[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
I’m glad Strong posted here sooner than I could, because he’s a far better writer than I am.
Just reducing the amount of HFCS-laden foods is not going to make someone lose weight unless they are in a caloric deficit from activity and/or reduced food intake.
Many athletes consume a shitoad of sugar and HFCS and have stellar body composition.[/quote]
Haha, you should have seen the FIRST post I typed up.
I think I’m going to use this study to promote a new intra-veinous, HFCS-based weight loss product: Over six months, test subjects consuming a steady flow of the proprietary ingredients in FRUCTOSALEAN lost more weight than those with diet and exercise alone!
Since the 24 hour HFCS group did, in fact, lose more weight than the control group in the long term study, this is claim is no less valid than the one Chris posted.
[quote]Chris Shugart wrote:
New study out of Princeton. Highlights:
Rats with access to high-fructose corn syrup gained significantly more weight than those with access to table sugar, even when their overall caloric intake was the same.
HFCS compared to regular sugar “…caused abnormal increases in body fat, especially in the abdomen, and a rise in triglycerides.”
“Some people have claimed that high-fructose corn syrup is no different than other sweeteners when it comes to weight gain and obesity, but our results make it clear that this just isn’t true.”
“When rats are drinking high-fructose corn syrup at levels well below those in soda pop, they’re becoming obese – every single one, across the board. Even when rats are fed a high-fat diet, you don’t see this; they don’t all gain extra weight.”
[/quote]
Yes. Between HFCS and replacing butter and lard with horrible processed oils and fats, its a wonder we’re not worse than we are.
If your great-grandmother wouldn’t recognize it as food, don’t eat it.
I have never, NEVER, heard or known anyone who built a respectable physique, let alone an admirable physique with HFCS. I had a terrible soda addiction at one point, and the moment I decided to kick the habit, I had weight peeling off me faster than anything I ever saw before. I realized that I found the carbonation refreshing, along with the cold temperature, so now if I crave it, I grab a Pellegrino or Perrier. I get the fizz without the sugar.
Bottom line, I have tinkered with all sorts of shit for yrs, and always looked and felt like total shit while having HFCS in my diet.
Asking a person to take junk food out of their diet is like trying to get someone off of drugs. There is so much resist and angry presented as a response to that…kind of crazy. All that processed sugary shit get some people so hooked and they don’t even realize it.
A bit about Soda in simple terms (or soft drinks, if you’re a civilized person):
1)Has lots of calories with no nutritional value (meaning no essential nutrients= vitamins, minerals, EFAs, EAAs). The term “Empty calories” is often used to describe this. The problem here is that over consumption of energy-containing foods (basically ALL food) leads to weight gain and therefore people need to get all of their essential nutrients within a certain caloric intake in order to maintain a healthy bodyweight. For example, if you’re a small female with a planned caloric intake of 1400 calories, you likely don’t have that much room for empty calories, as they will come in the expense of essential nutrients.
2)Those calories are delivered in the form of liquid —> liquids tend to provide lower satiety/satiation than whole foods. Therefore, it is easy to over drink calories from sodas.
All the calories from soda are in the form of either Sugar or HFCS. The only difference between these two sweeteners is a 5% difference in fructose content (which is nothing in the context of an overall diet). Over consumption of sugar poses two problems (one that is firmly established and one whose details haven’t really been fleshed out):
a) Sugar/HFCS contain nutritionally “empty calories.” (See 1)
b) Sugar/HFCS OVERconsumption can possibly have effects on health and/or body composition (two distinct yet overlapping concepts). The current research is targeted towards figuring out the contribution of sugar (and especially the fructose component of it) to various health and body comp issues including (but not limited to) satiety, effects on body weight regulatory mechanisms, genomic effects, and relationships to certain diseases (eg. diabetes/heart disease). All possible effects ARE ALWAYS DEPENDENT ON DOSE AND CONTEXT. Many researchers also hypothesize that fructose calories are inherently more fattening than other calories, but this has yet to be established in controlled conditions with HUMAN populations (and some acute overfeeding studies have been done showing NO DIFFERENCE). The problem is that it is difficult to establish negative effects of fructose on BW independent of it’s caloric content (especially directly) and not enough evidence exists to believe that there is any significant effect, especially to the extent to consider it as the prime cause of obesity.
Here is an abstract to a study by McDevitt et al on the effects of overfeeding with either glucose, fructose, sucrose, or fat in obese and lean woman. The study found no difference between each group:
Limitations of the study include a small sample size (n=13) especially considering the study was looking at two groups of people (obese AND lean woman) and that it only lasted for 4 DAYS (large problem). But still, an interesting observation worth reading.
I seem to recall reading somewhere that sucrose tastes sweeter than HFCS which might make it easier to consume a lot more of something containing HFCS before getting sick of the sweetness. I believe the claim was that if massive servings of soft drinks were made with the same caloric value of sugar instead of HFCS that people would have a hard time drinking it all because it would be sickening.
Does anyone know if there is there any truth to that?
[quote]debraD wrote:
I seem to recall reading somewhere that sucrose tastes sweeter than HFCS which might make it easier to consume a lot more of something containing HFCS before getting sick of the sweetness. I believe the claim was that if massive servings of soft drinks were made with the same caloric value of sugar instead of HFCS that people would have a hard time drinking it all because it would be sickening.
Does anyone know if there is there any truth to that?[/quote]
HFCS is slightly more sweet than sucrose, which can be mainly attributed to it’s slightly high fructose content.
HFCS is sweeter than sucrose and also cheaper per unit of measure. That is why it is a common food additive. It has nothing to do with any obscure global conspiracy to make people fat.
Max, if you were drinking a gallon of sugar water a day, I hate to tell you buddy, but it ain’t the fructose.
[quote]Old Dax wrote:
I heard recently that they (i.e. the producers/marketers of the stuff) are pettitioning to be allowed to refer to HFCS as ‘corn sugar’[/quote]
Fructose and glucose are processed differently by the body and have different effects. It’s like saying all fats are the same, and we all know they’re not. Not all sugars are the same, but these both pretty much suck in large amounts.