As the title says, why has (especially the United States) created an artificial sweetener that is worse for you than the naturally provided sweetener (sugar cane) that is quite abundant and also grows out of the ground? Almost every nation on the planet besides the US utilizes sugar cane in their food items and this gives them a distinct taste in comparison, why does corn syrup exist? Was it ever needed?
EDIT: I’m delighted to know that I’ve been going at this all wrong, and I’m happy to be educated more on the differences in sugars, the reasons as to why corn is utilized in the US, and general common sense that I didn’t pick up on, so thanks for that.
In: 0
Why do you think corn syrup is particularly bad for you? Sugar is sugar, the source doesn’t tend to matter that much.
[removed]
Corn syrup is not an artificial sweetener, it is a natural sweetener just like sugar cane. It is just sugar made from corn instead of sugar cane. The reason this is used in the US is that corn grows better then sugar cane in most of the climates in the US. So you can get a much higher crop yield. So each farm can produce more corn syrup then cane sugar a year. Which type of sugar is cheaper depend on the climate. Canada for example is known for its maple syrup, although it is still cheaper to import sugar. You may also find things like rice sugar and sugar beats around the world.
[removed]
Most of the US is great for growing corn. It’s less great for growing sugarcane. So we grow about 500x as much corn as sugarcane.
Corn is deemed an essential food stock in the U.S., and its reliable production is viewed as a strategic necessity. Because of that, the U.S. government subsidizes domestic production in various ways, mainly through paying a portion of crop insurance (but also through things like buying strategic reserves, and in extreme cases, commodity price supports).
In the existence of this corn abundance, it’s only natural that the stakeholders (producers, processors, government, etc.). would figure out ways to monetize some of the surplus, and HFC is a result of that. *“Hey, we’ve got a million extra tons of corn, and we can concentrate its sugar and sell the syrup. It’s more viable to grow than sugarcane, and it’s cheaper than sugarbeets since we’ve already decided to subsidize corn.”* Over time, food processors recognized the ready availability and relative low cost of HFC as a sweetener ingredient, and replaced cane and beet ingredient sources with HFC.
So, HFC’s dominance in the U.S. is an unintended consequence of the government’s agricultural policy (while it’s not the *only* reason, it’s a significant contributing factor).
The table sugar you get from sugar cane is sucrose, which is easiest to get from sugar cane. But that grows almost exclusively in tropical climates. You can also get sucrose from sugar beets, which do grow well in the US, but it’s not as cost efficient.
The US has import quotas in place on cane sugar in order to protect the beet sugar industry. But corn syrup– which is fructose and sucrose–can be used in place of beet/cane sugar for most things, and is cheaper to produce than beet sugar.
Don’t like high fructose corn syrup? Push your congressman to lift cane sugar quotas–and in the process, give poor/developing countries like Haiti an export market for one of the easiest crops they can grow.
Sugar cane or sugar beet is the standard source for sugar sucrose in food, corn syrup produces a different type of sugar fructose. Consuming excessive amounts of fructose, especially from the corn syrup used in the production of soft drinks can reduce the amount of potassium in the human body resulting in hypokalemia, which can result in a heart attack. https://youtu.be/wCKggwYEp9Y
Latest Answers