Consumption of High Fructose Corn Syrup Not Affected Much by High Corn Prices

It’s no secret that high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) has taken over America. It’s in nearly all processed foods. When my husband and I set out to eliminate high fructose corn syrup from our diet last year, we were surprised to see how many things it was hidden in. Luckily for those of us who want to avoid it, it’s mostly in stuff that’s not good for you anyway: cereals, condiments, juices and soft drinks. Consumers are getting more aware of the fact that HFCS is linked to obesity and diabetes, and recently asked Hansen’s ‘Natural’ Soda (emphasis mine) to stop using it. Despite more people trying to avoid it, though, HFCS isn’t going away, even though recent increases in the price of corn have lowered sales slightly.

From The Ethicurean:

Hansen’s says that 30% of consumer calls it received were asking for a change from HFCS to a more natural sugar. “Consumers asked and we listened,” is how one executive put it. This response is a refreshing change from the typical corporate doublespeak along the lines of “public pressure had nothing to do with our decision, it was planned long ago.”

Of course, cane sugar production is not without its flaws — workers are mistreated, fertilizer overapplied, ecosystems damaged, and so on, as an episode of the Deconstructing Dinner radio program explains in detail.

However, Hansen’s switch, along with record high corn prices, has me wondering if consumption rates of HFCS are changing, and if so, how fast.

There is a slight decrease of a few percentage points per year. Between 2006 and 2007 — when there was a 12% price increase — consumption dropped only 3.4%. Unfortunately, data for 2008 are not available, so we can’t tell whether the latest price rise is having similar effects on consumption.

The most likely reason for the relatively small decrease in consumption is that HFCS makes up only a tiny portion of the retail cost of even the most HFCS-intensive product like soft drinks. The February 2008 issue of Amber Waves estimates that a 2-liter bottle of soda contains 15 ounces of corn in the form of HFCS. At the 2007 average price of $3.40 per bushel (about 56 pounds of shelled corn), the value of corn in the soda is only 5.7 cents. So a 20% rise in the price of corn results in a raw material cost increase of only about a penny, an increase that the giant soft drink companies or fast-food chains can certainly absorb for a little while.

Unfortunately, American companies are hooked on HFCS, and that’s probably not going to change anytime soon even if prices continue to rise. Let’s say, for the sake of argument, that people did begin to switch to sugar instead of using HFCS: unfortunately, that opens a whole other can of worms, since Big Sugar has its own problems. Weaning ourselves off of the use of so many sweeteners would be a great step, but in sugar-crazed America, that just ain’t gonna happen.

You can see all of The Ethicurean’s charts and data here.

Link [The Ethicurean]
Photo credit: Flickr user graham

Related Posts:

Excuse Me, I’m Going to Need This to Run My Car, Or The Insanity of Food Based Biofuels
Green Meme Killers: Ethanol Is Causing The Food Crisis
Food Manufacturers Ban Food Dyes in Europe to Protect Kids, but Not in the U.S.
The Three Ingredient Vegan Junk Food You’ve Probably Been Eating for Years
Sean Hannity Dips Into the Desperation Well And Tries To Pin High Food Prices on Al Gore to Great Hillarity