Mercury in High Fructose Corn Syrup?

April 3, 2009 · 10 comments

HFCS

As if we need another reason to avoid HFCS.  Thanks to my friend, Bob, for sending a link to this article, Why is the FDA unwilling to study evidence of mercury in high-fructose corn syrup?

One more from Ethicurean.

The comments there are pretty interesting, too.  Let me know your thoughts!

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

  • Share this article


  • Stay Connected!

  • Get new articles and recipes, plus help getting and keeping your family on real food! Also coupons/discounts, and STAY signed up to be automatically entered in gift card giveaways!

  • { 10 comments… read them below or add one }

    1 Lauren April 3, 2009 at 8:02 am

    I think the link to the article mentioned above isn’ t working.

    Reply

    2 Rebecca from Michigan April 3, 2009 at 9:25 am

    not sure if this is the link but this is what I found with my own search
    http://www.grist.org/article/Sweetness-and-Blight/

    Reply

    3 Local Nourishment April 3, 2009 at 1:29 pm

    Oh, if only the mercury were the worst part of eating HFCS! That stuff is so hard to avoid, and if your family has allergies, it can be like chasing your tail at the grocery store. I’m so thankful we have allergies and got off this stuff QUICK!

    Local Nourishment

    Reply

    4 Liz April 3, 2009 at 4:27 pm

    An expert on mercury from Duke University Medical Center, Dr. Stopford, recently posted a statement that reviews lab results from independent, third-party testing that was conducted on high fructose corn syrup. The testing was very rigorous: third-party labs tested product from all 22 of the production facilities in the United States and Canada. The testing started in February and was completed this week.

    Dr. Stopford

    Reply

    5 Kelly April 3, 2009 at 9:27 pm

    Crappy carumba! Every time I don’t get a chance to check comments until later in the day I find out a link is broken. Thank you Rebecca for finding the right link!

    Liz, once again it’s a matter of which “study” to believe (http://kellythekitchenkop.com/2009/03/what-if-sex-was-bad-for-you-dont-forget-your-brain.html), but common sense won’t lead us wrong. Nothing against you personally, I know you’re just doing your job, but when I don’t know who to believe, I always go with the most natural foods, and genetically modified, highly refined corn doesn’t make the cut.

    Reply

    6 Rebecca from Michigan April 3, 2009 at 10:55 pm

    “……..Samples were digested in nitric acid and hydrogen peroxide in high pressure Teflon vessels using microwave heating in conformance with AOAC Official Method 986.15, developed for digestion and analysis of human and pet foods for heavy metals……”
    Liz, please explain this to me? I read this sentence and was surprised that they use microwave heating in this kind of study. If this means what I think it means, then that alters the sample. This means that I would not feel comfortable with how this study was performed. So there for I would not trust the outcome and would still not eat HFCS.

    Reply

    7 Jen@BigBinder April 3, 2009 at 11:45 pm

    I saw this post a couple of months ago

    http://smallnotebook.org/2009/02/03/mercury-in-high-fructose-corn-syrup-what-theyre-just-now-telling-us/

    and it was so discouraging. The FDA, which usually sort of scares me, is actually saying there is mercury in some products with HFCS. I can’t read your link either Kelly, but it sounds like it’s the same thing.

    It will be interesting to see if/how the FDA responds to this.

    Jen@BigBinder

    Reply

    8 Annette April 4, 2009 at 12:14 am

    A friend of mine mentioned she saw an ad on tv stating that HFCS was actually good for you because you use less of it than regular sugar. Thanks for putting my mind at ease there, Liz…sounds like it’s the perfect growing food for my kids to eat.

    Annette

    Reply

    9 Stephan April 5, 2009 at 6:34 pm

    I am always “surprised” to see how the FDA is regulating and ruling what is natural or not.
    HFCS is present in a lot of foods, and is considered as a “Natural Ingredient” by the FDA, hence I could extrapolate a little and point out that a lot of chemicals have for base a “natural ingredient”
    When you need so many chemical precessing steps to create a “food”, it should be labeled as “natural”
    It’s also notable that the epidemic of obesity in the US is in pair with the use of HFCS. Coincidence?
    As for me, I try (repeat: try) to follow a very good recommendation: I try to avoid a (food) product when it contains something that my grand mother would not recognize. (Twinkie anyone? :-)

    Reply

    10 Stephan April 5, 2009 at 6:58 pm

    Sorry , Me Again
    In Re to Liz, on the behalf of the corn refiner …
    Dear Liz,
    I appreciate you pointing out that study. Nevertheless, If HFCS was that good for you, as your latest adds suggest, you would not need an add to persuade us that “it almost like sugar”, without even saying it.
    As for the study, I could point to you few dozen “highly” scientific ones that contradict each other, depending on who provided the funding.
    I also can refer you to this marketing example: http://tinyurl.com/d9t87f and may suggest you to start smoking right away. No? come on! it was doctor approved!
    We could then have another scientific study where you could point out that no relations were found between HFCS and lung cancer: That would be great, no?
    So, let’s cut the crap: your product is a government subsidized health bomb. The mercury , or not , is not the prevalent issue. HFCS is.

    Reply

    disclaimer-disclosure

    Leave a Comment

    Previous post:

    Next post:


    Protect your files with Carbonite Online Backup Thesis Theme for WordPress:  Options Galore and a Helpful Support Community