2

votes

New "Corn Sugar" Commercials

Answered on August 19, 2014
Created November 08, 2010 at 11:47 AM

Have you seen the new corn sugar commercials?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fyj2N-AspqU

I think it's a shame that they continue to market that garbage.

9bca3c7a5a8a78433ce4a398b668aa4b

(287)

on September 08, 2011
at 04:11 PM

I think its a bigger shame that people actually listen to it and think its ok..

24fcc21452ebe39c032be6801d6bbadd

(9812)

on September 08, 2011
at 01:39 PM

Exactly!! I saw that one this morning; it made me feel really stabby. I don't know that HFCS is indeed worse than sugar, but sugar's bad enough for me!

C91000f66595a4dfa9b0f8fd041e7357

(20)

on September 08, 2011
at 12:48 PM

Love it! That's awesome!

6738ae1082ab735fc5fbd92baf7544d7

(200)

on November 09, 2010
at 03:29 PM

HFCS doesn't begin to explain the explosion of diabetes, and obesity in countries like China and India. However, sucrose does a fantastic job of predicting that as countries become more affluent they spend more money consuming luxury products like sugar laden beverages, candies, and other sweetened food products. As affluence increases, sugar consumption increases, and if there is a causative link between excess sugar consumption and metabolic disorders then you would expect to see a dramatic rise in metabolic disorders.

6738ae1082ab735fc5fbd92baf7544d7

(200)

on November 09, 2010
at 03:25 PM

That study uses a mouse model, and it is only one data point against several other human studies. As it stands, there just isn't enough information to say HFCS is worse than sucrose. If you want a startling statistic, between 1970 and 2005 the average American consumed 22.6 tbsp MORE sugar. That totals out to an extra 76 calories per day, or additional 27,740 Calories from sugar per year. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17653981 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17653981 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20516261 http://circ.ahajournals.org/cgi/reprint/CIRCULATIONAHA.109.192627

8ce2e69af79dcb1488f776efc1c54052

on November 08, 2010
at 09:21 PM

I agree with you. It's the way that sugar rich foods(I use this term loosely) are marketed. People shouldn't eat either in my opinion. It reminds me of the years of cigarette marketing. Ultimately, people are free to make their own choices but they really have to dig to find the truth between the marketing and the USDA.

8ce2e69af79dcb1488f776efc1c54052

on November 08, 2010
at 03:40 PM

That would make a great t shirt!

Frontpage book

Get FREE instant access to our Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!

5 Answers

11
Ef9f83cb4e1826261a44c173f733789e

on November 08, 2010
at 12:31 PM

Corn sugar is fine in moderation as long you consume 0 grams or less per day. :0P

8ce2e69af79dcb1488f776efc1c54052

on November 08, 2010
at 03:40 PM

That would make a great t shirt!

C91000f66595a4dfa9b0f8fd041e7357

(20)

on September 08, 2011
at 12:48 PM

Love it! That's awesome!

4
6738ae1082ab735fc5fbd92baf7544d7

on November 08, 2010
at 06:13 PM

There is nothing inherently wrong with HFCS55/42 other than it's sugar. The whole anti-HFCS debate is a distraction from the real problem, which is sugar over consumption in developed nations.

People who try to say otherwise are simply looking for a scape goat to explain their own poor decisions. (And who better to blame than a faceless corporation?)

Here's some medical research that backs me up.

Effects of high-fructose corn syrup and sucrose consumption on circulating glucose, insulin, leptin, and ghrelin and on appetite in normal-weight women.

The Health Effects of High Fructose Syrup

8ce2e69af79dcb1488f776efc1c54052

on November 08, 2010
at 09:21 PM

I agree with you. It's the way that sugar rich foods(I use this term loosely) are marketed. People shouldn't eat either in my opinion. It reminds me of the years of cigarette marketing. Ultimately, people are free to make their own choices but they really have to dig to find the truth between the marketing and the USDA.

3
62ed65f3596aa2f62fa1d58a0c09f8c3

(20807)

on November 09, 2010
at 04:00 AM

There was some research out recently comparing to HFCS to table suger and HFSC came out a substantially more damaging. I think it was just done in rats though, but still HFCS is not exactly the same as sugar and does not act metabolically exactly the same (perhaps in many ways similar, but not exactly the same). Personally, I think it may be even more harmful that sugar. It's more of a frankenfood. Not to say that sugar isn't also plenty damaging in the high dosages that most SAD eaters now consume though.

Funny when you think about it though. 30 years ago, sugar was the bad guy, but who would have thought they would come out with something potentially even worse, making sugar seem (only in comparison) to be somehow a slightly healthier choice! They keep lowering the bar by coming out with crappier and crappier foods each year.

6738ae1082ab735fc5fbd92baf7544d7

(200)

on November 09, 2010
at 03:29 PM

HFCS doesn't begin to explain the explosion of diabetes, and obesity in countries like China and India. However, sucrose does a fantastic job of predicting that as countries become more affluent they spend more money consuming luxury products like sugar laden beverages, candies, and other sweetened food products. As affluence increases, sugar consumption increases, and if there is a causative link between excess sugar consumption and metabolic disorders then you would expect to see a dramatic rise in metabolic disorders.

6738ae1082ab735fc5fbd92baf7544d7

(200)

on November 09, 2010
at 03:25 PM

That study uses a mouse model, and it is only one data point against several other human studies. As it stands, there just isn't enough information to say HFCS is worse than sucrose. If you want a startling statistic, between 1970 and 2005 the average American consumed 22.6 tbsp MORE sugar. That totals out to an extra 76 calories per day, or additional 27,740 Calories from sugar per year. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17653981 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17653981 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20516261 http://circ.ahajournals.org/cgi/reprint/CIRCULATIONAHA.109.192627

1
D1728f99db66ff91d695a6df5cd38b02

(1368)

on September 08, 2011
at 12:47 PM

I find the main problem with the commercial is the way that it implies things without saying them. There is a little girl and her father and the father is worried about her eating "high fructose corn syrup". But then he finds out that the body can't tell the difference between cane sugar or corn sugar, so that makes all sugar alright! It's implying that you shouldn't feel bad about feeding your kids sugar- in whatever form that may be. Its people who sell corn wanting consumers to stop being worried about what harmful effects the HFCS might have on their bodies. And by saying that the only worry is corn sugar (not sugar itself, as many of you have pointed out) it ultimately reinforces the idea that sugar should be eaten and is eaten by everybody.

In this post I see insufficient evidence to say that HFCS is bad, and although I had assumed this for many years, I once again see the need to research this myself. .. Reliable resources anybody?

I like my sugar coming from fruit. yum yum

24fcc21452ebe39c032be6801d6bbadd

(9812)

on September 08, 2011
at 01:39 PM

Exactly!! I saw that one this morning; it made me feel really stabby. I don't know that HFCS is indeed worse than sugar, but sugar's bad enough for me!

1
1aeb2cfacf9bc03644bcda640ce459ba

(154)

on November 09, 2010
at 01:54 AM

there is no healthy sugar whether it comes from beets, cane or corn. it is just silly to villify only one.

Answer Question


Get FREE instant access to our
Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!