I am listening to a webinar announcement hosted by The Coca Cola Company and Cargill. They are publishing results from a number of peer-reviewed double blind studies that demonstrate the safety of rebiana the “best tasting” part of the stevia plant. It is extracted from the leaf by “steeping with fresh water just like tea”. Truvia is the “brand name” for rebiana. So rebiana is to Truvia as sucrolose is to…..??? Splenda. OK, now we get it. And can we now get the potential impact on the food and beverage industry? We’ve all lived through the yellow-ing of the sweetener world!
They whizzed by the results extremely fast so I will post a link to the presentation slides when I get it by e-mail. I did notice a couple of trends in the studies. The studies lasted 4 weeks to 16 weeks. They reported no adverse effects on dosages of 1000 mg per day, which is like 27 sweetener packets. Tolerated by Type II diabetics. Did not raise blood pressure.
The researchers said they will be presenting results at food toxicology conferences this summer and they will be sharing the information with the FDA as well. Since this is all so new, expect more information to continue to come out. I’d appreciate anyone who has additional information on stevia, rebiana, or truvia to post links in the comments area.
Stevia has been used in food and beverages in Japan since 1977, but it has not been available in the U.S. until now.
Cargill will launch a table top sweetener in the U.S. in 2008 (like Splenda 2.0) followed by widespread use in food and beverages – think cereals, yogurts, ice cream, sodas, teas, etc.) I suspect that it will start as a table top sweetener for a couple of reasons: it is not approved by the FDA as a food additive so it needs to be sold as a dietary supplement for now; and they need time to formulate the right “dosage” in the products to get the desired “effects” of sweetness, texture etc.
Coca cola has exclusive rights for its use in beverages. Cargill is formulating its use for food.
That’s all I have for now… so want my early opinion on it?
1. The main claim is “consumers have been asking for a natural, zero calorie sweetener and Truvia is the breakthrough” and the tagline is “starts from a leaf, not from a lab”. So maybe this provides an alternative for those avoiding artificial sweeteners. I know people who have migranes and children with ADHD who cut out artificial sweeteners. I’m not so sure if the close-to-nature folks out there… those who avoid artificial sweeteners or processed foods as a personal preference will flock to buy Truvia products… would you??? Let me know.
2. Based on what they presented, it doesn’t look like rebiana has been extensively studied with humans. If it has been used in Japanese foods and beverages since the 1970s, have there been any studies? Something to look into. Share links if you have them.
3. I’m all for consumer choice and empowerment. Hey, I am a consumer too! But I would be remiss if I didn’t bring up concerns over cultural health impact with respect to food choices and the food industry. Is this anything but another way to sell more products?
Take cereals for example. Kids like sugary cereals and they eat a lot of it. Most of the sugar is added to make it sweet. Concerned parents would rather have them eat less of it. So, they might buy “your favorite sugar cereal” sweetened with all-natural Truvia and feel better about it. The kids eat breakfast and do better at school and all is well with the world. Right? I’m not so sure. Because chances are that cereal is low in fiber, something kids don’t get enough of.
I ponder the question: what’s wrong with cheerios or the similar generic counterparts? Hear me out… The cheerios has a little fiber and is very low in added sugar compared to its counterparts. Adding 1/2 banana or 1/4 cup strawberries or blueberries add sweetness and more fiber. The milk also has some natural sugar. That should be enough sweetness for breakfast. No, I’m not trying to say that everyone should avoid foods with added sugars, splenda, truvia, or the plethora of artificial sweeteners at all times. But the real impact for change, the real power is in families looking inward at their own behaviors and making decisions that are better for them. Instead of focusing what you should cut out (sugar, artificial sweeteners) what about looking at what needs to be brought in? How much fruit did you get today? Did you skip breakfast? Can you add in healthy oatmeal with some fruit a few days a week in place of a bagel and cream cheese or no breakfast at all? If you focus on the healthy things that should come in, you will notice that they displace the junkier-type foods. Switching from diet coke with splenda to diet coke with truvia is not going to make a major health impact.
So, that’s where my brain is now on the subject. Please enlighten me with your thoughts!
Filed under: food, food industry, food marketing and advertising, nutrition | Tagged: splenda, truvia
I’m very excited about the prospect of having Truvia (stevia) available as a sweetener and even as a food or drink additive. I am unable to tolerate Splenda, Sweet-n-low, or Equal due to sensitivity issues, but I have never had a problem or negative reaction to stevia (which I have purchased at health food stores). However, I have not found a consistantly pleasant taste with stevia, nor are there foods available which contain the sweetener; thus, my options have been limited. Therefore, the potential of being able to purchase foods that are low in sugar, but sweetened in a way that tastes good and is tolerable for me is great!
You bring up a good point… there are people who can’t tolerate artificial sweeteners and if they can tolerate this then it certainly makes their life better!
I think what they are releasing… this rebiana is supposed to offer the consistency you are looking for.
One other point about sweeteners… I personally grew very fond of the greek style yogurt, which is very low in sugar (from the milk). I mix it with fruit for smoothies or nuts and fruit for a parfait. Also with sodas… if you drink a 1-cup portion – 8 ounces – that is only 100 calories. Yes, HFCS too… but the issue is the portion size that gets soda drinkers into trouble. The original size was only 6.5 ounces. That’s reasonable…
There are lots of options that don’t use artificial sweeteners that, if consumed in the right portions, should not be a problem. But if you are a 6-cokes-a-day person then you are better off with coke zero or diet coke or the new coke with truvia.
I still maintain that if you look at what is missing from the diet and prioritize putting that in – which is usually fruits, veggies and whole grains – you will see a lot of the sweetened and processed stuff go away.
another news story on truvia:
http://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/news/ng.asp?n=85336&c=u%2Bw8lQwEgdHlwYCfdqc8%2FA%3D%3D
Hi everyone. I wanted to share with you Zevia, the all natural alternative to diet soda. It is a stevia carbonated beverage already produced and selling in stores. Like so many people, I get migraines when I digest artificial sweeteners like aspartame. I drink Zevia and have had absolutely no problems. I am vegan and I think its fantastic that there is a new, healthy alternative to toxic artificial sweeteners. Zevia is available in four flavors, Orange, Twist, Cola, and Ginger Root Beer. I LOVE the Cola. The Zevia web site at http://www.zevia.com ( http://www.zevia.com/ )( http://www.zevia.com/) has a zip code locator to find stores that carry it. Give it a try and write a review! I would love to hear how other people feel about Zevia. I know I am thrilled to be drinking a stevia beverage.
Does the new process remove the bitter/metallic/weird aftertaste of stevia?
I used stevia in the past but never got used to that aftertaste.
I agree with you Rebecca – what is wrong with Cheerios/oatmeal in place of sugary cereals, but when it comes to kids, there are two major problems getting them to eat this way.
1. We are genetically designed to prefer sweet foods – In our ‘less educated’ pre-history, our tastebuds were the first line of defense to avoiding food poisoning, and generally speaking, sweet foods are safe – bitter might kill us. So, score one for the Sugar Bomb cereals.
2. The tastebuds of children are not as developed as those of their parents. I hated broccoli as a kid, but I love it as an adult.
Food manufacturers know this – therefore kids foods are sweeeeeeeeeeeeeeet!
Evidently it does remove the bitter taste… but I think each person will have to decide for themselves.
I used stevia from the company Nustevia (I think) and they had a really good vanilla extract with stevia that I added to coffee and smoothies. I did not have any aftertaste.
As far as kids and tastebuds go… I can buy that we have a preference for sweet foods. But cheerios with fruit and milk and oatmeal made with milk and fruit are sweet – and nutritious – options. I think that sugar is a cheap way to make processed foods taste good. Parents like the price and the fact that it is something their kids ask for. So there doesn’t seem to be much incentive. Hopefully, as awareness of too much sugar in the diet becomes more salient, parents will look for other ways to negotiate breakfasts. For example, sugar cereal on weekends.
[...] in the U.S. so it is now sold as a dietary supplement. I have a feeling that will change soon since Cargill and Coca Cola announced the launch of Truvia, the brand name for the stevia derivative rebiana, which they intend to use as a natural sweetener [...]
Stevia has been around in the raw form, but I’ve only seen it in a few actual products. I’m a little skeebed-out by the idea if Cargill and Coke cornering the “Legal” stevia market with Truvia…and who knows what processing they did to stevia to get to Truvia in mass market quantities. I’d like to stick to true Stevia sweetened products like Zevia, but I can’t find any others around. Are they all frightened off by the “supplement” designation?
Just a general thought on sweeteners of the artificial kind. The problem with using them is that it disrupts the perception of sweetness without calories and sweetness laden with calories. It’s not the sugar in the coffee that’s really doing harm, but the sugar or HFCS found in other foods that should not really have them. Perhaps, just watching labels is all that’s really needed. But I’m also interested in seeing how stevia fares.
What gets me is the fact that stevia has been kept out of products for so long! >>It’s called the sugar cane monopoly, people!<< Science has proven there’s no ill-effects to stevia just recently… Historical evidence has maintained that it has no ill-effects. And let’s not forget that we haven’t heard about Stevia since 1994; why weren’t there studies going on between then and now? The FDA was likely in on making sure stevia didn’t become a mainstream sweetener because the sugar cane industry and diabetic markets were leaning on them! Why do you think that stevia was believed to affect fertility? When men’s “little soldiers” are on the line, people are quick to spread the news that something is “unsafe” based on hearsay. I’m sorry, but stevia is NOT a breakthrough! It’s the innocent herb that has been waiting to help fight diabetes and obesity! I love how Cargill and Coke worded it that way. GOTTA LOVE PROPAGANDA! All hail the FDA! o_O
Does this study also include test on the fertility in humans. This has been one of the major concerns.
Also it would be great if people (in general) can have access to the published report. Will be of great help.
But for sure.. this is revolutionary.
Here’s a link to the “research” page on the truvia website: http://www.truvia.com/research.html
all it says is that the research was published in a scientific journal. why not give the citations to consumers so they can look it up if they want?
if anyone else finds the studies, please share!
FYI… just got this press release in my e-mail from SweetLeaf claiming they are the only company to offer natural stevia and that truvia has to go through special processing…
_____________
SweetLeaf® Sweetener™ OFFERS ONLY 100% NATURAL STEVIA SWEETENER
Wisdom Natural Brands’ formulation is purest product available in market
GILBERT, Ariz. (July 10, 2008) – Many players in the beverage industry are working frantically to bring the latest craze in sweeteners to the marketplace – but only one provider can boast claims to have the purest, most natural formulation of stevia available – Wisdom Natural Brands’ SweetLeaf® Sweetener™.
“I don’t want consumers to be mistaken or misled by claims that other products out there are all-natural when they’re not,” said May. “Some of our competitors are mixing stevia with agents that are not natural. In some cases, these may even mitigate the health benefits of stevia.”
In production more than a month now and making its way into retailers, SweetLeaf® Sweetener™ stands alone as the ONLY stevia-based sweetener that uses only pure water in its proprietary extraction process. Unlike Truvia™, the Cargill/Coca Cola stevia product, SweetLeaf® does not have to pass its product thought absorption resins nor “elute” its stevia in a final stage utilizing either methanol (wood alcohol) or ethanol, according to their just released study, or add “natural flavors” to improve its taste.
“Stevia is the gold of the sweetener market,” said Wisdom Natural Brands CEO Jim May. “Many companies will jump on the bandwagon to bring products with stevia to market, and consumers need to be aware of what they’re buying.”
Just this week, the use of steviol glycosides (the sweet substance of the stevia leaves) was approved by the World Health Organization (WHO) as a safe food additive, bringing additional credibility and demand for the product in European countries. The requirements call for products to contain a minimum of 95 percent steviol (steviosides). SweetLeaf® is the only brand on the market containing 98 percent stevia sweet glycosides, the highest of all competitors.
Wisdom Natural Brands has been working doggedly over the past several months to bring a consistently pure stevia product to market before any competitors and received approval for its product in March 2008. Unlike artificial sweeteners which may contain chemicals, formaldehyde, acetic acids and chlorine, SweetLeaf® Sweetener™ is the first and only stevia extract to have received GRAS status (generally recognized as safe), enabling the company to expand the product beyond the dietary supplements market and sit alongside sugar and other sweetening alternatives in grocery store aisles. The new sweetener is available at http://www.sweetleaf.com and is arriving in retail outlets now. SweetLeaf® Sweetener™ is completely calorie-free, all-natural, and has a zero glycemic index. No other stevia product can make this claim.
Long used in the United States as a dietary supplement and nutritional additive, stevia is a naturally sweet plant, native to Paraguay, that is 30 times sweeter than sugar. The pure glycosides that are extracted from the stevia leaves are 250 to 400 times sweeter than sugar.
SweetLeaf® Stevia has gained an underground following in recent years among celebrities, health gurus, professional cooks, nutritionists, doctors and anyone looking for low-carb diet alternatives. The product can be used in beverages, cooking, baking and anywhere sugar might be used.
Gilbert, Ariz.-based Wisdom Natural Brands® is the parent company of the highly respected consumer brands known as: SweetLeaf® Sweetener™, and Wisdom of the Ancients® herbal teas. The company will soon be filling orders of its new stevia extract in bulk to major food and beverage manufacturers. The company also offers SteviaClear™ Liquid, SteviaTabs™ and a wide variety of Liquid Stevia Flavors. Recipes, equivalency charts and more information are available at http://www.sweetleaf.com.
SweetLeaf B-roll Footage Link: From harvesting in Paraguay to packaging in Chicago
MEDIA CONTACT: Melanie Blair or Sara Fleury
(602) 277-9530 ext. 229 or 226
I am surprised that the dietary sullplement company Zevia, sold out so quickly to Coca Cola and Cargill. I thought they were more pure and comitted to helping people.
Did Zevia provide the truvia (stevia) that will be in the product? I’m confused what Zevia has to do with it.
Can someone please explain why all the companies that have been selling Stevia-derived products so far can only call their products “dietary supplements” while Coke and Cargill can call Truvia a table-top “sweetener”? How are they getting around the FDA rules?
Thanks.
I believe it will be labeled legally as a dietary supplement at first. So it will be available like splenda in packets and bags, but will be labeled a supplement.
I am sure FDA approval will happen. It just seems like when there is a big push for something all of a sudden approvals happen.
Zevia has not sold to Coca Cola or Cargill. They are still a small independant company selling in upscale grocery stores and Natural Food Stores.
[...] Cola and Cargill would like to change that so stevia can become the sweetener du jour in processed foods and beverages. Cargill’s truvia is currently on shelves in New York as a test run and will soon be [...]
Just a note, late to this party, that I bought some Truvia via their web site and on first uses was very disappointed. In both hot tea and coffee there was no sweetening, I mean none. Nothing but a little after taste, though not a bitter one as with stevia (which I won’t use). That was with first one, then two, then three packets, thinking at first it was a dosage problem. Splenda sweetened the same drinks perfectly.
Thanks for posting, Rick… I have not seen Truvia in the stores, but I would try a sample of it. To be honest, I have been loving agave nectar recently… it is good in my hot tea and fruit smoothies.
I don’t use much sweetener anyway so I don’t know if I will go for stuff with stevia, unless I really like the product.
Anyone else try it yet?
It says on the Box of Truvia that it’s a great complement to fruit and other natural flavors.
After tasting it pure, I can see that it would be over powered in anything like coffee. They may end up doing a concentrated form for that stuff. Or just sell products for it so you have to buy them instead….
I can’t stand Sweetleaf brand. There’s still too much of an aftertaste.
I’m not one to drink coffee, or bake sweets or add sugar to anything. But for the processed food I do eat, if they could use this in the product I’d be happy. I just hope that they make more studies, and find out if it’s true that Stevia can reduce sugar cravings.
Ashley,
Just my opinion, but if you don’t go for sweets or add sugar to things then you might not necessarily need to worry about processed foods with sugar. Do you eat a lot of processed foods? If not, then why worry about a little sugar here-and-there? I think decreasing processed foods or foods with little nutrition so that they are “once in awhile” treats is a more idea change.
Have you tried agave nectar? It is a sweetener with calories, but less processed and a lower glycemic index than sugar, honey, etc.
I am probably one of SweetLeaf’s best customers. I mainly use their clear liquid to make sweet tea (the champagne of the South) with a splash of lemon…about 4-6 droppersful a day. Have used it in coffee but, am not totally thrilled with it in HOT beverages altho I’ve gotten used to it in hot tea. That’s really the key…you have to start somewhat slowly and build up – like weaning yourself from whole milk to skim milk. I put it in the family’s lemonade in place of about half the sugar. They don’t even notice it. When you combine natural stevia with natural cane sugar, the aftertaste seems to get cancelled.
Also, I use some of the flavored clear liquids with PURE seltzer when I’m craving a carbonated drink. Have the most success with the rootbeer flavor and the vanilla creme for that.
About Truvia…I’m still concerned. I had read somewhere else (not from SweetLeaf) that there was something about the processing of it that made it an isolated substance which, in my opinion, can leave open the potential for creating a less than safe product since plant substances balance each other out.
Truvia is available in stores. I found it at Pavilions so I bought some. Tastes good and dissolves quickly. Much better than artificial sweeteners since this one is natural. I highly recommend this one.
Beautiful packaging, though!
http://blog.pentagram.com/2008/10/new-work-truvia.php#more
I fully agree with your opinions Rebecca – I believe replacing the sugar with any kind of alternative sweetener in processed food isn’t going to make it wholesome, just possibly slightly less harmful. Replacing processed foods with wholesome alternatives such as fresh fruit and vegetables and whole grains is a much better switch to be making. It’s far better to wean yourself and your family away from unnatural sweetness altogether and to learn to appreciate the natural flavours of foods.
Cargill’s anti consumer Truvia-in-foods monopoly:
Truvia and Purvia are approved by the FDA as new sweeteners and the “inventors” are simultaneously guaranteed profitable effective monopolies by the FDA of a ‘version’ of a natural sweetener that health conscious consumers have been denied approval of for many years. Worse, Cargill has successfully lobbied the FDA to prevent the use of stevia in the thousands of recipes that producers sell to consumers, so they continue to eat empty or worse calories, except for monopolistic foods from Cargill, Coke, etc.
This is a complete perversion of the FDA and its standards of identities. I remember we got desisted by Cargill from marketing a healthy version of ketchup in the 70’s because they argued that it did NOT contain sugar. Standard of identities are regulations originally intended to assure that there is a decent percentage of tomatoes in ketchup with no more than 20% sugar, beef in beef stew, etc. Cargill won’t make billions selling Truvia packets, but knows that it can still prevent any food from containing stevia, and trumpet it’s unfairly designated “new sugar substitute” in baked goods, desserts, spaghetti sauce, frozen foods, etc. without fair competition.
Stevia is easy to grow, even in poor soil, and much cheaper to harvest than cane juice, so they HAD to supress it through FDA corruption of regulations for GRAS and standard of identities.
Since more enlightened countries like Japan have stevia in as many as 40% of packaged foods consumer outcry has been growing here at being relegated to “herbal” status by agribusiness lobbyists manipulating the FDA, which protects agribusiness, not consumers. In a coup de grace, Cargill and Pepsi did “studies” of an already generally-recognized-as-safe food, and somehow convinced the FDA to call stevia a sweetener, but only if Cargill or Pepsi sell it under “brand” names Truvia or Purvia. This is the single worst perversion of the FDA’s reason for existence I have ever seen.
I grow stevia in my back yard, and throw a few leaves in with my mint leaves for a sweetened mint tea. And yet I and other stevia users will be spammed by agribusiness as promoting a possibly dangerous unregulated substance, which is only a fiction they use to maintain their cleverly won monopoly. If stevia is unsafe, so is tea, lettuce, and any other garden green!
Even if you just used cost benefit analysis and ignored the Cargill/FDA perversion and monopoly, it’s going to cost consumers more with no additional benefit. Why aren’t any bloggers telling this story?
A correction of an error and a plea: Japan already has at least 40% of their health and diet packaged foods using stevia, not 40% of all packaged foods.’
The plea: Sweetleaf is pricey because they fought for years to get the FDA to give them GRAS status instead of herbal relegation, so they’re good guys. But even they know it is hopeless to get the FDA to do its job and let small famers and food processors use stevia and let the market decide if they like it. Please blog,comment, and write everywhere possible that consumers deserve to be the ones who decide to buy a product with stevia or not, NOT Cargill only! Cargill has perverted the FDA to make it the ONLY allowable source of stevia in packaged foods, and Cargill has given an exclusive license to Coca Cola for sodas. Why should Cargill be running the FDA and wiping out competitiion and setting prices?
First, stevia has been used in some countries for decades upon decades. It is nothing new. Only to some in the U.S. thanks to the FDA. There are many countries that use it in their diet pop while aspartame is banned in a good portion of the world because it is poison. There is too much evidence of this and even if that evidence from several different sources is false, it is still enough to make me steer clear from it. Although I have had a lot of personal experiences of these studies on aspartame with myself and my own family including how addictive it is(our own FDA has a list of 92 symptoms it causes and including death and illnesses it mimics). This is probably the main reason they held stevia back was because it is one of the few sweeteners that posed a threat to aspartame’s market. btw, aspartame is 10% methanol and 90% phenylalinine (look at the warning on a can of diet pop) Zevia and Truvia however do have a second sweetener other than stevia in it. It is found at a chemical level that in order to cover an undesired aftertaste, a second sweetener combined with the first works great. In these products, they used erythitol. Im sorry but I unfortunately still know little about this sweetener, It is claimed to be natural but it is a newer sweetener and I am not familiar with it’s source or process.
Correction:
Spelling is Erythritol
I do know it is a sugar alcohol like sorbitol, maltitol, mannitol, etc.
Does not have the same laxative effect of many other sugar alcohols however there are some people who have had adverse effects reported such as mood swings, cardiovascular problems, itching and hives, etc which ceased when they stopped using the product. These however could of been due to an allergic reaction.
Just bought Truvia and it seems to work ok in my teas and coffee. However I am concern that the first ingredient listed is erythritol. So how can they claim it’s nature’s calorie free sweetener? Where and how do they make erythritol?
Elaine:
erithrytol sweetener information
Erythritol has been used in Japan since 1990 in candies, chocolate, yogurt, fillings, jellies, jams, beverages, and as a sugar substitute.
Erythritol is classified as a sugar alcohol. Sugar alcohols, also called polyols, are sugar substitutes that are either extracted from plants or manufactured from starches. Some of the more common sugar alcohol sweeteners are sorbitol and xylitol.
Erythritol is a naturally-derived sugar substitute that looks and tastes very much like sugar, yet has almost no calories. It comes in granulated and powdered forms.
Sugar alcohols also occur naturally in plants. Erythritol is found naturally in small amounts in grapes, melons, mushrooms, and fermented foods such as wine, beer, cheese, and soy sauce.
I have been using Stevita Stevia for over a year now. Anything I would use sugar in before I now use Stevia. I am a type 2 diabetic. Stevita uses erythritol which is a natural filler from fruits, vegetables & grains. The first time I used it I did not like it at all & I went back to Splenda…tried it again after reading all the negativity about Splenda & now would not use anything else. I found Stevita at betterherbs.com and bought 3 16 oz. jars for $45.00. 1/4-1/3 of a tsp. is all it takes to sweeten tea or coffee. They also have a pure Stevia with no fillers at all.
I’m in the same boat. I cannot have Equal or Splenda or any of the sugar alcohols. Sweet and low doesn’t bother me but it’s very hard to find sodas with sweet and low in them.
What I hope is that they can find a way to make sodas that are as sweet as regular sodas, not the so sweet its bitter taste of Equal. I’ll try this if they make it into a soda.
I think Truvia is amazing.. Even if it does cause a side affect -which hasn’t affected me yet, I use the sweetener- it has to be better then sweet n low or splenda…
I hear it’s 300 times sweeter then sugar.. I believe it to.
SWEET POISON!
A MUST READ!
In October of 2001, my sister started getting very sick. She had stomach spasms and she was having a hard time getting around.
Walking was a major chore. It took everything she had just to get out of bed; she was in so much pain.
By March 2002, she had undergone several tissue and muscle biopsies and was on 24 various prescription medications. The doctors could not determine what was wrong with her.
She was in so much pain, and so sick she just knew she was dying.
She put her house, bank accounts, life insurance, etc., in her oldest daughter’s name, and made sure that her younger children were to be taken care of.
She also wanted her last hooray, so she planned a trip to Florida (basically in a wheelchair) for March 22nd.
On March 19 I called her to ask how her most recent tests went, and she said they didn’t find anything on the test, but they believe she had MS. I recalled an article a friend of mine e-mailed to me and I asked my sister if she drank diet soda?
She told me that she did. As a matter of fact, she was getting ready to crack one open that moment.
I told her not to open it, and to stop drinking the diet soda! I e-mailed her article my friend, a lawyer, had sent.
My sister called me within 32 hours after our phone conversation and told me she had stopped drinking the diet soda AND she could walk!
The muscle spasms went away. She said she didn’t feel 100% but, she sure felt a lot better.
She told me she was going to her doctor with this article and would call me when she got home.
Well, she called me, and said her doctor was amazed! He is going to call all of his MS patients to find out if they consumed artificial sweeteners of any kind.
In a nutshell, she was being poisoned by the Aspartame in the diet soda…and literally dying a slow and miserable death.
When she got to Florida March 22, all she had to take was one pill, and that was a pill for the Aspartame poisoning! She is well on her way to a complete recovery. And she is walking!
No wheelchair! This article saved her life.
If it says ‘SUGAR FREE’ on the label; DO NOT EVEN THINK ABOUT IT! I have spent several days lecturing at the WORLD ENVIRONMENTAL CONFERENCE on ‘ASPARTAME,’ marketed as ‘Nutra Sweet,’
‘Equal,’ and ‘Spoonful.’
In the keynote address by the EPA, it was announced that in the United States in 2001 there is an epidemic of multiple sclerosis and systemic lupus. It was difficult to determine exactly what toxin was causing this to be rampant. I stood up and said that I was there to lecture on exactly that subject.
I will explain why Aspartame is so dangerous:
When the temperature of this sweetener exceeds 86 degrees F, the wood alcohol in ASPARTAME converts to formaldehyde and then to formic acid, which in turn causes metabolic acidosis. Formic acid is the poison found in the sting of fire ants.
The methanol toxicity mimics, among other conditions, multiple sclerosis and systemic lupus.
Many people were being diagnosed in error.
Although multiple sclerosis is not a death sentence, Methanol toxicity is!
Systemic lupus has become almost as rampant as multiple sclerosis, especially with Diet Coke and Diet Pepsi drinkers.
The victim usually does not know that the Aspartame is the culprit. He or she continues its use; irritating the lupus to such a degree that it may become a life-threatening condition.
We have seen patients with systemic lupus become asymptotic, once taken off diet sodas.
In cases of those diagnosed with Multiple Sclerosis, most of the symptoms disappear. We’ve seen many cases where vision loss returned and hearing loss improved markedly.
This also applies to cases of tinnitus and fibromyalgia.
During a lecture, I said, ‘If you are using ASPARTAME (Nutra Sweet, Equal, Spoonful, etc) and you suffer from fibromyalgia symptoms, spasms, shooting, pains, numbness in your legs, Cramps, Vertigo,
Dizziness, Headaches, Tinnitus, Joint pain,
Unexplainable depression, anxiety attacks, slurred speech, blurred vision, or memory loss you probably have ASPARTAME poisoning!’
People were jumping up during the lecture saying, ‘I have some of these symptoms. Is it reversible?’
Yes!
Yes!
Yes!
STOP drinking diet sodas and be alert for Aspartame on food labels! Many products are fortified with it!
This is a serious problem.
Dr. Espart (one of my speakers) remarked that so many people seem to be symptomatic for MS and during his recent visit to a hospice; a nurse stated that six of her friends, who were heavy Diet Coke addicts, had all been diagnosed with MS. This is beyond coincidence!
Diet soda is NOT a diet product! It is a chemically altered, multiple SODIUM (salt) and ASPARTAME containing product that actually makes you crave carbohydrates. It is far more likely to make you GAIN weight!
These products also contain formaldehyde, which stores in the fat cells, particularly in the hips and thighs. Formaldehyde is an absolute toxin and is used primarily to preserve ’tissue specimens.’
Many products we use every day contain this chemical but we SHOULD NOT store it IN our body!
Dr. H. J. Roberts stated in his lectures that once free of the ‘diet products’ and with no significant increase in exercise; his patients lost an average of 19 pounds over a trial period.
Aspartame is especially dangerous for diabetics.
We found that some physicians, who believed that they had a patient with retinopathy, in fact, had symptoms caused by Aspartame.
The Aspartame drives the blood sugar out of control.
Thus diabetics may suffer acute memory loss due to the fact that aspartic acid and phenylalanine are NEUROTOXIC when taken without the other amino acids necessary for a good balance.
Treating diabetes is all about BALANCE.
Especially with diabetics, the Aspartame passes the blood/brain barrier and it then deteriorates the neurons of the brain; causing various levels of brain damage, Seizures,
Depression, Manic depression, Panic attacks,
Uncontrollable anger and rage.
Consumption of Aspartame causes these same symptoms in non-diabetics as well.
Documentation and observation also reveal that thousands of children diagnosed with ADD and ADHD have had complete turnarounds in their behavior when these chemicals have been removed from their diet.
So called ‘behavior modification prescription drugs’ (Ritalin and others) are no longer needed. Truth be told, they were never NEEDED in the first place!
Most of these children were being ‘poisoned’ on a daily basis with the very foods that were ‘better for them than sugar.’
It is also suspected that the Aspartame in thousands of pallets of Diet Coke and Diet Pepsi consumed by men and women fighting in the Gulf War, may be partially to blame for the well-known Gulf War Syndrome.
Dr. Roberts warns that it can cause birth defects, i.e. mental retardation, if taken at the time of conception and during early pregnancy.
Children are especially at risk for neurological disorders and should NEVER be given artificial sweeteners.
There are many different case histories to relate of children suffering grand mal seizures and other neurological disturbances talking about a plague of neurological diseases directly caused by the use of this deadly poison.’
Herein lies the problem:
There were Congressional Hearings when Aspartame was included in 100 different products and strong objection was made concerning its use. Since this initial hearing, there have been two subsequent hearings, and still nothing has been done. The drug and chemical lobbies have very deep pockets.
Sadly, MONSANTO’S patent on Aspartame has EXPIRED! There are now over 5,000 products on the market that contain this deadly chemical and there will be thousands more introduced. Everybody wants a ‘piece of the Aspartame pie.’
I assure you that MONSANTO, the creator of Aspartame, knows how deadly it is.
And isn’t it ironic that MONSANTO funds, among others, the American Diabetes Association, the American Dietetic Association and the Conference of the American College of Physicians?
This has been recently exposed in the New York Times.
These [organizations] cannot criticize any additives or convey their link to MONSANTO because they take money from the food industry and are required to endorse their products.
Senator Howard Metzenbaum wrote and presented a bill that would require label warnings on products containing Aspartame, especially regarding pregnant women, children and infants.
The bill would also institute independent studies on the known dangers and the problems existing in the general population regarding seizures, changes in brain chemistry, neurological changes and behavioral symptoms.
The bill was killed.
It is known that the powerful drug and chemical lobbies are responsible for this, letting loose the hounds of disease and death on an unsuspecting and uninformed public. Well, you’re informed now!
YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW!
Regarding Truvia– It keeps being sold as a stevia product but the
FIRST INGREDIENT the sugar alcohol ERYTHRITOL. Sugar alcohols do occur naturally in small amounts in fruits and vegetables–including mushrooms, lettuce, berries, apples, and plums–but for commercial purposes, they are manufactured from carbohydrates such as sucrose, glucose, and starch according to what I’ve read. The wording on Truvia does not actually claim their erythritol is processed from plants, only that erythritol is “also found in fruits like pears and grapes”. I can’t find what % of this product is NOT rebiana?
SECOND INGREDIENT- Rebiana from the Stevia… enough said here regarding that.
THIRD INGREDIENT – Natural Flavors, that means absolutely nothing to me. A natural flavor can be absolutely anything made to “taste” like a whole food.. it could be orange flavored arscenic… just to make the point.
Noone more than me would love to find a non threatening zero calorie sweetner.. but the marketing, verbage, and non information of Truvia seems like a reg flag to me regardless of studies or stevia history.
Rats! Leslie
I just bought some Truvia at the store since they just started selling it. It tastes good and dissolves very quickly. Plus no aftertaste. As far as I can tell it comes from the stevia plant, but I haven’t heard of any downside to this sweetener. It seems to be all natural, but without knowing much about it I can’t tell if it’s a better alternative.
Since Coke has exclusive rights to use stevia in beverages, is this mean no other beverage manufacturer can use stevia ?
Thanks
Vincent
Here ya go……….
Definitions of exclusive on the Web:
* not divided or shared with others; “they have exclusive use of the machine”; “sole rights of publication”
* excluding much or all; especially all but a particular group or minority; “exclusive clubs”; “an exclusive restaurants and shops”
* a news report that is reported first by one news organization; “he got a scoop on the bribery of city officials”
* single(a): not divided among or brought to bear on more than one object or objective; “judging a contest with a single eye”; “a single devotion to duty”; “undivided affection”; “gained their exclusive attention”
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
Coke doesn’t have exclusive rights. Pepsi has it’s purevia, coke has it’s truvia. Nutrisweet has something else. All stevia. Who the heck named a plant after Steve anyway?