CTA Doomsday Schedule: Day 2
Calumet Fisheries Wins James Beard Award
How To: Roast a Chicken (If You're an Idiot)
CTA Service Cuts Start Today
30% Chance Of Hailey
There's been a backlash against high fructose corn syrup in recent years as the sweetener has been linked to a litany of health problems. But when life gives you lemons, you make lemonade. Or, if you're the soft drink industry, you make sodas loaded with sugar and market it as both a better-tasting product and a healthier alternative to HFCS.
We'll freely admit that, when it comes to soft drinks, we fall on the "real sugar" side: Jarritos and Mexican Coca-cola (available at Pete's Fresh Market) have both taken pantry space in Casa del Sudo. Now Crain's is reporting that Kraft has reformulated many of its products to remove HFCS. It's like replacing heavily cut cocaine with a blend that only contains less baby laxative. Costco is even selling Mexican Coke in select markets to rave reviews from consumers.
It's consumer awareness that's driving the change here: among many factors in corporate decisions to remove HFCS, "stuff made with sugar tastes better" consistently ranks high on consumer feedback. There are some that will dispute that, but studies have also shown that That's the good news. The bad news is that companies are simply replacing one bad ingredient with another and saying, "We're looking out for you."
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
Sugar water is sugar water, so yes the whole debate is a bit amusing. You really shouldnt ever drink it, and yet there are folks out there going through 2-litres a day. However, Im more concerned about all the other foods and products on the market which contain HFCS (as well as other artificial ingredients). Which is why as a general rule, staying away from processed foods is really the best dietary choice you can make. You look at every other culture worldwide, and regardless of what their native diet consists of, they almost universally lead healthier lives than those on a western diet. And when you transplant these people or introduce western processed foods to these cultures, they almost immediately begin to develop "western" diseases (high blood pressure, diabetes, obesity, etc). And when you remove that food and put them back on a native diet, their conditions begin to improve almost immediately (some famous studies have been done on this).
My understanding is that Americans' increasing tendency to make everything we eat with corn the last 20 years, in conjunction with things like the push toward ethanol, land use issues and, to a lesser extent, increased production costs due to growing Great Plains water problems, have driven corn markets way out of whack the last 5 or 10 years or so. The sugar market, on the other hand, has fallen to the point that Florida's Republican governors are buying out sugar plantations and returning them to something close to natural wetlands. I can't help but wonder, then, what a large scale move from HFCS to sugar would do to these trends, and what it would mean for food costs in general.
Actually sugar prices are at their highest in 50 years because of supply issues and other factors. Companies might start turning back to corn syrup in a few years when they realize how expensive sugar has gotten.
Ah ... I know more about corn than sugar, as I don't really look at that part of the country/continent, and I really only know corn as it relates to other pet issues of mine. But you're right ... which makes me wonder even more about food prices.
Actually, sugar prices are artificially high. Tariffs on importing sugar are ridiculous, and the problem would be solved if we got sugar from Central America instead of boating it over from Hawaii, but thanks to tariffs that makes it ridiculous. Marion Nestle had plenty to say on this in her blog recently.
I'm the author of the 2nd link that Chuck posted up top, the link to BevReview's coverage of Pepsi Throwback (and yes, I'm in Chicago too!) We've seen the HFCS vs. sugar debate thrown around quite a bit, and the introduction in the spring of Pepsi & Mountain Dew Throwback only added to the screaming voices on both sides.
In my opinion, there are really two angles to the debate. There is the health side... and there is the actual taste side (I discussed this angle with NPR via an interview I did with them in May).
While I'm not privy to the sales numbers of Throwback, it was an interesting measurement of market demand, which up to this point has had folks going to niche brands like Jones that use cane sugar... or tracking down Mexican Coke or the nice Kosher Coke that hits around Passover. Throwback was one of the first times that a mainstream provider of soft drinks actually advertised that they were using sugar in the beverage as a differentiator. Granted, they were careful to say it was "natural sugar", as opposed to "real sugar" or something like that (In effect, it was a blend of cane and beet sugar).
The feedback we got as a beverage review website was that folks preferred the sugar-sweetened drinks not primarily for the health debate... the majority of folks seemed to skew that way because of the taste. It's just that much better (I wrote a review doing a side-by-side-by-side comparison of HFCS Pepsi, Pepsi Throwback, and Kosher Pepsi to sort of prove this point.) The outcry to Pepsi has been so strong that they are bringing Throwback back for a limited time in December (but with better packaging, thank goodness!)
That said, I don't think this is a trend you are seeing with a large conglomerate doing what is right. It's simply going after customer demands and trends for sugar-oriented products.
- Steve
The only reason HFCS is used is because it's cheaper for corporations to mass produce it. It keeps their costs low and improves their profit margins.
The health benefits and risks of sugar vs. HFCS are still up in the air, but for myself I can attest that when I cut down on eating foods with HFCS I felt enough of a difference that I avoid it whenever I can.
Clarence- yea, its cheaper, but ask yourself why. Sugar has had enormous tariffs placed on it, while the corn industry receives massive subsidies from the US gov't.
So many people are addicted to sugar. Corn or cane or whatever. It's too bad.
Sugar is just the absolute worst, worst, worst thing.
And then combine it with caffeine...it's criminal. They outlaw marijuana and yet market Mountain Dew in Appalachia where they wean their babies on that shit and you see people in their 20's who need dentures because all of their teeth have rotted out.
I wish they'd switch sugar and soda with marijuana. Outlaw the one, legalize the other, because sugar is way more dangerous than pot.
Mountain Dew is the gateway drug people should worry about.
Does the Mexican version of Coca-Cola have decoacainized coca leaves in it as well?
I don't think we can definitely say HFCS is or isn't worse for us than sugar. The problem is that companies put HFCS in damn near everything these days (though as the article points out, they are starting to roll it back a little) so that in any given day we are probably consuming a ton of the stuff without even being aware of it. HFCS is often added to reduced-fat foods to improve the taste. So read the labels carefully to make sure you're not just exchanging fat for sugar. HFCS is converted into fat by the liver.
It's too hard to completely eliminate HFCS from my diet, but I try to limit my sugar intake in general, especially HFCS. When practical I buy products without it. However, I've tried Pepsi Throwback and I just don't like the taste; to me it tastes like Coke, which is nasty. Give me HFCS Pepsi any day (except I don't drink it more than a couple times a month). Anyone want 10 cans of Pepsi Throwback? I foolishly bought a 12 pack without having tried it first.
All barbeque sauces, all ready-made marinades, and all brands of ketchup have HFCS. All of them.