Corn syrup producers want sweeter name: corn sugar

[tridim]

NEW YORK – The makers of high fructose corn syrup want to sweeten up its image with a new name: corn sugar.

The bid to rename the sweetener by the Corn Refiners Association comes as Americans' concerns about health and obesity have sent consumption of high fructose corn syrup, used in soft drinks but also in bread, cereal and other foods, to a 20-year low.

The group applied Tuesday to the Food and Drug Administration to get the "corn sugar" name approved for use on food labels. They hope a new name will ease confusion about about the sweetener. Some people think it is more harmful or more likely to make them obese than sugar, perceptions for which there is little scientific evidence.

Approval of the new name could take two years, but that's not stopping the industry from using the term now in advertising. There's a new online marketing campaign at http://www.cornsugar.com and on television. Two new commercials try to alleviate shopper confusion, showing people who say they now understand that "whether it's corn sugar or cane sugar, your body can't tell the difference. Sugar is sugar."

Renaming products has succeeded before. For example, low eurcic acid rapeseed oil became much more popular after becoming "canola oil" in 1988. Prunes tried to shed a stodgy image by becoming "dried plums" in 2000.

More: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100914/ap_on_bi_ge/us_corn_syrup_image

:eyes: I bet it'll be called just "sugar" eventually. Hey, it's legal because the HFCS PR department says so!

[SpiralHawk]

1. How about something French, like 'Crappe de Corn?'

That's something we could all get hooked on.

[leeroysphitz]

36. What about Corngasm™?

[supernova]

2. I've sworn off buying any thing

with corn syrup in it. Unless I'm doing some baking and the recipe specifically calls for Karo syrup, like pecan pie.

It's really a relief to just buy whole foods and nothing processed from the center of the grocery store.

[tridim]

5. Corn syrup isn't the same as HFCS.

You'll notice that lots of food contain both types. I use regular corn syrup for candy making and such, because it serves an actual purpose.

[leveymg]

8. What's the actual difference?

[tridim]

9. More processing, that converts the glucose to fructose.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

17. sucrose to glucose and fructose.

[leveymg]

21. Thnx - naturally occurring corn syrup is 100 percent glucose

The type of HFCS they put is sodas and most other processed stuff is 45/55 G/F. Table sugar is 50/50. http://recipes.howstuffworks.com/sugar2.htm

Don't think any of it is actually good for you in the large quantities typical of the US diet.

[supernova]

60. Yes, I'm aware of that

But sugar is not good in mass quantities in anybody's diet.

[MajorChode]

72. You just hit the nail on the head

Moderation in everything, including moderation.

[hlthe2b]

11. Yes... If you do so, you only frequent 10% or so of the store...

telling, isn't it?

[notadmblnd]

20. I've never used Karo syrup in Pecan pie

I've always used AlaGA

[supernova]

25. What is that?

Never heard of it. :shrug:

[notadmblnd]

61. It's a cane syrup

very dark in color, a slight molassas taste. I just looked at the lable, it dos have corn syrup in it too. My son loves it. His favorite meal is bacon, eggs, bread and AlaGa. His father (who was from the south) would make a big plate and eat from it together when he was little. His father passed away several years ago and I'm sure it's a huge comfort food for him.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

3. That's alright with me.

It's sugar that comes from corn.

:shrug:

[tridim]

7. Corn, not Pron.

[hlthe2b]

15. Has there ever been a post that mentioned HFCS, that you haven't

immediately appeared? So what is with your obsession? :rofl:

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[hlthe2b]

23. Yes, well, science is beginning to suggest otherwise...

Just like those H. pylori-deniers, still determined to ignore links to gastric ulcers... Or the Harvard crowd who eternally ignored the implications of biologic markers (other than cholesterol, LDL and HDL) for CVD...

Time will tell..

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

24. Right, right.

And science is beginning to uncover the truth about fluoride sapping our precious bodily fluids.

[SpiralHawk]

64. ...and there is irrefutable 'scientific' proof on the toxicity of red herrings

Been known to knock sockpuppets to purgatory

[KoKo]

50. We realize that there are Industry Reps who regularly visit comment sections

to defend products. Not saying you are one...but, it's a fact that Industry Reps are out there...and paid.

I've seen Pharma Reps here. Know the industry...so can see the talking points. Especially the lack of discussion just..incessant Talking Points and Name Calling.

Also realize there are Reps from the Natural Foodie Industry who also are around everywhere. In general, though, they aren't as Killer Instinct as the established corporate Reps are.

And...Yes...I avoid HFCS..because it's taste is different from "cane sugar" and causes me gastric problems.

[MajorChode]

73. ...

:tinfoilhat:

[HuckleB]

74. Ding! Ding! DING! DING!

:)

[Jazzgirl]

43. Oh gee. Somebody I'm ignoring and I'm sure I can guess who.

[supernova]

44. Same here

:D

[Pisces]

62. Great eat my share to your hearts content. Good luck with your health.

[Chan790]

4. Can someone just bring an action to just f*cking ban the sh*t already.

That article is so full of mistruths, it's pathetic. HFCS is toxic. It's treated nothing like sugar internally and it's been linked to pancreatic cancer, pancreatitis and increased risk of Type-I diabetes.

[Greybnk48]

13. I'm with you. I read this about an hour ago and could

not believe the gall of the author and the industry spokesperson in saying that there was little or no evidence HFCS is harmful and that it's sugar and "sugar is sugar." Fuckers.

We don't buy anything with it--nothing. I have to make homemade bar-B-que sauce and tartar sauce, but otherwise we have not missed it. When we're in a hurry in the store we just buy anything by Paul Newman's company. They don't put any poisonous shit in their food. Otherwise we read every label.

[trotsky]

19. You make the classic mistake of confusing pure fructose with HFCS.

FYI: table sugar is instantly broken up in our bodies into 50% fructose, 50% glucose. HFCS is roughly 55% fructose, 45% glucose. Please understand the facts.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

22. Do you think apples are toxic, Chan790?

How about honey?

[hlthe2b]

26. That you conflate apples with highy processed corn syrup products

tells me what kind of "scientist" you are HFPS. :eyes:

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

29. Apples have 55% frucose, 45% glucose.

Same as most HFCS.

Same as most fruit (corn, for example).

Same as honey.

"tells me what kind of "scientist" you are HFPS."

You mean one that understands basic chemistry?

You make that sound like it's a bad thing.

[hlthe2b]

33. and fiber?

Good God... what is wrong with you? Do you have ANY understanding of physiology? Biochemistry? Obviously NOT.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

35. Oh, now the goal posts have moved to being about fiber?

Sure, a can of soda with HFCS does not have much fiber. Neither does a sugar cube of cane sugar. Or a glass of apple juice for that matter.

Now a piece of grain bread made with HFCS? OK, there's your fiber. The same amount of fiber made with cane sugar.

HFCS itself does not contain fiber. That's a long way from being "toxic."

Do I understand physiology? Yes. Do I understand biochemistry? Yes.

Do you understand intellectual honesty? No.

[hlthe2b]

38. You equate apples with highly process hfcs....

Obviously you know NOTHING about the physiological effects in the human body. I don't think I have to state the obvious regarding your "intellectual honesty." DUers know.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

40. In that they have the same sugar content, yes.

The person I was responding to claimed that fructose is toxic.

Which is bullshit, which any DUer with a decent education knows.

[MattBaggins]

66. I have an education. Decent is of course debatable.

I will say that fructose is toxic.

[MattBaggins]

65. Yet you don't know that humans are apes

[tridim]

28. Apples and honey aren't processed corn sweeteners.

It's like comparing apples to processed corn sweeteners.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

30. Their sugar content is identical to HFCS.

The fact that one is processed does not actually change anything, any more than taking a photograph steals a person's soul.

[tridim]

31. Fine, go ahead and eat your multi vitamin and Dr. Pepper.

I'll eat the apple, and be healthier because of it.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

32. No, you won't.

That apple contains high fructose apple syrup, which is highly toxic and will give you autism. You're just a shill for the big apple industry.

[Chan790]

41. I don't know.

Have apples and honey been linked to pancreatic cancer, pancreatitis and increased risk of Type-I diabetes?

Not that I'm aware of.

Another question, HFPS. Rather than accusing you, I'll just ask directly. Are you a paid shill for the corn industry's trade association or the labs that produce HFCS?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

46. Using the same link, sure.

"Are you a paid shill for the corn industry's trade association or the labs that produce HFCS?"

No, Chan, I'm not. Are you a scientifically illiterate buffoon who's scared of complicated polysyllabic words like "fructose" and "high?"

[Chan790]

51. Nope.

Though that word before illiterate is giving me some problems.

scien?
scientif?
scientific?
sci-en-tif-ic-ally?
oh, scientifically.

You mean voodoo. Yeah, man, I know fuck-all about voodoo.

Fructose is fruit-sugar.

Hell yeah, I'm high right now.

:P

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

53. Um, fructose is fruit sugar.

Hence the name "fruct" (fruit) and "ose" (sugar).

:shrug:

[Chan790]

55. That's what I said, holmes.

Fructose is fruit-sugar.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

56. Fruit sugar which will kill us all.

What was your point again?

[HuckleB]

42. We'd have to ban all sugars, if we did that.

High Fructose Corn Syrup: Tasty Toxin or Slandered Sweetener?
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=6501

[Chan790]

45. No just the synthetic ones produced in laboratories.

Or even just the synthetic ones produced in laboratories using acetone and petrochemicals that are then excluded from the labeling of foods as "incidental food additives".

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

47. HFCS is not synthetic, nor made in a laboratory.

It's natural, and it comes from corn.

[HuckleB]

49. +1

[HuckleB]

48. What are you talking about?

:shrug:

[MajorChode]

75. Dihydrogen Monoxide is far more dangerous and has yet to be banned

Dihydrogen Monoxide and Cancer

The causative link between Dihydrogen Monoxide (DHMO) and Cancer is currently not established, although a significant amount of evidence seems to suggest that DHMO at least plays a role in the formation of cancer, including:

* Hodgkin's Lymphoma,
* Ewing's Tumor,
* chondrosarcoma,
* fibrosarcoma,
* multiple myeloma,
* colorectal cancer,
* Leukemia,
* basal cell carcinoma,
* squamous cell carcinoma, and
* malignant melanoma.

Detection and Treatment
What is known about these cancers is that Dihydrogen Monoxide is found in detectable and biologically significant levels in virtually all tumors and other cancerous and pre-cancerous growths.

Cancer research has made significant advances in the detection and treatment of many forms of cancers. With each new advancement, the role DHMO plays in the cause of cancer is likely to be better understood.

Environmental Impact of Dihydrogen Monoxide
Due in part to its widespread use in industry, Dihydrogen Monoxide (DHMO) is involved in many environmental incidents each year. While most are unavoidable given current technology, there can be little doubt that the presence of DHMO in each significantly increases the negative impact to the environment.


Among the many commonly-sited DHMO-related environmental impacts are:

* DHMO contributes to global warming and the "Greenhouse Effect", and is one of the so-called "greenhouse gasses."

* DHMO is an "enabling component" of acid rain -- in the absence of sufficient quantities of DHMO, acid rain is not a problem.

* DHMO is a causative agent in most instances of soil erosion -- sufficiently high levels of DHMO exacerbate the negative effects of soil erosion.

* DHMO is present in high levels nearly every creek, stream, pond, river, lake and reservoir in the U.S. and around the world.

* Measurable levels of DHMO have been verified in ice samples taken from both the Arctic and Antarctic ice caps.

* Recent massive DHMO exposures have lead to the loss of life and destruction of property in California, the Mid-West, the Philippines, and a number of islands in the Caribbean, to name just a few.
* Research has shown that significant levels of DHMO were found in the devastating Indian Ocean tsunami in 2004 which killed 230,000 in Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia and elsewhere, making it the deadliest tsunami in recorded history.
* It is widely believed that the levee failures, flooding and the widespread destruction resulting from Hurricane Katrina along the U.S. Gulf Coast in 2005 were caused or exacerbated by excessive DHMO levels found in the Gulf of Mexico, along with other contributing factors.

Industrial DHMO Dumping
In spite of the recent movement to ban unlawful dumping of hazardous chemicals into waterways in the U.S. and abroad, release of massive quantities of DHMO continues. Industry cannot be held accountable entirely because lawmakers are reluctant to pass legislation to make most forms of dumping of DHMO illegal. Reasons for this could include pressures from corporate leaders, industry lobbyists, and even vested foreign governments. This governmental inaction leading to nearly unregulated dumping may be one of the most overlooked environmental impacts of DHMO.

Meanwhile, federal (EPA) regulations are in place to make illegal the disposal of DHMO in landfills, including those licensed for hazardous waste. Regulations also stipulate that any DHMO appearing in a landfill must be removed. Judging from these laws it appears that the U.S. government recognizes the inherent danger DHMO poses to the environment, at least in certain circumstances.

The U.S. government refuses to ban the production, distribution, and use of DHMO. This inaction may be due to pressures from private interests and corporate-sponsored economists, among many, who predict a DHMO ban could produce disastrous results. Claims include damage to public health and the well-being of the U.S. and world economies.

Fortunately, some industry and governmental leaders are taking the initiative to inform and educate their employees in spite of what the U.S. government's official policy may be. Major employers, such as Sandia National Laboratories, a national security laboratory operated by the Sandia Corporation, a Lockheed Martin Co., for the U.S. Department of Energy, have begun notifying their workers of the DHMO issue. With efforts such as those at Sandia, the proliferation of DHMO may one day be minimized.

Equally encouraging is the support of environmental organizations, such as the Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand, an important force in the southern hemisphere promoting "ecological wisdom, social responsibility, appropriate decision-making and non-violence." Notably, a busy high-ranking Member of Parliament there supports a ban on DHMO. This welcome endorsement serves as a reminder to a pre-occupied world that fostering a widespread knowledge of DHMO is crucial.

Dihydrogen Monoxide Conspiracy
Current allegations suggest that the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) may be conspiring to cover up the whole DHMO issue. Attempts by DHMO researchers to elicit comment from the EPA regarding the possible coverup were either ignored or dodged, leading researchers to infer the alleged coverup. Incredibly, the EPA then attempted to divert attention from the real issue onto talk of the aesthetics and layout of the EAC's DMRD web site!

EPA Refuses to Confirm or Deny Coverup
In spite of a direct query for information, the EPA refused to deny the existence of a coverup. The researcher, who reported to us under conditions of anonymity, sent correspondence asking if the EPA knows more about Dihydrogen Monoxide than it is telling us.
Point Blank Questions Ignored
The researcher went on to ask, point blank, "Are you asking me to participate in some sort of coverup?" And, "Do you deny that the EPA is purposely keeping quiet on the issue of Dihydrogen Monoxide?" For whatever reason, the EPA would not say, offering no comment on the questions at all.

EPA Saber Rattling
However, in a strongly worded reply, the EPA did seemingly go on the offensive with statements such as:

* "The Agency would like to ask you to remove .",

* "The point is, if your visitors are in any way led to the impression that EPA is endorsing your site, that is not good for either of us.",

* "I hope you see our point of view",

* "We take our mission of protecting the environment seriously", and

* "We consider this a serious matter and would appreciate your help."

Some may find these heavy handed statements shocking. The wording of the EPA's correspondence with the researcher are filled with these sorts of anachronisms; one would expect such talk from a movie gangster, but not from a taxpayer-funded agency of the United States government.

Draw Your Own Conclusions
There is certainly no doubt that the Dihydrogen Monoxide issue touched a nerve at the US EPA. And while sources at the EPA admit to the benefits of freely distributing information to the public on DHMO, they stop short of admitting to a coverup. Perhaps there really is no coverup. Or maybe the EPA's silence confirms its existence. It is clear that the EPA is putting no effort into educating the public about the dangers of Dihydrogen Monoxide. It is also clear that the truth may forever be obscured, so for now the reader is left to reach his or her own conclusions regarding the possible conspiracy at the EPA to coverup the DHMO issue.

[leveymg]

6. Like compressed petroleum gas (aka "Clean Natural Gas"), we'll be calling it Healthy Natural Sugar

Orwell had a thing or two to say about the bastardization of the English language.

[stuntcat]

68. for real

I bet you are exactly right.

[InvisibleTouch]

10. Duplicitous dirtbags.

In this day and age of information, though, I think the word will get out - just as the word eventually got out to avoid the stuff in the first place. I'll be sure to do my part to spread the news. I do still very knowingly eat and drink a few things that contain HFCS, only on special occasions and just because I really *like* them (no one will ever accuse me of excessive self-discipline), but for everything else, I check the labels. I think health-conscious consumers are less easy to mislead these days, as there's starting to be an awareness that the big corps do *not* have our best interests at heart. The big food companies are owned by the same conglomerates as the big pharma companies, so of course they're happy to sell us "food" that will sooner or later give them a chance to sell us drugs as well.

[L0oniX]

34. +9999999999999999999999999999

[Junkdrawer]

12. Combat operations in Iraq are over....

Corn syrup has been eliminated in US food production.

There, that was easy.

[global1]

14. I Read All The Food Labels Now And Avoid Anything I Can That Contains HFCS.......

I think a lot of people are doing that because of all the bad publicity its been getting of late.

I'm thinking that the HFCS producers are starting to see this happening and want to fool us stupid Americans by changing the name.

Certainly looking at a label and seeing corn sugar versus HFCS might solve that problem for them.

Some unsuspecting people might even mistake this and think there is a comma between corn and sugar and think they are two separate ingredients (i.e.,corn, sugar vs corn sugar).

After all that's what marketing is all about - deception and fooling most of the people all of the time.

I hope that the FDA in this case continues to do their job to protect us and not allow for this name change.

[tridim]

18. Watch out for "Crystaline Fructose" as well, it's also a processed corn sweetener.

My favorite local yogurt brand recently switched from sugar to crystaline fructose. I stopped buying it immediately.

[stuntcat]

69. ty

I'm cutting out as much sugar as I can, but they give it like a THOUSAND names x(

[surrealAmerican]

27. "They hope a new name will ease confusion about about the sweetener."

No, they hope the new name will CAUSE confusion about it. I hope the FDA doesn't approve this. It's a pretty obvious ploy to "re-brand" their product in order to mislead customers.

[denverbill]

37. Cool. I'm going to rename a triple quarter pounder with cheese a carrot. n/t

[marmar]

39. .........

[SoCalDem]

52. I bought a bottle of Log Cabin syrup yesterday..LARGE letters on the front label

NO HIGH FRUCTOSE CORN SYRUP..

The food "manufacturers" are getting the message..:)

[HuckleB]

54. Well, their marketing departments know how to sell a product.

Unfortunately, that doesn't mean the product is any better for us. The problem is that we eat too much sugar period. Since HFCS is the cheapest sweetener around, it's the most prevalent, but it's not, in and of itself, an evil. The prevalence and amount we eat is the problem.

High Fructose Corn Syrup: Tasty Toxin or Slandered Sweetener?
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=6501

[SoCalDem]

57. Marketers are keenly aware of trends..

It's sure that Americans eat too much sugar, but with the way foods are processed these days, there is often added sugars in foods that did not used to have it..and that do not really need it.

Since we only go through a bottle of syrup once a year or so, we are relatively "safe"..and since my husband's diabetic, he has his own "special syrup"..and I never salt or "sugar" what I cook these days:)

[HuckleB]

59. It's definitely about how much.

We use real maple syrup, and we eat far too much of it, but, then again, we don't eat much else with sugar in it. OK. I do have some ice cream now and then. Mmmmm.

:hi:

[hlthe2b]

67. Other companies that are removing HFCS:

Moves back to sugar (from wiki) I have purchased buns and other bread products that specifically mention no hfcs...

*******************

A March 21, 2009 The New York Times article said that some food companies and restaurants were using sugar in their product as a selling point, in order to attract customers who prefer not to consume high-fructose corn syrup. As one example, the article cited Jason's Deli, a chain of delis with 200 restaurants in 27 states. The chain had replaced high-fructose corn syrup with sugar in everything except a few soft drinks. Daniel Helfman, a spokesman for the deli chain, was quoted as saying, "Part of this is a huge rebellion against HFCS... but part of it is taste."<71>

PepsiCo recently put forth a "throwback" version of Mountain Dew and Pepsi-Cola, designed to taste the same as these drinks did in the 1960s and 1970s. One aspect of the formulation is that sugar is used instead of HFCS. PepsiCo stated that HFCS and sugar are "essentially the same" and that the only reason HFCS was eschewed was in order to accurately reflect the taste of the past.<72> Dr Pepper also released a "heritage" version of Dr Pepper Soda in 2009 that was made to the original formula and used beet sugar instead of HFCS. Since its establishment in 1891, the Dr Pepper bottling plant in Dublin, TX has continued to use the original formula sweetened with Imperial Cane Sugar (see Dublin Dr Pepper).<73> In addition, the Coca-Cola bottling plant in the Lehigh Valley, Pennsylvania also uses sucrose. <74>

In May 2010, Hunt's removed high-fructose corn syrup from its ketchup due to buyer preference as a result of health concerns.<75>

[KamaAina]

58. That puts them right up there with PETA and their "sea kittens"

:eyes:

Someone needs to come up with a recipe featuring both "sea kittens" and "corn sugar".

[Burma Jones]

63. Time to grow stuff besides so damned much Corn....n/t

[stuntcat]

70. exactly

precisely.
growing it for fuel is a stupid waste of land too.
and we feed it to animals who don't even eat corn, except in our "farms"

dumb dumb dumb

[HuckleB]

71. Time to stop eating so much sugar, period.