trigger the production and release of insulin.
Overall, research seems to suggest that HFCS is worse than sugar by a sizable degree, but it is important to note that sugar is not a health food. While it is the lesser of two evils in this case, it still carries a host of risks if used in moderate to high levels. Both can be very damaging to our bodies, causing obesity, liver damage, and heart disease, among other dangerous health 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 dangers of food additives or my blog at why artificial sweeteners are bad
No comments:
Post a Comment