I want to chat about my favorite disaccharide, sucrose, also known as table sugar. Since the development of high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS), every food and beverage producer that could replace sugar with HFCS has, but why? It turns out that the US government has imposed steep tariffs on sugar imports since the Civil War. On top of the tariffs, the USDA sets limits on the amount of domestic sugar that may be sold annually, creating an artificially limited supply. This keeps US sugar prices two to three times above free-market prices.

It should come as no surprise that hard candy manufacturers – who have to use real sugar – have moved out of the country to avoid these troubles. The domestic sweetener industry isn’t losing sleep over any of this, though. For sugar growers, they get a great deal. Because the government helps prop up prices and sets production limits, they don’t have to work hard to compete in the sugarcane market. Also benefitting are corn growers since all of the HFCS comes from them.

Big consumers of sugar – candymakers and soft drink producers to name two – have grown tired of this system and are pushing to ditch the tariffs and production caps. I’m taking their side. I prefer things sweetened with sugar over those sweetened with HFCS.

An article in BusinessWeek got me started on this tirade. I’d link you to it, but you have to register and possibly buy something, so nevermind on that. You should also check out the Wikipedia article on HFCS. Pay special attention to the part where normal corn syrup is run through a process with alpha-amylase, glucoamylase, glucose isomerase, liquid chromotography, back-blending and plenty of ion-exchange. Not that sugar production is chemically uninvolved, but production of actual raw sugar is pretty simple: boil sugar juice. Bleaching the sugar to make it nice and white is a bit disturbing, but not too bad. Anyway, let your local congress critter know that sugar tariffs aren’t cool.