SUBSCRIBE

Breaking News on Food & Beverage Development - North AmericaEU edition | Asian edition

News > Suppliers

Read more breaking news

 

 

Consumer groups urge FDA to reject ‘corn sugar’ label for HFCS

8 commentsBy Caroline Scott-Thomas , 07-Mar-2011

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

Read all comments (8)

Related products

Key Industry Events

 

Access all events listing

Our events, Events from partners...