2 edits
Originally posted by Metal BrainThere 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.
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
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.
Originally posted by sonhouseVery interesting. I looked into the Stevia plant and it appears that it is adaptable enough to grow in many parts of the USA.
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.
http://www.stevia.net/growingstevia.htm
Thanks for the great information!
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.
Originally posted by sonhouseI'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).
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.
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).
Originally posted by Metal BrainThe 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.
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!
Originally posted by SoothfastIt appears to me that stevia is for most purposes superior to sugar.
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.
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 normbenignOriginally posted by Metal Brain
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?
"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?