4 Comments
User's avatar
C Watters's avatar

Great article as always, but this statement isn't necessarily accurate: "This pattern suggests that sugar producers are not making exorbitant profits. If they were, then more farmers would enter the market." Farmers can't easily enter/exit the sugar market because processors control the allotments. So not only do beet farmers need to be located nearby a processor (also, see recent beet plant closures in WY/MT/CA), you need to have acreage/sugar content allocation from the processor. Its complicated.

Aaron Smith's avatar

True, but the fact we aren't hitting the allotment implies there is scope for more production. It does seem that cane has been missing the allotment more than beet, although I haven't looked fully at those data.

Humberto Barreto's avatar

Nice post and excellent data viz. I have a chapter on sugar in my open access micro book (https://barretoh.github.io/GitHubmicro/) and it has this link to a great Colbert show (remember, the old one where he was Bill O'Reilly?) on the TRQ:

http://tiny.cc/TRQ

Carter Williams's avatar

Sucrose is a disaccharide: one molecule of glucose bound to one molecule of fructose via a glycosidic bond. This bond must be cleaved by the enzyme sucrase in the small intestine before the glucose and fructose can be absorbed. That cleavage slows absorption and creates a sort of gatekeeping step.

HFCS, on the other hand, is a mixture of free glucose and free fructose molecules in solution, not bound together. In HFCS-55, it's approximately 55% fructose and 42% glucose (the rest being other sugars). Because the fructose is already unbound, it's absorbed more quickly and starts impacting the liver immediately, especially in liquid form.