4 ms·
Some of the “low fat” foods are actually bad for you because they are high in HFCS or other sugary additives. This is a biggie. Much bigger than people realiz
by maukdaddy 16y ago
Some of the “low fat” foods are actually bad for you because they are high in HFCS or other sugary additives.
This is a biggie. Much bigger than people realize. Foods that are advertised as "low fat" must have those fat calories replaced with something. And that something is usually refined carbs of some sort, be it sugar, HFCS, or something else.
My wife has fructose intolerant, so we don't eat anything containing fructose or HFCS. You would be shocked to see how much food contains HFCS, and REALLY shocked to see how much "healthy" and "low fat" foods contain HFCS.
- matwood 16y agoObviously if you're fructose intolerant you need to avoid it, but HFSC isn't the evil it's been painted to be. I like reading this guys blog because it's no nonsense nutritional information with ALL his sources. http://www.alanaragonblog.com/2010/01/29/the-bitter-truth-about-fructose-alarmism/ http://www.alanaragonblog.com/2010/01/29/the-bitter-truth-ab...
- gxs 16y agoI appreciate your point, but typically you want to stay away from things that contain HFCS not simply because HFCS is "bad" for you, (jury is still out on that one), rather, because foods that contain it tend to be very calorie dense. The problem with our diets as americans is that EVERYTHING contains sugar/HFCS. For example, I get all my carbs from brown rice, and bran cereal. I have the occasional slice of 100% wheat bread. Why? Because almost all bread on the market contains HFCS and each slice is typically 110 calories. I'd rather get the same amount of calories from a much more satisfying bowl of brown rice and veggies then from a dense, unsatisfying piece of bread.