Sweet Replies

You may have seen the Sweet Surprise ads. A woman pours a purple fruit-like drink at a kid’s party. Her (rude) guest makes the statement, “Wow…you don’t care what the kids eat, huh?” In the second ad, a woman offers her man a popsicle, and he replies “I thought you loved me…its got high fructose corn syrup in it…” Both the savvy hostess and girlfriend probe their skeptics for a rationale why high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) is bad. Both look uneasy, so dumfounded you can almost see the drool trickle from the corners of their mouths. The women reply, “What? That it’s made of corn, has no artificial ingredients in it, and can be enjoyed in moderation…” Glug, glug, glug goes the jug, into the cups for babes. Whew, thank God, I thought you were poisoning the children.

Is HFCS getting a bad rap? Some of you may recall when the poor egg, once considered a nutritious, perfectly contained little meal, came under scrutiny for its cholesterol. The egg industry barely rebounded. I remember the confusion of a visiting Spanaird, wondering what the hell “Twice a Week is Okay” meant? It was a hard sell convincing one who originates from a land where they deep fry fried eggs that he should limit his intake of huevos. Ultimately, no convincing evidence found a link between eating eggs and an increase in blood cholesterol or coronary heart disease.

Maybe HFCS isn’t the devil’s spawn. After all, it mixes easily. Extends shelf-life. Prevents freezer burn. Helps breads brown and keeps them soft. And it’s cheap, cheap, cheap. As much as 20%-70% cheaper than other sources of sugar. When Coke switched from cane sugar to HFCS, it gained a $70 million/year cost advantage over Pepsi.

The ad campaign raises a good point. We are quick to jump on wagons, often wobbly wagons that drive you to damaged health and intellectual integrity. Remember when we thought diet pills were good for us, because the weight loss was healthy, right? No matter what the cold sweats and rapidly beating heart said. In our search for The Nutritional Answer, we make rash decisions after hearing only tidbits of information. People isolate and demonize single ingredients, vow to eliminate the food forever, and preach to everyone within earshot to do the same. We’ve all met these people. Hell, we’ve been these people. No fun at a party, I tell ya. But yes, solid research is a good thing before taking a strong stand, lest you get caught feeling naked at school.  

But ah, research. Good luck with that. The blessing and curse of research is that you’ll find what you’re looking for. There are hundreds of studies to either support or negate what you believe. We have a tendency to cite that which supports our beliefs. Keep in mind that every study has to be funded. Scientists are under economic and political pressure. Scientific discovery is competitive. Research methods are rushed, findings often premature. And if a special interest group, drug company, or big business industry in question funds the study, you can almost guarantee the results will fall in their favor.

For example, two studies on HFCS suggested there was little to no evidence that it differed from sucrose in its effects on appetite, on metabolic processes involved in fat storage, or caused obesity. Those were funded by the American Beverage Institute and the Corn Refiners Association On the other hand, diet researchers who find links between HFCS and bad juju force fed rodents with massive amounts of one substance in a short period of time, and project those results onto human use. Who do you believe?

Statistically sound results take time. Life-threatening products (Vioxx, for one) have been marketed after initial results, or “seed studies” with little to no follow up. Drug companies claim they help the sick, but you can’t ignore that they do make a little change off the sales. Reliable long term studies can take decades. We are not patient.

So what’s a sheep to do? Well, I’ve muddled through some research and am still dizzy. But I COULD hold my own in that commercial. Picture me at that party. Rather than twitch uncomfortably, I would take a deep breath and say:

“Well, my friend, it’s nice that you can accept the good word of the Corn Refiner’s Association with blind faith. Unfortunately, I can’t do the same. Although I do not question that HFCS comes from corn, I do question the quality of that corn.  

First, we’re not talking about pristine cobs plucked from Farmer Joe’s personal garden. Perhaps you are not aware that “field” or “dent” corn used to make HFCS, in its raw form, is inedible to humans. (Apparently it’s terrible on cow tummies too, who are normally grass grazers). HFCS doesn’t naturally occur in corn, unlike the sugars found in sugar cane, beehives, stevia, agave plants, or fruit. The process to create HFCS involves some crazy shit, including adding genetically modified enzymes that stimulate chemical reactions to change the molecular structure of the corn. There are claims that HFCS meets the FDA’s requirements for use of the term “natural”, despite the fact the FDA has no requirements or definition for “natural”.

Speaking of genetic modification (GM), most of the HFCS corn is grown from GM seed. Seed that has its DNA radically changed so that the plant will resist herbicide (both seed and herbicide are made by the same company, Monsanto) and produce its own pesticide. (Good for killing pests, bad for bees and butterflies who also rest on corn) This is an exciting science but it is an infant science. Because of its youth and recorded glitches in the matrix, many countries have banned the sale of GM foods. Our administration currently allows our population and its kids to be part of the GM experiment. Can you say “lobbyist”?. I do think there will be future benefits of GM food sources, but I agree with those who argue GM food should be contained in covered greenhouses until we know more. Until a few days ago, I knew very little about genetic modification. After reading both sides, I strongly suggest that if you choose to consume HFCS and other products made with corn, soy, canola, or industrial-raised meat (fed with GM food), educate yourself. You are an unknowing yet active participant in a long-term experiment with GM food. For an anti-GM view, check out this interview with Jeffery Smith, or read his book, Seeds of Deception. For pro-GM information, go to Monsanto’s website. For a particularly scathing, but eye-opening history of Monsanto, read this Vanity Fair article.

And oh, my confident hostess, I care about how that corn is grown. Corn is cheaper to grow and process, so we have overconsumed it. In 2007, 93.6 million acres of U.S. acreage were devoted to corn, a new record up 20 percent from the year before. Farmers are unwilling to stop growing the corn because they receive subsidies for it. They don’t get a subsidy for “marginal”, diverse crops, such as cassava, sorghum, millet, pigeon pea, chickpea, and groundnut, which are found to be more nutritionally balanced than corn or soybeans and are far better suited to local soils and tough climates. Furthermore, growing large crops of corn the way we do robs the soil of nitrogen, degrading it faster than can be replenished though crop rotation. (Which rarely occurs because there is no financial incentive to do so). Lower quality soil requires more use of fertilizer that is derived from ammonia through a process requiring fossil fuel. Growing one bushel of corn takes takes approximately ½ gallon of gas. Our habitual use of plow-based agriculture rapidly changes the erosion rate of the land, leaving the soil bare and exposed. Rain or wind storms have a bigger impact on the land. We are losing topsoil fast. That is why I have a tendency to consume products grown through methods that replenish, not deplete, the soil. To learn more about the demise and future of our topsoil, read the September ’08 issue of National Geographic.  

I do acknowledge that HFCS cannot be soley responsible for obesity, diabetes, or heart disease. I agree that we overreact to studies and cling on to weak links for answers. But HFCS rarely travels alone. I’m pretty sure that “fruit beverage” you’re pouring also contains Red #40 and Blue #1 to give it that lovely purple color. And I’ll bet there is artificial “punch” flavoring in the drink. What does the combination of all those ingredients do? And what are you serving with that punch? Cake. Chips and dip. Hot dogs with ketchup. That’s a lot of HFCS on the menu, my friend. Is that moderation?

HFCS is also cheaper, which encourages us to buy, say a gallon jug of “fruit beverage’ instead of organic juices or natural sodas. It allows us to buy the Big Gulp for the same price of a 4 oz. sip of pure, unadulterated juice. I don’t blame you for looking for the bargain. I do too. That’s why I give my son lots of water, and organic juice “in moderation” because he gets more vitamins and nutritional value for the money. And on occasion, he will consume HFCS because I don’t want him to feel stupid in social situations. Like at this party. My choices to avoid certain foods, oddly enough, still make me the pariah.  

So because I mistrust the research on both sides and don’t have time for long term studies, because I know our topsoil is being depleted by our overconsumption of corn, because I am leary of big business genetic modification and its effects on both the environment and our diets, and because I can’t control the amount of HFCS in combination with other craziness found in processesed foods, I choose to stick with foods that come as close to their purest form as possible. Research aside, that just feels “right” to me. And that, my friend, is why I significantly limit our intake of HFCS.

Yep, those kids are playing pretty hard. They’re so thirsty that I bet if we served up some nice cold water in some crazy cups with silly straws, they wouldn’t care what quenches their thirst. They really do care about silly straws though.

Oh, and here’s a napkin. You appear to be drooling.”