Screw you and your health

Screw you and your health

Debates

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.

MB

Joined
07 Dec 05
Moves
22048
24 Apr 12

Americans consume mercury and ruin their health.

http://www.naturalnews.com/032948_high_fructose_corn_syrup_glutaraldehyde.html

Pay more to ruin your health instead of enjoying mercury free cane sugar while you are at it.

http://www.fff.org/freedom/0498d.asp

s
Fast and Curious

slatington, pa, usa

Joined
28 Dec 04
Moves
53223
24 Apr 12
2 edits

Originally posted by Metal Brain
Americans consume mercury and ruin their health.

http://www.naturalnews.com/032948_high_fructose_corn_syrup_glutaraldehyde.html

Pay more to ruin your health instead of enjoying mercury free cane sugar while you are at it.

http://www.fff.org/freedom/0498d.asp
There is a sugar sub that is 300 times sweeter than sugar and has been used for centuries in South America, it's called Stevia. I think you can get it under the name Truvia here in the US.

The sugar industry attempted to have it banned as toxic but lately has been proven to be not only safe but can help restore insulin function for diabetics. I imagine Truvia would be diluted with something, otherwise you would need a piece the size of a period on the end of a sentence. Maybe a bit more than that but you get what I mean. And of course that begs the question of what would they dilute it with. Regular sugar?🙂

The sugar industry has had the last word however, they forced the FDA to require Stevia to be sold under the general term of "food supplement", forcing most of it to be sold in health food stores which of course makes it 4 or 5 times more expensive than if it was sold like sugar in grocery stores.

MB

Joined
07 Dec 05
Moves
22048
25 Apr 12

Originally posted by sonhouse
There is a sugar sub that is 300 times sweeter than sugar and has been used for centuries in South America, it's called Stevia. I think you can get it under the name Truvia here in the US.

The sugar industry attempted to have it banned as toxic but lately has been proven to be not only safe but can help restore insulin function for diabetics. I imagine ...[text shortened]... course makes it 4 or 5 times more expensive than if it was sold like sugar in grocery stores.
Very interesting. I looked into the Stevia plant and it appears that it is adaptable enough to grow in many parts of the USA.

http://www.stevia.net/growingstevia.htm

Thanks for the great information!

Australia

Joined
20 Jan 09
Moves
386476
26 Apr 12
1 edit

Stevia is sold in supermarkets here in Australia at reasonable prices, and having done all the reading I am happy to recommend it to other diabetics if you can get it. Our local version is a sugar-type crystalline powder with, they claim, only Stevia RebA and erythritol as content. It behaves exactly like sugar except that it tends to clump in moist conditions slightly more enthusiastically.

0,1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,

Planet Rain

Joined
04 Mar 04
Moves
2702
26 Apr 12

Originally posted by sonhouse
There is a sugar sub that is 300 times sweeter than sugar and has been used for centuries in South America, it's called Stevia. I think you can get it under the name Truvia here in the US.

The sugar industry attempted to have it banned as toxic but lately has been proven to be not only safe but can help restore insulin function for diabetics. I imagine ...[text shortened]... course makes it 4 or 5 times more expensive than if it was sold like sugar in grocery stores.
I'm drinking tea with stevia in it right now. It was around the beginning of the year that I switched from Splenda to stevia, and it's great (albeit a little more expensive).

The stevia plant leaf has a host of related chemicals in it that are sweet, and Truvia I believe is a distillation of just one of those chemicals, bulked out with erythritol (an alcohol sugar). I know because I have a box of the stuff in front of me.

Stevia in the raw is probably best, if you want the all-natural experience. Since some cultures have indeed been consuming stevia for generations with no perceptible ill effects, it's much better vetted than, say, Splenda, Equal (aspartame), or Sweet 'n' Lo (saccharin).

0,1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,

Planet Rain

Joined
04 Mar 04
Moves
2702
26 Apr 12

Originally posted by Metal Brain
Very interesting. I looked into the Stevia plant and it appears that it is adaptable enough to grow in many parts of the USA.

http://www.stevia.net/growingstevia.htm

Thanks for the great information!
The only downside of stevia is that it doesn't work well for baking purposes. It is also comparatively more expensive, but that'll probably change in the next couple of years as it gains market acceptance.

n

The Catbird's Seat

Joined
21 Oct 06
Moves
2598
27 Apr 12

Originally posted by Soothfast
The only downside of stevia is that it doesn't work well for baking purposes. It is also comparatively more expensive, but that'll probably change in the next couple of years as it gains market acceptance.
It appears to me that stevia is for most purposes superior to sugar.

Should there be legislation to promote its use, and to wean us off sugar? Or should sugar subsidies continue, to assist all the workers who are in the sugar business? Or should we just let the market take its course?

K

Germany

Joined
27 Oct 08
Moves
3118
27 Apr 12

Here's another shocker: Americans eat too much and become fatsos.

n

The Catbird's Seat

Joined
21 Oct 06
Moves
2598
30 Apr 12

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
Here's another shocker: Americans eat too much and become fatsos.
Absolutely true, but Somalians eat far to little, and some die of starvation and malnutrition.

Insanity at Masada

tinyurl.com/mw7txe34

Joined
23 Aug 04
Moves
26660
01 May 12

http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/150019/cartman-on-tv#searchterm=cartman%20marvin

k
Flexible

The wrong side of 60

Joined
22 Dec 11
Moves
37081
01 May 12

Originally posted by normbenign
It appears to me that stevia is for most purposes superior to sugar.

Should there be legislation to promote its use, and to wean us off sugar? Or should sugar subsidies continue, to assist all the workers who are in the sugar business? Or should we just let the market take its course?
Originally posted by Metal Brain
"Very interesting. I looked into the Stevia plant and it appears that it is adaptable enough to grow in many parts of the USA."

Or wean the workers off sugar as well, and perhaps Washington could be weaned off the sugar growers lobbying funds?