6 ms·

It would be nice if there were a nutrition label for the entire package. Until then I can use Wolfram Alpha, which has quite a good database. And I agree with

It would be nice if there were a nutrition label for the entire package. Until then I can use Wolfram Alpha, which has quite a good database. And I agree with you on the fructose. It is bad stuff, at least in the concentrations found in processed food. It is a bit comical that the EPA is raising holy hell over carbon dioxide while the FDA turns a blind eye to HFCS.

likpok 17y ago
Citation? I've heard lots of people talk of the dangers of HFCS, but I've never even heard of a scientific explanation, let alone seen a study.
- msluyter 17y ago
  There's tons out there. A good start would be "Good Calories, Bad Calories," by Gary Taubes. Here's a good article: http://www.westonaprice.org/The-Double-Danger-of-High-Fructose-Corn-Syrup.html http://www.westonaprice.org/The-Double-Danger-of-High-Fructo...
- jerf 17y ago
  "Robert H. Lustig, MD, UCSF Professor of Pediatrics in the Division of Endocrinology, explores the damage caused by sugary foods. He argues that fructose (too much) and fiber (not enough) appear to be cornerstones of the obesity epidemic through their effects on insulin. Series: UCSF Mini Medical School for the Public": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM
  - natrius 17y ago
    If you've watched the video then you know this already, but for those who haven't: For most intents and purposes, HFCS is biologically identical to table sugar, except it tastes a little sweeter. Sucrose (table sugar) is a glucose molecule bonded to a fructose molecule. HFCS is roughly half fructose as well. The problem is overconsumption of sugar and consumption of sugar unaccompanied by fiber. Watch the video.
    - jerf 17y ago
      Yup, I figured I'd just let the video speak for itself. It doesn't support the idea that HFCS is especially evil in the way that, say, transfats are, but it's still bad enough for you that the presenter is willing to call it a "poison", and he backs that up reasonably well even if you aren't quite willing to go that far.
      - lena 17y ago
        But it is important to note the presenter calls normal sugar a poison as well because they're both high in fructose and devoid of nutrients.

likpok 17y ago

Citation? I've heard lots of people talk of the dangers of HFCS, but I've never even heard of a scientific explanation, let alone seen a study.

msluyter 17y ago
There's tons out there. A good start would be "Good Calories, Bad Calories," by Gary Taubes. Here's a good article: http://www.westonaprice.org/The-Double-Danger-of-High-Fructose-Corn-Syrup.html http://www.westonaprice.org/The-Double-Danger-of-High-Fructo...
jerf 17y ago
"Robert H. Lustig, MD, UCSF Professor of Pediatrics in the Division of Endocrinology, explores the damage caused by sugary foods. He argues that fructose (too much) and fiber (not enough) appear to be cornerstones of the obesity epidemic through their effects on insulin. Series: UCSF Mini Medical School for the Public": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM
- natrius 17y ago
  If you've watched the video then you know this already, but for those who haven't: For most intents and purposes, HFCS is biologically identical to table sugar, except it tastes a little sweeter. Sucrose (table sugar) is a glucose molecule bonded to a fructose molecule. HFCS is roughly half fructose as well. The problem is overconsumption of sugar and consumption of sugar unaccompanied by fiber. Watch the video.
  - jerf 17y ago
    Yup, I figured I'd just let the video speak for itself. It doesn't support the idea that HFCS is especially evil in the way that, say, transfats are, but it's still bad enough for you that the presenter is willing to call it a "poison", and he backs that up reasonably well even if you aren't quite willing to go that far.
    - lena 17y ago
      But it is important to note the presenter calls normal sugar a poison as well because they're both high in fructose and devoid of nutrients.