In A Victory For Consumers, FDA Turns Thumbs Down On “Corn Sugar” Alias For HFCS

Thanks to Linda Bonvie, blogger for the Citizens for Health project Food Identity Theft, for the following post.

For the past several months, we here at Food Identity Theft have urged our readers to submit their comments to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration on the Corn Refiners Association’s petition to allow the name “high fructose corn syrup” to be officially changed to “corn sugar.”

The last word on this hot-button issue has just come down from the FDA itself.  And it’s “no.”

The CRA will now have to quit referring to high fructose corn syrup, or HFCS, as “corn sugar,” which it has been doing these days at every opportunity, apparently on the assumption that its 2010 petition would ultimately be granted despite the overwhelming opposition of consumers.

But the FDA had other ideas – the main one being that sugar is defined as “a solid, dried, and crystallized food; whereas syrup is an aqueous solution or liquid food.” (Duh!!!) Or so the agency informed CRA President Audrae Erickson in a letter dated May 30 (Wednesday) and signed by Michael M., Landa, director of the FDA’s Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, which also states that “…your petition does not provide sufficient grounds for the agency to authorize ‘corn sugar’ as an alternate common or usual name for HFCS.”

While the Corn Refiners Association had ignored a letter last year from the FDA that asked them to stop using “corn sugar” as a synonym for HFCS, which Erickson did a total of 10 times in two TV interviews last week, the official denial of the name change should now make such substitution verboten in the CRA’s commercials and communications. (In fact, one can’t help but wonder whether her blatant and repeated flouting of the FDA’s directive finally spurred the agency to act on this long-standing petition).

The FDA’s rejection of the proposed name change also quite clearly reaffirms “corn sugar” as a “standard of identity” for dextrose (an ingredient with NO fructose) and declines the CRA’s request that “corn sugar” be eliminated as an alternate name for dextrose.

“We are not persuaded by the arguments in the petition that consumers do not associate ‘corn sugar’ with dextrose,” notes the letter. “The term ‘corn sugar’ has been used to describe dextrose for over 30 years.”  It further points out that “’corn sugar’ has been known to be an allowed ingredient for individuals with hereditary fructose intolerance or fructose malabsorption, who have been advised to avoid ingredients that contain fructose. Because such individuals have associated ‘corn sugar’ to be an acceptable ingredient to their health when ‘high fructose corn syrup’ is not, changing the name for HFCS to ‘corn sugar’ could put these individuals at risk and pose a public health concern.”

The latter concern has been raised in a number of the comments submitted to the FDA by members of the public, which ran against the petition 100 to 1. Most, however, expressed indignation over the idea that an industry group would try to attach a new, innocuous-sounding identity to an increasingly unpopular ingredient that so many consumers have been going out of their way to avoid in an attempt to make it appear to be something it’s not.

So confident were the corn refiners in the pending approval of their petition, that in a press release issued last week they said, “Transitional co-labeling, such as ‘Corn Sugar (High Fructose Corn Syrup),’ and CRA’s education campaign will ensure consumers are well informed about the name change.”

While the FDA may well have denied the petition of its own volition, one can’t help but credit the growing public outcry over this deliberate attempt to confuse consumers (which, perversely, has been presented as an attempt to eliminate consumer “confusion”) with having set the stage for this major victory over attempted food identity theft.

To read the entire FDA response to the CRA’s petition, click here.

Related Posts

Comments (9)

It is absurd to claim that high fructose corn syrup is corn sugar. It is processed differently in the body, and the only reason why they want to call it “corn sugar” is to take focus off of the negative and unknown effects that it has on the body.

It’s just a cheap way to sweeten, and yet our bodies were not made to process this much corn products.

Will this put an end to the “sugar is sugar, your body can’t tell the difference” false advertising? — Your body clearly can tell the difference, that’s how HFCS leads to non-alcoholic fatty liver disease!

So when is the FDA going to make them pull the ads claiming, “sugar is sugar…all sugars are alike”? We all know that this is a lie – so when will the FDA learn this?

Thank you so much for sharing. I had no idea this was going on! What an eye opener!

Good to see the FDA do the right thing.

Here’s a petition to one of the largest multinational food companies, (and major campaigners against Prop 37), Rich’s Food Corporation, because they use high fructose corn syrup/GMOs that they label as “corn sugar” in their foods such as breads and deli dishes in nearly every in-store bakery/deli and restaurants in the US, Canada and are worldwide, marketed under the store name that uses them (if you’re not familiar with Rich’s)! Many families on the go don’t realize that HFCS/GMOs lurk in these types of foods and they unknowingly feed them to their kids! if you want to take some action to not let big corporations basically poison us to get “Rich”, please sign and share! If the link isn’t activated in this comment, simply copy and paste into your browser.

It’s about time, we’re gathering in numbers to make the change!

do it now!!

Leave a comment

5 + 4 =