Re: Artificial Sweeteners [was: Eating after 6 pm]

[Guest guest]

Hi Rodney,

Thanks for looking into that. I too was concern about maltodextrin with its’

high glycemic numbers.

Here’s the best explanation I can come up with why it does not have an effect:

Per gram sucralose is apparently many times sweeter than sucrose. It does not

take much to have the same sweetness equivalency. But the powdered Splenda has a

one to one ratio of sweetness compared to sucrose and a one to one volume

equivalency as well. You can use it just like table sugar by design. The purpose

of the maltodextrin is to act as filler so that you achieve approximately the

same sweetness and the same volumn as you would with sucrose. Apparently there

is not enough maltodextrin to have a material insulimic effect and sucralose

has no effect so the there is none.

I could not find a single source to independently verify this.

Quoting Rodney <perspect1111@...>:

> Well this is clearly a controversial topic.  We had a discussion here

>

> some months ago about the effects of artifical sweeteners on

>

> insulin.  In response to that discussion I contacted Dr. Tom Wolever

>

> (who most people regard as one of the top world experts in this area)

>

> and asked him specifically if sucralose generated an insulin

>

> response.  His answer was " No " .

>

>

>

> ***Splenda*** presumably does since most of it is a substance that

>

> has a glycemic index of 1.37!!!  I wonder who the genius was who

>

> thought of the idea of mixing an artifical sweetener with

>

> maltodextrin?????

----------------------------------------------------------------

This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

[Guest guest]

Hi Suzy. Thank you for your post. Just to clarify, do you mean sucralose

or Splenda? (they are different). I am wondering, b/c I do perceive a reaction

from Splenda, but do not get the same thing from sucralose at all. Thank

you!

Suzy P wrote:

That's fascinating...thank you and Logan both for your input. I had

no idea that artificial sweeteners could do this. (In fact, I thought they

were designed not to.) I would say sucralose affects me the most (although

I hate to admit it because I really do love it) and much more so than aspartame,

which corroborates what Mendosa is saying. I've never tried xylitol and

I've used stevia but am not fond of the taste. Perhaps the blend would be

better. I will surely look for it and until then try to do without ...

Thanks,

S.

Jeff Novick <jnovick@...> wrote:

>>Both

sweeteners (xylitol and stevia) have minimal impact on glycemic levels, but

I haven't seen any data on their insulin impact yet.

>>All of the artificial sweeteners spike your glycemic and insulin

levels.

From Mendosa.com

"Because Dr. Holt was the lead author of the insulin index study, I naturally

thought of her when I started receiving questions about artificial sweeteners

producing an insulin release. Some "authority" has apparently been making

noises to that effect. Dr. Holt has also been researching the effects of

sugar-free drinks o

[Guest guest]

> Hi Rodney,

................................. But the powdered Splenda has a

> one to one ratio of sweetness compared to sucrose and a one to one volume

> equivalency as well. You can use it just like table sugar by design. The

purpose

> of the maltodextrin is to act as filler so that you achieve approximately the

> same sweetness and the same volumn as you would with sucrose.

Well it might possibly be that the maltodextrin is added to give bulk

and confuse the buyer. Splenda is very expensive - by volume - in

Europe. Couldn't they omit the Maltodextrin or would that decrease

profits. JMO

[Guest guest]

Hi :

Why would you think a substance that has a glycemic index of 137

would " not have a material insulemic effect " ? Since almost all of

Splenda is maltodextrin I am not surprised some people here report

boom/crash sugar-type symptoms when they use Splenda. (I don't, but

then I don't get those symptoms with sugar either.)

Rodney.

> Hi Rodney,

>

> Thanks for looking into that. I too was concern about maltodextrin

with its'

> high glycemic numbers.

The purpose

> of the maltodextrin is to act as filler so that you achieve

approximately the

> same sweetness and the same volumn as you would with sucrose.

Apparently there

> is not enough maltodextrin to have a material insulimic

effect ...............

[Guest guest]

Rather than confuse the buyer adding bulk to sucralose, which is something

like 600x sweeter than sugar makes it easier to use. I too don't understand

why they couldn't use a more neutral bulking agent but they may have been

trying to mimic some other cooking characteristics of real sugar.

I have tried stevia and don't care for the taste. I have been buying raw

sucralose from Warren for years and find it great for my applications

(baking, no-cal lemonade, adding some sweetness to kefir-smoothies, etc).

JR

-----Original Message-----

From: Peg Diamond [mailto:enmuffins@...]

Sent: Friday, June 18, 2004 5:22 AM

Subject: [ ] Re: Artificial Sweeteners [was: Eating after 6

pm]

> Hi Rodney,

................................. But the powdered Splenda has a

> one to one ratio of sweetness compared to sucrose and a one to one volume

> equivalency as well. You can use it just like table sugar by design. The

purpose

> of the maltodextrin is to act as filler so that you achieve approximately

the

> same sweetness and the same volumn as you would with sucrose.

Well it might possibly be that the maltodextrin is added to give bulk

and confuse the buyer. Splenda is very expensive - by volume - in

Europe. Couldn't they omit the Maltodextrin or would that decrease

profits. JMO

________________________________________________________

This email has been scanned by Internet Pathway's Email

Gateway scanning system for potentially harmful content,

such as viruses or spam. Nothing out of the ordinary was

detected in this email. For more information, call

601-776-3355 or email support@...

________________________________________________________

[Guest guest]

If you don't want to buy in bulk (which is the only way Warren sells it) we

now have another source for only $16.99 for PREMIXED sucralose (free

shipping too). The amount for that price = 24 cups of sugar.

http://www.sweetzfree.com/

>

> I have tried stevia and don't care for the taste. I have been buying raw

> sucralose from Warren for years and find it great for my applications

> (baking, no-cal lemonade, adding some sweetness to kefir-smoothies, etc).

>

> JR

[Guest guest]

I dilute mine in water at a ratio of 100:1 by weight. I then just measure

out X grams of the mix to get .01 gram weight equivalents of sucralose.

The small amount of added water doesn't impact baking, lemonade, or other

uses I have.

For example I use 25G of my sucralose mix (1/4G pure sucralose) and 125G of

lemon concentrate to make a quart of lemonade.

JR

-----Original Message-----

From: scott@... [mailto:scott@...]

Sent: Friday, June 18, 2004 10:59 AM

Subject: [ ] Artificial Sweeteners [was: Eating after 6 pm]

Rodney, of course your reasoning is sound. I have no idea what the glycemic

index for Splenda is. I cannot find any data whatsoever.

That said, however, I read that the reason that Splenda SUPPOSEDLY does not

raise insulin levels is that it contains such a small amount of maltodextrin

measured by weight. You can see this if you calculate the glycemic load,

which

is (glycemic index) x (grams in a portion) / 100. A teaspoon of Splenda,

which

has the same sweetness, is only 0.5 grams of maltodextrin, plus a tiny bit

of

sucralose. GL = 105 * 0.5 / 100 = 0.5. A teaspoon of white sugar is 4 grams,

GL

= 65 * 4 /100 = 2.6. If you have a teaspoon of Splenda it is definitely

lighter

than a teaspoon of sucrose. You can tell without evening comparing them on a

scale.

I do see misleading information about Splenda. Advertisers will say

something

like “Splenda is the brand name for the low-glycemic sweetener, Sucralose. "

But

of course Splenda is not just sucralose. If you don't read the label you

think

you are getting plain sucralose. What you do get with Splenda is just a zero

calorie that one can use in baking and little or no after taste. IMO it that

best tasting of the alternatives. It’s relatively safe in terms of toxicity

as

well.

Really this is just academic if you use plain sucralose. I read the

sweetness of

pure sucralose is 600 times that of sugar. How do you advanced CRON masters,

who

use the unadulterated stuff, deal with this practically?

Thanks!

________________________________________________________

This email has been scanned by Internet Pathway's Email

Gateway scanning system for potentially harmful content,

such as viruses or spam. Nothing out of the ordinary was

detected in this email. For more information, call

601-776-3355 or email support@...

________________________________________________________

[Guest guest]

I don't dilute mine. I keep it in powder form (due to laziness). Of course

the new source I referenced sends it in liquid form which is very handy as

the powder is not that convenient (for several reasons). I parcel out a

couple of months worth of powder into a tiny container for everyday use.

AFA how much to use, I just go by experience, the same way I know by

experience how much guar to add to make guar pudding. If something isn't

sweet enough, I just add a teeny pinch more sucralose to it (just as one

would do with sugar or spices).

I doubt the claims that it is 600X sweeter than sugar. A little bit goes a

long way, but not that long.

on 6/18/2004 1:33 PM, john roberts at johnhrob@... wrote:

> I dilute mine in water at a ratio of 100:1 by weight. I then just measure

> out X grams of the mix to get .01 gram weight equivalents of sucralose.

>

> The small amount of added water doesn't impact baking, lemonade, or other

> uses I have.

>

> For example I use 25G of my sucralose mix (1/4G pure sucralose) and 125G of

> lemon concentrate to make a quart of lemonade.

>

> JR

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: scott@... [mailto:scott@...]

>

> Really this is just academic if you use plain sucralose. I read the

> sweetness of

> pure sucralose is 600 times that of sugar. How do you advanced CRON masters,

> who

> use the unadulterated stuff, deal with this practically?

>

> Thanks!

>