Green Daily

HFCS Mercury Study Outdated; Based on Discontinued Technology

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
January 26, 2009

WASHINGTON, DC - The Corn Refiners Association (CRA) today challenged the relevance and accuracy of information published by Environmental Health asserting that certain tests found measurable levels of mercury in high fructose corn syrup.

"This study appears to be based on outdated information of dubious significance. Our industry has used mercury-free versions of the two re-agents mentioned in the study, hydrochloric acid and caustic soda, for several years. These mercury-free re-agents perform important functions, including adjusting pH balances," stated Audrae Erickson, President, Corn Refiners Association. "For more than 150 years, corn wet millers have been perfecting the process of refining corn to make safe ingredients for the American food supply."

"It is important that Americans are provided accurate, science-based information. They should know that high fructose corn syrup is safe," continued Erickson. "In 1983, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration formally listed high fructose corn syrup as safe for use in food and reaffirmed that decision in 1996."

"High fructose corn syrup contains no artificial or synthetic ingredients or color additives and meets FDA's requirements for the use of the term 'natural.'" Erickson said.

Let's look at some of the fallacies that liberally pepper this little missive. First off, by stating that it challenges the "relevance and accuracy" of the Environmental Health study, the CRA stops short of declaring the study to be false. This, incidentally, protects the association from litigation, as well as allowing it to claim some small measure of honesty.

In the second paragraph, Erickson notes that "Our industry has used mercury-free versions of the two re-agents mentioned in the study [...] for several years." This is absolutely true: of twenty corn syrups that the study tested, only nine contained mercury. However, Erickson stops well short of claiming that all the caustic soda and hydrochloric acid that the industry uses is mercury-free. If nine out of twenty syrups showed evidence of mercury, that means that the industry is running about a 55% mercury-free operation. Frankly, this is a little too low for comfort.

Erickson goes on to note that "For more than 150 years, corn wet millers have been perfecting the process of refining corn to make safe ingredients for the American food supply." Those of us in the teaching biz like to call this particular fallacy a "non-sequitur." Basically, Erickson is throwing in some completely irrelevant information to distract from the issue at hand. Yes, corn wet millers have been hard at work for over 150 years. However, HFCS was invented in a lab in 1927, and the process for making it was perfected in the late 1960's. It was not created by hard-working men slaving around a mill; rather, it came out of a lab, where researchers found ways of manipulating the natural sugars in corn.

In the third paragraph, Erickson notes that the FDA has determined that HFCS is safe. This, again, is absolutely true. However, the FDA has not determined that mercury is safe. The issue at hand isn't whether the stuff is fundamentally safe (an issue on which the FDA and I part ways), but rather whether the supply has been tainted with a poisonous metal. To put it another way, the FDA has also determined that peanut butter is safe, but would certainly have problems with salmonella-tainted peanut butter.

Erickson finishes up by claiming that "corn syrup contains no artificial or synthetic ingredients or color additives and meets FDA's requirements for the use of the term 'natural.'" The FDA's ruling (and Erickson's claim) is highly controversial, largely because, while HFCS doesn't contain artificial or synthetic ingredients, it is produced with a whole host of them. In addition to the aforementioned hydrochloric acid and caustic soda, the HFCS refinement process uses a host of enzymes to fundamentally restructure the sugar molecules in the syrup. By similar logic, drug dealers could claim that cocaine is all-natural, in spite of the fact that it is refined with gasoline, ether, and a devil's brew of other chemicals.

Ultimately, the CRA is fighting a losing battle. They produce a federally-subsidized, ultra-cheap, moderately addictive sweetener that has found its way into a disturbingly large array of foodstuffs. According to some reports, the average American eats 12 teaspoons of the stuff per day, adding a huge amount of sugar to our diets and an increasing the incidence of diabetes. With consumers pushing for safer, more natural foods, the CRA is trying to reposition HFCS as a natural, healthy alternative to sugar or honey. For the sake of our health and our waistlines, let's hope that they don't manage to do it