Is Coke with cane sugar really healthier? MAHA's claims are missing the point.
Our favorite soda is being made great again. Or is it?
Early in my career, I was puzzled when a lab colleague asked me to bring back a few cans of Coke from my trip home to Brazil. I soon learned that sodas in the United States are sweetened with high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) instead of cane sugar, and that many people miss the original flavor of sugar-sweetened versions.
What I've learned about sweeteners since then feels especially relevant now, as Coca-Cola's decision to reintroduce cane sugar into at least one of its American-sold products, allegedly prompted by President Donald Trump's encouragement, has reignited discussion over what goes into our sodas.
Cane sugar vs. artificial sweeteners
While sucrose, the chemical name for cane sugar, could be the most common sweetener in our kitchens, many other substances also taste sweet to us.
These include glucose, fructose and intensely sweet compounds like saccharin (a synthetic sweetener), steviol glycosides (extracted from the leaves of Stevia rebaudiana) and even ultrasweet proteins.
One of the most intriguing of those proteins is brazzein, my personal favorite, which was discovered in the West African plant Pentadiplandra brazzeana and is now produced at scale by engineered microbes in large fermentation tanks.
Some of these substances are packed with calories, while others are virtually calorie-free. The way our bodies metabolize them varies widely.
Opinion: Food stamps shouldn't pay for soda and candy. Let's promote healthier options.
Corn syrup provides soda companies with advantages
Coca-Cola's reintroduction of cane sugar in its products line is a big deal, not just because it affects a multibillion dollar market, but also because beverages operate in an intensely competitive market space with razor-thin margins, where even a few extra cents per can carry real weight.
Cost, technical advantages and national interests might explain why soda manufacturers switched to corn syrup.
The technical advantages to using HFCS versus cane sugar include the level of sweetness. You can pack a lot of sweetness into HFCS because it is more soluble in water than cane sugar, and it is often easier for the industry to manage syrups versus powders.
There is also a strategic advantage for the U.S. economy. With the help of tariffs imposed on imported sugar in the late 1970s, adoption of HFCS allowed replacing sugar imports with a U.S.-grown and -produced alternative.
This explains why the industry made the switch, but does soda sweetened with HFCS taste the same? And is sugar really any healthier than HFCS?
Even though the sweetness level of the final product can be adjusted to be exactly the same, some consumers notice slight differences in taste and mouth feel when HFCS replaces sugar cane in beverages.
Opinion alerts: Get columns from your favorite columnists + expert analysis on top issues, delivered straight to your device through the USA TODAY app. Don't have the app? Download it for free from your app store.
Some say that the cane sugar version is 'crisper,' or that the HFCS version tastes more 'syrupy,' while others will either not notice the change or quickly get used to it.
However, beyond the perception in our mouths, our bodies handle these sugars in different ways. After we swallow products containing sucrose, our body breaks each molecule into one molecule of glucose and one of fructose.
Is cane sugar healthier? Excessive consumption of any sugar is a health risk.
Glucose is one of the most important sources of energy for our body, essential for the functioning of our brain, which might explain why we are hardwired to crave sweets so much.
Fructose, however, is almost solely metabolized in our livers, and because it isn't as readily consumed as an energy source, it may saturate liver capacities and lead to more fat accumulation.
Overconsumption of either of these sugars increases likelihood of obesity and fatty liver disease, ultimately leading to type 2 diabetes and other severe health problems.
RFK Jr: America's kids are obese. Making families healthier starts with the food we eat. | Opinion
The bottom line is simple: The potential difference in health impact between cane sugar and HFCS is minor when compared with the well-established risks of excessive consumption of sugar.
Both are added sugars that contribute to the growing burden of metabolic disease when consumed in excess.
Hopefully, the discussion around corn syrup versus cane sugar won't lead us to lose sight of the importance of reducing overall sugar consumption − perhaps by opting for the diet versions of our favorite sodas, as President Trump has.
Bruno Xavier is a food safety and product development expert who oversees the manufacturing and regulatory review of more than 2,000 products annually as associate director and thermal processing authority at the Cornell Food Venture Center.
You can read diverse opinions from our USA TODAY columnists and other writers on the Opinion front page, on X, formerly Twitter, @usatodayopinion and in our Opinion newsletter.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
6 hours ago
VA hospitals are finding it harder to fill jobs, watchdog says
NORFOLK, Va. -- Government-run medical centers serving the nation's veterans have reported an increase in severe staffing shortages, with many hospitals having trouble filling jobs for doctors, nurses and psychologists, according to an independent watchdog for the Department of Veterans Affairs. Tuesday's report from the VA's Office of Inspector General is based on surveys from late March and early April that were taken at 139 Veterans Health Administration facilities. Severe staffing shortages are not necessarily an indication of vacancies but refer to particular occupations that are difficult to fill. The surveys were taken just weeks after it was reported in early March that the VA had planned to cut 80,000 jobs — out of 484,000 — through the so-called Department of Government Efficiency, known as DOGE. The VA later reduced the figure to nearly 30,000 jobs to be cut by this fiscal year's end on Sept. 30. President Donald Trump's administration said Tuesday that the surveys are unreliable because they do not reflect actual vacancies, which VA officials said were in line with historical averages. But Democratic lawmakers warned that veterans won't get the health care they need as VA positions become harder to fill. The surveys reflected a 50% increase in the reporting of severe staffing shortages for specific jobs, both for clinical occupations that include doctors and psychologists and for non-clinical jobs that include police and custodial workers. Nearly all of the facilities — 94% — reported a shortage for medical officer occupations that include doctors, while 79% reported shortages for nurses. The report noted that severe shortages for medical officers and nurses have been identified every year in the report since 2014. Pete Kasperowicz, the VA's press secretary, stressed in an email that the report is not based on vacancies and is therefore 'not a reliable indicator of staffing shortages.' 'The report simply lists occupations facilities feel are difficult for which to recruit and retain, so the results are completely subjective, not standardized and unreliable,' Kasperowicz wrote. He said that vacancy rates for doctors and nurses are 14% and 10%, respectively, which he said are lower than most other health care systems and in line with 'normal VA historical averages.' But Jacqueline Simon, policy director for the American Federation of Government Employees, said the surveys reflect the Trump administration's profound hostility toward the federal workforce and what she said are its plans to ultimately privatize the VA. 'This is a deliberate effort to incapacitate and to undermine veterans' support for and approval of the care they receive in VA hospitals and clinics,' Simon said. 'They'll have to wait much longer for appointments. There won't be specialists available. They'll have no choice but to go to the private sector.' Simon also noted the VA's announcement last week that it was terminating collective bargaining agreements for most VA bargaining-unit employees, which could further hurt recruitment. The VA said in a news release that the move will 'make it easier for VA leaders to promote high-performing employees, hold poor performers accountable, and improve benefits and services to America's Veterans.' But U.S. Sen. Mark Warner said in a news release Tuesday that the Trump administration has made it harder for public servants to do their jobs 'and ultimately harder for veterans to get the care they've earned.' 'We also know from recent jobs reports that applications to work at the VA are plummeting," said Warner, a Democrat who represents the veteran-dense state of Virginia. 'How do skyrocketing staffing shortages and declining applicant pools make it more 'efficient' for veterans to access the care and services they deserve? The answer is: they don't.'
Health Line
8 hours ago
- Health Line
6 Ways Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' Could Limit Healthcare Access
The tax and spending bill approved by Congress last month will cut $1 trillion from health-related programs over the next decade. The 'One Big Beautiful Bill' will hit Medicaid hardest with $790 million chopped from its budget. Experts say these reductions will greatly impact health programs across the country, particularly those serving rural communities, children, and lower-income households. The so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), signed by President Donald Trump in early July, will impact virtually every health-related program in the United States. The bill, officially known as House Resolution 1, is expected to reduce federal spending on health-related programs by $1 trillion between now and 2034. It's estimated that those cuts will cause at least 10 million people to lose health insurance coverage during the next nine years. It calls for a reduction in funding for food assistance programs and rural hospitals, as well as reduced funding for Planned Parenthood services, which have been temporarily blocked by a federal judge. Some of these impacts will take years to be felt. Other provisions, however, could directly affect people's lives in the next year or two. 'It is the biggest cut to our social safety net in history,' Liz Fowler, PhD, a distinguished scholar in Health Policy and Management at the Bloomberg School of Public Health at Johns Hopkins University in Maryland, said in a news release from the college. Here's a look at six key areas affected by spending reductions outlined in President Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill.' Medicaid bears the brunt of the cuts Federal funding for Medicaid is expected to be reduced by more than $790 billion over the next decade. More than 70 million people currently receive Medicaid benefits, but various factors could significantly reduce this estimate. Work requirements will mandate that most 'able-bodied' recipients between the ages of 19 and 64 will be required to work, receive work training, volunteer, or be in school for at least 80 hours per month while receiving benefits. The new work requirements take effect on January 1, 2027. As many as 5 million people could lose health insurance due to this requirement, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF). More frequent eligibility checks will require states to verify beneficiaries' eligibility for Medicaid more often, causing some recipients to be removed from the program. Immigration restrictions will reduce the number of foreign-born residents receiving benefits. The cuts may also affect hospitals, as Medicaid is responsible for 20% of revenue at these medical facilities nationwide. Experts also point out that people who are no longer on Medicaid will not seek preventive care and end up in hospital emergency rooms due to more serious medical issues. 'Cutting Medicaid means millions lose access to basic care, leading to sicker patients, overwhelmed ERs, and rising costs for everyone,' said Kanwar Kelley, MD, a specialist in otolaryngology, head and neck surgery, obesity medicine, and lifestyle medicine as well as the co-founder and chief executive officer of Side Health. 'Lack of access to preventive care leads to a sicker population, which leads to more medical expenses,' Kelley told Healthline. Impacts to Medicare Medicare is a federal program founded in 1965 that provides health insurance coverage to people 65 years and older. About 66 million Americans are enrolled. Trump's bill does not directly mention Medicare cuts, but there are measures that could impact recipients. Under a 2010 budget mechanism law known as PAYGO, the Congressional Budget Office estimates the Trump bill could trigger more than $500 billion in Medicare cuts between 2026 and 2034, KFF reports. The Center for Medicare Advocacy notes the bill will also reduce the number of people eligible for Medicare. They say some non-citizens who meet Medicare eligibility requirements through work history or residency length will no longer be covered. In addition, the bill imposes a nine-year ban on implementing improvements to Medicare Savings Programs that help lower-income Medicare beneficiaries pay for premiums and out-of-pocket costs. Older adults who are enrolled in both Medicaid and Medicare could hit with a double impact. 'The [bill] will affect this [older] age range by reducing access to care,' Kelley said. 'Creating restrictions based on work requirements and new regulations for exemptions will exclude many in this age group from qualifying. Those in this age range will have a harder time re-entering the workforce to continue their coverage.' Fewer people enrolled in Obamacare The bill will make it more difficult for people to join or remain in programs offered by the Affordable Care Act (ACA), also known as Obamacare. This difficulty will be due to several changes. They include: Requiring enrollees to update their information regularly. This may include updating income, immigration status, and other details each year. Requiring individuals to manually reenroll every year during open enrollment. Last year, 10 million people were automatically reenrolled. Shortening the open enrollment period by a month. That period will now end on December 15 rather than January 15. For the current plan year, 40% of people signed up after December 15. Some immigrants will also no longer be eligible for ACA coverage. In addition, financial assistance that helps people afford insurance in ACA marketplaces will be allowed to expire at the end of this year. The Bloomberg School of Public Health at Johns Hopkins University predicts these changes will cause ACA premiums to rise by 75% next year. Kelley agrees that premiums will likely go up, causing a cascade of events. 'Removing or cutting these subsidies will lead to more expensive plans offered on the marketplace. By raising these prices, many will choose to live without health insurance and risk catastrophic medical debt,' he said. 'Making access to healthcare harder for individuals creates gaps in care for patients, which is crucial in screening for life-altering illnesses.' Strains on rural hospitals The bill does provide rural hospitals with $50 billion over the next five years to help reduce the effects from the cuts in Medicaid spending. However, the Center for American Progress reports that funding will not be nearly enough to make up the difference. The organization states that slightly more than 2,000 rural hospitals receive $12 billion per year in net revenue from Medicaid. At some rural hospitals, Medicaid represents 40–50% of their revenue. The organization added that children, non-elderly adults, and people with disabilities would be the people in rural areas most affected. Kelley agreed that the effects could be far-reaching. 'This loss of funding will hit rural hospitals hard, leading to closures and increasing healthcare disparities in marginalized neighborhoods,' he said. The Center for American Progress also notes that rural hospitals have low operating margins. They project that more than 300 rural hospitals could be at risk of closure. 'Rural communities already face challenges with adequate staffing and medically necessary equipment as they usually operate on tight margins with the subsidies,' Kelley said. 'Reducing the number of providers will lead to closures, which forces those in the community to travel farther for their regular and emergency care.' Fewer families will receive food assistance The bill would cut $120 billion from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) over the next decade, according to estimates. About 40 million people currently receive assistance from the SNAP program. The League of Women Voters projects the cuts could impact 22 million families. Kelley said the impact is beyond just food. 'Food insecurity leads to bad health outcomes,' he said. 'Cutting programs directed at addressing hunger will lead to increased rates of obesity, diabetes, and poor nutrition in kids.' 'Hunger in children leads to poor educational outcomes. Cutting SNAP and other food programs will lead to children going to school hungry, seniors skipping meals, and families making decisions between food and other necessities, including health,' Kelley added. Cuts to Planned Parenthood The bill impacts Planned Parenthood operations by banning people from using Medicaid at healthcare non-profit facilities that provide abortion services outside of cases of rape, incest, or when the pregnant person's life is in danger. Planned Parenthood estimates that the new law could close nearly 200 of its facilities. About 60% of those centers are in medically underserved communities. In addition, the organization states that more than 1 million people could lose access to afford healthcare services such as STI testing and birth control. Miller Morris, MA, MPH, is a women's health researcher and founder of Comma, a service focusing on menstrual health. She notes that a court injunction has temporarily blocked the bill's ban on Medicaid use at reproductive health clinics like Planned Parenthood. However, she said if the provisions are eventually upheld, they could have far-ranging effects. 'If the court's injunction were to be lifted, the defunding of Planned Parenthood would mean fewer resources for all the preventative and primary care services they offer, leading to reduced access for millions of women, especially those in low-income and rural communities,' Morris told Healthline. 'This reduction in Medicaid funding will see catastrophic consequences for the millions of women who rely on Planned Parenthood and similar low-cost organizations for vital, life saving care,' she added.
Boston Globe
10 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Biogen sees potential in combining Alzheimer's and obesity drugs
Advertisement Biogen's looking to the growth of its Alzheimer's drug Leqembi to offset the decline of its multiple sclerosis franchise, which is facing competition from cheaper generic drugs. Biogen's new Alzheimer's drug is already facing competition from Eli Lilly & Co.'s Alzheimer's drug, which was approved in the US last year and has since captured around 30 percent of the market, according to analysts. Other companies are also circling. Novo is carrying out clinical trials to assess whether the main ingredient in diabetes drug Ozempic and weight-loss shot Wegovy might help people with early Alzheimer's disease. Research suggests that the weight-loss drug could slow Alzheimer's progression by impacting inflammation and vascular health. Results of Novo's late-stage trial are expected later this year. Advertisement Viehbacher noted that being overweight is a risk factor for Alzheimer's. He cautioned the Novo study 'is a fairly risky proposition,' adding that 'most of the experts we're talking to are not convinced that it will work.' 'It's logical if you have a weight-loss drug that you can see some benefit, but it's actually pretty hard to move the needle on the cognitive side,' Viehbacher added. Alzheimer's drug development has been riddled with failures, even when drugs looked promising in early studies. Leqembi is a partnership between Cambridge, Massachusetts-based Biogen and Japanese drugmaker Eisai Co. Biogen makes the active ingredient for Leqembi in Switzerland. The company then ships it to North Carolina, where it gets made into a product. President Donald Trump recently put a 39 percent tariff on imports from Switzerland. It's unclear whether this would impact Biogen's drug. Still, Viehbacher said the company has the ability to start producing the substance used to make Leqembi in North Carolina for the US market, while continuing to make it in Switzerland for outside the US. He said the company always intended to use its North Carolina facilities to make Leqembi and the potential move was not a direct response to Trump's tariff threats. Last month, Biogen announced it intends to invest an additional $2 billion in its existing manufacturing footprint in North Carolina's Research Triangle Park.
