Oil - Gas prices going up there too ?

No, HFCS is not responsible for the obesity epidemic. People's eating and exercise habits are responsible for it (though education, economic factors and other social factors all play a role.) But few people realize how corn is overused in this country (and continent, for that matter.) You will not go a day without eating multiple foods containing corn or corn derivatives, much of it unnecessary.

Keeps me regular!

Iago is spot on about eating and exercise habits. Fifty to sixy years ago, people didn't necessarily eat better food than we have today (in fact, you can argue that the quality of food was worse), but people ate in moderation. And they did a heck of a lot more with themselves than sit in front of the television watching shows and playing video games. I do both of those, but you need to keep active as well.

I agree with that, though I do believe that people really underestimate how economic factors contribute. Good quality, healthy food is quite expensive. I have heard people scoff at the presence of poverty in this country by pointing out how fat many poor people are. Fresh fruits and vegetables are more expensive than crap like macaroni and cheese. Even with rising food prices, you can still eat cheaply as long as you are willing to eat the cheapest crap (invariably high in fat and sodium while low in complex carbohydrates.) You can practically peg this glycemic index of foods to the price.

sweet potato better than a normal potato

but i still think the corporately Americanism to banish sugar cane and use corn fructose causes alot of the the problem.

A coke made in the USA uses corn fructose.

A pop made in Mexico uses sugar cane.

You need to watch the documentary King Corn. The use of HFCS in this country is purely driven by politics, not industry. In agricultural fields (no pun intended,) corporations follow what government makes the most profitable. The government massively subsidizes corn. That is why HFCS is cheaper than sugar. There are other factors in the overuse of corn that are not as obvious, and affect even people who watch what they eat. For example, most of the meat that we eat in this country has been grain-fed rather than grass-fed. A steak cut from a grain-fed steer has several times as much saturated fat as the same size steak cut from a grass-fed steer. And many of the problems that we have with food safety in this country stem from feeding corn to cattle. If we stopped feeding corn to cattle we could nearly eliminate problems with e coli. If you really want to get sick (not to mention angry) then watch Food, Inc. as well.

ok tks will check it out

however a quick google serach for
is corn fructose the cause of the obesity epidemic

brings up a multitude of recent studies linking it to the problem at least partially. for example.

http://www.foodconsumer.org/newsite/Nutrition/Food/high_fructose_corn_syrup_the_cause_of_obesity_epidemic_250310081.html

"Bad news for the high fructose corn syrup industry. A new study led by a Princeton University research team suggests that high fructose corn syrup may be at least partially responsible for the increase in the obesity rate in the United States."

"Professor Hoebel said in a press release by the University that all the rats drinking high fructose corn syrup at levels well below those found in soda pop were becoming obese. This sweetener was so effective in causing obesity that even a high-fat diet was no match for it. The high fat diet did not cause obesity in all rats."

There are other studies that do not come to the same conclusion. The HFCS debate has become a bit like the global warming debate; both sides reject anything that disagrees with their thesis. Your bold-faced quote is a case in point. It is not comparing apples to apples (like comparing HFCS to table sugar is) and it leaves out too much information. The bottom line is that total calories are king. What was the total caloric intake of the rats on the high-fat diet compared to that of the rats on the HFCS? In each and every case, if you take in more calories than you expend you will get fat, regardless of the source of those calories. You can eat a diet consisting of nothing but HFCS or nothing but saturated fat and if you eat less calories than you expend you will lose weight. You can eat nothing but whole grains and vegetables and if you eat more calories than you expend you will get fat.

There are other related health questions that have nothing to do with obesity, of course. Few would argue that if you are dieting by eating nothing but steak, Snicker bars and soda, you may lose weight but are going to have other problems.

The other factor that goes beyond simply counting calories is how things are metabolized, and that is the only thing that the anti-HFCS forces may have in their favor. How both sugars are metabolized may make a difference, but that has yet to be consistently proven. And I am skeptical that it can make that much of a difference, for the simple reason that BOTH refined white sugar and HFCS are metabolized alarmingly quickly -- it is like comparing a Ferrari to a Lamborghini. Where you see major differences are when you compare any form of sugar to things like whole grains or especially resistant starches like some forms of beans. The latter can literally pass through your body before they are fully metabolized, and as a result your body does not absorb all of the calories. But regardless of the form of a sugar, your body will metabolize the whole thing almost as soon as you look at it, let alone eat it!

None of this is arguing that HFCS or any other form of sugar is good for you. The fact that our modern eating habits contain alarming amounts of HFCS or even refined white sugar, as well as staggering amounts of sodium, is indeed a contributing factor to modern obesity. Proccessed foods are horrible for you. But nevertheless you can make a choice to not eat them, provided you make enough money to eat the more expensive alternatives.

i know you have a vested interested in selling these sodas with hfsc in it but why

i wonder why all of Europe banned Hfcs

this is too much of coincident :
`` High Fructose Corn Syrup - Obesity in America is at epidemic proportions, with 75% of the population expected to be overweight by 2015. Studies have shown that the obesity rates in the US exactly follow the trend and time line of the introduction of High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS) into our diet. Between 1970 and 1990 consumption increased by more than 1000% mostly due to the sot drink manufaturers switching to HFCS as their sweetnener.``

http://www.selfgrowth.com/articles/Obesity_Basics.html

`
``he body doesn’t recognize chemically altered products and either flushes them out of the body or stores them as fat.
HFCS also blocks the absorption of nutrients from the food it is in. HFCS is banned in Great Britain and is soon to be banned in Europe. Unlike other carbohydrates, the main sweetener in beverages — high-fructose corn syrup — does not spur production of insulin to make the body “process” calories. It also does not spur leptin, a substance that helps moderate appetite. For these reasons, beverages are not as satisfying as foods containing similar amounts of calories and fly under the radar of the body’s normal weight-regulating mechanisms.``

When I shop for groceries, I generally shop on the outside lanes of the store, which means I buy primarily fresh food. The only time I hit an aisle is for things like pasta (yep, I don't make fresh) and seasoning. I can attest that that gets expensive quickly.

There are tricks to keeping the pounds off, but these tricks need not be complicated. At the most basic level, it's as simple as eating in moderation (consume less calories than you burn in a day, excepting when you are trying to put on muscle) and being smart about when you consume fat and load up on carbs. Eating carbs and high-fat foods early in the day gives your body a chance to burn off the calories. Consuming a big meal before bedtime (when your body essentially enters a mini state of hibernation) is only asking for trouble and you will quickly increase your waist size. That's how sumo wrestlers get so big. They load up on carbs and then hit the sack for a two-hour nap.

Even if everything that Agent is saying about HFCS is true (and like it or not, there is still conflicting evidence and unproven theories involved) it still is not to "blame" for obesity. Obesity would be on the rise with or without HFCS. People are eating more, period. They are also eating more processed food and highly refined carbohydrates. The logic of banning HFCS only holds if you apply it to refined carbohydrates, fat (saturated or not) and all of the other garbage that people eat. There is also a great deal of irony in banning a substance that is derived from a highly subsidized grain, while forcing price controls on its main competitor -- white sugar (cane, beet or otherwise.) Allow foreign sugar to compete with domestic sugar, stop subsidizing corn, and HFCS will slowly go away. But guess what? Then manufacturers will be putting vast quantities of refined sugar into foods, and you will gain nothing in the fight against obesity.

And I have no vested interest in the issue. CSDs have been declining for years, both sweetened and diet. That is why we offer a diversified portfolio. There will always be a market for beverages of some sort. You have to change with the times. But "blaming" any one factor for obesity is absurd, and the assumption that the alternatives (such as refined white sugar) are automatically better is problematic at best.

gas prices are upto $1.34 / liter here now .....

1. Denial.
2. Anger.
3. Bargaining.
4. Depression.
5. Acceptance.

The 5 Stages of buying Gas....