The Double Danger of High Fructose Corn Syrup

Health Topics - Modern Foods

Written by Bill Sanda

2004-Feb-19

For many years, Dr. Meira Fields and her coworkers at the US Department of Agriculture investigated the harmful effects of dietary sugar on rats. They discovered that when male rats are fed a diet deficient in copper, with sucrose as the carbohydrate, they develop severe pathologies of vital organs. Liver, heart and testes exhibit extreme swelling, while the pancreas atrophies, invariably leading to death of the rats before maturity. Sucrose is a disaccharide composed of 50 percent glucose and 50 percent fructose. Dr. Fields repeated her experiments to determine whether it was the glucose or fructose moiety that caused the harmful effects. Starch breaks down into glucose when digested. On a copper-deficient diet, the male rats showed some signs of copper deficiency, but not the gross abnormalities of vital organs that occur in rats on the sucrose diet. When the rats were fed fructose, the fatal organ abnormalities occured. Lysl oxidase is a copper-dependent enzyme that participates in the formation of collagen and elastin. Fructose seems to interfere with copper metabolism to such an extent that collagen and elastin cannot form in growing animals–hence the hypertrophy of the heart and liver in young males. The females did not develop these abnormalities, but they resorbed their litters.1 These experiements should give us pause when we consider the great increase in the use of high fructose corn syrup during the past 30 years, particularly in soft drinks, fruit juices and other beverages aimed at growing children, children increasingly likely to be copper deficient as modern parents no longer serve liver to their families. (Liver is by far the best source of copper in human diets.) “The bodies of the children I see today are mush,” observed a concerned chiropractor recently. The culprit is the modern diet, high in fructose and low in copper-containing foods, resulting in inadequate formation of elastin and collagen–the sinews that hold the body together. BINGEING ON FRUCTOSE Until the 1970s most of the sugar we ate came from sucrose derived from sugar beets or sugar cane.  Then sugar from corn–corn syrup, fructose, dextrose, dextrine and especially high fructose corn syrup (HFCS)–began to gain popularity as a sweetener because it was much less expensive to produce. High fructose corn syrup can be manipulated to contain equal amounts of fructose and glucose, or up to 80 percent fructose and 20 percent glucose.2 Thus, with almost twice the fructose, HFCS delivers a double danger compared to sugar. (With regards to fruit, the ratio is usually 50 percent glucose and 50 percent fructose, but most commercial fruit juices have HFCS added. Fruit contains fiber which slows down the metabolism of fructose and other sugars, but the fructose in HFCS is absorbed very quickly.) In 1980 the average person ate 39 pounds of fructose and 84 pounds of sucrose. In 1994 the average person ate 66 pounds of sucrose and 83 pounds of fructose, providing 19 percent of total caloric energy.3 Today approximately 25 percent of our average caloric intake comes from sugars, with the larger fraction as fructose.4 High fructose corn syrup is extremely soluble and mixes well in many foods. It is cheap to produce, sweet and easy to store. It’s used in everything from bread to pasta sauces to bacon to beer as well as in “health products” like protein bars and “natural” sodas. FRUCTOSE FOR DIABETICS? In the past, fructose was considered beneficial to diabetics because it is absorbed only 40 percent as quickly as glucose and causes only a modest rise in blood sugar.5 However, research on other hormonal factors suggests that fructose actually promotes disease more readily than glucose. Glucose is metabolized in every cell in the body but all fructose must be metabolized in the liver.6 The livers of test animals fed large amounts of fructose develop fatty deposits and cirrhosis, similar to problems that develop in the livers of alcoholics. Pure fructose contains no enzymes, vitamins or minerals and robs the body of its micronutrient treasures in order to assimilate itself for physiological use.7 While naturally occurring sugars, as well as sucrose, contain fructose bound to other sugars, high fructose corn syrup contains a good deal of “free” or unbound fructose.  Research indicates that this free fructose interferes with the heart’s use of key minerals like magnesium, copper and chromium. Among other consequences, HFCS has been implicated in elevated blood cholesterol levels and the creation of blood clots.  It has been found to inhibit the action of white blood cells so that they are unable to defend the body against harmful foreign invaders.8 Studies on the Maillard reaction indicate that fructose may contribute to diabetic complications more readily than glucose. The Maillard reaction is a browning reaction that occurs when compounds are exposed to various sugars. Fructose browns food seven times faster than glucose, resulting in a decrease in protein quality and a toxicity of protein in the body.9 This is due to the loss of amino acid residues and decreased protein digestibility. Maillard products can inhibit the uptake and metabolism of free amino acids and other nutrients such as zinc, and some advanced Maillard products have mutagenic and/or carcinogenic properties. The Maillard reactions between proteins and fructose, glucose, and other sugars may play a role in aging and in some clinical complications of diabetes.10 Fructose reduces the affinity of insulin for its receptor, which is the hallmark of type-2 diabetes. This is the first step for glucose to enter a cell and be metabolized. As a result, the body needs to pump out more insulin to handle the same amount of glucose.21 OTHER EFFECTS Nancy Appleton, PhD, clinical nutritionist, has compiled a list of the harmful effects of fructose in her books Lick the Sugar Habit, Healthy Bones, Heal Yourself With Natural Foods, The Curse Of Louis Pasteur and Lick the Sugar Habit Sugar Counter. She points out that consumption of fructose causes a significant increase in the concentration of uric acid; after ingestion of glucose, no significant change occurs. An increase in uric acid can be an indicator of heart disease.12 Furthermore, fructose ingestion in humans results in increases in blood lactic acid, especially in patients with preexisting acidotic conditions such as diabetes, postoperative stress or uremia. Extreme elevations cause metabolic acidosis and can result in death.13 Fructose is absorbed primarily in the jejunum before metabolism in the liver. Fructose is converted to fatty acids by the liver at a greater rate than is glucose.14 When consumed in excess of dietary glucose, the liver cannot convert all of the excess fructose in the system and it may be malabsorbed. The portion that escapes conversion may be thrown out in the urine. Diarrhea can be a consequence.19 A study of 25 patients with functional bowel disease showed that pronounced gastrointestinal distress may be provoked by malabsorption of small amounts of fructose.26 Fructose interacts with oral contraceptives and elevates insulin levels in women on “the pill.”17 In studies with rats, fructose consistently produces higher kidney calcium concentrations than glucose. Fructose generally induces greater urinary concentrations of phosphorus and magnesium and lowered urinary pH compared with glucose.18 In humans, fructose feeding leads to mineral losses, especially higher fecal excretions of iron and magnesium, than did subjects fed sucrose. Iron, magnesium, calcium, and zinc balances tended to be more negative during the fructose-feeding period as compared to balances during the sucrose-feeding period.19 There is significant evidence that high sucrose diets may alter intracellular metabolism, which in turn facilitates accelerated aging through oxidative damage. Scientists found that the rats given fructose had more undesirable cross-linking changes in the collagen of their skin than in the other groups. These changes are also thought to be markers for aging. The scientists say that it is the fructose molecule in the sucrose, not the glucose, that plays the larger part.20 Because it is metabolized by the liver, fructose does not cause the pancreas to release insulin the way it normally does. Fructose converts to fat more than any other sugar. This may be one of the reasons Americans continue to get fatter. Fructose raises serum triglycerides significantly. As a left-handed sugar, fructose digestion is very low. For complete internal conversion of fructose into glucose and acetates, it must rob ATP energy stores from the liver.21 Not only does fructose have more damaging effects in the presence of copper deficiency, fructose also inhibits copper metabolism–another example of the sweeteners double-whammy effect. A deficiency in copper leads to bone fragility, anemia, defects of the connective tissue, arteries, and bone, infertility, heart arrhythmias, high cholesterol levels, heart attacks, and an inability to control blood sugar levels.22 Although these studies were not designed to test the effects of fructose on weight gain, the observation of increased body weight associated with fructose ingestion is of interest. One explanation for this observation could be that fructose ingestion did not increase the production of two hormones, insulin and leptin, that have key roles in the long-term regulation of food intake and energy expenditure.23 HYPERSENSIVITY The magnitude of the deleterious effects of fructose varies depending on such factors as age, sex, baseline glucose, insulin, triglyceride concentrations, the presence of insulin resistance, and the amount of dietary fructose consumed.24Some people are more sensitive to fructose. They include hypertensive, hyperinsulinemic, hypertriglyceridemic, non-insulin dependent diabetic people, people with functional bowel disease and postmenopausal women.25 Everyone should avoid over-exposure to fructose, but especially those listed above. One or two pieces of fruit per day is fine, but commercial fruit juices and any products containing high fructose corn syrup are more dangerous than sugar and should be removed from the diet. Sidebar SOFT DRINKS IN THE SCHOOLS High fructose corn syrup is the primary sweetener used in soft drinks, now readily available to children in school vending machines. The soft drink industry increased US production from 22 to 41 gallons of soft drinks per person a year between 1970 and 1997. Teenagers and children, the industry’s main tragets, are among the largest consumers. In the past 10 years, soft drink consumption among children has almost doubled in the United States. Teenage boys now drink, on average, three or more cans of soda per day, and 10 percent drink seven or more cans a day. The average for teenage girls is more than two cans a day, and 10 percent drink more than five cans a day. A typical 20-ounce Coke contains zero fat, zero protein and 67 grams of carbohydrates, usually in the form of high fructose corn syrup. There are an estimated 20,000 vending machines in schools nationwide, according to the National Automatic Merchandising Association. The USDA collected data on vending machines in schools and reported that 88 percent of high schools, 61 percent of middle schools and 14 percent of elementary schools have food or beverage vending machines for student use. Thirty-four percent of high schools and 15 percent of middle schools permit students to use school vending machines at any time, and 6 percent of elementary schools allow students to use vending machines during lunch. REFERENCES Fields, M, Proceedings of the Society of Experimental Biology and Medicine, 1984, 175:530-537. Appleton, Nancy, PhD, Fructose is No Answer For a Sweetener,http://www.becomehealthynow.com/article/carbs/1170. Hunter, Beatrice Trum, Confusing Consumers About Sugar Intake,Consumer’s Research 78, no 1 (January 1995): 14-17. Fallon, Sally and Mary Enig, Nourishing Traditions, New Trends Publishing, Washington DC, 2001, p. 23. Hallfrisch, Judith, Metabolic Effects of Dietary Fructose, FASEB Journal 4 (June 1990): 2652-2660. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, November 2002 Vol. 76, No. 5, 911-922. Appleton, Nancy Ph.D., Fructose is No Answer For a Sweetener,http://www.becomehealthynow.com/article/carbs/1170. http://www.mcvitamins.com/cornsyrup.htm. H. F. Bunn and P. J. Higgins, Reaction of Nonosaccharides with Proteins; Possible Evolutionary Significance, Science 213 (1981):2222-2244. William L Dills Jr., Protein Fructosylation: Fructose and the Maillard Reaction, American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 58 (suppl) (1993): 779S-787S. Hunter. J. MacDonald, Anne Keyser, and Deborah Pacy, Some Effects, in Man, of Varying the Load of Glucose, Sucrose, Fructose, or Sorbitol on Various Metabolites in Blood, American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 31 (August 1978)): 1305-1311. Hallfrisch, Judith, Metabolic Effects of Dietary Fructose, FASEB Journal 4 (June 1990): 2652-2660. D. Zakim and R. H. Herman, Fructose Metabolism II, American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 21: 315-319, 1968. A. E. Bender and K. B. Damji, Some Effects of Dietary Sucrose, World Review of Nutrition and Dietetics 15 (1972): 104-155. J. J. Rumessen and E. Gudmand-Hoyer, Functional Bowel Disease: Malabsorption and Abdominal Distress After Ingestion of Fructose, Sorbitol, and Fructose-Sorbitol Mixtures, Gastroenterology 95, no. 3 (September 1988): 694-700. Hunter,Beatrice Trum,Confusing Consumers About Sugar Intake,Consumers’ Research 78, no 1 (January 1995): 14-17. A. E. Bergstra, A. G. Lemmens, and A. C. Beynens, Dietary Fructose vs. Glucose Stimulates Nephrocalcinogenesis in Female Rats, Journal of Nutrition 123, no. 7 (July 1993): 1320-1327. R. Ivaturi and C. Kies, Mineral Balances in Humans as Affected by Fructose, High Fructose Corn Syrup and Sucrose, Plant Foods for Human Nutrition 42, no. 2 (1992): 143-151. Roger B. Mc Donald, Influence of Dietary Sucrose on Biological Aging,American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 62 (suppl), (1995): 284s-293s. H. Hallfrisch, et al.,The Effects of Fructose on Blood Lipid Levels, American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 37: 5, 1983, 740-748. Klevay, Leslie, Acting Director of the U.S. Agriculture Department’s Human Nutrition Research Center, Grand Forks, N.D. Observation by Nancy Appleton, PhD. Hollenbeck, Claire B., Dietary Fructose Effects on Lipoprotein Metabolism and Risk for Coronary Artery Disease, American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 58 (suppl), (1993): 800S-807S. Appleton, Nancy Ph.D., Fructose is No Answer For a Sweetener,http://www.becomehealthynow.com/article/carbs/1170. This article appeared in Wise Traditions in Food, Farming and the Healing Arts, the quarterly magazine of the Weston A. Price Foundation, Winter 2003.About the Author Bill Sanda, BS, MBA, served as Executive Director and Director of Public Affairs for the Weston A. Price Foundation. Bill was a partner and co-owner of The McAdam Group, a lobbying company specializing in elements of education policy, and was a consultant to Primezyme, Inc., a nutrition and healing clinic. He has extensive experience in Washington D.C. politics and government, having served as a professional staff member in the US Senate.

Gracie MacKenzie: More Resources About Genetically Modified Foods

Gracie’s Notes|Notes about Gracie|Gracie’s Profile

Here are some resources in case you don’t know much about Genetically Modified foods and why you should not eat them — as well as more things you can do to help halt the growth of Genetically Modified Foods in our food supply. (Also, see my other two notes on GMOs in your Home, and how to get GMO foods out of your favorite restaurants!)

Educate Your Community:
1. Videos:
a. The World according to Monsanto –
www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsHYf2e8dzo Part 1–10

b. Poison on The Platter –
www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0jxYIZ1NrQ Parts 1 – 10

c. Everything You Need to Know about Genetically Modified Foods
www.responsibletechnology.org/GMFree/Home/index.cfm

d. Green Revolution I want my Father Back Part 1 and 2
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6063387598655207801#

e. Seeds of Deception Media Center www.seedsofdeception.com/Public/MediaCenter/index.cfm

f. The Future of Food www.hulu.com/watch/67878/the-future-of-food

g. Green Revolution: Monsanto caused Indian Farmer Suicides www.youtube.com/watch?v=Av6dx9yNiCA

2. Health Risks Brochure
www.seedsofdeception.com/Public/AboutGeneticallyModifiedFoods/HealthRisksBrochure/index.cfm

3. Genetically Modified Foods are Inherently Unsafe
www.seedsofdeception.com/utility/showArticle/?objectID=107

4. Doctors Warn: Avoid Genetically Modified Food
www.seedsofdeception.com/utility/showArticle/?objectID=2989

Resources:

1. Non GMO Shopping Guide http://www.nongmoshoppingguide.com/SG/Home/index.cfm

2. How to make safer buying choices –Organic must be on front of package www.seedsofdeception.com/DocumentFiles/141.pdf

3. Products that do not contain GMO (according to the producers) – scroll down www.westonaprice.org/federalupdate/aa2003/actionalert_072403.html Pulses =beans

Take Action:

1. Vote with Your Wallet. Print and Send the two notes referenced in the intro to all your friends and loved ones. Eat naturally and don’t buy packaged foods.
2. Support Non GMO Project verification www.nongmoproject.org/
3. Don’t use weed killer Roundup www.organicconsumers.org/monsanto/roundup.cfm
4. Join Millions Against Monsanto Campaign www.organicconsumers.org/monlink.cfm
5. Support Institute for Social Responsibility www.responsibletechnology.org/GMFree/Home/index.cfm
www.responsibletechnology.org/GMFree/TakeAction/index.cfm
6. True Food Network (watch Vandana Shiva and other activists’ videos) truefoodnow.org
7. How to ask for non-GM foods in your favorite restaurant
www.responsibletechnology.org/utility/showArticle/?ObjectID=206&find= restaurants&happ=siteAdministrator
8. Grow Your Own Food, Use Organic Seeds, Support Local Organic or Natural Grass based Farmers

9.Take a Permaculture Workshop

7 Companies You Can Trust to Use BPA-Free Cans
By April Streeter
Tree Hugger, March 2, 2010
Straight to the Source

Here’s a startling, almost amazing fact. Eden Organic has been canning beans since 1999 in BPA (bisphenol-A) free cans. For a decade. Concerns about BPA keep mounting – in January the FDA reversed its 2008 stance to say it was “concerned” about BPA and recommended limited exposure. So why don’t all food manufacturers follow Eden’s lead? It’s a persistance problem, says Eden’s Sue Becker. And, of course, a money issue – BPA-free cans are available, but they cost approximately 2.2 cents more (14%) than cans with standard BPA epoxy liners. More recently, at least six other foods have been switched to BPA-free cans. Read on to find out which ones.

1. Eden Makes A Hill of Beans BPA Free. Bisphenol-A has been used in plastics for more than 50 years, though it has been known since the 1930′s that this endocrine disruptor might have negative health effects. Still, even a decade ago most consumers were completely unaware what the compound was or that it is in so much of our plastic products, from baby bottles to steel cans’ epoxy linings. Eden switched to BPA free liners in April 1999 – all of its bean and grain combos and chilis are also in cans with BPA free liners. However, the company is only now putting a “BPA Free Lining” sticker on the specially-produced cans it orders from Ball Corp. “Most people wouldn’t have known what it meant before now,” said Eden spokesperson Sue Becker. Due to their acidic nature, Eden’s tomatoes (and all of the industry’s tomato products) are still in cans with BPA liners. To be BPA free, you’d have to switch to jarred tomato products.

2. Vital Choice Made the Choice and Pays the Price. Apart from Eden, Native Forest and Trader Joe’s, all of the other food manufacturers that have made the transition to BPA-free can liners are premium “sustainable” seafood producers. One reason for that is that canned premium seafood is a priced a bit higher than the average can of corn, so that the price premium of 2.2 cents more for BPA free cans doesn’t make or break the sale. Vital Choice cans MSC-certified salmon as well as albacore tuna, sardines and mackerel with BPA free liners. While Randy Hartnell of Vital Choice says eliminating the BPA is the right thing to do, and worth it, the costs of the switch can add up. Consumer Union last year tested Vital Choice’s salmon and found trace amounts of BPA, which lead the company to further testing to determine the source – the can lids were suspected – and then attempt to eliminate it. Eventually Vital Choice found Texax company Certi-Chem, to test for all “endocrine disruptor and estrogenic activtity” not just BPA. A round of testing costs approximately $2,000, Hartnell says. “That’s a lot of cans of tuna.” Vital Choice products are not currently labeled BPA free.

3,4,5. Oregon’s Choice, Wild Planet, Eco Fish Oregon’s Choice canned last season’s catch of lightly salted MSC certified Albacore (6 oz.) in BPA free cans, and the company says it will over the course of the next two years move all of its canned fish to BPA free. That will be a little more challenging with the company’s crab and shrimp, which has lemon juice added to retain fresh color in the seafood but disintegrates the non-BPA can liners more quickly. Still, the company is confident that though the can industry was slow to innovate around BPA-free, there will be solutions in the pipeline soon even for more acidic foods. No BPA free labels here either. 4. Tiny Eco Fish was an early innovator in sustainable seafood, and may be known better to consumers for its salmon burgers, fish sticks, or Celebrity Chef sustainable seafood entrees. But Eco Fish also has canned albacore tuna packaged in a BPA free can, and the company is planning to make the switch for its canned salmon once it finds a suitable can source. Not labeled. 5. Wild Planet has implemented BPA free packaging for both its 5 oz. skipjack tuna and its 5 oz. Albacore tuna products. The company said it does not pass on the extra “pennies per can” that BPA packaging costs to its consumers. Wild Planet also chooses smaller fish in order to make its “Low in Mercury” claim. In addition, the fish is packed without water or oil, so no need to drain. The company does not label BPA free.

>>> Read the Full Article

United States of Food

http://www.ediblegeography.com/united-states-of-food/

Your Taco, Deconstructed

GOOD Blog > Twilight Greenaway on March 2, 2010 at 8:30 am PST

Examining the ingredients in a taco paints a picture of the globalization of our food production network.

Look closely enough at anything and you can start to see the sum of its parts. Even, for instance, a single taco, which, when examined recently by a group of architecture students, became a window into the complexities of globalization. The assignment was part of URBANlab, a program of The California College of the Arts that took place under the guidance of landscape architect David Fletcher and members of the art and design studio Rebar.

The goal was to map the local “tacoshed,” which, much like a watershed, establishes the geographical boundaries of a taco’s origins—the source of everything from the corn in the tortilla to the tomatoes in the salsa.

By thoroughly understanding what it takes to make a taco, the class hoped to become “better able to propose and design a speculative model of a holistic and sustainable urban future.” The final product is a surprisingly useful microcosm of the industrial food system and its “richly complex network of systems, flows, and ecologies.” According to the class findings, within a single taco, the ingredients had traveled a total of 64,000 miles, or just over two and a half times the circumference of the earth.

For the project, each student worked to trace one ingredient back to its source, a task that turned out to be harder than it sounds. “It was difficult to trace the origins of these foods because of the intense obfuscation by the corporations that produce them,” said Rebar’s John Bela at a recent unveiling of the research at San Francisco’s Studio for Urban Projects. The students spent hours on the phone, spoke to customer representatives in corporate offices and eventually gathered the data necessary to create a map that includes farms, corporate offices, and the exact routes traveled by planes, trucks, and shipping containers.

The taco the group deconstructed was from Juan’s Taco Truck in the city’s Mission District, where every ingredient had been purchased from either Costco or Restaurant Depot, and had been chosen because it was the absolute most economical option possible—making it the taco most people are likely to eat.

“We talked a lot about what the moral taco would look like, or the locavore taco, but this was the cheapest taco you can produce in San Francisco,” said Annalise Aldrich, a CCA student who helped present the group’s findings. Aldrich and another student, Rachael Yu, walked the audience through some highlights of their research.

The students were surprised to find that several ingredients were produced locally, such as the salt, which had come from just south of San Francisco. The cheese, which appeared at Restaurant Depot as an in-house brand called Supremo Italiano, was actually from a company with 10 regional plants around the West that source ingredients and sell locally, despite their larger national brand.

Other ingredients had come from much further away. The various spices in the Adobo seasoning, for instance, had traveled a combined 15,000 miles. The avocados had traveled from Chile, home of the world’s largest avocado grower (a company that was said to produce 300 million fruit per year). The rice was imported from Thailand, despite an abundance of California-grown rice, and was packaged under an array of brand names. “The taco truck owner may have bought the bag with the Sombrero on it, while another shopper at Restaurant Depot might have bought the exact same rice with a Buddha on the package,” said Bela.

Rather than emphasize the current polarity between local and globally produced food, the students were given a chance to examine the values of both modes of production, from a systems perspective. Key to this process was a close look at the embodied energy in each ingredient, or the sum total of the energy necessary for its entire life-cycle.  The students compared tomatoes grown in a greenhouse with those shipped from the Southern Hemisphere, where they’d been grown in summer weather. They looked at aluminum foil, which originated as an aluminum alloy that was mined in New Zealand, and had traveled farther than the elements of the taco, but can be recycled indefinitely without degrading in quality.

“We left the project critical of the dogma that tends to frame the issue of provenance,” David Fletcher said. Or, as Edlrich told the audience: “We came away with the idea that global isn’t necessarily bad.”

Rebar and Fletcher plan to publish a book detailing the class’ complete findings. In the meantime, a more complete run-down of the research will be appearing in the next issue of Meatpaper Magazine.

Guest blogger Twilight Greenaway writes a weekly newsletter about sustainable food for the Center for Urban Education about Sustainable Agriculture. Her writing can also be found at Culinate, Civil Eats, and Ethicurean. She lives in the San Francisco Bay Area.

Read more: http://www.good.is/post/your-taco-deconstructed/#ixzz0h3uhbAEP
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution Non-Commercial
GOOD is hiring check for job listings here