Sugar vs HFCS: Which is worse?

January 29, 2010 | No comments | Healthy Eating Guidelines

The Centre For Consumer Freedom has called out the Sugar Association regarding the press release requesting that the words "sugar laden beverages" or "sugar sweetened drinks" type of wording not be used. The sugar associations claim is that sugar is not used in most sweetened drinks and High Fructose Corn Syrup is the sweetener used.

This is their attempt to confuse the consumer into thinking that sugar is better for you than HFCS. Particularly since HFCS has been in the media in regards to researchers saying that it has contributed or caused the obesity problem.

The USDA data shows that Americans consumed five million tons of HFCS in drinks in 2008, which is almost 15 times the amount of sugar consumed through drinks in the same year.

The main reason why most food manufactuers use HFCS is because it is a cheaper ingredient, which means the manufacturer makes a higher profit.

Here is a quote from the American Diabetic Association saying “high fructose corn syrup…is nutritionally equivalent to sucrose [table sugar]. Once absorbed into the blood stream, the two sweeteners are indistinguishable.”

So guess what?

They are both equally as bad.

If sugar was used in place of the HFCS all these years we would still end up with the same problem we have now. The food would have just cost us more.

The solution is to eat more natural whole foods and limit your consumption of processed foods and drinks.

That way you won’t consume unnecessary sugars or HFCS.

Problem solved!