Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

princeton.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 128 posts

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

#91

Post by yajoe »

Groxx wrote: post #63
stephengillie wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another control on this is the Overall Allotment Quantity of sugar, which is the USDA-regulated quantity of sugar which can be sold in any year. If you have too much sugar to sell, you'll have to store it or dump it. This is to keep sugar's price high. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overall_Allotment_Quantity

That's an... interesting mechanism. I can't figure out what the goal is, aside from, as you said, keeping prices high (specifically for those two kinds of sugar, which seems extra weird) - is there another reasonable explanation?

It's extremely complicated. One reason for keeping prices high this season is to prevent loan defaults from the farmers/producers in the fall. So one part of the federal government may spend another $40mil affecting the sugar market (high prices this season) to prevent a loan default of $100mil to different parts of same federal government and all of the fallout to those small businesses. Bankruptcy threatens families keeping their farms... as big of a deal as foreclosures for suburbanites.

The loans are based on a variety of factors and have a variety of goals from ensuring that family farms exist (and don't get gobbled by mega-farm corps) to ensuring that we grow certain kinds of crops in this country to ensuring we build better combines. It's very complicated and any 'narrative' that has a single cause or explanation is likely incorrect.

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

#92

Post by swamp40 »

I can't believe the smartest people on the planet here are arguing about this.

HFCS is cheaper than sugar because of the tariffs, but it is an equivalent substitute. No better, no worse.

Americans are getting fatter these days because the food industry (McDonald's as well as prepackaged foods) can make desirable, filling foods for a dollar or two.

If they needed to use sugar instead of HFCS, it would be about 10 cents more per dollar - big deal.

People like corn dogs and cake - it tastes good. So businesses have mass produced it enough to make it affordable to everyone.

The potatoes and beans of yesterday are cheap as well, but nobody wants them. That's why people are gaining weight.

Absolutely nothing to do with HFCS vs sugar - the food designers can use either one with the same effect.

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

#93

Post by gohrt »

kyllo wrote: post #45
buddylw wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree completely that corn subsidies are out of control, but it's not clear that getting rid of corn would solve the health problem. It would likely be replaced with 'high fructose' . Fructose has properties (very sweet, doesn't crystallize like sucrose, etc.) that junk food purveyors love and corn doesn't even contain any fructose naturally. Any starch + amylase makes a syrup (my personal favorite is rice syrup).…

Right, if corn were not subsidized, corn syrup would probably not be wholly replaced with cane sugar, as cane sugar is much more expensive, a lot of it is imported, and it can't really be grown productively in most of the US--inside the US it's really only grown in Florida, Texas, and Hawaii. The 89 million acres[1] of corn harvested in the US would be partly replaced by some other starchy crop x, and high fructose c…

Be careful! Raising the price of a cheap good can drive consumers to buy less of a more expensive competing good, and therefore buy yet MORE of the now-less-expensive cheap good.

If corn gets more expensive, and that may mean that people need to squeexe their food budgets and buy fewers expensive foods like vegetables, and instead by more corn sugar, which is still cheapest per-calorie.

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

#94

Post by gohrt »

tanzam75 wrote: post #74
rdouble wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where beets are grown in MN and ND is actually some of the best land in the country. Sugar beet subsidies are an even bigger boondoggle than corn. As the beet welfare queens retire or die off their land is generally bought out by a larger concern and switched over to another cash crop like GMO free soybeans for the Japanese market.

If you were being paid more money to grow beets on land that could support soybeans, why wouldn't you grow beets? It's economically rational to the farmer who's getting subsidies -- even though it's economically irrational for the world as a whole. Subsidies distort the market, and produce completely illogical results. You can't get rid of just one subsidy, because that just gives an advantage to the next-most-subsid…

> You can't get rid of just one subsidy, because that just gives an advantage to the next-most-subsidized item.

If the total amount of subsidy $ is reduced, it will be an improvement.

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

#95

Post by thret »

colinprince wrote: post #46
buddylw wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree completely that corn subsidies are out of control, but it's not clear that getting rid of corn would solve the health problem. It would likely be replaced with 'high fructose' . Fructose has properties (very sweet, doesn't crystallize like sucrose, etc.) that junk food purveyors love and corn doesn't even contain any fructose naturally. Any starch + amylase makes a syrup (my personal favorite is rice syrup).…

I think the point is that getting rid of the subsidies would let the price of HFCS increase and would be less attractive to food producers. Regarding the idea that sucrose is healthier than HFCS, I remain unconvinced. See Robert H. Lustig's awesome expostion, Sugar: The Bitter Truth: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM He explains the endocrinology behind why our bodies cannot stay ahead of our sugar intake.

Sugar: The Bitter Truth is movie length but well worth watching.

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

#96

Post by btilly »

justin66 wrote: post #86
btilly wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is mostly false. I'll try to explain. I don't believe it is false. Instead of explaining again, can you provide specific verifiable assertions and citations? I'll make it easy, I'll give you specifics to refute. If subsidization of farmers to produce more than the market is predicted to demand in order to smooth out volatility and prevent famine is necessary (and it seems to me like a laudable goal), government…

> The truth is that it is easier for most governments to justify giving subsidies to their own citizens rather than foreign countries. I don't disagree with that statement at all. It is a statement that only speaks to public sentiment and it strikes me as probably correct. > Also self-sufficiency on food is seen by many as a security issue, and therefore there is a resistance to relying on others. I don't disagree bu…

I am making a statement about the reasoning that results in current policies. I'm not saying that the policies are well-executed (indeed I think they are not), merely that they have something more than just "reward a well-connected lobby" justifying them.

As for African poverty and famine, you're right that measures that protect farmers in rich countries will hurt farmers in poor ones. However the #1 cause of African famine remains corruption and war inside of Africa. And on current economic trends, we'll see economic powerhouses emerging in Africa in near decades. So as sad as our neglect of the interests of over a billion Africans is, it does not seem to be a permanent boot in the face.

For perspective, take 5 minutes to watch http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo. There are - today - African countries that are better off than any country in the world was 70 years ago. If others continue on trends that have happened elsewhere, things are going to improve fairly dramatically.

I agree with you that our agricultural policies create problems. But I'm optimistic about what the future holds for people who are impacted.

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

#98

Post by Al-Khwarizmi »

zanny wrote: post #47
kyllo wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, if corn were not subsidized, corn syrup would probably not be wholly replaced with cane sugar, as cane sugar is much more expensive, a lot of it is imported, and it can't really be grown productively in most of the US--inside the US it's really only grown in Florida, Texas, and Hawaii. The 89 million acres[1] of corn harvested in the US would be partly replaced by some other starchy crop x, and high fructose c…

> we as a nation eat too much food I really don't know how to fix it, because it is more the subconscious drive to overeat when you can than any cultural issue. Food is plentiful and cheap, so Americans devour it incessantly. One thing I think could fix it is decoupling the social aspects of eating - most families only see each other for food, which prompts them to eat more if subconsciously they want more human inte…

> Food is plentiful and cheap

> most families only see each other for food

This happens in most European countries as well, it's by no means an American thing.

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

#99

Post by egypturnash »

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…

When I want sweet foods I just seek out things made with sugar rather than HFCS. If all I can find is HFCS or artificial sweeteners, I have to wait. And have some water, most likely.

I haven't done any experiments. I've just noted that (a) imported Mexican Coke really does taste like I remember Coke tasting in my 1970s childhood, and (b) I drink less when I have a soda made with sugar because it satisfies my sweet tooth instead of just tickling it and reminding me that sweet things taste good, maybe I'll go get another one of the HFCS sodas I just drank.

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

#100

Post by paul_f »

swamp40 wrote: post #92

I can't believe the smartest people on the planet here are arguing about this. HFCS is cheaper than sugar because of the tariffs, but it is an equivalent substitute. No better, no worse. Americans are getting fatter these days because the food industry (McDonald's as well as prepackaged foods) can make desirable, filling foods for a dollar or two. If they needed to use sugar instead of HFCS, it would be about 10 cent…

It is carbohydrates and "low fat" diets making people obese. The only think unhealthy in a bacon cheeseburger is the bun.

Until we can kill this "low fat" nonsense, people will continue to get fatter.

Post reply on HN