Ingredients: filtered carbonated water, high fructose corn syrup, natural flavors, natural citric acid and natural potassium citrate.

The bottom line really is that High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS) is a “natural” ingredient. Like the name implies, it is made from corn. The FDA has no real definition for what is and is not natural except that those ingredients that contain artificial or synthetic ingredients or color additives are not to be labeled “natural,” and so 7-Up gets to call itself “All-Natural.”

Consider, though, the way that the U.S. Department of Agriculture grades meat and poultry. Only those products which have been minimally processed are allowed to be labeled as “natural.”

High fructose corn syrup is not graded the same way. One cannot get high fructose corn syrup by simply growing and picking corn. The syrup is derived from a complicated process of “using a series of unit processes that include steeping corn to soften the hard kernel; physical separation of the kernel into its separate components—starch, corn hull, protein and oil; breakdown of the starch to glucose; use of enzymes to invert glucose to fructose; removal of impurities; and blending of glucose and fructose to make HFCS-42 and HFCS-55″¹, which seems logically separated from the idea of “natural.”

Further, consider the following quote from J. Faseb on “The metabolic effects of dietary fructose:”

Dietary fructose has resulted in increases in blood pressure, uric acid, and lactic acid. People who are hypertensive, hyperinsulinemic, hypertriglyceridemic, non-insulin-dependent diabetic, or postmenopausal are more susceptible to these adverse effects of dietary fructose than healthy young subjects. Although consumption of fructose as a component of fruits and vegetables is an unavoidable consequence of eating a healthy diet, added fructose seems to provide little advantage over other caloric sweetners and compares unfavorably to complex carbohydrates in susceptible segments of the population.²

Although no official statements have been made as to whether HFCS is natural, a product described as “100% Natural” may be confused with a product that is healthy or at least that poses no health problems. You’ll notice that 7-Up has changed its advertisement to “100% Natural Flavors” after much concern over the claims that it is “100% Natural.”

Nothing against 7-Up necessarily, but the consumer needs to be aware that he or she is still drinking a soft-drink with unhealthy sweeteners in it that can cause serious problems when consumed in mass quantities.

Keep on FiLCHeRS-ing.

1. White JS. 1992. Fructose syrup: production, properties and applications, in FW Schenck & RE Hebeda, eds, Starch Hydrolysis Products – Worldwide Technology, Production, and Applications. VCH Publishers, Inc. 177-200. [↩]
2. Faseb, J. (1990). Metabolic effects of dietary fructose. Gerontology Research Center, National Institute on Aging: Baltimore, Maryland. [↩]

However, the American Association for Justice’s fact sheet from the lawsuit² paints a different picture. Among other facts presented in the trial are these: 1) The coffee temperature was held at 185 degrees while a “full thickness” burn can be caused by any liquid at 180 degrees, 2) Liebeck suffered 3rd degree burns “on her inner thighs, perineum, buttocks, and genital and groin areas,” and 3) Liebeck “was hospitalized for eight days, during which time she underwent skin grafting and debridement treatments (the surgical removal of tissue)’ (American Association for Justice, 2006).

What do you think now? Was it worth millions of dollars? What if I told you that the defendant originally requested to settle for $20,000 and McDonald’s refused? Follow the link to the McDonald’s Coffee Case below for some factual details from the case like these:

1) During discovery, McDonald’s produced documents showing more than 700 claims by people burned by its coffee between 1982 and 1992. Some claims involved third-degree burns substantially similar to Liebeck’s. This history documented McDonald’s knowledge about the extent and nature of this hazard.

2) McDonald’s own quality assurance manager testified that a burn hazard exists with any food substance served at 140 degrees or above and that McDonald’s coffee was not fit for consumption because it would burn the mouth and throat.

3) The quality assurance manager further testified that the company actively enforces a requirement that coffee be held in the pot at 185 degrees, plus or minus five degrees. He also testified that while burns would occur, McDonald’s had no intention of reducing the “holding temperature” of its coffee.
—Adapted from:

Henderson, D. G. (2007, June). Bias in the media. [Discussion 2]. Message posted to https://secure.waldenu.edu/

1. Pearle, L. (May 02, 2007). ‘I’m being sued for what?’ ABC News. Retrieved June 28, 2007, from http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/Story?id=3121086&page=1. [↩]
2. McDonald’s scalding coffee case (2006). American Association for Justice. Retrieved June 28, 2007, from http://www.atla.org/pressroom/FACTS/frivolous/McdonaldsCoffeecase.aspx [↩]

This Website is currently being developed. Visit again soon!!!