LogFAQs > #888094187

Mead posted...

Businesses only care about your health if it affects their bottom line

Eeyup. These days, healthy eating is becoming more marketable, so soda companies are trying to play into that (without making any changes to their formulas that would actually cost money, preferably), but that's purely because it'll get people buying more stuff, not because they genuinely care.

Zeus posted...

The HFCS hype is overblown. The hate is largely based on a bulls*** naturalist argument. Repeated studies have shown no real difference when it comes to average consumption.

Compared to glucose, fructose skips the first regulatory step in sugar metabolism. This allows it to give more of a surge of energy, since the body processes it faster, but fructose isn't typically present in high enough quantities for this to cause any particular issue. When it becomes a significant source of carbohydrate calories (as happens when one has a significant amount of HFCS in their diet), though, it definitely messes with the insulin/glucagon regulatory system, and can lead to diabetes.

Average consumption may be alright, but bear in mind that "average consumption" is counting the very large number of people that say "I never drink soda because it's awful for you" and "I only drink soda very rarely because it's awful for you," as well as that soft drinks have considerable addictive properties. "Average consumption" isn't really that relevant when you take those points into account. Soda is very, very unhealthy, and HFCS is a major part of that unhealthiness, even if enough people are sufficiently aware of that fact to keep "average consumption" below dangerous levels.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.