Chemical Sweeteners in Whey Protein

[Nick29]

I don't know about you guys, but I'm convinced. I'm never eating anything with chemicals in it again

[ZDub212]

article: http://www.newstarget.com/001522.html that there was a protein powder called "Jay Robb's whey protein" that was aware of the chemicals

An article that is selling protein is a reliable source eh?

ZacharyMills: you look like a rep for protein is it? i would imagine bad news like this would cut into your bottom line. how much sucralose does your products have? heres some of the links that you requested above, you may just want to google it yourself.

My company doesn't make protein...but you could have checked online and found that out for yourself...right?

or maybe you could start here:

http://www.newstarget.com/001522.html
http://www.newstarget.com/sucralose.html

You cite an opinionated article...and a site that just contains more of them. Where is the research here?

So if we break this down and use the 1g protein/lb body weight /day to gain muscle, based on the amount of sucralose you shovel into yourself per

drink based on someone who is 180 lbs... it might look like this:

(1g x 180 lbs) x (roughly 25 mg's sucralose + mg's Potassium Acesulfame) = x

x = 4500mg's or 4.5 g's roughly... this is without the Acesulfame artificial sweetener seeing that they dont post it but add on whatever you know

to this equation. Also the Sucralose is usually unposted as well, but some list upwards of 28mg's per drink.

I dosages tested in humans were 125mg/day with a maximum of 500mg/day.. although there were no problems that they *reported*, it is a far cry from

4500mg/day

Other adverse effects reported in pre-approval research included:


Shrunken thymus glands (up to 40% shrinkage) (EO56)
Enlarged liver and kidneys. (EO57 & E161)
Atrophy of lymph follicles in the spleen and thymus (EO51, EO56, EO151)
Increased cecal weight (E151)
Reduced growth rate (EO57)
Decreased red blood cell count (EO55)
Hyperplasia of the pelvis (EO57)
Extension of the pregnancy period
Aborted pregnancy (E134)
Decreased fetal body weights and placental weights (EO32)
Diarrhea


http://www.mercola.com/2000/dec/3/sucralose_dangers.htm
http://www.mercola.com/2000/dec/3/su...stimonials.htm
http://www.mercola.com/2003/nov/8/splenda_dangers.htm
http://www.truthaboutsplenda.com/ (Sugar Association Website)
http://www.holisticmed.com/splenda/splenda-adverse.txt
http://www.splendaexposed.com/
http://www.tuberose.com/Sucralose.html
http://www.redicecreations.com/speci...sucralose.html
http://www.westonaprice.org/modernfo...ree_blues.html
http://www.mercola.com/fcgi/pf/2004/jul/21/splenda.htm
www.google.com

Hmmm...I don't really see much evidence/research at ALL in these links. Also, if you're consuming 180g of protein from powder everyday...then you have a lot more to worry about than artificial sweeteners...but nice work finding random websites by typing a few words in google.

Recent Research
A possible problem with caecal enlargement and renal mineralization has been seen in post approval animal research.

Sucralose Breaks Down
Despite the manufacturer's mis-statements, sucralose does break down into small amounts of 1,6-dichlorofructose, a chemical that has not been adequately tested in humans.


Independent, Long-Term Human Research
None. Manufacturer's "100's of studies" (some of which show hazards) were clearly inadequate and do not demonstrate safety in long-term use.


Chlorinated Pesticides
The manufacturer claims that the chlorine added to sucralose is similar to the chlorine atom in the salt (NaCl) molecule. That is not the case.

Sucralose may be more like ingesting tiny amounts of chlorinated pesticides, but we will never know without long-term, independent human research.


Conclusion
While it is unlikely that sucralose is as toxic as the poisoning people are experiencing from Monsanto's aspartame, it is clear from the hazards
seen in pre-approval research and from its chemical structure that years or decades of use may contribute to serious chronic immunological or
neurological disorders

Strong proof

This is more informative...

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showth...rs+An+Overview

[DinoT1985]

We need to go shopping for sugar now, too.

*goes to buy doughnuts*

[clg0159]

Just thought I would chime in for the first time in a long while. For backgroung I am a first year med. student with a BS in Biology and Chemistry and have done alot of research in nutrition. If you care about your health you owe it to yourself to do some serious research for a few months not just clicking a few websites. Bottom line.......artificial sweeteners are hazardous to your health even if you have no apparent side effects. Second, most artificial sweeteners actually cause insulin release anyway and without blood sugars present it will do job number 2 "FAT STORAGE". So eat some sugar and stop fooling yourself. Back to toxicity; In moderation AS are no worse than the preservatives in processed food , or the multitude of pesticides found on every vegetable you eat. You could spend a lifetime learning about just how toxic our food supply is. Last I would like to recommend a book to you that contains the actual court documents transcribed during aspartames first approval hearing. It is titled: The Aspartame Documents: What Industry and the FDA Don't Want You to Know. You owe it to yourself to read this before you make any more decisions as it contains REAL data on testing done by our government.
Remember that America is a market economy and big business is looking at for the bottom line many times at the cost of human life.

[DinoT1985]

Just thought I would chime in for the first time in a long while. For backgroung I am a first year med. student with a BS in Biology and Chemistry and have done alot of research in nutrition. If you care about your health you owe it to yourself to do some serious research for a few months not just clicking a few websites. Bottom line.......artificial sweeteners are hazardous to your health even if you have no apparent side effects. Second, most artificial sweeteners actually cause insulin release anyway and without blood sugars present it will do job number 2 "FAT STORAGE". So eat some sugar and stop fooling yourself. Back to toxicity; In moderation AS are no worse than the preservatives in processed food , or the multitude of pesticides found on every vegetable you eat. You could spend a lifetime learning about just how toxic our food supply is. Last I would like to recommend a book to you that contains the actual court documents transcribed during aspartames first approval hearing. It is titled: The Aspartame Documents: What Industry and the FDA Don't Want You to Know. You owe it to yourself to read this before you make any more decisions as it contains REAL data on testing done by our government.
Remember that America is a market economy and big business is looking at for the bottom line many times at the cost of human life.

And you think your evidence is more credible than the other? Sweeteners have been discussed a lot including between fully qualified professionals who design supplements in a world where health is the key. The whole stigmata of things being "unatural" is wearing thin.

http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/par64.htm with full refferences.
http://www.ific.org/publications/bro...alosebroch.cfm
http://www.ific.org/publications/bro...rtamebroch.cfm
http://www.snopes.com/toxins/aspartame.asp

and back to pogues thread with full refferences
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=291569

Before you go off prejudging people thinking they just read links and can't think for themselves, have some respect.

[Beejis60]

Lol at the OP!

*goes to buy doughnuts*

Hopefully they were cooked in ALL NATURAL oil or you might DIE FROM THE CHEMICALS OIL!!!!!!

OHH NOES!!!!!

[AronP24]

And you think your evidence is more credible than the other? Sweeteners have been discussed a lot including between fully qualified professionals who design supplements in a world where health is the key. The whole stigmata of things being "unatural" is wearing thin.

http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/par64.htm with full refferences.
http://www.ific.org/publications/bro...alosebroch.cfm
http://www.ific.org/publications/bro...rtamebroch.cfm
http://www.snopes.com/toxins/aspartame.asp

and back to pogues thread with full refferences
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=291569

Before you go off prejudging people thinking they just read links and can't think for themselves, have some respect.

your picture scares the sh*t out of me....that is all...back to snorting sweet n low

[NoNameNecessary]

I have nothing scientific or educated to say. Rather, I have something much the opposite and much more basic.

Here goes:

Everything in our world today seems to be bad for the individual. However, each individual has a health that is unique to that person and what may be bad for one person will not be bad for someone else.

My personal opinion:

If you enjoy having Splenda in your coffee, have it and do not worry about the possible side effects. Your head is not going to explode the second it hits your tongue - why worry? If we lived our lives in fear of the fate we may receive from drinking something, we'd worry ourselves sick.

[_Biff]

Just thought I would chime in for the first time in a long while. For backgroung I am a first year med. student with a BS in Biology and Chemistry and have done alot of research in nutrition. If you care about your health you owe it to yourself to do some serious research for a few months not just clicking a few websites. Bottom line.......artificial sweeteners are hazardous to your health even if you have no apparent side effects. Second, most artificial sweeteners actually cause insulin release anyway and without blood sugars present it will do job number 2 "FAT STORAGE". So eat some sugar and stop fooling yourself. Back to toxicity; In moderation AS are no worse than the preservatives in processed food , or the multitude of pesticides found on every vegetable you eat. You could spend a lifetime learning about just how toxic our food supply is. Last I would like to recommend a book to you that contains the actual court documents transcribed during aspartames first approval hearing. It is titled: The Aspartame Documents: What Industry and the FDA Don't Want You to Know. You owe it to yourself to read this before you make any more decisions as it contains REAL data on testing done by our government.
Remember that America is a market economy and big business is looking at for the bottom line many times at the cost of human life.

Well put... Money is always first before anything else. When your health goes bad due to eating some of this garbage, they still make money from healthcare... its a win win situation, not for you.


I ordered Jay Robb's Whey protein. It is sweetened with Stevia opposed to Acesulfame, Splenda(Sucralose) and such. It does cost quite a bit more $108 for 80oz?? i think it looks like 10lbs. I will update on the taste when i try it. This one didnt have a grocery list of things i couldn't pronounce so hopefully it is good... Plain is better.

Calories: 113
Total Fat: 0.5g
Saturated Fat: 0 g
Cholesterol: 13 mg
Sodium: 62 mg
Potassium: 170mg
Phosphorus: 85mg
Total Carbohydrates: 3.5 g
Dietary Fiber: 0 g
Sugars: 2 g naturally occuring from lactose
Protein: 24 g

Ingredients:
Cross-Flow Microfiltered Whey Protein Concentrate, Hydrolized Whey Protein, Ion Exchange Whey Protein, Natural Flavor including Stevia

Directions: Take one or more scoops daily to supplement the diet with additional protein. Mixes great in a blender with water, milk or your favorite beverage.

[pogue]

Not this garbage again...

A) Mercola is a quack
B) All the websites you posted are garbage. If you ran a search on Google for aspartame w/ come up with total frauds and lies

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=291569
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=399431

Doubtful that the OP would read those.

[ZDub212]

Not this garbage again...

A) Mercola is a quack
B) All the websites you posted are garbage. If you ran a search on Google for aspartame w/ come up with total frauds and lies

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=291569
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=399431

Doubtful that the OP would read those.

BINGO...YAHTZEE! Is that your final answer? OUR SURVEY SAYS....POGUE!!! DING DING DING DING DING!! Thanks for the threads.

[VaughnTrue]

biff...you lose/suck.




it's just the nature of the beast. sorry!

[SI03 Board Rep]

If you are looking for a protien that doesn't contain any artifical colors, flavors, or sweeteners Nectar Naturals is a great choice for you. It still has the great flavors of Nectar with nothing artifical.

[Dwizzo]

To the OP:

You should be able to find a brand called BIOCHEM. They make "Ultimate Whey Protein" and "Ultimate Whey Protein System".

No chemicals of any sort... Sweetened with fructose... 200 calories for 40 grams of whey protein... good stuff...

Whole foods sells it... Maybe GNC/Vitamin shoppe, but I always buy it online... Of course, bb.com has it too:

http://www.bodybuilding.com/store/bioc/ultimate.html

I use it as my standard whey...

[pogue]

BINGO...YAHTZEE! Is that your final answer? OUR SURVEY SAYS....POGUE!!! DING DING DING DING DING!! Thanks for the threads.

It's not surprising that so many people believe that these artificial sweeteners are dangerous for you. There is a huge number of websites out there that intentionally mislead people about the supposed risks and diseases that these substances can cause that it starts to become almost a common knowledge. These people are trying to profit off of horror stories by selling books, supplements, or even advertising to promote these ideas. They are nothing more than con artists who tell people that these things are poison, when in fact, if more people used them, they would be healthier, we would have much less obesity, and diabetes that is directly caused by overconsumption of processed bleached white sugar and high fructose corn syrup.

http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/blasp3.htm

[ZDub212]

It's not surprising that so many people believe that these artificial sweeteners are dangerous for you. There is a huge number of websites out there that intentionally mislead people about the supposed risks and diseases that these substances can cause that it starts to become almost a common knowledge. These people are trying to profit off of horror stories by selling books, supplements, or even advertising to promote these ideas. They are nothing more than con artists who tell people that these things are poison, when in fact, if more people used them, they would be healthier, we would have much less obesity, and diabetes that is directly caused by overconsumption of processed bleached white sugar and high fructose corn syrup.

http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/blasp3.htm

Are you seriously telling me that Pepsi with 42g of HFCS is worse for me than Diet Pepsi??

It's amazing how people think that HFCS, Enriched/Bleached/Refined White Sugar, and Enriched/Bleached/Refined White Flour are somehow healthier than splenda.

Do I believe in moderation? Yes. Everything can be detrimental in excess...but I'd rather consume a moderate amount of splenda, than risk diabetes and obesity.

[Mike83]

I really doubt diet soda once in awhile and sugar free gum will release insulin and promote fat storage.

[VaughnTrue]

Are you seriously telling me that Pepsi with 42g of HFCS is worse for me than Diet Pepsi??

It's amazing how people think that HFCS, Enriched/Bleached/Refined White Sugar, and Enriched/Bleached/Refined White Flour are somehow healthier than splenda.

Do I believe in moderation? Yes. Everything can be detrimental in excess...but I'd rather consume a moderate amount of splenda, than risk diabetes and obesity.

Most people these days don't realize that everything we put into our bodies that is "man-made" is going to hurt us in some way.


EVERYTHING that we eat is sugar laden...soda,candy,donuts,salad dressing, condiments, juices etc etc

we are bombarding our bodies with literally POUNDS of hfcs each week, yet no one cries foul?

Do you think man was intended to consume this much sugar and NOT get side effects? The entire diet of the average american is PATHETIC/DISGUSTING and is far worse for you than eating clean, and using splenda as a sweetner.


use your brain...EVERYTHING that you eat that wasn't KILLED, PICKED, or PULLED directly from somewhere on this earth, is bad for you.(EDIT: even easier was to think about it...if a caveman didn't eat it, neither should you)

[Dwizzo]

Personally, I prefer products with no artificial sweeteners and VERY little natural sweeteners... Like 20 calories or so per serving of natural fructose... (Forget HFCS, I'd rather have splenda)

I think the problem is products on the market today are over sweetened, whether it's artificial or not... Excess, excess, excess

I'd rather have a "bad" tasting bodybuilding supplement that's sweetener free than one with loads of artificial sweeteners... Why? because I don't take supplements for taste... But I know I'm in the minority when it comes to that so I wont hold my breath for anything to change...

[Dwizzo]

Most people these days don't realize that everything we put into our bodies that is "man-made" is going to hurt us in some way.


EVERYTHING that we eat is sugar laden...soda,candy,donuts,salad dressing, condiments, juices etc etc

we are bombarding our bodies with literally POUNDS of hfcs each week, yet no one cries foul?

Do you think man was intended to consume this much sugar and NOT get side effects? The entire diet of the average american is PATHETIC/DISGUSTING and is far worse for you than eating clean, and using splenda as a sweetner.


use your brain...EVERYTHING that you eat that wasn't KILLED, PICKED, or PULLED directly from somewhere on this earth, is bad for you.

Well said!!! Hence the reason the minority of people who don't eat "soda,candy,donuts,salad dressing, condiments, juices" are in great shape, feel great, and live long healthy lives...

Reps on recharge for you...

[_Biff]

Not this garbage again...

A) Mercola is a quack
B) All the websites you posted are garbage. If you ran a search on Google for aspartame w/ come up with total frauds and lies

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=291569
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=399431

Doubtful that the OP would read those.

You only believe these threads because they are on BB.com. They are not necessarily other peoples opinion.. just yours and theirs. For everyone 1 you put i can put one up.. but that is pointless.

ZacharyMills: I would expect posts like that from you seeing that you have a market share to protect and not my health... ironic for a "nutrition" company.

I am only offering this thread to someone else like me that does not like putting all those chemicals in them... and thats it. So REPS, save it and move on.

For those that are interested in this thread like i am. I went down to the BulkBarn and found some Whey Protein Isolate in Powder form. It was white and tastes like crap. i also got some Organic Coaco... mixed it 1:1 in a blender and it tasted kinda crappy... i added 1 TBSP of Organic Honey and it tasted awsome and holy smokes was it filling!!!

So to mix it in a protein jug:

- 1 cup Whey Protein Isolate (from bulk food store)
- 1 cup of organic Coaco (or normal coaco if organic is not available)
- 1 tbsp of organic Honey (readily available, NOT Pastuerized)

i also add 1 cup almonds and 4 frozen strawberries...

it tastes good and is about as natural as you can get. i dont have the specs on how much protein is in this but i will try to find out.

all for now... hope someone is finding this info good.

[_Biff]

forgot to mention that used organic Soy milk for the base.

So to pre-mix it in a protein jug:

- 1 cup Whey Protein Isolate (from bulk food store)
- 1 cup of organic Coaco (or normal coaco if organic is not available)
- 1 tbsp of organic Honey (readily available, NOT Pastuerized)

- maybe peanut butter?? (already extremely filling though)

i used about 2 cups organic Soy Milk (not exactly sure how much but estimated)

i also add 1 cup almonds and 4 frozen strawberries... just for good measure

Dwizzo: i also dont like the overpowering sweetness in most of the drinks.. this one is actually quite tame with this amount of honey in it... i will try Stevia next time.. i have a jug of it in the cupboard.

[pogue]

I really doubt diet soda once in awhile and sugar free gum will release insulin and promote fat storage.

Diet soda and sugar free gums that use artifical sweeteners will not increase insulin levels at all and are recommended by the ADA (American Diabetes Association).

The American Diabetes Association weighed in with this Feb. 9, 1999 statement: "The American Diabetes Association considers aspartame ? as well as the other FDA-approved nonnutritive sweeteners saccharin, acesulfame K, and sucralose ? acceptable sugar substitutes and a safe part of a diabetic meal plan."

You only believe these threads because they are on BB.com. They are not necessarily other peoples opinion.. just yours and theirs. For everyone 1 you put i can put one up.. but that is pointless.

No, it is not my opinion, it is fact. It is based on sound scientific peer reviewed studies that recognize science and logic, not pseudoscience and quackery. I have looked into these ingredients in depth and all the information regarding these sweeteners are posted in the first thread I linked to Artificial Sweeteners: An Overview. Just because they are posted here is irrelevant, they could have come from anywhere. By saying they are "just my opinion because they are posted on bb.com" you are using ad hominem faulty logic and attacking the source and not the issues brought up in them. That's not an objective argument.

Secondly, just because something is touted as natural does not mean it's safe. Stevia has been investigated as having being a possible carcinogen, mutagen, and having toxicity. It has also been shown to cause infertility in animal studies and has possible concerns w/ diabetes along w/ people who use it that are diabetic or have hypertension. There are very few human studies on it. On the other hand, both sucralose and aspartame had to go through over two decades of clinical trials and studies before it was approved by the FDA to be sold as a sweetener. Stevia is not approved by the FDA to be used as a sweetener.

Oh, and btw, what you call "sugar" is nowhere close to being "natural", it as well as high fructose corn syrup should be classified as chemical. Table sugar (sucrose) is extracted from sugar cane and then manufactured in a plant where it is bleached white with dye and heavily processed in order to remain stable. HFCS is the fructose extract from corn by product, which is used as an even cheaper replacement for sucrose. It raises insulin levels to an extremely high degree and both are linked to the cause of both type 1 and type 2 diabetes and obesity.

[_Biff]

Diet soda and sugar free gums that use artifical sweeteners will not increase insulin levels at all and are recommended by the ADA (American Diabetes Association).





No, it is not my opinion, it is fact. It is based on sound scientific peer reviewed studies that recognize science and logic, not pseudoscience and quackery. I have looked into these ingredients in depth and all the information regarding these sweeteners are posted in the first thread I linked to Artificial Sweeteners: An Overview. Just because they are posted here is irrelevant, they could have come from anywhere. By saying they are "just my opinion because they are posted on bb.com" you are using ad hominem faulty logic and attacking the source and not the issues brought up in them. That's not an objective argument.

Secondly, just because something is touted as natural does not mean it's safe. Stevia has been investigated as having being a possible carcinogen, mutagen, and having toxicity. It has also been shown to cause infertility in animal studies and has possible concerns w/ diabetes along w/ people who use it that are diabetic or have hypertension. There are very few human studies on it. On the other hand, both sucralose and aspartame had to go through over two decades of clinical trials and studies before it was approved by the FDA to be sold as a sweetener. Stevia is not approved by the FDA to be used as a sweetener.

Oh, and btw, what you call "sugar" is nowhere close to being "natural", it as well as high fructose corn syrup should be classified as chemical. Table sugar (sucrose) is extracted from sugar cane and then manufactured in a plant where it is bleached white with dye and heavily processed in order to remain stable. HFCS is the fructose extract from corn by product, which is used as an even cheaper replacement for sucrose. It raises insulin levels to an extremely high degree and both are linked to the cause of both type 1 and type 2 diabetes and obesity.

t is your opinion only. All you have said is that "It is based on sound scientific peer reviewed studies that recognize science and logic, not pseudoscience and quackery" Does your blessed sentence make this sound? does your command of the English language make it scientifically recognized? seeing that you have not produced anything that proves it is "scientifically sound" it is only your opinion, isn't it?

You have looked into these ingredients in depth? i have also provided links (Go back and read) that debunk what you have said. Does that mean i have provided scientific proof to debunk your scientific proof? maybe your information is based on quackery and not mine, but isnt that just my opinion? i have not tried to raise an objective argument, i have only responded to ZacharyMills childish shotgun digs at my opion. Nor have i been trying to prove anything in these threads. If you go back and read my first post, i have simply asked if anyone knows of a whey protein product that does not contain chemical sweeteners. The objective argument is when you post a post like the above to object to me wanting to know if someone knows of a protein shake that doesn't have chemical sweeteners in it.

Your post is useless and out of context for this thread.

At the very least i have provided someone out there with an alternative to the mass marketed pre-mixed protein shakes out there. I have purchased the products and tried them and posted them. This will hopefully answer someone elses question if they need it. This is also not useless conversation and out of context posts like yours above.

Secondly to answer your "secondly"; heres some information on your cancer causing Stevia reports also answers a bit about your fertility question. I find some of these humerous... i am not a doctor but a weigher of information that i receive.



(Incidentally, the SCMP had other misleading descriptions as well. Stevia or stevioside is an extract from stevia leaves. It is a natural substance. Yet several SCMP reports call it ?an artificial sweetener?.)

I like to defend the US as well. The official stand of the US Foods and Drugs Administration (FDA) is that stevia is ?not generally recognised as safe?. The FDA did not even say that stevia is harmful.

While the FDA has banned the use of stevia as a food additive, it actually approved its use as a dietary supplement. Would the FDA be so stupid and irresponsible to approve a ?cancer-causing substance? as a dietary supplement?

Meanwhile, did you notice that the latest SCMP report said stevia ?could reduce fertility in men??

The original report was about a scientific study on rodents. The Hong Kong doctor said ?animals?. Now, the SCMP said ?men?!

It?s amazing how rodents can evolve into men in less than a week. Strange, but true. It happens only in newspapers.


Heres the link: http://www.richardseah.com/news/stevia.html



thirdly secondly; Stevia is toxic?? lol

"Stevia has undergone numerous toxicity tests. None of these tests have shown any harmful effects. Few substances can make this claim. The real test, though, was centuries of continuous use by natives of South America. In addition, thousands of tons of stevia extracts have been consumed over the last 20 years in many countries with no harmful effects reported."

heres the link: http://healing.about.com/cs/uc_direc...evia_jones.htm


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


yet again: No human studies on Stevia?? LOL its been used for centuries as a sweeteners by your ancenstors.. well maybe not your ancestors but certainly mine. lol


now for your sugar as "natural"... high fructose corn syrup?? lololol do you even know what this is?

High fructose corn syrup (HFCS) refers to a group of corn syrups which have undergone enzymatic processing in order to increase their fructose content and are then mixed with pure corn syrup (100% glucose) to reach their final form.

it is used because it is extremely cheap for companies to use. you readily find it in cheap processed food devoid in nutrients.. or dead food. I have never linked table sugar to high fructose corn syrup in anyway in any of my posts... so what are you talking about. All i have stated is that if i had to choose a little sugar over chemical sweeteners, i would. I said "sugar" in general not white table sugar, nor high fructose corn syrup. not sure where you got that. I have stated that i would prefer my supplements to have

- organic raw sugar
- evaporated cane sugar
- Stevia
- etc..

if i had to choose Sucralose over white table sugar, i would choose table sugar in every instance. I base this on the fact that i cant be perfect but i can A-try and B-get as close as possible. But nonetheless, HFCS is not on my menu either so not sure where that came from.. but thanks for the info.

Its to bad this post is diluted into this. I hope someone finds some of this info usefull.. at least once your wade through the crap.

[HalleluYAH]

Plain sugar is also much MUCH worse than splenda IMO.

Why is this?

[pogue]

The first one might not play yet, as I just uploaded it.

You wouldn't give heroin to a four-year-old. (At least, we assume so, you sick f*ck.) But you don't hesitate to jack that kid up with heroic doses of the most successful recreational drug in the history of mankind, sugar -- a highly addictive, mood-altering, health-threatening substance that encourages antisocial behavior. (And after you get that kid hopped up on sugar, you have to give him Ritalin to get him to sit still. You sick f*ck.)

Known on the streets as glucose, sucrose or fructose, sugar comes in crystal, powder, and liquid forms. It's usually taken orally, and often (but not always) cut with some other food substance.

Refined sugar can be produced by several different processes, most of which include grinding the source plant into a pulp, running the pulp through a series of filters and then evaporating what's left to produce a crystallized residue, which can be powdered or dissolved in water.

Like any drug, the potency of sugar increases dramatically when it is refined. The vast majority of refined sugars used in the U.S. comes from corn, but sugar is also refined from beets, sugar cane plants, maple sap, honey and almost every kind of fruit.

If you are not convinced of that sugar is a drug, we suggest you eat several tablespoons of the substance on an empty stomach. At any rate, the question posed by the psychologists (and by the massive world sugar industry, which funds many studies on this topic) is not whether sugar produces the effects listed above. That's not in question, although the sugar industry would like you to think it is. The studies are only trying to measure the magnitude of the sugar effect.

Refined sugar is extremely addictive. Not "addictive" in the sense that you just really like it, but addictive in the sense that your body suffers withdrawal symptoms if sugar is removed from your diet. While sugar doesn't have the instantly addictive quality of, say, crack *******, recent studies suggest that refined sugar activates opioids, the same brain chemicals that fuel heroin and morphine addiction, with similar results at a lesser magnitude.

Pure sugar products are epidemic in the United States and most developed countries. The vast majority of soft drinks are simply high-fructose corn syrup with only enough water added to make them potable. Usually these drinks include a dash of flavoring as the pretext for liking them. Often, the drinks are paired with high caffeine content, increasing both the stimulation and the addictive power.

Source

[_Biff]

It wont play for some reason, say "no longer available" did they pull it alredy


lets put the sugar thing to rest. I dont use table sugar either but only contrasting chemical sweeteners to table sugar.

My recipe above, is sweetened with organic unpastuerized honey and not sugar and its what i recomend besided Stevia.

Its a natural product that you can make at home.. i know that is not good for the supplement companies but i do recomend you try This Jay Robb's stuff and also any info on it or the NOW brand or Pure WPI brand. These incorporate Stevia or non chemical sweeteners from what i can tell.

If anyone knows of them let me know..

[pogue]

t [sic] is your opinion only. All you have said is that "It is based on sound scientific peer reviewed studies that recognize science and logic, not pseudoscience and quackery" Does your blessed sentence make this sound? does your command of the English language make it scientifically recognized? seeing that you have not produced anything that proves it is "scientifically sound" it is only your opinion, isn't it?

Uhh... you obviously haven't even bothered to read any of the links that were posted, in which scientific evidence was posted numerous times.

You have looked into these ingredients in depth? i have also provided links (Go back and read) that debunk what you have said.

Links to Mercola and Dorway.com aren't credible and have already been debunked by me and others. Mercola has had numerous run ins with the FDA for false advertising and blatant use of scare tactics to drum up sales.

Your post is useless and out of context for this thread.

My posts are out of context? Sorry, but if you come on my board and start spouting off quackery nonsense you pulled up on Google and call it reality you can expect to hear about it. It's one thing to come here and ask for a "natural" protein powder (which is easily found in the cyberstore) and another to dribble falsehoods and nonsense to the other readers here who might be another sheep like yourself and believe everything they read.

At the very least i have provided someone out there with an alternative to the mass marketed pre-mixed protein shakes out there.

Yes, thank you for saving us from these "dangerous killer chemicals".

i am not a doctor

No kidding? You could have fooled me.

I like to defend the US as well. The official stand of the US Foods and Drugs Administration (FDA) is that stevia is ?not generally recognised as safe?. The FDA did not even say that stevia is harmful.

Maybe we should check our facts before regurgitating misinformation. Since it seems to be difficult for you to read what is posted in links for you, I'll take the time out of my day to quote them for you.

SUBJECT:"AUTOMATIC DETENTION OF STEVIA LEAVES, EXTRACT OF STEVIA LEAVES, AND FOOD CONTAINING STEVIA"

PROBLEM: Unsafe food additive

http://www.fda.gov/ora/fiars/ora_import_ia4506.html

Warning letter to bodybuilding.com:

The definition of a dietary supplement does not include products represented for use as conventional foods [section 210(ff)(2)(B) of the Act (21 U.S.C. ? 321(ff)(2)(B))]. Our review of the labeling for the above products disclosed that these products are represented for use in conventional foods. Any substance the intended use of which results in its becoming a component of food is a food additive under section 201(s) of the Act [21 U.S.C. ? 321(s)] unless it is generally recognized as safe ("GRAS") or meets one of the enumerated exceptions. Under section 409 of the Act [21 U.S.C. ? 349], food additives are deemed unsafe unless they are used in accordance with a food additive regulation approving the substance for that use.

Stevia (Stevia rebaudiuna) and Stevia extracts are not approved food additives. Stevia and Stevia extracts are also not GRAS because published studies have raised safety concerns about their use, including concerns about control of blood sugar, and effects on the reproductive, cardiovascular and renal systems. The above-listed products are thus adulterated under section 402(a)(2)(C) of the Act
(21 U.S.C. ? 342(a)(2)(C)) because they are or they contain an unsafe food additive, Stevia (Stevia rebaudiana) or Stevia extract.

http://www.fda.gov/foi/warning_letters/g5935d.htm

GRAS = Generally regarded as safe.

There are 10+ pages of links about Stevia on the FDA's website. Feel free to read through them yourself. While the FDA might not say stevia is "harmful", they do say it is unsafe. Still, not a single one of those pages recommends the use of stevia as a sweetener or supplement.

While the FDA has banned the use of stevia as a food additive, it actually approved its use as a dietary supplement. Would the FDA be so stupid and irresponsible to approve a ?cancer-causing substance? as a dietary supplement?

You clearly don't understand how the FDA works. The FDA does not approve dietary supplements. That is a fact, plain and simple. The FDA has only just announced last month that it will require companies to be GMP compliant and ensure that their ingredients are pure and what they say they are on the label. They still will not regulate what those ingredients are, however.

Meanwhile, did you notice that the latest SCMP report said stevia ?could reduce fertility in men??

The original report was about a scientific study on rodents. The Hong Kong doctor said ?animals?. Now, the SCMP said ?men?!

It?s amazing how rodents can evolve into men in less than a week. Strange, but true. It happens only in newspapers.

Yes, it's unfortunate that no one has taken the time to perform an actual human study on stevia's effects on fertility. But, since animal models are very close to human ones it is the next best thing.

thirdly secondly; Stevia is toxic?? lol

"Stevia has undergone numerous toxicity tests. None of these tests have shown any harmful effects. Few substances can make this claim. The real test, though, was centuries of continuous use by natives of South America. In addition, thousands of tons of stevia extracts have been consumed over the last 20 years in many countries with no harmful effects reported."

heres the link: http://healing.about.com/cs/uc_direc...evia_jones.htm

Unfortunately, that article does not cite any references. I want to introduce you to a new site you probably have not heard of called PubMed. You can search for real actual scientific studies (!!!) instead of opinions by certain people. A quick search of stevia showed zero studies for toxicity in humans - only in animals and only in vitro. I searched for "stevia toxic" (rat studies) "stevia human" many studies on the effects of it's isolated steviosides, but none on it's use as a sweetener, and "stevia safety" two studies, both in vitro. Feel free to try yourself.

yet again: No human studies on Stevia?? LOL its been used for centuries as a sweeteners by your ancenstors.. well maybe not your ancestors but certainly mine. lol

Hmm... so you know for a fact that your ancestors suffered no ill health as a result of consumption of stevia? Sorry, but that is not a valid argument for it's safety. People used alchemy for thousands of years too. In India, people have been using ayurvedic medicine for thousands of years, yet it has been found to contain lead in most of the supplements sold as ayurvedic.

Question

Is Stevia safe to use as a sugar substitute?
Answer

Stevia, derived from a South American shrub, is hundreds of times sweeter than sugar but provide no calories. It does not have FDA clearance for sale as a sugar substitute, but the 1994 Dietary Supplement and Health Education Act permits its sale as a "dietary supplement." Although no harm to humans has been documented, laboratory studies have raised questions about its safety [1]. Since 1989, the FDA has rejected petitions seeking approval as a food additive for this reason. In 1999, the European Commission Scientific Committee on Food concluded:

The information submitted on the plant products was insufficient with regard to specification and standardisation of the commercial product and contains no safety studies. There are no satisfactory data to support the safe use of these products as ingredients of food or as sucrose substitute for diabetics and obese individuals. The only toxicological data submitted are essentially concerned with the stevioside component of the plant product. No appropriate data were presented to enable the safety of the commercial plant product to be evaluated [2].

References

1. Henkel J. Sugar substitutes: Americans opt for sweetness and lite. FDA Consumer 33(6): 12-16, 1999.
2. European Commission Scientific Committee on Food. Opinion on Stevia Rebaudiana Bertoni plants and leaves. Adopted on June 17, 1999.Opinion on Stevia Rebaudiana Bertoni plants and leaves. Adopted on June 17, 1999.

Continued...

[pogue]

now for your sugar as "natural"... high fructose corn syrup?? lololol do you even know what this is?

lolololol!@@!# OMG ROLF!!! A/S/L??? No chuckles, I have no idea what high fructose corn syrup is.

High fructose corn syrup (HFCS) refers to a group of corn syrups which have undergone enzymatic processing in order to increase their fructose content and are then mixed with pure corn syrup (100% glucose) to reach their final form.

CTRL+C CTRL+V! Yay!

If i had to choose Sucralose over white table sugar, i would choose table sugar in every instance. I base this on the fact that i cant be perfect but i can A-try and B-get as close as possible. But nonetheless, HFCS is not on my menu either so not sure where that came from.. but thanks for the info.

Its to bad this post is diluted into this. I hope someone finds some of this info usefull.. at least once your wade through the crap.

Enjoy your diabetes. I'll teach you how to inject insulin when you come back here in a couple years with it. It's not too hard, really, so you don't have much to worry about.

[pogue]

It wont play for some reason, say "no longer available" did they pull it alredy

YouTube normally takes over an hour to post a video online once someone has uploaded it. I assume this is due to their increasing popularity as more and more people drive traffic to the site. It used to only take ~10 minutes.

My recipe above, is sweetened with organic unpastuerized honey

The problem w/ using honey is that it's pure fructose and if you mix it w/ whey w/o any low GI or slow digesting carbs/fiber it's going to spike your insulin levels very fast. Ideally, around the pre & post workout window you would want to take glucose (dextrose) along w/ a fast digesting whey.

Its a natural product that you can make at home.. i know that is not good for the supplement companies but i do recomend you try This Jay Robb's stuff and also any info on it or the NOW brand or Pure WPI brand. These incorporate Stevia or non chemical sweeteners from what i can tell.

Optimum 100% NATURAL Whey
Muscle Milk Naturals
Syntrax Nectar Naturals

Just do a search in the bodybuilding.com cyberstore and I'm sure you'll find more where that came from...