13 ms·
Fructose is processed by the body quite differently than sucrose, in a way quite relevant here. And actually one of humanity's major evolutionary advances.
by chris_va 1y ago
Fructose is processed by the body quite differently than sucrose, in a way quite relevant here.
And actually one of humanity's major evolutionary advances.
- eurleif 1y agoHFCS is typically 42:58 or 55:45 fructose:glucose. Table sugar is 50:50. HFCS is only "high fructose" relative to unprocessed corn syrup, not relative to table sugar and other common sweeteners.
- Tallain 1y agoA small difference at small levels but one which obviously matters when it's shoved into countless foods without most people event realizing. It's not just in soda and candy; it's in bread, pasta, almost any processed food (crackers, ketchups and other sauces, canned fruit, applesauce, lunch meat, peanut butter, the list goes on) and many foods one might not considered processed. It makes sense to try to eliminate it even though it's "only" a small difference. Might as well remove the difference at all and look out for things with no HFCS shoved in it for no reason.
- nradov 1y agoPlain pasta almost never contains any HFCS. Maybe you can find some that does but that's not what most people are buying in their local grocery store. (The sauce is often a different story.)
- Tallain 1y agoFair - I went back and re-edited enough times my original message got jumbled, and I had been thinking of pasta dishes you could buy, which almost invariably have HFCS, but absolutely correct plain pasta pretty much never does.
- crazygringo 1y agoThe point is, it doesn't matter if your ketchup is made with sugar or HFCS. If it weren't HFCS, it would be sugar, because ketchup is supposed to be sweet, and they have the same nutritional effect. Similarly, it's not suprising when pasta sauce has some sweetness added -- grandma also likely added a bit of sugar if she found tomatoes too acidic, which many do. The only thing that matters is that it's sugar. HFCS isn't somehow worse. If you're trying to eliminate sugar overall then sure, of course avoid HFCS. But if you're fine with a certain moderate amount of sugar per day, then the relatively small amounts of HFCS in things like pasta sauce and peanut butter are fine. The same way the sugar or honey in teriyaki sauces is. They count towards your daily allotment of sugar. For people trying to eat relatively healthily, avoid the soda but there's no reason to worry about the HFCS in ketchup or normal amounts of tomato sauce, for goodness' sake. The only reason to avoid HFCS entirely is if you're truly cutting sugar out of your diet entirely. Otherwise they're just substitutes for practical nutritional purposes.
- Tallain 1y agoThat's another fair point that specifically tomato-based products often have sugar, but also kind of missing the forest for the trees. For various reasons, we have a slew of foods that one might not expect to have added sugar (like lunch meat, ham notwithstanding, or applesauce which is already sweet without extra sugar, to pick from my short list above), that do because of reasons. In any case it does pay to still look, because if you're not careful you could pick one random tomato sauce that has double the amount of sugar compared to the jar right next to it on the shelf (Bertolli Tomato & Basil, 11g per serving; Newton's Own Marinara, 6g per serving). These choices add up, which is the point I was trying to make originally (though I agree I did not do a good job of it); I understand I was being pedantic so I understand the nature of the responses to me. The point is that small differences, isolated, don't matter, but in aggregate they absolutely do. We make arguments like this all the time in software when trying to write correct, performative code -- the milliseconds add up, and so do the grams of sugar. The anti-HFCS movement, despite having its targets aimed for wrong reasons, is still aiming at the right thing: being more mindful of what's in the things we put in our bodies.
- eurleif 1y agoWikipedia: >HFCS 42 is mainly used for processed foods and breakfast cereals, whereas HFCS 55 is used mostly for production of soft drinks. In other words, the type of HFCS that's "shoved into countless foods" has less fructose than table sugar, not more. If fructose is the villain here, that actually constitutes an improvement over table sugar.