Re: Fw: Butter vs Margarine -(don't normally pass this stuff on but this is a good comparison)

[Guest guest]

Harry,

The interesting thing about the margarine entry you posted is that we were

all told in the 70s how great margarine was and how we were doing ourselves

such a big favor by avoid that " bad " butter and switching to margarine. And

of course now we're all told this was all wrong. The irritating thing about

it is that the big companies making the margarine all KNEW it the whole time

and were selling it anyway just to make a buck while we were all turning

into plastic people. Geez!!!!

It seems the more we find out about foods, we see that the " real " foods have

always been the best. Butter beats margarine anyday all around! And with all

the stuff about different sweeteners, makes me think that sugar might

actually be the lesser evil. Gee, what's next?

Bill Powers

[Guest guest]

Bill,

You are exactly right. It is getting harder these days to figure out what

source of information one can trust. I have come to the conclusion that

trusting the so-called main stream media is a big mistake. They will spread

the news for anyone who is willing to pay the biggest bucks. I prefer to

search the internet, and I hope that congress does not censor it at all. It

does worry me that so many ignorant folks want the government to stop all

that spam and all those viruses to make our computer lives completely safe.

These folks don't know what they are asking for. They are simply asking the

government to control the information that they receive and nothing less.

Since I researched margarine around ten years ago, I have stuck to eating

butter ever since. All transfats are bad for anybody whether it is in small

amounts or large amounts. One of the best things for all people to do is to

avoid eating any transfats at all. Unfortunately, practically all the food

items including bread is made with transfats, that is those food items on

the grocery shelves. The reason they are made with transfats is because

they make the product have a longer shelf life. After all plastic will last

a lot longer than butter.

Now when it comes to sweetners, I prefer the one that has on its package

label the following warning, " This product has not been approved by the Food

and Drug Administration, the FDA. " It is only recently that this product

bares this caution on its label. It makes me wonder why. Could it be that

the makers of artificial sweetners like Equal, aspertane, Splenda and others

have pressured the FDA to require that this product bare this label? I

think so primarily because the sweetner I am talking about is a natural

product and not man-made through modern chemistry, which all the

forementioned are. The sweetner I use now practically all the time is

natural, contains no carbs, and contains no additives and is completely safe

for a diabetic to use. It does not raise the blood sugar and research has

shown no adverse side effects by using this product for several hundreds of

years. It comes in packets just like sugar, Equal and Splenda, but it costs

a little more at the natural food store. It is at least twice as sweet as

sugar. It is a dehydrogenated leaf of a plant called stevia. The product

is stevia.

Re: Fw: Butter vs Margarine -(don't normally pass

this stuff on but this is a good comparison)

> Harry,

>

> The interesting thing about the margarine entry you posted is that we were

> all told in the 70s how great margarine was and how we were doing

> ourselves

> such a big favor by avoid that " bad " butter and switching to margarine.

> And

> of course now we're all told this was all wrong. The irritating thing

> about

> it is that the big companies making the margarine all KNEW it the whole

> time

> and were selling it anyway just to make a buck while we were all turning

> into plastic people. Geez!!!!

>

> It seems the more we find out about foods, we see that the " real " foods

> have

> always been the best. Butter beats margarine anyday all around! And with

> all

> the stuff about different sweeteners, makes me think that sugar might

> actually be the lesser evil. Gee, what's next?

>

>

> Bill Powers

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Bill,

You are exactly right. It is getting harder these days to figure out what

source of information one can trust. I have come to the conclusion that

trusting the so-called main stream media is a big mistake. They will spread

the news for anyone who is willing to pay the biggest bucks. I prefer to

search the internet, and I hope that congress does not censor it at all. It

does worry me that so many ignorant folks want the government to stop all

that spam and all those viruses to make our computer lives completely safe.

These folks don't know what they are asking for. They are simply asking the

government to control the information that they receive and nothing less.

Since I researched margarine around ten years ago, I have stuck to eating

butter ever since. All transfats are bad for anybody whether it is in small

amounts or large amounts. One of the best things for all people to do is to

avoid eating any transfats at all. Unfortunately, practically all the food

items including bread is made with transfats, that is those food items on

the grocery shelves. The reason they are made with transfats is because

they make the product have a longer shelf life. After all plastic will last

a lot longer than butter.

Now when it comes to sweetners, I prefer the one that has on its package

label the following warning, " This product has not been approved by the Food

and Drug Administration, the FDA. " It is only recently that this product

bares this caution on its label. It makes me wonder why. Could it be that

the makers of artificial sweetners like Equal, aspertane, Splenda and others

have pressured the FDA to require that this product bare this label? I

think so primarily because the sweetner I am talking about is a natural

product and not man-made through modern chemistry, which all the

forementioned are. The sweetner I use now practically all the time is

natural, contains no carbs, and contains no additives and is completely safe

for a diabetic to use. It does not raise the blood sugar and research has

shown no adverse side effects by using this product for several hundreds of

years. It comes in packets just like sugar, Equal and Splenda, but it costs

a little more at the natural food store. It is at least twice as sweet as

sugar. It is a dehydrogenated leaf of a plant called stevia. The product

is stevia.

Re: Fw: Butter vs Margarine -(don't normally pass

this stuff on but this is a good comparison)

> Harry,

>

> The interesting thing about the margarine entry you posted is that we were

> all told in the 70s how great margarine was and how we were doing

> ourselves

> such a big favor by avoid that " bad " butter and switching to margarine.

> And

> of course now we're all told this was all wrong. The irritating thing

> about

> it is that the big companies making the margarine all KNEW it the whole

> time

> and were selling it anyway just to make a buck while we were all turning

> into plastic people. Geez!!!!

>

> It seems the more we find out about foods, we see that the " real " foods

> have

> always been the best. Butter beats margarine anyday all around! And with

> all

> the stuff about different sweeteners, makes me think that sugar might

> actually be the lesser evil. Gee, what's next?

>

>

> Bill Powers

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Yes, you can purchase stevia from a natural food store for $9.99 for a

package of 100 packets or $6.99 for a package of 50 packets. At least that

is what it costs at my natural food store where I trade. It may be cheaper

on line. I will check it out.

Re: Fw: Butter vs Margarine -(don't normally pass

this stuff on but this is a good comparison)

> Harry,

>

> So you have to get Stevia at a natural food store? Oh dear, I can't think

> of

> one that is local enough to get to darnit. I would like to try some

> especially now that I am out of Splenda. I will do some digging as this

> would be a good time to switch.

>

> Bill

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Yes, you can purchase stevia from a natural food store for $9.99 for a

package of 100 packets or $6.99 for a package of 50 packets. At least that

is what it costs at my natural food store where I trade. It may be cheaper

on line. I will check it out.

Re: Fw: Butter vs Margarine -(don't normally pass

this stuff on but this is a good comparison)

> Harry,

>

> So you have to get Stevia at a natural food store? Oh dear, I can't think

> of

> one that is local enough to get to darnit. I would like to try some

> especially now that I am out of Splenda. I will do some digging as this

> would be a good time to switch.

>

> Bill

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Harry,

Thanks for the info about Stevia. I think I would stick with the powder

form. I don't like to get things too sweet so I would then use very little.

I just want enough to take off the " edge " on whatever I'm having, but not to

try to make something sugary sweet. Sounds like it would be better for me

than Splenda even if it's a bit more trouble to find.

Bill

[Guest guest]

Harry,

Thanks for the info about Stevia. I think I would stick with the powder

form. I don't like to get things too sweet so I would then use very little.

I just want enough to take off the " edge " on whatever I'm having, but not to

try to make something sugary sweet. Sounds like it would be better for me

than Splenda even if it's a bit more trouble to find.

Bill

[Guest guest]

If your soft spread reads on its label as having hydrogenated or partially

hydrogenated fats in it, then it is a trans-fat. If it is a trans-fat like

margerine or even a soft spread, then it needs to be avoided, if at all

possible. The trans-fats collect in your body fat, and you just get fatter

and fatter, and trans-fats are the last type of fat to be utilized by the

body. There are many concerns about its unhealthy effects on the body, and

I wish it would be banned by the FDA. As a diabetic, I do not need any

harmful substances in my body.

Re: Fw: Butter vs Margarine -(don't normally pass

this stuff on but this is a good comparison)

> We don't use margerine or butter for toast and all, just margerine for

> baking cookies or other baking, but what about soft spread? Where does

> soft spread fall in the comparison? Thanks.

>

> Dave

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Dave,

Soft spread is still plastic. I avoid even that and don't use margarine for

anything now.

Bill