HFCS varies between ~40 to ~55 percent fructose. Compare this with sucrose (table sugar) which is 50% fructose. If it were the case that HFCS had an outstanding

HFCS varies between ~40 to ~55 percent fructose. Compare this with sucrose (table sugar) which is 50% fructose. If it were the case that HFCS had an outstanding effect on health, it would be in the non-sugar part of the HFCS. I think the simple explanation reflects reality the best: the diet in the US and now the rest of the world contains more foods which are rich in sugars and oils, which are highly processed and therefore easily digested, and which were designed to stimulate cravings to facilitate eating and sales. Rich foods are more calorie dense. Since satiety is partly related to volume of food consumed, rich foods can provide sufficient calories without diminishing hunger. Highly processed foods are effectively partially pre-digested. This increases the energy availability of the foods. For example, you will get more calories from white flour than from whole wheat flour than from wheat berries. Finally, products that have been successful are ones that sell more. For food marketers, the goal is to optimize the "bliss point", which is a balance between salt, sugar, and fat content. This is important because, in the past, when people's lives became more sedentary, they ate less in response. Targeting the bliss point has reversed that trend.