Sorting Last Post on Top Message:
CLEVENT SparkPoints: (0)
Fitness Minutes: (70,866)
Posts: 756
2/13/12 3:33 P

So I guess trans fat is not a poison either. Just we respect the limits right?

LAETU5 Posts: 1,405
2/13/12 2:55 P

"Here is the link:
ull/482027a.html "

Nature is by paid access only; on rare occasion they release articles/studies for free but this isn't one of them. I can't figure out what format the abstract is in but from the title and the comments it seems to be an opinion piece rather than an objective study.

BITTERQUILL Posts: 1,639
2/13/12 1:50 P

CLEVENT, nobody is saying that the food industry doesn't contain elements of major corruption, or that it's not out to make money more than to help people nourish themselves safely. Most people in this thread, if not everyone, would agree with you on that.

I can't speak for everyone, but I'm just confused as to why you can say that it's bad to demonize a single type of food (meaning fat, as the *admittedly corrupt* food industry often does) and then go on to make the alarmist and inaccurate statement that "sugar is poison." I do realize the difference between the two, in that you *can't* go without healthy sources of fat and still be well nourished, while you *can* go without refined sugars as long as you're getting carbs from healthy, natural sources. However, sugar isn't "poison" unless it's being consumed in excess. The same with fat, or salt, or just about anything else. There's a big difference between "nutritionally bereft" and "going to kill you if you eat a teaspoon every now and then."

CLEVENT SparkPoints: (0)
Fitness Minutes: (70,866)
Posts: 756
2/13/12 12:42 P

CLEVENT SparkPoints: (0)
Fitness Minutes: (70,866)
Posts: 756
2/13/12 12:41 P

Nature published the article recently on 1 Feb 2012: The toxic truth about sugar. Please examine the map called the global sugar glut. It is very self explanatory.

CLEVENT SparkPoints: (0)
Fitness Minutes: (70,866)
Posts: 756
2/13/12 12:11 P

There is a book called Food Politics by Marion Nestle. I suggest everyone read that.

CLEVENT SparkPoints: (0)
Fitness Minutes: (70,866)
Posts: 756
2/13/12 12:10 P

There are other factors of course. We live in 'easy' life. Automatic dishwaser, washers, driers, heaters, coolers, vacuums, cars etc. We don't move. We take elevators then we go to gyms. We buy expensive tv's and pay for the channels we can't even watch. We don't even walk to anywhere anymore. We are not a part of the nature anymore.
There was a video a professor showing the how the sugar is metabolised and proving that it is a poison like alcohol in biochemical reactions. I lost the link.
Unfortunately this is the bad part of the capitalism. Drug companies are the other part of the game. Pfizer for example, sell everyone collesterol lowering drugs, then those drugs cause sexual disfunction in men, and they also sell viagra. They pay for doctor's tuitions for all their phd years and they get their drug promotions as a return.
I do not actually blame sugar itself, but it is a product of the big companies. They grow so much corn, and this is the product. They need to sell it to someone. I now observe, because of the awareness in the western world, they sell their HCFS and sugar additives to the 3rd world countries. Guess what? Their obesity numbers started to increase since then.

LAETU5 Posts: 1,405
2/13/12 11:39 A

And, also already noted elsewhere in this thread, they didn't eat as much back then. The way we eat has experienced a cultural shift that must be taken into account when comparing now to 50 years ago. I'm in no way saying processed foods are good nor am I promoting adding sugars to everything...I'm, and others, are saying that sugar can't be singled out because numerous factors are at play.

CLEVENT SparkPoints: (0)
Fitness Minutes: (70,866)
Posts: 756
2/13/12 11:32 A

Those foods existed together 50 years ago. Everybody used salt on their food. They used real butter and salt on their popcorn. Processed foods surpsingly add sugar to almost everything to make them taste 'better'.

CLEVENT SparkPoints: (0)
Fitness Minutes: (70,866)
Posts: 756
2/13/12 11:29 A

I actually accuse food industry yes. They played with the results of scientific studies and 'proved' that fat is the cause of all obesity. Why? They are going to sell their products to everybody, making believe that their products are healthy. They have their agents, doctors, scientists inside the government agencies to approve their pseudo science.

LAETU5 Posts: 1,405
2/13/12 11:24 A

Fat sugar salt combinations trigger our pleasure centers (it's not just simple carbs)...but that doesn't mean that someone is addicted to them. There are lots of things in life that we can find enjoyable yet are not addicted to.

CLEVENT SparkPoints: (0)
Fitness Minutes: (70,866)
Posts: 756
2/13/12 11:22 A

Sugar is an addiction means 'creates addictive behaviours'. Showing that 'I am not addicted' type of examples is taking the statistical science to a different level. When something is said to be addictive, of course it comes with exceptions.

CLEVENT SparkPoints: (0)
Fitness Minutes: (70,866)
Posts: 756
2/13/12 11:19 A

I don't see binge eating on vegetables, fish or eggs. Why people binge on simple carbohydrates?

LAETU5 Posts: 1,405
2/13/12 10:50 A

"Also because sugar is an addiction. There is no such thing is 'moderation of sugar'. Nobody eats one cookie and stops if they have ten cookies in a box."

Sugar is not an addiction unless the person is addicted to it (just like how caffeine is not an addiction unless the person is addicted to it)...just as I am able to have a caffeinated drink one day then it might be a few days before I have another; there are lots of people who can be happy with just one cookie and may not have another for a few days/weeks. I end up wanting a treat a bit more often than I should if I keep them in the house (yet still not anywhere near the whole box at one time); so I don't keep them in the house so I can 'moderate' my intake by only getting a cookie (or some other treat) on the rare occasions when I really want one.

Not to mention that if someone eats a whole box of cookies it's not the sugar they are necessarily addicted to; it was more likely an emotional eating binge episode.

2/13/12 10:27 A

Bitterquill, that's exactly what I mean! :) So many who preach moderation aren't eating a diet of mostly whole foods. So many are swayed by marketing and believe that FiberOne brownies, VitaTop muffins, Lean Cuisine, Crystal Light, etc are good, healthy choices when working to lose weight. And then they add a moderate amount of fast food/pure junk/alcohol/etc on top of that (whatever "moderate" means to that person...some consider moderate to be just a little every day).

While that might work for losing weight (since the determining factor there is calories) it certainly doesn't nourish a body like whole foods do.

BITTERQUILL Posts: 1,639
2/13/12 10:22 A

"Unfortunately it is not only in powdered form so you can physically seperate it. It takes HCFS, glucose, fructose, white flour, chips, pops, juices and other forms."

Solution: minimize your intake of packaged food.

"There is no such thing is 'moderation of sugar'. Nobody eats one cookie and stops if they have ten cookies in a box. So they rationalize sugar."

That's not necessarily sugar-addiction. It could just as easily be portion issues (regardless of sugar content) or binge-eating. Likewise, many people have no trouble moderating their intake of sugars and treats. My husband and I have been working on the same package of cookies since mid December and will likely be working on it for a while (it contained 12 servings and it still has 7 or 8 left).

You're accusing people of arbitrarily demonizing a particular food group and then go on to do the exact same thing. Are you being sarcastic or am I just missing something?

Edited by: BITTERQUILL at: 2/13/2012 (10:58)
CLEVENT SparkPoints: (0)
Fitness Minutes: (70,866)
Posts: 756
2/13/12 10:13 A

I hope the moderators do not tolerate unbehaving people like that one.

BREWMASTERBILL SparkPoints: (31,088)
Fitness Minutes: (12,713)
Posts: 4,114
2/13/12 10:10 A

You sound like a nut.

CLEVENT SparkPoints: (0)
Fitness Minutes: (70,866)
Posts: 756
2/13/12 9:58 A

It is like "fat free" craze. People look something to blame for their obesity. They also look for miracle products that make them thinner in a week with no side effects. They look for cure of cancer, heart disease, diabetes in a fruit.
Also because sugar is an addiction. There is no such thing is 'moderation of sugar'. Nobody eats one cookie and stops if they have ten cookies in a box. So they rationalize sugar. They think their fathers eat sugar and never got fat. They ignore the fact that in early 1900's people was eating almost 4-5 lbs of sugar per year. Now the society averages 80 lbs of sugar.
Sugar is everywhere. It is a poison. Unfortunately it is not only in powdered form so you can physically seperate it. It takes HCFS, glucose, fructose, white flour, chips, pops, juices and other forms.
I personally do not take anything FDA or any government office suggests seriously. They suggested "the low fat" and look at the result. They are manupilated by food companies. Cargill, Monsanto etc. They make us eat genetically modified crops, they make us eat lab created, bioengineered Canola. They also use government agencies to sell their byproduct HCFS. They make billions by making us fat. And they create army of zombies to bite you everywhere. Yes they have independent, volunteer lawyers, even in some of the message boards.

LAETU5 Posts: 1,405
2/13/12 9:49 A

Consuming too many calories is the cause of obesity, to single out any single ingredient is playing the blame game. It's a good idea to avoid any added sugars as often as possible because they have zero nutritional benefit.

If someone were to go through and cut out all added sugars from their diet they are probably going to lose weight; not because the sugar itself was the cause but because processed foods (the only way you can get added sugar/hfcs without adding it yourself) tend to be higher in overall calories than what most of us would make at home.

I've quit buying most processed foods with only a few around for when I need a really quick meal that doesn't require thinking about it. I think the only thing we may have with added sugar is bread.

And just to emphasize how removing added sugars isn't going to magically fix weight on its own..I just looked at the ingredients on my husband's added sugars yet obviously not a healthy choice.

FARIS71 Posts: 492
2/13/12 9:44 A

I have realized that reading nutrition info AND ingredients are more and more important. If it's low fat the makers may add more salt to help the flavor. If they take out sugar they may put in man-made stuff that the body is not too familiar with. It can really be crazy to find the balance. I remember seeing a great talk on organic food and within 5 seconds I was a fanatic in my mind until a kind friend gave me some good advice. The same thing had happened to her but over time she decided that the items that her family ate the most of she would buy organic.

SWEETDARLA SparkPoints: (0)
Fitness Minutes: (935)
Posts: 200
2/13/12 9:32 A

"If you have a TraderJoe's nearby you might enjoy shopping there. They have a policy of not carrying any foods with HFCS or artificial colors."

I've been doing the bulk of my grocery shopping at Trader Joe's for a few years now. It is really an eye-opener to compare the ingredients of their products with commercial products. If Trader Joe's can mass produce food products without resorting to artificial fillers and HFCS AND still keep the prices competitive for many items, why can't the big food companies do it? The only thing I can think of is that Trader Joe's doesn't spend a wad on advertising like the other companies do.

BREWMASTERBILL SparkPoints: (31,088)
Fitness Minutes: (12,713)
Posts: 4,114
2/13/12 9:17 A

So I guess I'm still not understanding why HFCS is being singled out and demonized. It's no worse than sugar, it's marked on packages of processed food as such. What's the big deal? You eat crap out of a box and it's bad for you. Sound the alarm bells.

BITTERQUILL Posts: 1,639
2/13/12 9:11 A

"The word moderation is a huge pet peeve for me because most people are already being way more than moderate with their everyday meal choices with their use of processed foods...and they don't even realize it because of what is general considered normal."

That's certainly true for most people. People who are watching what they eat, however, are often much less liberal with their consumption of these foods (not everyone, of course, as a quick perusal of the boards will quickly show). If someone is eating a diet of whole foods (lots of veggies, some fruit, whole grains, minimally processed dairy, lean fish and meats etc) and generally avoiding foods that come in boxes, cans and cellophane wrappers, I don't think there's anything wrong with eating a candy bar or a packaged pastry a few times a year.

Whether or not moderation is a good thing just depends on how you define the word itself. There's a big difference between someone who has a packaged pastry every day for breakfast but still watches what they eat the rest of the time, and someone who eats 99% healthy foods but allows themselves small treats only on special occasions every few months (a piece of Halloween candy, a Christmas cookie, a slice of birthday cake), even though both people might both consider themselves to be eating treats "moderately." The subjectivity of the definition is sticky, but that doesn't necessarily mean that moderation is bad; it just means that a lot of people are using an overly broad definition.

Edited by: BITTERQUILL at: 2/13/2012 (09:17)
2/13/12 7:43 A

I had that very same awakening several years ago...a lightbulb moment where it became clear to me that what I had always considered "normal" was not healthy or beneficial. If I wanted to change my life I needed to rethink what foods I considered normal. And while my husband and children didn't have weight issues, they too could benefit from a whole foods diet.

The word moderation is a huge pet peeve for me because most people are already being way more than moderate with their everyday meal choices with their use of processed foods...and they don't even realize it because of what is general considered normal.

If you have a TraderJoe's nearby you might enjoy shopping there. They have a policy of not carrying any foods with HFCS or artificial colors. I imagine WholeFoods is the same. It's nice to be able to take the kids to the store and let them pick their treat for the week without having to say no to their first dozen choices lol.

CEDARBARK1 SparkPoints: (0)
Fitness Minutes: (50)
Posts: 996
2/13/12 7:29 A

Whether you call it high fructose corn syrup, or sugar, I prefer not to see it in my food, other than the occasional dessert. That's why I by and large prefer to make my own food. Yes, sometimes convenience is nice, but... it comes with a price.

By the way, when we grew up, we ate what the parents ate. And, other than brussels sprouts and liver, I grew to like it. There wasn't any such things as "childrens' food" -- and hot dogs only appeared occasionally, during outdoor grilling season. Granted, we did use cake mixes -- but we only made them for birthdays.

BREWMASTERBILL SparkPoints: (31,088)
Fitness Minutes: (12,713)
Posts: 4,114
2/13/12 7:12 A

You've listed a boat load of processed food and call it "normal" and then suggest outrage that there is sugar in them. Huh??

They're not "hiding" it, it's listed sugar on the label. Read the label.

FITGLAMGIRL Posts: 2,045
2/12/12 9:13 P

I love all the great comments here. So without thinking I grabbed a package of hot dog buns. I have kids so I do serve them turkey hotdogs on occassion and now I looked at the package and sure enough they have hfcs. Grrrrrrrr!

So these were some of the items I had in my home that contained hfcs, bread, bagels, hot dog buns, jam, jelly, bbq sauce, ketchup, crackers, waffles, pancake syrup. So if I had eaten all of these things in one day for different meals then wow how much sugar would I be taking in.

To me, these all seem to be normal type foods that a household might have especially with kids. Now I don't neccessarily eat all of these items but sometimes the kids aren't on board with everything my husband and I eat so I do offer them some alternatives.

So to me this is where that moderation comes in. I might not be serving them fast food or eating out, but I am contributing to the amount of sugar they are consuming and for me this was a NEW awareness. So what is moderation from above? I don't know if I ate all that above would I be over my sugar? Probably!

This is why I think may consumers get into trouble. Companies are hiding this crap in food and then expecting us to figure it out. So now, I just need to wise up and I am aware now what is going on with my food that I can make a more intelligent decision.

Hopefully we are all learning something from this discussion!

EXOTEC Posts: 3,327
2/12/12 2:20 P

Sugar is sugar is sugar. Your body doesn't really know (or care) where it came from. Metabolically, it's processed the same way.

You're right about the "moderation" tag. We don't really know what that means. But we can try to limit quasi-foods, and maybe try making some of our own concoctions so as to not be so dependent upon manufacturers and marketing ploys.

It's a bit more of a bother in some ways, but we can try to support our local producers through farmers' markets and co-ops, and avoid things that look like food but probably only pass muster narrowly. On the other hand, shopping in those local markets can be a lot of fun! I love our local independent, and weekend outings to the flea/farmers' markets are sometimes the highlight of my week.

And they don't have misleading labelling.

FIRECOM SparkPoints: (0)
Fitness Minutes: (11,796)
Posts: 5,855
2/12/12 1:34 P

This is a great and spirited conversation. I continually hear that HFCS is evil and it may be, but I strive to severly limit ALL sugar. And then I hear that Splenda is bad for us. Woe is us, eh?

Just make sure we are accurately trackig ALL calories taken in and we can address the weight (and diabetes in my case).

ANARIE Posts: 13,205
2/12/12 12:30 P

"Something has happened over the years to our food or we wouldn't be this obese as a society."

Yeah, something has happened to our food, all right. We've started eating too flippin' much of it!!!

The average American ate 523 calories per day more in 2003 than in 1970. No mystery why we're getting fat! (Actually, the true mystery is that we're not getting AS fat as we should, considering the increase in consumption and the decrease in activity.)

The only thing wrong with HFCS is that it's cheap. If you could get Coke made with organic agave nectar for $2.00 a gallon, we'd all be talking about how "they" put organic agave nectar in everything and the agave industry is conspiring to make us fat and addicted.

In 1970, nobody would have dreamed of giving their 8-year-old child a 64-ounce soda. Now a lot of people think that's entirely normal. You give a kid 600 calories to drink, she's going to get fat. It doesn't matter what kind of sugar is in there.

And I don't see the logic in complaining about HFCS being in everything, and then also objecting to changing the name to corn sugar. If anything, they should be REQUIRED to call it corn sugar, so the word "sugar" smacks you in the face, especially if there's also cane sugar in the same food. Sugar is the problem, not which plant it comes from.

What's interesting is that sugar isn't the main source of the increase in calories. The biggest portion of the increase since 1970 comes from fats and oils. We're eating more calories from every single category of food except dairy. (We're eating more dairy, but getting fewer calories from it-- I guess we're drinking skim milk but eating butter.) Sugar is pretty far down the list, although we're still eating a lot of it. We're even eating more vegetables than we were in 1970!

We eat too much. HFCS makes that a little easier, but it's not by any means the main reason we're fat. Our food is healthier than it was 40 years ago, but we eat too danged much of it.

Here's an interesting link to an easy-to-understand breakdown of where the calories come from:

2/12/12 11:49 A

HFCS is so bad for people. I've been trying to look for foods that don't have it. Lately, I've noticed labels on peanut butter and ketchup that say that theres no HFCS, so I think these companies have realized what it does do us. I'm just hoping they haven't substituted anything else in place of it, like they do with "diet" drinks/food.

RUSSELL_40 Posts: 16,826
2/12/12 10:03 A

I don't trust anything a scientist invented to eat. HFCS isn't a natural substance. I think these " foods" and the chemical additives are why we are experiencing the rash of diseases increasing. Diabetes, cancer, heart issues, and autism.

I have to agree with Zorbs on this one. I eat fruit/vegetables, chicken, eggs, cheese,and butter. Maybe some nuts. No HFCS in ANYTHING I eat.

I think a good rule of thumb is that if you can take it out of the package, and heat and eat.. it is probably bad for you. I always ask myself.. can I buy the ingredients separately? If so ( ex. soup ), I go buy the ingredients. The most basic items are usually the healthiest.

CEDARBARK1 SparkPoints: (0)
Fitness Minutes: (50)
Posts: 996
2/11/12 10:20 P

HFCS is a hidden sugar. It's not necessarily worse than straight-up sugar, but then again we don't really know. I'm personally finding it useful to eliminate both that and more normal sugar from my diet. And btw, a lot of manufacturers are finding other names for the stuff... you won't always see "high fructose corn syrup" on labels now. They'll find another word or phrase to add "corn" to.

FITGLAMGIRL Posts: 2,045
2/11/12 9:54 P

Yes I agree Clevent! We do need to be cautious about moderation. I see it this way. As an average american I have NO idea how much sugar I could safely consume over the course of the day and I am sure many americans do not know or even how to figure this out.

So if I am eating normally in my mind and then consuming products with hfcs on top of that more than likely this moderation would be putting me over on my sugar consumption on a daily basis, hence the extra poundage each year. In my mind, I might be thinking I am doing ok, but in reality I am not.

I would be cautious of eating anything with hfcs in it, since let's face it it's extra sugar extra calories.

We do keep saying everything in moderation, well if WE were eating in moderation then should we be this obese as a nation? I would think not, so part of the problem is WE don't know what moderation is. I have NO idea what moderation is for hfcs.

I will choose to control my sugar consumption by making my own foods, not eating out, and buying products with no added sugar. That might not work for all, but I personally think it's a great start in the right direction.

I don't want to be sitting on the sidelines and being part of the obesity issue. I want to take charge and make change in my own personal life. I do see it in lots of foods. I probably had at least 10 or more items in my home that had hfcs in them. Now I don't buy that stuff anymore and for the most part my family eats pretty healthy stuff.

LISAWMI SparkPoints: (50,169)
Fitness Minutes: (37,224)
Posts: 1,416
2/11/12 6:23 P

The science says your body sees it the same as any other simple sugar. However there always has to be an enemy food and HFCS is the current enemy. Moderation in all things is the key.

CLEVENT SparkPoints: (0)
Fitness Minutes: (70,866)
Posts: 756
2/11/12 5:47 P

Arsenic is ok in moderation too. Even rat poison.
HCFS and sugar (even honey) are causes of obesity even in numbers. Please don't fall to this 'moderation' tale and stay away from foods processed in plants.

BREWMASTERBILL SparkPoints: (31,088)
Fitness Minutes: (12,713)
Posts: 4,114
2/11/12 5:47 P

Ugh, lots of opinion here, not a lot of fact.

The metabolic response by the body is the same for HFCS or sugar when each are given in the same amount. This is mainly because of the sucrase (invertase) enzyme in the intestines that breaks down the bond sucrose has, which turns sucrose into both glucose and fructose and eliminates the only difference between sucrose and HFCS before it is digested. Once digested, both sucrose and HFCS are merely glucose and fructose and are no longer any different aside from the possible fructose content.

A great place to read up on the studies related to HFCS vs. sugar is here.

KELEKONA Posts: 605
2/11/12 5:12 P

I do believe that HFCS is okay in moderation, I'm just having trouble finding a comparison that isn't too much will kill you, like x-rays and bleach. I believe also that HFCS or even "science-made" foods aren't the entire picture, though a huge contributor.

Bringing HFCS down to negligible levels is quite possible with some effort. Most of the effort is glancing at labels, some is meal planning and cooking. Beyond condiments and bread, I'm not sure where HFCS could be lurking since there is something else that keeps me away from processed foods, but there are plenty of varieties and brands of condiments at least.

FITGLAMGIRL Posts: 2,045
2/11/12 2:58 P

Here is a good video on the evils of HFCS. I personally have an issue with hfcs. Something has happened over the years to our food or we wouldn't be this obese as a society. I do believe it has something to do with the fillers added to our food and a whole lot more, but if we cut things out of our diet like HFCS it will force the big companies to wise up and STOP making our food so unhealthy. Many people have NO idea what is causing them to be obese and over weight. It's not just about go out and exercise. I think it has a whole lot more to do with what has been added to our food over the years. That is my concern, but here is the video.

A little more on the chemistry side, but I think you will get the point!

HFCS is bad oh so bad! ha ha!

LEC358 SparkPoints: (11,135)
Fitness Minutes: (6,555)
Posts: 2,744
2/11/12 11:38 A

HFCS basically costs your body NOTHING to break down. Even normal sugar takes some energy to digest.

PANDAS10 SparkPoints: (16,949)
Fitness Minutes: (15,393)
Posts: 408
2/11/12 10:27 A

I think the ads from the Corn Association or whatever about how HFCS is just like any other sugar and is ok in moderation are a bunch of bologna!
The fact of the matter is that people who don't do research or watch closely don't realize that it IS in everything! For the life of me, I still can't figure out why it is in bread - when I make a loaf of homemade white bread, I don't put sugar in it...
But it's things like that which make it impossible to eat it in moderation.
Most people don't have the option to buy ONLY whole, unprocessed foods... So, even if a person doesn't want to consume HFCS, if they aren't reading the label of EVERYTHING they pick up, they will be eating it.
It just seems to me that ads like that prey upon complacency - if the ad says its ok, then I don't have to worry/watch for it...most people don't know that it is everywhere.

Fitness Minutes: (20,400)
Posts: 2,704
2/11/12 10:06 A

It's in very few of the things I buy, because I cook most things from scratch, and when I do buy pre-made foods (whole-wheat bread, etc.) I deliberately choose brands that don't use it. My consumption of things like barbecue sauce probably average out to one or two tablespoons per month, so I don't worry too much about it. I find that as long as I read the label for everything I buy, I'm able to avoid most of the supposedly "hidden" dangers.

ZORBS13 SparkPoints: (202,124)
Fitness Minutes: (197,692)
Posts: 15,874
2/11/12 7:08 A

I'm always surprised when people say it's in "everything", because it's not in ANYTHING I buy. All it takes is a little label reading; I've been buying the same brands for years so I just don't see it.

MISSRUTH Posts: 4,314
2/11/12 5:24 A

I agree that eating less processed food is the best way to avoid any kind of added sweeteners, whether hfcs, sugar, sugar alcohols, whatever.

Dietician Becky wrote an article on hfcs:

Personally, I don't see hfcs as any more "evil" than any other kind of added sugar. I think it's up to me, as the consumer, to choose products without added sugar, or at least where sugar is way down the list of added ingredients. Catsup and barbeque sauce would taste pretty bad without some sweet ingredient in there somewhere. But breakfast cereal doesn't need sugar as one of the leading ingredients.

I've made my own bread; most bread recipes call for the addition of sugar (usually white sugar for white bread, honey for wheat bread) to aid in raising the yeast.

BITTERQUILL Posts: 1,639
2/10/12 10:32 P

It might seem like its in everything , but honestly, it's not much of an issue if you minimize your intake of processed foods in the first place. If you choose to prepare most of your own food at home rather than buying it in a package, and check labels on the packaged foods you decide to continue buying, it's actually really easy to avoid.

FITGLAMGIRL Posts: 2,045
2/10/12 9:36 P

Yes I do think companies are catching on. My issue with that is the renaming of bad stuff. These companies are tricky. They make up a new name to call it.

It is relatively easy to live hfcs free, but I was suprised it was in everything and I was already eating pretty healthy. I do make my own dressings and bbq sauce now and look for brands of ketchup that are hfcs free.

I was suprised that I couldn't hardly find a loaf of bread or bagels without it in. I also have a couple of bread recipes and a bagel recipe to try. I prefer homemade whenever possible, but it's time consuming too to make bread and bagels at home that the kids will like. They are not big wheat bread eaters.

2/10/12 9:30 P

I avoid it myself. Some companies are catching on. The corn industry is catching on, too. They recently requested permission to refer to HFCS as simply "corn sugar." I'm sure they think that will buy them some time.

My son and I have been HFCS free for about a year. It's not too hard to do - keep reading those labels!

When possible, I just keep my shopping in the fruit/veggie and meat sections. Dressings and sauces can be made at home pretty easy and some companies do make HFCS free varieties of their products.

JONESINATOR Posts: 1,837
2/10/12 9:14 P

I actively look for HFCS and try not to include it in my foods.

But, I also keep an eye out for every other synonym for sugar that makes it onto food packaging: brown sugar, cane juice, etc etc.

FITGLAMGIRL Posts: 2,045
2/10/12 9:13 P

I have been doing a lot of research on this lately. It's in everything. This is part of the reason obesity is as high as it is. I went through all of our food and got rid of everything that has hfcs in it. It's in salad dressing, bbq sauce, ketchup, crackers, bread, bagels and the list goes on and on.

This is basically adding more sugar into your diet. Like a hidden sugar. It's seems once I cut this out I was able to lose more weight.

What do you think about this filler in our food? Are you reading labels and seeing this as well? I even wrote to Nabisco Foods asking them about this in all of their products. Basically they ignored me, which is really what I expected, but we don't need to be ignorant as a consumer either. Just wondering......I am hoping more people understand and realize what's in their food and maybe somehow we can stop this big companies from contributing to the obesity rise in our kids and us as adults.

Page: 1 of (1)   1

Other Diet and Nutrition Topics:

Last Post:
6/4/2017 1:41:59 AM
4/14/2017 8:00:37 AM
9/12/2016 6:19:09 PM
4/16/2017 12:20:10 AM