How it’s Made: High-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) is produced by processing corn starch to yield glucose, and then processing the glucose to produce a high percentage of fructose. First, cornstarch is treated with alpha-amylase to produce shorter chains of sugars called polysaccharides. Alpha-amylase is industrially produced by a bacterium, usually Bacillus sp It is purified and then shipped to HFCS manufacturers.Next, an enzyme called glucoamylase breaks the sugar chains down even further to yield the simple sugar glucose. Unlike alpha-amylase, glucoamylase is produced by Aspergillus, a fungus, in a fermentation vat where one would likely see little balls of Aspergillus floating on the top The third enzyme, glucose-isomerase, is very expensive. It converts glucose to a mixture of about 42 percent fructose and 50-52 percent glucose with some other sugars mixed in. While alpha-amylase and glucoamylase are added directly to the slurry, pricey glucose-isomerase is packed into columns and the sugar mixture is then passed over it. Inexpensive alpha-amylase and glucoamylase are used only once, glucose-isomerase is reused until it loses most of its activity. There are two more steps involved. First is a liquid chromatography step that takes the mixture to 90 percent fructose. Finally, this is back-blended with the original mixture to yield a final concentration of about 55 percent fructose–what the industry calls high fructose corn syrup.HFCS has the exact same sweetness and taste as an equal amount of sucrose from cane or beet sugar but it is obviously much more complicated to make, involving vats of murky fermenting liquid, fungus and chemical tweaking, all of which take place in one of 16 chemical plants located in the Corn Belt. Yet in spite of all the special enzymes required, HFCS is actually cheaper than sugar. It is also very easy to transport–it’s just piped into tanker trucks. This translates into lower costs and higher profits for food producers. Why It’s Bad Besides the way it’s made, there’s a couple of other murky things that consumers should know about HFCS. According to a food technology expert, two of the enzymes used, alpha-amylase and glucose-isomerase, are genetically modified to make them more stable. Enzymes are actually very large proteins and through genetic modification specific amino acids in the enzymes are changed or replaced so the enzyme’s “backbone” won’t break down or unfold. This allows the industry to get the enzymes to higher temperatures before they become unstable. Consumers trying to avoid genetically modified foods should avoid HFCS But there’s another reason to avoid HFCS. Consumers may think that because it contains fructose–which they associate with fruit, which is a natural food–that it is healthier than sugar. A team of investigators at the USDA, led by Dr. Meira Field, has discovered that this just ain’t so. Sucrose is composed of glucose and fructose. When sugar is given to rats in high amounts, the rats develop multiple health problems, especially when the rats were deficient in certain nutrients, such as copper. The researchers wanted to know whether it was the fructose or the glucose moiety that was causing the problems. So they repeated their studies with two groups of rats, one given high amounts of glucose and one given high amounts of fructose. The glucose group was unaffected but the fructose group had disastrous results. The male rats did not reach adulthood. They had anemia, high cholesterol and heart hypertrophy–that means that their hearts enlarged until they exploded. They also had delayed testicular development. Dr. Field explains that fructose in combination with copper deficiency in the growing animal interferes with collagen production. (Copper deficiency, by the way, is widespread in America.) In a nutshell, the little bodies of the rats just fell apart. The females were not so affected, but they were unable to produce live young. “The medical profession thinks fructose is better for diabetics than sugar,” says Dr. Field, “but every cell in the body can metabolize glucose. However, all fructose must be metabolized in the liver. The livers of the rats on the high fructose diet looked like the livers of alcoholics, plugged with fat and cirrhotic.” HFCS contains more fructose than sugar and this fructose is more immediately available because it is not bound up in sucrose. Since the effects of fructose are most severe in the growing organism, we need to think carefully about what kind of sweeteners we give to our children. Fruit juices should be strictly avoided–they are very high in fructose–but so should anything with HFCS. Interestingly, although HFCS is used in many products aimed at children, it is not used in baby formula, even though it would probably save the manufactueres a few pennies for each can. Do the formula makers know something they aren’t telling us? Pretty murky! Among other consequences, HFCS has been implicated in elevated blood cholesterol levels and the creation of blood clots. It has been found to inhibit the action of white blood cells so that they are unable to defend the body against harmful foreign invaders.8 This is the first step for glucose to enter a cell and be metabolized. As a result, the body needs to pump out more insulin to handle the same amount of glucose.21 Fructose reduces the affinity of insulin for its receptor, which is the hallmark of type-2 diabetes. Fructose interacts with oral contraceptives and elevates insulin levels in women on “the pill.” 17 Because it is metabolized by the liver, fructose does not cause the pancreas to release insulin the way it normally does. Fructose converts to fat more than any other sugar. This may be one of the reasons Americans continue to get fatter. Fructose raises serum triglycerides significantly. As a left-handed sugar, fructose digestion is very low. For complete internal conversion of fructose into glucose and acetates, it must rob ATP energy stores from the liver.21 Not only does fructose have more damaging effects in the presence of copper deficiency, fructose also inhibits copper metabolism–another example of the sweeteners double-whammy effect. A deficiency in copper leads to bone fragility, anemia, defects of the connective tissue, arteries, and bone, infertility, heart arrhythmias, high cholesterol levels, heart attacks, and an inability to control blood sugar levels.22 . It is almost certainly made from genetically modified corn and then it is processed with genetically modified enzymes. I’ve seen some estimates claiming that virtually everything–almost 80 percent–of what we eat today has been genetically modified at some point. Since the use of HFCS is so prevalent in processed foods, those figures may be right.
Archive for March, 2010
by Helena Bottemiller | Mar 13, 2010
It is not every day you find Amish farmers serving raw milk in the U.S. Senate. But this week a group of libertarian, small, sustainable, organic farmers were serving up the unpasteurized milk–which the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) deems dangerous–to Senate staff and local food advocates as part of an effort to push back against pending federal food safety regulations.
Raw Jersey Cow Milk from Amish Farms, Pennsylvania being served in the Dirksen Senate office building.
The National Independent Consumers and Farmers Association (NICFA), whose mission is to “promote and preserve unregulated direct farmer-to-consumer trade,” organized a lobby day Wednesday to rally opposition to the Senate FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (S. 510), a bill that would increase FDA inspections of food facilities and give the agency mandatory recall authority.
It is unclear exactly how or where NICFA fits into the lobbying scene. Most food policy experts inside the beltway know very little about the organization, and many characterize NICFA as a fringe group. The National Sustainable Agriculture Association (NSAC), an active force for sustainable agriculture in DC, doesn’t work with NICFA.
“We’re not working with them on anything, including food safety,” NSAC spokeswoman Aimee Witteman told Food Safety News in an email. “I don’t know much about them other than their opposition to National Animal ID. My sense is that they’re fundamentally opposed to any new food safety legislation–aren’t interested in trying to improve the food safety regime while also making it more targeted on the riskiest practices.”
It is also unclear how any members NICFA has or who exactly funds the organization. Many food policy insiders suspect the Weston A. Price foundation, a non-profit proponent of raw milk and whole foods, gives the group financial support. A spokesperson for NICFA said the group is funded exclusively through private donations but declined to provide any details.
Curious as NICFA may be, their reception on Wednesday had some libertarian star power. Former presidential candidate and small government hero Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX) kicked off the reception with his usual stump speech and Joel Salatin, a farmer-turned-celebrity, for his appearance in best-selling Omnivore’s Dilemma and Oscar-nominated Food, Inc., emceed the event.
Joel Salatin, of Polyface Farms (seated), and Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX). Photos by Helena Bottemiller.
Salatin, a self-described “Christian-libertarian-environmentalist-lunatic farmer,” fired off a number of clever sound bites to his audience, which appeared to be mostly NICFA members.
“When the government gets between my lips and my food, I call that invasion of privacy,” said Salatin. “By what science is feeding your kids Twinkies, Ho-ho cakes, and Mountain Dew safe–but raw milk, homemade pickles, and compost-grown tomatoes are dangerous?”
“Our nation has the lowest per capita food expenditure, but the highest per capita health care expenditure of any developed nation,” he said. “Welcome to safe, deadly food.”
Though the event piqued the curiosity of many food policy wonks, no one seems concerned NICFA’s efforts could derail S. 510, a bill that enjoys broad, bipartisan support, but has yet to be scheduled for a vote.
David Gumpert, a health blogger and author of The Raw Milk Revolution who also spoke at the reception, indicated on his blog this week that the response to NICFA’s message was hard to gauge.
“My meetings with congressional aides were pleasant, but difficult to assess,” wrote Gumpert. “This seemed a fairly common reaction among other citizen lobbyists. Maybe the most encouraging thing about the aides I met was that they seemed genuinely interested in what I had to say.”
“Most discouraging was that the aides seemed not to know very much about key problems in the food safety legislation–the absence of significant exemptions for the smallest food producers and farms, the huge financial burden imposed by the requirement for HACCP (hazard analysis critical control point) plans, and the imposition of Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) standards on farmers,” he added.
Consumer and public health advocates have been insisting for months that though they are open to “scale-appropriate” food safety regulations, no food grower or processor should be exempt from the food safety system.
“We do have issues with anything that provides any blanket exemptions,” Sandra Eskin, director of the food safety campaign with The Pew Charitable Trusts, recently told Food Safety News. Pew is a key member of the Make Our Food Safe coalition (MOFS), a broad coalition of consumer, public health, and industry groups pushing for the passage of S. 510.
“Food should be safe regardless of its source — big processor, small farm, conventional operation or organic grower,” said Eskin.
By Jake Miller • Marshfield News-Herald • March 11, 2010
The state is expected to appeal a Clark County judge’s ruling that allows an Amish man to continue to operate his farm without registering livestock in accordance to law, state assistant veterinarian Paul McGraw said.
Judge Jon Counsell issued a nine-page ruling Tuesday afternoon ordering the court to dismiss the charge filed against Emanuel Miller, 29, of Loyal in October 2008 for failing to comply with the state’s 2005 mandatory livestock registration law. It was the first case involving an Amish farmer challenging the state’s registration law.
The Amish believe the registration’s use of numbers is the first step in moving closer to the “Mark of the Beast,” referenced in the Bible’s book of Revelations and believed to be associated with Satan.
Proponents of the law say the registration allows officials to quickly track animals that could be impacted by a disease outbreak, McGraw said. Wisconsin’s department of agriculture continues to stand behind its belief that mandatory registration is beneficial to tracking disease, despite the court’s ruling, he said.
“I’m not sure there will be a huge impact at this point,” McGraw said of the ruling. “The department is likely to appeal. Everyone still needs to register their livestock.”
Miller testified that if he participated in the registration, he would risk eternal damnation, a statement supported by his community’s leader, Bishop Noah Schwartz.
In a brief filed Dec. 22, the state argued that a premises registration number is no different from other numbers, such as addresses. Only three states have mandatory registration, while 47 have voluntary registration, McGraw said.
However, Counsell wrote in his ruling that the number is just one part of Miller’s concern. It also requires him to put his faith in government, not God, which goes against Amish beliefs.
Registration is an “impermissible burden upon Miller’s religious beliefs,” Counsell wrote.
Counsell cited several flaws in the law, including that it will never reach 100 percent compliance and does not require the registered farmers to have a telephone, requiring state officials to still go door to door at some farms.
There is “no concrete evidence that premises registration serves the interest of promoting health and food safety better than other alternatives, which it must do to withstand this challenge,” Counsell noted.
Counsell wrote that Miller complies with other regulations, including providing his name and address when buying and selling livestock, which provides sufficient information for locating his animals.
Bill Herr, a Greenwood dairy farmer who owns about 165 cattle, said the premises registration is a benefit for tracking disease, as well as for the industry’s image. All of his animals are registered.
“Our livelihood is pretty dependent on how people view our product, how safe it is,” Herr said. “If there was a health issue, it would be very valuable information to know where these animals are being raised.”
Miller’s conviction, the court said, is supported by his statement that he “would accept government punishment or leave the state before violating his religious beliefs.”
Herr, despite his support of registration, said someone with serious religious convictions should not be subject to something that would infringe upon beliefs.
“I can respect religious beliefs, though. I have my own,” he said. “Just because they’re different from someone else’s doesn’t mean they’re wrong.”
By Patriot-News Editorial Board
March 11, 2010, 7:32AM
Is there such a thing as “must-miss” TV?
If so, put “Amish Grace” on your list. The Lifetime Movie Network film, which airs March 28, purports to recount the shooting of 10 Amish girls in a Nickel Mines schoolhouse by Charles Carl Roberts IV on Oct. 2, 2006.
CHRIS KNIGHT, The Patriot-News Movie about the Amish is shameful.
There has always been a fundamental contradiction in the fact that the “English” — as the Amish call non-Amish — make money off an intensely private people who reject the values of modern society.
Lancaster County has spawned an entire industry of Amish tourism, with busloads who ogle at horse-drawn buggies and men in straw hats.
It’s true that the Amish supplement their farming by selling handmade crafts and foods to tourists. But selling a few quilts and shoofly pie at a local craft store is light years from the crass exploitation that is “Amish Grace.”
Few who know the Amish wanted a piece of this horror show. The fictional film is based on the nonfiction book “Amish Grace: How Forgiveness Transcended Tragedy,” by Donald B. Kraybill, Steven M. Nolt and David L. Weaver-Zercher. Kraybill is an Elizabethtown College professor and senior fellow at the Young Center for Anabaptist and Pietist Studies.
“Out of respect to our friends in the Amish community, and especially those related to the Nickel Mines tragedy, we declined the producer’s requests to consult and assist in the development of a film,” the authors said in a written statement.
It is easy to see why.
This film has about as much to do with understanding the Amish as “Avatar” has to do with understanding the Masai.
As Patriot-News writer Ivey DeJesus described it, in the world of “Amish Grace,” the men all wear squeaky clean boots with no trace of farm mud and the women all sport manicured fingernails.
More importantly, the film distorts what happened.
“I can’t stand this place anymore,” says a character who lost her daughter in the shooting and lashes out at her husband.
In reality, the Nickel Mines tragedy only caused the Amish to affirm the bedrock values of their community.
“The media descend on the town and criticize its Amish leaders for their notion of unconditional forgiveness of the shooter,” trumpets the movie’s Web site (right next to a promo for “Kim Kardashian’s Most Memorable Hairstyles.”)
In reality, the public — including this newspaper — marveled at the Amish for truly living their deep faith.
It is inevitable that Hollywood tries to idealize and romanticize just about any hardship, from slavery to poverty to cancer.
But there is a special irony in glamorizing a people whose entire life is dedicated to eschewing individual attention.
You cannot see a shadow by shining a light on it. You cannot capture smoke by grabbing it with your hands. And you cannot celebrate the humility of the Amish by making them the stars of their own Lifetime movie.
If the film’s producers really wanted to honor the Amish, they would have said a prayer for them and let them be.
MORRISTOWN — Morristown is continuing to cite the Amish for building homes without permits while a federal lawsuit accusing the town of religious discrimination is pending.
Moise L. Swartzentruber, of 151 Stowe Road, was charged in late February. He’s the 12th Amish man since 2006 to be charged with failure to comply with building codes in Morristown.
Code Enforcement Officer Lanetta Kay Davis cited Mr. Swartzentruber over an addition made to his Stowe Road home last year. He is accused of not submitting a building plan to the town for the addition.
Mr. Swartzentruber is scheduled for arraignment March 18 before Town Judge James T. Phillips Jr., court officials said Wednesday. Ms. Davis declined to comment Wednesday
According to court documents, Ms. Davis in May noticed the addition being built. She sent a letter to Mr. Swartzentruber informing him of the building code violation, which had to be corrected by June 22.
Both parties met July 1 to discuss the matter. Ms. Davis provided Mr. Swartzentruber with an extension to Aug. 13, allowing him time to talk with his group.
On July 28, he informed the town that he wouldn’t submit a building plan. Both parties met again on Aug. 13, with no agreement reached because “the defendant stated that no inspections would be allowed.”
Eleven Amish families sued the town of Morristown in January 2009 over alleged religious discrimination.
“We’re sorry to see that Morristown is continuing its crusade against the Amish,” said Lori H. Windham, an attorney for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, Washington, D.C., who is representing the Amish families in the federal lawsuit.
The Amish say the town refuses to issue permits that allow them to build homes according to their beliefs. The Amish, members of the Old Order Swartzentruber sect, say their religious beliefs will be violated if the town forces them to install smoke detectors in their homes, submit engineering plans and allow home inspections.
The lawsuit says the Amish will be forced to leave the town if they cannot build their homes and farms.
The cases against the 11 Amish men have been delayed for more than a year for various reasons, including a lengthy search for an interpreter.
The lawsuit says the town is selectively enforcing the law against the Amish to effectively force them from the community.
Morristown Town Council members said previously that they must enforce building codes because turning a blind eye to the Amish will create unfair enforcement. Building codes are set by state law but enforced by municipalities.
The lawsuit also contends that Ms. Davis has made several postings on a Web site devoted to criticism of the Swartzentruber Amish religion, culture and practices. She also reportedly asked “nearby jurisdictions to take a hard line on code enforcement and issue citations to the Amish in their towns.”
Swartzentruber Amish also have encountered building code disputes in Hammond, Western New York, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. The 11 Amish men do not deny the charges, but say code requirements violate their right to freely exercise their religion.
An attempt to reach an out-of-court settlement failed in December. The case before U.S. District Court in Albany will be scheduled for trial, likely late this year or in early 2011.
Note: Facts, the application for the grant money to operate the program requires that Wisconsin abide by the terms set forth under the Federal Register. In which the participation must be voluntary and a producer can op-out. The state has breached their contract and are subject to Federal Administrative Relief which may result in repayment of all grant moneys. The USDA also failed to provide warning to the state that it may be sued, under requirements of Article 1 Sec.8 Clause 1 regarding grants under the authority of the General Welfare Clause. See annotated Supreme Court rulings for details.
Paul M. Griepentrog
A decision has finally been made in the highly anticipated case in which the State of Wisconsin was trying to sue an Amish man for not following Wisconsin’s Livestock Premise Registration law. On Tuesday, Clark County Circuit Court Judge Jon Counsell ruled that Emanuel Miller Jr. of Loyal, Wisconsin does have a ‘religious right’ to be exempt from the law, which requires anyone who keeps, houses, or co-mingles livestock to register their premises with the state.
It was noted during court proceedings that the Amish do provide their names and addresses when they buy and sell livestock, and the judge said that doing so should be enough for the state to track down an animal in the event of a disease.
Prosecutors also cited a recent pseudorabies case in Clark County as an example of why the premises law is needed. But Judge Counsell said the state failed to show why alternatives, that would not affect Miller’s religious freedom, would not be just as effective.
The Amish believe the requirement infringes on their religious believes because it could eventually result in the tagging of all animals, or the ‘Mark of the Beast.’ But prosecutors felt with mandatory premise ID, the process of tracking down potentially at-risk farms would be much easier if there were an animal disease. The issue of “government ease” fell short in court to the issue of “religious rights.”
Meanwhile, Paul McGraw, the assistant state veterinarian with the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture’s animal health division says he expects the state to appeal the ruling. A case of this nature regarding a state case, is normally a wearing down of the accused, which judges also tire of.
The NAIS, requiring premises registration, was a program instigated by the USDA. Every state was offered “grant” funds as an incentive to enforce a full mandatory NAIS with arrests and fines for noncompliance. The Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection has received over twelve million dollars to tighten the screws on all Wisconsin livestock producers. Their enforcements are the most ruthless of any state with many other pending cases. Their grant moneys are also the largest considering the number of livestock producers in the state.
Wisconsin has been used by USDA as an example of strict enforcements for the nation. Additionally increasing the weakened position of Wisconsin, national resistance to NAIS caused Sec. Vilsack on Feb. 5, to announce the NAIS program was discontinued. Without the backing of federal policy, judicial decisions by Wisconsin are predicted to be very problematic for the state. The Miller case is the first court decision since USDA withdrew the program.
On Feb 5 Vilsack stated that one of the reasons for terminating the NAIS program was that, “USDA had gotten a failing grade on NAIS” and that, “Terminating the program would help overcome some of the mistrust caused by NAIS.” It appears Dr. McGraw still has not arrived to where Sec. Vilsack is, serious work on the Wisconsin “mistrust” issue.
The case at one time was referred to as the state’s first such NAIS prosecution, until a Polk County judge ruled in October that Patrick Monchilovich of Cumberland violated the four-year-old rule after he refused to register his premises. He was ordered to pay a civil forfeiture and court costs. (This was before the USDA Feb. 5 announcement.)
McGraw and Wisconsin have been tossed under the bus by USDA and now Clark County Circuit Court Judge Jon Counsell just tossed them under a convoy of galloping Amish steel-wheeled buggies.