Which is worse to give a kid: high fructose corn syrup or splenda?

[Mickey's Minion]

Perhaps that is what really happened in the Blair Witch movie. They ate tainted smores!

It explains a lot of movies. That pea soup that Regan was spewing while her head was spinning must have had HFCS in it.

 

[clovergirl5]

Just read your labels, and you will be OK. I have been able to find jams, jellies, peanut butter, bread, ice cream, etc all without HFCS. Sometimes (ketchup, jelly, etc) you do have to go organic, but not always. I have NEVER had a problem with chocolate milk, and that's the only milk DD6 will drink.

Just a note, just plain ol' corn syrup is NOT the same as high fructose corn syrup. Corn syrup is in its natural state, HFCS has been tinkered with. I have no problem with regular corn syrup, personally.

I always wondered about that.

 

[TinkPinkPoem]

Stevia has been studied extensively and used without problems for decades outside of the US.

It is the sweetener of choice in some Asian countries.

I am a low carber, so try to use Stevia if I use something other than sugar. But even with a low carb diet, I would much rather just put a teaspoon of plain, raw sugar in my coffee over anything else.

I know that. I'm not saying it's causing anyone harm and yes, people have been using it for various causes for many many years but reasearch is still conducted. The results seem to be just fine so far but I'll wait a bit more and see.

 

[RNMOM]

IMHO it is just best to use the most basic and natural product you can. Honey is great as is simple sugar. The increase in health/weight related diseases has skyrocketed since we have had all these special products like artificial sweeteners and processed foods. Makes ya think, don't it?

 

[contemporarymom]

Forgive my ignorance but how on earth do you become allergic to all western medicine? Does seeing a doctor cause some type of reaction?

According to that poster it surely seems to. LOL

Demonic behavior from ingesting certain products, children being ripped from their mother's womb prematurely (Even though they were at least 40 weeks), and every type of malpractice by every type of MD is just a typical day in her life. *Sigh*

 

[Mouse House Mama]

According to that poster it surely seems to. LOL

Demonic behavior from ingesting certain products, children being ripped from their mother's womb prematurely (Even though they were at least 40 weeks), and every type of malpractice by every type of MD is just a typical day in her life. *Sigh*

Boy oh Boy!
All that and she can't even take an advil to stave off the headache of it all.

 

[contemporarymom]

Boy oh Boy!
All that and she can't even take an advil to stave off the headache of it all.

Of course not! The homicidal rage that it would cause would be sure to result in a headline.

 

[disfan07]

I have been told by my nutritionist to avoid any of the artificial swwetners. She said she would rather me have HFCS than any of teh artificial "crap" (as she put it)
She said she has seen more people gain weight while using artificial sweetners than when eating thiings with HFCS.

Artificial sweetners have been linked to so many health problems i dont understand anyone using it

 

[Becky2005]

Is Splenda the same as Nutrasweet? if so, I would go with HFCS. My mother & my brother get severe headaches from the Nutrasweet -- we are assuming since it happened to both of them at different times and both after eating something that had the Nutrasweet in it.

So far, it hasn't bothered any of my kids but I try to avoid it if I can considering I have two relatives in my immediate family with a bad reaction. I personally would just use sugar if I could. I always prefer to use real sugar.

 

[Mouse House Mama]

I have been told by my nutritionist to avoid any of the artificial swwetners. She said she would rather me have HFCS than any of teh artificial "crap" (as she put it)
She said she has seen more people gain weight while using artificial sweetners than when eating thiings with HFCS.

Artificial sweetners have been linked to so many health problems i dont understand anyone using it

Time to find a new nutritionist. HFCS is processed and washed with mercury. There was also a recent study done that said that pregnant women who ingested large amounts of HFCS have been shown to have children who have obesity problems later in life. HFCS is artificial and just as crappy as sweet and low. The only problem is that it is in so many foods that "in moderation" is a joke unless you read food labels (which I do). It is far from healthy or any better than any of the other junk out there. Stick with natural sugars like, well, sugar, honey, maple syrup, agave etc.

 

[luvmy3]

Time to find a new nutritionist. HFCS is processed and washed with mercury. There was also a recent study done that said that pregnant women who ingested large amounts of HFCS have been shown to have children who have obesity problems later in life. HFCS is artificial and just as crappy as sweet and low. The only problem is that it is in so many foods that "in moderation" is a joke unless you read food labels (which I do). It is far from healthy or any better than any of the other junk out there. Stick with natural sugars like, well, sugar, honey, maple syrup, agave etc.

Do you have a link that describes this process, I had never heard that before. I know that enzymes are added to change the glucose into fructose but I had never heard anything about using mercury. Have I just not been paying attention and this is well known

 

[Sorsha]

Do you have a link that describes this process, I had never heard that before. I know that enzymes are added to change the glucose into fructose but I had never heard anything about using mercury. Have I just not been paying attention and this is well known

Ummmm... I do not like HFCS, and think there are many problems with it. However, I believe the mercury link has been disproven. I did a little web research, and found that an independant company called ChemRisk issued the following statement:

ChemRisk, a leading scientific consulting firm, was asked by the Corn Refiners Association (CRA) to examine the recent publication by Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy (IATP), "Not So Sweet: Missing Mercury and High Fructose Corn Syrup," and the Environmental Health journal publication "Mercury from chlor-alkali plants: measured concentrations in food product sugar," by Dufault et al, 2009, and to offer our comments and analysis.

In summary we found:

The IATP report and Environmental Health article it references fall well below standards for proper scientific research and published literature.
The authors of both publications provide incomplete data and misleading conclusions.
Methods described by the authors deviate from standard procedure in testing for mercury.
The authors ignore important distinctions between organic and other forms of mercury and their implications for assessing human health risk.
Even if it were assumed that the mercury content found in the extremely limited sampling of foods and beverages was representative, the amounts are far lower than levels of concern set by government agencies.
The authors assume that the total mercury they detected in a questionably small sampling of consumer foods is primarily the result of high fructose corn syrup; an assumption that has not been properly tested or validated. The recipes for the items studied may have had multiple sources of potential contamination.
To imply that there is a safety concern to consumers based on the findings presented is both incorrect and irresponsible.

By combining the results of a four-year-old sampling analysis of high fructose corn syrup with a more recent testing of branded foods and beverages for total mercury, the IATP report fails to recognize basic scientific facts regarding mercury; ignores common dietary sources of mercury, an element that is widely present in our environment at low concentrations; and makes improper assumptions regarding the source of the mercury measured in various branded food products.

More than two-thirds of the samples analyzed by IATP had no detectable level of mercury at all. In the remaining sample, most of these were at or near the limit of detection. The average concentration for the 17 samples with detectable levels was only 128 parts per trillion (ppt). EPA sets limits for mercury in drinking water at two parts per billion.
It is well known that small amounts of mercury are broadly present in our environment. For example, Health Canada reported in 2003 that the concentrations of total mercury in steak ranged from 420 to 1,800 parts per trillion (ppt); fresh pork contained 1,100 to 1,500 ppt; organ meats (liver and kidney) contained over 2,100 ppt; and lamb contained 290 to 2,300 ppt of total mercury. (Dabeka et al, 2003) For the sake of reference, one part per trillion is equal to one drop of water spread out into 26 Olympic-size swimming pools. (Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission, 2009)
That same study by Health Canada looked at mercury in seafood, finding amounts that ranged from 40,000 ppt in fresh or frozen marine fish to 148,000 ppt in canned fish. Other foods, such as canned mushrooms, had 5,100 to 16,000 ppt total mercury, grapes had 180 to 590 ppt, blueberries 210 to 640 ppt, rice 570 to 1,800 ppt, raisins upwards of 700 ppt, and shelled seeds up to 1,000 parts per trillion (ppt).
The levels noted above are substantially greater than those found by Wallinga and colleagues in their reports. (Dabeka et al, 2003) Other studies by other international authorities (FDA, United Kingdom Food Standards Agency and others) have found similar or higher levels of mercury in common components of a typical human diet. (FDA, 2006; Ysart et al, 2000)
IATP assumes that the total mercury they detected in a questionably small sampling of consumer foods is primarily the result of high fructose corn syrup; an assumption that has not been properly tested or validated. In fact, the authors do not attempt to characterize whether there may be mercury in any other ingredients contained within the consumer products tested, even while the recipes for the items studied may have had multiple sources of potential contamination. As we have mentioned, very small amounts of mercury are practically ubiquitous in our society.

 

[Eeyores Butterfly]

I don't think either are a great option. I cannot eat the artificials because they cause my IBS to flair up. That was one of the first things I was told to eliminate. It sucks since I have diabetes and so many products geared towards diabetics have all those artificial sweeteners in it. I think in the end you need to do your own research and decide what works best for you.

 

[mhsjax]

I have been told by my nutritionist to avoid any of the artificial swwetners. She said she would rather me have HFCS than any of teh artificial "crap" (as she put it)
She said she has seen more people gain weight while using artificial sweetners than when eating thiings with HFCS.

Artificial sweetners have been linked to so many health problems i dont understand anyone using it

Give me artificial sweetners or give me death, and so far no symptoms of that. Also I have lost weight using them. Sacarin has been around forever, I don't recall anyone having problems with it. No one I know anyway, and just about everyone I know uses it. Even if I was bone thin and told to gain weight I wouldn't use sugar, that stuff makes me sick as a dog, gives me the shakes and tastes terrible. IMHO. That is why I use artificial sweetners.

 

[luvmy3]

Sorsha, thanks for that info.

 

[Eeyores Butterfly]

There have actually been several studies with soda that found that those who drank diet sodas consumed more calories than those who drank the full sugared versions. People who consume artificial sweeteners are also more likely to be overweight.

Of course, correlation does not equal causation. Nobody really knows why this is. One theory is that there is a mismatch between the brain and body. The brain expects the calories it associates with the sweetness, and when it doesn't get it overcompensates.

Another theory is that people drink them and then use that as an excuse to consume more calories at meals and then overcompensate.

Others postulate that people who drink diet sodas are more likely to be trying to lose weight and are already therefore predisposed to having weight problems.

It could also be that the artificial compounds alter our metabolisms somehow.

The fact is, we don't know. It could be that the overeating and weight gain is a direct result of the artificial sweeteners, or it could be coincidence. I do find it fascinating however as the results are the opposite of what you might expect based on the fact that they have zero calories

Oh, one other thing for those who are watching their carb intake (particularly diabetics): You have to be careful of sugar alcohols. Sugar alcohols do contain carbs and some of the "sugar free" foods sold to diabetics actually have more carbs than the full sugar version because they use sugar alcohols. That is why reading labels is so important.

 

[bananda]

i found this website about artificial sweeteners. its probably worth a look.
http://www.sweetpoison.com/aspartame-sweeteners.html

i would always go with just normal sugar. it seems to be safer than ingesting all these chemicals.

 

[bananda]

Is Splenda the same as Nutrasweet? if so, I would go with HFCS. My mother & my brother get severe headaches from the Nutrasweet -- we are assuming since it happened to both of them at different times and both after eating something that had the Nutrasweet in it.

So far, it hasn't bothered any of my kids but I try to avoid it if I can considering I have two relatives in my immediate family with a bad reaction. I personally would just use sugar if I could. I always prefer to use real sugar.

splenda is sucralose. nutrasweet is aspartame. aspartame is the worst and has over 92 side effects. the link below is a pretty long list:
http://www.sweetpoison.com/aspartame-side-effects.html

 

[disfan07]

Time to find a new nutritionist. HFCS is processed and washed with mercury. There was also a recent study done that said that pregnant women who ingested large amounts of HFCS have been shown to have children who have obesity problems later in life. HFCS is artificial and just as crappy as sweet and low. The only problem is that it is in so many foods that "in moderation" is a joke unless you read food labels (which I do). It is far from healthy or any better than any of the other junk out there. Stick with natural sugars like, well, sugar, honey, maple syrup, agave etc

I'll keep my nutritionist thank you very much. and that whole thing about HFCS and mercury is complete crap. its just another thing that they say to scare people adn to make people paranoid.
And the obesity link....basically eatign too much of ANYTHING can make you gain weight so i find it to be a moot point. Somehow, i still drink my soda a day with HFCS, eat ketchup almost everyday with HFCS, plus many other things and yet i was still able to loose the 60lbs i gained from prednisone treatment. I think this whole HFCS thing is just another way to scare people IMHO.

 

[bicker]

... that whole thing about HFCS and mercury is complete crap. its just another thing that they say to scare people adn to make people paranoid.

Just like practically every other nasty thing posted in this thread about any of the substances in question.