On-Demand Supplier Webinar
Clinical study
Yogurt Formulations with Clarinol® CLA for Weight Management
Stepan Lipid Nutrition
Consumer groups have petitioned the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), urging it to reject a Corn Refiners Association bid to allow ‘corn sugar’ as an alternative labeling declaration for high fructose corn syrup (HFCS).
The Corn Refiners Association (CRA) asked the FDA in September last year to consider the alternative name for use on product labels.
The CRA argued that allowing the use of ‘corn sugar’ on ingredient lists would help consumers understand that HFCS is simply a sugar made from corn.
The CRA - a trade association that represents the corn refining industry in the United States - has repeatedly stressed that HFCS is not high in fructose, even though that is what the name may suggest.
In fact it contains proportions of fructose and glucose similar to those of sucrose, but it has been the subject of a spate of bad publicity over the past few years, and food and beverage manufacturers have increasingly switched from HFCS to beet or cane sugar (sucrose).
However, consumer groups including the Consumer Federation of America and the National Consumers League have written to the FDA claiming that if food makers were allowed to label HFCS as corn sugar, it could obscure an ingredient with which the majority of consumers are already familiar.
In its letter to the FDA, the National Consumers League said: “Permitting HFCS to be called ‘corn sugar’ would allow manufacturers to conceal this ingredient from consumers…HFCS has been the name of this ingredient since the FDA’s original GRAS affirmation regulation in 1983.”
Meanwhile, the Consumer Federation of America said the FDA should not use its limited resources addressing the issue.
“The petition appears to be an attempt to address a decline in market share through a regulatory name change,” the organization said, adding that the CRA’s petition “amounts to an image makeover for a sweetener product.”
The CRA said in its September 14 petition to the FDA: “The proposed alternate name ‘corn sugar’ more closely reflects reasonable consumer expectations and more accurately describes the basic nature of the ingredient and its characterizing properties. Accordingly, revision of the high fructose corn syrup GRAS affirmation regulation to recognize ‘corn sugar’ as an alternate common or usual name would promote honesty and fair dealing in the interest of consumers.”
The Consumer Federation of America said it disagreed with this assessment, pointing out that the FDA already defines ‘corn sugar’ as dextrose, and that nutrition experts have put forward names that may more accurately reflect the nature of HFCS, including ‘corn glucose and fructose syrup’ or ‘glucose-fructose corn sweetener’.
It is expected to take the FDA up to two years to decide whether to allow food manufacturers to list HFCS as corn sugar on ingredient labels.
8 comments (Comments are now closed)
Reply to Rick in regard to the Princeton study
@Rick
The Princeton study you mention used grossly exaggerated intake levels in rats and incorrectly suggested that such results could have significant meaning for humans. Further, the medical community has long dismissed results from rat dietary studies as being inapplicable to human beings.
Please see what other experts have to say about this study:
“So, I’m skeptical. I don’t think the study produces convincing evidence of a difference between the effects of HFCS and sucrose on the body weight of rats. I’m afraid I have to agree with the Corn Refiners on this one. So does HFCS make rats fat? Sure if you feed them too many calories altogether. Sucrose will do that too.” http://bit.ly/ccycUc
Marion Nestle, Ph.D., Paulette Goddard Professor of Nutrition, Food Studies and Public Health, New York University
“The researchers concluded ‘over-consumption of HFCS could very well be a major factor in the ‘obesity epidemic,’ which correlates with the upsurge in the use of HFCS.’ It might be. But to my mind, these experiments hardly prove it.” http://bit.ly/bjkNaU
Karen Kaplan, Science Staff Writer, Los Angeles Times
You can also see more third party expert point of views here http://bit.ly/bkD52b and http://bit.ly/9ACeK1
Therese, Corn Refiners
Report abuse
Posted by Therese (CRA)
10 March 2011 | 01h33
Opinion without facts = worthless
Here is a good study done by Princeton University showing the dangers of HFCS, and why its not just another sugar.
Report abuse
Posted by Rick
09 March 2011 | 01h08
How About "Corn Syrup"
Something original eh? I beleive the FDA has already approved this description.
As for the CRA spreading lies, people need to look at the science. There is no difference from sucrose. It is more cost effective to use and works better at keeping soft foods soft. Let's not go back to the dark ages of magic and rumor deciding what is true. Get informed. Signed Not a CRA Lacky, a consumer something like you
Report abuse
Posted by David Busken
08 March 2011 | 22h12
Corn Refiners Want to Deceive Us
The comment posted by "Sugarissugar" is obviously from some lackey from the Corn Refiners Association.
Demand for High Fructose Corn Syrup is falling 10% a year and corn growers panicked.
It's been reported that the CRA is spending $50 MILLION dollars on their deceptive advertising campaign to try to convince us that High Fructose Corn Syrup is real sugar.
It's not, and I'm glad to see the American consumers are on to their lies.
Report abuse
Posted by Pat Hubbard
08 March 2011 | 20h52
So Corn Sugar
I guess you all are assuming that regular cane sugar is not processed at all and it comes directly from the field into the food you eat. If you all want to play ignorance that all the other items that you eat are not processed, go with it. In the end, I will say that there is no mercury added and this hydroxymethylfurfural is a common chemical found in the drying and cooking of SUGAR (all kinds of sugar).
Report abuse
Posted by Sugarissugar
08 March 2011 | 18h53
GMO HFCS
How about GMO corn glucose and fructose syrup laced with mercury and hydroxymethylfurfural? Then with a warning: hydroxymethylfurfural has been shown to be toxic to bees.
Report abuse
Posted by Gracie
08 March 2011 | 17h26
Genetically engineered corn
They can call it what they want but I won't eat anything that has corn in it because of it being genetically engineered. The truth is out on them, so a lot of people won't be deceived, but they should leave the name the same regardless. A lot of people are finding out about genetically engineered corn and avoiding it altogether, hope they lose more and more profits.
Report abuse
Posted by Karolyn
07 March 2011 | 21h25
Corn Sugar
This is an attempt to hide the products behind a name for the sake of profit instead of the health of consumers. For shame.
Report abuse
Posted by Lannea
07 March 2011 | 19h40
Read all comments (8)