High Fructose Corn Syrup -- Not the Worst Sweetener, But Does That Make it Good?

The results of a soon-to-be-released study on High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS) were recently summarized in Science Daily:

Not Enough Evidence to Indict High Fructose Corn Syrup in Obesity

Drs. Richard Forshee and Mauren Storey, along with their assembled team of experts, analyzed past research to find evidence of HFCS being linked to obesity . . . and didn't find a strong link between the two.  They took the time to provide suggestions for future studies, so that a link between HFCS and obesity could be more clearly defined (or refuted).  On the surface, the methodology used seem appropriate and the conclusions drawn, logical.  But I still have some reservations about this study, including. . .   

1.  The source of funding.  Tate & Lyle, one of the world's largest producers of starches and cereal sweeteners (including high fructose corn syrup), funded this project.  I'm not challenging the integrity of Drs. Richard Forshee and Maureen Storey, or anybody else involved in this project for that matter. But I think it'd be easier to believe that this research was truly objective had the funding come from a company without billions of dollars at stake.

2.  The emphasis of the research.  When I came across the title, Not Enough Evidence to Indict High Fructose Corn Syrup in Obesity, my initial perception was that this study (and any study like it) was aimed strictly at refuting HFCS' link to obesity.  Then I read Dr. Forshee's interpretation of the results: "the expert panel concluded that high fructose corn syrup does not appear to contribute (to obesity) differently than any other energy sources."

Differently than the other energy resources?  Okay, so HFCS might not own the unique capability of generating obesity.  But is it just as bad as other energy sources (i.e. other sugars), at wreaking havoc on our metabolism and prompting obesity?  If so, isn't that bad enough?

__________________________________________________

Ironically, Dr. Forshee's words are similar to those spoken by Dr. Walter Willett, nutrition department chairman at Harvard's School of Public Health, who was quoted in a New York Times article last year:

"There's no substantial evidence to support the idea that HFCS is somehow resonsible for obesity.  If there was no HFCS, I don't think we would see a change in anything important.  I think there's this overreaction."

Dr. Willett then continued on by saying (as paraphrased by the NY Times author) . . . that he was not defending HFCS as a healthy ingredient, but that he simply thinks that it is no worse than the refined white sugar it replaces, since both offer easily consumed calories with no nutrients in them. __________________________________________________

Shouldn't the issue here be not that HFCS contributes differently, but that society as a whole is simply eating too many sugars -- including high fructose corn syrup -- and chronic ingestion of simple sugars contributes to obesity?

Wouldn't we be better served if this research was directed more at finding ways to reduce excessive simple sugar consumption (regardless of the source), as opposed to trying to figure out which sugar is a tad worse than the other?

It seems to me, that this research may be merely nitpicking at the minute details so much that it's missing the overall point.

Comments

[Shellie]

I find this study to be a bit disturbing. I'm not sure why people can't just make an educated decision to cut back on ALL sweeteners.

[Eugene Thong]

If there's one thing I really dislike, it's when researchers purposely mislead. Take the statement from Dr. Forshee:

"Many other trends, from smoking rates to two-income households to computer use, have also been roughly coincident with the rise in obesity, and ecological analysis cannot determine which of the trends are truly associated with the obesity rate."

Well, Dr. Forshee, there's just one small problem with your analogy - obesity rates were stable until the introduction of HFCS as go-to sweetener. So while the other "factors" may have been "roughly coincedent" (hmmm) with obesity, they were also rising in time periods prior to the steep increase in obesity.

ONE factor, however, not only "roughly coincides" with the steep rise in obesity, but saw a 4086% increase in production and usage at nearly exactly the same time as the rise in obesity: High-fructose corn syrup.

You know, they smoke more in China than they do in the US. And yet, their rate of obesity lags far behind the US. But it's currently rising - as is their ingestion of foodstuffs containing HFCS.

I'd posit that anyone who thinks that computers and sugar have similar effects on obesity needs an immediate review of metabolic science.

I'm surprised that Dr. Willett stated that there was no apparent link between HFCS and obesity since someone having even a basic familiarity with metabolic science could make the link. But then again, it only took him 30 years or so (and some striking study results) to admit that low-carb diets worked more effectively than low-fat in fat loss.

I really enjoyed this post, Dr. Warden, and think you made some great recommendations to cut down on sugar consumption and to stop wasting valuable research time on this industry-funded crap.

We need a cure for the common cold already:)

[Christopher Warden]

Eugene,

What more can I say other than I concur completely? Thanks for your insight, input and kind words.