You’d do well to read the entire piece, but here are some excerpts

http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2015/natural-and-added-sugars-two-sides-of-the-same-coin/
Natural and Added Sugars: Two Sides of the Same Coin

by Mary E. Gearing

It’s hard to find a more controversial topic than sugar, which is never far from the media’s attention. From the recent hype surrounding That Sugar Film to the continued demonizing of high fructose corn syrup, we can’t stop talking about sugar and how we’re likely eating too much of it.

In an effort to decrease sugar consumption, the FDA has recommended labeling foods with “added sugars.” To determine if this policy change is appropriate, we’ll look at what science has to say about sugar, examining natural and added sugars to see how they compare.

Since HFCS has been blamed for the rise in US obesity levels, many companies have raced to replace HFCS with natural “pure cane sugar” . If we look more closely, however, the arguments against HFCS begin to crumble. The sweetest form of HFCS, with 55% fructose, has only 5% more fructose than cane sugar. HFCS containing 42% fructose is much more commonly used, and it contains even less fructose than cane sugar . The problem is not HFCS, but rather too much total sugar consumption. Natural cane sugar is not a healthy alternative to HFCS. Despite their different origins, these two sugars have fundamentally similar properties, and both have negative effects on our health when overconsumed.

Is added sugar labeling valuable?

Given what we know about added and natural sugars, it’s easy to see that the FDA’s new labeling venture is imperfect and potentially misleading. In the best case scenario, consumers would realize that their yogurt or cereal contain large amounts of added sugar and subsequently switch to lower sugar options. But by separating natural and added sugars, the FDA creates a false dichotomy. The benefits of fruit come from its fiber, rather than its natural sugar. The science does not support endorsing natural sugars over their added counterparts, since these sugars have similar metabolic effects. The FDA’s efforts would be better directed towards education about the negative metabolic effects of high sugar intake.

> high fructose corn syrup (HFCS).

OK

> HFCS containing 42% fructose is much more commonly used, and it contains even less fructose than cane sugar.

What? Check web.

“sugar cane juice, with a relatively low glycemic index of 43, as a healthy alternative to table sugar when used in moderation. It contains fructose and glucose”.

“Whatever you call it, evaporated cane juice is basically sugar. And it goes by many other names, including “dried cane juice,” “crystallized cane juice,” “milled cane sugar,” and “unrefined sugar.” Granted it is not-so-white, a-little-less-refined, way-more-expensive sugar”

Isn’t that just the same as “raw sugar”?

———

I was thinking about the healthiness of different sugars while pouring milk on my breakfast cereal yesterday. Milk has a much higher kilojoule count than orange juice, despite the orange juice being much sweeter than milk. Which brought to mind a sweetness table I saw years ago. Fructose is sweeter than sucrose is sweeter then glucose is sweeter than lactose. So as a sweetening agent, fructose ought to be better than sucrose because of its lower kilojoule count. So why don’t we see sweeteners with a higher fructose percentage? Why don’t we see on the supermarket shelves “fructose” as an alternative sweetener to “sugar”. Presumably because the taste is less palatable, but it is a pity.

Raw sugar is much less sweet than refined sugar, despite its (claimed) higher fructose content. It’s only 32% sugars. Nothing can be said about healthiness just from this. It is 13% minerals (calcium, iron, magnesium).

Now, returning to the “high fructose corn syrup” vs “cane sugar” debate in the OP. Fructose content is seen to be only a small part of healthiness. What really matters is the ratio of sweetness to kilojoules, and GI, as well as other components such as minerals.

Research on these matters will continue, and one day, they will converge on a simplest explanation that fits all observations:

(change to energy stored in body) = (energy inputs) – (energy outputs)

… carry on.

SCIENCE said:

Research on these matters will continue, and one day, they will converge on a simplest explanation that fits all observations:

(change to energy stored in body) = (energy inputs) – (energy outputs)

… carry on.

This is all time dependent, so it’s got to be a differential equation.

There are two energy storage stages, the time delay due to energy storage in foods, and the time delay due to energy storage in fat.

Then there’s an extra equation needed for calculating hunger. And an equation for how hunger affects food eaten.

Then there are extra equations for each nutrient – minerals, vitamins, sulphur, hydrogen etc.

For a start, we need to stop talking about That Sugar Film. It contains “experts” such as David Avocado Wolfe and David Gillespie, who wrote the widely discredited book Sweet Poison. And Hugh Jackman making pretty pictures with his fingers.

Something you may not know:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raffinose said:

Raffinose is a trisaccharide composed of galactose, glucose, and fructose. It can be found in beans, cabbage, brussels sprouts, broccoli, asparagus, other vegetables, and whole grains. Raffinose can be hydrolyzed to D-galactose and sucrose by the enzyme α-galactosidase (α-GAL), an enzyme not found in the human digestive tract. α-GAL also hydrolyzes other α-galactosides such as stachyose, verbascose, and galactinol, if present. The enzyme does not cleave β-linked galactose, as in lactose.

The raffinose family of oligosaccharides (RFOs) are alpha-galactosyl derivatives of sucrose, and the most common are the trisaccharide raffinose, the tetrasaccharide stachyose, and the pentasaccharide verbascose. RFOs are almost ubiquitous in the plant kingdom, being found in a large variety of seeds from many different families, and they rank second only to sucrose in abundance as soluble carbohydrates.

Humans and other monogastric animals (pigs and poultry) do not possess the α-GAL enzyme to break down RFOs and these oligosaccharides pass undigested through the stomach and upper intestine. In the lower intestine, they are fermented by gas-producing bacteria that do possess the α-GAL enzyme and make carbon dioxide, methane or hydrogen—leading to the flatulence commonly associated with eating beans and other vegetables. α-GAL is present in digestive aids such as the product Beano.

Procedures concerning cryopreservation have used raffinose to provide hypertonicity for cell desiccation prior to freezing. Either raffinose or sucrose is used as a base substance for sucralose.

I think it is remarkable that humans are unable to digest the second most abundant soluble sugar.

KJW said:

Something you may not know:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raffinose said:

Raffinose is a trisaccharide composed of galactose, glucose, and fructose. It can be found in beans, cabbage, brussels sprouts, broccoli, asparagus, other vegetables, and whole grains. Raffinose can be hydrolyzed to D-galactose and sucrose by the enzyme α-galactosidase (α-GAL), an enzyme not found in the human digestive tract. α-GAL also hydrolyzes other α-galactosides such as stachyose, verbascose, and galactinol, if present. The enzyme does not cleave β-linked galactose, as in lactose.

The raffinose family of oligosaccharides (RFOs) are alpha-galactosyl derivatives of sucrose, and the most common are the trisaccharide raffinose, the tetrasaccharide stachyose, and the pentasaccharide verbascose. RFOs are almost ubiquitous in the plant kingdom, being found in a large variety of seeds from many different families, and they rank second only to sucrose in abundance as soluble carbohydrates.

Humans and other monogastric animals (pigs and poultry) do not possess the α-GAL enzyme to break down RFOs and these oligosaccharides pass undigested through the stomach and upper intestine. In the lower intestine, they are fermented by gas-producing bacteria that do possess the α-GAL enzyme and make carbon dioxide, methane or hydrogen—leading to the flatulence commonly associated with eating beans and other vegetables. α-GAL is present in digestive aids such as the product Beano.

Procedures concerning cryopreservation have used raffinose to provide hypertonicity for cell desiccation prior to freezing. Either raffinose or sucrose is used as a base substance for sucralose.

I think it is remarkable that humans are unable to digest the second most abundant soluble sugar.

Yet we all crave sweet green forms of these.

I still recall this anecdote from when I was a toddling tottler..

My mum sent me up to the garden to fetch her some green peas. I arrived back in the kitchen and she asked “where are tehe peas I sent you to get?” I simply patted my belly. She said, “I want them to cook for dinner. They are no good in your belly”.
I said, “don’t like them cooked”.
Her reply, “OK, you have had yours, so go get some for the rest of us”.