Hannah Buffie Trend Analysis 13 May 2012 The Sweet Truth: A Trend Analysis of the Rising Rate of High

Fructose Corn Syrup Lead Cereal, ketchup, burgers, cough drops, and salad dressing--what could these foods possibly have in common? Most of these contain HFCS, known to most as high fructose corn syrup. Traditionally these never contained high fructose corn syrup, mostly because of the fact it did not exist. Yet these common foods are consumed quite frequently and, with the consumption of certain foods, high fructose corn syrup is ingested. There has been an increased amount of high fructose corn syrup used in foods and beverages since the invention of HFCS in the 1970s. Originally food was sweetened mainly with the same substance as plain old, white, table sugar, which is technically called sucrose. Since the 1970s, sucrose has increasingly been replaced by the use of HFCS. As it states in its name, high fructose corn syrup is made from corn. Tara Parker-Pope, a health journalist for The New York Times, reports that normal sugar is made from sugar cane or sugar beets, but highfructose corn syrup is made essentially by soaking corn kernels to extract cornstarch, and using enzymes to turn the glucose in the starch into fructose (n.p). Sucrose is a disaccharide, or a two-molecule sugar, that is made up of a glucose molecule and a fructose molecule in a 50:50 ratio. HFCS is also a disaccharide of glucose and fructose, but its ratio is more like 45% glucose and 55% fructose. While a 50:50 ratio versus a

45:55 ratio does not sound like it could be much of a concern, the ratio as it exists in HFCS does not exist naturally; it can only be produced synthetically. In an interview, Dr. Paul Ratte, a nutrition professor at Northwestern Health Sciences University, explains the problem with a high ratio fructose sugar. Glucose is the currency the body uses, because every cell in the body can use glucose for energy. Fructose is different; only the liver can metabolize fructose when it enters the body. HFCSs ratio of fructose to glucose is higher than sucroses ratio. This excess amount of fructose can overwork the liver when HFCS is present in the body. Proof of Trend This synthetically produced disaccharide is becoming more common in food and drinks being produced today. According to Miriam Bocarsly, a professor of psychology and neuroscience at Princeton University, From 1970 to 1990, consumption of HFCS has increased more than 1,000% and currently accounts for 40% of all added caloric sweeteners (n.p). With 40% of all sweeteners being HFCS consumers have a limited choice when purchasing some products. Kiyah Duffey and Barry Popkin, nutrition researchers at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, found that in 1970 HFCS made up less than 1% of all sweeteners in consumers food. By 2004 HFCS made up over 40% of the sweeteners on the market (1724S). Today, instead of assuming that natural ingredients are in food, consumers are forced to look for options labeled natural. As expected, the caloric intake of sugar coming from HFCS has increased instead of the calories coming from natural table sugar. It is a replacement of sugar types, but the caloric intake remains the same because both sugars have the same caloric value. Fruit

drinks on average, provide 40 kcal [of HFCS] per person per day, and soda is worse, provid[ing] 158 kcal per person per day (1726S). With HFCS being added to foods the caloric intake of all sugars has increased as well, and it is commonly known that sugar is not good for a well rounded diet. Thus, the increased sugar intake is leading to a less healthy population. Overall, the cheaper costs of corn, government subsidies for corn, and societies change in taste has led to the increased amount of corn syrup in our food for the past 40 years. Causal Analysis One of the reasons for the increase of HFCS is the fact that it is cheap. For any company producing a product, cheaper is better. This is the driving force for high fructose corn syrup into our diets. Duffey and Popkin note that the lower cost of corn syrup, and the sweeter taste of it drew companies into the idea of using HFCS. They could get the same taste using much less. A result of the cheaper sweetener caused larger serving sizes (1722S). Just by taking a look at grocery store shelves there has been a noticeable increase in the size of many products. Duffey and Popkin also add that the product is less expensive to make, so companies and producers can use the extra money for things such as advertising (1722S). Emily Beach, a writer for the website livestrong, found statistics on the cost of corn syrup compared to cane sugar from Beverage Watch. It states that in 2010 cane sugar cost about $0.33 per pound, and HFCS cost less at $0.20 per pound (n.p). Naturally, anyone would take the cheaper option over the more expensive option for the same product, without much regard of the effects that it could have on the consumer.

Another reason for the increased use of HFCS is government subsidies given to farmers for corn. A subsidy is a payment made by the government to a market to make up for low prices of a product or service, or if a market is competitive. Tom Philpott, a cofounder of Maverick Farms, a center for sustainable food education, and a former columnist for many dietary websites, talks about the corn subsidies: As corn prices generally dropped through the 1980s and into the 90s pushed down in part by U.S. farm policies also promoted by ADM [Archers Daniels Midland, a major owner in the HFCS market] the industry began to churn out more and more HFCS, and its price came down. That is why manufacturers began putting it seemingly in everything and U.S. sweetener consumption boomed along with obesity and diabetes rates. (n.p) Basically, there was a surplus of corn and the government needed something to do with it, so one of the innovations was the invention of high fructose corn syrup. Then, as the supply rose, the prices declined, and, as seen before, the price of corn syrup became cheaper than cane sugar. The cheaper sweetener and increased amounts of HFCS being used in food have led to societys pallets becoming accustomed to the added sugar in food and beverages. The United States Department of Agriculture created a graph showing the rise in corn sweeteners and total sweeteners, while showing the decreased consumption of refined sugars. [figure 1] (3). As seen on the graph, not only has HFCS consumption rose, but also the consumption of sugar in general. The Vreeland Clinic's Blog wrote about a study done by the Journal of the American Medical Association. The study concludes,

About 16% of participants total daily caloric intake was from added sugars. That compares with 11% in 1977-78 (n.p). In a 35 year period our consumption of sugar has risen 5%. Dr. Ratte recounts facts from even earlier than that. In 1830, the average American consumed 12.1 lbs. Today, that number is about 120 lbs a year. These facts are not just about high fructose corn syrup alone, but all sugar. The idea that Americans pallets have changed and become accustomed to sugar remains true whether the sweetener is HFCS or table sugar. Consumers pallets have expected that sugar is in food, but to consumers it is just not noticeable. Ratte then goes on about how the industry has helped to change consumers pallets: there are three taste preferences in our food: fat, salt, sweet.[. . .] The food industry has appealed to the idea of sweet out of those three. Its easier to over salt things, and harder to over sweeten things and the industry takes advantage of that.[. . .] Sugar is used because its cheap, [consumers] like it, and we become addicted to it. It activates the same chemicals in the brain as cocaine. Just by looking at the labels on food in a store, many would be surprised at the amount of added sweeteners. Even grocery stores are set up for consumers to buy the cheaper, artificially sweetened products located in the middle of the store. This means more sugar and leads to the effects that sugar has on the body, such as obesity. Effects Corn syrup has many effects, the most obvious being obesity. Bocarsly and her colleagues conducted an experiment on rats. One group was given food with sucrose in it;

the other was given high fructose corn syrup injected food. Here was what was concluded about the experiment: In the current study, long-term access to HFCS in rats led to obesity, while sucrose did not. [. . .] In summary, rats maintained on a diet rich in

HFCS for 6 or 7 months show abnormal weight gain, increased circulating TG [triglycerides] and augmented fat deposition. All these factors indicate obesity. Thus, over-consumption of HFCS could very well be a major factor in the obesity epidemic, which correlates with the upsurge in the use of HFCS. (n.p) As there is a rise in corn syrup added our food it can also be noted that there are rising obesity rates. More than one in every two adults is at least overweight, in fact 68% of the population in the United States is either overweight or obese. When comparing obesity alone (a BMI of 30 or higher,) in 1960 the percentage of the population that was obese was 13.4%. In 2005 it has risen to 35.1%. While this increase in the obesity rate may not be due to just high fructose corn syrup, but also to sugar in general, the fact remains that the low cost of HFCS has led to an increase of its use in food products. While obesity is a problem, the Corn Refiners Association wants consumers to believe it is not the fault of HFCS. They report that, high fructose corn syrup is basically the same as sugarboth in terms of composition and in the number of calories they contain. Since high fructose corn syrup and sugar are so similar, the human body absorbs them the same way.(n.p.). Although both may be the same caloric value, not all experts agree that they are metabolized in the same way. Dr. Ratte talks about the effects of a higher fructose level:

Glucose is the currency the body uses, because every cell in the body can use glucose for energy. Fructose is different, only the liver can metabolize fructose when it enters the body.When you eat fructose the liver is overtaken, it burdens the liver and makes you insulin resistant. It can be comparable to drinking alcohol. The CRA says that HFCS is metabolized the same way in the body, but as Ratte stated above it is not. Ratte agrees that whether it is HFCS or sugar, fewer disaccharides need to be consumed. The real culprit lies in the fructose component of the disaccharide, and there is simply more fructose in HFCS than there is in sucrose. If the trend were to continue, society would continue to focus on the price of products, not the quality, as already seen with sweeteners. Instead of looking at possible effects this choice is making, producers feel the price is more important. With societys taste changing and becoming more resilient towards sugar, consumers food will only become increasingly filled with sugar for added sweetness. This would then add to the problem of obesity, and the effects that the corn syrup has on the body. To slow or stop the trend, society must read the labels on foods, and look for alternate options so that cereal, ketchup, burgers, cough drops, and salad dressing no longer have anything in common with one another.

Appendix Figure 1

Estimated Per Capita Sweetener Consumption, Total and By Type of Sweetener, 19662004.

Source: USDA