Guest guest Posted March 2, 2006 Report Share Posted March 2, 2006 As with several of these newer generation sweeteners they are approved for human consumption but since they are relatively new and have only been on the market a few years it's hard to gage possible long term effects. AFAIK Neotame appears to be chemically similar to aspertame without the former's temperature issues and is much sweeter. I have consumed artifical sweeteners pretty much my entire adult life running the gambit from cyclamates back in 60's to these more modern players. I switched to sucralose several years ago when I started baking mega-muffins and such. I recently experimented with neotame due to difficulty in sourcing pure sucralose which now appears to be available again. As I previously noted neotame is even stronger than the super sweet sucralose and I found it more difficult to work with for that reason. I ended up dissolving 12.5 grams (equivalent to 220# of sugar) into a gallon of water to get it to evenly dissolve, but others have successfully dissolved it into lesser volumes of boiling water. We probably need to be a little suspect of anything our caveman ancestors didn't consume routinely, but the task at hand is not living longer " at any cost " but also enjoying a life worth living. At 57 YO with more than half a century of eating adlib with only marginal attention to nutrition, and recent suggestions of possible beneficial hormetic effects from small dose toxins, makes such decisions less clear cut. About the only food I target at zero is trans-fats, and I'm sure I've already consumed a lifetime's worth of them over the years. I am conflicted about strongly advocating use of any artificial sweetener. I have personally chosen to consume, but willingly accept the personal risk. In my life experience artificial sweeteners alone were not enough to turn the tide of energy balance but as part of an overall nutrition/calorie management plan I still find them useful. Sorry for the long, non-answer... JR Francesca Skelton wrote: > JR: please tell us more about Neotame. I note that you find it > harder to work with. Do you prefer sucralose? If Neotame is a useful > product we should add it to our links (where we discuss where to buy > CRON products). > > on 2/28/2006 11:33 PM, at crjohnr@... wrote: > > I've used real sucralose (the zero cal sweetener in splenda) for years > with no perceived ill effects. I have recently tried some neotame which > is even sweeter (and cheaper) than sucralose. > > I would be careful about some sugar-free or zero Kcal foods as > commercial preparations often include caloric components but game the > labels with serving size, etc. > > Spenda contains some caloric extender as pure sucralose is 600x as > sweet as raw sugar so would be difficult to use in raw form. (note: > Neotame is 8000x as sweet as sugar so even harder to work with). > > JR > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 2, 2006 Report Share Posted March 2, 2006 As with several of these newer generation sweeteners they are approved for human consumption but since they are relatively new and have only been on the market a few years it's hard to gage possible long term effects. AFAIK Neotame appears to be chemically similar to aspertame without the former's temperature issues and is much sweeter. I have consumed artifical sweeteners pretty much my entire adult life running the gambit from cyclamates back in 60's to these more modern players. I switched to sucralose several years ago when I started baking mega-muffins and such. I recently experimented with neotame due to difficulty in sourcing pure sucralose which now appears to be available again. As I previously noted neotame is even stronger than the super sweet sucralose and I found it more difficult to work with for that reason. I ended up dissolving 12.5 grams (equivalent to 220# of sugar) into a gallon of water to get it to evenly dissolve, but others have successfully dissolved it into lesser volumes of boiling water. We probably need to be a little suspect of anything our caveman ancestors didn't consume routinely, but the task at hand is not living longer " at any cost " but also enjoying a life worth living. At 57 YO with more than half a century of eating adlib with only marginal attention to nutrition, and recent suggestions of possible beneficial hormetic effects from small dose toxins, makes such decisions less clear cut. About the only food I target at zero is trans-fats, and I'm sure I've already consumed a lifetime's worth of them over the years. I am conflicted about strongly advocating use of any artificial sweetener. I have personally chosen to consume, but willingly accept the personal risk. In my life experience artificial sweeteners alone were not enough to turn the tide of energy balance but as part of an overall nutrition/calorie management plan I still find them useful. Sorry for the long, non-answer... JR Francesca Skelton wrote: > JR: please tell us more about Neotame. I note that you find it > harder to work with. Do you prefer sucralose? If Neotame is a useful > product we should add it to our links (where we discuss where to buy > CRON products). > > on 2/28/2006 11:33 PM, at crjohnr@... wrote: > > I've used real sucralose (the zero cal sweetener in splenda) for years > with no perceived ill effects. I have recently tried some neotame which > is even sweeter (and cheaper) than sucralose. > > I would be careful about some sugar-free or zero Kcal foods as > commercial preparations often include caloric components but game the > labels with serving size, etc. > > Spenda contains some caloric extender as pure sucralose is 600x as > sweet as raw sugar so would be difficult to use in raw form. (note: > Neotame is 8000x as sweet as sugar so even harder to work with). > > JR > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.