The Chemistry of Glucose

Glucose, otherwise known as C6H12O6, is the most common of all the polysaccharides. It provides energy for all plants, animals, and even people. The structure of this molecule looks like a long chain of Carbons with Hydrogens and Oxygens branching off of it. All though this chain is commonly portrayed in a straight line, glucose naturally exists in a cyclic, or circular chain. Sucrose, also known as sugar, is a polysaccharide made of one chain of glucose and another chain of fructose. Sugar is something that is consumed by millions of people on a regular basis.

The History of Glucose

As the new world was discovered, people found that its land was great for many crops that struggled in other places. Among these crops where corn, tobacco, cotton, wheat, beans, and sugar cane. With all of these new crops having the ability to be grown in this new world, and there being a huge demand for them overseas, made it necessary to grow vast amounts of all of these. The one that was grown more than any was sugar cane, to make sugar. Now that there where large amounts of crops able to be planted, the European colonists, and eventually the American citizens required a work force much greater than themselves. Instead of hiring people from foreign countries, they stole people from their homeland in Africa, and sold them into slavery to work the fields. They were horribly mistreated from the disease-infested ride to America on the middle passage to being beaten in the fields of their new home. Since sugar was the largest of the crops grown in this new world, not near as many slaves would have been needed to come and work the fields, so less of this inhumane madness would have occurred.

Is this argument valid?

The argument that the author proposes is that since, sugar was such an important crop to the new world, and glucose is a big part of sugar, that if glucose did not exist, there would not have been as many slaves brought from Africa. Although this may be slightly true, I believe that it would not have made very much of a difference, because the slaves would still have been brought over from Africa to work the fields. Also, the crops of sugar would probably just have been replaced with something else, and the same amount of slaves would have come over. Although this is something to think about, I believe that the author’s argument is invalid.


Categories: Uncategorized | 4 Comments

Post navigation

4 thoughts on “Glucose

  1. will, I appreciate how concise your post is. You got to the point without dressing it up too much, which makes for a great summary. I would’ve liked to see more facts within the history section, but that’s minor. Good work!

  2. Will, I agree with Noah on the fact that you did need a few more facts in the history section but I feel like that you could have used a little bit more chemistry. Other than that, I really liked how you did get straight to the point instead of just dragging the post on and on. Good job!!

  3. Hey Will, I liked your post, despite a few flaws. Firstly is that your first sentence is incorrect, sugar is the most common monosaccharide, not polysaccharide :P. Secondly, I believe part of the blog requirements were that you give your opinion on whether or not sugar’s impact on society increased or decreased in modern times, and I don’t see that anywhere. Correct me if I’m wrong. Anyway, nice job.

  4. *glucose is the most common monosaccharide, I said sugar /dumb me

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at

%d bloggers like this: