Picking a nit, but: I generally agreed with you up until you referenced HFCS. HFCS is a bogeyman and is nearly identical to sucrose (to be precise, HFCS-55 was formulated to replace sucrose by providing a nearly identical mix of fructose and glucose (yes, it's 55/45 rather than 50/50; blow); see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-fructose_corn_syrup).
The problem with HFCS is not HFCS, it's that the US government has subsidized corn production, lowering the price of corn, lowering the price on a sucrose-analog and increasing the total amount of sucrose-analog in the American diet. See Earl Butz [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earl_Butz ].
The problem with HFCS is not HFCS, it's that the US government has subsidized corn production, lowering the price of corn, lowering the price on a sucrose-analog and increasing the total amount of sucrose-analog in the American diet. See Earl Butz [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earl_Butz ].
Fascinating charts. Compare: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5e/Usda_swee... and http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c1/USObesity...