The Politics of Sugar vs High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS)

[housewolf]

Have you seen those commercials where someone purports to have been troubled about a controversy about sugar vs HFCS so she "did her research" on the matter and "discovered" that the human body reacted the same to both substances? "Sugar is sugar" she declares at the end.

The commercial is an attempt by the HFCS trade association to increase the public's acceptance of HFCS, as is their attempt to re-brand their product as "corn sugar". The sugar trade associations like things the way they are and are trying to deny the re-naming of HFCS. There is a lawsuit in process to deny HFCS's efforts.

Here's an article discussing the politics of the "sugar vs HFCS" campaign, discussing the roots and causes of the matter and addresses the issue of where the public interest fits in.

Short, interesting reading.

http://www.foodpolitics.com/2011/10/sugar-1-hfcs-0-at-least-for-the-moment/

[beac]

1. This is the key paragraph:

Both of these trade associations are acting totally in self-interest. Neither cares at all about public health. The lawsuit is entirely about corporate profits, not public welfare.

[pscot]

2. HFCS has a distinctive, cloying taste

that's easy to recognize once you become aware of it. But if you don't use processed foods, it's not an issue.