> it's basically the same

Not really. Fructose is JUST fructose, sucrose is half fructose.

"high fructose" corn syrup--what's typically used to replace sucrose--is 55% fructose, not 100% fructose. IOW, only 5% more fructose. (It can even be less than sucrose, as low as 42%, but for sake of argument 55% seems fair.)

~55%, plus another 50% of the sucrose content once its broken down in the gut, which means it's effectively somewhere around 75% sucrose for the body to break down~

EDIT: nevermind, assumed the rest was sucrose rather than glucose

I'm not following. HFCS is 55% fructose and 45% glucose, not 45% sucrose.

Fair point. I incorrectly assumed the parent was comparing fructose to sucrose directly.

"Basically the same" as fructose and glucose separately.

In soda, the ingredients say sugar, but it has already been dissociated to fructose and glucose in the bottle.

If we’re talking about sugar soft drinks in the US this is invariably HFCS.

There is no point in quibbling.

"High fructose corn syrup" is the same as table sugar, to your body.

So why do people make a big deal out of it, does it just taste bad?

Hipsterism. You cannot trust the taste of anybody who touches either of them.