Thursday, September 20, 2007

Sugar is Sugar

In a bit of a flying pig type moment, the Center for Science in the Public Interest has apparently joined hands with Big Food (in the form of the Corn Refiners Association) in chastising the President's Cancer Panel's report that vilifies high fructose corn syrup (HFCS).

HFCS is a sweetener that's made from corn and used widely in sugared soda. It has been demonized by consumers due to the suggestion that it somehow, independently of the laws of thermodynamics, causes those ingesting it to gain more weight than those consuming more "natural" sugars.

In fact, this attitude has become so prevalent that there are now foods that splash the words, "HFCS Free" on their front labels.

CSPI, like me, thinks sugar is sugar, whether it's god sugar or HFCS and in their letter state,

"the 2006-2007 Annual Report of the President's Cancer Panel diverges from accepted science in its unfair effort to identify high fructose corn syrup as a uniquely important contributor to obesity, which is a risk factor for cancer."

"The report's multiple, pejorative references to HFCS are unwarranted and risk mistakenly reinforcing the myth - now effectively disproved by a steadily growing body of research evidence - that HFCS and sugar might affect the body differently
"
Bottom line here - CSPI thinks we all eat too much sugar and it doesn't really matter where the sugar comes from, sugar is sugar and there's no sense in perpetuating a myth that one sugar is better than any other (even if God made it).

Bookmark and Share

2 comments:

  1. Every time I have a "sugar is sugar" conversation with my mom, who is a type 2 diabetic, she argues that it does matter where it comes from if you're diabetic. I still haven't been able to fully understand how the GI system works for diabetics. (I don't think she has either!) Any thoughts?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous6:24 am

    The major advantage to HFCS is that it can be added to many more processed foods than sugar can be.

    ReplyDelete