Site Search

Did I just see a Commercial for High Fructose Corn Syrup Being Natural?

By Velma Garnes

I had the TV on as background noise when I heard a commercial I'd never heard before about high fructose corn syrup (HFCS). You may have seen it. The commercial starts off with two moms throwing a party for their kids. One of the moms is pouring a fruity-looking flavored drink into a glass while the other mother makes what she thinks is a valid observation by starting an exchange with this statement:

"Wow, you don't care what the kids eat, huh?" Lady 1

"Excuse me?" Lady 2

" That has high fructose corn syrup in it." Lady 1

"…and?" Lady 2

"Yeah, you know what they say about it?" Lady 1

"Like what?" Lady 2

" Well….um, er (audible pauses)" Lady 1

"That it's made from corn, doesn't have artificial ingredients, and like sugar, it's fine in moderation?" Lady 2

Then there are words said at the end of the commercial to this effect:

"Get the facts. You're in for a sweet surprise."

This is the end of the commercial and it's an advertisement paid for by the Corn Refiner's Association. Hmmm? I know, big surprise, right? Needless to say, I was completely perplexed. I honestly thought that it might have been a skit by MadTV, but there was no canned laughter response. I wanted to know more.

Then my perplexity switched to concern. I started to wonder if there were any truth to these proposed claims and wanted to dig in a little further to see if I was giving HFCS a bad rap. I had to get the facts, and that's how this article came to be.

Are these claims warranted? Let's get to the bottom of it. The Corn Refiner's Association is on an obvious campaign to increase their sales and so has released several commercials like this one all espousing the same facts about high fructose corn syrup. I'll give you the facts, then YOU decide.

First, let's start with the 4 alleged facts purported in the one loaded statement at the end of this in all of their commercials:

Proposed Fact #1: HFCS is made from corn.

My findings:

This is actually true, but first, a little history/chemistry lesson.

Corn refining started in the United States around the time of the Civil War with the development of cornstarch. After that it was discovered that cornstarch could be converted to glucose (1866). By 1882 the corn industry began the manufacturing of "refined corn sugar" or corn syrup. The remainder of the corn plant from this process, the fiber, germ and protein, was sold as animal feed and/or to convert to corn oil. In 1921 corn made its evolution into crystalline dextrose hydrate. The purification of this process meant that for the first time corn-based sweeteners could compete in a market that was only dominated by- none other than- the sugar industry.

By mid-1950's technology for commercializing low conversion products was developed. Next came the enzyme-catalyzed isomerization of glucose to fructose – the beginning of high fructose corn syrup.

Commercialization of HFCS began in 1967 with the fructose content of the syrup at approximately 15%. Further research enabled a higher conversion 42%. By combining the converted 42% with the 90% HFCS and a few more conversions the fructose conversion became even sweeter still at 55% and so therefore became the prime choice for sweeteners of soda and ice cream. The 90% version is used in products labeled "natural" or "light"*

To simplify: HFCS is produced by processing cornstarch to yield glucose, and then processing the glucose to produce a high percentage of fructose. This might sound simple enough --white cornstarch is turned into crystal clear syrup. However, as you can see the process is actually very complicated. There are 3 different enzymes needed to break down cornstarch. Cornstarch is composed of chains of glucose molecules of nearly infinite length. To take these infinite glucose molecules and break them down into the simple sugars, glucose and fructose requires much processing.

I'm not sure after this whole process it HFCS should still be considered as "corn". That's for you to decide.

Proposed fact #2: HFCS does not have any artificial ingredients.

My findings:

Refer to Proposed Fact #1. In lieu of the explanation of the process/es from Proposed Fact #1 that corn must travel through to make this syrup, do you think artificial ingredients should be the primary concern here? It's not so much as the ingredients that are the problem as it is the process and it's affect it may have on your body. You'd be hard pressed to find anyone on the planet that has a problem with corn itself, dislikes and allergies aside.

In a most recent statement from Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), released this statement:

"The Corn Refiners Association's slick new advertising is deceptive in stating that high-fructose corn syrup "has the same natural sweeteners as table sugar." HFCS consists almost entirely of glucose and fructose, but not a single molecule of sucrose. Sugar is 100 percent sucrose. It is true that adding a water molecule to sucrose and splitting it in half yields one molecule each of glucose and fructose—but that is not the same as saying that HFCS and sugar contain the same sweeteners. It is also deceptive to imply that HFCS is natural. HFCS starts out as cornstarch, which is chemically or enzymatically degraded to glucose (and some short polymers of glucose). Another enzyme is then used to convert varying fractions of glucose into fructose. High fructose corn syrup just doesn't exist in nature. That said, the special harmfulness of HFCS has become one of those urban myths that sounds right, but is basically wrong. Nutritionally, HFCS and sucrose may be identical, but that's no excuse for this deceptive advertising campaign.

Subsequent ads from the Corn Refiners Association used less deceptive language to describe high-fructose corn syrup. Though made from corn starch and nutritionally equal to table sugar/sucrose, HFCS does not occur in nature and should be considered an artificial ingredient." 


This brings me to my next Proposed Fact:

Proposed fact #3: HFCS is like sugar.

This is true. HFCS is structurally the same as sugar. The difference may be in how the body processes it.

My findings:

Okay, sorry. This time it's a chemistry/biochemistry lesson. Ahem, I know, but bear with me here. First let's deal with the structure of our sugars:

Sucrose, fructose and HFCS:

Sucrose (sugar) is a naturally occurring disaccharide that is half glucose and half fructose, hence the name disaccharide; di- meaning two; sacharide meaning sugar; two-sugars.

Fructose is a fruit sugar and occurs naturally in fruits and is a 6-carbon sugar.

HFCS, as we learned in Proposed Fact #1 starts off as cornstarch and is highly processed to arrive at the most commonly used syrup in foods today resulting in the 52-55% syrup. Although the name may be misleading (high fructose), it has the same fructose components as sucrose.

Now let's deal with how your body translates each one:

Sucrose has been blamed for the malabsorption of calcium and the excretion of sodium and phosphorus both important components for calcium absorption. It is also known to increase insulin response, which in turn slows down the fat release into the bloodstream to be burned by the muscle.

Fructose does not cause an insulin response and bypasses cellular uptake. It is readily available for fatty acid and triglyceride synthesis. Which essentially means that it is quickly prepared to make fat. It is almost entirely metabolized by the liver. When sent to the liver, the liver stops everything else to metabolize the fructose. Eating an overabundance increases the likelihood of weight gain. Fructose does not stimulate 2 key hormones involved in long-term regulation of energy equilibrium, insulin and leptin. Fructose is rarely consumed alone, and is usually consumed together with sucrose.

HFCS should not be considered as natural or as a nutrient. It is still unclear why HFCS would affect satiety or absorption different from that of sucrose. To date I have not been able to find a study that clearly proves that HFCS contributes to weight gain any more than sucrose (sugar).

Proposed fact #4: HFCS is fine in moderation.

We should first define moderation. Vaguely most consumers define "moderation" as "not too much". Since HFCS is in virtually everything, this tends to complicate "moderation". Quite frankly, with our obesity rates soaring into the 70th percentile, I think consumers are having a difficult enough time trying to define "moderation".

That being said, there are no amounts proposed by the Corn Refiner's Association or the FDA to be found per the date of this writing.

My point is to raise your suspicion of the effects of ADDED fructose in the form of sucrose or HFCS to the American Diet, NOT from an abundance of fruits and vegetables. Consumption of fruits and vegetables in abundance should be encouraged for the benefits of fiber, micronutrients and antioxidants.

In conclusion, it's best to limit/eliminate if possible your intake of added sugars period except from those naturally occurring in fruits and vegetables.

So now you have the facts, although, I have to admit I am a little disappointed that I could not find more evidence that supports that HFCS is different from sucrose. I am still skeptical and I wonder why the use of HFCS is banned in Europe. Make your decision about whether or not you want to indulge in the HFCS, or decide if there is/ is not enough risk involved in order to spend time and effort in trying to avoid it. My guess is if doubt is being created and confusion surrounds it, there may be need for some concern, or suspicion. They may be worried about their own bottom line not yours. Just be suspicious and get the facts.

*Although there is a 90% version available of HFCS, it is the 55% solution that is most commonly used.

References:

1. Basciano, Federico, Adeli,: Fructose, insulin resistance, and metabolic dislipidemia. Nutrition and Metabolism (Lond) 2005, Feb 21;2(1):5.

2. Forshee, Storey, Allison, Glinsmann, Hein, Lineback, Miller, Nicklas, Weaver, White: A Critical Examination of the Evidence Relating High Fructose Corn Syrup and Weight Gain. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition (College Park, MD) 2007, Aug; pages 561-582

3. Holl, Allen:Sucrose ingestion, insulin response and mineral metabolism in humans. J- Nutr. 1987 Jul; 117(7): 1229-33

4. Wood, Phillip; A perspective on Sugars: Fructose, high fructose corn syrup, and sucrose.Oct, 2008 http://www.diabetesincontrol.com/results.php?storyarticle=4486

5. Sanda, Bill; The Double Danger of High Fructose Corn Syrup. Oct, 2008 http://www.westonaprice.org/modernfood/highfructose.html

6. Akhavan, Anderson: Effects of glucose-to-fructose ratios in solutions on subjective satiety, food intake, and satiety hormones in young men. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, November 2007;Vol. 86, No. 5, 1

7. Jegtvig: Is White Sugar Better Than High Fructose Corn Syrup? Oct, 2008. http://nutrition.about.com/od/grainsandcereals/f/fructosesyrup.htm

8. Jacobson, Michael,;Statement: Corn Refiner's Ad Campaign Called Deceptive. http://www.cspinet.org/new/200806231.html

9. Food Safety Food Additives. Oct. 2008.http://www.cspinet.org/reports/chemcuisine.htm#hfcs

10. Forristal, Joyce: The Murky World of High Fructose Corn Syrup. Oct, 2008. http://www.westonaprice.org/motherlinda/cornsyrup.html

11. George A Bray, Samara Joy Nielsen and Barry M Popkin: Consumption of High- Fructose Corn Syrup in Beverages May Play a Role in the Epidemic of Obesity. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, April 2004 ;Vol. 79, No. 4, 537-543

About the Author:

Velma Esprit Garnes resides in Gahanna, Ohio where she is a fitness freelance writer, professor and recently inducted into Columbus State Community College’s Sports Exercise Studies Hall of Fame. She can be through her website at www.studiotemple.com