-Caveat Lector-
Normally I do not repost a whole article but I wanted to keep the original with
these links, and to anyone that thinks that Stevia is not worth while - why would
they be afraid that it would take over the Aspartame market?
Laura
aka The Pied Piper
sugar # http://members.bellatlantic.net/~boncom/whatseatingkids.htm # msg,
aspartame, stevia Journalists Linda and Bill Bonvie What's eating kids? Maybe it's
their diet
sugar # http://members.bellatlantic.net/~boncom/sinfullysweet.htm # stevia Blazing
Tattles Sinfully Sweet
sugar # http://members.bellatlantic.net/~boncom/firstamendment.htm # stevia Blazing
Tattles stevia
sugar # http://www.cspinet.org/sodapop/liquid_candy.htm # sugar and aspartame
"Liquid Candy
How Soft Drinks are Harming Americans' Health
Liquid Candy"
sugar # http://cnn.com/HEALTH/9812/31/health.sugar.reut/index.html #
sugar # http://trufax.org/research/f16.html # Stevia and Natural Sweeteners Leading
Edge Research "Artificial Sweeteners:
Suppression of Natrual Stevia Leaves and the extract Stevioside"
sugar # http://trufax.org/research/f13.html # The Effect of Sugar, Synthetic
Colorings and Flavors on the Brain Leading Edge Research The Effect of Sugar,
Synthetic Colorings and Flavors on the Brain
sugar # http://trufax.org/research/f11.html # sugar, diabetes, hypoglycemia, Leading
Edge Research The Deliberate Use of Refined Sugar to Assist Degenerative Disease
aspartame # http://members.bellatlantic.net/~boncom/mystery.htm # aspartame
aspartame # http://www.vegsource.com/davis/sweeteners.htm # Aspartame and Stevia A
Tale Of Two Sweetners
aspartame # http://trufax.org/research/f18.html # "Artificial Sweeteners:
Aspartame - NutraSweet - Benevia" Leading Edge Research "Artificial Sweeteners:
Aspartame - NutraSweet - Benevia"
Aspartame # http://www.holisticmed.com/aspartame/ # Aspartame - Holistic Med
Holistic Med
Aspartame # http://www.dorway.com # Aspartame Information Dorway Com
Aspartame # http://www.w3-mediator.de/mcs/index.htm # Aspartame International
w/links MCS International
Aspartame # http://www.sweetpoison.com/ # Aspartame site and book Sweet Poison Sweet
Poison
Scott Bourassa wrote:
> -Caveat Lector-
>
> Y'know - you had me... right up until the last line. Why would the "police
> state" intentionally push a product onto the black market where, as you
> illustrate so clearly, they would receive no tax dollars from it? Waging the
> publicity war against a product such as tobacco would have to be for someone's
> gain (a point could easily be made that society is to gain, but as I am also a
> smoker, I'll claim the American 5th). Let's look at your logic for a second
> here...
>
> You seem to be ascerting that sugar consumption directly causes diabetes.
> Diabetes info can be found quite easily (the following excerpt was taken
> directly from the ADA web-page at: http://www.diabetes.org/ada/diabetesinfo.asp
> ), and confirms what I've always felt to be true - the anti-sugar thing I was
> plagued with as a glucose junkie pre-teen, is nothing but urban legend. I
> distinctly remember my mother telling me I'd wake up blind one day (diabetes
> *can* eventually lead to blindness) from all the sugar I heaped on my
> Coco-Puffs...
> What Causes Type 1 Diabetes?
> We do not know exactly what causes diabetes. We do know that people inherit a
> tendency to get diabetes. But not all people who have this tendency will get
> the disease. Other things such as illnesses must also come into play for
> diabetes to begin.
>
> Immune-mediated diabetes (formerly called insulin-dependent diabetes) is a
> disease that affects the way your body uses food. Immune-mediated diabetes is
> also called type 1 diabetes. In type 1 diabetes your body destroys the cells
> in the pancreas that produce insulin, usually leading to a total failure to
> produce insulin. It typically starts in children or young adults who are slim,
> but can start at any age. Without insulin, your body cannot control blood
> levels of sugar. And without insulin, you would die. So people with type 1
> diabetes give themselves at least one shot of insulin every day.
>
> Ok - so, by this definition, after you've already contracted Type 1 Diabetes,
> you can't handle your sugar. Sugar didn't cause a problem until after you
> became diabetic.
>
> What about Type 2 Diabetes?
> Type 2 diabetes used to be called non-insulin-dependent diabetes. The most
> common type of diabetes, it affects about 15 million Americans. Nine out of ten
> cases of diabetes are type 2. It usually occurs in people over 45 and
> overweight, among other factors.
>
> When you have type 2 diabetes, your body does not make enough insulin. Or, your
> body still makes insulin but can't properly use it. Without enough insulin,
> your body cannot move blood sugar into the cells. Sugar builds up in the
> bloodstream. High blood levels of sugar can cause problems.
>
> Medical experts do not know the exact cause of type 2 diabetes. They do know
> type 2 diabetes runs in families. A person can inherit a tendency to get type 2
> diabetes. But it usually takes another factor such as obesity to bring on the
> disease.
>
> Again, by the definition given above, I don't believe a person's intake of
> sugar (none, normal or vast quantities) has a direct effect on their
> contraction of diabetes.
>
> Lastly, there's one other type of Diabetes recognized by the ADA:
>
> What Is Gestational Diabetes?
> Pregnant women who have never had diabetes before but who have high blood
> glucose levels during pregnancy are said to have gestational diabetes.
> Gestational diabetes affects about 4 percent of all pregnant women, about
> 135,000 cases in the United States each year.
>
> Again - sugar intake is not indicated as being the cause of diabetes.
>
> On to Stevia, your solution to the evils of sugar...
> This one was a little more difficult to find 'real' information on, and nowhere
> could I find someone saying it was any better for you than natural cane sugar.
> Though Stevia has not been approved for use in the United States by the FDA,
> because of inadeqate information to demonstrate its safety as a food additive,
> it is available in health food stores and on the internet for personal use.
> These businesses get around the FDA's ban on using stevia as a sweetener, by
> misrepresenting that they sell stevia as a "dietary supplement," which is not
> subject to the existing food additive regulations.
>
> The medical advisors at Children with Diabetes are unaware of any valid use of
> stevia as a "dietary supplement" as it contains nothing of nutritional value.
>
> My own personal feelings on the subject are (please bear in mind that this and
> the following paragraph culminate years of subscribing to men's health
> magazines and journals; I am not a dietician, just someone with a crude plan
> thats work pretty well for me) that if all we wanted out of a sweetner was
> sweetness, the world probably would've adopted this Stevia stuff long ago
> through the normal commercial manner (Dow Chemical would've patented a
> synthetic version of it). But the interesting thing about it is that Sugar
> provides us with tons of quick-burning energy, and that's what we crave when we
> look for something sweet. Heck - I know I'm guilty - every day I take anywhere
> from 4 to 6 sugars in my morning coffee, just to get that jump start. The
> problem we run into is if we don't use that energy wisely, our bodies decide to
> store it. Eventually people get fat, and as you've read above, the first thing
> doctors tell Type 2 diabetes patients (90% of all diabetics) is to lose some
> weight.
>
> Sugar has a natural high, followed by a noticeable crash - the problem is: most
> people *sit* and enjoy the buzz. We need to get active from the moment we take
> it, and as it kicks in, try to make a point of ingesting something with a more
> sustainable burn rate (like whole wheat toast, some oatmeal, <or whole oat
> cereal - the rice and corn stuff leaves my tummy grumbling by 9am> plenty of
> milk, yogurt and some fruit). These kick your metabolic rate up, your core
> temerature goes up without much exercise, and you *burn* your caloric intake
> instead of storing it. My body reacts amazingly well; I'm wide awake, plenty
> alert, ready to take on the day with a vengeance (did I mention the shot of
> Buckley's Mixture? - cures smokers' cough instantly, and despite the taste, is
> easier than quitting... ain't I the picture of health). Now that I've ranted
> about my morning routine, I'll get back on topic for you...
>
> For the 'Police State' to drive the tobacco industry completely underground,
> where they will receive no benefit from it, would be less than ideal. The
> reality is probably more along the lines of what Canada has done: create enough
> of a public outcry through bad press, to justify raising the taxes on the
> product to astronomical levels. In the late 80's and early 90's prices per
> pack reached their all-time high (I personally remember paying just over $7 for
> a single pack of smokes from a vending machine), and then something interesting
> happened: the government realized that the dramatic drop in cigarette sales
> wasn't due to people quitting, they were cross border shopping. The news went
> national, as Mohawk Indians were caught smuggling tractor-trailer's full of
> contraban cigarettes into Canada for sale all across Quebec and Ontario, to
> retailers and gas stations. At this point, the Canadian government decided to
> lower the tax rate just enough to discourage the cross border shoppers (by the
> time you paid for the gas, you could've bought a pack up here), and increase
> the fines and penalties for illegally bringing the articles into the country.
>
> Personally - if I were looking for the conspiracy here, as a US citizen you
> should be checking out how much revenue is created by tobacco sales in the US.
> Establish an actual cost (before taxes), and multiply that by about 300% (what
> some say we Cannucks pay in taxes for a pack of smokes). Now if that's for a
> single pack, figure out how many packs are sold in the US, and from there you
> can see how many tax dollars will be generated by following our lead. Still
> think it makes sense to ban smoking completely? Gee - where would they get the
> money to jail all those people if they didn't have the revenue from Tobacco
> Taxes...
>
> Sgt Bee...
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 02/11/99 03:58 PM
>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]@internet@WTAXE
> cc:
> Subject: Re: [CTRL] Tobacco
>
> -Caveat Lector-
>
> We don't make war on all consumers goods which can lead to bad health in
> the future. High fat foods, nitrites in processed meat, and on and on and on.
>
> Why tobacco? Sure it causes health problems in 2/3 of it's users, sure
> the medical bills get expensive.....but are we taking a moral high ground
> against sugar because of the incidence of diabetes in this country?
>
> Stevia, a natural, healthy, powerful sweetener was banned in the US for
> years until health food advocates got it cleared to be sold as a food
> supplement. Makers are not ALLOWED to advertise it as a sweetener. The
> Japansese use stevia frequently, and it's added into their processed foods,
> and they have a much lower incidence of diabetes.
>
> But to make my point.....I think the attack on tobacco is so that it will
> be made illegal, forced onto the black market, sold at high prices -- tax free
> -- and give the police-state another lame excuse to jail ordinary people.
>
> Samantha
>
>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
