Erythritol news: this is not ideal

[kokotg]

3 minutes ago, Katy said:

 And all of them have had Covid multiple times. I believe any point in the previous 8 months puts you at risk for blood clots.

 

The initial study was looking at blood samples from 2004-2011 and the follow up one looked at nearly 3000 blood samples all collected before 2018. So covid was not an issue. 

[Arcadia]

6 minutes ago, Matryoshka said:

 

I should just make my own ginger juice and sweeten/dilute it myself...

If you have a pressure cooker, cut ginger into chunks, add water and use the soup/stew setting. I usually cook ginger chunks with water on stovetop but it takes quite long slow boiling. 

[Matryoshka]

Just now, Arcadia said:

If you have a pressure cooker, cut ginger into chunks, add water and use the soup/stew setting. I usually cook ginger chunks with water on stovetop but it takes quite long slow boiling. 

I was just going to grate the raw stuff and add water or sparkling water and stevia... LOL.  What does the cooking do - just make the infusion stronger (I was going to ingest all the gingery goodness of the grated stuff...)?  

I gave my instant pot to one of my dds, as it had too many buttons and I just ended up cooking everything on the stove anyway... seemed like it would take me more time to figure out which buttons to push than it would to just boil something a bit longer...

[Arcadia]

1 minute ago, Matryoshka said:

I was just going to grate the raw stuff and add water or sparkling water and stevia... LOL.  What does the cooking do - just make the infusion stronger (I was going to ingest all the gingery goodness of the grated stuff...)?  

Boiling ginger for ginger tea is often used by asians to help keep winter colds away. 
https://www.webmd.com/diet/health-benefits-ginger-water#091e9c5e82060706-4-7

“A basic ginger water recipe involves simply sprinkling ground ginger into water, or dropping a few slices of ginger root into your glass. However, these methods aren’t the most efficient way to get the ginger to release its natural compounds. Heating the ginger and water together helps the ginger steep, creating a more flavorful experience. Essentially, you can make ginger tea and then cool the mixture to produce ginger water. “

[Matryoshka]

38 minutes ago, Arcadia said:

Boiling ginger for ginger tea is often used by asians to help keep winter colds away. 
https://www.webmd.com/diet/health-benefits-ginger-water#091e9c5e82060706-4-7

“A basic ginger water recipe involves simply sprinkling ground ginger into water, or dropping a few slices of ginger root into your glass. However, these methods aren’t the most efficient way to get the ginger to release its natural compounds. Heating the ginger and water together helps the ginger steep, creating a more flavorful experience. Essentially, you can make ginger tea and then cool the mixture to produce ginger water. “

I like intense ginger.  Sounds like boiling time.  I should probably make some kind of concentrate...

[madteaparty]

Oh good I can continue eating sugar like god intended. 🙏🤣

[Corraleno]

6 hours ago, Katy said:

I follow this guy on YouTube & Instagram. It was an incredibly small study. 

DeLauer is a fitness coach and influencer whose whole empire is built on pushing a keto diet, and he recommends erythritol as a sweetener for people on keto. He has a BA in communications, with no background in medicine, nutrition, or even science. 

The data on erythritol now includes three studies with large databases that found strong correlations between erythritol levels in the blood and various aspects of cardiovascular disease; two studies demonstrating the mechanism by which erythritol can cause these issues (it makes platelets more sticky and causes clotting); and an in vivo human study showing huge, long-lasting spikes in blood levels after consumption of 30 g of erythritol.

It's true that the human study was small, but the research design was solid, and all eight people experienced extreme spikes in blood levels of erythritol (more than 1000x normal) after consuming a single erythritol-sweetened beverage — and the spike lasted for two days. Imagine what the levels would be like in someone who consumes more than that per day, every day — the initial spike wouldn't have even started to come down before the next spike would hit. Here is the graph from that study; the blood levels of erythritol in all 8 people are WAY above the levels associated with increased risk, and stay there for a long time.

 

 

[kokotg]

2 hours ago, Corraleno said:

 

The data on erythritol now includes three studies with large databases that found strong correlations between erythritol levels in the blood and various aspects of cardiovascular disease; two studies demonstrating the mechanism by which erythritol can cause these issues (it makes platelets more sticky and causes clotting); and an in vivo human study showing huge, long-lasting spikes in blood levels after consumption of 30 g of erythritol.

It's true that the human study was small, but the research design was solid, and all eight people experienced extreme spikes in blood levels of erythritol (more than 1000x normal) after consuming a single erythritol-sweetened beverage — and the spike lasted for two days. Imagine what the levels would be like in someone who consumes more than that per day, every day — the initial spike wouldn't have even started to come down before the next spike would hit. Here is the graph from that study; the blood levels of erythritol in all 8 people are WAY above the levels associated with increased risk, and stay there for a long time.

 

My natural inclination with any kind of nutrition study is to be skeptical (I think it's really hard to do nutrition science well), and, as my "but my brownies!" whining in this thread should make clear, I'd really LIKE for this to be a terrible study that means nothing. But it looks really thorough and solid to me. 

[Just Kate]

I’m putting this out here because I’m genuinely curious about your opinions. Most of you have probably heard of Trim Healthy Mama. They are a company that promotes a healthier carb lifestyle. They also make products and yes, their products contain erythritol. Two of their most popular erythritol-containing products are called Super Sweet and Gentle Sweet. 
 

Anyway, they put out a statement today and I am really curious to hear what you all think. I do sort of follow the Trim Healthy Mama way of eating and I use their products (their sweeteners are way better than anything I’ve ever bought in the store and if you want to try a pure stevia with no fillers, theirs is really amazing). 
 

Trim Healthy Mama Erythritol Response

Just X out of the landing page and it will take you to the response. 

[Corraleno]

5 hours ago, Just Kate said:

I’m putting this out here because I’m genuinely curious about your opinions. Most of you have probably heard of Trim Healthy Mama. They are a company that promotes a healthier carb lifestyle. They also make products and yes, their products contain erythritol. Two of their most popular erythritol-containing products are called Super Sweet and Gentle Sweet. 
 

Anyway, they put out a statement today and I am really curious to hear what you all think. I do sort of follow the Trim Healthy Mama way of eating and I use their products (their sweeteners are way better than anything I’ve ever bought in the store and if you want to try a pure stevia with no fillers, theirs is really amazing). 
 

Trim Healthy Mama Erythritol Response

Just X out of the landing page and it will take you to the response. 

There are several aspects of that response that seem red-flaggy to me. First is the use of hyperbolic language — "this new sensational clickbait is even more fear inducing… erythritol is apparently out to give us heart attacks and strokes! There are already memes circulating… “Marked Safe From Erythritol.” The hysteria is upon us!" The whole set up seems designed to prime the reader to think this is just a ridiculous case of bad science meeting hysterical media.

Second is the conflict of interest: THM sells erythritol products and the food scientist they quote is CEO of a company that develops processed foods, including artificial sweeteners.

Third is the rather bizarre logic of Peter Cicero's arguments. I find it hard to take this paragraph seriously:
Erythritol is a naturally occurring sugar alcohol found in grapes, watermelons, pears, and wine. Even if the study followed proper testing methods, which we know is not true, there is no way to even remotely link erythritol consumption to heart issues. It is simply present in too many food products and is present in everyone’s bloodstream at various concentrations during various times.... it is similar to stating that water kills people. To say that something that could always be present in the blood is a cause for a heart issue is completely preposterous and incredibly unscientific. 

I mean, that is demonstrably false on the face of it. Sodium and glucose are "naturally occurring" substances that are "present in too many food products and [are] present in everyone's bloodstream at various concentrations during various times" — so according to Peter Cicero's logic it would be "completely preposterous and incredibly unscientific" to claim that excess concentrations of sodium or glucose in the blood could cause health issues. 

He uses the absurd water argument here too:
The study showed that subjects with pre-existing conditions who experienced heart issues were found to have a high amount of erythritol in their blood. That’s it! Nothing else. That is similar to saying that drinking water kills people because you drink it, then eventually you die.

I think most people understand the limitations of correlational studies, but there are three studies, using three different databases, that all found a dose-dependent correlation between the level of erythritol in the blood and certain cardiovascular issues. I've seen some people argue that causation could go the other way — it could be that obesity, diabetes, or heart disease cause the high levels of erythritol. But (1) there are two studies demonstrating that erythritol in the blood can cause "sticky" platelets and clotting, thus providing a mechanism by which high levels of erythritol could potentially cause heart disease and stroke, and (2) even if the causation went the other way, why would people whose bodies were already producing or accumulating excessive levels of erythritol want to further increase those levels by ingesting even more of it?

This paragraph is especially puzzling, because it's not clear if he didn't read the study in humans, or is just pretending it doesn't exist, because that study seems to refute what he is claiming here:
The largest amount of evidence shows the body completely rids itself of consumed erythritol within 24-hours, 90% from urination and 10% from colon. To be able to quantify a reliable level of erythritol in your blood that could cause heart issues is next to impossible since the level is always changing. For some reason, the study failed to use these advanced testing methods and neglected consideration of the body’s flux in erythritol levels. This again requires us to suspect the researcher’s ultimate goal of the study. 

The study that gave 30 g of erythritol to 8 subjects showed pretty clearly that the body did not eliminate it within 24 hours; levels remained significantly elevated for 2 days, and although he says that the research fails to consider these fluctuating levels, all subjects were tested 5 times over the course of the first day, and then every day for 6 days afterwards. So again his argument is like saying that the body rids itself of sugar quickly, so you can't possibly quantify a level of sugar in the bloodstream that would be correlated with diabetes, because the level is always changing.

So to me that whole "rebuttal" article is basically two people with a vested financial interest using a hyperbolic appeal to emotion and a purposely deceptive appeal to "logic" to convince people to ignore the results of 6 different studies and keep buying their products.

Of course it's possible that future research will show that erythritol is perfectly safe and that all these results have other explanations, but IMO the fact that we have statistical studies in three different populations, a study in mice, and in vitro and in vivo studies in humans, all of which support and reinforce each other, is definitely worth paying attention to.

 

Edited March 1, 2023 by Corraleno

[DawnM]

This and the other 'tals give me such severe stomach issues that I haven't used it much unless it is already in a power bar or something, but if I have too much I get so sick.   And "too much" is not a lot for me.

But this is not good news for those who love it and it works for.

[Just Kate]

3 hours ago, Corraleno said:

There are several aspects of that response that seem red-flaggy to me. First is the use of hyperbolic language — "this new sensational clickbait is even more fear inducing… erythritol is apparently out to give us heart attacks and strokes! There are already memes circulating… “Marked Safe From Erythritol.” The hysteria is upon us!" The whole set up seems designed to prime the reader to think this is just a ridiculous case of bad science meeting hysterical media.

Second is the conflict of interest: THM sells erythritol products and the food scientist they quote is CEO of a company that develops processed foods, including artificial sweeteners.

Third is the rather bizarre logic of Peter Cicero's arguments. I find it hard to take this paragraph seriously:
Erythritol is a naturally occurring sugar alcohol found in grapes, watermelons, pears, and wine. Even if the study followed proper testing methods, which we know is not true, there is no way to even remotely link erythritol consumption to heart issues. It is simply present in too many food products and is present in everyone’s bloodstream at various concentrations during various times.... it is similar to stating that water kills people. To say that something that could always be present in the blood is a cause for a heart issue is completely preposterous and incredibly unscientific. 

I mean, that is demonstrably false on the face of it. Sodium and glucose are "naturally occurring" substances that are "present in too many food products and [are] present in everyone's bloodstream at various concentrations during various times" — so according to Peter Cicero's logic it would be "completely preposterous and incredibly unscientific" to claim that excess concentrations of sodium or glucose in the blood could cause health issues. 

He uses the absurd water argument here too:
The study showed that subjects with pre-existing conditions who experienced heart issues were found to have a high amount of erythritol in their blood. That’s it! Nothing else. That is similar to saying that drinking water kills people because you drink it, then eventually you die.

I think most people understand the limitations of correlational studies, but there are three studies, using three different databases, that all found a dose-dependent correlation between the level of erythritol in the blood and certain cardiovascular issues. I've seen some people argue that causation could go the other way — it could be that obesity, diabetes, or heart disease cause the high levels of erythritol. But (1) there are two studies demonstrating that erythritol in the blood can cause "sticky" platelets and clotting, thus providing a mechanism by which high levels of erythritol could potentially cause heart disease and stroke, and (2) even if the causation went the other way, why would people whose bodies were already producing or accumulating excessive levels of erythritol want to further increase those levels by ingesting even more of it?

This paragraph is especially puzzling, because it's not clear if he didn't read the study in humans, or is just pretending it doesn't exist, because that study seems to refute what he is claiming here:
The largest amount of evidence shows the body completely rids itself of consumed erythritol within 24-hours, 90% from urination and 10% from colon. To be able to quantify a reliable level of erythritol in your blood that could cause heart issues is next to impossible since the level is always changing. For some reason, the study failed to use these advanced testing methods and neglected consideration of the body’s flux in erythritol levels. This again requires us to suspect the researcher’s ultimate goal of the study. 

The study that gave 30 g of erythritol to 8 subjects showed pretty clearly that the body did not eliminate it within 24 hours; levels remained significantly elevated for 2 days, and although he says that the research fails to consider these fluctuating levels, all subjects were tested 5 times over the course of the first day, and then every day for 6 days afterwards. So again his argument is like saying that the body rids itself of sugar quickly, so you can't possibly quantify a level of sugar in the bloodstream that would be correlated with diabetes, because the level is always changing.

So to me that whole "rebuttal" article is basically two people with a vested financial interest using a hyperbolic appeal to emotion and a purposely deceptive appeal to "logic" to convince people to ignore the results of 6 different studies and keep buying their products.

Of course it's possible that future research will show that erythritol is perfectly safe and that all these results have other explanations, but IMO the fact that we have statistical studies in three different populations, a study in mice, and in vitro and in vivo studies in humans, all of which support and reinforce each other, is definitely worth paying attention to.

 

Thanks for your feedback!! It just stinks that I (like so many others) have found something that works so well. Ugh…I appreciate your thoughts. 

[kokotg]

I thought maybe I'd found a critique by someone who's not making a lot of money off keto stuff: 

 

....but no:

Quote

She has received consulting fees from Boeringer Ingelheim, Babylon Partners, Oviva and Ways of Eating (a low-carb app). She is also founder and director of CityDietitians, a nutritional consulting company.

Although she does appear to have actual credentials in nutrition. But we still get the eye-rolly "OMG, I can't believe anyone would suggest erythritol is bad for you!" snark, which, I mean...I know that's a persona for a lot of people, but it's not really helpful when someone is genuinely trying to figure out the best way to eat to...stay alive. 

[Indigo Blue]

Take personal care products as an example. You have EWG warning us of certain ingredients in lotion, etc. There are YouTube holistic derms that support using “natural” skincare, and can back this with studies. On the other hand, you have mainstream derms who poo-poo clean beauty and back it up with studies. They say EWG is a big fear-mongering organization. 
 

But there is truth on both sides. Some ingredients ARE harmful. And some clean beauty touting folks ARE fear mongering. 
 

🤷‍♀️

Then you have benzene in sunscreen. Lead in chocolate. They say “these brands are safe”. But will they stay that way? Constant dog food recalls, etc. It’s crazy. 
 

You can just never know from one day to the next what is and isn’t safe. So, maybe it’s best when they invent some weird fake sugar substitute to make money off you because you need to have sweet, to just skip all the hype and just….don’t eat it. 
 

I don’t mean this in a snarky way at all. I’m just explaining my thought processes on this out loud, and maybe it might make sense to someone else. 
 

I got tired of being confused about skincare ingredients. I keep lotions, etc. simple and safe…not out of fear, really. It just seems to make the most sense. 
 

If there is a way for you to just skip all the sugar alcohols, you’d honestly probably be better off in the long run. 
 

I don’t trust these companies, people, organizations, to always give accurate information that’s in my best interest. That’s a no brainer. The thing is, they, themselves, don’t always know what is going on, even when they claim to. Think about back in the 60’s when smoking was glamorized. I don’t want to put weird stuff in my mouth to find out years from now it does weird things to my body, and I don’t have trust that we know what is safe from day to day because it changes every darn day. 
 

Just my thinking…..

[ScoutTN]

Dumped my monkfruit-erythritol blend and my Lily’s choc chips in the trash.

[kokotg]

39 minutes ago, ScoutTN said:

Dumped my monkfruit-erythritol blend and my Lily’s choc chips in the trash.

I sweetened my smoothie/protein shake thing with stevia just now. It tastes terrible. to be fair, I think I used too much stevia. Also it expired in 2020. It maybe wasn't a fair trial for the stevia.

Edited March 1, 2023 by kokotg

[Toocrazy!!]

DS just started using a protein powder that has this. Google still tells me it’s one without artificial sweeteners. Off to research more! 
 

I still haven’t found good dark chocolate that passed the heavy metal screening. It sure does get complicated. 
 

[Harriet Vane]

1 hour ago, kokotg said:

I sweetened my smoothie/protein shake thing with stevia just now. It tastes terrible. to be fair, I think I used too much stevia. Also it expired in 2020. It maybe wasn't a fair trial for the stevia.

Plain stevia tastes completely hideous. I tried it and I felt the awful taste of it lingering in my mouth for.ev.er. It's only palatable when mixed with other things, and we've just learned that those other things are unsafe.

Personally, I go with regular sugar and restrict how much I take in.

[kokotg]

6 minutes ago, Harriet Vane said:

Plain stevia tastes completely hideous. I tried it and I felt the awful taste of it lingering in my mouth for.ev.er. It's only palatable when mixed with other things, and we've just learned that those other things are unsafe.

Personally, I go with regular sugar and restrict how much I take in.

I mostly just go with a couple squares of very dark chocolate lately, but sometimes I just want to have a slice of cake or something, and I felt like baking with xylitol or erythritol was a pretty decent way to do that without spiking my sugar. I've seen a couple of people cautioning about balancing the risk of erythritol vs. sugar....i.e. if people lay off artificial sweeteners in favor of equal amounts of real sugar, that's not any better (the article quoted one of the people who ran the study as saying it increases the risk of heart disease as much as type 2 diabetes does, which, of course....sugar). Obviously, it's a false dichotomy in that you don't HAVE to eat sweet stuff at all. But I think it's definitely true that a lot of people WILL be drinking sugary drinks and eating candy one way or the other, and it's not at all clear to me that sugar alcohols are WORSE than real sugar. 

[mathnerd]

8 hours ago, kokotg said:

I sweetened my smoothie/protein shake thing with stevia just now. It tastes terrible. to be fair, I think I used too much stevia. Also it expired in 2020. It maybe wasn't a fair trial for the stevia.

Try adding  a couple of dates to your smoothie. I find even one mejdool date is sufficiently sweet for my smoothie.

[kokotg]

21 minutes ago, mathnerd said:

Try adding  a couple of dates to your smoothie. I find even one mejdool date is sufficiently sweet for my smoothie.

There are a whole lot of people trying to get me to eat dates and prunes in this thread 😂 I guess I'd better give it a try. Dates are high in sugar, though--I'm seeing values from 6 to 18 grams of sugar listed for a single date when I try to look it up...like at the midpoint of that range it's not any different from putting in a tablespoon of actual sugar...sugar-wise (in the old days before this week, about a tablespoon was swerve was what I did). Obviously it has nutritional benefits sugar doesn't have, but when one is trying to avoid sugar, it's still sugar. 

[Matryoshka]

8 hours ago, Harriet Vane said:

Plain stevia tastes completely hideous. I tried it and I felt the awful taste of it lingering in my mouth for.ev.er. It's only palatable when mixed with other things, and we've just learned that those other things are unsafe.

Personally, I go with regular sugar and restrict how much I take in.

For baking, I put in 2T to 1/4 c. sugar (or molasses, or maple syrup, or agave, or other sweetener that has natural sugar), and replace the rest of the sugar in the recipe with pure stevia powder.  It's way less sugar than the original recipe and no erythriol or other weird fillers.  The bit of sugar does help any aftertaste.  I had a 'baking with stevia' cookbook that recommended this - you can't go to zero sugar and have it taste good, but a bit will do it.  

[Matryoshka]

46 minutes ago, kokotg said:

There are a whole lot of people trying to get me to eat dates and prunes in this thread 😂 I guess I'd better give it a try. Dates are high in sugar, though--I'm seeing values from 6 to 18 grams of sugar listed for a single date when I try to look it up...like at the midpoint of that range it's not any different from putting in a tablespoon of actual sugar...sugar-wise (in the old days before this week, about a tablespoon was swerve was what I did). Obviously it has nutritional benefits sugar doesn't have, but when one is trying to avoid sugar, it's still sugar. 

My banana nice cream is just bananas and unsweetened cocoa and a bit of vanilla.  No dates, no stevia.  Yes, the bananas have sugar, but no more than if I actually ate a banana, and one serving has less than one banana.

About the dates - yes, it's sugar, but it's instead of added processed sugar, and you're right, it still has sugar but not more than if you add the processed stuff, and it's mixed with fiber and vitamins.

[kokotg]

12 minutes ago, Matryoshka said:

For baking, I put in 2T to 1/4 c. sugar (or molasses, or maple syrup, or agave, or other sweetener that has natural sugar), and replace the rest of the sugar in the recipe with pure stevia powder.  It's way less sugar than the original recipe and no erythriol or other weird fillers.  The bit of sugar does help any aftertaste.  I had a 'baking with stevia' cookbook that recommended this - you can't go to zero sugar and have it taste good, but a bit will do it.  

I thought about trying that...stevia plus a tiny bit of sugar or honey. I'll have to try it.

[kokotg]

16 minutes ago, Matryoshka said:

My banana nice cream is just bananas and unsweetened cocoa and a bit of vanilla.  No dates, no stevia.  Yes, the bananas have sugar, but no more than if I actually ate a banana, and one serving has less than one banana.

About the dates - yes, it's sugar, but it's instead of added processed sugar, and you're right, it still has sugar but not more than if you add the processed stuff, and it's mixed with fiber and vitamins.

yes, but my personal concern is staving off diabetes for as long as possible, and for those purposes sugar is sugar (and erythritol is not sugar). Like, I wouldn't just eat a whole banana or anything else with that much sugar in it in one sitting...at least not on a regular basis. ETA: I also don't particularly care for bananas, so I don't have much motivation to experiment with them as sweeteners anyway 🙂

Edited March 2, 2023 by kokotg

[Corraleno]

12 hours ago, kokotg said:

I sweetened my smoothie/protein shake thing with stevia just now. It tastes terrible. to be fair, I think I used too much stevia. Also it expired in 2020. It maybe wasn't a fair trial for the stevia.

Have you tried monk fruit? To me it has a little bit of an aftertaste, but not as bad as stevia. Like stevia, it's so much sweeter than sugar that the powdered versions are usually mixed with erythritol or other sweeteners (since it's pretty hard to measure 1/250th of a tsp) but there are liquid versions that are just monk fruit extract (with water and a little alcohol as a preservative). I've used NOW Organic Monk Fruit Liquid, and you only need a few drops. I like my chai really strong and sweet, so I generally use a couple of drops of monk fruit plus a little bit of organic sugar to cover any aftertaste. 

There's not a lot of research on it, but also no indication that it's unhealthy, and the fruit has been used as a natural sweetener and as a medicine in China since at least the 13th century. The molecule that makes it sweet (mogroside V) is also supposedly an antioxidant and anti-inflammatory.

[Laura Corin]

3 hours ago, kokotg said:

There are a whole lot of people trying to get me to eat dates and prunes in this thread 😂 I guess I'd better give it a try. Dates are high in sugar, though--I'm seeing values from 6 to 18 grams of sugar listed for a single date when I try to look it up...like at the midpoint of that range it's not any different from putting in a tablespoon of actual sugar...sugar-wise (in the old days before this week, about a tablespoon was swerve was what I did). Obviously it has nutritional benefits sugar doesn't have, but when one is trying to avoid sugar, it's still sugar. 

I don't know whether it's the same with you, and this thought may not be appropriate for your situation, but when I was wearing a glucose monitor,  sweet fruit with lots of fibre didn't spike my sugar levels too much. 

[Shoeless]

The fiber in fruit slows the effect of the natural sugars in fruit.  Honey is actually worse than adding a sweet fruit, like banana or dates, because there is no fiber in honey. 

[ScoutTN]

7 hours ago, Laura Corin said:

I don't know whether it's the same with you, and this thought may not be appropriate for your situation, but when I was wearing a glucose monitor,  sweet fruit with lots of fibre didn't spike my sugar levels too much. 

A monitor is super helpful bc each person’s body reacts differently, but most people cannot get them bc insurance will only pay if you are insulin dependent. Very frustrating! 

[ScoutTN]

5 hours ago, Shoeless said:

The fiber in fruit slows the effect of the natural sugars in fruit.  Honey is actually worse than adding a sweet fruit, like banana or dates, because there is no fiber in honey. 

But it all spikes my sugars. Fruit is healthy, but only possible in very small servings for me and many others who have to keep blood sugars and A1c low without extra insulin. 

[kokotg]

8 hours ago, Corraleno said:

Have you tried monk fruit? To me it has a little bit of an aftertaste, but not as bad as stevia. Like stevia, it's so much sweeter than sugar that the powdered versions are usually mixed with erythritol or other sweeteners (since it's pretty hard to measure 1/250th of a tsp) but there are liquid versions that are just monk fruit extract (with water and a little alcohol as a preservative). I've used NOW Organic Monk Fruit Liquid, and you only need a few drops. I like my chai really strong and sweet, so I generally use a couple of drops of monk fruit plus a little bit of organic sugar to cover any aftertaste. 

There's not a lot of research on it, but also no indication that it's unhealthy, and the fruit has been used as a natural sweetener and as a medicine in China since at least the 13th century. The molecule that makes it sweet (mogroside V) is also supposedly an antioxidant and anti-inflammatory.

I haven't--I bought monkfruit once, but, yeah--it's an erythritol blend, so I haven't tried pure monkfruit yet. I'll have to try it.

[kokotg]

I appreciate all the suggestions! I should say that I've been very aware of watching my blood sugar for most of my adult life, since I had gestational diabetes when I was 26 (right around the same time my mother was diagnosed with diabetes...when she was younger than I am now). I managed to not get GD with 3 subsequent pregnancies, and I've kept my A1C in range pretty well ever since (though last spring it ventured over into pre-diabetic for the first time in several years), through, frankly, a good bit of obsessing about my blood sugar. So I know what spikes it and what doesn't. I know that fiber is good and I know when it's not good enough. I DO eat fruit, but I'm careful about amounts and types. So it's not a tragedy on a massive scale or anything, but if I need to sweeten my smoothies with something that has real sugar in it, that's sugar I can't eat somewhere else, if that makes sense (and I wouldn't eat something like a banana, with 20+ grams of carbs most of the time, because I just don't eat that much at once on a regular basis. I wish it were fine as long as there's a bit of fiber, but no such luck, at least not at this stage of my life). It would be really nice if I could put a little erythritol in them without worrying about it. Incidentally, the fiber thing is why dark chocolate is my go to. A pretty generous serving of 78% dark chocolate has 11 grams of carbs, but 5 of those are fiber and 6 sugar. And I put a tablespoon of psyllium husk powder in my smoothies. I'm all about fiber! 

[ScoutTN]

Just ordered some pure monkfruit to see what it tastes like. The concentration affects the price and I don’t need max power sweetening, so I got a low concentration. 
 

I really only use sugar/sweetener in a few dishes that I eat, mostly asian sorts of things. I don’t drink sweet coffee or tea.

I cook and bake with real sugar for my family,

Edited March 2, 2023 by ScoutTN

[Selkie]

Erythritol is the topic of the latest Exam Room Live podcast from Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine.

Also includes interesting discussion on other artificial sweeteners, dates, and whether there is an association between sugar consumption and type 2 diabetes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KqPMzuY2Oto

 

[livetoread]

I just learned recently that using fruit in smoothies significantly decreases the amount of fiber in the fruit. I suppose it makes sense because you are breaking down the fiber when you pulverize the fruit, but I hadn't thought about it before. 

 

[Indigo Blue]

27 minutes ago, livetoread said:

I just learned recently that using fruit in smoothies significantly decreases the amount of fiber in the fruit. I suppose it makes sense because you are breaking down the fiber when you pulverize the fruit, but I hadn't thought about it before. 

 

This makes sense, I suppose. I once read something online about how quickly you digest quick oats vs rolled oats vs steel cut oats. The more dense and chewy steel cut oats supposedly take the longest to chew and to digest. So, there is supposedly less of a blood sugar spike than with the quick oats because there is a slower digestion.  It makes sense, but I don’t know if it’s accurate. 

[Selkie]

1 hour ago, livetoread said:

I just learned recently that using fruit in smoothies significantly decreases the amount of fiber in the fruit. I suppose it makes sense because you are breaking down the fiber when you pulverize the fruit, but I hadn't thought about it before. 

Fortunately, the most up to date research shows that while juicing removes fiber, blending does not.

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/common-questions-fruits-vegetables/

If most or all of the whole fruit and/or vegetable is blended into the beverage (skin, pulp, and flesh), then the nutrients and fiber are preserved, making it nutritionally comparable to eating the ingredients in whole form. 

https://nutritionfacts.org/topics/smoothies/

Smoothies offer a convenient way to boost both the quantity and quality of fruit and vegetable intake by reducing food particle size to help maximize nutrient absorption. It’s important, however, to use whole fruits and veggies rather than just their juice. Why? Because, when we juice, we lose the fiber and all the phytonutrients bound to it.

 

[Shoeless]

12 hours ago, ScoutTN said:

But it all spikes my sugars. Fruit is healthy, but only possible in very small servings for me and many others who have to keep blood sugars and A1c low without extra insulin. 

Ok, but honey is unlikely to be an improvement if one's blood sugar spikes from fruit. 

[Laura Corin]

2 hours ago, Indigo Blue said:

This makes sense, I suppose. I once read something online about how quickly you digest quick oats vs rolled oats vs steel cut oats. The more dense and chewy steel cut oats supposedly take the longest to chew and to digest. So, there is supposedly less of a blood sugar spike than with the quick oats because there is a slower digestion.  It makes sense, but I don’t know if it’s accurate. 

That was my experience from wearing a continuous glucose monitor. Big spike with oat milk, smaller with rolled oats, smaller again with pinhead/ steel cut oats.

[kokotg]

1 hour ago, Shoeless said:

Ok, but honey is unlikely to be an improvement if one's blood sugar spikes from fruit. 

I wasn't saying I would use honey as a primary sweetener, but speculating that a tiny amount of it blended with stevia might make stevia as a primary sweetener more palatable. Like, say, a half teaspoon of honey would have 2 1/2 grams of sugar, compared to 27 grams of carbs (3 of which are fiber) in a banana.

Edited March 3, 2023 by kokotg

[ScoutTN]

1 hour ago, Shoeless said:

Ok, but honey is unlikely to be an improvement if one's blood sugar spikes from fruit. 

I never have honey or maple syrup or molasses, and rarely anything with even a small amount of sugar in it. I am diabetic, but not on insulin. 

[Shoeless]

1 hour ago, ScoutTN said:

I never have honey or maple syrup or molasses, and rarely anything with even a small amount of sugar in it. I am diabetic, but not on insulin. 

My comment about fiber, fruit, and honey was originally in reference to another poster (kokotog). If honey or fruit doesn't work for you, then ok. 🙂   

My husband is T2 diabetic, so we keep pretty close tabs on his A1C and b.g. We reversed the T2D via diet and exercise.  I think remission is probably a better descriptor because if he goes back to poor eating habits, his A1C and bg will be out of control and he'll be back on the metformin.  At last check, A1C was 5.6 for him.  

I feel like the hive has had the bananas vs diabetics argument before...

[ScoutTN]

8 hours ago, Shoeless said:

My comment about fiber, fruit, and honey was originally in reference to another poster (kokotog). If honey or fruit doesn't work for you, then ok. 🙂   

My husband is T2 diabetic, so we keep pretty close tabs on his A1C and b.g. We reversed the T2D via diet and exercise.  I think remission is probably a better descriptor because if he goes back to poor eating habits, his A1C and bg will be out of control and he'll be back on the metformin.  At last check, A1C was 5.6 for him.  

I feel like the hive has had the bananas vs diabetics argument before...

I glad your husband’s is so manageable! 

My diabetes is autoimmune, triggered by a virus, T 1.5. It is not reversible, because no one can stop the antibodies from attacking my pancreas. I will eventually be insulin dependent, but for now am on Ozempic. I ate low carb for over 20 years before being diagnosed and am not overweight. The diabetes is not caused by a poor diet and lack of exercise. I also have Hashimoto’s. Autoimmune cascade. 
 

[ktgrok]

On 3/1/2023 at 9:29 PM, kokotg said:

There are a whole lot of people trying to get me to eat dates and prunes in this thread 😂 I guess I'd better give it a try. Dates are high in sugar, though--I'm seeing values from 6 to 18 grams of sugar listed for a single date when I try to look it up...like at the midpoint of that range it's not any different from putting in a tablespoon of actual sugar...sugar-wise (in the old days before this week, about a tablespoon was swerve was what I did). Obviously it has nutritional benefits sugar doesn't have, but when one is trying to avoid sugar, it's still sugar. 

yeah, the number of "no added sugar" recipes that have TONS of dates are overwhelming. 

[Harriet Vane]

Re dates--I recently bought a square of vegan, raw tiramisu that used date paste (I assume the dates were cooked down and caramelized). The flavor was unbelievably decadent. It seriously tasted like caramel. I was overjoyed, as I love caramel but cannot have it since becoming lactose intolerant after an illness. 

[bolt.]

When I use stevia (not blended with erythrol) I can use it straight.

I don't know if it's because I have a good product (Sweetleaf "Sweet Drops" SteviaClear) or because I'm very used to it now (I used to sweeten with a little sugar together with the stevia) or because stevia is something that works well with my palate (different people taste stevia differently, especially the aftertaste) and/or because I use small amounts compared to some of the 'equivalent sweetness' measures.

However, I'm just saying that stevia itself is not a lost cause. It might be worth experimenting with different products and different amounts, and using other sources of sweetness together with it in the beginning. I guess it doesn't work for everyone -- but I'm happy with mine!

[kokotg]

59 minutes ago, bolt. said:

When I use stevia (not blended with erythrol) I can use it straight.

I don't know if it's because I have a good product (Sweetleaf "Sweet Drops" SteviaClear) or because I'm very used to it now (I used to sweeten with a little sugar together with the stevia) or because stevia is something that works well with my palate (different people taste stevia differently, especially the aftertaste) and/or because I use small amounts compared to some of the 'equivalent sweetness' measures.

However, I'm just saying that stevia itself is not a lost cause. It might be worth experimenting with different products and different amounts, and using other sources of sweetness together with it in the beginning. I guess it doesn't work for everyone -- but I'm happy with mine!

the sweetleaf drops are what I tried...with unpleasant results 🙂 I think it is just an individual palates thing....I've never been able to stand the taste of Diet Coke or anything either. xylitol/erythritol are the first fake sugars I've ever liked fine. 

[kokotg]

3 hours ago, ktgrok said:

yeah, the number of "no added sugar" recipes that have TONS of dates are overwhelming. 

I was talking to a friend about this, and and she reported a frustrating experience trying to find a banana bread recipe without added sugar and how many recipes proudly announced that they were using honey not sugar. Remember when agave nectar was all the rage? And then coconut sugar....I looked up coconut sugar the other day, and I seriously can't figure out why people were so excited about it. The glycemic index is maybe a little lower than table sugar, depending on whose numbers you believe. It's almost like there's not ANY magical way to eat a bunch of sugar without the downsides of eating sugar 😂

[maize]

2 minutes ago, kokotg said:

I was talking to a friend about this, and and she reported a frustrating experience trying to find a banana bread recipe without added sugar and how many recipes proudly announced that they were using honey not sugar. Remember when agave nectar was all the rage? And then coconut sugar....I looked up coconut sugar the other day, and I seriously can't figure out why people were so excited about it. The glycemic index is maybe a little lower than table sugar, depending on whose numbers you believe. It's almost like there's not ANY magical way to eat a bunch of sugar without the downsides of eating sugar 😂

I like the flavor of coconut sugar; I've never considered it other than sugar though.

[kokotg]

6 minutes ago, maize said:

I like the flavor of coconut sugar; I've never considered it other than sugar though.

A few years ago at least people were hyping it up as somehow way healthier than table sugar. Same with agave nectar. But really they're all just sugar.