Increased Body Weight
The "con" side will make a case that HFCS has not contributed to the increased body weight of Americans. High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS) has become a hot topic between most Americans in today’s society. High Fructose Corn Syrup is in a category of what we consider to be our carbohydrates. Carbohydrates are our body's major source of fuel. Therefore, they are our sugars, and complex carbohydrates include starches and fibers. HFCS is a simple carbohydrate, compared to fruits, milk, and sweeteners (brown sugar & honey). (Grodner, M., Escott-Stump, S., Dorner, S., 2016, p. 8). HFCS is a sweetener that all of our sodas and fruit-flavored drinks now contain. HFCS has been shown to be very similar to table sugar as well. HFCS …show more content…
According to the International Journal of Obesity, the authors explain that HFCS is one of the most misinterpreted food ingredients. This corn syrup was developed in the 1960s as an alternative to sucrose, which is table sugar. Throughout their research it was shown that HFCS peaked in 1999 and has been in decline since and while at its peak Americans still did not consume as much as they did sucrose. The name High Fructose Corn Syrup has become very misleading because of the name “high fructose,” leads people to believe it has more fructose than sucrose does, but it does not, compared to table sugars. However, manufacturers have yielded to adverse publicity and removed HFCS from their products and replaced it with sucrose despite overwhelming scientific evidence that the two sugars are metabolically equivalent. (Klurfeld, Foreyt, Angelopoulos, & Rippe, 2012). “Studies have shown Sucrose, which is generally used to replace HFCS by manufacturers, to be very similar if not identical to HFCS in food and beverage products. Sucrose and HFCS are absorbed identically in the human GI tract” (Klurfeld, Foreyt, Angelopoulos, & Rippe, 2012). “A number of research trials have demonstrated no short-term differences between HFCS and sucrose in any metabolic parameter or health related effect measured in human beings including blood glucose, …show more content…
According to my textbook, "the energy value of carbohydrates was discovered in 1844 by Dolan and Adams-Smith. Recognition that increasing our consumption of carbohydrates from grains, vegetables, and fruits provides preventive health benefits is more recent. Increased levels of complex carbohydrates, particularly dietary fiber, appear to reduce the risk factors associated with chronic diet-related disorders such as heart disease, diabetes, and some cancers" (Grodner, M., Escott-Stump, S., Dorner, S., 2016, p. 51). Scientific studies comparing HFCS to other sugars conclude that HFCS is no better or worse than other sugars when dealing with obesity. The clearest statement on this issue I have seen is as follows: “The hypothesis that the replacement of sucrose with HFCS in beverages plays a causative role in obesity is not supported on the basis of its composition, biological actions or short-term effects on food intake. Had the hypothesis been phrased in the converse, namely that replacing HFCS with sucrose in beverages would be a solution to the obesity epidemic, its merit would have been seen more clearly. Put simply, a proposal that a return to sucrose containing beverages would be a credible solution to the obesity epidemic would have been met with out right
The "con" side will make a case that HFCS has not contributed to the increased body weight of Americans. High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS) has become a hot topic between most Americans in today’s society. High Fructose Corn Syrup is in a category of what we consider to be our carbohydrates. Carbohydrates are our body's major source of fuel. Therefore, they are our sugars, and complex carbohydrates include starches and fibers. HFCS is a simple carbohydrate, compared to fruits, milk, and sweeteners (brown sugar & honey). (Grodner, M., Escott-Stump, S., Dorner, S., 2016, p. 8). HFCS is a sweetener that all of our sodas and fruit-flavored drinks now contain. HFCS has been shown to be very similar to table sugar as well. HFCS …show more content…
According to the International Journal of Obesity, the authors explain that HFCS is one of the most misinterpreted food ingredients. This corn syrup was developed in the 1960s as an alternative to sucrose, which is table sugar. Throughout their research it was shown that HFCS peaked in 1999 and has been in decline since and while at its peak Americans still did not consume as much as they did sucrose. The name High Fructose Corn Syrup has become very misleading because of the name “high fructose,” leads people to believe it has more fructose than sucrose does, but it does not, compared to table sugars. However, manufacturers have yielded to adverse publicity and removed HFCS from their products and replaced it with sucrose despite overwhelming scientific evidence that the two sugars are metabolically equivalent. (Klurfeld, Foreyt, Angelopoulos, & Rippe, 2012). “Studies have shown Sucrose, which is generally used to replace HFCS by manufacturers, to be very similar if not identical to HFCS in food and beverage products. Sucrose and HFCS are absorbed identically in the human GI tract” (Klurfeld, Foreyt, Angelopoulos, & Rippe, 2012). “A number of research trials have demonstrated no short-term differences between HFCS and sucrose in any metabolic parameter or health related effect measured in human beings including blood glucose, …show more content…
According to my textbook, "the energy value of carbohydrates was discovered in 1844 by Dolan and Adams-Smith. Recognition that increasing our consumption of carbohydrates from grains, vegetables, and fruits provides preventive health benefits is more recent. Increased levels of complex carbohydrates, particularly dietary fiber, appear to reduce the risk factors associated with chronic diet-related disorders such as heart disease, diabetes, and some cancers" (Grodner, M., Escott-Stump, S., Dorner, S., 2016, p. 51). Scientific studies comparing HFCS to other sugars conclude that HFCS is no better or worse than other sugars when dealing with obesity. The clearest statement on this issue I have seen is as follows: “The hypothesis that the replacement of sucrose with HFCS in beverages plays a causative role in obesity is not supported on the basis of its composition, biological actions or short-term effects on food intake. Had the hypothesis been phrased in the converse, namely that replacing HFCS with sucrose in beverages would be a solution to the obesity epidemic, its merit would have been seen more clearly. Put simply, a proposal that a return to sucrose containing beverages would be a credible solution to the obesity epidemic would have been met with out right