Most sweeteners are comprised of some mixture of glucose and fructose. Table sugar, or sucrose, is an easily broken disaccharide evenly split between the two sugars. Honey is basically the same ratio, but the bond is already broken (though this hardly matters, unless you have a sucrase deficiency and can’t break the bond yourself). Juices vary in their ratios, but as an example, apple juice is about 70% fructose. Malt sugars and other grain-derived sugars, like brown rice syrup, consist mainly of glucose. Dextrose, derived from corn, is 100% glucose. Agave can sometimes have about 80% fructose. HFCS can also vary a great deal, but the most commonly consumed form is about 55% fructose, which is pretty similar to plain old table sugar, except that the sugars aren’t bound in HFCS, just like in honey and most fruits.
My point: If you believe that fruit and table sugar can be healthy, then HFCS should be no different. It only makes sense to avoid HFCS is you also believe that you shouldn’t drink fruit juice or have any sucrose in your diet. I think that both glucose and fructose can play a role in a nourishing diet, and HFCS is a good source of both.
I have never heard a convincing argument for why HFCS should be looked at any differently from sugar, honey, or fruit juice. Most arguments are, in my opinion, complete sophistry, but I am happy to discuss them if anyone cares to.