Here at Sketchy Science we publish a lot of articles about living a
healthy lifestyle. In particular we like to help people wade through the fact
and fiction that goes along with eating a nutritious diet. There is a lot of
misinformation floating around in the ether of western civilization and we like
to think that it helps to hear the truth about what we are putting in our bodies.
With that in mind, we decided to write about high fructose corn syrup (HFSC)
for this week’s post.
If you pay attention to the news at all, you have probably heard about
how evil HFSC is. It is making us fat, diabetic, and hopelessly addicted to
soda. No matter where you look, from articles written by doctors, to the Huffington Post, to one of my personal favourite websites HowStuffWorks.com the message is clear: “High fructose corn syrup will kill you.” That
is the apparent consensus and it is fully the message of the article that I expected
to write. I even thought I might throw in some jabs at the Corn Refiners
Association for ridiculous brainwashy ads like this one. However, when I hit up the scientific literature, what I actually read
shocked me.
The actual science on HFCS is a lot less doom and gloom than you would
expect. First off, HFCS is a processed form of corn syrup where some of the
glucose is turned into another sugar called fructose. Average, run-of-the-mill
table sugar (sucrose) contains both glucose and fructose at about a 50/50 ratio. HFCS has
slightly more fructose. Since fructose is sweeter than glucose, HFCS is
friggin’ delicious. It makes anything you put it into crazily sweet. Pretty much
to the point where you really don’t want to stop eating it.
Therein lies the problem with HFCS. Its tastiness, combined with the fact that
food manufacturers understandably put it in everything (their goal, after all,
is to sell a lot of Oreos), makes HFCS dangerous. The poison is in the dose, as
the old saying goes; and we are happily dosing ourselves at off-the-charts
levels. An American study recently found that a full one-third of the calories
consumed by middle school students was in the form of added sugars.
However, just because gorging ourselves on something is bad for us
doesn’t make it fair to point the finger in one direction if the thing we are
pointing at isn’t especially harmful. When you look at research comparing HFCS
to sucrose (table sugar) you end up reading the same thing over and over
again: HFCS isn’t really any worse. If you don’t believe me (and I completely
understand being surprised by this) read some of the studies I’ve linked to at
the bottom of this post. Over and over again, the effects of HFCS and sucrose
are the same. While scientists agree that pure fructose has terrible consequences for your body, there is actually little evidence to support the idea that the combination of fructose and glucose in HFCS is any worse than classic sugar.
I did manage to find one study about how HFCS led to greater weight gain
over the long-term in mice, but researchers only compared mice eating HFCS to
controls who weren’t getting any extra sugar. When you stack the deck against something like that, you are not
conducting good science. Admittedly the same study also found differences in
short-term weight gain with HFCS causing more flub than sucrose, but I
haven’t found any other research to support that.
The lesson here is not to go out and inhale a gallon of orange soda, it
is actually pretty much the opposite. Obviously there is a problem with the way
companies make and sell food. They put sugar in things that have no business
having sugar. Read the ingredients list on a box of crackers next time you’re
at the grocery store if you have any doubts. However, the problem is not with
the substance itself. It is with the people who are making and marketing the food and, ultimately, with the people who are consuming it. Clearly we can’t rely on big companies to only
provide us with healthy foods, so we need to take some responsibility for our own
actions.
Read labels and make smart choices. Maybe somewhere down the line enough
people will get upset about the amount of sugar in food that we can pass a law
limiting it, but until then companies will continue to sell sugar loaded snacks for as long as we keep buying them. HFCS is really cheap to produce and it makes you drink
more juice. If I wanted to sell you a lot of lemonade, I would keep
making the kind you like the most. Capitalism isn’t rocket science.
The other lesson here is not to believe everything you hear. Just
because some doctor on the internet tells you something is good or bad, doesn’t
mean anything. When it comes down to it, you are trusting strangers to tell you
how the world works. Read different sources, make use of Google Scholar and
read some published science, make up your own mind. Sometimes what seems like
an issue of nutrition is really one of psychology.
References by findings:
No difference between HFCS and
sucrose:
Maybe a difference:
Pure Fructose is bad:
3 comments:
columbia outlet
nike factory
burberry outlet
christian louboutin outlet
fila shoes
tory burch outlet
oakley sunglasses
michael kors outlet
polo ralph lauren
maglie calcio
20189.14chenjinyan
true religion jeans
tiffany & co
nike store
kristaps porzingis jersey
tods shoes
converse chuck taylor
kevin durant shoes
ray ban
nike free
karen millen
2018.10.23chenlixiang
michael kors handbags
hermes belt
timberland boots
lacoste online shop
chrome hearts
calvin klein outlet
goyard wallet
curry 4
longchamp handbags
adidas tubular
Post a Comment