"Dan L." wrote:
In article ,
zxcvbob wrote:

David Hare-Scott wrote:
zxcvbob wrote:
Billy wrote:

Since we seem to have jumped the tracks here anyway, let me just
observe that the only people left in the industrialized world who
don't know about the deleterious health effects of HFCS must be
watchers of FOX NEWS (Murdoch & Co.), and, therefore, supporters
of
Glen Beck, and Sarah Palin.


HFCS is not significantly worse than cane sugar or beet sugar or
honey. All four are made up of approximately the same proportions
of
glucose and fructose. That doesn't mean HFCS is good for you,
quite
the opposite; it means sugar and honey are worse for you than ppl
think.

No. Cane sugar and beet sugar are almost 100% sucrose. I can't lay
my
hands on an analysis for beet sugar (which we don't get much here)
but
white refined cane sugar is one of the most pure chemical substances

that you will find in your kitchen.



Yes, but sucrose is fructose + glucose.

Bob

I do not think that statement is true. One needs to add an acid to
sucrose to form fructose + glucose. So for me soda pop is out.
However,
for other baked foods, like cereal, that extra HIGH fructose corn
syrup
is not for me. I will take plain non sweetened cereal and add table
sugar to it. I doubt skim milk has enough acid to completely change
the
structure of sucrose.

Also why the need for HIGH fructose corn syrup when plain old regular
corn syrup will do? I do use regular corn syrup for candy making.

Also, does the structure of HFCS's have an added fat molecule attached

to the fructose molecule that makes it different from a regular
fructose
molecule?



Corn syrup aids in preventing crystallizatio
The last line is a trailing thought that did not make it.

Also, which is worse?
Pure fructose in beverages or a combination or fructose and glucose from
sucrose?

--
Enjoy Life... Dan L (Garden in zone 5a Michigan)