Chiropractic Elk Grove

You’ve probably seen the “Sweet Surprise” television commercials posted by the American Corn Grower’s Association. They challenge people to actually report what’s specifically wrong with high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) and say: “It’s made from corn, doesn’t have artificial ingredients, has the same amount of calories as sugar and its fine in moderation.”

The implication that HFCS is a “natural product” doesn’t really say much. And “they,” as in “You know what they say about it…” should have you questioning a thing or two.

Both of these implications are simply not true. They actually have a lot to say about why high fructose corn syrup is bad for you, and HFCS is anything but natural.

“Natural”

The FDA has challenged claims that HFCS is a natural sweetener since companies such as Pepsi are now boasting of the “real sugar” content in their sodas and companies like Cadbury and Kraft have been called out for labeling their products as “natural” when they contain HFCS.

The controversy between whether high-fructose corn syrup or sugar is natural is just a smokescreen, a distraction that attempts to blur the negative health consequences associated with both of them.

The Sugar Association and the Corn Growers and Refiners associations have been able to indulge in this controversy because the FDA had never created a standard for what is or isn’t “natural.” Although the standard still hasn’t been set, the FDA has decided that the synthetic fixing agents used to produce HFCS does prompt the agency to “object to the use of the term ‘natural’ on a product containing HFCS.”

Weight Gain

There’s another controversy blooming between the HFCS and sugar industries, and again, it’s just another moot point. A Princeton University study has claimed that HFCS causes more weight gain than refined sugar does.

Industry-sponsored scientists have been quick to criticize the methodology of the research but scientist Miriam Bocarsly points out that the work was designed to demonstrate the long-term effects of HFCS. This is so important, she says, “because you don’t eat high fructose corn syrup once; you eat it every day, probably since you were a child.”

Corn in Everything

HFCS contains more fructose than table sugar, a dangerous difference. Author Bill Sanda reports that in 1980, the average American ingested 39 pounds of fructose and 84 pounds of sucrose. In 1994, Sanda writes, it was up to 66 pounds of sucrose and 83 pounds of fructose. Today, approximately 25% of our caloric intake comes from sugars, the larger portion being fructose.

The high amount of HFCS is behind this. It’s cheap, soluble, and easy to store and transport. It’s used in bread, beer, health foods, “natural” sodas, salad dressing etc. and is fed to livestock.

In fact, “King Corn” documentary-makers Curt Ellis and Ian Cheney found that analysis of their hair samples determined the carbon in their bodies has come from corn. They posit that the extreme prevalence of HFCS in so many foodstuffs means that it’s difficult to avoid: if you took everything containing corn (and soy) off average supermarket shelves, you’d be left with only enough food to fill a small vegetable stand.

Ellis and Cheney purchased an acre of Iowan field and followed their corn from planting to harvest. They found that half of a harvest normally goes into animal feed: 60% of cattle feed is corn even though it doesn’t sustain the animals. If they weren’t pushed to slaughter quickly, most cattle would die within 6 months. Another third of corn, Ellis and Cheney found, goes to ethanol and exports.

Farmers used to be subsidized to let their fields go unplanted and un-harvested in order to boost agricultural economy. Today, instead, they’re paid to overproduce and that’s why HFCS and other corn-based products dominate the food market.

Most corn used to make HFCS is genetically modified and genetically modified enzymes are used to process it.

The Fructose Factor

Before the 1970’s, most of the sugar Americans imbibed came from sucrose derived from sugar cane or beets. Sucrose is 50% glucose and 50% fructose. When the industry began to make sweeteners from corn, they were able to create HFCS with 50/50 ratios of fructose and glucose or as much as 80% fructose compared to 20% glucose.

Dr. Meira Fields, of the US Department of Agriculture, has been studying the effects of dietary sugar for many years. She and her colleagues found that when rats are fed sugar as a carbohydrate (especially if their diets are deficient in copper, as most American diets are) they developed diseases in their vital organs: liver, heart, pancreas and testes, and died before they fully matured.

Fields decided to determine whether it was glucose or fructose that was behind the diseases. The rats that were given glucose were unaffected while the fructose group developed anemia, high cholesterol and enlarged hearts. Testicular development was affected, and female rats, although less affected than their male counterparts, were unable to produce live young.

Fructose was once thought to be beneficial to diabetics because it is absorbed less quickly than glucose. In fact, scientists know today that fructose is more disease-promoting than glucose.

Dr Fields explains that “The medical profession thinks fructose is better for diabetics than sugar 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.”

The Dangers of High Fructose Corn Syrup

The fructose in naturally occurring sugars binds to other sugars. HFCS contains “free” or unbound fructose that robs the body of copper, chromium and magnesium.

HFCS is linked to high cholesterol and blood clots.

It also reduces the action of white blood cells, compromising the immune system.

Fructose browns foods seven times faster than glucose, a process called the Maillard reaction. As food browns, it loses protein and contributes to toxicity in the body. This, in turn, reduces the absorption and use of essential nutrients such as free amino acids and zinc. Some foods with the Maillard reaction are carcinogenic and mutate DNA.

Nutritionist Nancy Appleton says that fructose increases uric acid concentrations, a possible indicator of heart disease.

Fructose increases lactic acid levels in the blood.

Fructose interacts with oral contraceptives.

Fructose increases kidney calcium levels and excretion of calcium, iron, phosphorous, magnesium and zinc much more so than sucrose.

Fructose may affect collagen and contribute to faster aging.

Fructose is metabolized by the liver, not all body cells, so it has a different effect on insulin than table sugar does. It reduces the affinity of insulin for insulin receptors so that higher levels of insulin are needed to process glucose.

Fructose is converted to fat more readily than other sugar.

Fructose raises triglyceride levels.

The liver’s energy sources are compromised by conversion of fructose.

Fructose interferes with copper metabolism, hampering the production of elastin and collagen. Copper deficiencies can lead to anemia, bone density problems, heart and liver problems, blood vessel weakness, high cholesterol levels and an inability to control blood sugar.

HFCS is a deadly part of the American diet and the rivalry between corn and sugar producers is a moot one.

Elizabeth Abbot, author of Sugar: A Bittersweet History, says “The debate about which one is better for you is a false debate, because neither of them is good for you. By having cane sugar, you’re not doing yourself a great big favor. Not so much sugar is what we should be striving for.”

Sources

CNN (2008)

CNN (2010)

Weston A. Price Foundation (2004)

King Corn (2008)

Weston A. Price Foundation (2003)

Action Steps

1. Don’t miss the forest for the trees with all these advertisements and controversy. It’s simple: High Fructose Corn Syrup is not good for you! And neither is regular sugar!
2. Read the labels on any packaged food you buy to make sure it does not include HFCS. Or better yet, buy fresh, whole foods instead of packaged and processed.

It may actually cause it.

This might touch a nerve with you. Slathering on sunscreen before going out in the sun has become as routine as brushing our teeth. We are inundated with messages from the media that sunscreen is the most effective way to prevent skin cancer.

Melanoma accounts for more than 75% of all skin cancer deaths–making it the most dangerous. Yet more incidences of melanoma occur in indoor workers than outdoor workers who are in the sun the entire day. And a study published in the European Journal of Cancer tells us that there is a higher survival rate in skin cancer patients who previously received more sunlight.

Researchers at the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston have said that “there is no substantial evidence that sunscreen protects against any of the three forms of skin cancer.”

So what is really going on? And why will sunscreens not help you to prevent skin cancer?

Chemical Sunscreens

Your skin is an absorbent organ. Anything we apply to our skin skips the digestive tract filter and enters the cells and bloodstream directly. Eventually, it will make its way to the liver and be broken down, but not until it’s had negative effects on living tissue in your body.

This is why I recommend you never put anything on your skin that you wouldn’t eat.

The Environmental Working Group compiled a review of over 1,700 market brands of sunscreen products and found that 3 out of 5 are only minimally protective or contain potentially harmful ingredients. The leading brands, says EWG, are the worst offenders.

The compounds that the EWG gave the highest health hazard ratings include:

• octinoxate
• oxybenzone
• nano zinc oxide
• nano titanium oxide
• padimate O
• octisilate
• avobenzone
• octocrylene
• homosalate
• ensulizole
• methyl antrhanilate
• methoryl SX
• sulisobenzone
• cinoxate

Oxtinoxate is the most widely used ingredient in sunscreens. It sensitizes skin to the sun and disrupts hormonal balances and brain signaling.

In 2008, oxybenzone was used as a chemical safeguard against UVA radiation in 52% of the sunscreens the EWG looked at. That number dropped by 19% after oxybenzone was found to be an endocrine disruptor found in 97% of American urine samples by the Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC).

Oxybenzone interferes with the hormonal system and releases free radicals that may contribute to the development of skin cancer. 9% of oxybenzone applied to the skin is absorbed into cells and blood vessels. It has also been linked to low female birth weights.

Padimate O can cause allergic reactions, disrupt the endocrine system and damage DNA.

The lower health-hazard-rated ingredients in the list may sensitize skin, increase the absorption of other compounds, break down into unknown compounds, have low stability or release DNA-damaging free radicals. There is also concern about the stockpiling of these ingredients in the body.

Dermatologist and professor at the University of Melbourne Robin Marks, M.B., M.P.H., reminds us that “relying on synthetic chemicals to prevent cancer is laughable.”

Yet these dangerous chemicals are not the only reason I can’t encourage you strongly enough to discontinue using these sunblocks.

UVA & UVB Rays

Sunlight is made of 3 different wavelengths:

• Ultraviolet A (UVA)
• Ultraviolet B (UVB)
• Ultraviolet C (UVC)

Ultraviolet C waves don’t reach the earth. UVA rays are more prevalent in the early morning and late afternoon hours. UVB rays are stronger during the middle of the day.

In years past, the majority of sunscreens only offered protection from UVB rays. The FDA doesn’t require that sunscreen formulas contain UVA filters, so historically most of them haven’t done so. A sunscreen’s sun protection factor (SPF) only takes into account the measure of UVB rays blocked.

What you won’t hear from the media is that melanoma rates are rising as our exposure to sunlight and vitamin D levels are decreasing.

When you avoid the sun entirely, you are ignoring one of our biggest defenses against many diseases, including skin cancer–Vitamin D!

It’s the UVB rays (stronger in the middle of the day) that will actually give you your best source of Vitamin D. The UVA rays (more prevalent in the early morning and late afternoon) will penetrate your skin and lead to long-term aging.

So the vitamin D-producing UVB rays can be considered the “good guys,” and the skin-damaging UVA rays can be considered the “bad guys.”

This is one theory as to why melanoma rates are higher among indoor workers. The only exposure to sunlight they receive is through glass windows in their office, home or car. And only the damaging UVA rays will pass through the glass.

Add to this the fact that sunscreens will block out any UVB rays those people might have received, and you’re left with a major Vitamin D deficiency.

The great thing about the way God designed our bodies is that the very thing that can cause damage to our bodies (ultraviolet rays) also protects us from that very same damage. Dr. John J. Cannell tells us that when you are out in the sunshine, Vitamin D goes directly to your genes and helps prevent any sort of abnormality that could be caused by ultraviolet light.

That is why sunscreen can actually contribute to cancer. Aside from the high amounts of toxicity, sunscreen blocks Vitamin D production in your body and you are left without nature’s built in cancer-fighting protection.

Sources

Mayo Clinic Staff (2009)

Environmental Working Group (2009)

Dr. Joseph Mercola (2009)

National Center for Biotechnology Information (2008)

Dr. John J. Cannell (2009)

Francis Raymond, M.Sc (2002)

1. Throw out the toxic chemical sunscreens (and makeups and lotions) that are in your cabinet.
2. Start gradually spending more time in the sun each day. You might begin with 10-15 minutes a day–just enough so you turn a very light shade of pink. You still don’t want to burn!
3. If you are going to spend a long day at the beach and haven’t had a chance to naturally build up your skin’s defenses, choose a natural sunscreen. My favorite brands are Jason and Burt’s Bees.