Study: HFCS Leads To Much More Weight Gain In Rats Than Sugar

[TotallyOz]

Short URL: http://con.st/10017193

it's just corn sugar

Study: HFCS Leads To Much More Weight Gain In Rats Than Sugar

By Ben Popken on March 28, 2011 3:00 PM

(Princeton University)

A study from Princeton published in the February issue of the journal Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior (PDF) shows that high fructose corn syrup (HFCS), used as a cheap sweetener in everything from Coke to Progresso soup, is not the same as table sugar, namely for the way that it makes you gain 48% more weight.

We wrote about this a year ago, after the study was first completed.

Over 6 months, one group of rats was fed rat chow sweetened with HFCS and another just regular rat chow. The group consuming HFCS showed signed of obesisty, like unusual weight gain, and big increases in triglcerides and fat deposits in the belly. Overall they rats on HFCS ganied 48% more weight than those on a regular diet.

In an earlier study, the researchers gave one group of rats access to water sweetened with table sugar and another, water sweetened with HFCS. The rats on HFCS gained much more weight than the others. The concentration in the table sugar formula was the same as what is found in some soft drinks, while the HFCS was only half as concentrated as most soda pops.

http://consumerist.com/2011/03/studies-hfcs-leads-to-much-more-weight-gain-than-sugar.html

[ihpguy]

Bill Maher has been railing about this for years. And so many apologists for agribusiness were in denial. Interesting that he might have been right. And now.....what about grass?

[Guest hitoallusa]

I was so mad when Corn Refiner Association aired these ads on TV.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVsgXPt564Q&playnext=1&list=PL40C8121ADD917632

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7BJJGzbN3fg&feature=autoplay&list=PL40C8121ADD917632&index=3&playnext=2

Here is a spoof.

[MsGuy]

Who knew?

Damn, does that mean I need to cut down from 4 cans of coke a day?

[Guest hitoallusa]

Oh my MsGuy.. If I were near you I would make you smoothies everyday. Here is what David Murdoch eats.

http://www.happyhealthylonglife.com/happy_healthy_long_life/2011/03/murdock.html

Now I have to confess. I think I did it excessively so I had a stomach ache one night so I stopped eating orange peels.

Who knew?

Damn, does that mean I need to cut down from 4 cans of coke a day?

[lookin]

Damn, does that mean I need to cut down from 4 cans of coke a day?

If you're serious, you might be able to find Coke made with sugar. It comes in bottles from Mexico. In California, some Mexican grocery stores carry it, and I understand that Costco and (shudder) Walmart do too. Check the ingredient label to make sure It's the Real Thing ©.

It's more expensive but I think it tastes much better, just like it did when I was growing up.

[MsGuy]

I'd love to do that, Lookin, but bodegas are kind of scarce hereabouts.

[Guest BeachBoy]

Those commercials are BULLSHIT. Oh my God. This is why I don't watch TV. They have got to be kidding.

Do you guys listen to Stuff You Should Know, the podcast? They had a thing on HFCS a while back, and I swear to God I cleaned out my fridge and pantry after that.

[MsGuy]

I understand that Costco and (shudder) Walmart carry Coke made with sugar too.

So no sooner do I pooh pooh Lookin's suggestion than I'm staring at some funky looking, skinny glass coke bottles stacked by the checkout at my local Walmart. Sure enough, careful examination under bifocal magnification revealed Hecho En Mexico, sugar in the ingredients list and the disclaimer "no retornable". Who would have thought to find Mexican coke in Mississippi.

It's more expensive but I think it tastes much better, just like it did when I was growing up.

You know it really does have a cleaner, crisper taste. But at roughly 4 x the cost per oz. as cans, I'll probably reserve it's use for fine dining & formal evenings.

[lookin]

Glad to hear it, MsGuy. While I was checking the other day to see where bottled Coke might be available in Mississippi, I ran across an interesting tidbit that the very first Coca Cola bottling plant was in Vicksburg.

Asa Chandler himself made the pitch in 1894.

Seems only fitting that it should still be available, albeit by a rather circuitous route.

[MsGuy]

"Prices at that time were 785 cents per case on Coca-Cola and 60 cents per case on bottled soda water. This started us off on the right track."

I can see why Mr. Biedenharn was so enthusiastic about his new idea.

I knew that Coke was first was first bottled in Vicksburg but had pictured it starting as a backroom adjunct to a retail soda fountain (which doesn't seem practical when you think it through). Starting life as a new product for someone already in the bottled soda water business makes much more sense.

[RA1]

Coca-Cola is an interesting product, kind of the MS of the day and still going strong. I have two quick stories about Coke.

When I was growing up, my father was in the restaurant supply business. As now, Coke and Pepsi were in mortal combat. In those days, "drive-ins" usually had post mix drink dispensers which means they poured syrup into a cooled dispenser which mixed soda water with the syrup per each drink. Coke syrup was about 10% more expensive than Pepsi. So, some people used Pepsi syrup in their dispensers and called it whatever the customer wanted, Coke, Pepsi or whatever. They claimed that most could not tell the difference. This alarmed Coke. They thereafter homogenized their syrup so that continued use of any syrup other than Coke in their special "nozzles" would stick and gum up the works. Now, most everything is pre-mix which means the drink is already "made" before it is dispensed. More expensive because of the transport of water vs. syrup.

A couple of years ago, when the CEO of Coca-Cola ATL was visiting MEM, they sent an advance team to the Fixed Base Operator at MEM to make sure the "vending area" had Coke machines and Coke products. They arranged and paid to have a generic machine changed for a Coke machine just for the visit. After the visit, everything was reversed. Now, I find it very difficult to imagine that the CEO of Coke, ATL who arrived in a Gulfstream V was going to go to the vending area to see what was there and certainly not to acquire a can of Coke. However, stranger things have happened and I suppose if the CEO was that anally inclined he might do it just to see what was there. I don't think he did.

Best regards,

RA1

[MsGuy]

A couple of years ago, when the CEO of Coca-Cola ATL was visiting MEM, they sent an advance team to the Fixed Base Operator at MEM to make sure the "vending area" had Coke machines and Coke products. They arranged and paid to have a generic machine changed for a Coke machine just for the visit.

Rofl. A modern iteration of the tried and true Potemkin village concept.

[lookin]

Woe betide the Coca Cola territory manager who failed to have his sales territory shipshape when the Brass came through. He would hear about it from the regional manager, who would hear about it from the vp of sales, who would hear about it from the senior vp of sales and marketing, who would hear about it from the executive vp in charge of reaming everyone a new asshole. Plenty of grief to go around.

There's lots of profit in a serving of Coke (even more now that sugar has been replaced by HFCS) and distribrution is the name of the game. Sodas are usually impulse purchases, and the customer can't buy what he can't find. That's why Coke and Pepsi spend huge amounts of money getting shelf space in the grocery store and other retail outlets.

The nozzle-clogging story is a funny one and would certainly be consistent with a high-margin, impulse-driven product. Coke and Pepsi each want to be the exclusive brand, and pay big bucks for the privilege. They do it in fast food joints, and they do it in schools. Can't remember the last time I went to a fast food restaurant and had a choice between Coke or Pepsi.

Does make me wonder though how Coke managed to get an exclusive with Santa Claus, and if the switch to HCFS will have any unintended consequences.

[RA1]

You are correct about high profit. As I recall, a case of Coke syrup cost 2.20. That was four gallon jugs of syrup. The syrup was mixed at 5 or 6 to one with cabonated water and that was served in a 10 ounce paper cup filled with ice + the 7 ounces of Coke. I think that sold for 10 cents. A case of syrup made 512 of that size drinks or 51.20. The cups cost about a penny; the ice and carbonated water less than 1 cent, so the gross profit was about 43.88 on a case of syrup. Even if that drink cost a nickle, the gross profit was 21.94. Not a bad return on a 2.20 + cups + CO2 + ice investment. Pepsi was about 2.00 a case, so you can see there was a certain amount of what I call unnecessary greed involved. Of course, there was plenty of other overhead with equipment, drive-ins not open all year in those days, etc., etc. Also, Coke provided "free" the dispenser which had their logo all over it and their "perfected" nozzles.

Best regards,

RA1

[lookin]

Odd topic for an escort site, but an interesting one, and it seems to have 'legs'. OZ sure knows how to pick 'em.

Thanks for all the insights. The only thing that surprises me about your info is that Coke now ships the product ready-made. I don't doubt you; it's just that I thought Coca Cola would rather ship a lighter product if they could.

I'm sure they like the control it gives them over the syrup/seltzer ratio. I know I hate it when somebody serves me a Coke with very little syrup and very little flavor. Not only does it taste bad, but I know the soda jerk is nickle-and-dime'ing me.

As long as I'm ranting, the guys who piss me off most are the ones who started using artificial flavors. Dr. Pepper tastes like it came out of a lab. (A chemistry lab, not a labrador retriever. Close though.)

And A&W used to be the best national root beer brand, but now it tastes like tiger piss.

Or so I'm told. Don't want to give anyone the wrong impression.

[RA1]

Well, being the anal folks you know and love, they get to control where the water comes from also. I am sure they ship syrup to bottling plants, just not retail outlets.

You know why they locate plants that make cans right next door to beer plants, don't you? The can cost more than the beer; in out one door and in another with the can and out comes a can of beer. At least that is how they did it here when our brewery was in operation.

Best regards,

RA1

Hey, it is all part of the world economy, isn't it? A "hot" topic these days.

[BigK]

You know it really does have a cleaner, crisper taste. But at roughly 4 x the cost per oz. as cans, I'll probably reserve it's use for fine dining & formal evenings.

If there is a market for Coke with sugar at 4 x the cost, I don't understand why Coke doesn't make a sugar version at say 2 x the cost and make more money while increasing the market size (by lowering the price relative to Mexico Coke) for consumers who would prefer sugar to Syrup. I can't believe sugar would be more than double the cost of HFCS. I guess it's probably the marketing challenge of differentiating between the 2 different varieties. If a consumer compared the price of sugar Coke to Syrup Pepsi and bought the Syrup Pepsi not realizing there is an option for Syrup Coke at similar pricing.