Sugar, NutraSweet, Aspartame, or Stevia; which is better?

Some surprising findings over the course of handling my IBS, and gastronomical distresses.

My GP did a biopsy and blood test for Gluten intolerance, but suggested I go ahead and start avoiding gluten; so I did. It’s been over 2 weeks, and I feel so much better. My tests results should come in any day. But, some readings while deciding to ‘go in’, have produced a few surprises. Well-known sweeteners can cause a lot of the same ‘symptoms’ I have been experiencing.

We all know what pure cane sugar does, and how to avoid its side-effects. I ‘cut-back’ on sugar a long time ago. I used to use NutraSweet (Equal), and used it for several years; but switched to Splenda (and later, a generic version from Wal-mart), because I was concerned about the bad ‘press’ NutraSweet had. After learning about sucralose, I switched to Stevia leaf crystals.

NutraSweet (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NutraSweet) (Aspartame) is made up of three chemicals. It is a mixture of 40% aspartic acid, 50% phenylalanine, and 10% methanol (also known as wood alcohol -- poison!)

Aspartame is also known as: BienVia, Canderal, Equal, Miwon, NatraSweet, Neotame, Nutrasweet Spoonfuls, etc. It is found in: Breath mints, chewing gum, diet drinks, electrolyte solutions, fiber supplements, diet foods, teas, medications, and vitamins.

Aspartame is used as an artificial sweetener in many foods to decrease caloric intake. However, aspartame may stimulate the appetite, leading to overeating, which sabotages the weight control program. (The Lancet, May 10, 1986, p. 1092-1093)

Aspartame use can cause: Abdominal pain, achiness, back pain, chest tightness, dizziness, eye pain, fibromyalgia, headache, joint pain, leg cramps, loss of equilibrium, migraine, multiple sclerosis, nerve damage, nueralgia, neuritis, numbness and tingling of hands and feet, osteoarthritis, seizures, severe headache, shooting pains in extremities, swallowing pain, systimic lupus and multiple sclerosis (false positive), tingling, unsteady gait, and general weakness.

Aspartame breaks down into methanol, amino acids and several other chemicals. The methanol is quickly absorbed and converted into formaldehyde. The methanol found in foods and alcoholic beverages is also absorbed, but there are "protective chemicals" in these traditionally-ingested foods and beverages that prevent the conversion of methanol to formaldehyde.

Formaldehyde is known to cause gradual damage to the nervous system, the immune system and has recently been shown to cause irreversible genetic damage at long-term, low-level exposure. The calculated level of formaldehyde exposure is approximately 61.3mg for every liter of aspartame ingested. That is over twice the level necessary to cause irreversible genetic damage in humans and several times the level shown to cause chronic neurological, cardiovascular, musculoskeletal, and other symptoms in long-term industrial exposure research. The damage caused by formaldehyde from aspartame may be worsened by other aspartame breakdown chemicals, especially the aspartic acid. http://www.diagnose-me.com/cond/C237252.html

Read "The Truth About Aspartame" http://www.tuberose.com/Aspartame.html (http://www.tuberose.com/Aspartame.html)

Splenda (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Splenda) isn’t much better. It is called ‘sucralose’, but it isn’t. The most misunderstood fact about sucralose is that it is nothing like sugar even though the marketing implies that it is.

Sucralose was actually discovered while trying to create a new insecticide. It may have started out as sugar, but the final product is anything but sugar.

According to the book Sweet Deception, sucralose is made when sugar is treated with trityl chloride, acetic anhydride, hydrogen chlorine, thionyl chloride, and methanol in the presence of dimethylformamide, 4-methylmorpholine, toluene, methyl isobutyl ketone, acetic acid, benzyltriethlyammonium chloride, and sodium methoxide, making it unlike anything found in nature. If you read the fine print on the Splenda web site, it states that "although sucralose has a structure like sugar and a sugar-like taste, it is not natural."

The name sucralose is misleading. The suffix -ose is used to name sugars, not additives. Sucralose sounds very close to sucrose, table sugar, and can be confusing for consumers. A more accurate name for the structure of sucralose was purposed. The name would have been trichlorogalactosucrose, but the FDA did not believe that it was necessary to use this, so sucralose was allowed.

Sucralose is no longer the newest non-nutritive sweetener on the market, but it is still well known for its claim to be made from sugar. It is used alone, or found in Splenda (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Splenda), and is 600 times sweeter than sucrose (table sugar). When used alone, it provides essentially no calories and is not fully absorbed. In 1998, it was approved for limited use, and in 1999, it was given approval for use as a general-purpose sweetener. It is currently found in over 4,500 products, including foods that are cooked or baked. This artificial sweetener can be used for cooking, so it has rapidly become one of the most popular and highly consumed artificial sweeteners.

Symptoms associated with sucralose are; gastrointestinal problems such as flatulence, bloating, gas (heartburn & acid reflux), diarrhea, nausea, skin irritations (rash, hives, redness, itching, swelling), wheezing, cough, runny nose, heart attack-like chest pains, palpitations, anxiety, anger, moods swings, depression, and itchy eyes.

A recent study found that Splenda affected the absorption of medications in rats. After 12-weeks, they found that the rats had half of the good bacteria in the gut. {If your gut bacteria aren’t balanced, you can get IBS and other gastrointestinal symptoms.} http://www.medicinenet.com/artificial_s ... /page9.htm

Stevia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stevia)is all natural, and comes from a shrub which grows naturally in (native of) Brazil and Paraguay. People in South America have been using it to sweeten their foods and beverages for hundreds of years. It has antioxidants and other nutrients in it, including vitamins C and A, zinc, magnesium, and iron, and has no known side effects.

Studies have shown it to improve insulin sensitivity in rats, and possibly even to promote additional insulin production, helping to reverse diabetes and metabolic syndrome. Millions of Japanese have been using stevia for over thirty years with no reported or known harmful effects. Similarly, stevia leaves have been used for centuries in South America, spanning multiple generations of folk medicine as a treatment for Diabetes mellitus type-2.

Stevia can be grown in the home garden in much of North America. One leaf in a cup of tea or coffee is more sweetener than most people prefer. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stevia

http://ezinearticles.com/?The-Many-Bene ... id=3164524

http://www.diabeteshealth.com/read/2006 ... ener-game/

Yep. Aspartame and MSG and GM generally, incl GMO, SUCKS BIG TIME because it's all just toxic dead chemicals (that happen to taste sweet as hell and then gets patented). Damn. The DEA in the USA is making nature illegal, while 'approving' deadly shit like this, even "medicines" that don't cure anything, but actually just spikes the conditions and creates new diseases. While the DEA knows this, I'm wondering what the hell is going on sometimes =p

You are what you eat. The right nutrition is all that matters.

Twinsenboy (imported) wrote: Wed Apr 27, 2011 3:00 am Yep. Aspartame and MSG and GM generally, incl GMO, SUCKS BIG TIME because it's all just toxic dead chemicals (that happen to taste sweet as hell and then gets patented). Damn. The DEA in the USA is making nature illegal, while 'approving' deadly shit like this, even "medicines" that don't cure anything, but actually just spikes the conditions and creates new diseases. While the DEA knows this, I'm wondering what the hell is going on sometimes =p

You are what you eat. The right nutrition is all that matters.

What about cigarettes and alcohol? These are both known to be deadly yet the Government continues to allow its existence, and even collects a tidy profit.

The biggest 'crime' from the Food & Drug Ass. & the Medical community, is against the Diabetics and children (school lunches and snacks). All physicians know what wood alcohol does to a diabetic.

The 'fake' stuff is STILL pushed as a "good" substitute for sweet-tooths. USDA refuses to acknowledge the dangers (money-in-pockets syndrome?).

Non-genetic Obesity is viewed as an illness, and not a discipline/ignorance problem. And it is promoted as something that can be treated with the use of these chemicals. Everyone knows that obesity is rampant in America.

Doctors KNOW what the damages from aspartame poisoning can be (its been prevalent since the late 90's), but most of the symptoms are 'manageable'; and since "treatment" is more profitable than "cure", it's better for the physician.

I am sure there are diabetic members who can relate, to some degree.

Did their doctors ever warn them OFF/about aspartame and sucralose?

Advise them NOT to use 'sugar-free' products?

It's all numbers.

The 'desired' effects of the products, out-weigh the 'adverse' effects. Producers of the products can afford to buy USDA approval, which creates a money train, Doctors follow the money, and, people want to trust their doctors.

evenealy, there is a big difference between alcohol and cigarettes, and aspartame.

We all know booze and smokes can kill us. We take them on purpose, though, fully knowing the ramifications. we use them anyway, though, because they get us high and drunk; nobody pretends to think getting drunk is actually good for us.

Splenda and Aspartame, though, are fake foods. People are tricked into thinking the benefit (less sugar) is the only problem; the heart palpitations, runny stool, and hypertention risks are burried and hidden... and their cures feed the doctors pockets.

I never have and neverwill touch aspartame or splenda. Why wold I risk it, when sugar is cheap, available, and certainly no worst than sugar. The calorie savings gleaned from aspartame are paltry... it's the carbohydrates that will getcha in the end. Eat enough french fries, and your sugar levels skyrocket.

I have REAL sugar in the house; some white, mostly brown, and some raw. I have REAL butter in the house; no bullshit margarine, a disgusting oil product, here.

These fake food chemicals are the scourge of our food.

I also smoke and drink, but if I ever get sick from them, I'll know it was from a product plainly labled and commonly known to be 'bad', but which I choose to enjoy because I like getting drunk and high. Well, okay, I get more stoned from pot than cigarettes.... but at least the POT I smoke doesn't have added formeldehyde and fuckin' BENZENE in it like cigs do. I know where my pot comes from, and that stuff is nothing but herb (it's washed thouroughly with water through the roots for two weeks before havest).

My god, the pot I smoke is probably the most natural and least poluted thing I put in my body.

When I was told I had IBS (Irritable Bowel Syndrome), my GP told me to "eat more fiber and fresh vegetables."

Did he tell me to ALSO supplement my diet with digestive enzymes and probiotics?

NO. Doctors don't think too much about probiotic use (it's folk-medicine).

IBS is a big deal in America. Aspartame and sucralose may well be a 'cause' of a lot of it (considering how many Americans use the stuff). Yet, Doctors do not consider aspartame and sucralose "poisoning".

Does that mean your physician is a dummy? No, but it does show lack of 'continuous' education, indifference, or possibly greed.

Should they keep up-to-date?

Yes.

Especially for the $ they ask for.

At the time (1993), I was using NutraSweet; and there were lots of Scientific & Medical Journal publishings (pro-&-con) about it (something I recently discovered).

But as I said before; doctors are taught to 'treat', not 'cure'. It is a trend that is spreading around the world as more and more foreign students come here to study medicine. Just mention the WORD 'cure' and watch your physician's expression. You'll get a canned response about treatments available.

Today, you MIGHT see a question about artificial sugar use on their induction forms. That lets them know what may be causing your symptoms, so they can formulate a 'work-around'. The fake stuff is allowed to continue, because they believe it's ills are less important than it's benefits.

I say if you need a substitute for sugar, then use stuff with aspartame. There are people who require sugar substitutes. I remember the problems the banning of saccharin caused with several diabetics I knew at the time.

However, if you don't need a sugar substitute, then don't use it.

Dave (imported) wrote: Thu Apr 28, 2011 9:16 am I say if you need a substitute for sugar, then use stuff with aspartame. There are people who require sugar substitutes. I remember the problems the banning of saccharin caused with several diabetics I knew at the time.

However, if you don't need a sugar substitute, then don't use it.

banning of saccharin (?) I still see it on store shelves. Are you talking about something like 'bad press', or just issues with (diabetics)?

I know several guys who drink sugar-free sodas because they think it's better than regular, and they like to drink a lot of soda. All of them are 'a little overweight' . One friend says he's so used to them, regular sodas just don't taste as good. Wonder if it's the wood alcohol? I don't do alcohol, so I wouldn't know it's effects.

Ever since the Gulf War, when all those soldiers got sick, the soda manufacturers broke the wagon trying to recover from the 'bad press'.

Several thousand pallets of diet drinks were shipped to the Dessert Storm troops. (heat can liberate the methanol from the aspartame at 86° F). Diet drinks sat in the 120° F. Arabian sun for weeks at a time on pallets. The service men and women drank them all day long. Exerpt from 'The Truth About Aspartame'.

Stevia tastes just like what I'm accustomed to with regular old sugar, but I still bake with sugar. I'm hyperglycemic (risk for type-2) & I do have to watch my blood sugar. I have 2 sisters who are diabetics. One is a little over-weight, the other is skinny like me. My brother has no issues. But he has never liked sweets much.

Luckily, several manufacturers (not just soda) are producing stevia 'sugar-free' products.

PS, just noticed your footnote for the 'Winged Isle'. I'm a descendant of the Clan MacCrimmon, from Skye island.

For some people (around 20% of the population), Stevia is very bitter. I'm one of them. I've tried Stevia three different times (three different brands). All were horribly bitter for me. Unpalatable. No exageration. Wasn't bitter at all for friends of mine who had tried the same stuff at the same time I did.

Here are some other sugar alternatives I use:

Xylitol -- good but doesn't work well in beverages. Seems less sweet than sugar to me. Supposed to be good for diabetics (low glycemic index). Also is said to have a lot of other healt benefits. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xylitol

Agave Nectar -- sort of like maple syrup, but has a carmel-like flavor. Low to Medium glycemic index (similar to Fructose). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agave_nectar

Maple Syrup, Birch Syrup, and Palm Syrup are also quite good. Not sure how these would be for diabetics, though.

I've also heard of Pine Syrup, but have never tried it.

"Stevia Extract in the Raw", from the makers of 'Sugar in the Raw', is all I can get around here, without ordering it.

Once in a while, in hot coffee, I get a bitter twinge. But, usually the second sip, it tastes like sugar. Never has, in cold stuff like cereal.

I think Agave Nectar taste like caramel too. Used it once, been sitting on the counter since.