Now my trainer isn't huge on the nutrition side of things - at least he hasn't been so far. During our first session, he looked at my food log (yes, I keep a food log) and really didn't have much to say. He did, however, take issue with my daily intake of diet soda (diet coke and diet sierra mist are my pleasure) and use of splenda in my coffee. My trainer said that he didn't want me to change much - just eat more protein and cut out the use of artificial sweeteners. At first, I resisted, which many of you might already be doing right now as you continue reading this entry. I love diet coke, and I like artificial sweeteners. I use sweet-n-low or splenda in my iced tea and coffee, things I drink almost every day.
When I met with my trainer the next week, one of his first questions was whether I had stopped using artificial sweeteners. And I did the worst thing ever - I lied and told him I quit cold turkey. Lying to my trainer is not something I do. After all, if you lie to your trainer, how can you expect to benefit from his advice? Inevitably, the guilt washed over me. I resolved to make a conscious effort to learn about artificial sweeteners and decide for myself whether it was worth stopping or not. In other words, I wasn't going to blow my trainer off, but I was going to make the decision for myself whether I wanted to continue using artificial sweeteners in my diet.
Artificial sweeteners are a calorie-free way to satisfy your sweet tooth. Thus, it is no surprise that most people dieting substitute artificial sweeteners for real sugar. There are a ton of different artificial sweeteners - Saccharine (aka Sweet N Low), Aspartame (aka NutraSweet and Equal), AspatAcesulfame potassium (aka ACK, Sweet One, and Sunett), Sucralose (aka Splenda), and Neotame. Artificial sweeteners are used in all sorts of things - soda and other beverages, baked goods, ice cream, cookies, gum - they are all over the place.
The safety of artificial sweeteners has become a controversial subject because there have been some studies showing a link between artificial sweeteners and cancer in laboratory animals. FDA-approved studies, however, have not demonstrated clear evidence of an association with cancer in humans. For example, in 2005, a study found increased instances of lymphoma and leukemia in rats that were fed very high doses of aspartame. Because of inconsistencies in the study, however, the FDA did not mess with its approval of aspartame as a safe artificial sweetener. And in 1996, a study linked an increase in the number of people with brain tumors between 1975 and 1992 to the introduction of aspartame in the United States - but the study could not establish a conclusive link. Artificial sweeteners remain FDA approved, and have served as a powerful tool for people attempting to lose weight or people with diabetes. Still, the inconsistencies and inconclusive reports are not reassuring to me, given the relatively short life of artificial sweeteners.
Thus, I decided that I would make up my mind after trying some natural sweeteners. After all, why bother with artificial sweeteners if I'm satisfied with natural sweeteners? My trainer suggested using natural sweeteners such as Blue Agave, honey, or stevia. My first inclination was to try stevia because of the similar consistency to sugar and the artificial sweeteners I enjoy. Blue Agave and honey have a similar consistency - a kind of gold colored liquid.
So what exactly is stevia? Stevia is derived from the leaves of the Latin American herb stevia. The leaves contain a substance that is hundreds of times more potent than sugar, and what makes it so great is that it is the first true natural competitor to artificial sweeteners - it has zero calories, zero carbs, and zero chance of spiking blood sugar levels (which can sometimes happen even with artificial sweeteners). And unlike artificial sweeteners, stevia, as a natural substance, has benefits that go beyond taste and effective sugar replacement. For centuries, tribes from many Latin American countries have used the sweetener in medicinal teas for treating heartburn and other ailments. It is also widely used in Japan, Australia, New Zealand, and Latin American countries. Plus, medical research has shown a great effect in the treatment of obesity and high blood pressure, and it helps enhance glucose tolerance, making it attractive to those with diabetes. However, it appears that these positive medical benefits may occur only in high dosages of stevia (meaning, you have to ingest a lot more stevia than a couple of sweetener packets - e.g. a dietary supplement).
So you might be wondering - if tribes have been using it for centuries and it has been widely used in places like Japan for years, why are we just starting to hear about this little herb? First, there are various ways to process the stevia plant. For a long time, there was a bitter licorice aftertaste that accompanied stevia dietary supplements and sweeteners. Thus, it wasn't all that marketable within the U.S. Second, during the 1960s there were some animal studies that suggested stevia might cause cancerous mutations or reproductive problems. The evidence from these studies was widely criticized due to questionable methodologies and the fact that stevia had a great safety record in places like Japan where it was widely used. In 1991, the US banned imports of stevia, though many contend that this was less about public safety and more about pleasing the artificial sweetener lobby. This theory gained even more legitimacy when in 1994, the FDA approved stevia for use as a dietary supplement but refused to sign off on its use as an additive in foods or drinks. The FDA claimed that they wanted to ensure the safety of stevia as an additive before people started widely consuming it.
Stevia as a food additive or natural sweetener has only come on the market within the past two years. And actually, the FDA still has only approved Rebaudioside A, the least bitter part of the stevia plant, as a food additive. There are two main products you have to choose from - at least at the mainstream grocery store. Truvia is produced by Cargill, in collaboration with Coca-Cola, and was approved in December 2008. PepsiCo with Whole Earth Sweetner Co. produces the other option - PureVia - which was approved by the FDA in early 2009.
My local grocery store had Truvia, so that is what I went with. One downfall is that Truvia (and I am sure PureVia also) is more expensive than artificial sweeteners, but it lasts such a long time, that I can sort of put that issue aside. And I assume that once the stevia sweetener gains momentum in the market, the price will come down. Coca Cola and Pepsi both plan to market sodas and other beverages with the natural sweetener. Another downfall of using stevia as a sweetener (as opposed to the artificial kind) is that if you want to truly quit artificial sweeteners, you're going to have to bring it with you when you eat out because no restaurants (as far as I know) carry it. Finally, I would be remiss if I didn't note that both Truvia and PureVia contain Erythritol, a natural sugar alcohol found in grapes and melons, which add 3 carbs per packet of Truvia and 2 carbs per packet of PureVia.
Now onto the important question: How does it taste? My first true test was my Monday morning cup of coffee. I usually use three packets of Splenda in my coffee, so this time I used three packets of Truvia. And it really wasn't bad. It was a little less sweet, but it was still pretty sweet, and in all likelihood, I could probably add a fourth packet to equal the flavor of Splenda. But after sticking with three packets of Truvia for a few days I don't even think about going back to Splenda.
I would be lying if I said I have completely come off artificial sweeteners. Frankly, it is harder then one might think. But I am proud to say that I have definitely cut back. I also cut out the diet coke and other diet sodas or beverages that use artificial sweeteners. Frankly, there are a lot of other issues with diet soda that go beyond its use of artificial sweeteners (things like dental health come to mind). Plus, I've noticed that without drinking artificially sweetened beverages, I drink a lot more water. And if you're looking for a fast track to healthy living, there aren't much better things to have than water.
Some fun facts about artificial sweeteners and Stevia:
- Saccharin, the first of many artificial sweeteners to hit the market, was discovered in 1879 by a researcher from Johns Hopkins University when he accidentally spilled a derivative of coal tar on his hand and after tasting it noticed a sweet flavor.
- Despite the FDA's relatively recent lift of the stevia ban, it remains banned in every country within the European Union (except France), Singapore and Hong Kong. The European Food Standards Agency is conducting a safety review and is expected to permit the use of stevia in the EU member states in 2010.
- The leaves of the stevia plant have 30-45 times the sweetness of sucruose (table sugar).
- The Japanese began using stevia in the 1970s. They use it in many of their food products, including their version of Coca Cola, and the country currently consumes more of the plant than any other country (Stevia comprises 40% of Japan's sweetener market).

I'm disappointed that you went through this whole post without acknowledging the studies that have shown that artificial sweeteners can actually cause more weight gain than sugar. (Link: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/02/080210183902.htm ). The theory is that by taking away the connection that your body has between sweetness and high calorie density, your body loses its ability to regulate intake. If this theory is correct, then I imagine it would be true for stevia as well. Also, having recently done research on agave syrup, I can't really get behind that either. Most available agave syrup is made more commercially so it loses some of its nutritional qualities and the syrup of the agave is also somewhere between 80 and 90% fructose (as compared to high fructose corn syrup which is around 60%) which is what gives it such a low glycemic index. The issue with fructose (the same issue it is believed to be with HFCS) is that fructose isn't metabolized into energy like glucose is. Fructose is metabolized in the liver into triglycerides (fats).
ReplyDeleteOne lesson you might have learned from your experience with stevia however is that you don't actually require the sweetness that you think you do. You mentioned that the amount of stevia you were using was less sweet than your normal Splenda use, but you followed that up by saying that after a week you were fine with the lower sweetness level. Odds are good that you could drop two more of those packets over the course of several weeks (allowing your taste buds to get comfortable with the sweetness levels) so that you are only using one or no packets. Remember that we did not evolve to eat foods that are so sweet. Nothing in nature is so sweet as artificial sweeteners. You may find, once you've grown accustomed to a lower (more natural) level of sweetness, that you may enjoy the subtle sweetness of fruits much more. In much the same way that a Beethoven piano sonata cannot truly be appreciated after a loud rock concert, an apple cannot truly be appreciated after a Diet Coke.
Matt, you are right that I neglected to mention these latest studies regarding a possible link between artificial sweeteners and weight gain. In fact, I've heard that if you want a soda, you're better off going with a regular coca cola than a diet coke for the very reason that you explained in your comment. The bottom line though is that the jury is still out on artificial sweeteners. It is frustrating that nothing is conclusive in this area, but it's not all that surprising given that many of these artificial sweeteners are new to the market (too new to know long term implications of regular intake). But I agree with you that it is not natural to have things so sweet, and like I said - natural always seems better than artificial. I haven't checked out agave yet, but I am sure I will at some point.
ReplyDelete