The guy in that talk is the principal investigator of the study. But it has nothing to do with HFCS in particular, and everything to do with added sugar in general. Sugar made from cane and beets is just as bad as HFCS.
>> Sugar made from cane and beets is just as bad as HFCS.
That is false.
Refined sugar (that is, sucrose) is made up of a molecule of the carbohydrate glucose, bonded to a molecule of the carbohydrate fructose — a 50-50 mixture of the two. The fructose, which is almost twice as sweet as glucose, is what distinguishes sugar from other carbohydrate-rich foods like bread or potatoes that break down upon digestion to glucose alone. The more fructose in a substance, the sweeter it will be. High-fructose corn syrup, as it is most commonly consumed, is 55 percent fructose, and the remaining 45 percent is nearly all glucose. It was first marketed in the late 1970s and was created to be indistinguishable from refined sugar when used in soft drinks. Because each of these sugars ends up as glucose and fructose in our guts, our bodies react the same way to both, and the physiological effects are identical. In a 2010 review of the relevant science, Luc Tappy, a researcher at the University of Lausanne in Switzerland who is considered by biochemists who study fructose to be the world’s foremost authority on the subject, said there was “not the single hint” that H.F.C.S. was more deleterious than other sources of sugar.
The fructose component of sugar and H.F.C.S. is metabolized primarily by the liver, while the glucose from sugar and starches is metabolized by every cell in the body. Consuming sugar (fructose and glucose) means more work for the liver than if you consumed the same number of calories of starch (glucose). And if you take that sugar in liquid form — soda or fruit juices — the fructose and glucose will hit the liver more quickly than if you consume them, say, in an apple (or several apples, to get what researchers would call the equivalent dose of sugar). The speed with which the liver has to do its work will also affect how it metabolizes the fructose and glucose.
I don't see anything in there which refutes the statement that refined sugar from cane and beets isn't significantly different to HFCS in terms of their effect.
Nor do I see anything offered that HFCS IS equivalent to sugar.
Substituting the random manufacturer chemical is what should go through safety tests; you shouldn't have to prove it's dangerous, it should have to prove it is safe.
Fructose is metabolized primarily in the liver. Glucose is metabolized through many other (supposedly less deleterious) processes. HFCS is primarily fructose. Refined sugar is a mix of about 50-50 fructose-glucose. Thus, refined sugar is significantly different that HFCS.
Because each of these sugars ends up as glucose and fructose in our guts, our bodies react the same way to both, and the physiological effects are identical.
I'm not sure you read this before you copied and pasted it. The sentence I've quoted specifically agrees with jganetsk's claim.
The bigger thing I remember from that video was that high fructose corn syrup and sugar weren't far of compositionally. That and how close fructose itself is to alcohol in its side effects.