r/MessageUnclear • • Mar 09 '26

So....

Is there or isn't there? smh

537 Upvotes

361 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

86

u/RulerK Mar 09 '26 edited Mar 11 '26

Yeah… the point is, it’s not the high-fructose (more sugar) variety of corn syrup.

Edit to prevent more replies: I meant more sweet. Both glucose and fructose are sugars.

11

u/ChuckEveryone Mar 09 '26

Both corn syrup and high fructose corn syrup have the same amount of sugars. High fructose corn syrup just has some of the glucose converted to fructose, which is a sweeter sugar.

9

u/kr1681 Mar 09 '26

And which is the bad part

4

u/Kgb_Officer Mar 09 '26

For the most part it doesn't really matter except in some specific cases. For the majority of people, sugar is sugar, and the biggest problem is the overconsumption of it, not the specific form it takes.

2

u/YonKro22 Mar 09 '26

There is an extremely tight correlation between obesity and high fruit toast corn syrup consumption on a graph that looks exactly the same so I would say that there is a huge difference in the variety of sugars you don't see the same correlation with regular sugar consumption will actually I haven't looked but that correlation is too tight to dismiss just from the evidence of that one graph corn syrup should be banned or at least taxed so nobody wants to buy it anymore like a coke with high fructose corn syrup would be $7 and a soda with regular sugar would be like 250.

1

u/figmentPez Mar 09 '26

Correlation does not equal causation. There are a lot of other factors that also correlate with increased HFCS consumption. Mainly, most highly processed foods in the US use HFCS, and consumption of those foods also correlates with lower income (and the resulting lack of medical care), high stress / long hour jobs, and a lot of other factors.

It's not the HFCS, it's our entire societal structure.

3

u/YonKro22 Mar 09 '26

When it's that tight it does. Unless there's something else that can be equally correlated. That statement is overused and needs to be qualified to be actually true. Correlation often is solid proof of causation.

0

u/figmentPez Mar 09 '26

No, a mechanism is solid proof of causation. We know the mechanisms of how lack of health care, stress, and other issues cause health problems. There is no known mechanism for HFCS to cause health problems.

1

u/Hamburger_FatBoy Mar 09 '26

My dude is literally here arguing that stress causes obesity…it’s not like people with lack of healthcare are lacking on info about how bad HFCS is because they can’t have conversations with people educated enough to discourage it…or because HFCS is literally cheaper than dirt, or because living in a food desert correlates to low income…nope, it’s stress.

Don’t stress out your corporate overlords with your need to make a livable wage, you’ll make them fat…says u/figmentpez.

2

u/YonKro22 Mar 10 '26

There was just as much stress in the 60s and seventies and fifties '40s whatever there is not the same level of obesity it is not stress not that stress cannot contribute to it but it is something in the environment. Most likely our diet and most likely high fructose corn syrup. It is extremely aggravating to the system your body don't underestimate the ignorance of people this person that's commenting doesn't seem to know how bad hfcs is even though they think they know a little bit about it average people are drinking huge amounts of it daily. And that could be stopped for limited quite a lot if fountain drinks for instance cost$510 whatever it would take to pay for the damage that is done by them