I can't find the study report I saw, but I'm pretty sure as far as kCal goes, they were equalized.
??
I'm almost 100% positive that HCFS is more energy dense (energy/volume) than table sugar. Or do you mean to say that in the study in question, the energy content WAS the same?
??
I'm almost 100% positive that HCFS is more energy dense (energy/volume) than table sugar. Or do you mean to say that in the study in question, the energy content WAS the same?
Sorry, yeah, I meant that the study equalized the kCal content between the groups.
Seriously, that bag of grapes, and sack of apples really doesn't cost that much more than the box of pop tarts, and the tasty cakes.
You think someone on food stamps buys Pop Tarts or Tastey Cakes? Those are expensive and were the first things I stopped buying when money ran low here last fall. It's Wonderbread, Kraft Mac & Cheese, hotdogs with Wonderbread buns, Heinz Ketchup, and Campbell's Tomato Soup. That's how HFCS gets into poor diets. Produce is FAR more expensive than that stuff.
I've been saving money since I have changed my lifestyle. I eat out less, and common whole fruits and veggies really don't cost that much when you consider the volume you can eat compared to the fast food junk I have been stuffing myself with for years.
Eating out & junk food != poor families trying to feed themselves.
I agree that in general, junky food costs less. But with some shrewd choices (like the ones Thrax makes), you can eat healthy for a reasonable amount of money.
This article talks about the difference in costs (quoting a news source) and has some tips for making smart choices.
Corn syrup, as opposed to HFCS, is composed mainly of glucose. As a cooking ingredient, corn syrup is used to prevent recrystallization of sugar in candies and to keep foods soft. It's not as dangerous as HFCS by a long shot. Biologically speaking, glucose is the basis for energy in the body.
Table sugar, or sucrose, is made of a combination of a glucose molecule along with a fructose molecule.
Fructose alone is pure fruit sugar. In other words, you'll find fructose in (for example) an apple or a pear. In its natural state, however, it's offset by a lot of fiber. If something is artificially enhanced with additional fructose, however, I'd personally stay away from it. In nature it occurs in much lower amounts than in items that are 'enhanced' with it (such as HFCS) because it is about 75% sweeter than sucrose, and twice as sweet as glucose.
Aye, corn subsidies are a load of BS. IF the government really needs to subsidize food, it should at least be food that isn't so blatantly bad for us. Even in it's natural form, corn is far less nutritious than just about any other vegetable. Or so I've read.
Yeah, corn basically has no nutritional value whatsoever. Its just "decoration" for your poop. ;-)
BTW.....I'm sure most of you know that I am Bobby1211's lady. Up until about a week ago we had not given much thought to HFCS. It had been talked about, but we had not gotten into looking for that too. Now along with looking at Calories/Fat/Fiber/Salt and Protein, I have to look for HFCS. Do you all even realize now how long it takes me to do my grocery shopping??? Hours I tell you, Hoursssss!!!
I tried to totally eliminate HFCS out of my daly diet. The only thing that didn't have HFCS is nutbran.
It's difficult, for sure. I was able to eliminate a lot of it just by eliminating sugar, period.
Fortunately, a lot of food manufacturers have latched on to the anti-HFCS sentiment and are labeling products that are HFCS free for easy identification.
Of course, it would have been easier just to not include it in the first place, but that's a different discussion altogether*.
Actually, it's not as simple as "corn lobby" The frequent use of high-fructose corn syrup goes back to The New Deal, part of which was a bunch of measures designed to decrease the cost of food for people in the US (because it was getting to the point that normal middle class families couldn't afford to eat anymore). Since HFCS was so much cheaper to use than cane sugar, our government encouraged manufacturers to start using it in everything as a cost-cutting measure. At the time, no one knew it was so bad for us.
It can be astonishing how much of what goes on in our daily lives can be traced back to The New Deal, actually. A lot of what we think of as normal politics, economics, and life are a direct or indirect result of those policies.
The only reason that HFCS is cheaper than real sugar is because of the huge government subsidies that go to corn growers though. If the corn lobby wasn't there, the subsidies probably wouldn't be as large and HFCS wouldn't be as cheap. Or at least the information presented in King Corn suggests that. Pretty good documentary.
Oh, and as for the anti-HFCS sentiment... gotta be careful with companies that advertise their lack of it in their products. As they mentioned in the lecture posted earlier in the thread, a lot of those companies are replacing HFCS with crystalline fructose which is... drum-roll please... even WORSE for you than HFCS.
It's just too bad that the average american can't afford to easily eat healthy.
someone had to mention HFCS and get me out of my chair...
I can't find the link but the more the data is tracked:
Total Lifetime Food and Health Spend = Lifetime Medical Expenses + Lifetime Grocery Expenditures
You can decide what you want to spend your money on, it's just difficult to spend it on a known cost like groceries for the next week, instead of an unknown amount of health complications, or expenditures therein.
Does anyone know what diabetes medication is? Since we're talking about sugar, is:
healthy food cost per week - prepackaged food cost per week > diabetes medication cost per week?
I'd be interested to try and track both grocery vs. medical costs over an identical amount of time.
Sadly, the way to cheat the system is not pay for healthy food now, and get out of paying for medical expenses later with an early demise...
Comments
??
I'm almost 100% positive that HCFS is more energy dense (energy/volume) than table sugar. Or do you mean to say that in the study in question, the energy content WAS the same?
Sorry, yeah, I meant that the study equalized the kCal content between the groups.
This article talks about the difference in costs (quoting a news source) and has some tips for making smart choices.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKSoiDtdi9s
I've started looking for HFCS in everything I eat. Some things really surprise me, some not so much.
I should have paid attention in health class. Does a product containing Fructose and Corn Syrup indicate anything? Is this a way of masking HFCS?
-Bobby
Table sugar, or sucrose, is made of a combination of a glucose molecule along with a fructose molecule.
Fructose alone is pure fruit sugar. In other words, you'll find fructose in (for example) an apple or a pear. In its natural state, however, it's offset by a lot of fiber. If something is artificially enhanced with additional fructose, however, I'd personally stay away from it. In nature it occurs in much lower amounts than in items that are 'enhanced' with it (such as HFCS) because it is about 75% sweeter than sucrose, and twice as sweet as glucose.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM
Yeah, corn basically has no nutritional value whatsoever. Its just "decoration" for your poop. ;-)
Ladies and Gentlemen of Icrontic, Allow me to introduce you to my Fiance, The beautiful Sugar Cheryl :-)
-Bobby
That is why you fail...
-Bobby
No, that's just because I'm weak in the Force.
Must be all the HFCS.
Let me 2nd that. I took it in while getting some work done about a week ago. Extremely valued. Thanks for posting CB.
It's difficult, for sure. I was able to eliminate a lot of it just by eliminating sugar, period.
Fortunately, a lot of food manufacturers have latched on to the anti-HFCS sentiment and are labeling products that are HFCS free for easy identification.
Of course, it would have been easier just to not include it in the first place, but that's a different discussion altogether*.
*
It can be astonishing how much of what goes on in our daily lives can be traced back to The New Deal, actually. A lot of what we think of as normal politics, economics, and life are a direct or indirect result of those policies.
Oh, and as for the anti-HFCS sentiment... gotta be careful with companies that advertise their lack of it in their products. As they mentioned in the lecture posted earlier in the thread, a lot of those companies are replacing HFCS with crystalline fructose which is... drum-roll please... even WORSE for you than HFCS.
someone had to mention HFCS and get me out of my chair...
I can't find the link but the more the data is tracked:
Total Lifetime Food and Health Spend = Lifetime Medical Expenses + Lifetime Grocery Expenditures
You can decide what you want to spend your money on, it's just difficult to spend it on a known cost like groceries for the next week, instead of an unknown amount of health complications, or expenditures therein.
Does anyone know what diabetes medication is? Since we're talking about sugar, is:
healthy food cost per week - prepackaged food cost per week > diabetes medication cost per week?
I'd be interested to try and track both grocery vs. medical costs over an identical amount of time.
Sadly, the way to cheat the system is not pay for healthy food now, and get out of paying for medical expenses later with an early demise...
They generally do give you time off for medical reasons though.
Opportunity cost is a bitch.
I don't feel like I spend a lot of time cooking. I do enjoy it though - might seem more of a chore if I didn't.