I think the concerns isn't so much for the >21 crowd as it is the younger folks. If it truly does cause mutations and linked to things like ADHD, that could cause some real disasters in 30 years when the cancer rates spike.

While not necessarily bad to investigate it, we don't have the data to really see IF, and WHAT, it's capable to screwing up.

Go back to glass and pottery - it's got a pretty good track record.

HFCS is a US government subsided sweeter (tax payer funded) and its cost of production is distorted in the World market place through Cane and beet sugar import tariffs and subsidies to grow corn (the majority grown in the USA is Monsanto GMO corn Mon 863, insecticide-producing Mon 810, and Roundup® herbicide-absorbing NK 603 i.e. the GMO corn to the report you have linked to). HFCS is also linked to a whole host of known, difficult to treat but wholly preventable diseases such as obesity, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. It would appear these Monsanto products are also linked to higher rates of cancer.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM

www.youtube.com/watch?v=iE-H__aIEFE

Even more concerning is the Russian study of Monsanto GMO corn, which has indicated long term sterility issues for subsequent generations in the mammals forced to eat this product i.e. who cannot avoid it because they cannot read the label ingredients

In the UK, I am now beginning to see many products that traditionally have used cane and beet sugars now being replaced with Fructose Corn Syrup. GMO corn products could not survive in the market place without the import tariffs and subsidies, yet the attempts to export this costly industrial mono agriculture product to other nations has even required strong arms foreign policy objective tactics to push these Monsanto products on to the rest of the world. (such as indicated in the Wikileaks information)

As for the apologists of GMO and the so called benefits of feeding the world (which are highly disputed anyway and has no basis in fact), then ultimately this will lead to a historical disaster. Remember how long it took the producers of tobacco to admit liability for its product for causing lung cancer.

As for estrogen chemical mimickers such as BPA and the other chemicals which effect the ability of the local Florida male gators which haven't been able to grow a penis, yeah its best to avoid as much as possible (along with the excrement of the Monsanto GMO bacteria which was developed for biological weapons research i.e. another sweetener that has known brain cancer effects)

I think were beginning to see a theme developing here by Monsanto Inc over the last few decades.

I can see this thread is going to get killed because unfortunately this has a huge political component to it,I dont believe this is happening in a vacuum outside of politics.

BPA,HFCS,GMO,all are bad things IMO and they exist because ..... yup,politics (MONEY).

We can avoid some of it,when they refuse to allow GMO to even be labeled,you are in trouble.How do you avoid that? I cant grow my own crops enough to feed us,nor can most of us.

Want a funny but true? When forums (the larger ones anyhow) for homesteading/farming mention GMO or Monsanto the company trolls hit the boards hard,seen it time and time again. Now THAT I find telling.

HFCS is chemically identical to plain old table sugar (sucrose). Explain to me how it is different.

http://junkfoodscience.blogspot.com/2007/05/science-of-sweets.html

Some folks think pink slime is wholesome,I sure dont.But for those who do,more power to ya,I dont want it.

For starters,and perhaps most important,its in just about EVERYTHING processed. Obesity and HFCS seem to be almost related in usage/wt gain for the populace.

2nd,it isnt the same to me.One is cane one is corn,one is sugar,one is corn.Not the same to me,YMMV,I respect that.Mine is its 2 different critters,corn and cane.

HFCS usage increases....diabetes increases.I see a link,others wont but I see a direct linear line on both.I believe MY lying eyes before any other 'study',etc.

But its cheaper than sugar,hence stuff it everything,along with the corn subsidies (did I say that?)...oops,here comes the politics again. Im afraid it always comes back to dollars and politicians.

But for those who think processed foodstuffs and additives are good,and for those who think its bad,not a single opinion is going to be changed here.

But I can avoid HFCS to an extent thru labeling......

But I have a question,how can we realistically avoid GMO's? Anybody have an insight on that,I would really appreciate your thoughts on how.

Um, I almost hate to point this out to you, because I'm afraid it will ruin your day:
I've been admiring your Food Projects thread. You've been smoking, canning, pickling, drying and cooking all this food. Don't you realize that you're making "processed food"? Does your family know they are eating buckboard bacon that was processed in greenhouse gasses?

I think you are part of the problem

True, at least to the extent that it is listed as such. But if the ingredient is listed just as sugar, (sucrose, or table sugar, or cane sugar), about half of it is fructose, as sucrose consists of 1 molecule of glucose and 1 of fructose.

I don't think the body really can tell the difference if the fructose came from corn or sugar cane.

IMO, reduce both to the minimum you can in your diet.

Also, here is a link to the video of Dr. Lustig (cited by the article thseng cited). It details the adverse effects of HFCS and walks through how it affects the body, and is at the root of many of our medical problems. Warning--- it is 90 minutes, but well worth the time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM

Good advice, but does anyone know how the mercury contamination of the HFCS occurs within the industrial production of the HFCS? Mercury is used in mercury-cell chlor-alkali plants as a catalyst, where the products (mercury-grade caustic soda), which is apparently used in the industrial grade production of HFCS

http://www.safeminds.org/mercury/chlor-alkali-manufacturing.html

Could this mercury contamination have led to the huge increase in Autism and retardation rates in the population?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epidemiology_of_autism

Does anyone know what the excrements (enzymes such as alpha-amylase ,Glucoamylase and Xylose isomerase) from the Industrial batch production of the bacterium (Bacillus licheniformis, GMO version no doubt ) and the fungus mold (Aspergillus) has on the contaminated (GMO plant production of the internally produced toxic herbicides/pesticides i.e bt toxin)corn already present within the GMO corn starch as it gets fed into the industrial facility at the beginning of the rather expensive complex biochemistry process?

It would seem your not just getting the rather pure chemical known as Fructose and Glucose in the syrupy sludge before it goes on to adulterate/contaminate the rest of the processed food industry.

Again the only reason this process exists is that Cane and Beet sugar prices are artificially raised through trade barrier restriction to make the economics of this mono agricultural industrial biochemical production process viable, the question is why?

Then there are the artificial sweeteners as if HFCS wasn't already artificial enough.


Edit;


Russia has reportedly today suspended the import of GMO corn on the basis of the French University of Caen study.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...ancer-risk.html

Spuds,

You may be confused about chemicals. Everything is made up of chemicals--people included. Some chemical compounds are synthesized by man and some by nature. There is no known difference between the same pure chemical synthesized by man or by nature.

Note also that there are some very toxic chemicals produced by nature--probably the most toxic ones.

I can understand why you could be confused by this. There is a lot of misinformation out there on this topic.

Spuds,

I think I should clarify my previous message. Note that I said "pure chemical." Most chemicals used in foods, food containers and/or agriculture are not 99.9% pure. They all have contaminates.

So it is true that a product called "sugar" from one source may not be completely identical to sugar from another source. Even a sugar from a natural source could be contaminated with chemicals such as pesticides, etc. Likewise man-made sugar could be contaminated.

This certainly clouds the issue, nevertheless, it still is true that just because a substance comes from natural products, it doesn't mean that it is "better" than a man-made substance.