The economics of HFCS is the key take away from this article. The rest of the comparison is probably too reductive. just because two products (e.g. agave and

The economics of HFCS is the key take away from this article. The rest of the comparison is probably too reductive. just because two products (e.g. agave and HCFS) have similar fructose/sucrose/glucose proportions does not mean that they are similar once digestion comes into play. e.g. Honey is ~50% fructose and so is HCFS 55 with the majority of the rest being water, but i bet anyone could tell the difference between these two substances by smell alone. The article fails to take into account what these differences may be and therefore disrespects the 'science' part of its name by failing to inform us of possible missing pieces in the analysis.