McDonald's Italy disses pizza, causes gastronomic outrage

Insulting pizza is a big deal in Italy. Especially if you're an American fast food goliath.

Business Insider reports that the the Associazione Verace Pizza Napoletana (AVPN), representing the pizza chefs of Naples, the food's birthplace, are threatening to sue McDonald's for pizza defamation.

And it's all because of this ad:

You don't need to speak Italian to follow the story: Parents of a picky child are at a pizzeria, anxiously awaiting their child's choice from the menu. The waiter asks the boy what he wants, and he says "a Happy Meal." So the family leaves and takes him to McDonald's where he is happy.

The AVPN's VP is quoted in this imperfectly-translated statement:

Di porzio states that it is ignoble comparing two products very different from each other, especially if it is for discrediting those restaurants most loved by Italian families: pizzerias. Also, it is already well known that children love pizzas, especially for the taste. It is obvious that the American colossus is trying to discredit its main competitor, but speculating on children’s health is just too much. Furthermore, it is not the first time that Mc Donald attacks our culinary traditions, but this time we are willing to take some legal countermeasures.

North Americans may find it odd for pizzerias to attack burgers on nutritional standards, but only if they haven't had authentic Italian pizza. Unlike our doughy, salty and cheesy delivery versions, Italian pizze are all about fresh ingredients and restraint. Even though the dough is made from highly-refined flour, the Italian tradition of much stricter portion control makes the pizza less of a calorie bomb:

A standard margherita (with 250g of dough) has around 800Kcal, but children do not usually eat a whole pizza. So, if we reduce the size of a standard pizza and then we add a drink (without gas), we will reach 700Kcal per meal. A Happy meal has 600Kcal, which for a children are just too much. However, it is not about “how many Kcals there are per meal”, but it is a matter of “what kind of quality” they are! What kind of meat do they use to prepare their hamburgers and how many fats they have? What kind of oil do they use to prepare their potatos: colza oil? How much mayonnaise do they put on their hamburgers? And how about the preservatives contained in their bread? The true napolitan pizza, which is a product guaranteed by our international regulations, it is a “handcrafted” product which only uses selected raw materials, like mozzarella di bufala, fiordilatte, tomatos from Campania and extra virgin oil. In this way, pizzas results in a complete and balanced meal from a nutritional point of view. It is time for parents to control what their children eat: junk food might be ok if consumed now and then, but they should teach their children to eat clean everyday. They must. And eating clean means to follow the culinary culture offered by our wonderful Mediterranean Diet: it will supply parents with the right tools to choose among a great number of meals which are not only tasty and healthy but, above all, Italians.

If you're sensing a certain cultural pride here, you're not mistaken. McDonald's has only been in Italy since 1986, and its arrival in Rome's historic core was greeted with outrage. Designer Valentino even threatened legal action against his new neighbours over the smell:

According to Valentino, who this week began legal action aimed at closing the restaurant, which backs on to his Rome headquarters, the McDonald's created a ''significant and constant noise and an unbearable smell of fried food fouling the air.'' He has asked Italian magistrates to order it closed immediately on the ground that it is a nuisance.

McDonald's stayed, and expanded. Now, it can be found among the historic attractions of Venice, Florence, Milan, and —yes—Naples.

I live in Italy for several months-long stints in the 90s, and McDonald's by then had become a shibboleth for whether one was "cultured" or not. Since food is a massive part of Italy's many regional identities, the arrival of American fast food was bound to cause a reaction. In fact, that Roman McDonald's was the barbarian at the gates of Italian culture that caused Carlo Petrini to found the now-international Slow Food Movement.

There is a certain amount of pretentious Anti-Americanism in the AVPN complaint, but I can see why they are so upset. Defaming pizza in Italy (especially in Naples) is a really obtuse move by McDonald's marketers. Especially since the corporation has been trying so hard to adapt to the demand for more local foods elsewhere in Europe.

Bell sets a grease trap for students with delicious #poutine

Bell poutine may not appear exactly as pictured

Since you can't give free beer to students to get them interested in your brand, Bell Canada is delivering the next best thing:

Hey @uOttawa students, we're offering free poutine today. Find our truck on campus between 10:30am and 3:30pm. pic.twitter.com/c0Y8Oc61i3
— Bell (@Bell) September 12, 2014

Okay, so this is not exactly helping students achieve a healthy lifestyle on campus. But I certainly ate my share when I went to Queen's U in Kingston.

Offering swag to students is an old marketing trick, but at least this one is for a service that they actually need. (As opposed to giant home theatre rentals or credit they won't be able to pay back.) And I'm sure they'll work off the calories come exam time.

Someone please let me know if there's a PETA protest.

Domino's pizza targets bad home cooks with "food fails"

Ads Of The World

I doubt there's one popular internet photo meme that doesn't get turned into an ad campaign. In this case, it's "Food Fails" — pictures of really pathetic dishes shared on Tumblr, Instagram or elsewhere (Two of my favourites are Dimly Lit Meals for One, and the stomach-churning Cooking For Bae.)

Ads Of The World

This campaign by Artplan, Brazil, is sort-of funny. But personally, I find the execution lacks finesse. Why not just show the resulting dish, the Domino's logo, and a phone number to order?

Ads Of The World

That said, I can't help but point out that poor cooking skills are a major contributor to poor diet.  And the decades-long push for cheap, tasty and convenient fast food continues to erode these basic life skills.

Via Attic Paper

Via Country Chic Mom

Do we really need fast food brands telling us that we shouldn't bother making our own food?

What the hell have we been eating all these years?

McCain Deep'n Delicious frozen chocolate cake is a Canadian comfort food classic. But I have to admit I was a little alarmed at the ad above.

It clicks through to this product page, which states

The dessert you grew up with is now made with better ingredients. 

We’ve put a lot of heart into our new recipes to ensure we deliver the icing you love on an even better cake. It’s all part of our journey to make our yummy desserts using the same ingredients you’d find in your own kitchen, like flour, eggs, baking powder and vanilla.

 Once again: What the hell was in it before?!?

But Julia, my wife, had no issue whatsoever with this approach. "I'm glad to hear it!" she quipped.

When asked whether she was alarmed by having it pointed out that the countless freezer cakes we had eaten in years past were basically frozen chemicals, her response was "It was the '70s. We didn't care!"

The target market has spoken.

"F*ck the Diet" - now THAT's a food slogan

Du Darfst is a German company that produces butter, cheese, sausages and other rather gluttonous foods. For their latest campaign, they have decided to create a movement, "Fuck the Diet", encouraging people to make nutritional contrariness part of their social identity.



In addition to the above video and links to a Facebook page the campaign site features advice from a nutritionist named Silke Kayadelen who says "I want to stay as I am!" It champions the approach of simple choices in food and exercise to enjoy life without getting fat. And it features recipes.

Yeah... I'm assuming this is aimed at women.

It may not be the most nutritionally sensible approach, but I sure do love the tagline.

Thanks to Tatjana Vukic for the tip!

Hot dogs are bad for your ass #FdAdFriday

"Okay, I guess I'll stop sticking them up there now."

Ah, the Physician's Committee for Responsible Medicine! Always at the forefront of getting headlines by any means necessary.

Last year, they told Wisconsonites not to eat cheese during football games. Now they're telling people in Chicago not to eat hot dogs just in time for baseball season.

Their message:

"Consuming processed meats increases the risk of colorectal cancer, according to a large number of studies, including the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) study. Studies also show a strong link between other types of cancer and processed meats. An NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study, for example, found that processed red meat was associated with a 10 percent increased risk of prostate cancer with every 10 grams of increased intake."

So if I eat 100g of hot dogs, I'm have a 100% chance of getting prostate cancer? I'm already a goner many times over!

As usual, PCRM is just making waves while preaching to their shrill choir. Yes, processed meats are bad for you (especially those nasty factory dogs). But this provocation will do nothing to educate people about making better eating choices. It will, if anything, have the opposite effect as angry Chicagoans are motivated to have a dog just to spite the billboard.

"What about the mustard, relish, onions, pickle, tomato, pepper and celery salt?  Those are vegetables, aren't they?"

Meanwhile, the American Meat Institute does itself no favours by protesting too much:

"Hot dogs are a great Chicago tradition and part of a healthy, balanced diet. They come in a variety of nutrition and taste formulas and they are an excellent source of protein, vitamins and minerals," said National Hot Dog & Sausage Council President Janet M. Riley. "This group's claims are an effort to seek attention for their animal rights cause.” 

...

"Consumers need a healthy balanced diet and they need balanced, credible information," [says] Riley.  "When it comes to nutrition and cancer, check with health sources such as your doctor, dietician or the U.S. Dietary Guidelines. You can be assured that they will tell you that a healthy diet can include processed meats like hot dogs alongside your vegetables, grains and dairy." 

Damn it, Janet. This isn't health food we're talking about here. People know that hot dogs are salty, smoked, conglomerations of scary dead pig leftovers. We know they are junk food. And we love them anyway. 

Tip via The Consumerist

"Pink Slime" producer fights back in PR food fight

Is it any worse than a McRib?

I just got around to picking up a copy of Food Inc. this week and watching the film. It's pretty good infotainment. (My 7-year-old loves it, and has been watching it over and over again!)

One of the corporate targets of the documentary makers is BPI, "Beef Products Inc.", the company responsible for extracting the meat paste from trim that has become infamous as "Pink Slime".

The actual finished product, via BPI

Coincidentally, Pink Slime is in the news right now, after McDonald's stopped adding it to their burgers and the USDA okayed it for school lunches.

Meanwhile, BPI is fighting back with a campaign Wordpress site called "Pink Slime is a Myth" in which they tell their side of the story.

Actual copy: "Ammonia is essential for life. This naturally occurring substance is found in virtually all life forms, from plants to animals to humans. Life could not have evolved and cannot survive without it."

They make the usual mistake of protesting too loudly that boneless lean beef trim (their term for the product) "is beef – period".

What it is, is meat that has been separated from the trimmed fat of cow carcasses through chemical and mechanical means and has been sterilized with Ammonium Hydroxide .

What it is not, is this:

That's mechanically separated chicken. Want a nugget?

I'm not defending BPI. I think what they do is gross, and I don't want to eat it. But if we're going to stop putting processed animal byproducts in our meat snacks, we're going to have to give up cheap meat and accept a more wasteful meat industry.

What? 

Let's look at it this way: livestock are more than steaks and chops. Traditional trim, carved off the bones with an expert knife, wound up as sausages, cold cuts and ground meat. It still does, if you buy your processed meats from a butcher who makes them in-store. (Which I am, admittedly, a real snob about. Even organic packaged hot dogs gross me out.)

But even the most expert cutter misses lots of digestible protein that is in unpalatable organs, bone marrow, and inextricably merged with fat. The old-school solution would be to render it into gelatin, tallow or lard, or make it into stock. But back in the '60s and '70s, food scientists started looking for ways to get more edible and saleable product from each animal. Mechanically separated meat entered the market, and it got into many of the packaged soups, burgers, sausages and finger foods you eat. 

This was seen as a good thing. Consumerist quotes Roger Mandigo, a professor at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln:

"Most people would be extremely unhappy if they were served heart or tongue on a plate," he observed. "But flaked into a restructured product it loses its identity. Such products as tripe, heart, and scalded stomachs are high in protein, completely edible, wholesome, and nutritious, and most are already used in sausage without objection." Pork patties could be shaped into any form and marketed in restaurants or for airlines, solving a secondary problem of irregular portion size of cuts such as pork chops. In 1981 McDonald's introduced a boneless pork sandwich of chunked and formed meat called the McRib, developed in part through check-off funds [micro-donations from pork producers] from the NPPC [National Pork Producers Council]. It was not as popular as the McNugget, introduced in 1983, would be, even though both products were composed of unmarketable parts of the animal (skin and dark meat in the McNugget). The McNugget, however, benefited from positive consumer associations with chicken, even though it had none of the "healthy" attributes people associated with poultry.”

McRib, McNugget: McAnicallySeparatedMeat. (Although the McNugget changed to "real" chicken a few years ago.) So why is this beef process singled out for disgust?

People love this shit.

It's purely subjective. First, Jamie Oliver grossed people out on his show with a demonstration of how ammonia and water dissolve meat into red goop. Then there was the Food Inc. exposé. Then McDonald's and the FDA. Combined with the mislabelled chicken visual, the negative PR shitstorm has stirred public anxiety over one particular kind of processed meat product.

But is it really worse than the others? The process at issue is the decontamination with ammonia, which is toxic. It was actually a breakthrough for BPI, since the trimmings that are their raw product get disgustingly  contaminated in industrial butchery, and were previously not fit for human consumption. The ammonia was supposed to fix that. 

But when you look for research on the safety of the process, it's not trace ammonia that's the big problem. It's that it still lets some pathogens, like e. coli and salmonella, through. BPI had been exempted from regular testing and recalls, simply because the US government was overconfident with the efficacy of chemical sterilization.

Factory mass-production of meat is gross, period. But it also allows companies to offer $1 hamburger deals and other cheap meats, plus it feeds more people per animal—which has some significant environmental benefits. The original process of mechanical separation of beef from bones was banned in the US following the mad cow epidemic, so this is one of the cheapest sources of total animal utilization available.

(Ironically, the "nose-to-tail" foodie movement attempts to accomplish the same goal, but by gourmet means, by creating recipes for offal and other unpopular animal parts.)

If we want to stop eating questionable meat, we will have to eat less meat overall and pay a lot more for it. But as long as enough people are ignorant or ambivalent about what goes in their meals, there will always be a market for Pink Slime.

My advice for BPI, and consumer advocates, is to be absolutely honest. Activists need to stop misusing the chicken image and focus fairly on all mass-produced factory meat processes (as well as related food safety, worker rights and animal welfare issues), not just the cause of the day. BPI needs to back off on its claims that their product is virtually identical to ordinary lean ground beef, and take the position that using more of the animal is more economical and sustainable as long as you don't think about it too much.

Epilogue: BPI was so outraged by its portrayal in Food Inc. and on Chef Oliver's show that it commissioned its own reactionary video series:

Meanwhile in Canada, cup sizes are increasing rapidly

I'm talking about coffee, pervs. My brother David shared this snapshot of Tim Horton's newly- recalibrated coffee sizes.

The extra large is now 710 ml, or 24 ounces. That's over three cups of coffee in one.

According to City TV:

The change brings Tim Hortons sizes more in line with American chains, that have phased out the 236 mL “small” cups, and competitors including Starbucks, Second Cup and McDonalds.

They are, obviously, responding to customer demand. But is it really a good idea? I've had that much coffee in one sitting before, sure. But I drink mine black. Imagine the amount of cream and sugar it takes to make one of these as sweet and creamy as the traditional "double double" — quadruple quadruple? Quintuple quintuple?

Hey, do what you want with your life. But please don't fool yourself into thinking that getting a coffee like this every day, with the fat and calories that go with it, isn't going to weigh heavily on your health. (While we're at it, I guess we had better recalibrate clothing sizes again too.)

Has McDonald's been forced to label its food carcinogenic?

There's a pic going around showing a "new" McDonald's warning label about cancer-causing ingredients. But here's the kicker: that shit is in most of what you eat.

If you've been paying attention, you've been hearing about acrylamide for years. It's naturally present in ripe olives, and dried plums (prunes) and pears. It's in your coffee. And it gets produced every time you brown many of your favourite foods (like meat, potatoes and bread) at high heat. In short, it's in everything you like.

This picture showed up on Buzzfeed today, but a web search seems to indicate that it is a hoax from 2009, based on conjecture about whether California's strict food safety laws would lead to fast foods being labelled the way cigarettes are. I can't find any evidence that that is actually happening.

Of course, that won't stop this image from going viral, again, with reactionary comments like this:

"It stands to reason that this is a legal/precautionary measure; after reports swirled about fast food wrappers containing cancer causing chemicals that have been found in the fecal matter, blood, and urine of tested subjects, McDonald’s likely placed these notices on their wrappers to save face. 

For us, this is a wake up call. Personally I wish I could throw up the Big Mac I ate last night (if it weren’t too digested) but since I can’t, I’m going to be forced to take a brief hiatus from my local Dirt Ronnies. Will you continue to eat McDonald’s without shame or concern, or is a warning like this big enough to scare you away?"

No, it does not "stand to reason". Even the faux label itself admits that the compound is naturally occurring, and that that the FDA has nothing against it. If McDonald's were forced to issue this warning, so would all those other cooked and prepared foods I listed above. It is simply not a "McDonald's issue."

My feeling is, if you're going to trash McDonald's for selling sugary, fatty, overprocessed and marginally nutritious food to kids and other vulnerable groups, then do that. McDonald's is not a nice company (although I do love an Egg McMuffin). But random and ill-informed anti-McDonald's panic is not helping the conversation about nutrition, culture or corporate ethics.

Related:

F'd Ad Fridays: F'd Nutritional Science Edition

In my day, it was ketchup that the US government reclassified as a vegetable to meet nutritional standards for school lunches. Now, after great advanced in food science, they have decided to replace it with much-healthier pizza sauce.

In case their is any confusion, Jonathan Mann has created this helpful little PSA:



Via BoingBoing

An Open Letter to Hawkins Cheezies

Dear Mr. Hawkins

Today is Halloween, and I am giving out nothing but Cheezies.

This is not due to any obsession with your product. It is the best of its category, sure, but there are other reasons to give it out.

First of all, I am from Kingston. You are from Belleville. I now live in Ottawa. And your product gives me the opportunity to contribute to a regional family-owned business. My family and I buy local food as much as possible — Ontario wines, and local cheese, meat and produce. So the opportunity to make even our rare junk food purchases (sorry) locavorous is one we appreciate.

Second, I'm having more and more of a problem with chocolate these days. A child labour problem. So much of the cheap chocolate that will be given out tonight to excited children was illegally harvested by children their own age in Ghana and Ivory Coast. These kids are exposed to dangerous working conditions, climbing trees with machetes to harvest pods, and few of them go to school. Many are trafficked from neighbouring countries as slave labour. It's really sad.

That's why my wife and I have tried to move towards Fairtrade chocolate from another regional company, Camino. But that stuff is a little expensive for Halloween giveaways.

Your product, on the other hand, is very affordable. I just wish it had not been so hard to find. But I know how the companies of "Big Chips" dominate shelf space with money and pressure. My sharp-eyed son managed to find two 24-packs of 28g bags of Cheezies stuffed into a bottom shelf at the Halloween display in an Ottawa Wal-Mart. (We had to buy the rest in much more expensive 8-count bags from Metro.)

Part of my Hawkins horde.

I was surprised how few Hawkins Cheezies I could find in local retail. Everyone seems to agree that yours are the best. Humpty Dumpty's cheese things and Cheetos both have long and scary ingredients lists, compared to yours — including MSG. People like your crunch better, too, and the fact that the orange stuff is not quite so stainingly neon.

I would have expected that Halloween was the perfect time to mount a strong regional campaign, touting your provenance and your goodness, to encourage parents around Ontario to act as brand ambassadors to hand out Cheezies samples at their doors. But I saw nothing.

You have a good product, but I'm afraid that your marketing is a little old fashioned. Why can't I find this beloved Canadian brand on Facebook? Where would I hear your great story, if I had not bothered to Google you? You need help.

And it's not just the "promotional" P of marketing that you need to work on. While the product tastes great, I note that you are a hold-out for still using hydrogenated vegetable oil. My son doesn't eat enough Cheezies to make the small amount of trans fats a health issue, but your competitors have already made the switch to better oils. You need to do that, ASAP. The war on trans fats is not going away.

The other thing you could do is make sure your product fully lives up to its local, wholesome, made-in-Canada heritage. If you're using Canadian corn, you should proudly say so. People like that. And while I don't expect you to go organic, as a family-owned company you could become a very popular champion of smaller, family-owned farms that use non-GMO corn. This would also be a great thing to add to your story. Finally, using real aged cheddar is part of your Canadian charm. Is the cheese made regionally, or provincially? This could also be a great story to tell.

And then there's the peanut thing. Humpty Dumpty got their cheese sticks certified peanut free. I'm sure you could, too.

Your product will never be health food. But it is a "feel-good" food. Wouldn't it be great if you were able to out-maneuver your larger competition in Canada by being the cheese-flavoured snack with more to feel good about?

This is a conversation I'd like to have. So if you're in the neighbourhood tonight, please drop by for some Cheezies.

The cheesiest ad you will see today

AdFreak shared this new provocation by Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine:

It's going to be placed along the highway in De Pere, Wisconsin, where Green Bay Packers cheeseheads will see it on the way to Lambeau Field on Oct. 2 for a game against the Denver Broncos.

That's right, they want Wisconsinites to give up cheese.

From PCRM's release:

"Foods served at Lambeau Field’s eateries are typically loaded with cheese and other high-fat dairy products. Offerings include Hall of Fame Curds, which are deep-fried Wisconsin cheese curds; Cheesehead Beer Cheese Soup, made with cheddar cheese, beer, and then topped with more cheese; and nachos piled with cheddar cheese and sour cream. Americans today eat three times as much cheese as they did in 1970—almost 33 pounds per person in a single year.

'Our greatest concern is for children who are fed cheese products by their well-meaning parents,' says PCRM nutrition education director Susan Levin, M.S., R.D. “Cheese is loaded with fat, cholesterol, sodium—and calories. It ought to come with a warning label so consumers understand the health risk."

Oh, really?

In case you aren't familiar with these guys, they are actually an animal welfare organization in disguise. I have long considered them another front for PETA, although the relationship is arm's length, with PETA only providing them some funding.

There is no doubt that too much cheese is bad for your health. And Wisconsinites are overweight. But that's not really why PCRM wants people to stop eating cheese.

From Quackwatch:

"The Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) is a nonprofit association that claims to promote "optimal diet for prevention of disease," says there is evidence that humans don't have a specific requirement for protein, and teaches that "too much dietary protein from animal sources is detrimental to health."  PCRM's reference to "animal sources" is key to understanding its true purpose. Its leader, Neal Barnard, MD, has been identified as medical adviser to the radical animal rights organization People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), and PCRM may be substantially funded by it."

Which is certainly their prerogative. But why not be more honest about their motives? Because a billboard that says "the dairy industry is cruel to cows" does not appeal to people's self interest. Instead, PCRM goes after the consumption of animal-based foods with dire warnings about health consequences.

Personally, I am much more concerned about cruelty to humans than cruelty to animals. What would you think if I went on a rant about inhumane child labour in the cultivation of chocolate, coffee or bananas, but then I suddenly told you that I wanted you to stop buying those things because I'm worried for your health? You'd question my motives. (And probably ask me why I didn't consider Fairtrade tropical goods.)

Anything is bad for you in excess. Factory farming is disgusting and cruel. And PCRM is not a very "responsible" advertiser, IMHO.

Brought to you by the generation who told women breastfeeding was disgusting and primitive

(Click to enlarge and read copy)

That's right! Seven-Up is so pure...so wholesome!

Via The Consumerist

Healthy eating starts on the farm

My God, it's hard to be a good parent these days. Especially when you've got a two-income family and very little time between wrapping up work, getting the kid(s) home, feeding them, and putting them to bed. Soon, the soup cans and KD boxes start piling up in your recycling, and you wonder whatever happened to home cooked meals.

Well, there is an alternative. And it starts with teaching your kids to appreciate real food.



This is a fun little video Acart's Cause Loop (our employee-run CSR committee) did for the Fill-A-Bus programme at the Canadian Agricultural Museum.

Fill-a-Bus sends kids to the Ag Museum's summer day camp, where kids learn more about how the food they eat is grown and raised. It's a first step in getting them to think "outside the box" (sorry) when it comes to mealtimes.

And the little dude in the blue shirt who knows all the answers? He's mine.

Yeah, we've been practising what we preach at Chez Adman.

To donate to Fill-A-Bus, go here.

Big Corn and Big Sugar: Fighting (sweet) tooth and nail

The Consumerist reports that Big Sugar is none too sweet on Big Corn's attempts to rebrand high fructose corn syrup as "corn sugar". In fact, Western Sugar Cooperative, Michigan Sugar Company and C & H Sugar Company, Inc. are suing rcher Daniels Midland, Cargill, Tate & Lyle and the Corn Refiners Association in U.S. District Court for false advertising.

"This suit is about false advertising, pure and simple," sayeth the President and CEO of Western Sugar Cooperative. "If consumers are concerned about your product, then you should improve it or explain its benefits, not try to deceive people about its name or distort scientific facts."

The commercials in question are linked to the images below. (The Corn Refiners don't like embedding.)

Watch "Maze" (new window)

Watch "Question Mark" (new window)

The corn people are, obviously, not amused:

"The name 'corn sugar' more accurately describes this sweetener and helps clarify food products labeling for manufacturers and consumers alike. The Corn Refiners Association petitioned the Food & Drug Administration in September 2010 to more succinctly and accurately describe what this natural ingredient is and where it comes from—corn.
High fructose corn syrup makes many healthy foods palatable and affordable for American consumers. It is disappointing that another sweetener would sue the competition for its own gain - and stand in the way of consumer clarity about added sugars in the diet.
Simply, this lawsuit is without merit, and we will vigorously defend our right to petition the FDA to clear up consumer confusion about the name."

Interestingly, this new PR campaign comes at a time when consumers are starting to demand real sugar again — just look at the Pepsi Throwback phenomenon.

The health differences between cane sugar and high fructose corn syrup are debatable. But there is some evidence that HFCS, calorie for calorie, is processed differently in the body. A Princeton study, for example, found that HFCS led to significantly greater weight gain in lab rats:

"Some people have claimed that high-fructose corn syrup is no different than other sweeteners when it comes to weight gain and obesity, but our results make it clear that this just isn't true, at least under the conditions of our tests," said psychology professor Bart Hoebel, who specializes in the neuroscience of appetite, weight and sugar addiction. "When rats are drinking high-fructose corn syrup at levels well below those in soda pop, they're becoming obese -- every single one, across the board. Even when rats are fed a high-fat diet, you don't see this; they don't all gain extra weight."

Me, I'm just turned off by the whole corn situation in the United States: heavily subsidized, industrialized, genetically modified, and grown for fuel as well as being slipped into so many foods, it's a $15.1 Billion industry that obviously pulls a lot of weight as a political lobby.

I'm trying to cut down on all sugars, but somehow cane seems a little less evil — or at least more wholesome — these days.

Have you changed your sweetener habits lately? And why?