The biochemical reactions used to convert corn derived glucose
into fructose by a hydride shift that is catalysed
by bacterial glucose isomerase enzyme.
Trevor Butterworth at Forbes, analysis of fructose hysteria:
For the past decade, a specter has haunted the food chain—the specter of high fructose corn syrup (HFCS). HFCS began life as a technological response to a market problem—volatile prices for sugar in the 1970s and early 1980s driven by protectionism and dumping, along with high production costs and all the challenge of matching a multi-year crop to shifting demand. HFCS aimed to stabilize the cost of sweetness. It did; and in doing so, it conquered the US market.
But HFCS had, like Achilles, a weakness—actually, two. First, as many scientists have noted, high fructose corn syrup wasn’t really high in fructose—and its other primary component was glucose. The sweet spot in balancing fructose with glucose was roughly a ratio of 55 percent to 45 percent—the same as honey—and not dissimilar to ordinary table sugar, which has a ratio of 50:50.
The second weakness was timing. The spread of HFCS coincided with the beginnings of the obesity crisis—or more specifically a point where people were beginning to tip over the BMI boundary lines from normal to overweight and overweight to obese...
The full story @ Sweet And Sour: The Media Decided Fructose Was Bad For America; But Science Had Second Thoughts:
For the past decade, a specter has haunted the food chain—the specter of high fructose corn syrup (HFCS). HFCS began life as a technological response to a market problem—volatile prices for sugar in the 1970s and early 1980s driven by protectionism and dumping, along with high production costs and all the challenge of matching a multi-year crop to shifting demand. HFCS aimed to stabilize the cost of sweetness. It did; and in doing so, it conquered the US market.
But HFCS had, like Achilles, a weakness—actually, two. First, as many scientists have noted, high fructose corn syrup wasn’t really high in fructose—and its other primary component was glucose. The sweet spot in balancing fructose with glucose was roughly a ratio of 55 percent to 45 percent—the same as honey—and not dissimilar to ordinary table sugar, which has a ratio of 50:50.
The second weakness was timing. The spread of HFCS coincided with the beginnings of the obesity crisis—or more specifically a point where people were beginning to tip over the BMI boundary lines from normal to overweight and overweight to obese...
The full story @ Sweet And Sour: The Media Decided Fructose Was Bad For America; But Science Had Second Thoughts:
No comments:
Post a Comment