Is this true?

[robert@fm]

I've just seen a spam message (an attempt to flog some quack nostrum or other ? needless to say, I didn't click the link contained in it) which claims that fructose (in the form of high fructose corn syrup) is sweeter than ordinary sugar, and doesn't promote the production of insulin, so it invariably gets processed to fat.

I find these claims deeply suspect; my impression was that fructose is only slightly sweeter than sucrose (to exactly the degree that glucose is less sweet, of course, since they're respectively the left- and right-handed isomers of the basic sugar, which together make up the symmetrical sucrose molecule) and that fructose promotes insulin production just as well as glucose does.

I suppose this is an example of Rule 1 (spammers always lie) and possibly also Rule 3 (spammers are stupid); what does anyone else think?

 

[everydayupsanddowns]

I have heard on a BBC doc that the noxious HFCS (corn syrup) is multiple times sweeter than cane sugar, but that soft drinks manufacturers (principally in the US) actually put *more* of it in 😱

Not sure if that is relevant to what you read as HFCS certainly does stimulate insulin production from what I recall.

 

[Vicsetter]

It was on the BBC 'addicted to food' prog about sugar. The soda manufacturers in the states use high fructose corn syrup (hfcs) instead of sugar. Because it's made from corn, they actually produce a variation with sugar for Jews who can't consume stuff made from corn at certain times of the year. It was part of a government drive to bolster the corn industry.

According to Wikipedia: "Fructose is absorbed from the gastrointestinal tract by a different mechanism than that for glucose. Glucose stimulates insulin release from the beta islet cells of the pancreas, but fructose does not. Fructose is metabolized primarily in the liver. " so if you don't produce insulin they probably act the same be hfcs is blamed for the increase in T2 diabetes.

It is quite amazing that Spammers take no account of geographical location of their intended victims so messages about HFCS should really only scare people in the USA, well maybe not, that would require effort and thought and spam uses the scattergun approach.

 

[robert@fm]

Spammers always take the shotgun approach; I've received spams for breast enlargement products, despite the fact that my knockers are already bigger than any man's should be, and contrariwise I've read complaints on other forums from women who have received (ahem) male-specific spam. 😉

 

[Caroline]

I often get male specific spam and never seem to get any female specific spam. My email adress does not make my gender obvious either

 

[DeusXM]

HFCS is pretty bad stuff. You don't have to pay attention to the spammer but the point remains that fructose definitely increases fat storage. Think about it logically. What do animals need to ensure they stay warm and have enough energy when hibernating in winter, and what foodstuff tends to come out in abundance shortly before winter which is eaten by animals?

Generally yes, HFCS is an American problem, as the European Union has high tariffs on the stuff to protect European sugar beet farmers. However, you will still find products with glucose-fructose syrup on the shelves here. I would personally try to avoid it where possible.

 

[Austin Mini]

Spam...when I was in the Boy Scouts, we are talking smokey bear hats era 1950's, we would slice tinned spam into slices, mix up batter and fry in a very large black frying pan heated by our camp fire (no health and safety them days). This fried battered spam was the food of Gods.

 

[trophywench]

AFAIK the spam of which we speak comes from Ukraine, China and anywhere else on earth that sells (mostly) cheap Ugg Boots.

Mind you considering HMRC/Police copped a ?12m stash of fake Uggs in the last week, I certainly won't be ordering any!

 

[Northerner]

AFAIK the spam of which we speak comes from Ukraine, China and anywhere else on earth that sells (mostly) cheap Ugg Boots.

Mind you considering HMRC/Police copped a ?12m stash of fake Uggs in the last week, I certainly won't be ordering any!

We currently have 13 (banned) members whose user names begin with 'ugg', 12 of them have joined this month. I shudder to think how many forums they must have invaded. Of course, not everyone out to sell fake uggs are so stupid as to telegraph it with their user names! 🙄

 

[trophywench]

Blimey - only 13 in a whole month?

peanuts my dear Alan .....