Good Sugars, Bad Sugars From Hearsay & Hype to Sound Science - Florida Dietetic Association Webinar

Susan Mitchell, PhD, RD, LD/N, FAND Founder and President

Practicalories Inc.

BAD SUGARS, GOOD SUGARS: FROM HEARSAY & HYPE

TO SOUND SCIENCE

Florida Dietetic Association Webinar June 27, 2013

Twenty years in the media communicating evidence-based health messages

Featured Contributor for Growing Bolder Media: Growing Bolder TV and Radio, Growing Bolder Magazine & Growing Bolder.com

Continuing education for health professionals

Member of the Corn Refiners Association RD Network

SUSAN MITCHELL, PHD, RD/LDN, FAND MEDIA CONSULTANT: NUTRITION & HEALTH

2

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Welcome and thank you for sharing your time with me today.

Objectives

1. Understand the similarities and difference of caloric sweeteners.

2. Describe the metabolism, endocrine effects and health implications of consuming fructose, sucrose, and high fructose corn syrup (HFCS).

3. Identify factors that contribute to misinformation and confusion about nutritive sweeteners.

4. Distinguish fact from fiction, often conveyed in the media as hype, surrounding nutritive sweeteners.

5. Apply this knowledge when educating your patients/clients.

3

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Here are today’s objectives and by the end of the webinar, you will be able to: Understand the similarities and difference of caloric sweeteners.� Describe the metabolism, endocrine effects and health implications of consuming fructose, sucrose, and high fructose corn syrup (HFCS). Identify factors that contribute to misinformation and confusion about nutritive sweeteners.� Distinguish fact from fiction, often conveyed in the media as hype, surrounding nutritive sweeteners.� Apply this knowledge when educating your patients/clients. Next Slide

Caloric Sweeteners Comparison

4

Sweetener Processing Methods are Similar

Sweetener Sucrose HFCS Honey Fruit Juice Concentrate

Agave Nectar

Source Cane, Beet Corn Bees Pear, Grape, Apple

Cactus

Physical/botanical extraction X X X X X Hydrolysis X X X Filtration X X X X X Enzyme treatment X X X X Concentration X X X X X Color/flavor/aroma removal X X X X

5

6

Absorption Differences of Sweeteners Disappear in the Bloodstream

6

Presenter

Presentation Notes

High [fructose] ≠ HFCS Dietary incidence of pure fructose is negligible High dose is toxic, not physiologic Fructose metabolism ≠ fructose + glucose HFCS replaced sucrose, not glucose; �best model: HFCS vs sucrose Another misconception is that there are significant differences in the absorption and metabolism of HFCS and sugar John S. White9/12/2011 HFCS and sugar are similar in composition: about half fructose and half glucose True that the specifics of absorption are different between HFCS and sugar, but once the absorbed sugars reach the bloodstream, these difference disappear This further predicts that HFCS and sugar will be metabolized the same by the body

7

Absorption Differences Disappear in the Bloodstream

Deliver the same sugars

At the same ratios

To the same tissues

Within the same time frame

To the same metabolic pathways

Once sucrose and HFCS are absorbed into the bloodstream, they:

Source: White. 2008. Straight talk about high-fructose corn syrup: what it is and what it ain't. AJCN 88(suppl):1716S–21S. 7

Presenter

Presentation Notes

John S. White9/12/2011 add Source: JS White, AJCN, 2008;88(suppl):1716S–21S. Sweetener reformulation is a metabolic wash:�no nutritional improvement … misleads consumers

Storage/Transportation of Fructose

Source: Tappy. 2010. Metabolic Effects of Fructose and the Worldwide Increase in Obesity. Physiol Rev. 90:23-46. 8

Side-By-Side Comparison of Common Sweeteners After Absorption*

Sugar Honey HFCS 55 | 42

Is it natural? Yes Yes Yes

How sweet is it? Table sugar – standard 100% 100% | 92%

Calories per gram 4 4 4

Composition*

50% Glucose 50% Fructose

51% Glucose 49% Fructose

45% Glucose 58% Glucose 55% Fructose 42% Fructose

How is it used?

Sweetener Preservative

Flavor enhancer Provides texture Moisture retainer





Benefits Maintains flavor heated

Creaming agent Gives cookie crunch

Lends floral note Contains antioxidant

Enhance fruit/spice flavor Extends freshness

Retains moisture in high fiber foods

Soft moist cookies

Made From… Sugar cane and sugar beets Nectar from flowers and trees Yellow dent corn

*Total sugars after absorption = Ʃ hydrolyzed (sucrose + glucose + fructose + glucose polymers) 9

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Great resource slide to help you remember and compare the sweeteners. Notice that sugar, honey and HFCS 55 have the same sweetness level and the same calories per gram. The compositions of glucose and fructose are very close as we’ve talked about…very similar to the 50-50 glucose/fructose of sugar. The main three are also used in the same ways and have benefits beyond just as sweeteners. CLEAR UP THE MYTHS HFCS is high in fructose: 55/45 MOST COMMONLY USED IN FOOD HFCS is metabolized differently than other sweeteners like white sugar or honey : JUST LOOKED AT MELANSON’S RESULTS ON BLOOD PARAMETER EFFECTS AND BIOCHEMISTRY� HFCS is used in foods just to make them sweet HFCS blocks my body’s ability to know when it is full MELANSON Source: http://www.sweetsurprise.com/comparing-hfcs-and-other-sweeteners Polymer: substance that has a molecular structure consisting chiefly or entirely of a large number of similar units bonded together (so glucose polymers would be large number of glucose units bonded together) Next Slide

Fructose (% total sugars) Fruit, vegetables, nuts

≥66 Apples, pears

56-65 Asparagus, raspberries, spinach, watermelon

42-55

Almonds, apricots, bananas, blackberries, blueberries, broccoli, Brussels sprouts, cabbage, cantaloupe, carrots, cashews, cherries, Clementines, sweet corn, cucumbers, currants, dates, figs, filberts, grapefruit, grapes, hazelnuts, honeydew, melon, kiwi fruit, lentils, lettuce, lime juice, macadamias, nectarines, sweet onions, navel oranges, peaches, peanuts, peas pecans, sweet peppers, persimmons, pineapple, pistachios, raisins, summer squash, strawberries, sweet potatoes, tomatoes, walnuts, cooked wild rice

31-41 Artichokes, celery, okra, plums, radishes, turnip greens

Fructose and Glucose are Consumed Together Fruit, Vegetables, Nuts

Data: NutritionData.com, 2012, Conde Nast.

10 10

Presenter

Presentation Notes

And F is NOT consumed by itself from fruit, vegetables and nuts – always equivalent glucose present at the same time Composition data from NutritionData.com

A Look at the Evidence-Based Science

11

• 30 women consumed identical meals for one day with sweetened beverage in each

• Half drank beverage sweetened with sugar and half with HFCS

• Measured blood levels of glucose, insulin, appetite hormones and triglycerides

12 Source: Melanson, Zukley, Lowndes, Nguyen, Angelopoulos, Rippe. 2007.Effects of high-fructose corn syrup and sucrose consumption on

circulating glucose, insulin, leptin, and ghrelin and on appetite in normal-weight woman. Nutrition 23(2):103-112.

Sugar vs. HFCS Research

Source: Melanson, Zukley, Lowndes, Nguyen, Angelopoulos, Rippe. 2007.Effects of high-fructose corn syrup and sucrose consumption on circulating glucose, insulin, leptin, and ghrelin and on appetite in normal-weight woman. Nutrition 23(2):103-112.

13

Presenter

Presentation Notes

2007 Nutrition The important take away in this slide is to notice how the concentration of sugar and HFCS in each graph are very close together…they are not significantly different which suggests that there is NOT a difference between HFCS and Sugar when consumed in a beverage on blood levels of glucose, insulin or triglycerides. They are metabolically equivalent. True for ghrelin and leptin too (not shown here but the appetite hormones) Next slide

Source: Melanson, Zukley, Lowndes, Nguyen, Angelopoulos, Rippe. 2007.Effects of high-fructose corn syrup and sucrose consumption on circulating glucose, insulin, leptin, and ghrelin and on appetite in normal-weight woman. Nutrition 23(2):103-112.

14

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Melanson Study �Comparing Sugar & HFCS in Humans In this study from the journal Nutrition, 30 women consumed identical meals for one day with sweetened beverage in each Half drank a beverage with sugar, and half drank a bev with HFCS Then blood was taken and measured for levels of glucose, insulin, appetite hormones and triglycerides (a blood fat) 30 women consumed identical meals for one day with sweetened beverage in each Half drank beverage sweetened with sugar and half with HFCS Measured blood levels of glucose, insulin, appetite hormones and triglycerides Melanson, et al. “Effects of high-fructose corn syrup and sucrose consumption on circulating glucose, insulin, leptin, and ghrelin and on appetite in normal-weight woman.” Nutrition, 23 (2007) 103 – 112 MYTH: HFCS blocks my body’s ability to know when it is full Beverages sweetened with sugar and high fructose corn syrup all have similar effects on feelings of fullness Ghrelin: an enzyme produced by stomach lining cells that stimulates appetite. Leptin: a protein produced by fatty tissue and believed to regulate fat storage in the body. Feeling of fullness Next slide

Weight Loss Research Methods • Overweight or obese individuals fed 4 hypocaloric diets • Contained levels of sucrose or HFCS typically consumed by adults in

US Results • All four hypocaloric groups: reductions observed in all measures

including body mass, BMI,% body fat, waist circumference and fat mass

• Reductions in the exercise only group for body mass, BMI and waist circumference

Conclusions • Similar decreases in weight and indices of adiposity observed

15 Source: Lowndes, Kawiecki, Pardo, Nguyen, Melanson, Yu, Rippe. 2012. The effects of four hypocaloric diets containing different levels of sucrose or high fructose corn syrup on weight loss and related parameters. Nutrition Journal 11:55 15

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Lowndes, Kawiecki, Pardo, Nguyen, Melanson, Yu, Rippe. 2012. The effects of four hypocaloric diets containing different levels of sucrose or high fructose corn syrup on weight loss and related parameters. Nutrition Journal 11:55 Background: The replacement of sucrose with HFCS in food products has been suggested as playing a role in the development of obesity as a public health issue. The objective of this study was to examine the effects of four equally hypocaloric diets containing different levels of sucrose or high fructose corn syrup (HFCS). Methods: This was a randomized, prospective, double blind trial, with overweight/obese participants measured for body composition and blood chemistry before and after the completion of 12 weeks following a hypocaloric diet. The average caloric deficit achieved on the hypocaloric diets was 309 kcal. Results: Reductions were observed in all measures of adiposity including body mass, BMI,% body fat, waist circumference and fat mass for all four hypocaloric groups, as well as reductions in the exercise only group for body mass, BMI and waist circumference. Conclusions: Similar decreases in weight and indices of adiposity are observed when overweight or obese individuals are fed hypocaloric diets containing levels of sucrose or high fructose corn syrup typically consumed by adults in the United States

Nutritive Sweeteners & Liver Fat Methods • For 10 weeks, 64 individuals consumed low-fat milk sweetened with either HFCS or

sucrose; the added sugar matched consumption levels of fructose in the 25th, 50th, and 90th percentiles of the population.

• The fat content of the liver was measured with unenhanced computed tomography imaging, and the fat content of muscle was assessed with magnetic resonance imaging.

Results • When the 6 HFCS and sucrose groups were averaged, there was no change over

the course of 10 weeks in the fat content of the liver, vastus lateralis muscle, or gluteus maximus muscle.

• Group assignment did not affect the result (interaction > 0.05). Conclusions • These data suggest that when fructose is consumed as part of a typical diet in

normally consumed sweeteners, such as sucrose or HFCS, ectopic fat storage in the liver or muscles is not promoted.

16 Source: Bravo, S., Lowndes, J., Sinnett, S., Fullterton, Z. and Rippe, J. 2013. Consumption of sucrose and high fructose corn syrup does not increase liver fat or ectopic fat deposition in muscles. Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism. 38(999): 681-688 16

Presenter

Presentation Notes

A new study published by Dr. Rippe in the Applied Physiology, Nutrition and Metabolism journal is the first study of its kind to test and measure the effects of high fructose corn syrup on fatty liver disease based on how humans actually consume fructose in the real world. The study presents data that shows the consumption of high fructose corn syrup and sucrose at levels consistent with average daily consumption does not increase liver fat in humans, a leading cause of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.

The Commentary that Started It All

17

Presenter

Presentation Notes

With an article by Bray and Popkin in 2004 Popkin: UNC Chapel Hill and Bray: LA commentary in the Am J of Clin Nutrition pointing out that the country’s obesity crisis appeared to rise in tandem with the use of HFCS in food products. (early 70s by Japanese) The speculation offered by Popkin and Bray became like an indictment as bloggers starting writing about it. Since then HFCS has become a food villain or dietary boogeyman. Misperceptions about HFCS began with a 2004 commentary in a prestigious scientific journal (AJCN) by a respected nutritionist (George Bray) and his colleagues Based solely on a mathematical correlation, they proposed the following hypothesis: “increased consumption of HFCS may play a role in the epidemic of obesity” Correlation and hypothesis were obsolete/untrue/false even before published – relied on data showing increase in HFCS use through 1999 (peak consumption year); didn’t have subsequent data showing HFCS in decline for the past 12 years George Bray and co-author Barry Popkin have since retracted their hypothesis Next Slide

Fructose & Exercise Evaluated the effects of exercise on circulating lipids in healthy subjects fed a weight-maintenance, high-fructose diet.

Methods Eight healthy males were studied on three occasions after 4 days of …

1. A diet low in fructose and no exercise, 2. A diet with 30% fructose and no exercise, or 3. A diet with 30% fructose and moderate aerobic exercise.

Conclusions The data concluded that even with high intakes of fructose, exercise completely prevented fructose-induced alterations of lipid metabolism.

18 Source: Egli, L., et al. 2013. Exercise prevents fructose-induced hypertriglyceridemia in healthy young subjects. Diabetes. 18

Continued Conversations about Sweeteners

19

Dr. Mark Kern, PhD, RD, CSSD, a professor at San Diego State University, was commissioned by the Corn Refiners Association to use evidence-based scientific analysis to critically analyze and challenge the major claims made in "Fat Chance.”

Find the Review: SweetenerStudies.com/Resources

Fat Chance: Beating the Odds Against Sugar, Processed Food, Obesity and Disease, By: Dr. Robert Lustig

Fructose & Obesity: • No Scientific evidence to support the idea that fructose causes obesity or

metabolic syndrome when consumed in typical amounts. • Dr. Lustig’s assertion that excessive fructose is converted to fat by the body,

thereby uniquely contributing to obesity & metabolic syndrome is unsubstantiated.

“A Calorie Is Not A Calorie” • Dr. Lustig’s point of view on energy balance is opposed to leading government

& scientific sources on health & nutrition, including NIH & AND. • Calorie recommendations ignore the complexity of

determining individual calorie requirements, which depend on a variety of factors, including but not limited to age, gender & physical activity.

Presenter

Presentation Notes

NEEDS CLEARANCE

Commentary: Lack of evidence for high fructose corn syrup as the cause of the obesity epidemic Authors: Klurfeld D.M., Foreyt J., Angelopoulos T.J., & Rippe, J.M.

20

HFCS & Obesity

Conclusions • After an extensive review of all available HFCS research, there is

overwhelming evidence showing HFCS is nutritionally equivalent to sugar.

• This opinion is in-line with the American Medical Association and the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, both of which concluded that HFCS is not a unique cause of obesity.

Source: Klurfeld D.M., Foreyt J., Angelopoulos T.J., & Rippe, J.M. 2013. Lack of evidence for high fructose corn syrup as the cause of the obesity epidemic. International Journal of Obesity.

Presenter

Presentation Notes

The commentary concludes that after an extensive review of all available HFCS research, there is overwhelming evidence showing HFCS is nutritionally equivalent to sugar. This opinion is in-line with the American Medical Association and the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, both of which concluded that HFCS is not a unique cause of obesity. The authors state that while there has been a large amount of debate in the media about the impact of HFCS on obesity levels, the fact is "Sucrose (sugar) and HFCS are very similar in composition....and are absorbed identically in the human GI tract." "The public discussion about HFCS will likely continue to rage on and more studies will be conducted," said James M. Rippe, M.D., Founder and Director of the Rippe Lifestyle Institute, and Professor of Biomedical Sciences at the University of Central Florida, one of the article's authors. "However, at this point there is simply no evidence to suggest that the use of HFCS alone is directly responsible for increased obesity rates or other health concerns.“ The article goes on to discuss a number of research trials that have been conducted on the issue of HFCS and obesity, and concludes that at this time the evidence shows no short-term health differences between the use of HFCS or sugar could be detected in humans. Weight gain, glucose levels, insulin and appetite were not adversely affected by the use of HFCS over sugar. The commentary was co-authored with Dr. Rippe by David M. Klurfeld, Ph.D. of the USDA Agricultural Research Service, John Foreyt, Ph.D. of Baylor College of Medicine, and Theodore J. Angelopoulos, Ph.D., MPH Professor and Director, Laboratory of Applied Physiology Department of Health Professions at University of Central Florida. HFCS was developed in the mid-1960s as a more flexible alternative to sugar and was widely embraced by the food industry. The use of HFCS grew rapidly from 1970-1999 where usage peaked. Since 1999, the use of HFCS has declined while obesity rates have continued to rise. Sucrose is still the dominant sweetener worldwide with over nine times the consumption of HFCS. Dr. Rippe is a cardiologist and graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Medical School. His research laboratory has conducted numerous studies and published widely in the areas of nutrition and weight management. He is an advisor to the food and beverage industry and has received unrestricted educational grants from the Corn Refiners Association. He is the Founder and Director of the Rippe Lifestyle Institute, and Professor of Biomedical Sciences at the University of Central Florida.

Why the Confusion?

• HFCS was a bad choice of name; HFCS must be high in fructose

• Many people confuse pure “fructose” with “high fructose corn syrup”

• Research on pure fructose is being applied to HFCS • The very high levels of fructose used in these studies are not found in the human diet

21

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Why all the confusion? 1. HFCS was a bad choice of name: HFCS is not high in fructose; it’s actually very close to sugar in it’s fructose content. Sugar is 50% glucose and 50% fructose; most HFCS used in food processing is 45% Glucose and less common 58% Glucose 55% Fructose 42% Fructose 2. Many people confuse pure “fructose” with “high fructose corn syrup” : this is a big point of contention. Much of the research has been on fructose only and in the typical American diet, fructose is not consumed alone but with glucose…this is a very important point in clearing up myths…one that the average consumer doesn’t hear or know. 3. Research on pure fructose is being applied to HFCS: so the research using fructose only is being extrapolated to include HFCS which is not accurate. 4. Again, the very high levels of fructose used in these studies are not found in the human diet. Next slide

THE OBESITY EPIDEMIC AND SWEETENERS

22

1970 to 2010

Source: Economic Research Service, USDA, 2012. (U.S. per capita loss-adjusted food availability: “Total Calories”)

2,076

2,534

1970 2010

Percent of Caloric Growth

WE’RE EATING 458 MORE CALORIES PER DAY COMPARED TO 1970

+458 Calories

Added Fats 53%

Flours/Cereal Products 37%

Added Sugars 7%

Other 3%

22%

23

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Don’t miss this: We eat 458 more calories per day than we did in 1970…458…that’s a lot of calories….plus look at where these calories are coming from. Added fats and flours/cereal products….notice that added sugars are only 7%....a big factor in obesity is the size of our portions which are extreme…cookies look like small pizzas and that we consume these large portions and often go back for more. Obesity is a calorie/exercise IMBALANCE HFCS is NOT uniquely responsible for obesity Next slide

Source of additional 458 calories/day

Added sugars 34 calories/day

Cereals/Grains 167 calories/day

Fats and oils 242 calories/day

All other foods 15 calories/day

Source: Economic Research Service, USDA, 2012. (U.S. per capita loss-adjusted food availability: “Total Calories”) 24

Presenter

Presentation Notes

If you convert the percentage into calories, you can see that cereals/grains and fats/oils contribute the majority of the 458 Next slide

NHANES Added Sugar Data

• Added sugar intake in the U.S. decreased from 100 grams (400 calories) in 1999-2000 to 77 grams (308 calories) in 2007-2008

• Total calories from added sugars declined from 18.1% to 14.6%

Source: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 25

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Actually, sugar intake has decreased….let me say that again in case you had a full day and some brain drain….sugar intake is down….total calories from added sugars declined from 18.1% to 14.6% from 1999-2000 to 2007-2008. The message of consuming less sugar is getting thru…the naysayers just haven't’ realized it Next slide

Sugar and High Fructose Corn Syrup Used Equally

Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. 2012. Table 51 -- Refined cane and beet sugar: estimated number of per capita calories consumed daily, by calendar year. Table 52 -- High fructose corn syrup: estimated number of per capita calories consumed daily, by calendar year. Table 53 --Other sweeteners: estimated number of per capita calories consumed daily, by calendar year. Sugar and Sweeteners Yearbook 2012.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

Poun

ds P

er Y

ear

Per Capita Consumption of Caloric Sweeteners 1970 – 2011

Refined Sugar

High Fructose Corn

Total Caloric Sweeteners

26

Presenter

Presentation Notes

The top line reminds you that the total consumption of calories from added sugars has declined The second and third line represent sugar and HFCS and indicate that both are used almost equally in the diet Next slide

Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. 2012. Table 51 -- Refined cane and beet sugar: estimated number of per capita calories consumed daily, by calendar year. Table 52 -- High fructose corn syrup: estimated number of per capita calories consumed daily, by calendar year. Table 53 -- Other sweeteners: estimated number of per capita calories consumed daily, by calendar year. See column I, Per capita consumption (adjusted for loss) lb/yr http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/sugar-and-sweeteners-yearbook-tables.aspx#25512, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Diabetes Surveillance System. 2010. Long-term Trends in Diabetes, October 2010 http://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/statistics/slides/long_term_trends.pdf, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2010. Prevalence of overweight, obesity and extreme obesity among adults: United States, trends 1960-62 through 2005-2006. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hestat/overweight/overweight_adult.htm. Obesity Rates 2007-2010 Source: Flegal KM, Carroll MD, Ogden CL, Curtin LR. 2010. Prevalence and Trends in Obesity Among US Adults, 1999-2008. JAMA, January 20, 2010—Vol 303, No. 3. http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/303/3/235.full.pdf+, and Flegal KM, Carroll MD, Kit BK, Ogden CL. 2012. Prevalence of Obesity and Trends in the Distribution of Body Mass Index Among US Adults, 1999-2010. JAMA, February 1, 2012 - Vol. 307, No. 5 http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/307/5/491.full.pdf+html.

27

Presenter

Presentation Notes

In this slide, let’s look at one more added dimension. The orange line represents the decrease in total calories from sweeteners, the red and blue lines represent sugar and HFCS and how they are consumed similarly…what we just discussed. The yellow graphs that look like buildings show you that obesity rates continue to climb along with the green lines which indicate diabetes and that these rates continue to climb. Your take away. Consumption of sweeteners is down but obesity and diabetes rates continue to climb. Next slide

No Single Ingredient is to Blame

Walter Willett, Ph.D. Chairman of the Nutrition Department Harvard School of Public Health The New York Times, July 2, 2006

“THERE’S NO SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE IDEA THAT HIGH FRUCTOSE CORN SYRUP IS SOMEHOW RESPONSIBLE FOR OBESITY.”

28 28

HOW SOCIAL MEDIA BUZZ IS CREATED

29

Added Sugars, Particularly HFCS: The Current Social Media Villains

A Quick Google Search: Health Professionals, Media Professionals & the Public are bombarded with misinformation on ADDED sugars

Hype Includes: Added sugars, especially HFCS, are THE cause of various health issues including obesity and HFCS is toxic

HFCS is metabolized differently than other nutritive sweeteners & is not as natural as sucrose/other added sugars

30

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Google search sugar: About 492,000,000 results (0.24 seconds) About 1,960,000 results (0.19 seconds)

What Do You Think Consumers Are Thinking? Is the media coloring your perception of consumer attitudes?

“Is Sugar Toxic?” (4/01/12)

“Sounding the alarms against sugar”

(4/14/12) “Health advocates go sour on sugar: ‘Sugar is

killing us’” (6/08/12)

“Soft drinks: Public Enemy No.1 in Obesity

Fight?” (4/27/12)

“Sugar Should Be Regulated As Toxin, Researchers Say”

(2/01/12)

31

Hype: Ban HFCS

32 Source: 6/11/13 https://www.facebook.com/BanOfHFCS 32

Hype: Avoid HFCS at All Costs

33 Source: Accessed 6/10/13 http://www.womansday.com/health-fitness/nutrition/is-high-fructose-corn-syrup-bad-for-you#slide-4 33

That Buzz You Heard? Chances Are It’s Manufactured

• 61% of identifiable Very High Volume posters may be “suspicious,” i.e. content farms, trolls, and bots.

• 44% originated with Facebook accounts that are opened and closed just to generate buzz.

A small number of posters create a disproportionate amount of content.

Source: “Dissecting “Buzz” - It’s not what you think it is. A detailed analysis of social media “buzz” around controversial topics” (2012) By Katie Delahaye Paine & Heather Fysh, KDPaine & Partners. 34

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Content farm: a company that employs large numbers of often freelance writers to generate large amounts of textual content Troll someone who posts inflammatory,[1] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as a forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response Bots WWW robots or simply bots, are software applications that run automated tasks over the Internet. Typically, bots perform tasks that are both simple and structurally repetitive, at a much higher rate than would be possible for a human alone. Source: “Dissecting “Buzz” - It’s not what you think it is. A detailed analysis of social media “buzz” around controversial topics” (2012) By Katie Delahaye Paine, CEO, and Heather Fysh, Operations Manager, KDPaine & Partners. http://kdpaine.blogs.com/files/kdpp2012buzzanalysis.pdf. Research conducted in Q1 2012, using a combination of automatic and human analysis of 300,000 comments (1-years-worth) on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, blogs, and forums. All conversations researched were public. Blogs and comments on blogs = 37% of comments; Twitter = 30%; forums = 15%; balance scattered.

That engagement you saw? Probably not what you think • Low volume posters represent the majority of all posts but are not very engaged in the topic.

• Moderate Volume Posters are more engaged.

• Moderate Volume Posters tended to get involved in a particular discussion on a specific forum or site; i.e., Final Gear or Body Building.

Many relevant conversations are taking place on Reddit and other smaller networks.


Most People Post One Comment, Then Move On

Poster Volume

Posts per 12 months

Very-low volume

1 - 2

Low-volume 3 - 12

Moderate 13 - 24

High-volume 25 - 60

Very-high volume

61+


Other Food Topics Rank Significantly Higher in Social Media Conversations

HFCS MENTIONS ARE LESS THAN 1% OF TOTAL SOCIAL MEDIA INGREDIENT CONVERSATIONS

Source: Radian6, 2011 37

Presenter

Presentation Notes

HFCS Mentions are less than 1% of Total Social Media Ingredient Conversations where is this data from? 2010-2011 Sugar is at the top and so is protein which has now become a big conversation, salt and fiber Next slide

Social Media Buzz… A True Picture?

• Consumers are more concerned with total added sugars than with any specific type of caloric sweetener.

• Social media contributes to confusion about true consumer sentiment.

• Social media buzz alone does not portray a full or true picture of the consumer.

38

RESEARCH FOCUS ON MOMS, THE PRIMARY SHOPPER • Conducted by Mintel Research Consultancy • October 2012 • Base Size: 2,400 respondents • Female • 18-44 years old (6 of 10 respondents) • Children under 18 years old in HH • Annual income range: $35k - $85k • Education: Bachelors or advanced degree

Sample weighted by age and education prior to analysis. 75% of primary shoppers being women is within range of other studies. 40

Presenter

Presentation Notes

As noted earlier, the Mintel sample base represents the full range of education levels, but it includes many respondents with college degrees – and these are the consumers often perceived as leaning toward HFCS-free.

WHAT ARE CONSUMERS DEMANDING? LESS ADDED SUGAR.

3%

3%

3%

3%

4%

5%

8%

10%

17%

21%

22%

Sodium

Red meat

Processed/packaged foods

High fructose corn syrup

Fast food

Carbohydrates/white foods

Soda/carbonated beverages

Salt/Sodium

Fats/oils, hydrogenated fats

Sugar, added sugar

Not avoiding or purposefully consuming less…

In the last six months, have there been any particular foods, beverages, or specific ingredients that you and your family are trying to consume less of or avoid? (UNAIDED)

Source: Mintel 2012; N = 2,400 Q3. In the last six months, have there been any particular foods, beverages, or specific ingredients that you and your family are trying to consume less of or avoid? (multiple responses accepted) * “HFCS” Includes HFCS and corn syrup

41

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Mintel October 2012

PRIMARY SHOPPERS DON’T LOOK FOR HFCS ON LABELS

Hardly Ever 15%

Never 12%

Regularly 48%

Occasionally 30%

Source: Mintel 2012; N = 2,173 Q2. When you read labels, what information are you looking for? (multiple responses accepted) * “HFCS” Includes HFCS and corn syrup

38%

30% 28% 24%

13%

5% 5% 4% 4% 4%

42

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Right chart, Mintel 2012 data Q1.On average, when you are shopping for food products, how often do you read the nutritional information on food and beverage labels or packages? Would you say you read them Never, Hardly Ever, Occasionally, Regularly? Q2.When you read labels, what information are you looking for? Mintel’s survey followed a very logical progression to ask people: Do you read labels? If so, what do you look for on labels? (5% look for HFCS) Most people read labels regularly or occasionally. Of those who do any label reading, they know what they should be avoiding – fats and oils and calories, with salt and added sugars next. And note that 28% watch out for sugar, while again only 5% look specifically for HFCS. *Close to 80% of shoppers read labels. The key takeaway is that they aren’t looking for HFCS.

NET: FAR MORE AVOIDING ADDED SUGARS OVERALL THAN HFCS

*Includes “Don’t know” / Source: Mintel 2012; N=2,400

27% Don’t limit sweeteners*

50% of shoppers limit sweeteners (not HFCS)

23% Limit HFCS (aided)

3% Limit HFCS (unaided)

43

Presenter

Presentation Notes

SLIDE IS INCLUDED IN OTHER PPT DECKS Mintel, October 2012 Multiple answers were allowed in the survey.

NO HFCS ≠ SUGAR FREE

44

Presenter

Presentation Notes

NO HFCS does not mean sugar free Notice there are 19 grams of sugar….do you know how many grams of sugar = a teaspoon? 4…so there are almost 5 teaspoons of sugar in a one cup serving of this cereal. In this case, the sugar would have been added. Next slide

Key Take Away Messages

• Choose your sugars by the company they keep. No single food or ingredient is the cause of weight gain, obesity or disease.

• Sugar, honey, agave nectar and HFCS are nutritionally and metabolically equivalent.

• USDA recommends limiting all added sugars to 32 grams/day for a 2000 calorie meal pattern (8 tsp. or 128 calories).

• It’s the total diet and lifestyle over time that influences weight and health status. 45

Presenter

Presentation Notes

So when you get asked questions, what are the key points, based on science, to remember: Choose your sugars by the company they keep. No single food or ingredient is the cause of weight gain, obesity or disease. Sugar, honey, agave nectar and HFCS are nutritionally and metabolically equivalent USDA recommends limiting all added sugars to 32 grams/day for a 2000 calorie meal pattern (8 tsp. or 128 calories) It’s the total diet and lifestyle over time that influences weight and health status. Next slide

WEBSITE RESOURCES

46

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Share a couple of good resources for you to find quick answers Next slide

Third Party Expert Review SweetenerStudies.com

47 47

http://sweetenerstudies.com/

Information For Your Clients SweetSurprise.com

48 48

http://sweetsurprise.com/

QUESTIONS?

49

Susan Mitchell, PhD, RD, LD/N, FADA Email: [email protected]

Website: susanmitchell.org

Presenter

Presentation Notes

Next slide

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.susanmitchell.org/

50

THANK YOU!

50

Date post:	30-Nov-2014
Category:	Education
Upload:	sweetener-studiescom
View:	997 times
Download:	1 times