Did the FDA Suppress Evidence of Mercury-Tainted High-Fructose Corn Syrup?
13 Jan, 2012
by Tom Philpott, via Grist.org,
High-fructose corn syrup rose from obscurity to ubiquity starting in the late 1970s, borne up by an informal public-private partnership between grain-processing giant Archer Daniels Midland and the federal government. For me, HFCS is at best a highly processed, lavishly subsidized, calorie-heavy, nutritional vacuum.
I visited a public high school in Boone, N.C. The main hall literally hummed with machines peddling variations on Coca-Cola’s formula for success: fizzy water with artificial flavor, artificial color, added caffeine, and a jolt of HFCS. Other machines displayed snack “foods” tarted up with HFCS. Why are we feeding our kids this crap?
Now comes news that makes even an HFCS cynic like me do a spit-take over my home-brewed morning coffee. Turns out that HFCS is commonly tainted with mercury — a highly toxic substance — according to a peer-reviewed report published by Environmental Health (abstract here; PDF of the must-read full text here.)
The Environmental Health study draws on samples of high-fructose corn syrup taken straight from the factory. But no one drinks the stuff straight. What about, say, cookies sweetened with HFCS? The Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy plucked HFCS-containing products from supermarket shelves and tested them for mercury. The result?
Overall, we found detectable mercury in 17 of 55 samples, or around 31 percent
Traces of mercury turned up in name-brand products from makers including Quaker, Hunt’s, Manwich, Hershey’s, Smucker’s, Kraft, Nutri-Grain, and Yoplait.
That a ubiquitous industrial-food ingredient such as HFCS should be tainted by mercury is bad enough. But it gets worse. The FDA has apparently known about this since 2005 — and done nothing to publicize it or change it.
In 2005, EH study lead author Renee Dufault was an FDA researcher. At that time, she conducted the tests now cited in the EH report. Her results found mercury in 9 of 20 HFCS samples — 45 percent.
She doesn’t comment on why, but the FDA apparently did nothing with her results in the years since they emerged. She retired from the agency in March 2008 — and evidently decided to go public. She deserves praise for the decision to publish her work — essentially blowing the whistle on what looks like an egregious attempt to hide key information from the public.
Click here to read the rest of this article at Grist.org.

loading...
loading...
About the author
Related Posts
-
Avoiding Lead (and other metals) in Your Lipstick
-
Weight Loss: The Secret to Faster Metabolism
-
How Can We Stop Deceptive Food Marketing?
-
Examining the True Risks of GMO Salmon
-
GMO Salmon: Nearly 2 Million People Tell FDA "No Way!"
-
Food Terrorism: Why We Must Cook Our Way to Health
-
Federal Court Declares FDA Delay of Food Safety Regulations Illegal
-
Tell Your Representatives to Support the New GMO Labeling Bill!
-
How Biotech Is Gagging Research into GMO Crops
-
Green Calorie Labels Fake Out Consumers







