Dr. Mercola July 08 2008 51,296 views
Vote against hfcs by checking all labels and not buying anything that has corn sweetener in it. that's the best way to fight them.
And tell everyone who mocks you to make you their life insurance beneficiary!
Folks, there's one VERY big thing not being spoken of here - namely, that it is the fault of the U.S. government that HFCS is even an issue.
Why?
Because of sugar subsidies!
Americans pay roughly DOUBLE the normal amount for sugar than the rest of the world due to these subsidies. In response to the high cost of sugar, the food industry created HFCS, a kind of super-carbohydrate that is actually quite expensive to produce, but still at least 20% cheaper than our inflated sugar prices.
This is why "Aaltrude" above said he/she isn't seeing much HFCS in New Zealand. You'll typically only find it in American products as most other countries pay FAR less for sugar than Americans. So once again, the few are benefiting at the expense of the many.
Thank you Big Brother!
Taxes, MikeM, not subsidies, but you've got the general idea.
"THE POWER TO TAX, IS THE POWER TO DESTROY."
Scroll back up to Aaltrude for a moment...
C Ed Wright...I'm afraid you're wrong. To be specific, it is an issue of subsidies and tariffs specific to the U.S. and Canada. Read more here: en.wikipedia.org/.../HFCS or do a google search for more information. I am very well versed on this subject and the issue of agricultural subsidies.
MikeM, yes, there are subsidies to corn farmers, but for the crop not the syrup. And I read that link below, as you'll see. My point is if the syrup was taxed -- tarriffs are taxes -- like the sugar, or higher, we'd get switched back to sugar in a heartbeat. And we'll still need the corn syrup, or some suitable substitute, to ferment into ethanol motor fuel. ...Eventually.
(I'm well aware of the ethanol motor fuel controversy but I believe changeover is necessary & inevitable, with certain changes regarding production, etc., and I'm not interested in sidetracking the issue at hand with that controversy.)
I keep hoping -- yes, I know it's in vain -- that Congress will suddenly realize that farm subsidies are specifically & blatantly un-Constitutional hence illegal, and repeal them. Problem is, that's how they pay each other!!!
As always....FOLLOW THE MONEY!!!
'nuf said.
so hard to avoid this crap, organic stuff hard to find and expensive. It's sad when it is almost impossible to afford to eat healthy.
It's another example of Bernaysian damage control.
For over a year I was trying to lose weight and was drinking large bottles of Ocean Spray DIET pink grapefruit juice. Then it occurred to me to read the label and found it contained high fructose corn syrup. I have insulin resistance now and my cholesterol is up. How can they market anything as a DIET drink when it contains this substance.?
tanguera, You have to read the labels of everything you buy. Even then the garbage could be hidden in the "natural flavorings" listed at the bottom. I avoid anything that has that listed as an ingredient.
I have looked at some products on the shelves in New Zealand and we don't appear to have much HFCS in products here - YET. Here's hoping it stays that way.
Aaltrude, the HFCS plague started when we taxed sugar. You don't see HFCS in Coke & Pepsi, for example, bottled in any other countries, just plain ol' SUGAR. We need to tax HFCS higher than sugar now, and then we'll see a switch back. Will it happen? When GMO pigs fly, probably (they'd have to be GMO, right...?)
Anyway, yes, it will stay that way unless & until you tax sugar in New Zealand.
C Ed Wright...the answer is NOT more taxation, but less!
The reason for the sugar issue is not some type of "sugar tax". Instead, it is due directly to subsidies of sugar growers and tariffs on the importation of sugar.
Here's how it works (this comes from a published editorial I wrote for The Free Market News Network back in 2005):
"Well, it should come as no surprise to learn that the sugar industry is a commodity machine that is largely propped up (i.e. subsidized) by the U.S. government, specifically by the USDA's Commodity Credit Corporation, which loans money to sugar-cane processors at a specific rate per pound of sugar. Should the price of sugar fall, these processors can forfeit their sugar in lieu of repaying the loans. The government, however, manipulates the market to maintain prices to avoid such forfeiture (after all, they want their money with interest, not crates of sugar cane or beats landing on the steps of Capital Hill). This manipulation includes creating pre-set quotas for importation of foreign (i.e. cheaper) sugar, thereby maintaining average sugar prices in the U.S. at much higher rates than in most other parts of the world.
Taking this a step further, it's a fairly well-known fact that the ties between the USDA and agricultural producers are exceeded only by those of the Department of Defense and its defense contractors. Pretty hefty ties, indeed!"
=====================
Aaltrude:
One reason you probably don't see much corn syrup is that you probably aren't swimming in corn. According to the USDA, last year the US grew 42% of the entire world's corn (producing twice as much as China). I don't know how much corn New Zealand grew last year, but I imagine HCFS is less accessible to food producers there than in the US.
Everyone:
Have you seen the documentary "King Corn"? It's an interesting and funny look at US corn production and the factors that make it what it is today. (Though today, much of the corn crop has been damaged by floods, etc; the surplus in bio-tech, HFCS-bound corn showed in the movie was a few seasons ago).
TARIFF
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:
A tariff is a tax on goods upon importation. When a ship arrives in port a customs officer inspects the contents and charges a tax according to the tariff formula. Since the goods cannot be landed until the tax is paid, it is the easiest tax to collect, and the cost of collection is small. Traders seeking to evade tariffs are known as smugglers.
Tariffs may be of various kinds:
An ad valorem tariff is a set percentage of the value of the good that is being imported. Sometimes these are problematic as when the international price of a good falls, so does the tariff, and domestic industries become more vulnerable to competition. Conversely when the price of a good rises on the international market so does the tariff, but a country is often less interested in protection when the price is higher. They also face the problem of inappropriate transfer pricing where a company declares a value for goods being traded which differs from the market price, aimed at reducing overall taxes due.
A specific tariff is a tariff of a specific amount of money that does not vary with the price of the good. These tariffs may be harder to decide the amount at which to set them, and they may need to be updated due to changes in the market or inflation.
A "revenue tariff" is a set of rates designed primarily to raise money for the government. A tariff on coffee imports, for example (imposed by countries where coffee cannot be grown) raises a steady flow of revenue.
A "protective tariff" is intended to artificially inflate prices of imports and "protect" domestic industries from foreign competition (see also effective rate of protection). For example, a 50% tax on an imported machine raises the price from $100 to $150. Without a tariff, the local manufacturers could only charge $100 for the same machine; now they can charge $149 and make the sale.
A "prohibitive tariff" is one so high that no one imports any of that item.
"C Ed Wright...the answer is NOT more taxation, but less!"
The answer...? I'm no longer sure what the question was.
What I said was, the tax (tariff = "impost") on sugar, coming into this country, raises the price of that sugar so high that expensive-to-produce HFCS becomes cheaper than sugar; and that if HFCS was taxed ("excise") enough, then sugar would become cheaper than HFCS and all the Soilent Green manufacturers would go back to using sugar in all the foodah.
That would be a good thing. Right? We're all in agreement that regular ol' plain white sugar would be BETTER than HFCS, right? Maybe only a LITTLE better, but still better, right? Sure, we could reduce or eliminate the present sugar tariff and drop the price of sugar below that of HFCS and the switch would still happen.
BUT ... If we tax both, even higher than now, "Cheap Carbs" wouldn't be so cheap, tempting all but the wealthiest folks to fill up on the cheap stuff. Soda wouldn't be cheaper than milk. Twinkies might even cost more than hotdogs. ...Anybody see where I'm going with this yet?
Personally, I'd like to also see a heavy impost and equal excise on flour of all kinds. Moderate ones on potatoes and rice. Before you think I'm some kind of tax-and-spend Liberal, however, the idea is not just to raise taxes -- that's going to happen anyway -- but to raise the cost of cheap carbs, especially foodah, relative to quality nutrition AND find replacement taxes for the income tax, whose days are numbered. (No, I don't know the actual number.)
What would wake up all the sheeple to the fallacy of the income tax would be to eliminate withholding; everyone would write a check on or before April 15th. Withholding lulls the sleep-deprived ( I'm being VERY kind, here) into feeling like they're not really paying, just getting a little gift called a "refund." Then, when the "sleep-deprived suddenly got their April wakeup call, they'd start screaming hard questions with a hard answer.
I have know about HFCS for some time. Which is why I drink beer. Home brew is the best.
Not quite sure that's the best solution, LOL. (Bu-u-u-r-r-P...) "But, ociffer, I only had one ... six pack ... just now... What line...?"
Try squeezing the juice of a small lemon (half that of a large one) into a glass of icewater, for a refreshing cold drink. Then you only need to worry about water quality.
Stick to unpasteurized, unfiltered beer, preferably with yeast that's still alive (such as a Hefeweizen). It's loaded with vitamins, minerals, antioxidants, and enzymes.
Okay, guys, brew me some "dry" beer like Coors & Michelob made for a few months several years ago -- I hate to get Bitter Beer Face! LOL