Stevia the best sweetener on the Market. Natural with loads of health benefits. I buy mine from the states, why can't we purchase it in the UK?
The worst product on the Market is artificial sweetener Aspartame, closely followed by Sucrolose, and Acesulfame K, which are all poisons to your system.
I have been under the understanding that artificial sweeteners are cancerous. I recently heard about stevia and I am curious weather it is safe or not, but it sounds appealing because they claim it is natural.
I use only stevia and cane/beet sugar. Saccharin is tolerable, but I wouldn't use it it as much for sure. I try to avoid Splenda (sucralose), HFCS, and the dreaded Aspartame completely. From -my- experience and research, this my my list of best to worst common sweeteners:
@kerdoi I haven't really used Xylitol or the others, so that's why I didn't mention them. Again, it's only from my experience and research, because i know it's a very debatable topic. I do think everyone can agree that Aspartame is the worst there is though. I hear you can put it (Equal) on ants, and it will kill them. If so, at least it's cheap pest control, lol!
No, artificial sugar alternatives are NOT safe. I grow and use STEVIA. And now you have to be careful on what brand of Stevia you buy because some are NOT natural either! For traveling I use the SWEETLEAF brand of Stevia because it is 100% natural.
The food industry and the pharmaceutical industry are bedfellows. One makes us sick on a daily basis and then we need to go the Dr's to find out what is wrong with us and they send us to the pharmacy with a script so we can buy the right drugs to make us healthy again from the foods we eat and water we drink. It's criminal. Its probably the most elaborate scam/scheme this world has ever run. Drug us through our food and water and then give us the "miracle drugs" to "cure" us. Evil with a smile.
It took me 52 years to realize that ALL artificial sweeteners are bad for us. Aspartame IS the worst like you said. I could probably write a book on what Aspartame and other artificial sweeteners have done to my health. STAY AWAY FROM ARTIFICIAL SWEETENERS, they re NO GOOD FOR US. If the body THINKS it's getting sugar but instead gets an artificial sweetener it shuts down our metabolism, stores fat and that's when the problems begin. Then we go to the Dr's and they "fix us" from what we eat.
I accidentally bought orange juice not from concentrate with 50% less sugar. As I got home I finally noticed and was prepared to read "aspartame" on the label. But no, it read "stevia". So I researched it online and was surprised at the results. So immediately I poured a glass of this OJ and tested it out. Damn, stevia tastes great!!! they should ban aspartame and start using this stuff!!! I'm sold on it already, plus it's safe!
If you knew how stevia is processed, it would be the least thing on your list. Stevia is bleached, that's why the powder is so white, not to mention ethanol is another chemical used in the process. Anything we consumed that has to be processed with chemicals which will eventually cause serious health issuses should be eaten at your own risk. We should become more aware of what we're eating and drinking, and less concerned about what looks and taste good. you're better off using honey or sugar.
@roz3657 No see Stevia itself is not synthetic, it's certain company brands of it. Stevia doesn't raise your insulin levels so it is better for you than sugar. Most artificial sweeteners are not safe. Stevia is completely natural when you don't buy it from a company that overly processes it. I get migraines within 5 minutes of consuming aspartame and have no symptoms with Stevia. That alone isn't a surefire test necessarily but, there is a lot of information about stevia. Use its natural form.
@roz3657 It's nice to see others awake to the truth about our food. Keeping people sick with food and water and then healing them is an annual multi-trillion dollar business. All we can do is try and keep it to a minimum by choosing more wisely.
@FyrDenAfNu Aspartame is poison and all one has to do is start Goggling it. It contains methanol which the body cannot metabolize and then it turns into formaldehyde, which THEN the body cannot rid itself of. It kills people very, very, very, very slowly and then when they do an autopsy they blame it on something else like cigarettes or some other cancer. The whole time half the people in the USA ingest it unknowingly through their food. Easy test is to detox off it for 30 days then YOU decide.
@FyrDenAfNu Aspartame is poison and all one has to do is start Goggling it. It contains methanol which the body cannot metabolize and then it turns into formaldehyde, which THEN the body cannot rid itself of. It kills people very, very, slowly and then when they do an autopsy they blame it on something else like cigarettes or some other cancer. The whole time half the people in the USA ingest it unknowingly through their food. Easy test is to detox off it for 30 days then YOU decide.
I would say nope!!! in my opinion anything with the word "artificial" next to it isn't safe, I know it's kind of radical but I think it's easier and safer this way
Artifical sugars are not healthy but they're not poison either. I believe in moderation. Too much of anything is bad for everybody even if it's healthy.
It's important to use our brain and common sense, and not go to extremes like my vegan friend who's gone completely MAD over raw food. She's scared of food now and sees poison everywhere.
My favorite alternative to sugar is HONEY! The only occasions I use "sweet" is in my tea, coffee, herbal tea and soups.
You lost all credibility when you perpetuated the saccharin causes cancer fallacy. Even after stating that it was possibly conducted or funded by the makers of aspartame.
Brilliant! Clear, concise information. My husband's a diabetic and has been using Splenda which I have only just discovered is harmful. I've been searching the web and discovered stevia and have done as much investigation into it as I can. I am now in the process of finding a supplier to the UK. Whilst so doing, my husband will finish what supplies of Splenda he has left (not much) and sweeten his cereal with fresh fruit and take his tea without sweetener. THANK YOU for your help
I use Xylitol and Zsweet sparingly. I've never had the runs from either, because I'm smart enough to not over do it. Thanks this is a great video that really explains about sweeteners.
You forgot grade B maple syrup. :) Organic, has nutrients and minerals, no animal byproducts (it's from a plant) would probably go somewhere between Molasses and Stevia, I love stevia, my favorite sweetner.
did you know that mexican american indians had over 1000 varities of corn . over hundreds of years corn has been cross bred to eliminate negative aspects of other varieties to produce the best of the breeds they had .. same with potatetoes and many other fruits and veggies . a precursor to genectic modification . yuk!!!
i will take any hing naturel over chemicals and genetic modification anytime . STEVIA ROCKS!!!!!
I don't think they generally are safe; I don't like most of them anyway and would rather do without than have a substitute. Stevia and aspartame are bitter. I did try xylitol a few weeks ago because I learned that it was "natural," and it wasn't a good experience. I give it mixed reviews and think it's better to avoid sweeteners as much as I can stand.
STEVIA IS NOT A MUTAGEN . IT WAS LABLED AS SUCH DUE TO TRIALS PERFORMED BY DUKE UNI AND THE LIKE , PAID FOR BY THE SWEETENER FOLKS. THEY SUCCEEDED IN HAVEING IT LABLED THAT WAY WITH FALSE RESULTS AND TEST FINDINGS. SO THEY CAN SELL US ASPERTAME AND SUCRALOSE . ANY ONE WHO INVESTIGATES WHAT HE/SHE IS BEEING TOLD COULD FIND THIS INFO ON HE NET . STEVIA HAS BEEN USED FOR HUNDREDS OF YEARS THERE BY GIVING US THE BIGEST TEST GROUP AND LONGEST TEST STUDY EVERY DONE ON A "PRODUCT". WAKE UP
@rharha2112 JUST BECAUSE YOU SAY SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SAFE BUT YOU COULD RUB IT ON YOUR CHEST IF YOU LIKE BUT PEOPLE SHOULD KNOW THE TRUTH.THE TRUTH SHALL MAKE THEM FREE,FREE FROM ARTIFICIAL HYBRID PLANTS THAT ARE NOT NATURAL AND WAS NEVER MENT TO BE THIS SWEET.JUST EAT FRUIT AND CHILL OUT.
My understanding is that most are not safe. I avoid them studiously. I am interested in learning moreabout xylitol, as I have heard it has health benefits, and stevia might be okay in small amounts. I am interested to hear what Joe thinks.
this is a very informative video. We are starting a green house and we are experimenting with Stevia. I am very excited about this herb. Christimynatt@yahoo.com
WARNING STEVIA IS A MUTAGEN :WICH MUTATES OUR CELLS AS IT COMES IN CONTACT WITH THEM..STEVIA IS A HYBRID PLANT NOT WILD OR NATURAL STAY AWAY PLEASE..LOOK IT UP......!Hybrid plants are plants produced by impregnating the pistil of one species with the pollen of another.It's not natural plant found in nature it was created by this prosses.
@Squirrelletta I didn't say it was evil.but its a mutagen which means it does have a mutating effect when we digest it....and anything that mutates in our body i try to stay awy from.HYBRID not natural.Why take it just because you really want something sweet....eat a peice of fruit.
I have personally audited a sucralose plant. The process is nasty. It contains 13 ingredients of which only one is pharma grade sugar (already highly processed). The rest are mostly heavy duty solvents. Even the PHD responsible for the process told me would never dream of eating it himself. Sucralose was developed as an ant poison and as you are best to stay away from all synthetic sweeteners including erythritol and the other sugar alcohols. Look for clean processed natural stevia extract.
@angusf27 it was developed as an ant poison because it smells almost exactly like sugar but doesn't metabolize and starves them...i'll bet you wouldn't be happy to see the sort of plants that turn out stevia. of course since they're applying organic solvents to a plant instead of working from scratch they're subject to less oversight before it gets approved to market...
there's also a pretty big difference between eating concentrated hcl and using it in a substitution reaction
splenda safer than nutrasweet or saccharin? are you on crack? sucralose is an organochlorine, a class of chemicals which is so toxic they're used as insecticides.
the fda banned stevia from one "anonymous" complaint (from splenda no doubt) yet they get mountains of complaints about sucralose every year! there are thousands of people claiming sucralose POISONED them! and that includes me, as the few times I tried it I got very sick.
aspartame has made me feel a little ill too, but not as bad.
@ucihapokujin According to what? Studies funded by the company that makes it? I know I read that a certain amount of it is absorbed by the body. Then what? It just passes through? Where does it go?
But anyway I'm not a scientist. All I know is that it made me sick every time I tried it. And there are many other people claiming the same thing.
I don't believe the research is unbiased especially when there's huge profits at stake.
@jwallbanger the fact that sucralose is metabolically inert is pretty well established at this point.
besides that for all the pissing and moaning people to about how aspartame and sucralose are evil i've never seen any actual data. i don't think any of the studies that are supposed to back this crap have ever even gotten beyond forming a hypothesis.
there's just nothing to go on. it's like saying that WWII was fought to bail out the israelis
@ucihapokujin I haven't seen enough to prove it safe either. It's like "here eat this artificial chemical we made in a lab there's nothing to prove it's harmful!" Yeah, right. My body evolved to eat chemicals made by nature, not chemicals made in a vat in New Jersey by some rich bastards that don't give a rat's ass about my health.
The fact that sucralose is an organochlorine is enough to make me stay away from it. That, and that it has already posioned me multiple times.
@jwallbanger by that comment i can tell you're real learned about where your "natural products" come from...
go to pubmed, look up sucralose toxicity. if you pay attention you can see the article entitled "the absence of genotoxicity in sucralose" between all the studies that talk about how they failed to give rats cancer by feeding them the stuff.
of course the nih is an evil government conspirator and none of the academic sources there are to be trusted...
@ucihapokujin and by the way you just dove down the gutter of arrogant sarcasm i can tell you are a narrow minded sheep who will eat any poison mansanto wants to put on your plate. of course you can trust them, they're rich! and hell, no big corporation with a conflict of interest ever funded an academic research study before, right? next are you going to tell me nicotine is not addictive and cigarettes are harmless? i mean, there's loads of studies funded by the tobacco institute that prove it!
@ucihapokujin you're just not going to convince me and the thousands of other people who have gotten sick eating sucralose to give it another chance. you think we're all delusional? horseshit.
and as for your heroes who tested and approved that garbage, the FDA banned stevia as a food additive in 1991 because of one anonymous complaint (from mansanto no doubt) yet they have piles of complaints about splenda and do nothing.
if you think the biomedical community can't be bought you're very naive.
@ucihapokujin dear arrogant douche bag. please do not put words in my mouth. i know it provides you great narcissistic supply to think yourself some science whiz who I should be in awe with and automatically trust to tell me what new wonder chemicals I should ingest.
the problem is, data can't be trusted, and neither can head-up-the-ass egotists like yourself.
these companies have gotten away with too much poisoning of everything for too long, they can no longer be trusted by anyone, ever.
@ucihapokujin yes, data can't possibly be faked. figures can't ever be manipulated by researchers on corporate payroll. numbers never lie that's why the enron accountants were really innocent!
After all, what is your sarcasm but a way for you to fake intelligence?
@ucihapokujin Ha. So to summarize, you're all out of arguments and sarcasm so you're just being absurd now? I can't even figure out how that's supposed to be a joke. That's not even "Family Guy funny." Try again jackass.
@jwallbanger well there isn't much else anyone can do either way than present you with relevant data, but if you really refuse to acknowledge the conclusion that doesn't sound good to you because you know you're absolutely right then you might have a bright future as a researcher at the creation institute.
give em a call and start showing those dumbass scientists what's what today!
@ucihapokujin OK, prove the studies aren't funded by biased sources then I'll consider the data. (crickets chirping)
But even then I still wouldn't eat that shit. It made me sick multiple times. Even unbiased data means nothing to those of us who got physically ill eating sucralose. You're just going to have a tough time getting people to trust big corporations that make pesticides and additives who have already done too much damage to count.
@jwallbanger well there's no evidence suggesting that the studies were biased, but you can play rumsfield rules if it makes you feel smarter.
maybe you could provide me with evidence that they are biased?
and like it's been said before, the taste is a little much, so i believe it made you nauseous. not everything that induces nausea is a poison though. like how i can't eat onions
@ucihapokujin Wow. So all this time you're trying to get me to accept these studies and you don't even know where their funding came from? I didn't think anyone was still that naive!
Here's a clue for you: Go to any state university and ask what corporations are funding their research. Here at UW it's like a 47 page list!
Oh and, uh, how could the taste make me nauseous Dr. Ignoramus? It made me feel toxic. Headaches, weakness, body aches, all disappeared when I quit sucralose-sweetened soda.
@jwallbanger donating money to a university and awarding a grant to a specific lab are two pretty different things. if you're going to pretend to have found anything interesting maybe you should go to the wet labs at your school and harass all the PIs first.
sort of like you're going to actually establish something definitive instead of pretending you understand how the labs work. of course you could always double check the data....you're allowed to do that you know....
@ucihapokujin Wow that's an awful lot of faith you have in those wonderful, loving chemical corporations. Of course they award those grants out of the sheer goodness of their warm, fuzzy little hearts! I bet you think chemical lobbyists give billions to politicians because they really strongly believe in democracy!
I don't pretend to know how labs work. Like I said, I'm not a scientist. But unlike you I'm wise enough to know corporations don't give away fortunes without a very specific agenda.
@jwallbanger my point is that people tend to get more government support. you can get large corporations donating money towards a grant, which is good for them since they get to write it off, but they don't really have any control over what it's going to end up funding.
it's also pretty damb hard to buy off the scientific community. that's why the corporate bogeyman spends so much money setting up bullshit nonprofit "research institutes" that they staff with yes men
@ucihapokujin it doesn't sound like you know much more about it than i do. what i do know is that corporations are profit machines, so it makes no sense they would give away large amounts of money with no control of what results it ends up producing. a tax write-off on a loss only saves them the tax, it's still lost money. the scientific community is not morally superior to the business community, everyone can be bought. some can be bought directly, some indirectly ("i'm just doing my job!")
@jwallbanger linus pauling would have been more impressive imo. von braun didn't really do much biology.
anyways it's pretty well documented that how you perceive your food affects how your body reacts to it. you could get sick eating a steak for no other reason than it looks weird. people have even written papers about it.
plus digestion 101 is about how sensory apparati stimulate your gut
@ucihapokujin bullshit bullshit, i'll have some more lie sauce with my bullshit please. if that's true it's far from common. never seen that happen, never heard of it, sounds like some genuine grade A bullplop to me son...
but maybe you should explain it to your imaginary girlfriend next time you're watching through her windows from the safety of your car. just don't go crazy when you see her with her real boyfriend, that's how you stalker freaks always end up in the gas chamber.
@ucihapokujin linus pauling, i thought that name sounded familiar. he's the guy that cured cancer with vitamin c and pissed off the medical establishment by proving it could cure diseases. yeah that's great stuff. of course, you probably dismiss that as early senility, dont you?
@jwallbanger i don't think you'll find many doctors who would advise against taking vitamin c. there's even fewer people doing biochemistry who would tell you it isn't important for your body to work correctly.
@ucihapokujin It's funny how I say something and your misshapen little pea brain garbles it into something completely different. Again, what I said was, he proved vitamin c COULD CURE CANCER AND OTHER DISEASES, not just that people should take it and the body needs it to work right. Understand? Or do I need to reword it so a 5 year old can get it?
I read about Pauling years ago when I was getting into vitamin c megadosing, an alternative medicine practice that he more or less pioneered.
@jwallbanger except that he didn't. taking more vitamin c than is recommended won't do much other than raise the amount that shows up in your urine...you could kill yourself if you take enough, but you'd need an ungodly amount for that to happen.
just stay away from the polar bear sweetmeats and you'll be fine.
@ucihapokujin he didn't? he did studies that showed a higher survival rate with cancer patientsand even wrote books on it. you really do enjoy pretending to be a smug little know-it-all don't you? you don't know shit.
but i guess a guy with only the internet for company on a saturday night needs complex delusions to maintain his self-esteem.
i could care less what you think, poindexter, vitamin c megadosing has helped me greatly, and pauling knows a hell of a lot more than you about it.
@jwallbanger like i said, you're going to find few people in health science or general biochemistry who will say vitamin c is bad for you.
if it did have that much of an effect on gene expression then it wouldn't take much to kill you under normal circumstances though...i also get the sneaking suspicion that you've never actually read anything he wrote
@ucihapokujin again, i don't care what you or medical professionals think. like you they know much less than they imagine. in fact, i've had so much more luck with alternative treatments than the 3 dozen or so bottles of worthless pills they've given me over the years, that based on my experience i'd say conventional medicine is about 80% horseshit.
furthermore, i have more than a sneaking suspicion that what i have read of pauling's work is 100% more than you have.
@ucihapokujin i'll take pity on your ignorance and summarize pauling's beliefs about vitamin c.
the thing is, the amount that the fda and doctors recommend is just enough to stave off scurvy. humans are one of the few animals that can't make their own vitamin c and animals that make their own produce much more than we get in our diets or a daily vitamin, especially during sickness or stress. therefore, for our bodies to function right we need at least 3 grams per day according to pauling.
@ucihapokujin and by functioning normally, pauling means having the ability to destroy viruses, bacteria, cancer cells, etc. he even cured heroin addicts with vitamin c megadosing. sound kooky? this is your hero we're talking about here. if you don't believe it consult the google oracle and educate yourself.
it doesn't suprise me at all that with billions in big, hi tech treatments at stake, the medical community would reject his research.
@ucihapokujin oh and i forgot to clarify, 3 grams doesn't sound like much, but that's just what he recommended for healthy people to stay healthy. he treated his trial subjects with much more, up to 100 grams per day of IV sodium ascorbate and ascorbic acid. all this was based on the amounts he found in the bodies of sick animals that produce their own. since i read about this i've gone through at least 20 pounds of sodium ascorbate and i could care less what you say about it, it fucking works.
@jwallbanger i'm so against vitamin c that i told you not to worry unless you start eating polar bear liver.
it still sounds like you didn't read the paper though. at some point you start collecting data and interpreting the results, at which point you find out that vitamin c is good for you but won't cure cancer.
nobody in the medical community going to advise you against taking vitamin c supplements though. also you need about 10 mg of vitamin c to prevent scurvy...
@ucihapokujin LOL. Well unless you have read it, how can you know whether or not I have? I haven't even said which of his studies I've read, so how can you know if I read it or not? You just want to be right when you know you're wrong. In other words, you're an idiot.
@ucihapokujin LOL. that's your response? some irrelevant, getaway smokescreen? a chewbacca defense? you are a pitiful little horse's ass and it's become a real yawn. you have done all the work for me and proved yourself the ignorant one with "no idea what you're talking about," with your tendency to fall back on absurd nonsense when you've run out of arrogant, condescending bullshit to say. so, boring retard, i'm moving on to more challenging quarry, because you're just a hopeless little nerd.
@jwallbanger lol i'll bet you don't even think a toaster puts out radiation.
anyways, i'm not the one denying facts on the basis that i refuse to believe them. there's over a 100 papers detailing reproducible experiments that prove sucralose doesn't really do anything, and it's pretty obvious why if you look at the molecule and the pathway it's not going into.
there's also some 40,000+ papers on why vitamin c is good for you that the evil medical establishment endorses....
@ucihapokujin oh and if you "know a hell of a lot more about what goes on in science" (lol) then why do you think i could get nauseous from the TASTE of sucralose? since when does taste produce nausea Dr. Science?
You never even attempted to tell me what I was wrong about regarding the STD stuff I was talking about with the other guy (you know, the other channel you stalked me into, Sir Nerdicus)
You sure don't seem all that learned about that there science stuff I reckon!
Due to childhood problems with health my siblings and my mother and I we had seizures. The start point was from drinking diet coke it did build up over the years in our systems. So no not in any way is a sugar replacement safe, when I worked at the garden center we had received a plant called stevia so much better then splenda or anything of the sort. We can not turn back time so we are stuck with seizures, My mom has a tumor and I have a cyst on my brain.
At the moment I drink no more than 2 cans of aspartame-flavored soda a day. To compensate for this, I try to drink at least 2 liters of water a day (about four bottles of bottled water).
When stevia prices drop, and product becomes more available, I'll switch to its use.
@sageb1 Be careful. Aspartame has caused tumors and killed people. Check out the video "Aspartame killed my wife" here on youtube. Nobody should mess around with aspartame...
@Oyhus Even at 2 cans a day, I consumer so little of aspartame (less than 200 mg a day) that most of it is metabolized, and so little of it affects me. Most of it is metabolized into harmless amounts of phenyalanine, formic acid and aspartic acid, most of which never reaches my brain.
i LIKED this video but I would like to know what brand of Stevia would you recommend. I have tried a certain brand that was very bitter to me. It came in green packetts. I didn't know there were better brands. Please recommend one to me. I don't care right now about the cost. I am diabetic and I like sweetener in my coffee. I use splenda, only because it is the best artificial one out there to me
Suchero Low Glycemic All-Natural Sweetener can be used 1:1 as a substitute for cane sugar. Suchero rapidly dissolves in liquids without residue and Suchero offers a unique caramel sweetness with a full, round body without altering the taste of coffee, tea or other beverages.
Joe, we have been using Sun Crystals which is a blend of stevia leaf and natural sugar. We looked at Truvia but don't like the sugar alcohol it is mixed with and heard reports of people gaining weight with it plus having other problems such as headaches and neck pain.
I am planning to move to pure stevia exract and see how that works but the sun crystals are only 5 cals per packet and we sweeten a whole pitcher of tea with only 6-8 packets which is only 30-40 cals per pitcher. not bad.
you need to emphasis organic stevia that is not processed. i know green is not appealing but the white is basically bleached/altered to give it the sugar appearance.
I thinki that organic cane sugar (like mascobado) is perfectly safe if not used abundantly! Or agave syrup as well...I tried stevia but it tastes funny...you have to get used to it before...
Hell no none of that crap is safe! holy crap. Alternative sweetners are stevia (an herb) Agave, yocan syrup, honey, maple, etc ... No fake sugar is healthy period!
im on a diet trying to kick soda im drinking pepsi max right now and im wondering would stevia sugar packets with koolade work well for my diet?i have stevia extract IN THE RAW says on box someone tell me if this is good?
artificial sweeteners are NOT safe! look at the history of aspartame-- it was created as a chemical warfare agent, that just happened to taste sweet (don't know why they tasted it!) and the man on the FDA board who made it legal, quit and joined the leading aspartame company a month after the legalization. Hrm, sounds well researched and legit to me. The only alternative I've heard of that seems "safe" is stevia-- not Truvia or any chemically refined version of stevia-- just plain stevia leaf.
The things I've seen about aspartame makes me believe it is not only unsafe but dangerous. I've heard good things about stevia but am reluctant to switch from raw sugar or honey until it has been studied further.
A recent Cytogenetic study conducted on mice in the College of Science, King Saud University in Saudi Arabia found “chromosome aberrations” in the thigh bone marrow cells of mice given aspartame, concluding that “aspartame has a genotoxic risk.”. This test was run for 24 hours! Aspartame is a toxin to DNA!
Notice that those opposing voices generally use name calling to advance their arguments, so called ad hominem attacks. Do your own research and do not accept my words at face value!
My answer to your questiom is that no i dont think that Aspartame is safer than sugar since i have tried it at least 6 times only to discover that all av the times i ended up having dizzyness, unexplainable shakes and stomachpains! Aspartame can cill you in the long turm and it is jard for the body to break it down because it was not ment to be put there in the first place! I would recomend for everyones safty that they use stevia or honey or ordenary sugar! WE MUST FIGHT TO BAN ASPARTAME!
I question your standards of evidence and your expertise if you really think that Joseph "microwaves and vaccines are evil!!11one" Mercola is someone whose works you should be mentioning.
how can you even turst artificial sugars when they are basically nothing .. how can nothing be something and usually when things lack the ordinary traits to natural things.
everything in life comes with both good and bad.. but aspartame and these artificial ones promiss NOTHING while they infact contain everythign BAD ...
there is no such thing as balance with these artificial sweeteners
my comment is
if you want sweet you got to eat sweet and not every day every time
why has the FDA approved these harmful sweeteners for so long? Aspartame was declared safe in 1974 and it still is today,even with so many people with health problems associated with aspartame. I'm sure its because of the amount of blowback it would create for the companies that use it in their products. So i guess its one of those things people should be aware of.
I do get a little put off by stevia probably due to its bitter after taste, and i end up using stuffs like Pal Sweet, Nutrasweet, and Equal. I know, I know the danger so I think I will go easy with honey.
I'm looking into stevia, however. As natural as possible. Aspartame is the fecal matter of the ecoli virus
Takiado 1 week ago
aspartame is NOT safe AT ALL. Also, get yourself an Mberry. It makes EVERYTHING taste good!
Takiado 1 week ago
Really enjoyed this video, I'll dig some Stevia out in the UK to try some!
naughtyusmaximus1969 4 weeks ago
uuuhhh ... honey and raisins??
iKhwAnfAez09 1 month ago in playlist Stevia
Post video on the dangers of MSG and Fluoride...
TheNobleMoor 1 month ago
Stevia the best sweetener on the Market. Natural with loads of health benefits. I buy mine from the states, why can't we purchase it in the UK?
The worst product on the Market is artificial sweetener Aspartame, closely followed by Sucrolose, and Acesulfame K, which are all poisons to your system.
Blackhawk0069 1 month ago
I have been under the understanding that artificial sweeteners are cancerous. I recently heard about stevia and I am curious weather it is safe or not, but it sounds appealing because they claim it is natural.
clumsygenius 2 months ago
I use only stevia and cane/beet sugar. Saccharin is tolerable, but I wouldn't use it it as much for sure. I try to avoid Splenda (sucralose), HFCS, and the dreaded Aspartame completely. From -my- experience and research, this my my list of best to worst common sweeteners:
Stevia > Cane/Beet Sugar > Saccharin > Splenda or HFCS > Aspartame
STAY AWAY FROM ASPARTAME.
kerdoi 2 months ago
@kerdoi I haven't really used Xylitol or the others, so that's why I didn't mention them. Again, it's only from my experience and research, because i know it's a very debatable topic. I do think everyone can agree that Aspartame is the worst there is though. I hear you can put it (Equal) on ants, and it will kill them. If so, at least it's cheap pest control, lol!
kerdoi 2 months ago
Stevia is the only safe and effective sweetener
MMMWhataburger 3 months ago
Aspartame destroys brain cells aswell
thecsslife 3 months ago
The only sugar I take is Xylitol and Stevia!
reasecplus 3 months ago in playlist Better Body Nutrition Austin
No, artificial sugar alternatives are NOT safe. I grow and use STEVIA. And now you have to be careful on what brand of Stevia you buy because some are NOT natural either! For traveling I use the SWEETLEAF brand of Stevia because it is 100% natural.
joanninna 3 months ago
The food industry and the pharmaceutical industry are bedfellows. One makes us sick on a daily basis and then we need to go the Dr's to find out what is wrong with us and they send us to the pharmacy with a script so we can buy the right drugs to make us healthy again from the foods we eat and water we drink. It's criminal. Its probably the most elaborate scam/scheme this world has ever run. Drug us through our food and water and then give us the "miracle drugs" to "cure" us. Evil with a smile.
ThePowerWithinMe 4 months ago
It took me 52 years to realize that ALL artificial sweeteners are bad for us. Aspartame IS the worst like you said. I could probably write a book on what Aspartame and other artificial sweeteners have done to my health. STAY AWAY FROM ARTIFICIAL SWEETENERS, they re NO GOOD FOR US. If the body THINKS it's getting sugar but instead gets an artificial sweetener it shuts down our metabolism, stores fat and that's when the problems begin. Then we go to the Dr's and they "fix us" from what we eat.
ThePowerWithinMe 4 months ago
What about Sweet Leaf vs Stevia in the Raw vs Purvia vs Truvia?
ryebread1980 4 months ago
High fructose corn syrup is bad to , But we need more videos that test if peyote and mushrooms are worst or healthier than Alcohol ! Lol cheers
JSprayaEntertainment 5 months ago
no i dont think it iz safe...and i use brown sugar if anythin.
GODLEESOLDIER 5 months ago
I love Stevia and it now is available in the large economy packs for baking and such!
mistressczarinaofall 5 months ago
My favorite alternative to sugar is fruit.
Rainwhisper1326 6 months ago
I accidentally bought orange juice not from concentrate with 50% less sugar. As I got home I finally noticed and was prepared to read "aspartame" on the label. But no, it read "stevia". So I researched it online and was surprised at the results. So immediately I poured a glass of this OJ and tested it out. Damn, stevia tastes great!!! they should ban aspartame and start using this stuff!!! I'm sold on it already, plus it's safe!
crackparty 6 months ago
If you knew how stevia is processed, it would be the least thing on your list. Stevia is bleached, that's why the powder is so white, not to mention ethanol is another chemical used in the process. Anything we consumed that has to be processed with chemicals which will eventually cause serious health issuses should be eaten at your own risk. We should become more aware of what we're eating and drinking, and less concerned about what looks and taste good. you're better off using honey or sugar.
roz3657 6 months ago
@roz3657 No see Stevia itself is not synthetic, it's certain company brands of it. Stevia doesn't raise your insulin levels so it is better for you than sugar. Most artificial sweeteners are not safe. Stevia is completely natural when you don't buy it from a company that overly processes it. I get migraines within 5 minutes of consuming aspartame and have no symptoms with Stevia. That alone isn't a surefire test necessarily but, there is a lot of information about stevia. Use its natural form.
TheEnlightenedTruth 6 months ago
@roz3657 It's nice to see others awake to the truth about our food. Keeping people sick with food and water and then healing them is an annual multi-trillion dollar business. All we can do is try and keep it to a minimum by choosing more wisely.
ThePowerWithinMe 4 months ago
Will Stevia contribute to cavities?
GodsGenuineGift 6 months ago
I use raw sugar (turbinado). Do you?
iman0626 6 months ago
Stevia
123makedonec 6 months ago
Aspartame contains metanhol, a nervine poison...
All artificial is not safe.
TrueWealth108 6 months ago
What about Truvia, I love it.
tailtail75 6 months ago
@tailtail75 Truvia is made from Stevia
hoosyourdaddyo 6 months ago
The best sweetners are those that are from a natural source like fruit or stevia which is a nutrient.
NinjaBiaatch 7 months ago
Aspartame is neuro toxic. As a matter of fact it is a chemical product!!
TheValerioPaolini 7 months ago
Aspartame IS safe. People who say different base there "knowlegde" on non evident internet "facts".
FyrDenAfNu 7 months ago
@FyrDenAfNu And you're opinion means more how? Maybe you need to read more than the Monsanto web pages that shill for that poision
hoosyourdaddyo 6 months ago
@FyrDenAfNu Aspartame is poison and all one has to do is start Goggling it. It contains methanol which the body cannot metabolize and then it turns into formaldehyde, which THEN the body cannot rid itself of. It kills people very, very, very, very slowly and then when they do an autopsy they blame it on something else like cigarettes or some other cancer. The whole time half the people in the USA ingest it unknowingly through their food. Easy test is to detox off it for 30 days then YOU decide.
ThePowerWithinMe 4 months ago
@FyrDenAfNu Aspartame is poison and all one has to do is start Goggling it. It contains methanol which the body cannot metabolize and then it turns into formaldehyde, which THEN the body cannot rid itself of. It kills people very, very, slowly and then when they do an autopsy they blame it on something else like cigarettes or some other cancer. The whole time half the people in the USA ingest it unknowingly through their food. Easy test is to detox off it for 30 days then YOU decide.
ThePowerWithinMe 4 months ago
no, honey
terrancelueckgen 7 months ago
What is your opinion about Just Like Sugar product?
markwmila 7 months ago
I would say nope!!! in my opinion anything with the word "artificial" next to it isn't safe, I know it's kind of radical but I think it's easier and safer this way
MsMad94 7 months ago
banana
wajikhan1 7 months ago
stevia rocksyou need some give me a call (416)573-8440
scarpycocoful 8 months ago
STEVIA! and Honey.
thenameismandy 8 months ago
Honey and maple syrup are made of sugar, it's like eating sugar with some extra vitamins and mineral. While it is better, but it's still bad for you.
kinfolk321 8 months ago
@kinfolk321 Fucking nailed it.
ooJDMoo 7 months ago
Honey or maple syrup
Allen2045 8 months ago
Yes. Splenda is my favorite artificial sweetener. Honey is favorite natural. Sugar is too sweet and syrupy.
dean2663 9 months ago
i dont like sugar....
YsahsCreativeHobbies 9 months ago
i think all artificial sweeteners are not safe. Alternatives are honey, sugar cane raw and stevia natural (I cut up the leaves and add it to my tea)
RCOCINA 9 months ago
no i dont think so. i would say my favorite alternative to sugar is high fructose corn syrup.. if that counts.
Crosstin 9 months ago
sugar puffs!
PICKyourSELFupTV 9 months ago
honey and table sugar are both made of the same thing...
jewie27 9 months ago
yes, FDA Approved. Your body doesn't recongize artificial sweetners so it they just pass.
jewie27 9 months ago
Honey!
TheShantae101 9 months ago
stevia!!!! and fruitjuices :) great vid!
MrMinutemen 9 months ago
Thank you!
MsEbonycat 9 months ago
Artifical sugars are not healthy but they're not poison either. I believe in moderation. Too much of anything is bad for everybody even if it's healthy.
It's important to use our brain and common sense, and not go to extremes like my vegan friend who's gone completely MAD over raw food. She's scared of food now and sees poison everywhere.
My favorite alternative to sugar is HONEY! The only occasions I use "sweet" is in my tea, coffee, herbal tea and soups.
Thanks 4 your time.
Autres1 10 months ago
No they are not safe, I use Stevia instead. Great info,
Have you done GM Foods.
davidfbegin 10 months ago
No they are not safe, I use Stevia instead.
davidfbegin 10 months ago
What about neohesperidin (DC)?
mirrormouth 10 months ago
Stevia the most healhty sweets boycotted by whon?
dogoodfeelgoodshop 10 months ago
Artificial sugars are not safe! i will go for natural honey instead.
manmustwak 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Nice videos this you tube world just gets bigger every day! When you
have time come visit my chann
FatReleaseSystem 10 months ago
truvia but i sometimes use 20 packets a day
hereticg0d 10 months ago
Did you know that the advertisement associated with your video is Frosted Mini Wheats!
cindylynn62006 10 months ago 2
You lost all credibility when you perpetuated the saccharin causes cancer fallacy. Even after stating that it was possibly conducted or funded by the makers of aspartame.
BlatentYak 11 months ago
Brilliant! Clear, concise information. My husband's a diabetic and has been using Splenda which I have only just discovered is harmful. I've been searching the web and discovered stevia and have done as much investigation into it as I can. I am now in the process of finding a supplier to the UK. Whilst so doing, my husband will finish what supplies of Splenda he has left (not much) and sweeten his cereal with fresh fruit and take his tea without sweetener. THANK YOU for your help
vixfoxwatch1 11 months ago
no, nothing or just sugar
amrowe555 11 months ago
what about raw cane sugar or turbinado sugar???
whodatcreativechic 11 months ago
I use Xylitol and Zsweet sparingly. I've never had the runs from either, because I'm smart enough to not over do it. Thanks this is a great video that really explains about sweeteners.
selket51 11 months ago
Comment removed
selket51 11 months ago
You forgot grade B maple syrup. :) Organic, has nutrients and minerals, no animal byproducts (it's from a plant) would probably go somewhere between Molasses and Stevia, I love stevia, my favorite sweetner.
AlexandriaLanai 11 months ago
did you know that mexican american indians had over 1000 varities of corn . over hundreds of years corn has been cross bred to eliminate negative aspects of other varieties to produce the best of the breeds they had .. same with potatetoes and many other fruits and veggies . a precursor to genectic modification . yuk!!!
i will take any hing naturel over chemicals and genetic modification anytime . STEVIA ROCKS!!!!!
rharha2112 11 months ago
in what year was stevia hybridized ? post a link to this misinformation you are spreading .
rharha2112 11 months ago
aspartame is bad for people and makes you gain weight, and may cause cancer and worse in some folks.
I go for a little honey from time to time,
blewEAGLE 1 year ago
I don't think they generally are safe; I don't like most of them anyway and would rather do without than have a substitute. Stevia and aspartame are bitter. I did try xylitol a few weeks ago because I learned that it was "natural," and it wasn't a good experience. I give it mixed reviews and think it's better to avoid sweeteners as much as I can stand.
zmbaker 1 year ago
STEVIA IS NOT A MUTAGEN . IT WAS LABLED AS SUCH DUE TO TRIALS PERFORMED BY DUKE UNI AND THE LIKE , PAID FOR BY THE SWEETENER FOLKS. THEY SUCCEEDED IN HAVEING IT LABLED THAT WAY WITH FALSE RESULTS AND TEST FINDINGS. SO THEY CAN SELL US ASPERTAME AND SUCRALOSE . ANY ONE WHO INVESTIGATES WHAT HE/SHE IS BEEING TOLD COULD FIND THIS INFO ON HE NET . STEVIA HAS BEEN USED FOR HUNDREDS OF YEARS THERE BY GIVING US THE BIGEST TEST GROUP AND LONGEST TEST STUDY EVERY DONE ON A "PRODUCT". WAKE UP
rharha2112 1 year ago
@rharha2112 JUST BECAUSE YOU SAY SO DOESN'T MAKE IT SAFE BUT YOU COULD RUB IT ON YOUR CHEST IF YOU LIKE BUT PEOPLE SHOULD KNOW THE TRUTH.THE TRUTH SHALL MAKE THEM FREE,FREE FROM ARTIFICIAL HYBRID PLANTS THAT ARE NOT NATURAL AND WAS NEVER MENT TO BE THIS SWEET.JUST EAT FRUIT AND CHILL OUT.
PastorErickDMarquez 11 months ago
My understanding is that most are not safe. I avoid them studiously. I am interested in learning moreabout xylitol, as I have heard it has health benefits, and stevia might be okay in small amounts. I am interested to hear what Joe thinks.
jww12341 1 year ago
this is a very informative video. We are starting a green house and we are experimenting with Stevia. I am very excited about this herb. Christimynatt@yahoo.com
christi10081962 1 year ago
WARNING STEVIA IS A MUTAGEN :WICH MUTATES OUR CELLS AS IT COMES IN CONTACT WITH THEM..STEVIA IS A HYBRID PLANT NOT WILD OR NATURAL STAY AWAY PLEASE..LOOK IT UP......!Hybrid plants are plants produced by impregnating the pistil of one species with the pollen of another.It's not natural plant found in nature it was created by this prosses.
PastorErickDMarquez 1 year ago
@PastorErickDMarquez Yes, but "hybrid" does not necessarily mean its evil.
Squirrelletta 11 months ago
@Squirrelletta I didn't say it was evil.but its a mutagen which means it does have a mutating effect when we digest it....and anything that mutates in our body i try to stay awy from.HYBRID not natural.Why take it just because you really want something sweet....eat a peice of fruit.
PastorErickDMarquez 11 months ago
I have personally audited a sucralose plant. The process is nasty. It contains 13 ingredients of which only one is pharma grade sugar (already highly processed). The rest are mostly heavy duty solvents. Even the PHD responsible for the process told me would never dream of eating it himself. Sucralose was developed as an ant poison and as you are best to stay away from all synthetic sweeteners including erythritol and the other sugar alcohols. Look for clean processed natural stevia extract.
angusf27 1 year ago
@angusf27 it was developed as an ant poison because it smells almost exactly like sugar but doesn't metabolize and starves them...i'll bet you wouldn't be happy to see the sort of plants that turn out stevia. of course since they're applying organic solvents to a plant instead of working from scratch they're subject to less oversight before it gets approved to market...
there's also a pretty big difference between eating concentrated hcl and using it in a substitution reaction
ucihapokujin 1 year ago
sugar is not a substitute for sugar....and the amount of formaldehyde your body deals with due to aspartame is not nearly enough to hurt you.
you probably get a higher dose eating your fruits and veggies...
ucihapokujin 1 year ago
What about oral health,whats the best one for teeth?
billthespac 1 year ago
How about we stick to stevia IF necesary and try to stay away from sweeteners as a whole(minus special occasions)
FitnessChronicles 1 year ago
who is this nutritionist that can't spell molasses?
pretty funny that three of his alternatives to sugar are just natural forms of sugar.
honey is sugary goo made by bees, and it spikes blood sugar just like the processed stuff.
so does molasses which is just the leftover sugar-sludge from refineries.
fruits are sugary plant ovaries, and some fruit like table grapes are as sugary as candy.
eaten whole/undried most fruit is better than refined sugar, but fruit juice spikes blood sugar badly.
jwallbanger 1 year ago
splenda safer than nutrasweet or saccharin? are you on crack? sucralose is an organochlorine, a class of chemicals which is so toxic they're used as insecticides.
the fda banned stevia from one "anonymous" complaint (from splenda no doubt) yet they get mountains of complaints about sucralose every year! there are thousands of people claiming sucralose POISONED them! and that includes me, as the few times I tried it I got very sick.
aspartame has made me feel a little ill too, but not as bad.
jwallbanger 1 year ago
@jwallbanger sucralose is metabolically inert. the taste can be a little much though
ucihapokujin 1 year ago
@ucihapokujin According to what? Studies funded by the company that makes it? I know I read that a certain amount of it is absorbed by the body. Then what? It just passes through? Where does it go?
But anyway I'm not a scientist. All I know is that it made me sick every time I tried it. And there are many other people claiming the same thing.
I don't believe the research is unbiased especially when there's huge profits at stake.
jwallbanger 1 year ago
@jwallbanger the fact that sucralose is metabolically inert is pretty well established at this point.
besides that for all the pissing and moaning people to about how aspartame and sucralose are evil i've never seen any actual data. i don't think any of the studies that are supposed to back this crap have ever even gotten beyond forming a hypothesis.
there's just nothing to go on. it's like saying that WWII was fought to bail out the israelis
ucihapokujin 1 year ago
@ucihapokujin I haven't seen enough to prove it safe either. It's like "here eat this artificial chemical we made in a lab there's nothing to prove it's harmful!" Yeah, right. My body evolved to eat chemicals made by nature, not chemicals made in a vat in New Jersey by some rich bastards that don't give a rat's ass about my health.
The fact that sucralose is an organochlorine is enough to make me stay away from it. That, and that it has already posioned me multiple times.
jwallbanger 1 year ago
@jwallbanger by that comment i can tell you're real learned about where your "natural products" come from...
go to pubmed, look up sucralose toxicity. if you pay attention you can see the article entitled "the absence of genotoxicity in sucralose" between all the studies that talk about how they failed to give rats cancer by feeding them the stuff.
of course the nih is an evil government conspirator and none of the academic sources there are to be trusted...
ucihapokujin 1 year ago
@ucihapokujin and by the way you just dove down the gutter of arrogant sarcasm i can tell you are a narrow minded sheep who will eat any poison mansanto wants to put on your plate. of course you can trust them, they're rich! and hell, no big corporation with a conflict of interest ever funded an academic research study before, right? next are you going to tell me nicotine is not addictive and cigarettes are harmless? i mean, there's loads of studies funded by the tobacco institute that prove it!
jwallbanger 1 year ago
@jwallbanger you lose if you're comparing the work of the biomedical community to some crap phillip morris bought off of cato...
sucralose makes people sick for no other reason than the taste is too damned strong
ucihapokujin 1 year ago
@ucihapokujin you're just not going to convince me and the thousands of other people who have gotten sick eating sucralose to give it another chance. you think we're all delusional? horseshit.
and as for your heroes who tested and approved that garbage, the FDA banned stevia as a food additive in 1991 because of one anonymous complaint (from mansanto no doubt) yet they have piles of complaints about splenda and do nothing.
if you think the biomedical community can't be bought you're very naive.
jwallbanger 1 year ago
@jwallbanger dammit. the overlord will be displeased with me...
but just to summarize, i'm wrong because you refuse to even look at the data?
ucihapokujin 1 year ago
@ucihapokujin dear arrogant douche bag. please do not put words in my mouth. i know it provides you great narcissistic supply to think yourself some science whiz who I should be in awe with and automatically trust to tell me what new wonder chemicals I should ingest.
the problem is, data can't be trusted, and neither can head-up-the-ass egotists like yourself.
these companies have gotten away with too much poisoning of everything for too long, they can no longer be trusted by anyone, ever.
jwallbanger 1 year ago
@jwallbanger data can't be trusted. that's why we need to take self identified experts at their word.
after all, what is math but an elaborate plot to kill all life on earth?
ucihapokujin 1 year ago
@ucihapokujin yes, data can't possibly be faked. figures can't ever be manipulated by researchers on corporate payroll. numbers never lie that's why the enron accountants were really innocent!
After all, what is your sarcasm but a way for you to fake intelligence?
jwallbanger 1 year ago
@jwallbanger so to summarize, sucralose is an evil poison because you refuse to look at anything that isn't already jacking you off?
ucihapokujin 1 year ago
@ucihapokujin Ha. So to summarize, you're all out of arguments and sarcasm so you're just being absurd now? I can't even figure out how that's supposed to be a joke. That's not even "Family Guy funny." Try again jackass.
jwallbanger 1 year ago
@jwallbanger well there isn't much else anyone can do either way than present you with relevant data, but if you really refuse to acknowledge the conclusion that doesn't sound good to you because you know you're absolutely right then you might have a bright future as a researcher at the creation institute.
give em a call and start showing those dumbass scientists what's what today!
ucihapokujin 1 year ago
@ucihapokujin OK, prove the studies aren't funded by biased sources then I'll consider the data. (crickets chirping)
But even then I still wouldn't eat that shit. It made me sick multiple times. Even unbiased data means nothing to those of us who got physically ill eating sucralose. You're just going to have a tough time getting people to trust big corporations that make pesticides and additives who have already done too much damage to count.
Is the logic of that over your head, genius?
jwallbanger 1 year ago
@jwallbanger well there's no evidence suggesting that the studies were biased, but you can play rumsfield rules if it makes you feel smarter.
maybe you could provide me with evidence that they are biased?
and like it's been said before, the taste is a little much, so i believe it made you nauseous. not everything that induces nausea is a poison though. like how i can't eat onions
ucihapokujin 1 year ago
@ucihapokujin Wow. So all this time you're trying to get me to accept these studies and you don't even know where their funding came from? I didn't think anyone was still that naive!
Here's a clue for you: Go to any state university and ask what corporations are funding their research. Here at UW it's like a 47 page list!
Oh and, uh, how could the taste make me nauseous Dr. Ignoramus? It made me feel toxic. Headaches, weakness, body aches, all disappeared when I quit sucralose-sweetened soda.
jwallbanger 1 year ago
@jwallbanger donating money to a university and awarding a grant to a specific lab are two pretty different things. if you're going to pretend to have found anything interesting maybe you should go to the wet labs at your school and harass all the PIs first.
sort of like you're going to actually establish something definitive instead of pretending you understand how the labs work. of course you could always double check the data....you're allowed to do that you know....
ucihapokujin 1 year ago
@ucihapokujin Wow that's an awful lot of faith you have in those wonderful, loving chemical corporations. Of course they award those grants out of the sheer goodness of their warm, fuzzy little hearts! I bet you think chemical lobbyists give billions to politicians because they really strongly believe in democracy!
I don't pretend to know how labs work. Like I said, I'm not a scientist. But unlike you I'm wise enough to know corporations don't give away fortunes without a very specific agenda.
jwallbanger 1 year ago
@jwallbanger my point is that people tend to get more government support. you can get large corporations donating money towards a grant, which is good for them since they get to write it off, but they don't really have any control over what it's going to end up funding.
it's also pretty damb hard to buy off the scientific community. that's why the corporate bogeyman spends so much money setting up bullshit nonprofit "research institutes" that they staff with yes men
ucihapokujin 1 year ago
@ucihapokujin it doesn't sound like you know much more about it than i do. what i do know is that corporations are profit machines, so it makes no sense they would give away large amounts of money with no control of what results it ends up producing. a tax write-off on a loss only saves them the tax, it's still lost money. the scientific community is not morally superior to the business community, everyone can be bought. some can be bought directly, some indirectly ("i'm just doing my job!")
jwallbanger 1 year ago
@jwallbanger well seeing how i had a stint at lbnl i'd say i know a hell of a lot more about what goes on in science than you do.
you ig'nant son
ucihapokujin 1 year ago
@ucihapokujin dudn't soun like it. soun like ya tawkin out ya ass boy! ya two-teethed inbred flipper baby!
oh and i was werner von braun in a past life so that trumps your lie! so i'll be taking this pot thank you.
jwallbanger 1 year ago
@jwallbanger linus pauling would have been more impressive imo. von braun didn't really do much biology.
anyways it's pretty well documented that how you perceive your food affects how your body reacts to it. you could get sick eating a steak for no other reason than it looks weird. people have even written papers about it.
plus digestion 101 is about how sensory apparati stimulate your gut
ucihapokujin 1 year ago
@ucihapokujin bullshit bullshit, i'll have some more lie sauce with my bullshit please. if that's true it's far from common. never seen that happen, never heard of it, sounds like some genuine grade A bullplop to me son...
but maybe you should explain it to your imaginary girlfriend next time you're watching through her windows from the safety of your car. just don't go crazy when you see her with her real boyfriend, that's how you stalker freaks always end up in the gas chamber.
jwallbanger 1 year ago
@ucihapokujin linus pauling, i thought that name sounded familiar. he's the guy that cured cancer with vitamin c and pissed off the medical establishment by proving it could cure diseases. yeah that's great stuff. of course, you probably dismiss that as early senility, dont you?
jwallbanger 1 year ago
@jwallbanger i don't think you'll find many doctors who would advise against taking vitamin c. there's even fewer people doing biochemistry who would tell you it isn't important for your body to work correctly.
what exactly did you type into the google?
ucihapokujin 1 year ago
@ucihapokujin It's funny how I say something and your misshapen little pea brain garbles it into something completely different. Again, what I said was, he proved vitamin c COULD CURE CANCER AND OTHER DISEASES, not just that people should take it and the body needs it to work right. Understand? Or do I need to reword it so a 5 year old can get it?
I read about Pauling years ago when I was getting into vitamin c megadosing, an alternative medicine practice that he more or less pioneered.
jwallbanger 1 year ago
@jwallbanger except that he didn't. taking more vitamin c than is recommended won't do much other than raise the amount that shows up in your urine...you could kill yourself if you take enough, but you'd need an ungodly amount for that to happen.
just stay away from the polar bear sweetmeats and you'll be fine.
ucihapokujin 1 year ago
@ucihapokujin he didn't? he did studies that showed a higher survival rate with cancer patientsand even wrote books on it. you really do enjoy pretending to be a smug little know-it-all don't you? you don't know shit.
but i guess a guy with only the internet for company on a saturday night needs complex delusions to maintain his self-esteem.
i could care less what you think, poindexter, vitamin c megadosing has helped me greatly, and pauling knows a hell of a lot more than you about it.
jwallbanger 1 year ago
@jwallbanger like i said, you're going to find few people in health science or general biochemistry who will say vitamin c is bad for you.
if it did have that much of an effect on gene expression then it wouldn't take much to kill you under normal circumstances though...i also get the sneaking suspicion that you've never actually read anything he wrote
ucihapokujin 1 year ago
@ucihapokujin again, i don't care what you or medical professionals think. like you they know much less than they imagine. in fact, i've had so much more luck with alternative treatments than the 3 dozen or so bottles of worthless pills they've given me over the years, that based on my experience i'd say conventional medicine is about 80% horseshit.
furthermore, i have more than a sneaking suspicion that what i have read of pauling's work is 100% more than you have.
(so shut yer cock holster...)
jwallbanger 1 year ago
@ucihapokujin i'll take pity on your ignorance and summarize pauling's beliefs about vitamin c.
the thing is, the amount that the fda and doctors recommend is just enough to stave off scurvy. humans are one of the few animals that can't make their own vitamin c and animals that make their own produce much more than we get in our diets or a daily vitamin, especially during sickness or stress. therefore, for our bodies to function right we need at least 3 grams per day according to pauling.
jwallbanger 1 year ago
@ucihapokujin and by functioning normally, pauling means having the ability to destroy viruses, bacteria, cancer cells, etc. he even cured heroin addicts with vitamin c megadosing. sound kooky? this is your hero we're talking about here. if you don't believe it consult the google oracle and educate yourself.
it doesn't suprise me at all that with billions in big, hi tech treatments at stake, the medical community would reject his research.
after all, healthy people don't make them rich.
jwallbanger 1 year ago
@ucihapokujin oh and i forgot to clarify, 3 grams doesn't sound like much, but that's just what he recommended for healthy people to stay healthy. he treated his trial subjects with much more, up to 100 grams per day of IV sodium ascorbate and ascorbic acid. all this was based on the amounts he found in the bodies of sick animals that produce their own. since i read about this i've gone through at least 20 pounds of sodium ascorbate and i could care less what you say about it, it fucking works.
jwallbanger 1 year ago
@jwallbanger i'm so against vitamin c that i told you not to worry unless you start eating polar bear liver.
it still sounds like you didn't read the paper though. at some point you start collecting data and interpreting the results, at which point you find out that vitamin c is good for you but won't cure cancer.
nobody in the medical community going to advise you against taking vitamin c supplements though. also you need about 10 mg of vitamin c to prevent scurvy...
ucihapokujin 1 year ago
@ucihapokujin LOL. Well unless you have read it, how can you know whether or not I have? I haven't even said which of his studies I've read, so how can you know if I read it or not? You just want to be right when you know you're wrong. In other words, you're an idiot.
jwallbanger 1 year ago
@jwallbanger pretty much for the same reason i can know that you get a higher dosage of radiation from your toaster than a cell phone hardware
ucihapokujin 1 year ago
@ucihapokujin LOL. that's your response? some irrelevant, getaway smokescreen? a chewbacca defense? you are a pitiful little horse's ass and it's become a real yawn. you have done all the work for me and proved yourself the ignorant one with "no idea what you're talking about," with your tendency to fall back on absurd nonsense when you've run out of arrogant, condescending bullshit to say. so, boring retard, i'm moving on to more challenging quarry, because you're just a hopeless little nerd.
jwallbanger 1 year ago
Comment removed
ucihapokujin 1 year ago
@jwallbanger lol i'll bet you don't even think a toaster puts out radiation.
anyways, i'm not the one denying facts on the basis that i refuse to believe them. there's over a 100 papers detailing reproducible experiments that prove sucralose doesn't really do anything, and it's pretty obvious why if you look at the molecule and the pathway it's not going into.
there's also some 40,000+ papers on why vitamin c is good for you that the evil medical establishment endorses....
ucihapokujin 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jwallbanger pretty much for the same reason i can know that you get a higher dosage of radiation from your toaster than from cell phone hardware
ucihapokujin 1 year ago
@ucihapokujin oh and if you "know a hell of a lot more about what goes on in science" (lol) then why do you think i could get nauseous from the TASTE of sucralose? since when does taste produce nausea Dr. Science?
You never even attempted to tell me what I was wrong about regarding the STD stuff I was talking about with the other guy (you know, the other channel you stalked me into, Sir Nerdicus)
You sure don't seem all that learned about that there science stuff I reckon!
jwallbanger 1 year ago
aspartame is a bioweapon..wich is hi toxic !
its produced from the excretions of e koli bacteria.!
airforce pilots are not allowed to take it..cause it messes with their brain...
infokriegerBerlin 1 year ago
Due to childhood problems with health my siblings and my mother and I we had seizures. The start point was from drinking diet coke it did build up over the years in our systems. So no not in any way is a sugar replacement safe, when I worked at the garden center we had received a plant called stevia so much better then splenda or anything of the sort. We can not turn back time so we are stuck with seizures, My mom has a tumor and I have a cyst on my brain.
yd2kc 1 year ago
P.S. I also know that some substitutes for sugar where actually pesticides now how is that for edible
yd2kc 1 year ago
I can live without sugar.
At the moment I drink no more than 2 cans of aspartame-flavored soda a day. To compensate for this, I try to drink at least 2 liters of water a day (about four bottles of bottled water).
When stevia prices drop, and product becomes more available, I'll switch to its use.
sageb1 1 year ago
@sageb1 Be careful. Aspartame has caused tumors and killed people. Check out the video "Aspartame killed my wife" here on youtube. Nobody should mess around with aspartame...
Oyhus 1 year ago
@Oyhus Even at 2 cans a day, I consumer so little of aspartame (less than 200 mg a day) that most of it is metabolized, and so little of it affects me. Most of it is metabolized into harmless amounts of phenyalanine, formic acid and aspartic acid, most of which never reaches my brain.
sageb1 1 year ago
i LIKED this video but I would like to know what brand of Stevia would you recommend. I have tried a certain brand that was very bitter to me. It came in green packetts. I didn't know there were better brands. Please recommend one to me. I don't care right now about the cost. I am diabetic and I like sweetener in my coffee. I use splenda, only because it is the best artificial one out there to me
but its not great tasting in my coffee.
gayle2020 1 year ago
Stevia honey.
techdude1876 1 year ago
Suchero Low Glycemic All-Natural Sweetener can be used 1:1 as a substitute for cane sugar. Suchero rapidly dissolves in liquids without residue and Suchero offers a unique caramel sweetness with a full, round body without altering the taste of coffee, tea or other beverages.
jvilla83 1 year ago
I use Suchero Low Glycemic All-Natural Sweetener. Unbleached and unfiltered.
jvilla83 1 year ago
Joe, we have been using Sun Crystals which is a blend of stevia leaf and natural sugar. We looked at Truvia but don't like the sugar alcohol it is mixed with and heard reports of people gaining weight with it plus having other problems such as headaches and neck pain.
I am planning to move to pure stevia exract and see how that works but the sun crystals are only 5 cals per packet and we sweeten a whole pitcher of tea with only 6-8 packets which is only 30-40 cals per pitcher. not bad.
thescubageek 1 year ago
you need to emphasis organic stevia that is not processed. i know green is not appealing but the white is basically bleached/altered to give it the sugar appearance.
mesh24lv 1 year ago
I thinki that organic cane sugar (like mascobado) is perfectly safe if not used abundantly! Or agave syrup as well...I tried stevia but it tastes funny...you have to get used to it before...
ValeDocet 1 year ago
Hell no none of that crap is safe! holy crap. Alternative sweetners are stevia (an herb) Agave, yocan syrup, honey, maple, etc ... No fake sugar is healthy period!
realityvsmyth 1 year ago
if you truly believe that aspartame is safe you've obviously been taking it for decades
BRGxRandomHero 1 year ago
im on a diet trying to kick soda im drinking pepsi max right now and im wondering would stevia sugar packets with koolade work well for my diet?i have stevia extract IN THE RAW says on box someone tell me if this is good?
blakasassin1 1 year ago
stevia tastes lousy.
xylosweet has never given me diarhea. I certainly wouldn't knock it on that basis.
Fruit?
albartsch 1 year ago
artificial sweeteners are NOT safe! look at the history of aspartame-- it was created as a chemical warfare agent, that just happened to taste sweet (don't know why they tasted it!) and the man on the FDA board who made it legal, quit and joined the leading aspartame company a month after the legalization. Hrm, sounds well researched and legit to me. The only alternative I've heard of that seems "safe" is stevia-- not Truvia or any chemically refined version of stevia-- just plain stevia leaf.
lochnessie233 1 year ago
He really should have mentioned xylitol. It's the best by far.
VainApocalypse 1 year ago
@VainApocalypse
He did mentioned Xylitol and its side-effects at 3:00,
I personally like the hyper-expensive erythritol and stevia.
tclulu 1 year ago
The things I've seen about aspartame makes me believe it is not only unsafe but dangerous. I've heard good things about stevia but am reluctant to switch from raw sugar or honey until it has been studied further.
MsAolora 1 year ago
A recent Cytogenetic study conducted on mice in the College of Science, King Saud University in Saudi Arabia found “chromosome aberrations” in the thigh bone marrow cells of mice given aspartame, concluding that “aspartame has a genotoxic risk.”. This test was run for 24 hours! Aspartame is a toxin to DNA!
Notice that those opposing voices generally use name calling to advance their arguments, so called ad hominem attacks. Do your own research and do not accept my words at face value!
mogambo55 1 year ago
SORRY FOR MISS SPELLING I WAS IN A HURRY I USUALLY SPELL BETTER, I HOPE YOU UNDERSTAND MY REPLY ANYWAY yours respectfully mr Orian
orianization 1 year ago
My answer to your questiom is that no i dont think that Aspartame is safer than sugar since i have tried it at least 6 times only to discover that all av the times i ended up having dizzyness, unexplainable shakes and stomachpains! Aspartame can cill you in the long turm and it is jard for the body to break it down because it was not ment to be put there in the first place! I would recomend for everyones safty that they use stevia or honey or ordenary sugar! WE MUST FIGHT TO BAN ASPARTAME!
orianization 1 year ago
I question your standards of evidence and your expertise if you really think that Joseph "microwaves and vaccines are evil!!11one" Mercola is someone whose works you should be mentioning.
aquariussphere 1 year ago
many artificial sugars aren't safe. but then again, many natural sugars aren't safe either.
it's not my favorite, but i consume aspartame (yick!) most because that's the product used in most soft drinks.
Urudrim 1 year ago
Nutrasweet is the best . The internet has such false and bad information about it.
TELEVISIONARCHIVES 1 year ago
how can you even turst artificial sugars when they are basically nothing .. how can nothing be something and usually when things lack the ordinary traits to natural things.
everything in life comes with both good and bad.. but aspartame and these artificial ones promiss NOTHING while they infact contain everythign BAD ...
there is no such thing as balance with these artificial sweeteners
my comment is
if you want sweet you got to eat sweet and not every day every time
TheRogueMonk 1 year ago
stevia seems to be the best tasting and safest sweetener plus it's not ARTIFICIAL since it comes from a plant.
desmirage 1 year ago
Artificial sweetmers are not safe aspartame is an exito-toxin 200% sweeter than sugar and kills brain cells!!
BePrepared2012 1 year ago
why has the FDA approved these harmful sweeteners for so long? Aspartame was declared safe in 1974 and it still is today,even with so many people with health problems associated with aspartame. I'm sure its because of the amount of blowback it would create for the companies that use it in their products. So i guess its one of those things people should be aware of.
happypants07 1 year ago
No artificial sugars are not safe!
I try to avoid refined sugar but instead will use fruit or honey.
seiferzion 1 year ago
I do get a little put off by stevia probably due to its bitter after taste, and i end up using stuffs like Pal Sweet, Nutrasweet, and Equal. I know, I know the danger so I think I will go easy with honey.
mrblurblur2003 1 year ago
@mrblurblur2003 Nustevia pure extract has no bitter aftertaste. I'd recommend getting it off iherb; it's much cheaper there.
Chikin1ninjas 1 year ago
Honeys the way to go
ReeseMac 1 year ago
I use agave but mostly I love raw organic honey for my teas in the morning and evening.
ladyjung1 1 year ago
I don't think so...honey
sunshine4eternity 1 year ago
no.... and my alternative sugar is natural bee honey.
JOsu1DEath 1 year ago
thanks! very useful information
Mrschinasa 1 year ago
stevia i think
nicob89 1 year ago
aspartame is a killer, use honey
20122017 1 year ago