So many people have sent me the link to the Corn Refiners’ Association website extolling the virtues of high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) that I thought you had best not miss it.   OK, so lots of people think HFCS is the new trans-fat.  It isn’t, but is insulting your intelligence an effective way to deal with that concern?  It’s hard to know what on the website is most offensive: the videos of dumb people being condescended to by friends who think they know better (and what’s up with the race and gender combinations?), the slogans (“HFCS has no artificial ingredients and is the same as table sugar”), the quiz questions (“which of the following sweeteners is considered a natural food ingredient: HFCS, honey, sugar, or all of the above”), or the take home message: “As registered dietitians recommend, keep enjoying the foods you love, just do it in moderation.”

Let’s agree that HFCS has an enormous public relations problem and is widely misunderstood.  Biochemically, it is about the same as table sugar (both have about the same amount of fructose and calories), but it is in everything and Americans eat a lot of it—nearly 60 pounds per capita in 2006, just a bit less than pounds of table sugar.   HFCS is not a poison, but eating less of any kind of sugar is a good idea these days and anything that promotes eating more is not. 

According to SourceWatch, this website is part of a $20 to $30 million campaign to make you stop thinking there is something evil about HFCS.  Are you convinced?  If the essence of public relations is to get attention – and there is no such thing as bad publicity – they got it with this website.

And thanks to my colleague Andy Bellatti who points out that another website run by the Corn Refiners provides a disclaimer: “Materials on this site are provided for informational purposes only, do not constitute legal advice and are not guaranteed to be complete, correct or up-to-date.”  Oh.  Maybe that explains it.

Sandja, who works for a PR agency, wants me to know about Embodi: “What if you could have all the health and longevity benefits of red wine without the negative effects of alcohol? In fact, what if it came in the form of a delicious and antioxidant-rich fruit drink that you could enjoy daily?

I love the idea that red wine has special health benefits, especially at a really nice dinner.  But here comes Sandbox Industries, a company devoted to dreaming up brilliant new business ideas, one of which is Embodi, a non-alcoholic soft drink fortified with polyphenol antioxidants like the ones in red wine.  The ads say “now you can have all the benefits of red wine without the headache.”   But I thought it was the alcohol in wine, beer, and spirits that was most strongly associated with reduction in heart disease risk.

Alas, Sandja did not send the Nutrition Facts labels and they are not on the website so what is in this drink is a mystery.  But that’s not its point.  It’s a business venture.

Update, September 4: After reading my post, the Embodi PR folks forwarded their well hidden Nutrition Facts label–90 calories per bottle from 22 grams of sugars.  The ingredients?  “Water, organic fruit juice blend (organic white grape, organic red grape, organic apple,  organic pomegranate, and organic pear juices from concentrate), grape pomace extract, and natural flavors.”  No wonder they don’t put this information on the website.

 Update, September 6: Oops.  The PR folks wrote again and I stand partially corrected.  The Nutrition Facts label is indeed on the website.  You have to click on the bottle label and up it pops.   But the ingredient list part of the label is not (or if it is, I can’t find it).  Sandja writes: “There is complete transparency of ingredients and nutrition facts.  The grape pomace extract is what holds the health benefits.”  I’d say partially transparent.”  And the pomace extract is second-to-last on the ingredient list so there can’t be much of it.  

Every now and then the CDC surveys the use of “competitive” (translation: junk) foods in public schools.  The latest survey reports little change from 2004.  About 80% of public schools let kids buy snacks or sodas during school hours, although what those items are varies widely.  About 70% of schools sell sports drinks but only about 30% sell fruits and vegetables.   Kids can buy bottled water in about 80% of public schools, which makes me wonder whatever happened to free water from drinking fountains.  I’ve been in schools that do not sell competitive foods at all.  Something to consider?

The American Dietetic Association says plastic water bottles are OK to use and there is no need to worry about them.  Aren’t you relieved?  No conflicts of interest are noted in this report, but I hear rumors, as yet unconfirmed.

Sometimes I think we live in an alternate reality.  The U.S. Court of Appeals (District of Columbia Circuit) has now overturned a lower court ruling that allowed Creekstone Farms Premium Beef to conduct its own tests for mad cow disease (bovine spongiform encephalopathy or BSE).  Imagine!  Creekstone wanted to demonstrate that its beef was free of BSE so it could be sold in Asia.  But that would imply that other meat was not safe and force other companies to test as well.  Apparently, the USDA does not think that would be fair and the Appeals Court agrees.  What about fairness to beef eaters?  About that, the court had nothing to say.

I am at the huge Slow Food Nation event in San Francisco and took part last night in the reading of the Slow Food Declaration for a Healthy Food and Agriculture Policy, now collecting signatures online as well as open for discussion.  Raj Patel, author of Stuffed and Starved, has some especially interesting comments on his worth-reading blog on the event.

According to Food Chemical News, the FDA has just released a report exonerating bisphenol A from causing harm from the small amount that leaches from plastic bottles into what you and babies are drinking. I can’t find the report online but I will be most interested to see what it says. I hope the science is sound and the FDA’s assessment makes sense.

And here is the actual FDA report, so you can decide for yourself.

The New York Times (August 23) reports a third death in Canada linked to cold cuts contaminated with Listeria, along with another 17 or more cases of illness. Nothing unusual here except for this statement: “The outbreak came as Canada’s Conservative government was considering a controversial plan to transfer all or some of the responsibility for food inspection to the food industry.” I hope they are kidding. Fox guarding chickens, anyone?

As of today, it’s 12 deaths and 26 confirmed cases with a bunch more under investigation.