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?




Your *stomach* provides the acid to hydrolyze the sucrose into its
components glucose and fructose, which are then quickly absorbed
into the bloodstream. The glucose causes an insulin reaction and
the fructose does not. The glucose is then used by your whole body
as an energy source or converted into glycogen. The fructose can
only be metabolized by the liver.

Bob

zxcvbob wrote:
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?


Your *stomach* provides the acid to hydrolyze the sucrose into its
components glucose and fructose, which are then quickly absorbed into
the bloodstream. The glucose causes an insulin reaction and the
fructose does not. The glucose is then used by your whole body as an
energy source or converted into glycogen. The fructose can only be
metabolized by the liver.

Bob

Ok Bob, now if I want to value my liver over my pancreas, would cane
sugar put less fructose in my system over HFCS in my foods?

Would there be less work on my liver if I used regular corn syrup over
HFCS?

Also does the liver covert fructose to fat?
Therefore the structure of fructose is not that far from the structure
of a fat molecule. If so then a high fructose diet is a high fat diet.

If you answer yes to any of these questions, it is best to favor cane
sugar over HFCS? Therefore NOT the same!

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

Dan L wrote:

Ok Bob, now if I want to value my liver over my pancreas, would cane
sugar put less fructose in my system over HFCS in my foods?

Would there be less work on my liver if I used regular corn syrup over
HFCS?

Also does the liver covert fructose to fat?
Therefore the structure of fructose is not that far from the structure
of a fat molecule. If so then a high fructose diet is a high fat diet.

Sucrose is 50% fructose. HFCS is between 45% and 55% fructose, same
as honey. (Starch is 100% glucose. That's why white bread has a
higher glycemic index than sugar.)

Fructose metabolism is explained about 42 minutes into this video if
you want to skip ahead: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM

The point is that excess sugar consumption is bad, and it doesn't
matter whether it is sugar or HFCS or honey.

Bob

In article ,
Dan L wrote:

"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?

What I was trying to say was that glucose is intrinsically different
from fructose, and before our species became agrarian, both were
seasonal additions to the human diet. Now, it is highly processed carbs,
day and night, all year long.

I think you will find that historically (hunter gatherers), our main
energy source was animal fat.
--
- Billy
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the
merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini.
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/7/2/maude
http://english.aljazeera.net/video/m...515308172.html

zxcvbob wrote:
Dan L wrote:

Ok Bob, now if I want to value my liver over my pancreas, would cane
sugar put less fructose in my system over HFCS in my foods?

Would there be less work on my liver if I used regular corn syrup
over HFCS?

Also does the liver covert fructose to fat?
Therefore the structure of fructose is not that far from the
structure of a fat molecule. If so then a high fructose diet is a
high fat diet.

Sucrose is 50% fructose. HFCS is between 45% and 55% fructose, same
as honey. (Starch is 100% glucose. That's why white bread has a
higher glycemic index than sugar.)


No sucrose is 100% sucrose. Each sucrose molecule can be split into one
each of glucose and fructose in which case you don't have sucrose but
glucose and fructose. The two do not behave the same.

Fructose metabolism is explained about 42 minutes into this video if
you want to skip ahead: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM

The point is that excess sugar consumption is bad,

True

and it doesn't
matter whether it is sugar or HFCS or honey.


That is yet to be determined.

David

zxcvbob wrote:
Dan L wrote:

Ok Bob, now if I want to value my liver over my pancreas, would cane
sugar put less fructose in my system over HFCS in my foods?
Would there be less work on my liver if I used regular corn syrup
over
HFCS?
Also does the liver covert fructose to fat?
Therefore the structure of fructose is not that far from the
structure
of a fat molecule. If so then a high fructose diet is a high fat
diet.

Sucrose is 50% fructose. HFCS is between 45% and 55% fructose, same
as honey. (Starch is 100% glucose. That's why white bread has a
higher glycemic index than sugar.)

Fructose metabolism is explained about 42 minutes into this video if
you want to skip ahead: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM

The point is that excess sugar consumption is bad, and it doesn't
matter whether it is sugar or HFCS or honey.

Bob
I have seen the video "Sugar: The bitter truth".
He is the one that states "a high fructose diet is a high fat diet".

I will agree, that EXCESS sugar is bad.
If one does consume a sweetener, perhaps it is better to consume table
sugar that has both glucose and fructose in the body over fructose
alone.

In my opinion, the more processing of the food the less balanced
nutrition is in the food. So I favor Honey for my main sweetener, then
table sugar.
--
Enjoy Life... Dan L (Garden in zone 5a Michigan)

On 11/2/2010 12:44 PM, Billy wrote:
In ,
"David wrote:

Dan L wrote:

Two of my favorite science fiction classic books is "The Space
Merchants, by Fredrick Pohl& C.M. Kornbluth" a 1952 classic. It's
about corporations in the future selling addictive foods and products
that are harmful to human health and saying it's good for you and
making bigs bucks and enslaving the lower class at the same time.
These guys were way ahead of their time. Reading this novel was like
reading the current news during bad old cigarette days.


Eat some crunchies which make you thirsty, so you have some popsie soda
which triggers a craving for a cigarette, that triggers a craving for some
crunchies, so you follow that with a popsie and then ......

David.

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.

Probably the best thing we could do for our country, and the planet is
to encourage these folks to eat as much HFCS as possible, and refuse any
government health care that they may be offered.

We now return to our next OT posting.

You forgot to tell people to eat more fruit - it's full of fructose

In article ,
Frank wrote:

On 11/2/2010 12:44 PM, Billy wrote:
In ,
"David wrote:

Dan L wrote:

Two of my favorite science fiction classic books is "The Space
Merchants, by Fredrick Pohl& C.M. Kornbluth" a 1952 classic. It's
about corporations in the future selling addictive foods and products
that are harmful to human health and saying it's good for you and
making bigs bucks and enslaving the lower class at the same time.
These guys were way ahead of their time. Reading this novel was like
reading the current news during bad old cigarette days.


Eat some crunchies which make you thirsty, so you have some popsie soda
which triggers a craving for a cigarette, that triggers a craving for some
crunchies, so you follow that with a popsie and then ......

David.

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.

Probably the best thing we could do for our country, and the planet is
to encourage these folks to eat as much HFCS as possible, and refuse any
government health care that they may be offered.

We now return to our next OT posting.

You forgot to tell people to eat more fruit - it's full of fructose

Frank is there any difference between Fructose derived from corn and
that found in an apple ? I'd think the apple package differs offers
more per caloric input than these do (See URL) in important ways such
as trace minerals and the expenditure to chew it. Celery I sort of
remember is caloric negative.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twinkie



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twinkie

--
Bill S. Jersey USA zone 5 shade garden
http://www.informationisbeautiful.ne...l-supplements/

Bill who putters wrote:
In article ,
Frank wrote:

On 11/2/2010 12:44 PM, Billy wrote:
In ,
"David wrote:

Dan L wrote:

Two of my favorite science fiction classic books is "The Space
Merchants, by Fredrick Pohl& C.M. Kornbluth" a 1952 classic. It's
about corporations in the future selling addictive foods and
products that are harmful to human health and saying it's good
for you and making bigs bucks and enslaving the lower class at
the same time. These guys were way ahead of their time. Reading
this novel was like reading the current news during bad old
cigarette days.


Eat some crunchies which make you thirsty, so you have some popsie
soda which triggers a craving for a cigarette, that triggers a
craving for some crunchies, so you follow that with a popsie and
then ......

David.

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.

Probably the best thing we could do for our country, and the planet
is to encourage these folks to eat as much HFCS as possible, and
refuse any government health care that they may be offered.

We now return to our next OT posting.

You forgot to tell people to eat more fruit - it's full of fructose


Frank is there any difference between Fructose derived from corn and
that found in an apple ?

No


I'd think the apple package differs offers
more per caloric input than these do (See URL) in important ways
such as trace minerals and the expenditure to chew it.

It does: vitamins, minerals and fibre. This is an important point. A
healthy diet does not necessarily always include or always avoid some
specific ingredient such as fructose (contrary to the babble of fad diet
merchants) it is a balance.

David

David