Is there any good use for this high fructose corn syrup shit?

[VMI Dem]

Its pretty much nasty and not good for you. Enough to even make me sick sometimes.

Lets get rid of this shit.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

1. cane sugar substitute.

lower transport costs, and cane sugar companies are evil corporations.

[kirby]

6. Only when you add in all the subsidies

that we give to corn growers in the country. The low cost of HFCS is an artificial artifact of all the corporate and farm subsidies for corn.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

10. Here in Brazil, all sodas are evil. Excuse me while I buy an Evil Coke. MWAHAHAHAAAA!!!

[dionysus]

29. they use reral sugar, don't they? i drink diet myself, but evey time i go grocery shopping i get

a bottle of mexican coke, with the real sugar in it. so tasty...

[Sebastian Doyle]

33. They have so much sugar in Brazil that they actually run their cars on the shit.

No, I'm not kidding....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4715332.stm

[dionysus]

34. wow. way cool.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

45. Die of envy, suckas.

[customerserviceguy]

65. Sure, until your Dodge gets diabetes...

[Foo Fighter]

125. Yeah, but since he's in Brazil, he has public health insurance.

No problem!

OTOH, if he were in the good ol' US of A, he'd be screwed.

[TroglodyteScholar]

138. +1

:rofl:

[blondeatlast]

140. I lol'ed! nt

[mitchum]

97. True, but that is also why I never buy white powder drugs...

in Brazil.
I keed! I keed! :)

[WonderGrunion]

149. And most of those cars are made by Ford in America

Yay Unions! (no sarcasm intended)

[walldude]

214. Me too.. hooked on it.

Luckily Costco carries it.

[jberryhill]

104. Coke? In Brazil I kept to Guarana Antarctica

Yum.

And you really need to go out of the way to find that where I live...

[NoNothing]

28. Its benefit as a sucrose substitute

Is that fructose tastes sweeter than sucrose, so you need less sugar for the same flavor profile.

[Ken Burch]

76. "cane sugar companies are evil corporations"

That doesn't apply to the cane syrup producers in Cuba.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

80. Wouldn't that mean the Cuban government?

Or do they strike you as the good guys?

[Ken Burch]

83. They're not saints, but compared to the people they overthrew,

they're not bad. At least their cane cutters get real healthcare and a decent wage. And the poor were never helped by American-style "press freedom" anyway.

You'd have to back Castro against Monsanto if it came down to it.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

102. >You'd have to back Castro against Monsanto if it came down to it.

Umm, no.

[Ken Burch]

106. Yes, you would.

At least Castro, with his repressive tendencies, had a vision of a better life for all and justice for working people.

What does Monsanto have but greed and arrogance?

Nothing they do is to the greater good of the world.

(and for the record, I'd choose decentralized democratic socialism over either Fidel or Monsanto).

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

108. No.

Monsanto, despite its faults, is by far morally superior to Fidel Castro.

[Ken Burch]

111. Monsanto exists solely for its own short-term self-interest

It has no social values.

It forces farmers around the world to bow to its will, and leaves them to starve if they won't.

How could anyone who posts here EVER defend a symbol of multinational arrogance like Monsanto?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

126. Which makes it more or less neutral.

Castro, on the other hand, is actually evil.

"It forces farmers around the world to bow to its will, and leaves them to starve if they won't."

I'd expect a Castro fanboy to say something so ridiculously far from reality.

Monsanto has never forced any farmer to do anything that they didn't agree to in a contract, they've never starved anybody.

Anybody defending third world dictators hasn't got much business lecturing anybody else.

[Ken Burch]

128. "that they didn't agree to in a contract"

You do realize that the choice those farmers had was to agree to the contract or not get seed, don't you?

That's what market values does. It is just as coercive as anything like Stalinism.

And nothing Monsanto has done is comparable to giving the Cuban people universal healthcare and free university education.

I wish Cuba would be freer, but that can't happen while the U.S. keeps trying to starve it through the embargo.

It's time for our country's leaders to accept the fact that we have no right to try to force Cuba to be what it doesn't want to be.

You can't seriously disagree with that.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

134. The choice of those farmers....

was to get Monsanto seed on contract, or get the regular old fashioned seed from some other source.

They chose to sign a contract because the Monsanto seed was better than the old fashioned seed.

I don't agree with any of your crap.

[Ken Burch]

137. As a corporate apologist, you wouldn't.

And I think we've just established who pays you to post here.

[MajorChode]

145. I wondered how long that fallacious bullshit to appear

Actually it took longer than I thought, but you certainly came through eventually just as I suspected someone would sooner or later.

Suggesting that someone is getting paid to post for merely presenting facts which may be inconvienient to the bullshit you are slinging is not only lame, it pretty much borders on the lack of touch with reality.

Cheers!

[obxhead]

170. When your old fashion seed is altered by pollen from your

neighbors Monsanto seed they come and sue you.

Yeah, such a great company. :eyes:

[siligut]

212. Yes...it is not as simple as some people would make it. nt

[U4ikLefty]

129. Ken Burch won that one...sorry you lose.

[MajorChode]

144. Only if irrational emotion based arguments count for something

They don't in my book. YMMV.

[Ken Burch]

181. Why would ANYONE on DU defend Monsanto?

It's not as if their way is the ONLY way.

[noamnety]

142. Your post is false.

Monsanto has fucked over farmers who never signed a contract with them at all - who never did anything except get sued by Monsanto because they had the back luck to live near a Monsanto-infested field.

[MajorChode]

143. You just pegged the bullshit meter

Those poor unfortunate farmer you're referring to knew EXACTLY what he was doing. He KNEW the field next to his neighbor was growing canola from patented seed. He knew this because he sprayed some of it with roundup and it didn't die. Had he simply harvested and sold that crop, there would never had been a problem. Instead he specifically used the seed from THAT field to sow the rest of his fields knowing full well it was patented seed. Furthermore he was TOLD by a Monsanto representative he was using their patent and continued to do so. The next season he continued to sow the patented seed and he KNEW he was under investigation for doing so. Even AFTER his lawyer advised him NOT to use the patented seed, he did so anyway again. He pleaded ignorance and the judge didn't buy it for damn good reason. Had the guy simply stopped stealing Monsanto's patent when he had ample chances to do so, he would have never gotten sued.

The way he was discovered was someone turned him in to Monsanto. It was probably one of his neighbors who was buying their seed honestly and pissed because they knew Schmeiser was stealing Monsanto's intellectual property.

Now perhaps you're just parroting out someone else's bullshit. If that's the case you can educate yourself by reading the judge's ruling:
http://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/en/2001/2001fct256/2001fct256.html

[noamnety]

147. Can you clarify this?

"He KNEW the field next to his neighbor was growing canola from patented seed. He knew this because he sprayed some of it with roundup and it didn't die."

The field next to his neighbor? You mean one of HIS fields was contaminated with seed without his consent? And that Monsanto then claimed rights to seeds they put on his land without his consent? How did the seed get on his land? How does it work that a corporation can put something on your land against your will and then claim rights of ANY sort to those crops?

And that's not the only farmer Monsanto has sued because they infested the farmer's crops without the farmer's consent.

The statement I was responding to, that all the farmers involved with Monsanto have signed contracts with the corporation was either a mistake through ignorance or a deliberate lie. Your post confirms that it was wrong.

[MajorChode]

150. It's called patent laws

The farmer wasn't sued because some seed blew onto one of his fields and he grew those plants (which happens on most every other field everywhere in the world, btw). He was sued because he was knowingly propogating patented seeds and continued to do so even after he was told by both Monsanto and his own lawyer that he was fucking up.

Your allegation that the poster was "wrong" is absurd. He was responding to the ridiculous assertion that Monsanto makes their money by coercing poor innocent farmers into indentured servitude, which is complete bullshit. You're trying to allege that since Monsanto enforces patent laws exactly as they were designed, this must be a false premise. Unless you subscribe to the Andrew Breitbart school of duplicitous rhetoric, context does mean something.

[noamnety]

151. You didn't explain how the seed got onto his land in the first place.

And therein lies the problem. He didn't steal the seed, it was forced onto his land - and it put him in a situation where he couldn't even kill it with Round Up.

You gloss over that, but you haven't explained why. The corporation was already guilty AT THAT POINT. Prior to them contaminating HIS field without his permission, he owned the rights to all the seeds he produced. They stole that from him.

It's like raping a woman, and then suing for sole custody of the resulting child. And then suing the mother because she opted to give birth instead of have an abortion.

[MajorChode]

152. I did explain it and your analogy is fallacious

Talk to any farmer and they will tell you that some of their neighbor's seed frequently spills over onto their field. Most don't even have fences separating the property lines. The farmer was in the wrong per the law. You may not like the way the law it written, but that's the way it is nonetheless. Monsanto sued in accordance with existing patent laws and prevailed. They prevailed because those laws agreed with them. If you don't like how the patent laws are written, the remedy for that is to petition your elected representative to have those laws changed. The remedy is not to simply break the law and hope you can prevail in court because you don't like the law. There's a lot of laws I don't particularly like, but I'm not dumb enough to intentionally break those laws and then expect to win in court because I never agreed with them.

If the farmer was upset because his neighbor planted his field, he could have sought remedy from that neighbor. That's not what he did. He knowingly and intentionally propogated something he knew wasn't his. So let's try to keep the red herrings down a bit.

Your analogy is absurd. Do you actually believe patent laws mirror rape and child custody laws?

[noamnety]

153. I'll stand by my analogy.

If you force something onto another person against their will, it's unethical to later sue them because they decided how to deal with it in a way you didn't like.

If they can't keep their dog from shitting in other people's yard, they shouldn't have a patent on their dog's shit.

[MajorChode]

155. dog shit is a pretty accurate description of it

The problem with analogies is they rarely accurately reflect the situation with a high degree of fidelity. Sometimes they are useful for describing a complicated scenario, but this scenario isn't complicated. The farmer was in violation of existing patent laws and he got sued. It's really that simple. If you think the judge erred in his decision, explain why and we'll have a discussion, but as yet you appear to only want to complain about the law itself. The merits of the patent laws is a tangential discussion.

[noamnety]

157. When the laws favor corporate powers

over people, and the discussion of that is termed a "tangential" point that we're unwilling to acknowledge or discuss, that's a very effective way of shutting down any criticism of the morality or ethics of the company.

Sometimes, though, ethics and laws collide. I hope I am not somebody who proudly supports unethical laws or falls back on "it's the law" to justify why something is moral.

But I understand that for others the legality is the ultimate determining factor.

[MajorChode]

158. You're trying to make this into an emotional argument and I'm not going to go there

Some laws may favor corporate interests over consumer interests, but that has little to do with whether Monsanto is taking unfair advantage over this particular farmer. It's also unethical (and illegal) to steal intellectual property, and there's a very good reason for that. Would you want to live in a society where no artist, inventor, author, or musician could ever profit from their work? Without patent and copyright laws, very few of these people could ever make a living. These types of agricultural patent laws predate Monsanto and have been in existence the world over for decades. They work the same for grandmas cultivating new rose bush varitals in their back yard just as well as they work for Monsanto. There's nothing morally or ethically wrong with them. If your neighbor grows a David Austin rose and you take a clipping that grows through your fence and you propogate and sell it, you can pretty much be assured that David Austin will sue you if they find out about it and they would be legally and morally justified in doing so. Even if your neighbor kicked down your fence and planted David Austin roses all over your yard without your consent, you still can't propogate and sell them legally. Even if David Austin were selling crack to schoolkids, it wouldn't make you any less of a crook. So there's an analogy you should be able to sink your teeth into.

[noamnety]

160. I reject the notion that

the ethics of a matter constitutes an "emotional" argument and therefore isn't valid.

As for your Rose analogy, that doesn't work, because a branch of a crop didn't "grow through his fence." Entire new plants invaded his field that he uses for growing crops, and they were engineered specifically so he had no way to kill them.

They caused damage to his fields by creating a situation where he couldn't fully use his farmland in the way that he previously had, which you refuse to acknowledge.

[MajorChode]

161. I didn't acknowledge it because it's a completely ridiculous assertion

I assumed you read the link I provided and were knowledgeable about what really happened. You keep making assumptions that have absolutely no basis in the facts of these circumstances. But since you are obviously ignorant of the facts, I'll explain it to you.

If this invasion was so offensive and destructive, as you suggest, why did Schmeiser intentionally and knowingly propagate the Monsanto seed across his entire farm? His own worker testified he ordered him to save the seed from that one field to use for the next years planting AFTER they had figured out those plants were grown from the Monsanto seed. Canola is an annual, meaning the winter kills it. All Schmeiser had to do if he didn't want it was to NOT replant it. He intentionally and knowingly choose to replant it not just in that one field, but across his entire farm not just one year, but 3. The rose analogy is entirely relevant here and is designed to get around your appeal to emotion that Monsanto is somehow evil and therefore always in the wrong. They are simply using laws that are designed to protect the intellectual property of anyone who develops unique cultivars for profit.

Your statement:

When the laws favor corporate powers over people, and the discussion of that is termed a "tangential" point that we're unwilling to acknowledge or discuss, that's a very effective way of shutting down any criticism of the morality or ethics of the company.

You are speaking in generalities that all corporations are evil and work against the interests of everyone else. That is an appeal to emotion whether you acknowledge it or not, and I'm not going to argue on that basis. Not today, not tomorrow, and not ever. I'm not going to get roped into generalities that have nothing to do with reason or the subject at hand. If anything, Monsanto was more than fair with Schmeiser. They gave him ample opportunity to stop doing what he was knowingly and intentionally doing. Even his own lawyer advised him to cease and desist, yet he persisted with his theft with the full knowledge that what he was doing was wrong. Monsanto did what any other company that produces patented cultivars would have done in the same situation. If the law unfairly favors Monsanto, explain how it's unfair. If those laws are morally and/or ethically wrong, explain how. As yet you haven't.

[noamnety]

162. Sounds like you are saying

that he had no right to save seed from that field, even though previous to the contamination he did have that right.

Is that correct?

You believe it's fair for Monsanto to come in and tell him that he can no longer use seed from that field, even though he could in every previous year?

Prior to their contamination, he owned full rights to the seeds he grew.
After their contamination, he lost full rights to the seeds he grew.

Monsanto came in and claimed rights to what they put on his land without his consent.

[MajorChode]

167. Sounds like you have no clue what I'm saying

He had no right to seeds propagated from Monsanto seed.

That's what I'm saying.

Nothing more.

Now you are going around in circles on matters that I have already explained to you in great detail, more than once.

Monsanto didn't put jack shit in Schmeiser's field. So either you are ignorant of the facts(which I have explained in great detail with included reference), or you are lying for effect, or you simply lack the cognitive abilities or basic literacy to understand what you've been told and what has been provided as a proof of what you have been told.

His neighbor did.

If he had a problem with this, he should have sought remedy from his neighbor.

He didn't.

Instead he used patented seeds he knew were patented without compensation to the patent owner (AKA theft of intellectual property).

That is illegal in every civilized nation on earth.

No amount of spin is going to change those facts.

I've already explained to you in great detail why you can't willfully use patented plants no matter how you acquire them. Your ignorance is either willful or you lack the ability to understand fairly easy concepts. Either way I don't play games of obfuscation and circular nonsense. You can either find a different angle, or you can discuss this on your own.

For further reading:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_by_assertion

[laughingliberal]

165. "Do you actually believe patent laws mirror rape and child custody laws?"

In a country where the government is owned by corporations? Sure.

[MajorChode]

168. Sounds great

So long as you are driven by pure emotion and have no use for reason in any form. I'm not. YMMV.

Cheers!

[laughingliberal]

172. My mileage does vary. I'm convinced most of our government is beholding to wealthy campaign donors.

While you may believe they are all purely working for those they represent.

[MajorChode]

174. Hyperbole much?

Or do you just like tossing around completely irrelevant rhetoric so you can listen to the clicking on your keyboard?

Just curious.

[laughingliberal]

177. I don't consider the wholesale corruption of our government by wealthy interests irrelevant

And you seem OK with it. So, we disagree.

[MajorChode]

185. Let's play your silly game of hyperbole, OK?

Since you are OK with someone stealing intellectual property and reproducing it for their own gains, here's a list of the things you are OK with...

1) You are OK with someone downloading copyright songs off the internet, then selling bootleg copies on the streetcorner.

2) You are OK with someone photocopying first run books and selling them for a profit.

3) You are OK with someone scanning a numbered artist print and reproducing it for a profit.

4) You hate all people who actually take the time and effort to create something and then have the audacity to expect to be compensated for it.

So using your own fucked up backwards ass 'logic' of hyperbole, those are the things you MUST be for. So even though you never actually said you were for those things, it doesn't matter because I can just use your style of silly-assed juvenile hyperbole to pretty much put whatever words in your mouth I want. Amazing, isn't it? We can now just throw all reason, analytical thought, and even anything remotely resembling civilized adult discussion right out the window and just make up shit as we go along. How enlightening!

So yes, we disagree. I think all those things you are for are completely fucked up and counterproductive to any reasonable and civilized society.

Have a nice day!

[laughingliberal]

186. I'm OK doing whatever I wish with stuff people throw in my yard without my permission.

Also noticed the judge in the case noted the lack of countering activity towards Monsanto by the defendant and he seemed to indicate he found it significant. Perhaps that was his downfall. I'm wondering how different it might have been had he sued Monsanto for contamination of his crop. Maybe no difference but the judge saw fit to draw attention to it.

[MajorChode]

188. You are OK with stealing. We've already established that, remember?

Let's not try to change the rules in the middle of the game here, OK? Remember, these are your rules.

I can already tell you how different it would be.

The case would be thrown out of court on day one as completely and utterly frivolous and he would have been ordered to pay Monsanto's legal bills because Monsanto didn't put jack shit on his field. It would be roughly the equivalent of you suing Bush Baked Beans because your neighbor got drunk and took a shit on your front porch after a 4th of July picnic.

Had he actually sued his neighbor for contaminating his crop, he might have had a case(although since he intentionally propagated those seeds all over the rest of his farm it's hard to imagine how). The judge suggested as much. It would have made no difference to the fact that he knowingly and intentionally stole Monsanto's intellectual property. If you had actually taken the time to read and comprehend the ruling, you might know these things.

The farmer didn't counter anything because he had no basis to do so. His own lawyer told him he was fucking up BEFORE he was sued by Monsanto and he continued to use patented seeds contrary to his own lawyer's advice he paid for. Again, if you had actually taken the time to read and comprehend the ruling, you might know these things.

[laughingliberal]

190. I just don't see how something that blows into my yard is something I stole.

Not sure why the judge went to the trouble to note the lack of counter action by the defendant if there was no significance. Maybe just to hear himself talk?

I read the ruling. How does one protect oneself from substances the wind carries into one's fields? I can't reuse my seeds as I've done for decades because their material invaded my crops?

I get it that's the law. I also get it a lot of laws have been bought by wealthy corporate interests. Yes, we need to work to change them. But, is that not the crux of all the problems facing the average person in our current culture?

[MajorChode]

192. Anything that comes your way you are free to steal, duplicate, and sell

I already know you are OK with theft. You don't have to repeat yourself.

As far as the farmer goes, if he was so offended by those seeds blowing onto his land, he could have sought remedy from his neighbor. Is that so hard of a concept for you to understand?

The farmer didn't have a problem with those seeds blowing onto his land. Once he figured out they were patented seeds, instead of simply selling that crop for canola oil, he saved THOSE particular seeds for replanting. He propagated those seeds across his entire farm. After Monsanto confronted him about it, he did it again for another year. After his lawyer told him Monsanto was going to sue him for violation of patent, he still used those seeds on his farm for another year. He would have continued to do so if Monsanto hadn't sued him.

You are no different than the previous poster. You keep wanting to invent your own scenario that has no basis on what actually happened. You want to ignore relevant facts, pull your own 'facts' straight out of your arse, pretend this is really about corporate greed and other appeals to emotion, and fill in the rest with hyperbole and bullshit. I guess when reality is too much you bear, you simply invent your own.

[laughingliberal]

193. It is about corporate greed.

I did not invent corporate greed. I just notice it has now invaded every aspect of our lives.

It was noted the farmer had been saving seed from his crops for years before the Monsanto material invaded his crops. It was not a new practice for him.

[MajorChode]

195. Right. It's never about personal greed

Resowing seed from last years crop is pretty much as old as farming. Nothing unusual there. Intentionally using patented seed without license is theft no matter how you choose to spin it.

I love your choice of words. It really does speak volumes about how corporate hate has invaded every aspect of your life and has distorted any sense of reason you may have had. This "invasion" you speak of was not shunned by this farmer. In fact, as soon as he discovered it, he thought he had hit a gold mine. He intentionally saved those seeds even though he had several other fields that DIDN'T contain the Monsanto strain. He probably thought he would never get caught, and he probably wouldn't have were it not for someone who didn't particular care for him stealing something while his neighbors were growing their crops legally and paying the license fee to Monsanto. Perhaps, like you he thought he was entitled to something he wasn't, or perhaps like you he thought the corporate Monsanto deserved to be stolen from.

I'm sure Percy Schmeiser thinks of himself as some sort of crusader against "corporate greed", but the record shows he's really nothing more than a crook who got caught. And no matter what kind of appeal to emotion fallacy you can bring up, or no matter what you say about Monsanto, or corporations in general, or me, or whatever other untruths you can pull out of your arse will change that.

Have a nice day.

[laughingliberal]

204. This would not be the case if a grower did not know the Monsanto material had invaded them?

So, for instance, I plant 2 fields, Monsanto's crap invades my crop and I don't know it. I harvest my crop, save my seeds, as always, plant them all the following year and it's all good? Or would they be able to come after me for that? I'm just trying to understand how that works. Is it anyone who has their crops invaded or just those that know they have been invaded and seek to isolate the Monsanto seed. I'm not sure how I'd know which seeds were invaded and which weren't. I can certainly see it ruining my business if I'm an organic farmer selling to a market which shuns GMO's. Would I, then, have recourse against them? It's all very weird to me as I'm doing everything I know to keep GMO's and unnatural foods out of my life.

That involves my use of heirloom seeds which I then save from year to year as some of the varieties I grow are now hard to find. It would be a disaster for us to have the seed modified in this way.

BTW, I have been reading that many of the weeds in the areas where Roundup Ready seed has been used are now resistant to Roundup and, therefore, the seed is not much help as it is not resistant to the ever stronger herbicides which are having to be used.

We saw that in infections which developed antibiotic resistance in people. It's a viscious cycle.

[MajorChode]

205. Your recourse would be against whoever overseeded your field

Just as the judge said. This is not what happened in this case. The farmer knew that field had been overseeded by his neighbor. He knew it because he and his hired hand figured it out. He knew it because Monsanto told him. He knew it because his lawyer told him.

The problem you mention has nothing to do with roundup ready seed. No crop seed, GMO or otherwise, is going to cause weeds to mutate. Roundup (glosphate) itself may have caused this, but that doesn't negate the benefit roundup has provided to farmers. If roundup had never existed, farmers would be worse off today. They would be using more land, more water, getting lower crop yields, and food would be more expensive.

[laughingliberal]

209. Yes, I knew it was the Roundup causing the mutation.

Just as the antibiotics trigger mutations in organisms. With antibiotics, it's overuse and misuse-the same here, I suspect.

Well, that's a relief that there is recourse if some of the genetically modified material were to wind up in one's crops who didn't want it. Not sure what the answer is. How the hell do you even know what your neighbors are planting? And If you're trying to provide for the natural food market, your product for that year is useless. Is there any assurance the person who overseeded your field would, actually, be made to compensate you? And would your fields still be certifiable for growing organic? I can see the increased yields as a positive for the average farmer but I see it could be a disaster for an organic farmer to be anywhere near them.

Thankfully, I just grow for our personal use and sell a little at Farmers' Markets. If I were a bigger producer, I'd be scared silly about this stuff.

[MajorChode]

213. So-called 'organic' standards allow for a certain degree of contamination

Which makes sense because even if GMO didn't exist, cross pollination, synthetic pesticide and herbicide runoff still would. So the so-called problem would exist regardless.

The reality is that the majority of the so-called 'organic' market is controlled by the same big-agra that you seem to have so much disdain, and their market share is increasing exponentially with every year.

[laughingliberal]

217. I'm trying to buy as much in the way of fresh produce locally &/or grow my own.

Not always easy but makes sense to me. Supports local growers and doesn't take massive amounts of fuel to get it here.

I know it doesn't solve the problem of how to feed huge populations but I've felt better since I've gone more that way.

[MajorChode]

218. Good for you

I have no problem with that. I grow fruits and vegetables myself. I love local farmer's markets. I don't have any problem if someone wants to use so-called 'organic' methods in their back yard. I use some of them myself, but I'm not going to stop myself from using perfectly good pesticides, fertilizer, or herbicides just because they happen to be synthetic. Some pesticides break down into completely harmless substances within 24 hours. Some are so benign to humans you can drink them. Some so-called 'organic' substances are so heavily processed they are either equivalent to their synthetic counterparts in terms of environmental impact or they are worse. I never have been able to understand the mentality that somehow manmade substances are always 'evil' and naturally occurring substances are always 'good'.

[laughingliberal]

219. Yes, there is a balance. Not everything natural is beneficial nor is everything synthetic bad.

As an RN, I liked to point out to patients who would insist on all natural medicines and resist proven, effective treatments that hemlock is natural.

That said, there are some natural remedies I've found effective for me and some which are crap. Come to think of it, I find the same to be true of traditional medicine. The world is a buyers beware market. I try, through trial and error, to find a balance which works for me and does the least harm to the world around me.

[laughingliberal]

163. So, you're saying this farmer had not been saving his own seed from crops & cleaning them before?

I think farmers did this for years before Monsanto was heard of. I save seeds from our garden and use them.

[MajorChode]

169. Patent laws go back about 2500 years or so

If you don't understand them, you should better educate yourself before you comment and reveal your ignorance.

You can't legally use seed that is patented without license from the patent owner. Those laws also predate Monsanto.

Cheers!

[laughingliberal]

171. Well, I'm going to keep using seed from my garden. Anyone else's who invade it, I consider

trespassers.

[MajorChode]

173. I'm so happy for you

It's completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand, but thanks for sharing.

Cheers!

[polly7]

132. Disagree 100%. eom.

[AnArmyVeteran]

146. While exploring Belize we stopped at a cane field & it was so sweet.

Raw cane sugars are good stuff. But high fructose can syrup that is doctored and manipulated is deadly.

[SOS]

166. Cane sugar corporations are evil

True.

So let the Cuban cane sugar in to compete with the Florida gangsters.

[hobbit709]

2. Force feeding Rush Limbaugh perhaps.

[Blue Owl]

9. Hmm, maybe there IS a good use for it after all!

n/t

[Sebastian Doyle]

62. Rush looks like he's eating enough of it as he is.

Somebody who makes as much money as that son of a bitch does, can't say they can't afford to eat healthy food.

[quinnox]

3. good luck

Its in just about every food at the supermarket when I bother to read the label.

[ixion]

7. Buy organic

that's where you still get real food.

But yeah, in any of your common off-the-shelf items, it's gonna be there.

[Scurrilous]

178. Yep...

When I went to work for Cargill (years & years ago) they gave us a test during orientation.

A long list of well known food products was listed and we were to guess which contained their corn syrup.

The answer was all of them.

LOL

I was pretty surprised.




Yum!!

[ixion]

4. works for me...

I've been HFCS free for almost a year now, and the difference is NOT negligible. I've lost weight, have several times the energy, and feel better, generally speaking.

[SheilaT]

53. What exactly did you do to

become HFCS free?

I almost never have a soft drink of any kind. Absolutely never the diet ones.

What else should I be aware of?

[ixion]

60. Sadly, you need to watch everything... from bread to salsa

And don't let the labeling fool you. Read the ingredients. You'd be amazed where you'd find HFCS. It's used in just about every commercial food product out there. Bread and breading, condiments (bbq sauce, ketchup, salsa, etc), "fruit juice" drinks, you name it.

The safest bet is to buy organic, but short of that, always read the ingredients.

Softdrink-wise, there are natural alternatives, like Boylan's (one of my favs) that use pure cane sugar.

Beyond fructose, though, I altered my entire diet. I went entirely organic, and vegetarian for the most part. I still eat eggs, and still cook with chicken broth, but no more large chucks of meat, no more cheese, and flatbread or tortillas instead of regular bread.

Hope this helps. :toast:

[unapatriciated]

121. I rarely drink soda, Boylan's is great but Hansens is a little more affordable

http://www.hansens.com/products/products.php?subcat=1

love their Cherry Vanilla. and on a hot day the Grapefruit Soda is great.

[ixion]

122. Yeah, I don't either. Maybe one a week... but I'll try it out. It reminds me of Fresca.

Thanks! :hi:

[unapatriciated]

133. look for it at your local store (tj's carry Hansen sodas)

The online store seems a bit pricey. TJ's also has there own brand in three flavors made with cane sugars. I like the orange cream soda, reminds me of the old 50/50 Ice cream bar.

(disclaimer I work at my local tj's.):hi:

[dixiegrrrrl]

215. Hunt's Ketchsup came out with big bold letters saying HFC free, uses sugar now.

I actually wrote and thanked them. Got a 50 cent coupon back.

We went HFC free abut 9 months ago, I am still having to read lables.t

[Jazzgirl]

88. You are correct.

I noticed some significant weight loss when I eliminated it from my diet too. People don't realize all the products that have that nasty crap in them. I was shocked when I dropped about 7 lbs. in about 2 weeks after I eliminated it though.

[ixion]

123. Yep. And it takes months to get all of that garbage out of your body

But once your metabolism comes back, you feel much better, in my opinion. :)

[Blue Owl]

5. Ahhhh, the sweet nectar of Monsanto

:hangover:

[Sebastian Doyle]

8. No need for ANY MonSatan products

Aside from Wall Street money shell game criminal firms, it's the single most useless corporation on the planet. And one of the most toxic to all life on earth.

[MajorChode]

58. Monsanto doesn't produce HFCS

But don't let reality get in the way of a good rant.

[bvar22]

72. But Monsanto DOES produce the Genetically Modified Corn...

...used to produce HFCS.
Nice try at a dishonest diversion, but No Sale.

[MajorChode]

77. They don't produce that either

They own the patent for some GMO products (corn happening to be one of those) which other producers use to make corn and other producers use some GMO corn to make HFCS. So your desperate link to Monsanto is even more remote.

I suppose inconvenient truths qualify as "dishonest" in your book, which I find quite amusing. Please do carry on, though. The entertainment value alone is well worth it.

Cheers! :popcorn:

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

79. This is like getting mad at the Wright Bros. for inventing chemtrails.

[MajorChode]

86. True, but teh Wright Bros. aren't 'evil'

So any dubious link to big-agra should be capitalized at every given opportunity. Forget that most so-called 'organic' food that is so highly prized is also produced almost exclusively by big-agra as well.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

95. More to the point, chemtrails don't exist and the Wright Bros. have nothing to do with "them."

"Forget that most so-called 'organic' food that is so highly prized is also produced almost exclusively by big-agra as well."

Pff. Well, yeah. "Organic" food's a scam to trick scientifically illiterate chemophobes out of their own money.

Of course it's big business.

[MajorChode]

112. There's always someone ready to make money from ignorance

Snake oil sales are more lucrative today than ever.

[Tsiyu]

201. You two

circle jerk much?

:boring:


Dayum, get a room...

[jberryhill]

105. Zeppelins work fine for air transport...

...and rail is often faster, since it takes you to city center without airport delays.

Given those factors, it is clear that the Wright brothers' work probably was motivated by the peculiar requirements of chemtrail spraying.

You may have inadvertently stumbled onto something here.

[SidDithers]

210. Good point...

as always, you've seen straight to the heart of the chemtrail conspiracy.

Nicely done :applause:

Sid

[gateley]

11. It's a big ass money maker for those who produce and sell it. Other than that

it's poison.

I'm amused that since this has caught the public's awareness, where we used to see items with labels shouting "No Sugar" we now see labels boasting "Real Sugar!" "No High Fructose Corn Syrup!"

Same thing happened with aspartame. The drag is, we're happily guzzling and swallowing for quite awhile and the few voices trying to tell the real story are labeled as conspiracy nuts or loonies are ignored.

[postulater]

12. Our local convenience store sells single bottles of Coke from Mexico made with sugar.

Tastes better. Double the price.

[gateley]

19. Well worth it, though -- it's SO GOOD! Reminds me of my childhood. I'm thinking

the US will be manufacturing it w/sugar soon because of all the HFCS brouhaha. And, I'm thinking the sugar ones are selling otherwise those small stores wouldn't keep carrying it - and THAT will be incentive to offer it here, too.

[Sebastian Doyle]

30. Sadly, even Mexican Coke is ruined now

Better grab as many of those bottles while you can, because the next batch will have the mutant corn poison. :evilfrown:

[dionysus]

32. WHAT?! when did this happen?

[Sebastian Doyle]

35. Fairly recently.

A few weeks ago I went to a local Mexican store/cafe and got a Mexican Coke with my food. First taste, I thought it was a little "off", but it wasn't all that cold, and I usually drink it ice cold, so I thought that might have been the problem. Then a little later I read the label. Sure enough it had high fructose corn poison listed in the ingredients. :evilfrown:

MonSatan has been hitting Mexican corn farmers hard recently, and apparently they went after Coca Cola's Mexican division too. Lousy bastards.

[dionysus]

38. god dammit and i just discovered that shit too.

:(

[Bluenorthwest]

57. The Kosher will always do as well

No HFCS

[Sebastian Doyle]

63. Assuming you can find it.

It's only available a few weeks out of the year, and only in cities with higher Jewish populations. Naturally, that's the intended market for the product, but it sucks when you happen to live in a "one synagogue town" like this one, and have never seen the yellow capped Coke bottles around here.

[MajorChode]

84. Or you can simply make it yourself

Sugar, carbonated water, flavoring, stir to combine.

[dionysus]

101. where does one find kosher coke?

[Hekate]

119. Look for it in the early Spring, just before Passover. I see that Costco carries it now, but...

... since I generally only drink diet soda anyway, I haven't checked the labels to see if it's the same as the ones known for being kosher for Passover. Anyway, try Costco now.

I don't keep kosher myself, but have learned that (1) nearly everything edible now has ingredients from China that don't need to be separately listed by origin, and (2) there are a couple of Rabbis posted to China whose sole job is to verify the origin and suitability of each ingredient. If they can't verify all along the chain of manufacture (and it can be spread out pretty far), then they don't buy it for their products. Unlike other US buyers, they are careful and don't take anyone else's word for it.

Just sayin.

Hekate

[postulater]

43. Say it ain't soooooo!

[customerserviceguy]

68. If you live in an area with a significant Jewish population

You can get Passover Coke during that season, made with real sugar. Around here, the two-liter bottle tops are yellow to identify it.

[dionysus]

31. but it's in the cool glass bottle!

;)

[NoNothing]

13. It is a natural sugar that is produced naturally in a wide variety of foods

Frankly I find the hysteria surrounding it ridiculous. Like anything else, it is harmful in excess. But chemically it's really quite simple.

[trotsky]

15. Its fructose-glucose ratio is virtually identical to honey.

I don't get the hysteria either. They key is exactly what you said: "Like anything else, it is harmful in excess." We Americans consume way too much sweetener - it doesn't really matter what the form. But that requires a little bit of work and discomfort on our part to modify our diets. Far easier to just blame "Big Ag" for making "poison."

[derby378]

18. It isn't "natural" - it has to be manufactured in a laboratory

HFCS is made from sugars, but it's only natural in the same way that George W. Bush captured Osama bin Laden.

[NoNothing]

21. It's manufactured in a factory, not a laboratory

Like many other things we consume, such as ethanol. Or table sugar, for that matter. You don't think sugar crystals simply fall off the sugar tree to be harvested, do you?

My point is that its chemical components, fructose and glucose, are extremely common even in completely natural foods, like unprocessed fruits and vegetables. There's no evil "synthetic" chemicals (aside from contamination).

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

23. It comes from corn.

Herpaderp

[Desertrose]

70. GMO corn, too. n/t

[slampoet]

14. PECAN PIE.

[quinnox]

25. heh

I don't know why, but that response (and I like the caps) made me giggle.

[Sebastian Doyle]

46. Karo corn syrup (the kind used in pecan pie or popcorn balls) is different stuff entirely.

It's a glucose corn syrup, and not chemically altered the way MonSatan's corn poison is.

[damntexdem]

16. Hmm, input for biodiesel?

A complex of complex hydrocarbon, including a high amount of fructose, should be good for some chemical production of something.

[Sebastian Doyle]

109. It is "a" source for biofuels, but not the best by any stretch of the imagination.

Just like with the use of corn poison in the food supply, it's the federal subsidies, lowering the price that allows for the wide use of it. But the biofuels manufacturers would be much better off using hemp or switchgrass as a source rather than corn. As I posted above, they use sugar cane for biofuel in Brazil, but if we don't even use it for sugar here, that's not gonna happen.

[Hekate]

17. Fattening farm animals for the slaughter. HFCS is to sugar what lard is to olive oil....

Which is to say, dietarily speaking it is a false equivalency to say that your body uses lard the same way it uses olive oil (and we all know that now) and it is also a false equivalency to say that your body uses HFCS the same way it uses cane sugar (something I hope we will all know soon).

Hekate

[NoNothing]

24. What science is this based on?

Lard and olive oil have a different profile of fatty acid chemical compounds.

Table sugar, sucrose, is simply a glucose molecule stuck to a fructose molecule. HFCS is glucose and fructose not stuck together. The first step in digestion of sucrose is that it is split into glucose and fructose. There is no chemical difference.

[Hekate]

61. That's what used to be said about fats and oils: the body processes them the same. They don't.

HFCS is a highly-manipulated laboratory product. I found the information persuasive.

Hekate

[IADEMO2004]

54. Leave lard alone. It is a must for pie crust and peanut butter cookies

but just for special occasions.

[MineralMan]

90. I use lard for all my pie crusts, but I never tell my guests.

I did that once, after a guest exclaimed about my wonderful flaky pie crust. She looked at me in horror. So, I just make the pies, and say, "family secret recipe" if someone asks now. Feh!

[IADEMO2004]

116. your secret is safe

[Chan790]

176. Don't ever feed me any of that pie.

Me and lard equal spew. It doesn't stay down, I know within 5 seconds that I have...(uuuurp!) just...:puke:...consumed...:puke:...lard. :puke::puke::puke:

[Ken Burch]

113. Is it better than Crisco(for the record, I don't use either, so I actually don't know)?

As I understand it, Crisco is basically intended to be a non-pork equivalent of lard.

[Hekate]

117. Lard's okay for "special". What rankles me about HFCS is that it has shown up in everything....

It would be like if I picked up a loaf of bread and read "lard" where a veg oil should be. Or a jar of olives and read "lard" among the oily marinade. What about the oil in a sardine can? "Lard." Salad dressing? "Lard and vinegar." Actually, more deceptive because something would say "contains olive oil" and then list lard first in the fine print and oil much farther down.

I am now reading ingredients labels again, if I can find my reading glasses while shopping. 30 years ago I read labels religiously because my toddler had an enzyme deficiency and couldn't digest wheat. I got so I could spot all the names of wheat and its by-products, just as I knew that anything with "-ose" in its name was a sugar. I just don't remember that much HFCS in things not by nature sweet. Now that I'm reading labels again I can spot that ingredient everywhere, from ice cream to stewed tomatoes to soup.

Hekate

[Taverner]

20. Nope. It's even bad as insect food.

Some say its the reason bees are dying

[Sebastian Doyle]

37. That's probably more the genetic modification than the HFCP

But it's still MonSatan's fault.

The GMO's are "roundup ready" Roundup is a pesticide. Bees are insects. Do the math.

[NoNothing]

67. No, Roundup is an herbicide

You know, for killing weeds.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

74. lol

[sendero]

22. Maybe we could..

... invent a vehicle that runs on this shit.

[NoNothing]

27. Why would you?

Just use the corn for ethanol instead and run the car on that.

[Sebastian Doyle]

41. Why don't we use hemp for ethanol, sugar cane for sweetner

And organic corn for the purposes nature intended corn to be used for. And not use MonSatan products for anything.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

81. How about we provide all students with a rudimentary science education?

[MineralMan]

94. How 'bout we use hemp for rope and smokes, and

eat the corn. Cane sugar's good. So is beet sugar. Of course, sometimes, you need that Karo Corn Syrup. Sometimes, there's no substitute.

[Sebastian Doyle]

103. Karo corn syrup (sucrose) is good for pecan pie. HFCS isn't good for anything.

You could use the mutant MonSatan corn to make biofuels (because at least then no living creature would be eating the shit) but it's a horribly inefficent source material for biofuels. Hemp would work much better. It also works better for rope than synthetic fibers which probably come from petroleum. Or makes stronger fabric than cotton.

As for the "smoking" variety, that's a different strain of cannabis altogether, but it also should be legal.

[MineralMan]

110. You'd better look at that Karo ingredients list again.

It's 20-30% dextrose, and the rest is "various sugars from corn." Direct from the site.

HFCS, my friend.

[H2O Man]

26. It should be

banned from DU.

[boston bean]

39. could be mighty

tasty on a pizza, for one moment anyhow....

[H2O Man]

40. True, that!

[zabet]

52. Totally agree!

;)

[dbt]

115. +42!

It adds exactly nothing. It's a distraction wrapped in empty calories and it lives on (for) the sidetrack. It's so cheap to manufacture that we cannot seem to get rid of it.

[BeHereNow]

136. I'll second that...

:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :hi:
BHN

[ThomWV]

36. Its in dam near everything you eat, I've been trying to avoid it - not easy

Once you start looking you find the shit is in dam near everything.

[Lars39]

48. Looked at the ingredient list for flour tortillas today....

yep, you guessed it! Guess I'm going to find a good source or learn how to roll 'em myself.

[MajorChode]

71. They are simple to make

The hardest part is finding a good press.

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[FreeState]

44. Can anyone point me to peer reviewed studies on it?

Just curious...

[RC]

50. I don't know how peer reviewed, but...

Sugar: The Bitter Truth
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM


High Fructose Corn Syrup Linked to a considerable increase in non-alcoholic Americans fatty, hard, Liver Scarring disease, Research Suggests
http://home.comcast.net/~pobrien48/high_fructose_corn_syrup_linked.htm

[MajorChode]

51. You can check the wiki article for some of them

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hfcs

Despite what some would claim, the studies on HFCS are entirely based on correlative evidence only, and I have yet to see a fully objective study on the subject. The Princeton study is the one most referenced by opponents of HFCS, but it is certainly not without problems as you can read about here:
http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2010/03/does-high-fructose-corn-syrup-make-you-fatter.ars

The average american consumes 41 lbs of HFCS per year. I'm not sure we would be considerably better off if people consumed 41 lbs of sucrose in addition to the other 135 lbs of sucrose the average american consumes. You would still be talking about 176 lbs of sugar each year, or about 14 1/2 lbs of sugar per month. It doesn't take a ph.d to figure out that's not healthy.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

78. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition

White, J.S. "Straight Talk About High Fructose Corn Syrup: What it is and what it ain't" Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 88 (6), 1716-21

http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/88/6/1716S

[tandot]

93. From a consultant to the food and beverage industry?

"ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The author is a consultant to the food and beverage industry in nutritive sweeteners, including HFCS and sucrose. His professional associations, past and present, include individual food industry companies as well as such organizations as the American Chemical Society, American Council on Science and Health, Calorie Control Council, Corn Refiners Association, Institute of Food Technologists, and International Life Sciences Institute."

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

96. Sure.

It's peer-reviewed.

[Jigglebilly]

216. peer-reviewed. snicker.

Oh wait you're serious.

[glitch]

98. NIH lists some studies on it.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?db=pubmed&cmd=link&linkname=pubmed_pubmed&uid=17653981

[flvegan]

47. Chicks in bikinis could wrestle in it.

:hide:

Just kidding!

[hunter]

49. Desalinization of seawater.

Put a little HFCS into some dialysis tubing, tie off the ends, and dip it into the ocean. Fresh water will diffuse into the tubing by osmosis. Sugar water is easier to drink than salt water, even if it's HFCS sugar water.

[valerief]

55. Nope. None whatsoever. Unless you're rich and want to get richer. nt

[marions ghost]

56. Find some industrial use for it

and do the same with soybean oil, which is also in everything.

[Bluenorthwest]

59. It ruins the taste and texture of anything it touches

It is not welcome in my abode, nor my bod.

[ChimpersMcSmirkers]

64. .

[Hello_Kitty]

66. This OP works for me on more than one level.

:)

[Tsiyu]

202. Oh, Too True.

It must be getting extra attention from the Corp that paid to make it.

Maybe fewer sales lately? More people are on to its decidedly stale, false flavor.

Seem to be ramping up the marketing...tag-teaming it with other "fine products" of the corporate world.



lol

[The Backlash Cometh]

69. It's poison

If you start a petition, I'll sign it.

[LostinVA]

73. Dr. Oz says there's absolutely NO REASON to keep it around

All it is is manufactured poo, that's become insidious in our life. It sucks. I would like to have ANYONE on here give me a legit reason to keep it.

Y'all ever seen what that shit looks like IRL? UGH!!!!!

[Ken Burch]

75. It's tasty when you pour it on your corn.

:eyes:

[Imajika]

82. I can't taste the difference between the two in soda...

..and neither could anyone else I know who claimed they could.

We just tried this recently at the office when the subject came up - with Mt. Dew actually. I could not tell the difference between the special "made with real sugar" Mt. Dew and the HFCS stuff. I hoped I would, but I couldn't. No one else could either. A few guessed right the first time, but couldn't consistently pick the Dew made with real sugar against the one made with HFCS. Not one person could demonstrably tell the difference - and we have some major Mt. Dew addicts there.

I still think I'd prefer real sugar. I am suspicious of HFCS, but don't see any real evidence there is anything wrong with it. Till I do I won't be joining the anti-HFCS bandwagon. At least for me, it just isn't something worth worrying about right now.

Still, I have become convinced that it is actually useful for people to want to avoid HFCS or whatever other ingredient they are concerned about. Right or wrong, it causes people to become more focused on what they are eating. Makes them pay more attention to all ingredients, calories, nutritional content, etc. So, in the end, if someone wants to avoid HFCS then I bet they are doing themselves a lot of good - even if it turns out HFCS isn't harmful at all.

[Fleshdancer]

154. I can't speak for Mt Dew since I never drink it....

but in Coca-Cola, it's very obvious.

[Starry Messenger]

85. It isn't good for anything.

The only remotely useful thing I've heard it used for is fake movie blood in horror movies. So I guess I could like seeing it dripping from a beastly hooligan on his way to pushing up daisies under a grave marker.

[LostinVA]

87. They use it in Hot Pockets

Al Gore says so.

[Starry Messenger]

89. Funny coincidence:

Al Gore founded a company with a guy named David Blood--http://www.generationim.com/about/

Blood and Gore, Inc.!

Al Gore likes the pepperoni Hot Pockets, I have it on good authority.

[Sebastian Doyle]

92. Seriously? When did they start doing that?

I try not to eat Hot Pockets very often, but last time I read the label on the package, the main problem with them was a ridiculously high sodium content. Not the genetically modified sugar substitute.

If that's true, they better damn well leave the microwave burritos alone. :mad:

[NoNothing]

91. Why, did you know there's a plan to put HFCS in ice cream?

Children's ice cream, Mandrake!

[mitchum]

99. It's a really cheap filler for products

Profit!
Profit!
Profit!

[Bluebear]

100. It's totally revolting on all levels.

[upi402]

107. We could bless it

and sell it on Fox, maybe sponsor Beck as there may be an open slot.

[BuelahWitch]

114. Here's a list of everyday products that supposedly do not contain HFCS

Found at this link: http://www.stophfcs.com/list.html


Baking and Cooking Ingredients

* Betty Crocker 7-Layer Bar(mix)
* Betty Crocker Dark Chocolate Brownie mix
* Betty Crocker cake icing
* Bisquick

Beverages

* Northland Cranberry Juice
* China Cola
* Dr.Pepper(original formula)
* Jones Soda (recently announced that they were going back to real sugar)
* Goose Island soda (Root Beer, Orange Soda)
* Calistoga Juice Squeeze
* Simply Orange juice products
* Simply Lemonade
* Tropicana OJ
* Nestle NesQuik Chocolate Milk Mix
* Nestle "Abuelita" Chocolate Syrup (Hispanic Section)
* R.W. Knudsen Recharge (sports drink)
* Fuze Drinks link
* TeaZazz link
* Vivi Smart Soda link

Bread

* Pepperidge Farms whole grain honey oat
* Nature's Own Sugar Free 100% Whole Grain bread link
* Nature's Own -Honey 7 Grain link
* Nature's Own 100% whole wheat link
* Martins Potato breads and rolls
* Thomas's Low Carb English Muffins
* Thomas Hearty Grain Honey Wheat English Muffins (?)
* Nature's Own -Healthline SugarFree Wholewheat
* Ezekiel 4:9 sprouted grain breads (in freezer section)
* Francisco International Extra Sour Dough bread (the regular Sour Dough has it!)
* Pepperidge Farm Honey Wheatberry
* Milton's Wheat and Multi-grain bread
* Bagels from a local Jewish bakery
* Kirkland brand (Costco) multigrain bread
* Sara Lee Cinnamon Raisin
* Pepperidge Farm whole grain bagel
* Matthew's All Natural Bread link
* Amana Multi Grain Bread
* Country Hearth 12-Grain Bread
* Earth Grains 100% Natural 7-Grain Bread
* Orrow Wheat Light 100% Whole Wheat
* Rays New York Bagels
* Whole Foods store brand hot dog and hamburger buns (they are whole wheat)
* FlatOut Bread link
* Alternative Bagel --- sweat wheat link


Breakfast Cereals

* Post Grape-Nuts
* Life Cereal/Cinnamon Life
* Quaker Oatmeal
* Cheerios
* Most cereals labeled "Organic"
* Kashi Go Lean (original and Crunch)
* Barabara's Puffins
* Chex Cereals (Wheat, Rice and Corn)
* Kroger Apple Dapples
* Post Honey Bunches of Oats
* Great Value fruit and cream instant oatmeal
* Mom's Best Natural Cereals (all varieties) link


Breakfast Pasteries / Waffles / Bars

* Eggo Nutrigrain Blueberry
* Kashi Go Lean and Heart to Heart Waffles link
* The TLC granola bars, by Kashi, all are HFCS free link
* Bisquick Mix


Candy and Childrens treats

* Lindt Lindor truffles (balls)
* Cost Plus World Market has a lot of imported candy from Germany that I've found to be HFCS free.
* Kellogg's Yogos Bits


Condiments

* Heinz organic tomato ketchup
* French's Worcestershire
* Farman's pickle relish
* Mt. Olive Hamburger dill chips
* Annie's Natural Organic Ketchup
* Frenchs Honey Dijon Mustard (I don't think most regular mustard contains hfcs, but a lot of the "honey" mustard does, which is why I'm listing some honey mustards here that don't.)
* Woeber Sweet And Spicy Mustard
* Consorzio Bbq Sauce Organic Original
* Whole Foods 365 Ketchup (both regular and Organic)
* Kroger coctail sauce


Cookies and Cakes

* Pepperidge Farm Chessmen cookies -- plain and the new chocolate
* Kedem Tea Biscuits (reg. and chocolate) --- found in the Kosher section
* Paul Newman sandwich cookies
* Kashi line of cookies
* Back to Nature peanut butter sandwich cookies
* Destrooper Almond Thins Cookie
* Destrooper Butter Crisp Cookies
* Keebler Pecan Sandies Cookies
* Keebler Simply Sandies Cookies
* Lu Le Petit Beurre Cookies
* Lu Scottish Recipe Shortbread
* Mi-Del Snaps Ginger
* Newmans Wheat Free Fig Newton Cookies
* Newmans Own Ginger Os Ginger N Creme Cookies
* NewmanS Own Alphabet Cookies
* Pepperidge Farms Butter Chessman Cookies
* Pepperidge Farm 100% Natural Varieties


Chocolate

* Cadbury - Most Varieties
* Hershey's Symphony
* Hershey's 100 Calorie Wafer Bar
* Hershey Skor Candy Bar
* Hershey Special Dark Candy Bar
* Dove - Most varieties
* Reeses Peanut Butter Cups
* Most Imported (Europe) and Organic chocolate


Crackers

* Annies - Cheddar cheese bunnies and honey graham bunnies
* Wasa Crisp Breads (all varieties)
* Atheno's baked pita chips
* Stacey's Naked Pita bread chips *note, have not seen HFCS in Hummus
* Dare Vinta Crackers
* Triscuits
* Great Value (Walmart's brand) cracked wheat rounds
* Stone Ground (the white square crackers from Canada)


Dairy

* Brown Cow vanilla yogurt
* Southern Home Nonfat Plain Yogurt
* Dannon Plain Yogurt*
* Mountain High Yogurt (it appears all varieties are HFCS free)
* Dannon All Natural Vanilla Yogurt
* Dannon All Natural Coffee Yogurt
* Horizon Organic Fat Free Yogurt
* Nancys Reduced Fat Plain
* Nancy's Whole Milk Honey Yogurt
* Stoneyfield Farm Yobaby Yogurt


Fruits and Vegetables - Canned

* Motts Natural (No Sugar Added)Apple Sauce
* Most no sugar added packed fruit --- please check labels


Granola Bars

* Nature Valley Roasted Nut Crunch bars
* Kashi Bars
* Odwalla Bars

Ice Cream

* Breyers - All Natural Coffee
* Breyers - All Natural Cherry Vanilla
* Breyers - All Natural Mint Chocolate Chip
* Luigi Italian Ice


Jam, Jelly, Syrup, Spreads

* Skippy Peanut Butter
* Costco makes an organic peanut butter
* Whole Foods brand peanut butter
* Karo Dark (with Blue label)
* Karo Brown Sugar syrup
* Hero Jams (from Swizterland) --- can be found at Cost Plus World Market
* Darbo Jams (from Austria) --- can be found at Cost Plus World Market
* Whole foods brand (365) strawberry jam
* Sarabeth Jam link (you can buy these jams marked down at Marshalls and TJ Max).
* Smuckers organic grapy jelly
* Safeway "O" Organics Maple Syrup
* Harry and David Ancho sweet chili peper spread


Pastries

* Try your local, family operated, pastry shop. Since HFCS is added to extend shelf life it is not generally found in family operated bakeries.


Salad Dressings

* Great Value (WalMart) Zesty Italian Dressing
* Hellmann's Real Mayonnaise
* HIdden Valley Ranch Old Fash.Buttermilk
* Blue Plate Mayonnaise
* Ken's Sweet Vidalia Onion dressing
* Annie's Naturals organic papaya poppyseed salad dressing.
* Annie's Naturals Goddess Dressing (check other Annie's too, quite a few are HFCS free).
* Brianna's Homemade Blush Vinaigrette Salad Dressing (all varieties seem to be HFCS free)
* Drew's Salad Dressings
* Most Neumann's varieties
* Kraft Honey Dijon Vinaigreette, dressing & marinade
* Kraft Balsamic Vinaigreette, dressing & marinade


Sauces

* Barilla Pesto
* Ken's Steak House Honey Teriyaki Marinade
* Kikkoman Soy Sauce
* Soy Vey Very Very Teriyaki --- check marinade section, also Kosher section
* Bullseye BBQ sauce Original


Snacks

* Frito's corn chips
* Natural Cheetos


Soups

* Annie's Organic Soups

[laughingliberal]

183. Thanks! nt

[Radical Activist]

200. Shouldn't it be quicker to list products that DO contain HFCS?

When we get to the point that the list of products containing it is much smaller than the products that don't, then we'll be close to a healthier balance.

[foxfeet]

118. Astroglide.

Or so I'm told.

[Motown_Johnny]

120. I believe fructose is 16X sweeter than sucrose

so you will need to consume 16 times the amount of sugar to get the same flavor as you do from normal fructose


I would need to look up the numbers for HFCS but they may even be higher.


Not that I am favor of this stuff, I just don't see a reasonable alternative.

[Cal Carpenter]

124. Yeah the huge ag companies get to make bank off the shit

Processed corn parts are in just about everything at this point. And there's very little benefit in eating it - certainly not this amount, and with this frequency. There are better sweeteners out there. A few drops of honey instead of corn syrup in commercial bread, shit, that's better. Even 'real' sugar in soda instead of the HFCS. But it's in everything, obvious stuff like soda and not-so-obvious like bread.

Our farmland is getting abused and most farmers aren't able to make a living growing actual *food* for people anymore. But some big companies are making big profits, and a basic human need (food)is becoming a commodity rather than sustenance.

Every part of processed corn is used for one thing or another. It is everywhere.

[defendandprotect]

127. Evidently, it's also a good place to hide MERCURY . . . ???

[Warren DeMontague]

130. The planet?

Are you sure it's not tucked into Van Allen's belt, again?

[Warren DeMontague]

131. Read your ingredients, and buy from smaller, organic producers if possible.

It's hard to avoid, but not as hard as it used to be.

[Naturyl]

135. It's just corn sugar.

Some scares are just scares.

[Vickers]

141. No it's not. Glucose vs. fructose (and cane sugar is sucrose).

When you have a diabetic kid, these distinctions become very important.

[AspenRose]

139. What is it good for? Absolutely NOTHIN'

x(

[Kurovski]

220. It's terrific for triggering corn allergies.

And ruining the taste of food.

[The Midway Rebel]

148. I can personally testify to this fact.

I have seen stands of corn being grown from Monsanto seed for use in the manufacture of HFCS as large as 300 acres. Those huge stands of corn have about the equivalent biodiversity of an asphalt parking lot.

[Violet_Crumble]

156. It's got a lot more depth to it than its competitors

If it's making you sick, you'll probably find you need to get yr haemarroids treated properly and you'll end up being very tolerant of it :)

[SmileyRose]

159. Yes there is a good use for it.

It's great at permanently screwing up someone's metabolism. Should be some way to put that in a medicine that will help anorexics, cancer patients and the frail maintain or gain weight............

[jeffrey_X]

164. It helps corporations in the food industry be profitable....why would we do anything about it?????

eom

[sl8]

175. If you're eating so much of it that it makes you sick ...

... why not cut back or eliminate it from your diet?

Perhaps HFCS will need to be banned someday, but unfavorable opinions of it aren't sufficient justification.

Why would you keep eating so much of it that it makes you sick? Do you think that you have an addiction? Can you not cut back unless someone else makes it unavailable to you?

[Chan790]

179. Because it's in everything?

I do mean everything too. I just found it this morning in my bakery bread.

It's also in salad dressing, pasta sauce, Vitamin Water, flavored (sexual) lubricants, pre-prep fruit (you know, the pre-sliced apples that Mott's and Dole now sell to lazy people.), bagged salad greens, some canned vegetables, crackers, processed cheese foods, breakfast sausage links, meat substitutes, soy milk, single-serving containers of dairy...

It's not avoidable, short of making all your own foods, milking and slaughtering your own animals and baking your own bread. Who has time for all that?

[sl8]

184. You have a point, but I'm not convinced.

Honestly, I was wondering if the OP was just trying to stir up shit. He or she didn't mention anything about trying to cut back, just went straight for "let's ban it". I'm not a big fan of banning things, except as a last resort. Perhaps the OP will correct me.

As to your list:

I'm sure you're right that some salad dressings contain HFCS. I have two in my cupboard, Good Seasons Italian (mix) and Hidden Valley Ranch (mix), and neither contains HFCS.

Bagged salad greens? Really? You may be right, but that seems very odd to me. Do they just glaze the lettuce with HFCS?

Vitamin water - No offense, but I assumed that that was a gimmick intended to convince people to pay extra for something they could get for (nearly ?) free. I wouldn't be very surprised at any ingredient that they added to the water. I mean, if someone is willing to sell sugared water as "Vitamin water", I doubt that they'd have any qualms over using the cheapest sugar they could get.

Mott's & Dole pre-prep fruit - I've never run into it before. Is it dried, canned, or ?

Some canned vegetables - I'm sure you're right.

Sausage - I'm sure you're right, but HFCS wouldn't be the ingredient that most concerns me with most sausage. Same goes for "cheese foods".

Soy milk & meat substitutes - I've no idea, but I've no reason to doubt you. I'll look next time I go grocery shopping.

Crackers - The only ones I have on-hand are Nabisco multi-grain saltines, they don't list HFCS (or any other sugar) in the ingredients.

Pasta (tomato ?) sauce: Some may very well have HFCS, but mine doesn't list it (Price Chopper brand).

Bread - the loaf I have, Pepperidge Farms sourdough, does list HFCS among the ingredients, but it's way down the list (after yeast). I usually buy Arnold's; I'll have to check its ingredients.

I certainly don't make all my own food, but, so far as I can tell, I only got a tiny amount of HFCS in my diet today (3 slices of bread). I don't think I ingested any HFCS yesterday or the day before. I don't try to minimize HFCS when I shop, although I do tend to buy stuff with less processing or fewer unpronounceable ingredients.

Regarding milking and slaughtering your own animals, I don't understand. I'm almost certain that the meat (aside from sausages) & milk at my grocery store don't have HFCS added.

Edited to correct "its" -> it's". D'oh!

[MajorChode]

196. You don't have time to read a label?

You claim it's in everything, but I can go to the supermarket and literally find thousands of things that don't have it. If you are so paranoid that you want to remove every iota of a substance that has exactly zero causation evidence of health problems, I suspect you could do so with a lot less effort than milking your own animals.

[Chan790]

197. I grew up on a goat farm...

milking my own animals isn't that distressing. The lack of a decent loaf of bread or blue cheese dressing under $7/bottle which lacks in HFCS is cause of much consternation by comparison.

I don't aim to ban HFCS, mind you. That was someone else...I merely want it regulated as a food additive in terms of where and how much can be used. I read somewhere that it now accounts for more than half the carbohydrate calories in the diet of the average American. I'd be concerned by that proportion regardless of the source.

[MajorChode]

199. I'm not sure I can buy those numbers

On average, Americans still get more calories from table sugar than HFCS. See tables 51 & 52:
http://www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/Sugar/data.htm

If it were true that Americans get half their carb calories from HFCS, they are getting more than half from table sugar, and that equals > 100% even before you factor in carbs from other sources. Those numbers don't add up.

The premise here is that there's an assumption if HFCS is a significant health risk when consumed in huge amounts, then elimination or the near elimination is ideal. I can't really agree with that. Moderation is the key here whether you're talking about HFCS or table sugar.

The biggest problem with the American diet is the amount of complete crap that people eat such as candy, liquid candy (sodas), and other various sweets (cakes, cookies, pastries, doughnuts, etc.). I don't really see a few grams of HFCS in commercial bread or blue cheese dressing as a significant health issue. The average young male (12-29) drinks 1/2 gallon of soda per day. It doesn't take a ph.d to see the health risk there.
http://www.everyday-wisdom.com/soft-drink-consumption.html

Even so, I'm not so much for the govenment telling me what I can or can't eat, especially when you're talking about things that pose little to no health risks in moderation.

[Statistical]

189. You are aware it is in everythng now.

Even stuff it makes no sense being in.

Given it is cheaper than dirt it is simply used as a filler to being the price down.

By everything I mean everything.
Juices, jams, jellys, stuffing, soups, bread, buns, spaghetti sauce, pasta, cereal, granola bars, candy bars, ketchup, steak sauce, crackers, cottage cheese, cool whip, yogurt, ice cream, many processed meats, salad dressing, etc....

I mean today it is easier to make a list of items NOT containing HFCS than items containing it.

[sl8]

194. No, I don't know that.

If you haven't already, see my post # 179.

My main point of contention was with the premise I inferred from the the OP; paraphrasing, "I don't like it, sometimes it makes me sick, we should ban it". The OP didn't mention trying to avoid HFCS, hasn't responded to any posts, just announced that it was bad, therefore it should be banned. The OP seems to have departed for points unknown.

Maybe it should be banned someday; I don't know. I don't think that banning should be the first step. I know from personal experience that eating too many M & Ms will make me feel sick. I'll probably confirm that a few more times in my life. I will never call for a ban on M & Ms based on those experiences.

Foods that you mentioned that I didn't mention in my previous post:

Cereal - The only breakfast cereal I have in the house are (generic) toasted oats and Shredded Wheat, neither of which list HFCS as an ingredient. The other cereals I have - oats, corn meal, wheat, rice and (wheat) flour, I'm almost positive contain no HFCS.

Jelly - You've got me there. My Smuckers does list HFCS as a major ingredient. The homemade stuff, I'm pretty sure is HFCS free.

Granola/candy bars - I'm sure you're right, but I'm not sure how significant the type of sugar is, as compared to the amount of sugar. I don't consider candy bars as healthy food, regardless of HFCS content. I consider granola bars as candy bars with a fancy name, unless they prove themselves as different.

Juice - I only buy juice labeled as 100% juice. Not out of any particular HFCS concerns, I'm just suspicious of any juice that feels the need to add anything to be palatable.

Cool whip - In my mind, and I may be wrong, is like "cheese food". An artificial mimic of a perfectly good food (in moderation). It's styrofoam with a creamy texture.

Yogurt - none of the yogurt in my fridge has HFCS in it. "Fancy" yogurt, I wouldn't be surprised.

Steak sauce - I have a 2 year old, half-full bottle of Bullseye in the fridge that doesn't list HFCS as an ingredient, but it's not something I often buy, so I'll take your word for it.

Cottage cheese - I rarely buy it. If people are putting HFCS in cottage cheese, that just doesn't seem right. Maybe they should have to label it as "cottage cheese food", or something similar.

Pasta - Whose pasta has HFCS, or any other sugar, in it? My Ronzoni lists wheat, niacin, iron, thiamin mononitrate (I'll have to look that up), riboflavin, and folic acid.

Edit - replaced "banning is" with "banning should be"

[Chan790]

198. FYI, thiamin mononitrate is a vitamin added to "enrich" pasta.

Not unlike the addition of Vitamin D to milk or iodide to table salt. Thiamin also has antifungal properties making it an effective preservative during the drying process.

[sl8]

206. Thanks! n/t

[yurbud]

180. give it too our enemies so they get too fat to fight.

[sofa king]

182. I think I could ferment it into scooter fuel.

But it costs a lot more than gasoline.

[Kurovski]

187. Sure, it gives some folks a way to score a few bucks on the internet.

$$tippy,tappity$$tippity,tappity$$

[undeterred]

191. Its pretty much out of my life since I became a vegetarian.

Its primary use was to make me fat and addicted to sweets. I still like sweets, but now I have fruit instead and I feel a lot better.

[eShirl]

203. feeding yeast so they can poop out alcohol

[ensho]

207. only occasionally in baking - when I was a kid that's the only place

it was. then they started putting it in everything - it acts like an addiction for sweet taste.

theory is that it makes you buy it again.

[harun]

208. Yes, on waffles with peanut butter.

[Kurovski]

221. Not the same thing. (nt)

[SidDithers]

211. Lubricant...nt

Sid

[Kurovski]

222. It feeds cancer cells...

!


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8871713

[LanternWaste]

223. Petulant, self-absorbed posts...?

Petulant, self-absorbed posts...? :evilgrin:

Oh, you mean the real thing, not the cheap imitations... I dunno :shrug: