RE: Stevia, as well as my usual slant of course

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: Stevia, as well as my usual slant of course

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Stevia, as well as my usual slant of course

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Stevia, as well as my usual slant of course - 4/26/2009 3:05:33 PM

Louve00

Posts: 1674
Joined: 2/1/2009
Status: offline

LOL...if you keep your mouth shut and don't pass comment, you'll never get rid of your vanilla cone.

And maybe technically you could say stevia is a chemical (or a chemical ingredient in the plant that grows, if you want to be that technical). There's no point in being that technical though, when MichiganHeadMast points out (rightfully) that we are all made up of chemicals. However, not to assume what you were thinking, you may have meant that while sacharin and aspartame are artifical sweeteners, stevia comes from a plant. It is an herb. You're right.

< Message edited by Louve00 -- 4/26/2009 3:06:21 PM >

_____________________________

For the great majority of mankind are satisfied with appearance, as though they were realities and are often more influenced by the things that seem than by those that are. - Niccolo Machiavelli

(in reply to Oldmansmisty)

Profile

Post #: 21

RE: Stevia, as well as my usual slant of course - 4/26/2009 3:33:39 PM

pahunkboy

Posts: 33061
Joined: 2/26/2006
From: Central Pennsylvania
Status: offline

Hey Term, your gums must be very healthy. Do you floss?

I am not too quick to want dental work anymore either. Besides- why worry about sugar to anyone who smokes and drinks. ;-0

(in reply to Louve00)

Profile

Post #: 22

RE: Stevia, as well as my usual slant of course - 4/26/2009 3:57:54 PM

Termyn8or

Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline

So far so good. I shaddup and find more people agree with me. About par for the course. Now consider this, where is all the extensive research that made them allow aspartame, saccarine, cyclamates, or for that matter refined sugar ? Even sugar, you know what it does. It pumps the metabolism up which leaches nutrients out of your bones and teeth, and causes a few other problems along the way. If they can ban one, why not the other ?

I bring to the table a new card - olestra. Where is all the testing on that ? What's more olestra was proven to sap nutrients out of your food right in the digestive tract. They did not ban it. I wll not eat anything with olestra in it, and I suggest others do the same.

Now I want to know the rationale behind the banning of stevia, which happened nineteen years ago. I want to know how poisons like aspartame and olestra got approved, and quickly I might add, while this substance needed to be labelled a supplement. In short, I want to know who these suits work for. The chemistry lesson is fine, but that was not the point.

Eventually I think everyone is going to agree, the problem is money. Our FDA does things they execute you for in China, it was in the news. The big problem is what to do about it. On a personal basis, how can we actually steer clear of this crap ? And who knows how many other poisons are lurking in the foods we eat every day.

Right now I want to let it ride. You are showing me that I am not a crazed consipracy theorist, that others CAN see this and therefore it is probably real. I am not going to go into genetically engineered corn which reduces the size of lab animals reproductive organs and they have smaller than average offspring. I am not going to go into the virus they put in milk now which attacks the bacteria which makes it go sour, thus increasing it's shelf life. (they satarted that right around the time I stopped drinking milk, it simply tastes different now)

And I don't want to talk about going out to a farm for raw milk, they will bust you. Bet you didn't know it was illegal did you ? But then we are not to that point yet. Nor are we to the point of discussing why farmers with a big outdoor chicken pen can feed the chickens the old Monsanto mix and call their eggs organic, while another may not because the chickens, though fed an entirely organic diet cannot because they are not given enough "free range" time.

Let's just let this unfold slowly, so we can examine the whoile situation. Sweeteners are in such common use, therefore their effect can be considerable. It is claimed that they want to keep health care costs down, but their actions defy this so diametrically I think few actually believe it. So why is there no action on the part of the public ? The election is over, for better or worse. Can people "sink their teeth" into an issue that could be more important by many orders of magnitude ?

Ya think some sort of public oversight might be in order ?

T

(in reply to Louve00)

Profile

Post #: 23

RE: Stevia, as well as my usual slant of course - 4/26/2009 4:35:50 PM

Louve00

Posts: 1674
Joined: 2/1/2009
Status: offline

Interesting questions and points.

There is an organization that agrees with you on alot of your questions and has addressed even more. I believe in the things they advocate and have even become a member. Know you're entering into much scrutinized territory though. Witch doctor, quack, ill-informed enthusiast, are just some of the accusations they'll (the unbelievers will) hurl at you. You have to decide for yourself though, what makes sense to you. And let the others go on as they will.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_Extension_Foundation

_____________________________

For the great majority of mankind are satisfied with appearance, as though they were realities and are often more influenced by the things that seem than by those that are. - Niccolo Machiavelli

(in reply to Termyn8or)

Profile

Post #: 24

RE: Stevia, as well as my usual slant of course - 4/26/2009 8:00:17 PM

Oldmansmisty

Posts: 28
Joined: 10/17/2006
Status: offline

oooh...i love DARK chocolate....yummmy...of course in moderation...

(in reply to pahunkboy)

Profile

Post #: 25

RE: Stevia, as well as my usual slant of course - 4/26/2009 8:32:22 PM

Oldmansmisty

Posts: 28
Joined: 10/17/2006
Status: offline

Louve00,
since i am known as a motormouth.....chances are i wont be able to keep my mouth shut....for long anyway
i just need to know that i know what i am talking about....and this particular subject suddenly has me....kinda baffled
*sigh* ok....so what?
gotta run now

(in reply to Louve00)

Profile

Post #: 26

RE: Stevia, as well as my usual slant of course - 4/26/2009 9:12:19 PM

Oldmansmisty

Posts: 28
Joined: 10/17/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

Eventually I think everyone is going to agree, the problem is money. Our FDA does things they execute you for in China, it was in the news. The big problem is what to do about it. On a personal basis, how can we actually steer clear of this crap ? And who knows how many other poisons are lurking in the foods we eat every day.

T

yes, Termyn8tor, i agree....who knows how many other poisons are lurking in the foods we eat every day??
AND....yes the problem IS money! seems a lot of other things are about money
BTW....i read Your profile....all i can say is wow!

(in reply to Termyn8or)

Profile

Post #: 27

RE: Stevia, as well as my usual slant of course - 4/27/2009 8:38:38 AM

Termyn8or

Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline

You say wow to my relatively mundane profile ? You need to get out more LOL.

OK, now that the thread has taken a twist and possibly a turn, it is now time to bring another fact into the mix.

What is the best fed animal on Earth ? (I am going to hit enter about five times now so you have time to think about it)

Lab rats. Yup, as hard as it may be to believe it is true. I will tell you why.

About ½ of the diseases humans get are due to mineral deficiencies. They make money when humans get sick, so baby formula has about twelve out of the twentyfour recognized worldwide as being essential to good health. There are twenty in puppy chow.

Now we get to lab rats, this is a controlled environment. They choose rats with no congenital defects and feed them a very mineral and vitamin rich diet. Why ? Well the norm is that they would live their lives without disease, AKA the control group. The researchers don't want the rats to contract any diseases at all, except for what they intentionally cause by introducing suspected carcinogens and so forth. This is very important to make the research valid.

This PROVES that they know, they know about the selenium/cancer link, the chromium/vanadium/diabetes link, the sulfur/gall bladder link, and many many more that they are not telling us. Ironically the research is more important than the human lives which it supposed to save. And every time you find out something new, it alludes more to a "master" link in the whole chain of events. It is a five letter word beginning with "M".

To quote my Aunt ; how does that grab ya ?

T

(in reply to Oldmansmisty)

Profile

Post #: 28

RE: Stevia, as well as my usual slant of course - 4/27/2009 9:08:34 AM

pahunkboy

Posts: 33061
Joined: 2/26/2006
From: Central Pennsylvania
Status: offline

IMO Soda pop and HFCS, -delete these from your world and life gets better.

A modest amount of sugar works for me. Out in public I see so many morbidly obese people.   Drink plain water. Doing so the taste buds come back. If I drank a can of soda now it would shock my system.

There is not alot we can do about the FDA.   When I chop garlic- brocholi, carrots, mushroom, olives, tomotos, and make up one of my salads- that is real food. It takes time and is perishable.

I wish you could see me grocery shop.

Years ago- I took this seminar in ChicAGO. The speaker said- rub food on your face- on the skin. If it is something you can rub on -then good. But sugary- oily- salty- not good.

http://www.roguegovernment.com/Video%3A_1976_Swine_Flu_Propaganda/15399/0/10/10/Y/M.html     (back to 1976, my dad and bros went for a shot- they all got sick. I by chance did not go...and was fine)

95% of the product in the grocery store is crap.      Thats not an exageration.
So Stevia doesn worry me.

Teach those around you how to be a chemist in regard to groceries.

Consider that the FDA- = food AND drug industry.   The food wont be cleaned up becuase they want to sell you RXs.   The more the better. I am on 7 of them, age 45, and the DR doesnt even blink.
In fact- the Psch flies off the handle by me taking the dose down!!!!
So the food industry will NEVER be cleaned up.      Not as long as there is profit to be made on drugs.

(in reply to Termyn8or)

Profile

Post #: 29

RE: Stevia, as well as my usual slant of course - 4/28/2009 11:28:37 AM

Termyn8or

Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline

Hunky I got one word for you - margarine.

It came out during the war (the last real one) and was a CHEAPER alternative to butter. Back then they weren't allowed to color it, it was this milky blue/green white gook that was not very appealing, but they gave a packet of food coloring with it. That's why margarine over the years has usually been yellower than butter, because the food coloring has to overcome the "natural" color of the stuff, which was pretty much the opposite on the color spectrum. Later they solved that problem and now it can be made to look the same.

And then the no fat fad came along and it was touted as a more healthy alternative to real butter. Then they seem to have just discovered that there are different types of fat, you don't say.........

Now I am not sure, I think they say butter is better now but who knows ?

Oh, and back to the money issue, wonder why they were prohibited from coloring the margarine in the beginning ? Because the dairy industry lobbied for it.

This is many years ago, and I think part of the point is that this shit has been going on for alot longer than many think. And that since we were born into it, we just don't notice it, at least all of it.

The fact is that most of the PTB in the FDA and USDA are moonlighting from their normal jobs, usually on the board at big pharma or the food industry. Pays pretty good from what I have read.

T

(in reply to pahunkboy)

Profile

Post #: 30

RE: Stevia, as well as my usual slant of course - 4/28/2009 1:26:10 PM

hizgeorgiapeach

Posts: 1672
Status: offline

I can't use aspartame or sacharine at all - both of them tend to induce screaming migrains when I eat/drink anything that contains them. (Hence why I avoid switching to diet sodas despite my knowledge that cutting out the sugar content of colas would make my weight loss efforts much more effective.)

I use Stevia Extract in my shop, as a natural sweetner for lip balms and a couple of edible massage oils that I'm testing. I'll use stevia or agave nectar when I'm out of honey, in my coffee or herbal teas. (And considering how frequently all the honey in the house goes into a carbouy for fermentation into mead - that's more and more frequently!) I prefer not to even have processed sugar - whether cane, beet, or fruit derived - in the house. Stevia bush - known around my area as Sugar Bush or SugarLeaf Bush - isn't difficult to grow, is fairly drought resistant (in my experience) and seems to adapt well to various soil conditions.

As for my opinion of the FDA - heh - well - let's just say that while I don't consider it the Beast, I do consider it the Agent of the Beast....

_____________________________

Rhi
Light travels faster than sound, which is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.
Essential Scentsations

(in reply to pahunkboy)

Profile

Post #: 31

RE: Stevia, as well as my usual slant of course - 4/28/2009 10:38:59 PM

subfever

Posts: 2895
Joined: 5/22/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

Now I want to know the rationale behind the banning of stevia, which happened nineteen years ago. I want to know how poisons like aspartame and olestra got approved, and quickly I might add, while this substance needed to be labelled a supplement. In short, I want to know who these suits work for...

Eventually I think everyone is going to agree, the problem is money.

Of course the problem is money... but since there are status-quo defenders who would have us believe otherwise, everyone won't agree.

Status-quo defenders will try to convince us that the FDA is a benevolent entity, beyond the reach of concentrated wealth, that seeks only to protect the masses.

(in reply to Termyn8or)

Profile

Post #: 32