I am a Christian. I believe in the God of the Bible, in God the Father, in His Son Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Spirit. I believe in Genesis 1:1 - "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. (NIV)" I am a biochemist and a pharmacist by education. As such I have a desire to understand nature. I am writing this blog as my way to express the facts of true science as I understand them, from the perspective of one who believes that all things were created by God, for God and for His purposes.

Feel free to comment, to offer your perspective, or to give suggestions for subjects.
Please take a minute to "Like" us on Facebook.

Friday, July 1, 2016

Are God and Science Compatible?

Can we believe in God and still be a scientist? Since the existence of "God" can not be proven or dis-proven scientifically, believing either choice is believing one side of the theory. Those of us who are Christian hold that the God of the Bible does exist and that He created all that we see and know about the universe (and a lot that we do not know). This is considered "Intelligent Design" by many - that the universe as we know it could not have come into existence by random chance.

Those who believe in "Evolution" claim that random mutations of organisms - natural selection - resulted in all of the diversity in the universe and that this can be proven. They do not allow an Intelligent Designer to even be considered. Evolutionists claim that evolution can and has been proven but it appears that what is proven is that natural selection does occur "within species" but that does not prove that every living thing came from one life source and that all species are connected.

None of this even considers the "big bang" and how existence came from nothing. My point is that this is not a finished discussion, evolution is not a proven fact (although natural selection does occur) and that intelligent design should not be ruled out as a possibility. It takes more faith to believe that all of this just "happened" than it does to believe in the God of the universe.

Although I am a Christian and believe in the Bible, I am not pointing to that for the purpose of "proof". Within Creationism there are many different views, old earth, young earth, creation with evolution and others. My belief is that "random chance" as proposed by strict evolutionists is less likely a cause of the universe as we know it than a creation by God. I believe this because I believe the Bible (in spite of the "contradictions" claimed by some) and I believe that the pressure to "evolve" is not sufficient to account for all of the diversity and complexity found in the universe. There is not enough time and most mutations would likely be negative rather than a move in the right direction. Again, none of this even considers the creation of time and space.

Genesis 1:1 (NIV) In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

Secular Man has tried to understand "why" time and space, the earth, the nature around us and we ourselves exist. He has explained it away as the "big bang", evolution, a random event, a happenstance. But if you look into the Word of God you will see He tells us that He made it all, for a reason, for us to seek Him and find Him in His creation.


In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
Or did it just happen by chance?

It is easy to say that there is no God - scientifically - since science requires a direct observation and God is invisible in a physical sense. But it is even easier to see that God does exist - seeing His work in creation. Evolution, in its strictest sense, can not be proven scientifically either, because it requires an observation of something that happened outside of time, the formation of the universe, or the observation of something that has not happened in the short time that man has been looking for it, the development of a new, more advanced, species from a lower life form.

Scientifically evolution and creation are both theories. Science uses indirect observations of past events, from fossil records or deep space, to support the evolutionary theory. These indirect observations can also be used to support the existence of God. If evolution does occur, less complex life becoming more complex, it does not have to be considered outside of God. God and evolution can co-exist. If God created DNA, He created a way for it to be altered by mutations. This can be part of a design process - allowing for variations within, and between lifeforms.

Romans 1:20 (NIV) For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

The purpose of this upcoming blog series is to share known facts about the universe and the world around us that seem to point to a creator, as much as or more than to random chance, so that you can decide for yourself if the universe, the earth and life itself came from the action of an all-powerful source outside of the dimensions of time (God), or were just random actions that resulted, by chance, in the complex world in which we live.

I see this being divided into four parts:

  • Looking Upward - Psalm 19:1-2 (NIV) The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands. Day after day they pour forth speech; night after night they reveal knowledge. - Finding God in the universe above.
  • Turning Outward - Proverbs 25:2 (NIV) It is the glory of God to conceal a matter; to search out a matter is the glory of kings. - Finding God in the world around us.
  • Searching Inward - Psalm 139:13-14 (NIV) For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well. - Finding God in the formation of the human body, and thus in life itself.
  • Moving Forward - Ephesians 2:10 (NIV) For we are God's handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do. - How to take this to the next level - confirmation of your faith, or lack thereof. There is more to life than just "existing".

I am a Christian so I have a bias here, that God does exist and He created all we can see and try to understand around us. I can not make that decision for you, however, it is a personal choice but one that can be based on scientific evidence. It takes faith to believe that the universe as we know it was a random chance event, just as it does to believe in a Creator. All of the scientific evidence we have can be used to point in either direction, depending on how you look at it - there is no way to prove the existence or absence of God by the scientific method.

Just as I have a bias that God exists, many scientists have ruled out the existence of God. They do not even consider it a possibility, even though the evidence points just as strongly in that direction. They consider it "pseudo-science" since it can not be proven.

None of these scientific facts, theories or concepts I plan to share will prove either hypothesis, that the universe exists by random chance or that it was formed by a Creator. This can not be done. But they do show that this existence is wondrous and amazing, and fragile. Because of this, to me, the possibility of God is so strongly present in the evidence that the only way to say that God does not exist is to not even consider it as a possible explanation for the world. You must rule it out in your mind before you even start your examination of the scientific evidence. If you don't, you may just find that God is at the center of it all.

Saturday, May 7, 2016

Mother's Day revisited

I posted this message 4 years ago for Mother's Day and thought I would re-post it this year. Since then I have retired and we have added a few new grandkids to the mix. Now that I am home more I can see even more clearly what an amazing wife, mother and grandmother my wife is. I am truly blessed. I can also see what wonderful mothers my daughters, my niece and my daughters-in-law have become as their children grow up. God is good!

Happy Mother's Day - All We Need is Your Love!

My wife and I have 5 kids (and a niece that is just like a daughter). We were blessed with the financial stability for their mom to stay at home and care for them all. All are now married with children of their own. My wife is an amazing Mom and a wonderful Grandma. I was caught up in the business of life when the kids were young and did not appreciate to the full the blessing it was for her to stay home and instruct our children. Thank you honey for all of the love and care and comfort you have brought to our family. You are truly the glue that holds us so closely together. I love you, Happy Mother's Day!

We all have a Mother. No matter how we remember her, when we were young (and even now) we wanted her to love us. I am sure she felt the same, loving us with all her heart and wanting us to love her as well. God knew we would need a Mom in a special way. We see in His Word His love for this most special person in all of our lives.

The word "Mother" appears 338 times in the Bible. God knew that He needed someone special to raise His children:
  • Genesis 3:20 (NIV) - Adam named his wife Eve, because she would become the mother of all the living.
So He specially chose Moms to co-create with Him in the generation of new life within the womb:
  • Psalms 139:13-14a (NIV) - For You created my inmost being; You knit me together in my mother's womb. 14 I praise You because I am fearfully and wonderfully made.
He even chose the woman who would be His mother:
  • Luke 1:28 & 31 (NIV) - The angel went to her [Mary] and said, "Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you."... 31 You will be with child and give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus.
And He listened to her and honored her during His life, and His mother treasured all that He did:
  • Luke 2:42, 48 & 51 (NIV) - When He was twelve years old, they went up to the Feast, according to the custom... 48 When His parents saw Him, they were astonished. His mother said to Him, "Son, why have You treated us like this? Your father and I have been anxiously searching for You."... 51 Then He went down to Nazareth with them and was obedient to them. But His mother treasured all these things in her heart.
  • John 2:1-3,5,7,9-10 (NIV) - On the third day a wedding took place at Cana in Galilee. Jesus' mother was there, 2 and Jesus and his disciples had also been invited to the wedding. 3 When the wine was gone, Jesus' mother said to Him, "They have no more wine."... 5 His mother said to the servants, "Do whatever He tells you."... 7 Jesus said to the servants, "Fill the jars with water"; so they filled them to the brim... 9a and the master of the banquet tasted the water that had been turned into wine... 10b ...[exclaiming] "You have saved the best till now."
He even took care of her in His last moments as He hung on the Cross:
  • John 19:25a-27 (NIV) - Near the cross of Jesus stood His mother... 26 When Jesus saw His mother there, and the disciple whom He loved standing nearby, He said to His mother, "Dear woman, here is your son," 27 and to the disciple, "Here is your mother." From that time on, this disciple took her into his home.
And after His death, His mother continued to pray:
  • Acts 1:14 (NIV) - They all joined together constantly in prayer, along with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with His brothers.
So now we all must remember to:
  • Deuteronomy 5:16 (NIV) - "Honor your father and your mother, as the LORD your God has commanded you, so that you may live long and that it may go well with you in the land the LORD your God is giving you.
  • Proverbs 6:20b (NIV) - ...and do not forsake your mother's teaching.
So that "Your father and mother may be glad and may she who gave you birth rejoice! Proverbs 23:25 (NIV).

Monday, April 25, 2016

Artificial Sweeteners - Getting to Zero

www.sciencenews.org

America eats too much! So what is the solution? Eat less? Eat healthier? For some maybe, but for most of us it is now to use zero or low calorie sweeteners in place of those natural sweeteners we discussed in the last two blogs ("How Sweet it Is!" and "Are Nature's Other Sweeteners Better?") to help reduce our calorie intake without cutting out of our diet the things we love. So today we will discuss the most common non-carbohydrate sweeteners. They are often called artificial sweeteners but several are actually from natural sources (made from naturally occurring organic compounds).

The list includes - Saccharin, Cyclamate, Aspartame, Stevia, and Sucralose - the five most common artificial sweeteners used in the United States today.

Artificial Sweeteners

Scientific
Name
Sweetness (by weight) Trade Name FDA Approval
Status
Notes
Saccharin 300 Sweet'N Low 1958
Cyclamate 30-50 SugarTwin Banned 1969 Approved outside of USA
Aspartame 200 NutraSweet 1981 Amino Acid based
Aspartame-Acesulfame 350 Equal Original, TwinSweet 1988 --
Neotame 9000 NutraSweet (mfg) 2002 Chemically similar to Aspartame
Stevia 150 Truvia -- Naturally derived plant sweetener
Sucralose 600 Splenda, Kaltame 1998 Sugar Alcohol
Advantame 20000 -- 2014 --

Many people trying to get off sugar think they can still have their cake and eat it, too. Most use artificial sweeteners for one of two reasons: weight loss or trying to reduce sugar cravings. Sadly, artificial sweeteners do not accomplish these health goals: they can make your sweet cravings worse, resulting in you consuming more carbs or calories than before. Artificial sweeteners actually increase cravings by continuing your addiction to super-sweet tasting foods. It only takes 3-6 weeks of complete abstinence from sweet tasting substances to eliminate your sweet cravings (psychological cravings will remain). You simply have to avoid all sweet tasting foods (including artificial sweeteners) during this time and your cravings will subside.

Artificial sweeteners may also cause your blood insulin to rise, although this has not been proven. When insulin levels rise, your blood sugar levels decrease. Low blood sugar causes you to crave sugar and eat more. Studies have shown that people who consume artificial sweeteners eat more calories than people who don’t, possibly for this reason. Additionally, this rise in insulin signals your body to store fat or not use it as fuel. So, the weight stays on your body.

Some studies show that you may be able to blame it on the bugs in your gut. Some artificial sweeteners appear to dramatically change the makeup of the gut microorganisms, mainly bacteria, that are in the intestines and help with nutrition and the immune system. There are trillions of these gut bacteria - many times more than the number of cells in your body. All these physiological changes also have the potential of slowing your metabolism, resulting in increased storage of body fat.

All of this to say that although some artificial sweeteners may be safe and most have no calories, they are not as helpful as they appear when it comes to weigh loss and cutting down carbohydrate intake. In fact, they may alter the brain's natural response to sweet tastes, resulting in a decrease in the bodies ability to know when enough calories have been consumed. It is best to reduce sugar and carbohydrate intake by reducing or eliminating sweet cravings (and sweet tasting foods) from your diet.


Artificial Sweeteners can increase cravings for sweet foods
Resulting in eating more calories than before.

Saccharin (Sweet'N Low)

Saccharin was the first artificial sweetener and was originally synthesized in 1879. Its sweet taste was discovered by accident. It is 300 to 500 times as sweet as sugar and is often used to improve the taste of toothpastes, dietary foods, and diet beverages. The bitter aftertaste of saccharin is masked by blending it with other sweeteners.

Fear about saccharin increased in 1960 when a study showed a possible link to bladder cancer in laboratory rats. Further studies later showed that saccharin causes cancer in male rats by a mechanism not found in humans. In 2001 the United States repealed the warning label requirement, and in 2010 the EPA stated that saccharin was no longer considered a potential hazard to human health. It is available in the United States and is making a comeback.

Saccharin itself has zero calories per gram and has a Glycemic Index index of zero, meaning it does not raise body sugar levels. It is usually blended with other sweeteners to mask its metallic taste. These other sweeteners are sometimes sugars, such as dextrose, and can add a few calories to the final product.

Saccharin is a sulfa-based sweetener. Reported side effects include allergic reactions for those with sulfa allergies, nausea, diarrhea, skin problems or other allergy-related symptoms. Saccharin is not metabolized in the body and is rapidly eliminated in the urine. The quantity of saccharin in a typical diet soda (12 ounces) is about 100 milligrams.

Cyclamate

In the United States, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) banned the sale of cyclamate in 1969 after lab tests in rats indicated that large amounts of cyclamates could cause bladder cancer. Cyclamates are still used as sweeteners in many parts of the world, including Europe. It is marketed as Sugar Twin and Sweet'N Low in Canada.

Cyclamate has zero calories per gram and has a Glycemic Index index of zero, the same as saccharin. It is usually blended with saccharin which produces a more "sugar-like" taste. Cyclamate is not absorbed by the body and is probably safe in small quantities. It has been used for about 70 years and despite the fears, no side effects have been reported in humans. It is now believed not to cause cancer directly, but may increase the potency of other carcinogens so it is best to avoid this sweetener.

Aspartame (NutraSweet)

Aspartame was discovered in 1965 at the G.D. Searle company. A chemist was working on an anti-ulcer drug and accidentally spilled some aspartame, an intermediary product in generating a tetrapeptide of the hormone gastrin, on his hand. When he licked his finger, he noticed that it had a sweet taste.

Aspartame is derived from the two amino acids aspartic acid and phenylalanine. It is about 200 times as sweet as sugar. It is not stable when heated so is used as a tabletop sweetener or in frozen desserts, gelatins, beverages, and chewing gum. When cooked or stored at high temperatures, aspartame breaks down into its constituent amino acids.

This is also its metabolic path in the body. It is broken down into L-Aspartic Acid, L-Phenylalanine and Methanol. L-Aspartic Acid and L-Phenylalanine are two of the 23 amino acids our bodies use to build protein. L-Aspartic Acid can be manufactured by our bodies, so it is not an "essential" amino acid. L-Phenylalanine is considered "essential" and must be included in our diet. The genetic disorder, PKU or Phenylketonuria, is a disorder of the metabolism of Phenylalanine and requires those with this condition to closely monitor their intake of this amino acid. Too much Phenylalanine in the diet of someone with PKU can lead to intellectual disability, seizures, and other serious medical problems.

Aspartame is metabolized fully in the digestive tract and is not absorbed intact. L-Aspartic Acid and L-Phenylalanine are found naturally in many proteins and thus we routinely consume these in our diet. A typical "dose" of Aspartame found in a diet soda is about 180mg. This is equivalent to about 70mg of L-Aspartic Acid and about 90mg of L-Phenylalanine. A 12 ounce glass of milk contains about 1140mg of L-Aspartic Acid and about 650mg of L-Phenylalanine.

The third metabolite of aspartame is methanol. Here is where much of the controversy is centered. A typical diet soda produces about 20mg of methanol when the aspartame is broken down. Methanol is a toxic substance and when consumed in large quantities (adult doses in excess of 10 grams per day) can cause blindness and other serious complications. But with the diet soda the quantity is very low. Methanol is oxidized sequentially to formaldehyde, then to formic acid and finally to carbon dioxide. These three chemicals are found in many fruits and vegetables and/or are produced within the body or by gut bacteria as breakdown products of metabolism. The body has a means to eliminate the small amount of methanol produced without harm. A 12 ounce glass of orange juice contains about 36mg of methanol, or about twice that found in a similar serving of diet soda. The bodies own metabolic processes can handle several grams per day of methanol without toxic effects.

The safety of aspartame has been studied extensively, including animal studies, clinical and epidemiological research, and post marketing surveillance. Aspartame is one of the most rigorously tested food ingredients to date. Aspartame has been deemed safe for human consumption by over 100 regulatory agencies in their respective countries.

There are claims of many adverse reactions to aspartame, including increased risk of cancers and multiple sclerosis. Others claim that the amino acids in aspartame are chemically manipulated or the amount of methanol produced is toxic. There does not seem to be any hard scientific evidence to support these claims. The amino acids are joined as they would be in any protein and the amount consumed, even from drinking numerous diet soda a day, is not outside of what would be found in proteins from a typical diet. As mentioned above, the quantity of methanol is very low and easily handled by our bodies existing metabolic processes. The one area of concern, as with all artificial sweeteners, is the undocumented possibility that consuming "sweet" substances my alter our bodies processes for recognizing caloric intake and possibly causing an increase in sugar cravings with a subsequent increase in consumption.

A typical diet soda with Aspartame alone contains about 180 mg of aspartame. When combined with Acesulfame, it drops to about around 120 mg. Since aspartame is basically a "protein", consisting of two amino acids, it contains approximately 4 calories per gram, or essentially zero calories in a 12 ounce diet soda. Aspartame has a Glycemic Index of zero.

Aspartame & Acesulfame Potassium (Equal Original, TwinSweet)

Acesulfame potassium (Ace-K) is 200 times sweeter than sucrose and has a slightly bitter aftertaste. It is often blended with other sweeteners (usually aspartame or sucralose), which give a more sucrose-like taste, whereby each sweetener masks the other's aftertaste and also exhibits a synergistic effect in which the blend is sweeter than its components.

Unlike aspartame, acesulfame potassium is stable under heat, allowing it to be used in baking or in products that require a long shelf life. It is also used as a sweetener in protein shakes and pharmaceutical products, especially chewable and liquid medications, where it can make the active ingredients more palatable.

One of the major concerns expressed about this sweetener is that it contains methylene chloride, a known carcinogen. Methylene Chloride is used as a solvent in the manufacture of acesulfame but is tested for in the final purity testing of acesulfame and is not detected. The limits of testing for methylene chloride is 40 parts per billion, so the maximum undetected would be 0.0016 micrograms (1 millionth of a gram) in a 12 ounce diet soda. Actual quantity of methylene chloride present is probably much less since it is a highly volatile substance and would be lost during final synthesis of acesulfame. Methylene Chloride is metabolized in the liver and human systems are capable of handling these amounts of methylene chloride safely. Although it is best to avoid exposure when possible, methylene chloride is found in other foods at higher concentrations, such as beer, decaf and some spices as well as in the background air (exposure as high as 30-300 micrograms per day).

Acesulfame is not metabolized by the body and is excreted mainly via the kidneys (95%) with the remainder in the feces. One minor breakdown product is acetoacetamide. In large doses, it has been shown to affect the thyroid in rats, rabbits, and dogs. This may be one reason to avoid this no calorie sweetener however exposure to this breakdown product is almost negligible from acesulfame used as a sweetener.

Of all the artificial sweeteners, acesulfame-K has undergone the least scientific scrutiny and other sweeteners are available so this may be one to use in moderation, if at all, for now.

Neotame

Neotame is not sold to the consumer market. Food producers mainly use it. It is chemically related to aspartame, but the difference confers greater chemical stability, enabling this new sweetener to be used in baked foods. It is not metabolized into its related amino acids, as aspartame is, and is eliminated quickly. It is de-esterified and eliminated in the urine and feces. Neotame is 7,000 to 13,000 times as sweet as sugar, depending on the use, and 40 times sweeter than aspartame so the dose needed is significantly less than with other sweeteners. It has zero calories and a Glycemic Index of zero. Since it is not broken down into its two constituent amino acids, unlike aspartame, there are no concerns for use in PKU.

Over 100 corporate-sponsored studies were conducted on Neotame to prove its safety prior to FDA approval. Neotame is one of only two artificial sweeteners ranked as “safe” by the consumer advocacy group Center for Science in the Public Interest. It is not used in diet soda currently but based on its sweetness the dose would be about 5mg in a 12 ounce can.

Neotame’s main concern seems to be guilt by association. Because it is a chemical derivative of aspartame, critics of that product are also negative towards Neotame. However, given the number of products containing Neotame now on the market, there have been few reported side effects. The main reason for this may be the tiny amount of the sweetener per serving. Unless new information arises, it appears to be safe.

Stevia (Truvia)

Stevia has been widely used as a natural sweetener in South America for centuries. It is an herb native to Paraguay that is about 150 times sweeter than sugar. It has been found in many studies to be completely safe. It even has some health benefits. It appears to improve insulin sensitivity to fight obesity and diabetes and can reduce hypertension.

Stevia comes in many forms. It comes dried, powdered, and in a concentrated liquid extract. Due to its characteristics of zero glycemic index and zero calories, it is fast becoming popular world-wide. Stevia consists of two active components, rebaudioside (Reb A) and stevioside. Most studies of Stevia have shown it to be completely safe, but most of the research on long-term use with stevia extracts has been done with stevioside, not rebaudioside A or Rebiana, the ingredient in most Stevia brands on the market. Much is known about the safety of stevioside (the extract used for years in Japan), but more information is needed about the extracts that are in use today. Stevia contains 80% stevioside and 8% rebaudioside A. Like any sweetener, Stevia should be used in moderation and not consumed in large doses.

Since Stevia is a plant based natural sweetener, there are a growing number of Stevia options on the market; however, not all are the same in quality, taste, bitterness or sweetness. Most powdered versions have some form of sugar as a "filler" since the dose of Stevia is very small and needs to be "bulked up" with another powder.

Clearly, Stevia is a good alternative to the other artificial sweeteners on the market as well as a good alternative to sugar. It has no calories, a Glycemic Index of zero and is appropriate for people with sugar regulation problems.

Sucralose (Splenda)

Sucralose is a chlorinated sugar that is about 600 times as sweet as sugar. It is produced from sucrose when three chlorine atoms replace three hydroxyl groups. It is used in beverages, frozen desserts, chewing gum, baked goods, and other foods. It is stable when heated and can therefore be used in baked and fried goods. About 15% of sucralose is absorbed by the body and most of it passes out of the body unchanged, suggesting a reduced risk of toxicity. Sucralose is extremely insoluble in fat and, therefore does not accumulate in fatty tissues; sucralose also does not break down and will dechlorinate only under conditions that are not found in the body. The FDA approved sucralose in 1998.

There are few safety concerns pertaining to sucralose. In determining the safety of sucralose, the FDA reviewed data from more than 110 studies in humans and animals. Many of the studies were designed to identify possible toxic effects, including carcinogenic, reproductive, and neurological effects. No such effects were found, and FDA's approval is based on the finding that sucralose is safe for human consumption.

Most of the controversy surrounding sucralose is focused not on safety but on the marketing of Splenda, a sucralose sweetener. It has been marketed with the slogan, "Splenda is made from sugar, so it tastes like sugar." Sugar manufacturers objected to what this slogan implied. Sucralose has zero calories and a Glycemic Index of zero. Splenda contains dextrose or maltodextrin as bulking agents and has about 3 calories per gram.

Advantame

Advantame is a high-intensity artifical sweetener based on aspartame, similar to neotame but modified with isovanillin instead of a dimethylbutyl group. These additions block the breakdown of the aspartame group into the two amino acids, aspartic acid and phenylalanine. It is about 20,000 times sweeter than sugar and was approved by the FDA in 2014.

Although studies generally show it to be safe, its tie to aspartame has automatically made it suspect. Much of the concerns are based on the supposed problems with aspartame, not on anything found specifically with advantame. Further testing is sure to be in the works.

Some other, less common, artificial sweeteners

Erythritol

Erythritol is a sugar alcohol that is about 70 percent as sweet as sugar. It occurs naturally in some fruits, but virtually all of the erythritol used as a food additive is produced by fermenting glucose. Many companies use it to bulk up other sweeteners and mask their unpleasant after-tastes, such as rebiana (from stevia), aspartame, and sucralose. It contains about 0.2 calories per gram and has a Glycemic Index of zero.

Other than occasional allergic reactions, the main safety concern about erythritol is that eating too much of it could cause nausea. Erythritol’s relative safety is due to its being mostly absorbed into the bloodstream and excreted unchanged in urine. Because 90% of erythritol is absorbed before it enters the large intestine, it does not normally cause laxative effects, as are often experienced after consumption of other sugar alcohols.

Sorbitol

Sorbitol naturally occurs in fruit and is a close relative of sugar. It is about 60 percent as sweet as sugar. Moderate amounts of sorbitol are safe, but large amounts may have a strong laxative effect and even cause diarrhea. The FDA requires foods “whose reasonably foreseeable consumption may result in a daily ingestion of 50 grams of sorbitol” to bear the label statement: “Excess consumption may have a laxative effect.” Sorbitol may aggravate irritable bowel syndrome and other gastrointestinal conditions even from small ingested amounts. Sorbitol has 2.6 calories per gram and a Glycemic Index of nine (glucose = 100). It is generally considered safe.

Xylitol

Xylitol resembles sugar in consistency and taste, but has only 2.4 calories/gm and a Glycemic Index of seven. It is a great sugar alternative, much like sorbitol. It is as sweet as sugar, but is a sugar alcohol, which can cause intestinal problems. Xylitol is found in fruits and vegetables, but most is made from corn. Birch tree derived xylitol is a great alternative for those who want to avoid corn based products.

Xylitol is used mainly as a sugar substitute in chewing gums, because it produces fewer cavities and reduces plaque. Xylitol may also inhibit cavities by denying plaque bacteria the sugar they need to erode tooth enamel. Xylitol may also help control yeast infections, such as thrush.

Daily consumption of more than 25g of xylitol may cause diarrhea. It can also cause other gastrointestinal issues, such as gas and bloating. Xylitol is generally considered safe, having no known toxicity in humans. It is, however, toxic to dogs with ingestion frequently being fatal.

Monk Fruit Extract

Monk fruit extract is 300 times sweeter than sucrose but contains no calories and has a Glycemic Index of zero. Monk fruit extract can be used in baking as well as in anything calling for sugar. It is combined with erythritol (discussed above) to produce a product that looks and tastes like sugar and can be substituted one-to-one. The sweet taste of the fruit comes mainly from mogrosides, a group of glycosides that make up about 1% of the flesh of the fresh fruit. No incidents of negative side effects of Monk fruit have been reported.

Final Words

In summary, most of these sweeteners are probably safe when used in moderation. The problems seem mainly to arise when taken in larger doses or for extended periods of time, such as when consumed in beverages as a substitute for sugar. Although they help reduce the caloric intake in a person's diet, there is the possible issues with confusion of the food reward pathways, particularly with the sweeteners that contain no calories. Sweetness decoupled from caloric content offers partial, but not complete, activation of the food reward pathways. Activation of the hedonic component may contribute to increased appetite. We seek food to satisfy the inherent craving for sweetness, even in the absence of energy need. Lack of complete satisfaction, likely because of the failure to activate the postingestive component, further fuels the food seeking behavior. Reduction in the reward response may contribute to obesity by increasing overall caloric intake to compensate for the lack of closure in this cycle.

It seems that, once again, it is best to reduce total sugar (and sweetener) intake and thus reduce the craving for sweet foods, rather than try to substitute another, lower calorie, sweetener for sugar. This ultimately will reduce the total caloric intake and give the desired result of weight loss. This is easier said than done, however, in that we all, to varying degrees, have a sweet tooth. We can not have our cake and eat it too! Moderation is the key, not trying to fool our bodies.

1 Corinthians 6:12 (NIV) “I have the right to do anything,” you say—but not everything is beneficial. “I have the right to do anything”—but I will not be mastered by anything.

Friday, April 8, 2016

AZUSA NOW

TheCall has been bringing together the body of Christ for 15 years now and it is culminating in AZUSA NOW tomorrow, April 9th, 2016, on the 110th anniversary of the Azusa Street Revival of 1906 here in Los Angeles. 120,000 will be filling the LA Memorial Coliseum to fast and pray for the fulfillment of a prophetic word from William Seymour at that Revival - "In 100 years there will come a great outpouring of the Holy Spirit far eclipsing that of this Azusa Street Revival".

Lou Engle, the founder of TheCall, says that the prophecy "Is overdue but it is time!" Azusa NOW.


Make Us ONE as You are ONE
Not just Azusa then but AZUSA NOW

Learn, Watch and Pray - visit TheCall or GOD TV for more information.

Wednesday, March 9, 2016

Are Nature's Other Sweeteners Better?

The room had no windows. It was dark, except for a lone covered incandescent that hung by a wire from the ceiling. Its light shown on an old square table and a battered wooden chair in the middle of the room. Moving close, the detective grabbed the shade and bent the glaring beam into the face of the accused, getting almost nose to nose with the suspect sitting hunched over in the chair. "Where were you on the night of the 21st?" he asked in an accusatory tone. "I've been framed" said the perpetrator. The detective knew the case was weak but everyone was looking for someone to pin this crime on, anyone but themselves...

And so starts the story of how Sugar became a bad word in the dietary world and a string of alternatives were born. Are they any better? We will look at the natural alternatives to sugar in this story and see if we can find any benefits or uncover any harm to replacing sugar in our diets.

The main suspects in this story are:

  • Honey
  • Corn Syrup
  • High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS)
  • Agave Nectar (syrup)

Honey is a sweet food made by bees from the nectar of flowers. The variety produced by honey bees (the genus Apis) is the one most commonly referred to, as it is the type of honey collected by most beekeepers and consumed by people. Honeys are also produced by other hymenopteran insects, though in much lower quantities and with slightly different properties compared to honey from bees. Honey bees convert nectar into honey by regurgitation and evaporation and store it as a primary food source in wax honeycombs inside the beehive.

Honey gets its sweetness from fructose and glucose. It has a slightly higher ratio of fructose to glucose than table sugar, close to 1.2:1, depending on the source. This makes honey slightly sweeter than sugar, thus less is required. Honey has attractive chemical properties for baking and a distinctive flavor that leads some people to prefer it over sugar and other sweeteners. Most microorganisms do not grow in honey because of its low water content (< 20%) but it sometimes contains dormant endospores of the bacterium Clostridium botulinum, which can be dangerous to infants (botulism). Because it is a natural product by definition, the types and percentages of sugars contained can vary greatly depending on the source of the honey. It also can contain other ingredients, such as organic and amino acids, antioxidants, proteins, as well as trace amounts of vitamins and minerals.

Honey is available in many forms and nectar types. The most common form is filtered and pasteurized honey, the kind usually found at the market, which is generally a clear or slightly opaque amber liquid. Another popular form is raw or unfiltered honey which typically will contain crystals of glucose and may appear solid.


The Problem is not the Sugars Themselves
It is Eating Too Many Empty Sugar Calories

Corn syrup is a food syrup which is made from corn starch. It softens texture, adds volume, prevents crystallization of sugar, and enhances flavor. It contains primarily glucose, maltose and longer chain oligosaccharides. It is made by enzymatically splitting the long chain starch molecules. It does not naturally contain fructose. It can be found in your local market flavored with Vanilla or Molasses. It is a pure syrup. It does not naturally contain any proteins, vitamins or minerals.

High-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) is a sweetener made from corn syrup that has been further processed by glucose isomerase to convert some of its glucose into fructose. HFCS was first marketed in the early 1970s by the Clinton Corn Processing Company, together with the Japanese research institute where the enzyme was discovered.

As a sweetener, HFCS is often compared to granulated sugar. Advantages of HFCS over granulated sugar include being easier to handle, and being less expensive in some countries. However, there is also widespread debate concerning whether HFCS presents greater health risks than other sweeteners. Use of HFCS peaked in the late 1990s; demand decreased due to public concern about a possible link between HFCS and metabolic diseases like obesity and diabetes. It contains either 42% or 55% fructose, with the remaining sugar primarily as glucose. In reality it is much closer to table sugar in its fructose/glucose composition.

Agave nectar (more accurately called Agave syrup) is a sweetener commercially produced from several species of agave, including Agave tequilana (blue agave) and Agave salmiana. Agave syrup is sweeter than honey due to its higher fructose concentration and tends to be less viscous. Most Agave syrup comes from Mexico and South Africa. It is considered a "natural" sweetener by some but is more processed than table sugar.

Agave syrup has been marketed as a "healthful" sweetener due to the low glycemic index of fructose. This concept has been criticized due to its very high fructose content, even higher than high fructose corn syrup, and its potential to lead to insulin resistance and significantly increased triglyceride level, a risk factor for heart disease. Agave syrup, depending on the method of preparation, has anywhere from 56% to as much as 90% fructose.

Overall there is strong scientific evidence that the over-consumption of added sugars, as sucrose or any of these other sweeteners, is a major health problem. Consuming empty sugar calories, especially in the form of soft drinks, is strongly linked to obesity. The World Health Organization has recommended that people limit their consumption of added sugars to 10% of total calories, but typical consumption of empty calories in the United States is nearly twice that level.

Excessive sugar or glucose intake can lead to obesity and Type 2 Diabetes. Fructose does not affect insulin levels, is metabolized mainly in the liver. It is converted into triglycerides and stored as fat. Excess fructose increases the likelihood of fatty liver disease and insulin resistance.

Fructose is sweeter than sucrose or glucose so products high in fructose taste sweeter and smaller amounts may be used. Percentages listed below can vary as some of these products are more natural or less processed than regular sugar.

Carbohydrate Percentages
Average
Carbohydrates(%)
    Fructose         Glucose       Sucrose     Maltose    Oligosaccharides 
Honey 38.2% 31.3% 1.3% 7.1% 1.5%
Corn Syrup 0.0% 26.0% 0.0% 24.0% 50.0%
HFCS 42% or 55% 53% or 40% 0.0% 0.0% 5.0%
Agave Syrup 56%-90% <20% 0.0% 0.0% 5%-30%

A plethora of variations of these syrups and other carbohydrates are used in the food industry to improve the sweetness, texture, appearance or shelf life of many products. Other than the fact that Honey does contain some beneficial impurities (amino acids, vitamins and minerals), and less fructose seems to be better, any of these can be used in place of sugar. The real perpetrator in this case is excess carbohydrate consumption and your body is the victim. You need to check the calories as carbohydrates and look at the ingredient list to see where sugar or HFCS is listed to help reduce your carb calories.

Proverbs 16:24 (NLT) - Kind words are like honey — sweet to the soul and healthy for the body.

Proverbs 25:16 (NLT) - Do you like honey? Don't eat too much, or it will make you sick!