Sugar and HFCS are pretty much the same and there’s no demonstrated harm done by HFCS.

So like the poster who was talking about coke made without HFCS is saying, a bunch of processed, non healthy food products (like coke) are made with “real” sugar and not hfcs.

I get the idea that it’s supposed to be about not eating processed foods, but if you’re going to be serious about it, just looking for HFCS is not going to be enough to change your life, especially if you just replaces it with sugar.

The number one rule is: If you want your eating habits to change, and you want to lose weight, you must cut out the bad stuff and NOT replace it with something else.

Calorie restriction is the fastest path to weight loss, and you know that you’re being healthy about it by talking to a doctor or nutritionist.

As a chemistry, biology, and health teacher, I think that this website (sweetsurprise.com) is deceiving the American public.
In no place did you mention that the molecular make-up of HFCS is not the same as sugar (you forgot to mention hydrogen atoms)–that the cells have only recently been introduced to this “chemical” as food. And what about the revealing “and more research is needed,” addition to most of the research. Appears much like the tobacco industry claims of years past.
As I tell my students, the American people should boycott corn (corn in every way–even corn-on-the-cob) because of those TV advertisements. Shame on you!
By the way, those advertisements are hurting your health attack on the American people. You wouldn’t believe how many people are really enraged over those stupid advertisements.
Liz at Windale Studios
But thanks for an excellent teaching tool–I’ve used such advertisements and the use of HFCS in multi-curriculum teaching strategies combining science, government, economics, history, and health. I also draw attention to research statistics and the comparison of “who” is supporting such research–and the resulting conclusions.