The ‘New’ Sweeteners

TRENDSPOTTING | by MOLLY MARTIN

I’VE GIVEN UP ON FOOD SUBSTITUTIONS, for the most part. Quickly abandoned the carob-for-chocolate movement ― not much fun for me there. After original Fresca, never really hopped on board the artificial-sweeteners train ― don’t trust ’em. Eventually realized through the low-fat and low-carb trends that I feel better when I eat a variety of real foods. Get more satisfaction from indulging in, say, some great chocolate.

SOURCE: TRUVIA.COM

But two sweeteners have gotten my attention recently, because both come from natural sources and also might have less of an effect on blood sugar. With my family history of Type 2 diabetes, I try to pay attention.

The first is agave syrup, derived from a succulent native to Mexico. It’s sweeter than honey, and although its calorie and carb counts aren’t far from sugar’s, for some reason it doesn’t seem to make blood sugar spike. Manufacturers, naturally, offer sugar-to-agave conversion charts and recipes.

The second, and I think more promising, is stevia. Also known as sweet leaf, the plant native to Central and South America has a long and sometimes controversial history , in part because it was not until December 2008 that the Food and Drug Administration granted two stevia-based products, Truvia and PureVia, the prized “generally recognized as safe” (GRAS) status for use in foods.

Stevia’s big selling points? Much lower in carbs and calories than other natural sweeteners, and little apparent impact on blood sugar. Drawbacks? Slight licorice aftertaste (to me, a worthwhile tradeoff in flavored waters), and adapting it to recipes.

Since one of Truvia’s developers is The Coca-Cola Company, and one of PureVia’s is PepsiCo, you can imagine that I’m not the only one who sees some promise here.