A new study says by the year 2030 42 percent of Americans will be obese. Needless to say, the experts are calling for more regulations, so of which will be highly intrusive into people's private lives.
Yet nobody is calling for the one regulation that might actually help: a ban on high fructose corn syrup. Perhaps it was coincidence, but America's obesity epidemic began with the mass introduction of high fructose corn syrup into our diets and this product has been linked to obesity by numerous studies. Other studies don't find the link, but I am firmly convinced HFCS is the cause of much of our nation's obesity and other health problems.
Despite its name, high fructose corn syrup is a highly artificial product which has to be manufactured. Food processors like it for one reason: it's cheaper than sugar. They care not one whit about our health.
Why hasn't this dangerous product been banned? It's sort of like the case with cigarettes. It's virtually impossible to do double-blind experiments on humans, so even though there are correlations that can be seen there is not the type of absolute scientific proof that is needed to prove the product is dangerous.
Because the product is so dangerous manufactures have gotten permission to relabel it as "corn syrup" or "corn sugar" when it is included in a product in order to fool consumers. The government has been willing to go along with this because it promotes corn production. Of course it also promotes obesity, diabetes and a host of other diseases, but nobody cares about that.
We can work at the state level to solve this problem by asking our state legislators to tax products containing high fructose corn syrup in order to generate revenue. For example, don't tax all soda, just those with HFCS. If it discourages the use of this deadly product, all the better!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I would settle for having the federal government cease subsidizing it. This is a product of Nixon-era farm policy (creature of his first Ag secretary, Earl Butz, who got defenestrated from the Ag sec job for a pretty non-pc joke to a reporter) and really, really should be ended. Prior to the 70s, cane sugar was cheaper.
Of course, the other thing driving it is changes in processed food in the diet. Processed food doesn't taste as good. So sugar, salt, and lots of other stuff is added to try to solve that problem. Which circles me around to this: If the subsidy is ended, or its taxed, will we still see the stuff in food? In either event, I think we should start by ceasing to encourage it.
This is a government solution to fix a government problem. The rise in HFCS use began when sugar became more expensive. A market intrusion created this rise in prices. A tariff was put on imported sugar to help protect domestic sugar producers. They could only compete if imported sugar was more expensive. This is still on the books. As sugar prices rose, producers had to find alternatives to decrease costs. Their solution was HFCS.
Your proposal would ultimately create the same market interference. Producers will find other alternatives thats dietary effects are unproven (as HFCS's were in the 70's).
I agree that the decision to use HFCS was a monetary one brought on in large part by sugar tariffs. Food companies went for the cheapest sweetener. And let's face it, it's sort of like margarine, they didn't know how bad for your health it was as the time.
Vivastarkvegas, I support sugar tariffs or sugar subsidies. It is very important that the U.S. be able to supply at least a substantial portion of its sugar supply during wartime. We will be going to war at some point, since the politicians of both parties are working very hard to ensure that we do so. I just think we should find a way to discourage the use of HFCS.
My point is that if the Mississippi legislature would tax products with HFCS it could be the shot heard round the nation. I think other states would join us, and while it might not get rid of the stuff you would see less of it and the state would generate some revenue.
"We can work at the state level to solve this problem by asking our state legislators to tax products containing high fructose corn syrup in order to generate revenue. For example, don't tax all soda, just those with HFCS. If it discourages the use of this deadly product, all the better!" I like your idea. These companies doesn't really care for us. they just want to earn money that's why they use cheaper ingredients in their products. It will also help control consumers in buying foods and drinks with HFCS because the price will get high compared for the price today.
Post a Comment