Anybody notice that the HFCS lobby has come out with a "cute" new
marketing program to counteract the bad press that this cheap,
unhealthful sweetener has been receiving lately?

Now we're suppose to call it "corn sugar"! The female voice-over says
"Sugar is sugar!"

NOT!

Just another way for the corn-growing states to maximize pork to mix
metaphors badly.

Anybody remember when the whores -- pardon, legislators -- from those
states got everybody, including the ignorant print/electronic media
and the corrupt Bush Administration (maybe back to Clinton?) of, going
ape over ethanol (made from subsidized corn, naturally!) as biofuel?
Thus raising the price of corn for, say, poor Mexicans whose staple
food soared out of sight. So much corn was going into biofuel, I
couldn't even find corn oil at my co-op for years, until the corn-
ethanol scam bubble burst.

The on-line literature on HFCS is extensive; includes recent study
that it may contain mercury.

Many of us label-readers now refuse to buy a product which features
heavy use of HFCS.

Persephone

Higgs Boson wrote:
Anybody notice that the HFCS lobby has come out with a "cute" new
marketing program to counteract the bad press that this cheap,
unhealthful sweetener has been receiving lately?

Now we're suppose to call it "corn sugar"! The female voice-over says
"Sugar is sugar!"

NOT!

Just another way for the corn-growing states to maximize pork to mix
metaphors badly.

Anybody remember when the whores -- pardon, legislators -- from those
states got everybody, including the ignorant print/electronic media
and the corrupt Bush Administration (maybe back to Clinton?) of, going
ape over ethanol (made from subsidized corn, naturally!) as biofuel?
Thus raising the price of corn for, say, poor Mexicans whose staple
food soared out of sight. So much corn was going into biofuel, I
couldn't even find corn oil at my co-op for years, until the corn-
ethanol scam bubble burst.

The on-line literature on HFCS is extensive; includes recent study
that it may contain mercury.

Many of us label-readers now refuse to buy a product which features
heavy use of HFCS.

Persephone

Yep, we talked about it last week here. I see the commercial on every
"Good Eats" cable show. I am now seeing it on cereal box labels also. We
also mentioned the exact same phrase. "sugar is sugar"? She also states
something like, "The body can't tell the difference"?

Another article that may be of interest by USA today that one in three
will have diabetes by 2050.
http://www.usatoday.com/yourlife/hea...tes22_ST_N.htm

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.

Another favorite is "Under Pressure by Frank Herbert" a 1955 classic
novel that is about deep under water oil drilling. Another author way
ahead of time.

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

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.

"David Hare-Scott" 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.

Another fan
I am about to have breakfast with my cup of Coffiest

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

In article ,
"David Hare-Scott" 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.
--
- 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

In article
,
Billy wrote:

In article ,
"David Hare-Scott" 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.

Glad you are back missed ya!

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

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.

The food industry in the USA switched from sugar to HFCS because
protective tariffs made the price of sugar too high to use it in
products where HFCS could be substituted (an that means just about
everything except candy.) The corn-ethanol for fuel craze has raised
the cost of HFCS to where sugar (even with the tariff) is almost
competitive again, so food companies are starting to switch back.

Americans (myself included) get way too many of our calories from
fructose and alcohol. The actual delivery vehicles are not that
important except for the ubiquity of the fructose. But reverting from
HFCS to sucrose won't really help.

I liked Sarah Palin before she got popular, but I don't watch
mainstream media, Fox News or otherwise (and especially not AM radio.)

Best regards,
Bob

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.

There is a body of evidence that suggests that the carbohydrate metabolism
of the body reacts differently to HFCS compared to sucrose. The cites have
been mentioned here before. This is disputed by corn producers so the
matter is not resolved.

David

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

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

True depending on what meaning you give to the "+", in this case it is
false. The compound sucrose behaves chemically quite differently to the
mixture of the two compounds fructose and glucose. Any chemistry textbook
will show you examples of this. The issue being disputed is how human
metabolism reacts in the two cases. For that have a look he

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

David

Billy wrote:

We now return to our next OT posting.

"It wusn't me it wus her" he said pointing his finger. :-)

D

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

--
Enjoy Life... Dan
Garden in Zone 5 South East Michigan.
Using a Laptop

In article ,
"David Hare-Scott" wrote:

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

True depending on what meaning you give to the "+", in this case it is
false. The compound sucrose behaves chemically quite differently to the
mixture of the two compounds fructose and glucose. Any chemistry textbook
will show you examples of this. The issue being disputed is how human
metabolism reacts in the two cases. For that have a look he

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

David

I think a peek at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fructose would be more
enlightening.

(1)
Fructose is also seventy-three percent sweeter than sucrose (see 2.1
Relative Sweetness) at room temperature . . .

(2)
"Eating fructose instead of glucose results in lower circulating insulin
and leptin levels, and higher ghrelin levels after the meal.[58] Since
leptin and insulin decrease appetite and ghrelin increases appetite,
some researchers suspect that eating large amounts of fructose increases
the likelihood of weight gain.[59]"

(3)
And then there is
http://www.princeton.edu/main/news/a...dex.xml?sectio
n=topstories

A sweet problem: Princeton researchers find that high-fructose corn
syrup prompts considerably more weight gain.
----

What we have above is (2): fructose increases appetite, which (1) makes
increased sweetness more attractive to the consumer. And (3) that
consumers of HFCS gain weight, even on the comparable diets where
sucrose eaters eating the same number of calories, don't gain weight.

Ten thousand years ago (before agriculture), glucose was mainly consumed
as starch, and fructose consumption was an annual event, coinciding with
the ripening of fruits in the fall.
--
- 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

"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)

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?



No. Fructose is fructose. Fat molecules are quite different in structure
to sugars.

D