Mexican Coke: Actual Win For Health Or Just Marketing?

Why Coke’s “real cane sugar” is selling nostalgia, not nutrition.

The MAHA movement (Make America Healthy Again) wants to overhaul America’s health, starting with the food industry. This includes getting rid of dyes, additives, and other ultra-processed junk.

Their latest “big win” has been replacing high-fructose corn syrup with cane sugar in the popular health food we know as Coke. Cane sugar was the original sweetener – it’s what’s currently used in Mexican Coke. It’s being hailed as a healthier choice and a victory in the fight against obesity. But is this really a health upgrade? An attempt at appeasement? Or just great marketing?

*Note:  This is not a full breakdown of the consumption of HFCS or processed foods in our diet. 

Real Cane Sugar Vs. High Fructose Corn Syrup

What You Need To Know: Cane sugar and HFCS are actually very similar in their make-up and effects on overall health.

You will hear health-conscious Coke drinkers say, “Cane sugar is natural and real!”.

“Natural” sounds nice, but it doesn’t guarantee health. When it comes to the sugar in Coke, it’s hard to believe it has anything to do with health at all.

But what is cane sugar and how is it different from high fructose corn syrup? We’re going to first break this down.

What Is Cane Sugar?

Cane sugar is simply sucrose, the same basic table sugar you’ve been using for decades. Sucrose is a disaccharide, meaning it’s composed of two sugars broken down like this: ¹

• 50% Glucose
• 50% Fructose

Notice that it is 50% fructose, one of the main complaints of high-fructose corn syrup. This doesn’t automatically make sucrose bad, but it’s still sugar.

The term “cane sugar” sticks because it seems natural and healthy. Which one of these sounds better?

• “We’re putting real cane sugar back in your Coke!”
• “We’re putting sucrose back in your Coke!”
• “We’re putting table sugar back in your Coke!”

One feels like a high-end ingredient, one sounds like “chemicals,” and the other sounds like basic junk – but they’re all the same thing.

What is High Fructose Corn Syrup?

High Fructose Corn Syrup gets a bad rap due to the “high fructose”. While we’re not saying it’s healthy, it’s a bit misunderstood.

Around the 1960s-1970s, researchers found a way to extract the starch from corn, allowing the creation of corn syrup.  In this form, corn syrup is almost 100% glucose.

They then converted some of the glucose into fructose, creating High Fructose Corn Syrup.

The “high” in high fructose corn syrup is relative to corn syrup, which is almost 100% glucose¹. 

There are actually two types used;

• HFCS‑42: ~42% fructose, 58% glucose (used in baked goods)
• HFCS‑55: ~55% fructose, 45% glucose (used in soda)

As you can see, it’s not “high” in fructose compared to sucrose – the type used in baking actually has less fructose than cane sugar.

The primary difference is that HFCS is absorbed slightly faster, as the glucose and fructose are already in isolated forms. This is opposed to sucrose where the glucose and fructose are joined together. 

Regardless, many studies have found almost identical acute responses to both sugars.¹

History Of Cane Sugar & High Fructose Corn Syrup

What You Need To Know: Sucrose (cane sugar) has always been in the American diet and currently makes up around half, or slightly more, of all added sweeteners. (Exact date is hard to find) 

The excitement that surrounds the Mexican Coke would have you believe the US no longer uses cane sugar. They do.

Before the 1960s and 1970s, sucrose was the USA’s primary source of sugar.¹ However, after the discovery of HFCS, its use took off.

But even at the peak of HFCS consumption (around 1999-2005), it made up around 50-60% of US sweetener consumption while sucrose made up about 40-50%. Annual consumption rate per person equated to: ²

• HFCS: 36-40 lbs/person/year*
• Sucrose: 37.1 - 40 lbs lbs/person/year*

*These numbers are based on the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Other data may vary.

After 2010, there was pushback on HFCS, and there was an obvious shift back towards sucrose.²-³ Today, the breakdown is approximately;

• Sucrose: 60-65%   (40.2 lbs/person/year)*
• HFCS: 35-40%  (20.2lbs lbs/person/year)*

Even though the consumption of HFCS has been decreasing for the past 2 decades, there has been a steady increase in both obesity and diabetes (and chronic disease as a whole).

Regardless, sugary beverages are one of the largest contributors to fructose and added sugars in our diet. Replacing HFCS with sucrose isn’t going to do anything to solve that.

High Fructose Corn Syrup Vs Cane Sugar: Effects On Health

Because HFCS is portrayed as being solely responsible for obesity, it’s important to look at actual studies. We can then see if using cane sugar would produce better results.

This is not going to be a complete review of all the literature on these two sugars, nor are we advocating for either. We will just list a few reviews to illustrate this;

The Effect of High-Fructose Corn Syrup vs. Sucrose On Anthropometric and Metabolic Parameters: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (2022)³

Results showed similar effects on numerous health markers including; 

• Waist circumference, body mass index, fat mass 
• Total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein, low-density lipoprotein, triglyceride
• Systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure

They conclude, “Combined data from three studies indicated that HFCS intake does not significantly change the weight when compared to the sucrose group.”

High fructose corn syrup did show a greater increase in CRP (C-reactive protein), which can indicate greater inflammation.

Consuming Sucrose or HFCS-sweetened Beverages Increases Hepatic Lipid and Decreases Insulin Sensitivity in Adults (2021)⁴

This study compared sodas with sucrose or HFCS and their effect on various health markers. It found negative effects in both, with no significant differences.

“Consumption of both sucrose and HFCS induced detrimental changes in hepatic lipid, insulin sensitivity, and circulating lipids, lipoproteins, and uric acid in 2 weeks.”

In other words, stop drinking so much soda because none of it is “healthy”, especially in large quantities.

Sucrose, High-Fructose Corn Syrup, and Fructose, Their Metabolism and Potential Health Effects: What Do We Really Know? (2013)¹

This study made several important conclusions, including;

1. No unique relationship between HFCS and obesity. (They both will make you gain weight)

2. No significant metabolic or endocrine response differences or differences in health-related effects between HFCS and sucrose. (Their effect on your metabolism and hormones were similar…in a bad way).

3. Metabolism and health effects of both HFCS and sucrose are different from those observed in studies that compare pure fructose with pure glucose (using studies that use 100% fructose or 100% glucose are irrelevant)

Ultimately, they conclude saying;

“...we must be very cautious when attributing adverse health consequences to the consumption of fructose, HFCS, or sucrose, particularly at normal population consumption levels.”

“At the end of the day, cane sugar and HFCS both contain fructose. The metabolism is slightly different, but that doesn't really matter. Ultimately, either one can contribute to excess body fat when consumed in excess” -Erik Bustillo, MS, RD, CISSN, CSC, CPT

Eric is a registered dietician and trusted leader in the area of sports nutrition. He served as Vice President of the International Society of Sports Nutrition (ISSN) while currently acting as an ambassador and fellow. You can check his Instagram page here https://www.instagram.com/erikbustillo/)

Is Mexico Coke Healthier by Using Real Cane Sugar?

Due to the obsession with calling it “Mexico Coke”, we think it’s a good idea to simply look at Mexico’s health and its relationship with Coke.

Ironically, before this change in the US, there was a well-known issue in Mexico with the rise in diabetes.⁵ It’s been estimated to have some of the highest prognoses in the world and is responsible for ⅓ of all their excess deaths between 35 and 74 years of age.⁶

According to recent research, ⁶ 

• “Mexico is the largest soft drink market in the world, with average consumption at 151 L per capita per year.”
• “The country also has disproportionately high rates of obesity and type 2 diabetes.”

As you can see, a major factor of the rise in diabetes is due to the high consumption rate of various sugary drinks. Now, of course, soda isn’t the only factor – but it’s a large one.

151 liters of soda per person comes out to;

• 1.15 cans of Coke every day, all year
• 160 extra calories every day
• 1,120 calories every week
• 58,240 extra calories every year
• About 16.64lbs of extra fat every year

Mexico Soda Tax

The relationship between soda and health became so bad that Mexico began placing a tax on soda in 2014.⁷ 

• This effectively decreased purchases and increased the purchase of water.
• The decrease still hasn’t had a significant impact on obesity 
• There’s evidence that heavy and moderate drinkers were less responsive to light drinkers. I.e., the people who need to stop drinking didn’t
• Some researchers have suggested the taxes did help, but lobbyists paid scientists for alternative results (but this deserves way more time than this article).⁶ 

Regardless, this is not a criticism of Mexico, as obesity is worldwide. It’s simply a bit naive to get excited about Mexican Coke from a health perspective when Mexico has similar, if not worse, health issues from sugary foods.

With that said, it’s almost universally agreed upon that it tastes better. But when we consider we’re already consuming too much, is that a good thing?

The Primary Problem Isn’t Sugar, It’s Over-Consumption And….

And this brings us to the primary issue. When addressing sugar’s role in obesity, the main issue isn’t what type of sugar or where it comes from; it’s the amount and mode of consumption.

Both cane sugar and HFCS have the same caloric content at 4 calories per gram. If you’re drinking either too much, you’re still consuming an excess of calories, which ultimately leads to obesity and diabetes. 

For perspective, one 12-oz can of Coke has about 140 calories, no matter which sugar is in it. Drink one a day for a year and you’re looking at nearly 51,000 calories — about 14.5 pounds of fat.

The health fight isn’t over HFCS vs cane sugar in Coke. It’s sugar vs too much sugar. 

….Lack Of Physical Activity 

It can be easy to point our fingers at a certain ingredient or a specific food as the reason for all our problems. And yes, there is definitely nuance in these discussions about ingredients.

However, one thing we know for sure is that physical inactivity and sedentary lifestyles are at the root of our health crisis as well. This topic is almost always left out of the discussion and, in some cases, almost downplayed.

Physical activity and strength training have a (Link the new paper on health benefits: myriad of benefits that are essential for health and obesity). This doesn’t mean it will offset a diet composed of excess soda and processed foods, but it can definitely help with improved caloric burn, body composition, and improved metabolism.

Conclusion

Focusing on swapping out a single ingredient ignores the larger health issue. This is more apparent when you realize that in this situation, the ingredient swap is not nearly as significant as some may have you believe. Soda simply isn’t a healthy beverage and probably shouldn’t be a significant part of your diet. Sugar that comes from sugar cane or corn stalks, when consumed in high amounts and stripped from its natural source, will cause health issues.  

References

1. Rippe JM, Angelopoulos TJ. Sucrose, high-fructose corn syrup, and fructose, their metabolism and potential health effects: what do we really know?. Adv Nutr. 2013;4(2):236-245. Published 2013 Mar 1. doi:10.3945/an.112.002824 https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3649104/
2. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. Sugar and Sweeteners Yearbook Tables. Updated July 18, 2024. Accessed August 12, 2025. https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/sugar-and-sweeteners-yearbook-tables
3. Li X, Luan Y, Li Y, et al. The effect of high-fructose corn syrup vs. sucrose on anthropometric and metabolic parameters: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Nutr. 2022;9:1013310. Published 2022 Sep 27. doi:10.3389/fnut.2022.1013310 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36238453/
4. Sigala DM, Hieronimus B, Medici V, et al. Consuming Sucrose- or HFCS-sweetened Beverages Increases Hepatic Lipid and Decreases Insulin Sensitivity in Adults. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2021;106(11):3248-3264. doi:10.1210/clinem/dgab508 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34265055/
5. Gregg EW, Sattar N, Ali MK. Diabetes and cause-specific mortality in Mexico City. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(20):1961-1963. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1605368 https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1605368
6. Balcazar H, Perez Lizaur AB. Sugar-Sweetened Soda Consumption in Mexico: The Translation of Accumulating Evidence for an Increasing Diabetes Risk in Mexican Women. J Nutr. 2019;149(5):705-707. doi:10.1093/jn/nxz007 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31034026/
7. Pedroza-Tobias A, Crosbie E, Mialon M, Carriedo A, Schmidt LA. Food and beverage industry interference in science and policy: efforts to block soda tax implementation in Mexico and prevent international diffusion. BMJ Glob Health. 2021;6(8):e005662. doi:10.1136/bmjgh-2021-005662 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34413076/