Back to regular view     Print this page
  • Suburban Chicago News Classifieds
  • SearchChicago Autos
  • SearchChicago Homes
  • Sun-Times Find a Pet
Become a member of our community!


Opinions
News Alerts
Blogs
News
Local News
Columnists

Letters to the Editor ::
Print Article Email Article Share / Bookmark


TOP STORIES ::
Fire damages Naperville flower shop

Aurora loses its Arby's landmark

A perfect season

No peace on earth: Holiday films go to battle

A table worth remembering








FEATURED ADVERTISER ::
Annie Tickets
Jersey Boys Tickets
Kenny Chesney Tickets
Cirque du Soleil Tickets
Keith Urban Tickets
Custom Home Builder

Letters to the Editor


November 6, 2009

High-fructose corn syrup not fattening in moderation

The Nov. 3 column by Bill Mego, "Naperville's children being harmed by diet," may mislead consumers about high-fructose corn syrup.

High-fructose corn syrup is simply a kind of corn sugar. It has the same number of calories as sugar and is handled the same by the body.

The American Medical Association in June 2008 helped put to rest misunderstandings about this sweetener and obesity, stating that "high-fructose syrup does not appear to contribute to obesity more than other caloric sweeteners."

According to the American Dietetic Association, "high-fructose corn syrup ... is nutritionally equivalent to sucrose. Once absorbed into the blood stream, the two sweeteners are indistinguishable."

As many dietitians agree, all sugars should be consumed in moderation as part of a balanced lifestyle.

Consumers can see the latest research and learn more about high fructose corn syrup at www.sweetsurprise.com.

Audrae Erickson

President

Corn Refiners Association

Washington, D.C.

Values, as well as politics, have to be gotten right

In recent weeks The Naperville Sun has published an array of reader opinions regarding the health care reform bills working their way through Congress.

These opinions have largely focused on politics and relatively little has been written about the values that these opinions reflect.

Many of those who oppose health care reform champion the view that a free market economy is the answer not only to our health care crisis, but to virtually every problem facing our nation.

They choose to ignore the fact that it was this same free market system that created the medical care crisis that we are now experiencing. They also conveniently forget that our current economic crisis was largely the result of lax government regulation and the dangerous excesses that unregulated markets naturally create.

This group apparently longs for a return to the late 19th and early 20th centuries when free market economics created a society where vast wealth was controlled by a handful of capitalists who lived in ostentatious luxury while much of the country lacked the essentials of life. The primary value of this group of people is every man for himself.

The counterpoint to this view stands those who support health care reform and recognize an essential and legitimate role for government in meeting the needs of our country and in curbing the excesses of unbridled capitalism.

They understand the reality of our social and economic interdependence and reject the view that any individual can stand alone. They realize that with our current health care system, even those in the middle class, with good jobs and good health insurance, are one pink slip or one serious illness away from medically based bankruptcy.

The underlying value of this group of people is we are all in this together.

When these two contrasting value systems are applied to our country, the choice may be reframed as a question: What kind of a country do we want for ourselves, our children, and our grandchildren? Does this vision grow out of our basest instincts or does it reflect what Abraham Lincoln called "the better angels of our nature"?

It is critical that we choose wisely, and get the values as well as the politics right, for our decisions today will shape the future for generations to come.

Richard Winchell

Aurora