The trade group which sponsors the commercials argues that no one can say for certain that HFCS is better or worse than cane sugar. Now, however, we do have some evidence that HFCS IS worse than cane sugar. Although we know that cane sugar is metabolized by every cell in the body, whereas fructose must be metabolized in the liver, the evidence on fructose has been mixed. Now, we have scientific evidence that high levels of fructose, including that which is found in HFCS, does raise triglyceride levels in rodent models, and we know that many people with insulin resistance also have elevated triglycerides, suggesting that high levels of fructose consumption associated with HFCS may play a role. In addition, high levels of fructose consumption also seems to cause Leptin resistance, which in turn, causes rapid weight gain.

Allie Beatty did an interesting vLog posting on Leptin in August which is worth having a look at if you're interested in knowing more about Leptin. An article contained in Science Daily and Medical News Today does a better job of covering the latest research implicating HFCS, so I won't attempt to do that here. A word of caution, however, is that the studies were done using rodent models, not humans. But further research is likely to be pursued!
You need to clarify why the fructose that constitutes 50% of can sugar isn't also dangerous.
ReplyDelete