High-fructose corn syrup prompts considerably more weight gain than sugar (2010)

Post by maxerickson » Sat, Jul 13, 2013, 6:45 PM UTC

jjoonathan wrote: post #20

MostAwesomeDude wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You sound like you are a paid shill. I know that you aren't, which disappoints me further, because I'd like to think that people are capable of educating themselves instead of spreading misinformation. On your first paragraph, pondering whether sucrose breaks down into fructose and glucose immediately: No, it doesn't. HFCS makes sugars available to the bloodstream sooner, causing larger swings in overall blood sugar…

First of all, I tend to agree with the sibling posts accusing you of failing to maintain scholarly decorum. The "paid shill" remark was uncalled for, even if I tend to agree with your criticisms (at least, all but the most crucial one). > pondering whether sucrose breaks down into fructose and glucose immediately: No, it doesn't. Can you substantiate this further (say, with an in-vivo sucrose half-life)? I don't have…

Post by randomdata » Sat, Jul 13, 2013, 6:49 PM UTC

hayksaakian wrote: post #30

randomdata wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is not exactly solved, because it is not clear what the farmers should grow in the place of corn. As a grain farmer operating in a country that does not have subsidies, we still end up growing corn, even if it results in a loss. Bankers prefer to see a loss than to leave the land lay fallow, and there are not many famers who can operate against banker's wishes in such a capital intensive business. You can…

As long as the subsidies exist, there is no capitalistic incentive to solve the problem. If a solution NEEDS to be found, it is more likely to be found.

Post by meowface » Sat, Jul 13, 2013, 6:50 PM UTC

MostAwesomeDude wrote: post #5

buddylw wrote: post #2

I don't understand the mechanism here. I thought sucrase, the enzyme that breaks down sucrose (table sugar) into 1 fructose and 1 glucose (same as HFCS), acted almost immediately -- at least on the timescale of nutrient absorption. Is it just short circuiting our sense of satiety? Maybe the raw fructose makes things sweeter and stimulates reward centers better? I wonder where honey falls in all this since it has high…

You sound like you are a paid shill. I know that you aren't, which disappoints me further, because I'd like to think that people are capable of educating themselves instead of spreading misinformation. On your first paragraph, pondering whether sucrose breaks down into fructose and glucose immediately: No, it doesn't. HFCS makes sugars available to the bloodstream sooner, causing larger swings in overall blood sugar…

Post by randomdata » Sat, Jul 13, 2013, 6:53 PM UTC

justin66 wrote: post #29

randomdata wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is not exactly solved, because it is not clear what the farmers should grow in the place of corn. As a grain farmer operating in a country that does not have subsidies, we still end up growing corn, even if it results in a loss. Bankers prefer to see a loss than to leave the land lay fallow, and there are not many famers who can operate against banker's wishes in such a capital intensive business. You can…

> The problem is not exactly solved, because it is not clear what the farmers should grow in the place of corn. It's quite possible they should stop being farmers and that the nation should farm out (get it?) much of its agriculture to the developing world. This is certainly what "the market" dictates and something which government spends a lot of money working to prevent.

Post by buddylw » Sat, Jul 13, 2013, 6:56 PM UTC

ck2 wrote: post #3

Stop giving out corn welfare to corporations and problem solved. It's the ONLY reason why it's so heavily used. Corn syrup and ethanol - two massively damaging products of a completely corrupt system that everyone refuses to change because of massive profits off taxpayers.