Stevia sweetener fraud

It is a shame and abuse of power by the great food industries (Coca Cola-Azucarera Española, Carrefour, Hacendado, etc.), which is allowed to sell fraudulently sweeteners of Stevia, when Stevia carry only 1%And the remaining 99% is erythritol, sweetener from the fermentation of transgenic maize and of doubtful reputation for their genetic modification

It is not surprising, then, that in areas of the planet where these fraudulent mixtures of sweeteners have been used for a long time, erythritol in 99%, turns out to be a powerful insecticide for fruit fly.

The main producer of erythritol is Cargill, a multinational American specialized in the speculation of cereals and meats, being one of the main causes of many world famines, given the hoarding of food that he practices, to artificially more expensive the basic foods that he dominates.

that is, companies without entrails, which intend to sell us cat (erythritol) by hare (Stevia).

As consumers you have to ask for responsibilities on these frauds, but the best way the citizen to defend himself is to be informed and read the labels and if he carries erythritol that his mother or father bought.

Dietary and herbalists must also be informed of this fraud and not collaborate with these economic mafias distributing their products.

If you have difficulty finding reliable Stevia sweeteners, from
More information:

Previous article on the subject criticizing the spawn of Coca Cola.
Link

Source: Link

Uff, by parts:

- The transgenic corn does not have any problem, more specifically it is "corn BT", it is called because it has been incorporated a gene of the bacteria "Bacillus thuringiensis", which is used in "ecological" agriculture: the aforementionedBacterial produces a protein called "cry" that has insecticidal properties.Because the "BT corn" differs from the "normal" in which it is capable of producing that "ecological" protein and therefore it is not necessary to fumigate it.Thus, in practice it is impossible to be more dangerous than ecological corn.

- That erythritol has iscticidal properties for fruit fly is no problem, nor is it indicative that it is toxic to the human being, so among the main preservatives we find ascorbic acid (vitamin C) and citric acid... or what is the same "a lemon splash."

- Stevia is not exactly the best option as a sweetener, in fact the aspartamo has proven to be equally insurance at 10 times greater doses.

On the concrete Truvia they have no forgiveness, I have denounced it in my blog ( Link

What is behind all this is "chemophobia", we have been instilled that we have to be afraid of everything that sounds like "chemistry" and throw ourselves without looking to buy everything that sounds like "natural."That is why the product is erythritol, they prefer to put a ridiculous amount of Stevia, which sounds better.(By the way, it is a very common practice in almost all sectors, especially in the food).

Thank you very much for the explanations @con_q_de_quimica, as always, very didactic, clear and simple!, So even I understand chemistry!;)

I have gone through the blog and also tell you that I liked it.= D>

So what we are, the Stevia is good or bad?

nigiri said:
So what we are, the stevia is good or bad?

The plant as such is toxic, the glycosides of thisviol (which is what they sell as sweeteners with the name of Stevia), are safe if we take at most 4mg per kilo of weight per day.For example, for a person who weighs 65 kilos, he can take a maximum of 260mg, or what is the same 0.26 grams.

If we compare it for example with the aspartamo, this is safe at dose of up to 40mg per kilo of weight per day.Taking the previous example, a person of 65 kilos can take a maximum of 2600mg, or what is the same 2.6 grams.

The sweetening power of both is practically identical, and the price of the aspartm is significantly lower than the Stevia.But to taste the colors, there are those who prefer one or the other for the taste, and even conz someone who combines both.

So what do you recommend?

mallefic33 said:
then which one do you recommend?

Personally, I would recommend that you try all, and once you decide which one you like to adapt the consumption to the permissible daily intake (IDA).The reason is that some sweeteners can like cold drinks but not so much with hot food, and you can even prefer one for juices and others for soft drinks or milk and you can even try combinations.

If you look at the tags of sweetened products do not usually use a single sweetener, they usually mix several to imitate as much as possible the taste of sugar.Right now, for example, I am taking a sugar-free energy drink that combines E-950 (Acesulrefined palate).

But as for Stevia, is it true that it has hypoglycemic and hypotensive properties?Or it is simply a mere sweetener.

Notice if I use Stevia, they send it to me from Peru, that we use it in infusions, for desserts, as sweetener, until you can fry the fried potato style and is very good ...........

Now you leave me a little chafado with this "eye with consumption."At home we thought that being a natural product was not problematic, in fact a few Latin American countries consume it a lot.

hugoglezp said:
but as for stevia, is it true that it has hypoglycemic and hypotensive properties?or it is simply a mere sweetener.

It is a sweetener

Malefica33 said:
Look if I use Stevia, they send it to me from Peru, that we use it in infusions, for desserts, as sweetener, you can fry the fried potato style and is very good ...........

Now you leave me a little chafado with this "eye with consumption."At home we thought that being a natural product was not problematic, in fact, a Latin American countries consume it a lot.

What you say that "as it is a natural product is not problematic" is one of the most widespread and dangerous urban legends;Oil, cyanide, uranium ... are 100% natural and give many problems, although there is no need to go to those extremes;Pineapple juice without going any further interferes with the action of several medications.

I always usually put the example of aspirin to illustrate this issue;From the sauce bark, salicylic acid is extracted, which has the same properties as aspirin and in many herbalists it is sold as "natural aspirin", the problem is that it is very irritating for the stomach mucosa, so it is transformed into acidAcetylsalicylic, manitene the beneficial properties but greatly reduces stomach irritation.

The danger of "natural" things is that they normally not let you know that they also have side effects, and also those who buy them think that since they are not taking a medication nothing happens, nor do they have to inform their doctor that they are ingesting it.

There are natural things that kill you in a moment .. mushrooms or vipers .. jaaaa
I find insulin much more physiological than sweeteners, so we eat normal sweets with sugar .., counting hydrates.

By the way, I have put the permissible daily intakes (first leg) of the aspartamo and the stevia but not the respective links. Here the Stevia and Here the aspartamo

This is a mess, on the one hand they say that sweeteners are not bad for diabetics and on the other they say they are not good either.I have read articles out there that they are not good either, but I don't know what will be really in all this.