Thus, in seeking out this substance, I became as aware of the pervasiveness of this food in all things. Once a cherished substance, I began to find it suspect that it truly was in so many foods; and in living in that shared house, I watched as my friend's favorite snacks quickly were removed from his "OK" list. Cookies, it seemed, were especially problematic in this regard, for one day a cookie might have sugar as its sweetener, and then next, be produced with corn syrup instead.
The ads started coming a couple of years ago from the Corn Refiners Association:
There are two things that send up red flags for me. One, the woman in this video who speaks out against corn syrup has little more to say than, "You know what they say." Clearly CRA does not want to address the real concerns people have about a highly processed corn derivative in their foods. The second issue is the statement, "it's fine in moderation." That may be true, but how can anyone have moderate amounts of high fructose corn syrup when it's pervasive in almost everything we consume that is not a whole food (e.g. produce, dairy, rice, dried legumes, meat, etc.)? There's also the whole ambiguous term "natural" being used, which holds with it a host of trouble, and was not even a legally acceptable term for HFCS until 2008. Not only do manufacturers of HFCS send it through such a heavy refining process, natural does not always indicate good or healthy, despite the undertones of using such language. The other ads in the campaign seen here and , use the same language and formula. The agitator has nothing of value to back up any claim, and the term "in moderation" is repeated throughout. Any real discourse is shot down, and those who protest against HFCS are portrayed as ignorant, misled, or even crazy (not the eyes of the first woman in the ad shown above).
Who makes up the Corn Refiners Association? According to their website, their members include: Archer Daniels Midland, Cargill, Penford, National Starch, and Tate & Lyle, all of whom have something to lose of people start actively rejecting corn derivatives in their foods. Then again, some already have begun to do just that.
In 2007, PCC banned high fructose corn syrup from its stores. The European Union has banned its products, as well as many genetically modified foods (GMOs) from the United States. Even Florida legislators, led by Rep. Juan Zapata, attempted in 2006 to ban it from school cafeterias, but were talked out of it due to the high cost of healthier foods that did not contain HFCS.
If it's so bad for us, why do we have it at all? There are several reasons, one of them my friend was most focused on was the embargo on Cuban sugar, and his belief that a corporate conspiracy was set to keep that in tact. By driving the price of sugar up and the cost of corn syrup down, it's easier for food manufacturer's to make the same product at a reduced cost with higher profit. What motivations there have been for the embargo continue to be debated. However, when it comes to the practical uses of HFCS, The San Francisco Chronicle in a 2003 article titled "Sugar Coated: We're drowning in high fructose corn syrup" does explain that it began being added to our foods in the 1970's in part because:
Because high fructose corn syrup mixes easily, extends shelf-life and is as much as 20 percent cheaper than other sources of sugar, large-scale food manufacturers love it. It can help prevent freezer burn, so you'll find it on the labels of many frozen foods. It helps breads brown and keeps them soft, which is why hot dog buns and even English muffins hold unexpected amounts.
Fructose, and our increased intake of the substance over the last forty years is speculated by numerous sources to be the primary reason for the U.S. being considered the fattest nation in the world. There are a multitude of books on the subject most noteworthy, Fast Food Nation, Supersize Me, and Fat Land: How Americans Became the Fattest People in the World. As if that weren't enough, there is now evidence to support that high fructose corn syrup is and has been tainted with mercury all along!
Despite what the CRA and its corporate members would like you to believe, HFCS is not natural after going through such a heavy process, it is unhealthy for the body both causing issues for diabetics and causing our bodies to become resistant to leptin, one of the most important adipose derived hormones in the human body, which helps to regulate our metabolisms and generate essential tissues. There is no moderation when the majority of our packaged foods are coated in it (even certain whole grain breads and low fat yogurts), unless we can afford to select our foods from stores like PCC or cook all of our meals from scratch using whole foods.
Though the CRA ads for HFCS show a series of individuals who state, "you know what they say," most people who know about the dangers can cite at least some genuine concerns and often can back them up with unbiased studies. The following spoofs of the CRA ad campaign are evidence of the real voices of activists:
The above spoof gives a host of facts all stated succinctly and in response to the same park ad as the one linked above. It uses the couple's discussion over a popsicle, but offers a significant wealth of information to counter the dismissive tone offered by the Corn industry. Other spoofs (and there are many) include: a couple using a cigarette and tobacco in the same context as the CRA park ad, andcomediennes who tackle larger social issues with the same CRA lines of rebuttal.
No comments:
Post a Comment