Cooperative Purchasers
Home Suppliers Distribution About Us Contact Us
Starches Sweeteners Sugars Salts Phosphates Food Chemicals Other Ingredients
FOOD INGREDIENTS
BEVERAGE INGREDIENTS
NUTRACEUTICAL INGREDIENTS
ALL INGREDIENTS
COMPANY RESOURCES
Featured Suppliers

Food Ingredients Insider

Home | Sugar Drinks - What the US Thinks » | Sugar Tax Not So Sweet » | Food Ingredients Research Findings: Modified Bran » | Starch Giant Introduces New Cocoa Replacement Ingr... » | Sugar News: Sweets go Mini » | Campbell's, Salt, and the Science of Good Taste » | "All Natural" and "No Artificial" Claims Undermini... » | Battle Over Sweetener Lacks Scientific Basis » | High Fructose Corn Syrup: Sweetener Doesn't Cause ... » | Major Sugar Companies Suing Over "Natural" Corn Syrup »  

Monday, September 26, 2011  

Cane Sugar, Beet Sugar: How about Corn Sugar?

Over the past few decades, high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) has been criticized with some very biting comments.

With it's reputation for contributing to obesity and related health issues in America, it's easy to see how the term 'HFCS' could leave a bad taste in your mouth.

In 2004, a couple of well respected university professors even stated that HFCS was uniquely responsible for the obesity epidemic in the US.

With a ratio of fructose to glucose nearly identical to that of ordinary table sugar, the bad press seems a little unfair, according to the Corn Refiners Association (CRA) and several supporting US senators.

In response, the CRA has recently petitioned the FDA to allow food manufacturers to use the term 'corn sugar' rather than HFCS. They argue that many consumers are misled by the ingredient name, due to the current negative stigma.

In support, several US senators have also petitioned for the name change with hopes to change public opinion. The senators argue that HFCS is mischaracterized in the market place largely because of its name.

They declare that the manufacture of HFCS keeps food affordable for American consumers and creates high-paying jobs here at home.

The also assert (with support from nutritional experts) that HFCS is actually just sugar made from corn.

Biochemists concur that HFCS is basically the biochemical equivalent of sucrose. One product, HFCS 42 (commonly used in foods) is actually lower in fructose than ordinary table sugar.

Quick to dissent are the sugar refiners and farmers, who are trying to stop the CRA's efforts with various lawsuits, etc.

In support of US corn refiners and farmers, the CRA retorts:
CRA members have the same interests as the broader food industry and consumers in promoting a clear and accurate food labeling and in assuring that all ingredient producers are permitted to compete on a level playing field.
In other words, if food labels can describe food ingredients as 'cane sugar' or 'beet sugar,' why not 'corn sugar'?

Post a Comment

  Copyright © 2009 Cooperative Purchasers, Inc. sitemap | privacy policy | terms of use