You're probably familiar with high fructose corn syrup (HFCS). It's commonly found in most sugary drinks and processed baked goods. However, is HFCS really worse than other sugars? Read on to find out!

There are several different types of sugars, but the most commonly found in food are monosaccharides and come in the form of glucose, fructose, galactose (McGuire & Beerman, 2018). These are naturally occurring sugars in the blood (glucose), in fruits and vegetables (fructose), and dairy products (galactose). On the more processed side is high fructose corn syrup (HFCS), which is produced by combining fructose and glucose (McGuire & Beerman, 2018). This sweetener is commonly added to soft drinks, juices, bread products and other baked goods, and prepared desserts just to name a few as a cheaper alternative to another sugar - sucrose. Current recommendations are to consume no more than 100 calories per day of added sugars for women (~6 teaspoons) and no more than 150 calories per day of added sugars for men (~9 teaspoons) (American Heart Association, 2018). In general, consuming higher amounts of added sugar than necessary over time may eventually lead to undesirable side effects including cardiovascular disease, type II diabetes, and weight gain (Stanhope, 2016). However, there is little research behind the theory that HFCS is the sole culprit behind all of these health problems.          

While consuming foods that are nutrient-dense provide many more health benefits compared to high-calorie and low nutrient-dense foods, consuming more sugar of any type than necessary causes the body to store it as fat (McGuire & Beerman, 2018). Adding to the confusion, research has found that HFCS combined with high-fat diets interfere with insulin signaling as well as hepatic stress and inflammation (Ferder et al., 2010). Furthermore, it has been studied that chronic inflammation may lead to the development of cardiovascular disease and type II diabetes (Ferder et al., 2010). Since HFCS is added to high fat and/or calorie-dense foods, it is difficult to say conclusively that HFCS is the only problem. In addition, many studies have stated that there is much to be determined about the effects of HFCS compared to other sugars as research has found “no differential effects of excessive amounts of fructose, HFCS, or glucose (Kuzma et al., 2016).    

Therefore, although HFCS is not the most natural or healthful form of sugar one could be consuming, it is commonly added to unhealthy, high calorie foods that, when over-consumed, create health problems. There may be a correlative relationship with HFCS and negative health effects, but there may also be a link between over-consumption of these unhealthy food choices and cardiovascular disease, type II diabetes, and weight gain. Singling out HFCS is not the complete answer as the sole cause of all of these problems as there are likely other factors involved.

References: 

American Heart Association (2018). Added Sugars. Retrieved from: https://www.heart.org/en/healthy-living/healthy-eating/eat-smart/sugar/added-sugars#:~:text=The%20American%20Heart%20Association%20(AHA,day%2C%20or%20about%209%20teaspoons 

Ferder, L., Ferder, M., & Inserra, F., (2010). The Role of High-Fructose Corn Syrup in Metabolic Syndrome and Hypertension. Current hypertension reports. 12. 105-12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11906-010-0097-3  

Kuzma, J. N., Cromer, G., Hagman, D. K., Breymeyer, K. L., Roth, C. L., Foster-Schubert, K. E., Holte, S. E., Weigle, D. S., & Kratz, M. (2016). No differential effect of beverages sweetened with fructose, high-fructose corn syrup, or glucose on systemic or adipose tissue inflammation in normal-weight to obese adults: a randomized controlled trial. The American journal of clinical nutrition, 104(2), 306–314. https://doi.org/10.3945/ajcn.115.129650 

McGuire, M., & Beerman, K., (2018). Nutritional Sciences: From Fundamentals to Food (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Cengage Learning. 

Stanhope K. L. (2016). Sugar consumption, metabolic disease and obesity: The state of the controversy. Critical reviews in clinical laboratory sciences, 53(1), 52–67. https://doi.org/10.3109/10408363.2015.1084990