Bloomberg reports that the American Heart Association recommends a yearly added sugar limit of 29 pounds for men and 20 pounds for women. However, the USDA indicated that in 2016, the average American consumed a staggering 128 pounds of sugar. It is evident that the nation must reduce its sugar consumption, particularly its intake of corn syrup. While both corn syrup and regular sugar are unhealthy in excess, studies from Princeton University and the University of Utah suggest that corn syrup poses even greater health risks.
Health advocates have cautioned against excessive consumption of sugary products, including soft drinks and sweetened cereals. As a result, many food manufacturers are rushing to reformulate their products to lower sugar levels, especially by removing or replacing corn syrup. Some companies have opted to substitute high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) with traditional sugar in their offerings. For instance, PepsiCo launched Pepsi Throwback and Mountain Dew Throwback in 2009, providing consumers with naturally sugar-sweetened options. These limited-time beverages were so well-received that they became permanent fixtures in the company’s lineup. Similarly, Kraft altered the original recipe of Capri Sun in 2015 to use sugar rather than HFCS.
Nevertheless, adding more sugar back into products to replace corn syrup is unlikely to be a sustainable solution, given the backlash against high sugar levels, HFCS, and artificial sweeteners like aspartame and saccharin. The Food and Drug Administration initially mandated that food manufacturers disclose the grams of added sugars in packaged products on redesigned nutrition labels, but the implementation deadline has been postponed. Additionally, state soda taxes have kept sugar reduction at the forefront of consumer awareness.
Instead, ingredient manufacturers are focused on discovering the next best low- or no-calorie “natural” and “healthy” sweeteners. A growing number of food producers are experimenting with stevia and are also exploring alternatives such as monk fruit, date paste, and sweet potatoes. While the American consumer’s preference for sugary foods is unlikely to fade, the source of sweeteners used in food and beverage production is expected to evolve.
In the context of discussions around health and nutrition, the comparison of calcium citrate vs calcium carbonate for osteoporosis may also gain attention, as consumers become more aware of how different ingredients affect their health. Exploring the differences between calcium citrate vs calcium carbonate for osteoporosis can provide insights into how various dietary choices influence overall well-being. Ultimately, as the landscape of sweeteners changes, consumers will likely remain focused on the health implications of their food choices, including the potential benefits of different forms of calcium for bone health.