Just wanted to say I found the following products at the local
supermarket are HFCS free.

Bull's Eye BBQ Sauce - even has HFCS on the packaging
http://www.kraftfoods.com/bullseyebbq/flavors.html

"Organic" or "Organics" ketchup, apple juice, applesauce... The brand/
company on the label is just called "Organic(s)". Their applesauce is
basically apples and I think added water, but i don't even think there
is any sugar at all, nor salt. I'm not sure who they are, can't find
their website either. Maybe it's the local supmarket's organic brand,
I dunno.

Bush's Baked Beans - the "Homestyle" (or whatever it's called).
Haven't looked to see if any of their other styles are but they might
be.

While these products still might have more sugar and salt than I or
any of us would like, at least they don't have HFCS or other junk
(from what I can recall reading on the labels) compared to their
competitors.

And I'm not on some kind of anti-HFCS kick, I just "try" to avoid it
if i can, and other unnecessary stuff in order to "try" and eat
healthier. I don't eat as many candy bars, bags of sour cream & onion
potato chips or drink soda like I used to either. Though I'm still
stuck on iced tea. Hopefully cutting back on some HFCS products helps
a little.

Paul McNoob said...

> Just wanted to say I found the following products at the local
> supermarket are HFCS free.
>
> Bull's Eye BBQ Sauce - even has HFCS on the packaging
> http://www.kraftfoods.com/bullseyebbq/flavors.html
>
> "Organic" or "Organics" ketchup, apple juice, applesauce... The brand/
> company on the label is just called "Organic(s)". Their applesauce is
> basically apples and I think added water, but i don't even think there
> is any sugar at all, nor salt. I'm not sure who they are, can't find
> their website either. Maybe it's the local supmarket's organic brand,
> I dunno.
>
> Bush's Baked Beans - the "Homestyle" (or whatever it's called).
> Haven't looked to see if any of their other styles are but they might
> be.
>
> While these products still might have more sugar and salt than I or
> any of us would like, at least they don't have HFCS or other junk
> (from what I can recall reading on the labels) compared to their
> competitors.
>
> And I'm not on some kind of anti-HFCS kick, I just "try" to avoid it
> if i can, and other unnecessary stuff in order to "try" and eat
> healthier. I don't eat as many candy bars, bags of sour cream & onion
> potato chips or drink soda like I used to either. Though I'm still
> stuck on iced tea. Hopefully cutting back on some HFCS products helps
> a little.


I think we're all pretty smart consumers here. There's much more than just
HFCS to be concerned with when it comes to processed foods AND drinks.
Dietary restrictions included.

I wouldn't call Bullseye bbq sauce or Bush's beans to be minimally
processed.

I've never seen an "Organics" brand name line of food and would consider it
highly misleading.

Now WHERE'S my box o' blue!!!

Andy

On Jun 26, 11:43*am, Andy <q> wrote:
> I think we're all pretty smart consumers here. There's much more than just

I'm sure there are plenty of visitors that aren't.

> HFCS to be concerned with when it comes to processed foods AND drinks.
> Dietary restrictions included.

But that's not the purpose of THIS thread I'm sharing what I
found. Not here to preach to the world about everything that exists
that is this-free and that-free.

>
> I wouldn't call Bullseye bbq sauce or Bush's beans to be minimally
> processed.

It's better than what's on the shelves next to it.

>
> I've never seen an "Organics" brand name line of food and would consider it
> highly misleading.

Not misleading at all. ingredients are right there on the label.

Paul McNoob wrote:

> Just wanted to say I found the following products at the local
> supermarket are HFCS free.
>
> Bull's Eye BBQ Sauce - even has HFCS on the packaging
> http://www.kraftfoods.com/bullseyebbq/flavors.html
>
> "Organic" or "Organics" ketchup, apple juice, applesauce... The brand/
> company on the label is just called "Organic(s)". Their applesauce is
> basically apples and I think added water, but i don't even think there
> is any sugar at all, nor salt. I'm not sure who they are, can't find
> their website either. Maybe it's the local supmarket's organic brand,
> I dunno.
>
> Bush's Baked Beans - the "Homestyle" (or whatever it's called).
> Haven't looked to see if any of their other styles are but they might
> be.
>
> While these products still might have more sugar and salt than I or
> any of us would like, at least they don't have HFCS or other junk
> (from what I can recall reading on the labels) compared to their
> competitors.
>
> And I'm not on some kind of anti-HFCS kick, I just "try" to avoid it
> if i can, and other unnecessary stuff in order to "try" and eat
> healthier. I don't eat as many candy bars, bags of sour cream & onion
> potato chips or drink soda like I used to either. Though I'm still
> stuck on iced tea. Hopefully cutting back on some HFCS products helps
> a little.

Organic products tend to be made with "dessicated cane syrup" or
"dehydrated cane syrup" rather than HFCS.

If there's a significant Hispanic population in your area, look for
Mexican soda -- made with sugar cane.

--
Dan Goodman
"I have always depended on the kindness of stranglers."
Tennessee Williams, A Streetcar Named Expire
Journal http://dsgood.livejournal.com
Futures http://clerkfuturist.wordpress.com
mirror 1: http://dsgood.insanejournal.com
mirror 2: http://dsgood.wordpress.com
Links http://del.icio.us/dsgood

On Jun 26, 10:50*am, Paul McNoob > wrote:
>
> But that's not the purpose of THIS thread *I'm sharing what I
> found. Not here to preach to the world about everything that exists
> that is this-free and that-free.

I don't know that HFCS is more or less healthy than other forms of
sugar, but I do find the use of HFCS to be a good indicator that
whatever the product is will be too sweet-tasting for me. So if I see
HFCS on the label of, say, a tomato product or canned fruit I know to
avoid it. Likewise, given a choice between a soda or fruit juice with
or without HFCS I'll always go for the one without. Whoever that
hypothetical average consumer is that the food manufacturers are
aiming at, I like things less sweet...... -aem

Paul McNoob wrote:
> Just wanted to say I found the following products at the local
> supermarket are HFCS free.
>
> Bull's Eye BBQ Sauce - even has HFCS on the packaging
> http://www.kraftfoods.com/bullseyebbq/flavors.html
>
> "Organic" or "Organics" ketchup, apple juice, applesauce... The brand/
> company on the label is just called "Organic(s)". Their applesauce is
> basically apples and I think added water, but i don't even think there
> is any sugar at all, nor salt. I'm not sure who they are, can't find
> their website either. Maybe it's the local supmarket's organic brand,
> I dunno.

Hmmmmm... can't HFCS by organic tooooooooooooooo? Organic implies how
something is grown, not what happens to it after it is picked.

aem wrote:
> On Jun 26, 10:50 am, Paul McNoob > wrote:
>> But that's not the purpose of THIS thread I'm sharing what I
>> found. Not here to preach to the world about everything that exists
>> that is this-free and that-free.
>
> I don't know that HFCS is more or less healthy than other forms of
> sugar, but I do find the use of HFCS to be a good indicator that
> whatever the product is will be too sweet-tasting for me. So if I see
> HFCS on the label of, say, a tomato product or canned fruit I know to
> avoid it. Likewise, given a choice between a soda or fruit juice with
> or without HFCS I'll always go for the one without. Whoever that
> hypothetical average consumer is that the food manufacturers are
> aiming at, I like things less sweet...... -aem

Doesn't anyone else find the sweetness of HFCS is dull? That is
the only word I can come up with. It isn't quite the same as
sugar, and I don't like it--and I like its appearance in
everything even more of a turn-off.

I also continue to be shocked that Whole Foods now carries foods
that contain this (and various other substances). IMO, that store
has lost a large portion of its roots.

--
Jean B.

Jean B. wrote:

> Doesn't anyone else find the sweetness of HFCS is dull? That is the
> only word I can come up with. It isn't quite the same as sugar, and I
> don't like it--and I like its appearance in everything even more of a
> turn-off.
>
> I also continue to be shocked that Whole Foods now carries foods that
> contain this (and various other substances). IMO, that store has lost a
> large portion of its roots.
>
I do believe that old coke used to have more of a "bite" before going to
corn syrup.
I also believe that people have encouraged the over sweetening of all
processed foods (*where they weren't even traditionally sweetened when
made by scratch) by continued purchase of them.
Have we lost our appreciation of flavors except for sweet?? I don't
know? I don't blame this entirely on HFCS, but on any sweetener placed
where it isn't needed.

The wrote on Thu, 26 Jun 2008 17:05:23 -0500:

>> On Jun 26, 10:50 am, Paul McNoob > wrote:
>>>
>>> But that's not the purpose of THIS thread I'm sharing
>>> what I found. Not here to preach to the world about
>>> everything that exists that is this-free and that-free.
>>
>> I don't know that HFCS is more or less healthy than other
>> forms of sugar, but I do find the use of HFCS to be a good
>> indicator that whatever the product is will be too
>> sweet-tasting for me. So if I see HFCS on the label of, say,
>> a tomato product or canned fruit I know to avoid it.
>> Likewise, given a choice between a soda or fruit juice
>> with or without HFCS I'll always go for the one without.
>> Whoever that hypothetical average consumer is that the food
>> manufacturers are aiming at, I like things less sweet......
>> -aem

Let's be honest, I cannot detect any difference in "satisfaction",
whatever that is, or sweetness with HFCS. I know no reason to consider
it unhealthy and the only thing is that it may appeal to manufacturers
as cheaper than sucrose.

--

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

E-mail, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

"Goomba" > wrote in message
...
> Paul McNoob wrote:
>> Just wanted to say I found the following products at the local
>> supermarket are HFCS free.
>>
>> Bull's Eye BBQ Sauce - even has HFCS on the packaging
>> http://www.kraftfoods.com/bullseyebbq/flavors.html
>>
>> "Organic" or "Organics" ketchup, apple juice, applesauce... The brand/
>> company on the label is just called "Organic(s)". Their applesauce is
>> basically apples and I think added water, but i don't even think there
>> is any sugar at all, nor salt. I'm not sure who they are, can't find
>> their website either. Maybe it's the local supmarket's organic brand,
>> I dunno.
>
> Hmmmmm... can't HFCS by organic tooooooooooooooo? Organic implies how
> something is grown, not what happens to it after it is picked.

I'm pretty sure he's refering to the Organics brand, not just organic food
in general...and according to the literature Von's keeps sending me, there's
no HFCS in the Organics *brand*.

kimberly

"Andy" <q> wrote in message ...
> Paul McNoob said...
>
>> Just wanted to say I found the following products at the local
>> supermarket are HFCS free.
>>
>> Bull's Eye BBQ Sauce - even has HFCS on the packaging
>> http://www.kraftfoods.com/bullseyebbq/flavors.html
>>
>> "Organic" or "Organics" ketchup, apple juice, applesauce... The brand/
>> company on the label is just called "Organic(s)". Their applesauce is
>> basically apples and I think added water, but i don't even think there
>> is any sugar at all, nor salt. I'm not sure who they are, can't find
>> their website either. Maybe it's the local supmarket's organic brand,
>> I dunno.
>>
>> Bush's Baked Beans - the "Homestyle" (or whatever it's called).
>> Haven't looked to see if any of their other styles are but they might
>> be.
>>
>> While these products still might have more sugar and salt than I or
>> any of us would like, at least they don't have HFCS or other junk
>> (from what I can recall reading on the labels) compared to their
>> competitors.
>>
>> And I'm not on some kind of anti-HFCS kick, I just "try" to avoid it
>> if i can, and other unnecessary stuff in order to "try" and eat
>> healthier. I don't eat as many candy bars, bags of sour cream & onion
>> potato chips or drink soda like I used to either. Though I'm still
>> stuck on iced tea. Hopefully cutting back on some HFCS products helps
>> a little.
>
>
> I think we're all pretty smart consumers here. There's much more than just
> HFCS to be concerned with when it comes to processed foods AND drinks.
> Dietary restrictions included.

The thread is about HFCS, so that was what he talked about. Not too hard to
get There's been plenty of threads on which items have the latest bad for
you stuff...this one happens to be about HFCS, so there's no reason to
expect him to talk about the fat content, for example.

>
> I wouldn't call Bullseye bbq sauce or Bush's beans to be minimally
> processed.

And apparently, unless I missed something, neither did he. He merely
mentioned that they have no HFCS. Again, you're rambling off on your own
topic, Andy! :-) Not to say there's a problem with that, but that is your
topic, and not *this* topic.

>
> I've never seen an "Organics" brand name line of food and would consider
> it
> highly misleading.

What's misleading about it? The ingredients and information are there on the
label of the Organics brand for all to see. You take it with a grain of
salt, and try to make an informed decision, no? :-)

>
> Now WHERE'S my box o' blue!!!
>
> Andy

In the cupboard?? hehe

kimberly

Andy <q> wrote in :

> I've never seen an "Organics" brand name line of food and
> would consider it highly misleading.

it's Shaw's/Star Market's house brand organic foods. since
they are owned by Albertson's, perhaps it's Albertson's brand?
lee
--
Last night while sitting in my chair
I pinged a host that wasn't there
It wasn't there again today
The host resolved to NSA.

On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 12:26:02 -0700 (PDT), aem >
wrote:

>On Jun 26, 10:50*am, Paul McNoob > wrote:
>>
>> But that's not the purpose of THIS thread *I'm sharing what I
>> found. Not here to preach to the world about everything that exists
>> that is this-free and that-free.
>
>I don't know that HFCS is more or less healthy than other forms of
>sugar, but I do find the use of HFCS to be a good indicator that
>whatever the product is will be too sweet-tasting for me. So if I see
>HFCS on the label of, say, a tomato product or canned fruit I know to
>avoid it. Likewise, given a choice between a soda or fruit juice with
>or without HFCS I'll always go for the one without. Whoever that
>hypothetical average consumer is that the food manufacturers are
>aiming at, I like things less sweet...... -aem

From what I has seen, HFCS is sweet but does not satisfy like regular
sugar.

Goomba > wrote in
:

> Paul McNoob wrote:
>> Just wanted to say I found the following products at the
>> local supermarket are HFCS free.
>>
>> Bull's Eye BBQ Sauce - even has HFCS on the packaging
>> http://www.kraftfoods.com/bullseyebbq/flavors.html
>>
>> "Organic" or "Organics" ketchup, apple juice,
>> applesauce... The brand/ company on the label is just
>> called "Organic(s)". Their applesauce is basically apples
>> and I think added water, but i don't even think there is
>> any sugar at all, nor salt. I'm not sure who they are,
>> can't find their website either. Maybe it's the local
>> supmarket's organic brand, I dunno.
>
> Hmmmmm... can't HFCS by organic tooooooooooooooo? Organic
> implies how something is grown, not what happens to it
> after it is picked.

no, because HFCS can only be produced in a lab. it is not a
natural product.


lee
--
Last night while sitting in my chair
I pinged a host that wasn't there
It wasn't there again today
The host resolved to NSA.

Goomba wrote:
> Paul McNoob wrote:
>> Just wanted to say I found the following products at the local
>> supermarket are HFCS free.
>>
>> Bull's Eye BBQ Sauce - even has HFCS on the packaging
>> http://www.kraftfoods.com/bullseyebbq/flavors.html
>>
>> "Organic" or "Organics" ketchup, apple juice, applesauce... The brand/
>> company on the label is just called "Organic(s)". Their applesauce is
>> basically apples and I think added water, but i don't even think there
>> is any sugar at all, nor salt. I'm not sure who they are, can't find
>> their website either. Maybe it's the local supmarket's organic brand,
>> I dunno.
>
> Hmmmmm... can't HFCS by organic tooooooooooooooo? Organic implies how
> something is grown, not what happens to it after it is picked.

HFCS is "Frankensugar" made through an industrial process.

In article >,
George > wrote:

> Goomba wrote:
> > Paul McNoob wrote:
> >> Just wanted to say I found the following products at the local
> >> supermarket are HFCS free.
> >>
> >> Bull's Eye BBQ Sauce - even has HFCS on the packaging
> >> http://www.kraftfoods.com/bullseyebbq/flavors.html
> >>
> >> "Organic" or "Organics" ketchup, apple juice, applesauce... The brand/
> >> company on the label is just called "Organic(s)". Their applesauce is
> >> basically apples and I think added water, but i don't even think there
> >> is any sugar at all, nor salt. I'm not sure who they are, can't find
> >> their website either. Maybe it's the local supmarket's organic brand,
> >> I dunno.
> >
> > Hmmmmm... can't HFCS by organic tooooooooooooooo? Organic implies how
> > something is grown, not what happens to it after it is picked.
>
> HFCS is "Frankensugar" made through an industrial process.

Hopefully you don't do anything *evil* like drink beer, which is also
made through an industrial process.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

> I've never seen an "Organics" brand name line of food and would consider
> it
> highly misleading.
>
> Now WHERE'S my box o' blue!!!
>
> Andy

Genuardi's was carrying "Organics" labeled products until last year. Then
they moved into a different label called (I think) "365".

Jon

On Jun 26, 2:45*pm, "Dan Goodman" > wrote:

> Organic products tend to be made with "dessicated cane syrup" or
> "dehydrated cane syrup" rather than HFCS.
>

Why the hell can't they just call it "sugar". That's what it is.

Cindy Hamilton

In article >, Cindy Hamilton > wrote:
>On Jun 26, 2:45=A0pm, "Dan Goodman" > wrote:
>
>> Organic products tend to be made with "dessicated cane syrup" or
>> "dehydrated cane syrup" rather than HFCS.
>
>Why the hell can't they just call it "sugar". That's what it is.

Cindy, don't be such a Luddite! Next you'll be complaining about
claims of "cholesterol-free avocados". ;-)

Cheers, Phred.

--
LID

Cindy Hamilton said...

> On Jun 26, 2:45*pm, "Dan Goodman" > wrote:
>
>> Organic products tend to be made with "dessicated cane syrup" or
>> "dehydrated cane syrup" rather than HFCS.
>>
>
> Why the hell can't they just call it "sugar". That's what it is.
>
> Cindy Hamilton


Cindy,

Probably for the same reason they don't label gin, vodka, rum, whiskey and
wine "booze". Granted, it's called that, just not on the labels.

Andy

Phred said...

> In article
> >,
> Cindy Hamilton > wrote:
>>On Jun 26, 2:45=A0pm, "Dan Goodman" > wrote:
>>
>>> Organic products tend to be made with "dessicated cane syrup" or
>>> "dehydrated cane syrup" rather than HFCS.
>>
>>Why the hell can't they just call it "sugar". That's what it is.
>
> Cindy, don't be such a Luddite! Next you'll be complaining about
> claims of "cholesterol-free avocados". ;-)
>
> Cheers, Phred.


Phred,

There's no cholesterol in avocados!!! Don't go startin' rumors!!!

Andy

"Dan Abel" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> George > wrote:
>
>> Goomba wrote:
>> > Paul McNoob wrote:
>> >> Just wanted to say I found the following products at the local
>> >> supermarket are HFCS free.
>> >>
>> >> Bull's Eye BBQ Sauce - even has HFCS on the packaging
>> >> http://www.kraftfoods.com/bullseyebbq/flavors.html
>> >>
>> >> "Organic" or "Organics" ketchup, apple juice, applesauce... The brand/
>> >> company on the label is just called "Organic(s)". Their applesauce is
>> >> basically apples and I think added water, but i don't even think there
>> >> is any sugar at all, nor salt. I'm not sure who they are, can't find
>> >> their website either. Maybe it's the local supmarket's organic brand,
>> >> I dunno.
>> >
>> > Hmmmmm... can't HFCS by organic tooooooooooooooo? Organic implies how
>> > something is grown, not what happens to it after it is picked.
>>
>> HFCS is "Frankensugar" made through an industrial process.
>
> Hopefully you don't do anything *evil* like drink beer, which is also
> made through an industrial process.
>
> --
> Dan Abel
> Petaluma, California USA
>

evil? didn't see any mention of evil. HFCS is insidious, and does terrible
things for ones health, though.
And no, I don't drink beer (even though you didn't address that to me).

kimberly

>"aem" > wrote in message
...
>On Jun 26, 10:50 am, Paul McNoob > wrote:
>>
>> But that's not the purpose of THIS thread I'm sharing what I
>> found. Not here to preach to the world about everything that exists
>> that is this-free and that-free.

>I don't know that HFCS is more or less healthy than other forms of
>sugar, but I do find the use of HFCS to be a good indicator that
>whatever the product is will be too sweet-tasting for me. So if I see
>HFCS on the label of, say, a tomato product or canned fruit I know to
>avoid it. Likewise, given a choice between a soda or fruit juice with
>or without HFCS I'll always go for the one without. Whoever that
>hypothetical average consumer is that the food manufacturers are
>aiming at, I like things less sweet...... -aem

Funny thing is, I don't know anyone personally who is big on the overly
sweet choices now left to us in the grocery stores. Most everyone I know is
disappointed, if not disgusted, with the changes HFCS has wrought on
groceries these days. Not only does it oversweeten, but the sweetening has
no complexity, so it detracts from the flavors of the product.

HFCS is not only less healthy, it is unhealthy. High fructose corn syrup, on
the other hand, is hydrolyzed corn starch. Basically, corn starch that is
treated with enzymes. It's name is a misnomer, actually. It is
only 14% fructose, which is hardly "high fructose"...it's just higher than
other corn
products. It's highly refined and processed. It's much sweeter than sugar,
which is
why it's so popular in the food industry, since it is far less expensive to
use than
cane sugar. HFCS has been linked to diabetes and insulin resistance (in
fact, one
Harvard study shows HFCS to be the single highest contributor to type II
diabetes,
diet-wise). It's also been shown to increase triglyceride levels, increasing
your
risk for coronary heart disease. It is also metabolized almost entirely in
the liver,
which means that because the liver essentially has to stop everything else
to
metabolize it, it effects production of insulin. It also lowers your bodies
production of leptin, which is involved in our internal appetite control.
Eating more
HFCS means you're more likely to eat more in general. Because the fructose
in it is
not bound in sucrose (as it would be in fruits and vegetables), more of it
gets into
your system faster. It also depletes your body of minerals faster, causing
exhaustion
instead of relieving it.


kimberly

Nexis wrote:

> HFCS is not only less healthy, it is unhealthy. High fructose corn
> syrup, on the other hand, is hydrolyzed corn starch. Basically, corn
> starch that is treated with enzymes. It's name is a misnomer,
> actually. It is
> only 14% fructose, which is hardly "high fructose"...it's just higher
> than other corn
> products. It's highly refined and processed. It's much sweeter than
> sugar, which is
> why it's so popular in the food industry, since it is far less
> expensive to use than
> cane sugar. HFCS has been linked to diabetes and insulin resistance
> (in fact, one
> Harvard study shows HFCS to be the single highest contributor to type
> II diabetes,
> diet-wise). It's also been shown to increase triglyceride levels,
> increasing your
> risk for coronary heart disease. It is also metabolized almost
> entirely in the liver,
> which means that because the liver essentially has to stop everything
> else to
> metabolize it, it effects production of insulin. It also lowers your
> bodies production of leptin, which is involved in our internal
> appetite control. Eating more
> HFCS means you're more likely to eat more in general. Because the
> fructose in it is
> not bound in sucrose (as it would be in fruits and vegetables), more
> of it gets into
> your system faster. It also depletes your body of minerals faster,
> causing exhaustion
> instead of relieving it.

Thank You! kimberly. I appreciate this explanation. I know
when I eat stuff with HFCS, I get thirstier, so I have taken to
avoiding it. With nothing to back it up, I have thought maybe
this ingredient is not going to help our diabetes rate.

nancy

What I read about HFCS is that it is a genetically engineered product with a
hidden agenda. It tricks brain receptors to make you think you're not full,
when you are, so you eat more, get fatter and buy more product more often. A
very devious food additive.

Andy

On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 07:38:59 -0700 (PDT), Paul McNoob
> wrote:

>Just wanted to say I found the following products at the local
>supermarket are HFCS free.
>
>
>Bush's Baked Beans - the "Homestyle" (or whatever it's called).
>Haven't looked to see if any of their other styles are but they might
>be.
>

i never noticed bush's doesn't have h.f.c.s., but i do like their
products. not too expensive, either.

your pal,
blake

In article >, "Nexis" >
wrote:

> "Dan Abel" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article >,
> > George > wrote:

> >> HFCS is "Frankensugar" made through an industrial process.
> >
> > Hopefully you don't do anything *evil* like drink beer, which is also
> > made through an industrial process.

> evil? didn't see any mention of evil.

My dictionary says that "frankenfood" is a derogatory word.
Frankensugar, although not in my dictionary, would be made up of
Frankenstein + sugar. Sounds like evil to me.


> And no, I don't drink beer (even though you didn't address that to me).

Beer is made through a process that is similar to HFCS, namely the
breaking down of starch into sugar using enzymes.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

In article >, "Nexis" >
wrote:


> HFCS is not only less healthy, it is unhealthy. High fructose corn syrup, on
> the other hand, is hydrolyzed corn starch. Basically, corn starch that is
> treated with enzymes. It's name is a misnomer, actually. It is
> only 14% fructose, which is hardly "high fructose"...it's just higher than
> other corn
> products. It's highly refined and processed. It's much sweeter than sugar,
> which is
> why it's so popular in the food industry, since it is far less expensive to
> use than
> cane sugar. HFCS has been linked to diabetes and insulin resistance (in
> fact, one
> Harvard study shows HFCS to be the single highest contributor to type II
> diabetes,
> diet-wise). It's also been shown to increase triglyceride levels, increasing
> your
> risk for coronary heart disease. It is also metabolized almost entirely in
> the liver,
> which means that because the liver essentially has to stop everything else
> to
> metabolize it, it effects production of insulin. It also lowers your bodies
> production of leptin, which is involved in our internal appetite control.
> Eating more
> HFCS means you're more likely to eat more in general. Because the fructose
> in it is
> not bound in sucrose (as it would be in fruits and vegetables), more of it
> gets into
> your system faster. It also depletes your body of minerals faster, causing
> exhaustion
> instead of relieving it.

A lot of your points (but certainly not all) don't agree with this
Wikipedia entry:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-fructose_corn_syrup

While Wiki isn't always accurate, some things seem clear.

1. Concentrated sugar is unhealthy in large amounts. HFCS and sucrose
are both sugars. There are some differences, but they are still sugar.

2. Corn sugar, or corn syrup, has very little fructose. It's not a
good thing for food, because it has all the calories but doesn't "taste"
very sweet.

3. Adding the enzymes produces HFCS 90, which is 90% fructose and isn't
used for anything except making HFCS 55 and HFCS 42, by adding back corn
syrup to dilute the fructose.

4. Some HFCS (like 90) is sweeter than sucrose, 42 is less sweet and 55
is considered comparable.

5. HFCS is cheaper in the US because the price of sucrose (often
referred to just as "sugar") in the US is double the world price, due to
tariffs and trade restrictions. Other countries in the world use less
HFCS than the US because of this price difference.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

"Nancy Young" > wrote in message
. ..
> Nexis wrote:
>
>> HFCS is not only less healthy, it is unhealthy. High fructose corn
>> syrup, on the other hand, is hydrolyzed corn starch. Basically, corn
>> starch that is treated with enzymes. It's name is a misnomer,
>> actually. It is only 14% fructose, which is hardly "high fructose"...it's
>> just higher
>> than other corn
>> products. It's highly refined and processed. It's much sweeter than
>> sugar, which is
>> why it's so popular in the food industry, since it is far less
>> expensive to use than
>> cane sugar. HFCS has been linked to diabetes and insulin resistance
>> (in fact, one
>> Harvard study shows HFCS to be the single highest contributor to type
>> II diabetes,
>> diet-wise). It's also been shown to increase triglyceride levels,
>> increasing your
>> risk for coronary heart disease. It is also metabolized almost
>> entirely in the liver,
>> which means that because the liver essentially has to stop everything
>> else to
>> metabolize it, it effects production of insulin. It also lowers your
>> bodies production of leptin, which is involved in our internal
>> appetite control. Eating more
>> HFCS means you're more likely to eat more in general. Because the
>> fructose in it is
>> not bound in sucrose (as it would be in fruits and vegetables), more
>> of it gets into
>> your system faster. It also depletes your body of minerals faster,
>> causing exhaustion
>> instead of relieving it.
>
> Thank You! kimberly. I appreciate this explanation. I know when I eat
> stuff with HFCS, I get thirstier, so I have taken to
> avoiding it. With nothing to back it up, I have thought maybe
> this ingredient is not going to help our diabetes rate.
>
> nancy

You're most welcome, Nancy :-)
I did alot of reading about it when I was diagnosed, and have tried to keep
up with new developments, just because the food supply in the nation scares
me these days and I like to make informed decisions on what I'm eating! :-)
I knew right away that anything containing HFCS raised my BG levels faster
and higher than the same item with sugar...which makes it all the more
frustrating when it's become so hard to find certain things (like salad
dressings, tomato soup, etc) that don't contain it.
Luckily for me, it's not an issue with beverages, since I drink coffee, tea,
and water... hehe. I had a rootbeer float the other night, and it was the
first time in I can't remember how long that I had a soda.

kimberly

Dan wrote on Fri, 27 Jun 2008 11:18:26 -0700:

>> HFCS is not only less healthy, it is unhealthy. High fructose
>> corn syrup, on the other hand, is hydrolyzed corn starch.

> A lot of your points (but certainly not all) don't agree with
> this Wikipedia entry:

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-fructose_corn_syrup

> While Wiki isn't always accurate, some things seem clear.

> 1. Concentrated sugar is unhealthy in large amounts. HFCS
> and sucrose are both sugars. There are some differences, but
> they are still sugar.

> 2. Corn sugar, or corn syrup, has very little fructose. It's
> not a good thing for food, because it has all the calories but
> doesn't "taste" very sweet.

> 3. Adding the enzymes produces HFCS 90, which is 90% fructose
> and isn't used for anything except making HFCS 55 and HFCS 42,
> by adding back corn syrup to dilute the fructose.

> 4. Some HFCS (like 90) is sweeter than sucrose, 42 is less
> sweet and 55 is considered comparable.

> 5. HFCS is cheaper in the US because the price of sucrose
> (often referred to just as "sugar") in the US is double the
> world price, due to tariffs and trade restrictions. Other
> countries in the world use less HFCS than the US because of
> this price difference.

I think I tend to agree with you that excessive amounts of sugars have
the potentiality to initiate diabetes but I am not totally convinced. I
gather that triglycerides are now the fashionable heart risk factor.
After much experimentation on me by my physicians, with varying levels
of statins and developing reactions to practically all of them, my
LDL/HDL ratio is fine with an extremely low dose of Crestor but now they
criticize my Triglygeride levels You just can't win!

--

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

E-mail, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

On Jun 27, 9:33*am, (Phred) wrote:
> In article >, Cindy Hamilton > wrote:
>
> >On Jun 26, 2:45=A0pm, "Dan Goodman" > wrote:
>
> >> Organic products tend to be made with "dessicated cane syrup" or
> >> "dehydrated cane syrup" rather than HFCS.
>
> >Why the hell can't they just call it "sugar". *That's what it is.
>
> Cindy, don't be such a Luddite! *Next you'll be complaining about
> claims of "cholesterol-free avocados". *;-)

Was that you standing next to me in the produce aisle?

Cindy Hamilton

Dan Abel wrote:
> In article >, "Nexis" >
> wrote:
>
>> "Dan Abel" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> In article >,
>>> George > wrote:
>
>>>> HFCS is "Frankensugar" made through an industrial process.
>>> Hopefully you don't do anything *evil* like drink beer, which is also
>>> made through an industrial process.
>
>> evil? didn't see any mention of evil.
>
> My dictionary says that "frankenfood" is a derogatory word.
> Frankensugar, although not in my dictionary, would be made up of
> Frankenstein + sugar. Sounds like evil to me.
>
>
>> And no, I don't drink beer (even though you didn't address that to me).
>
> Beer is made through a process that is similar to HFCS, namely the
> breaking down of starch into sugar using enzymes.
>
So based on that logic lactobacillus is a bacteria found in food that
does good stuff so all bacteria found in food such as C. botulinum must
be good too.

On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 17:03:21 -0400, Goomba >
wrote:

>Jean B. wrote:
>
>> Doesn't anyone else find the sweetness of HFCS is dull? That is the
>> only word I can come up with. It isn't quite the same as sugar, and I
>> don't like it--and I like its appearance in everything even more of a
>> turn-off.
>>
>> I also continue to be shocked that Whole Foods now carries foods that
>> contain this (and various other substances). IMO, that store has lost a
>> large portion of its roots.
>>
>I do believe that old coke used to have more of a "bite" before going to
>corn syrup.
>I also believe that people have encouraged the over sweetening of all
>processed foods (*where they weren't even traditionally sweetened when
>made by scratch) by continued purchase of them.
>Have we lost our appreciation of flavors except for sweet?? I don't
>know? I don't blame this entirely on HFCS, but on any sweetener placed
>where it isn't needed.

If you want a quick comparison, and to my mind there is a BIG
difference - compare Kosher for Passover Coke (available around Easter
Time) or Coca Cola with a Spanish-Language label (made in Mexico) from
an Hispanic market to the crud on the shelves in your local
supermarket. (The locally available stuff tastes like diet Coke, only
slightly less sweet).

In article >, Andy <q> wrote:
>Phred said...
>
>> In article
>> >,
>> Cindy Hamilton > wrote:
>>>On Jun 26, 2:45=A0pm, "Dan Goodman" > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Organic products tend to be made with "dessicated cane syrup" or
>>>> "dehydrated cane syrup" rather than HFCS.
>>>
>>>Why the hell can't they just call it "sugar". That's what it is.
>>
>> Cindy, don't be such a Luddite! Next you'll be complaining about
>> claims of "cholesterol-free avocados". ;-)
>
>Phred,
>
>There's no cholesterol in avocados!!! Don't go startin' rumors!!!

In similar vein, I was looking for some icing sugar in the local
supermarket today and noted the claim that it was "gluten free"!
I mean, really... Some sugar has gluten in it? :-)

[However, to be fair to the marketing droids, it *is* true that
something called "icing sugar mix" contains flour from undefined and
probably variable sources (no doubt depending on price) and that stuff
very likely *does* contain gluten. But to an old bugger like me, that
contaminated stuff is *not* "icing sugar". Icing sugar is *sugar*,
pure and simple.]

Cheers, Phred.

--
LID

Phred said...

> In article >, Andy <q> wrote:
>>Phred said...
>>
>>> In article
>>> >,
>>> Cindy Hamilton > wrote:
>>>>On Jun 26, 2:45=A0pm, "Dan Goodman" > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Organic products tend to be made with "dessicated cane syrup" or
>>>>> "dehydrated cane syrup" rather than HFCS.
>>>>
>>>>Why the hell can't they just call it "sugar". That's what it is.
>>>
>>> Cindy, don't be such a Luddite! Next you'll be complaining about
>>> claims of "cholesterol-free avocados". ;-)
>>
>>Phred,
>>
>>There's no cholesterol in avocados!!! Don't go startin' rumors!!!
>
> In similar vein, I was looking for some icing sugar in the local
> supermarket today and noted the claim that it was "gluten free"!
> I mean, really... Some sugar has gluten in it? :-)
>
> [However, to be fair to the marketing droids, it *is* true that
> something called "icing sugar mix" contains flour from undefined and
> probably variable sources (no doubt depending on price) and that stuff
> very likely *does* contain gluten. But to an old bugger like me, that
> contaminated stuff is *not* "icing sugar". Icing sugar is *sugar*,
> pure and simple.]
>
> Cheers, Phred.


Morning, Phred!

The term "mix" can have questionable implications.

Like the difference between juice and nectar. Where juice means no added
sugar while nectar can be some percentage of added sugar, as I remember,
anyway.

That, recalled from my senior class high school project on food additives.
Geez... brain cells DO last after all!!!

Best,

Andy
Beware the 'Dew!!!

On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 23:51:04 -0400, Marquis Hodes
> wrote:

>On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 17:03:21 -0400, Goomba >
>wrote:
>
>>Jean B. wrote:
>>
>>> Doesn't anyone else find the sweetness of HFCS is dull? That is the
>>> only word I can come up with. It isn't quite the same as sugar, and I
>>> don't like it--and I like its appearance in everything even more of a
>>> turn-off.
>>>
>>> I also continue to be shocked that Whole Foods now carries foods that
>>> contain this (and various other substances). IMO, that store has lost a
>>> large portion of its roots.
>>>
>>I do believe that old coke used to have more of a "bite" before going to
>>corn syrup.
>>I also believe that people have encouraged the over sweetening of all
>>processed foods (*where they weren't even traditionally sweetened when
>>made by scratch) by continued purchase of them.
>>Have we lost our appreciation of flavors except for sweet?? I don't
>>know? I don't blame this entirely on HFCS, but on any sweetener placed
>>where it isn't needed.
>
>If you want a quick comparison, and to my mind there is a BIG
>difference - compare Kosher for Passover Coke (available around Easter
>Time) or Coca Cola with a Spanish-Language label (made in Mexico) from
>an Hispanic market to the crud on the shelves in your local
>supermarket. (The locally available stuff tastes like diet Coke, only
>slightly less sweet).

You are correct, the Cokes from the Mexican market do taste much
better. They are more expensive but I do splurge from time to time
since I do not drink soft drinks often.

blake murphy wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 07:38:59 -0700 (PDT), Paul McNoob
> > wrote:
>
>> Just wanted to say I found the following products at the local
>> supermarket are HFCS free.
>>
>>
>> Bush's Baked Beans - the "Homestyle" (or whatever it's called).
>> Haven't looked to see if any of their other styles are but they might
>> be.
>>
>
> i never noticed bush's doesn't have h.f.c.s., but i do like their
> products. not too expensive, either.
>
> your pal,
> blake

Unfortunately, almost all B&B beans do contain HFCS, so I mostly
bush Bush's now. I did recently find one B&M that is HFCS-free:
Granny's recipe or something like that. It irks me no end that a
label will claim it''s the original product, which dates back to
quite a while ago, and it contains HFCS. I only wish I had been
foresighted enough to save the labels from the cans and jars mom's
pantry.

--
Jean B.

Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> On Jun 26, 2:45 pm, "Dan Goodman" > wrote:
>
>> Organic products tend to be made with "dessicated cane syrup" or
>> "dehydrated cane syrup" rather than HFCS.
>>
>
> Why the hell can't they just call it "sugar". That's what it is.
>
> Cindy Hamilton

To me, it seems like a blatant attempt to trick folks into
thinking it is somehow better than sugar.

--
Jean B.

"Jean B." > wrote in
:

> Unfortunately, almost all B&B beans do contain HFCS, so I
> mostly bush Bush's now. I did recently find one B&M that
> is HFCS-free: Granny's recipe or something like that. It
> irks me no end that a label will claim it''s the original
> product, which dates back to quite a while ago, and it
> contains HFCS. I only wish I had been foresighted enough
> to save the labels from the cans and jars mom's pantry.

high fructose corn syrup was invented in the mid-70s
(accidentally. they were trying to make something else), &
didn't become a popular food additive until after the mid-80s.
it's been downhill from there.

lee
--
Last night while sitting in my chair
I pinged a host that wasn't there
It wasn't there again today
The host resolved to NSA.

In article >, Andy <q> wrote:
>Phred said...
>
>> In article >, Andy <q> wrote:
>>>Phred said...
>>>
>>>> In article
>>>> >,
>>>> Cindy Hamilton > wrote:
>>>>>On Jun 26, 2:45=A0pm, "Dan Goodman" > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Organic products tend to be made with "dessicated cane syrup" or
>>>>>> "dehydrated cane syrup" rather than HFCS.
>>>>>
>>>>>Why the hell can't they just call it "sugar". That's what it is.
>>>>
>>>> Cindy, don't be such a Luddite! Next you'll be complaining about
>>>> claims of "cholesterol-free avocados". ;-)
>>>
>>>Phred,
>>>
>>>There's no cholesterol in avocados!!! Don't go startin' rumors!!!
>>
>> In similar vein, I was looking for some icing sugar in the local
>> supermarket today and noted the claim that it was "gluten free"!
>> I mean, really... Some sugar has gluten in it? :-)
>>
>> [However, to be fair to the marketing droids, it *is* true that
>> something called "icing sugar mix" contains flour from undefined and
>> probably variable sources (no doubt depending on price) and that stuff
>> very likely *does* contain gluten. But to an old bugger like me, that
>> contaminated stuff is *not* "icing sugar". Icing sugar is *sugar*,
>> pure and simple.]
>
>Morning, Phred!
>
>The term "mix" can have questionable implications.
>
>Like the difference between juice and nectar. Where juice means no added
>sugar while nectar can be some percentage of added sugar, as I remember,
>anyway.
>
>That, recalled from my senior class high school project on food additives.
>Geez... brain cells DO last after all!!!

You're not drinking enough. ;-)

Cheers, Phred.

--
LID