High fructose corn syrup

[javasaurus]

Some people absolutely hate high fructose corn syrup (HFCS). Why?

I can understand that some people can actually taste the difference between HFCS and sucrose, but I have trouble understanding why they find the difference to be so strong as to really get upset about it.

Before I continue, here's trivia that some people may not know: Sucrose is 50:50 glucose/fructose. HFCS is 45:55 glucose/fructose. There is very little difference between them!

Also, some people blame HFCS for the increasing gut size in the US. Why? HFCS can actually achieve the same sweetness as sucrose with slightly fewer calories! Fructose is sweeter than glucose, so upping the ratio means you can use less sugar. If you use the same amount of sugar, you get the same calories. HFCS is no worse for you calorie-wise than sucrose.

This doesn't really mean that HFCS has no role in the increasing waist size. HFCS is somewhat cheaper to produce than sucrose, so soda manufacturers can use the savings to keep prices down and/or increase serving size. If people are getting fat, it's from drinking more soda, not because the HFCS soda has more calories.

Comments

[acroyear70.livejournal.com]

HFCS, or well, Fructose, is a very *simple* sugar. it breaks up into instant calories without any effort at all.

the result is that you can actually not REALIZE you're drinking more sodas because unlike "sugar" based drinks, they're not in any way filling at all.

the other curse is the saturation factor, particularly in sweetened tea. they put so damn much in there that you can't actually taste the tea at all.

and in coke, it DOES taste different. get a bottle of kosher coke next lent (leading up to passover) and a bottle of regular. if you can't taste the difference, fine, forget it.

but i can, and the difference is huge.

[javasaurus.livejournal.com]

HFCS, or well, Fructose, is a very *simple* sugar. it breaks up into instant calories without any effort at all.

First, HFCS is only 55% fructose. The other 45% is glucose (another very simple sugar). For comparison, each sucrose (table sugar) molecule is made of one fructose and one glucose. Sucrose is broken down into fructose and glucose in the intestine with little-to-no effort. So by the time either HFCS or sucrose hits the bloodstream, they are similar. One difference between glucose and fructose is that glucose triggers insulin production which has two effects: insulin is linked to feeling "full" and allows cells to take up the glucose. Only "excess" glucose becomes fat. If I'm not mistaken, fructose is generally converted to fat immediately.

The body reacts very differently to glucose and fructose. The important part here is that both HFCS and sucrose have similar levels of glucose and fructose.

the result is that you can actually not REALIZE you're drinking more sodas because unlike "sugar" based drinks, they're not in any way filling at all.

The "full" reaction is related to the production of insulin, which is triggered by glucose. HFCS has 90% of the glucose content of sucrose, so should generate nearly the same "full" response.

My main point was that blaming HFCS for the obesity problems in this country seems silly considering the lack of major chemical difference between it and sucrose.

All that being said, I am willing to concede that they have different tastes (and textures) for some people. Prior to hitting the intestines, sucrose is a different molecule. Personally, I'd rather have Coke in glass bottles instead of plastic.