Health & Science
The Tao of Stevia
Sizing up the latest entrant in the zero-calorie sweetener market.
-
- |
-
- |
- |
- 6
What fro-yo addict worth her Pinkberry card wouldn’t kill for a zero-calorie sweetener that doesn’t cause bladder cancer or carry the faint taste of rubber? And if it comes straight from the earth and not from the corridors of a scary laboratory? Why, even better.
That’s the edge stevia-derived Rebiudioside-A, the latest entrant in the zero-calorie sweetener market, has claimed over its pastel competitors: It’s totally 100-percent natural. Or so say the labels on Truvia and other newly popular sweeteners that use Reb-A, a “high purity” component of stevia, as their main ingredient. But is stevia really as pure and natural as manufacturers’ labels would have us believe? And, not unimportantly, how does it taste?
Indigenous South Americans have known of the sweetening powers of Stevia rebaudiana, which comes from the leaves of a South American shrub, for centuries, and the Japanese have cultivated it since the 1970s.
But stevia’s record in this country has always been spotty. It was banned by the FDA in 1991 after a study on rats showed adverse effects on fertility and even possible DNA damage. In 1995, four years after declaring stevia an “unsafe food additive,” the FDA softened this controversial ruling and allowed the importation of stevia, but only as a “dietary supplement,” meaning you had to hunt it down in the vitamin aisle. More than a decade later—in an astonishing stroke of corporate coincidence, soon after Pepsi, Coke, and related titans got involved—the FDA changed its tune again, granting Reb-A GRAS (“generally recognized as safe”) status.
And just like that, with a speed befitting its own scene in The Informant!, Reb-A was everywhere. Within nine months of gaining FDA approval last December, stevia derivatives had claimed about 10 percent of the sugar-substitute market. Market research has identified more than 110 new food, drink, and personal-care products made with stevia in 2009 alone. A recent tabulation put the stevia market at $100 million this year; another study predicted that this figure will grow to $700 million in the next five years. For now, Reb-A is still expensive—it costs more than twice as much as high-fructose corn syrup—but analysts expect the price to drop with the spike in demand.
But not everyone is feeling the stevia fever. Advocacy groups like the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) have objected to the FDA’s rushed approval of Reb-A. Last summer, CSPI demanded more extensive testing before the release of Reb-A on to the marketplace, but by then there was too much money on the table to stem the tide.
These misgivings have done little to deter the many food and beverage makers scrambling to claim their corner of the stevia market. The two biggest-money entrants are Truvia (“Nature’s Calorie-Free Sweetener,” the lovechild of Cargill and Coca-Cola) and PureVia (“All Natural Zero Calorie Sweetener,” brought to you by Pepsi and the makers of Equal). There’s also Sweet Leaf (“America’s first 100% Natural Alternative to Artificial Sweeteners”), Sun Crystals (a combination of “cane sugar and the stevia plant—two of nature’s wonders under the same sun”), Stevia Extract in the Raw … and this is just at my local Safeway.
So how do all these new stevia permutations taste? If, as it’s been anointed, Reb-A really is the “holy grail” of the no-cal-sweetener market, it has to be pretty delicious—not that the extreme nastiness of aspartame did much to dim its popularity.
SNL: Equal Opportunity Objectifiers
Jon Hamm spent most of the Saturday Night Live episode he hosted last night shirtless.
Confessions of a Woman Comedy Writer
Allison Silverman accepts one from New York Women in Film & Television (and tells us why it's rare).
Comments
Sweetening green tea
By: Celeste | Fri, 10/30/2009 - 09:41
I have never had sweetened green tea - it is generally drunk unadulterated. Is it possible that this is what caused the strange aftertaste? I would be more interested in knowing how the stevia held up when put into other foods like cakes, cookies, and confections. As well as how it stands up to freezing and high temperature cooking methods.
Uh, research?
By: schamber | Thu, 10/29/2009 - 17:50
Why doesn't the author of this piece mention that Stevia (as a chemically-modified extract) has been used, apparently safely, in Japan since the 80s?
research indicates safety
By: measy | Thu, 10/29/2009 - 16:19
I have read several scientific review articles and clinical studies on stevia and constituents. Based on those studies, I would say that the safety profile looks good. Why did the author not mention them? You can find them on Medline at www.pubmed.gov. Search for "stevia."
STEVIA
By: partsmom | Thu, 10/29/2009 - 04:29
I have used Stevia from the health food stores for years, and have never noticed an aftertaste, nor any problems that appear to be related to it. On the other hand, Sucrolose scares me; I have had severe digestive problems that are definitely related to even small quantities of it. A friend who brought me some sucrolose-sweetened candy chocolates after his family-owned candy factory started to make it warned me not to eat more than two pieces at a time.
I'm Not Seeing The Downsides Here
By: Dubious | Wed, 10/28/2009 - 21:45
To begin with I followed the link about bladder cancer, and while there may be some social associations between saccharine and bladder cancer, the research says that it's only the case in rats, and we don't share the traits that cause the problem. That in and of itself eroded credibility about how Reb-A (why do I feel like stevia should be sold in boxes decorated like the General Lee of Dukes of Hazzard fame?) might be some lurking horror show we don't know anything about, simply by declaring how it could maybe possibly be in some way harmful despite the fact that all evidence we have so far suggests it isn't.
Secondarily, I've had a serious sweet tooth for the majority of my life, and I've used sugar, aspartame, saccharin, Splenda, and stevia, as well as honey and various other substitutes (not all of them calorie-free). Stevia I found to be unacceptable at first, but not nearly so much as Splenda- the latter always struck me as having a rather unusual, powdery aftertaste that I wanted to avoid. Prior to switching to Sun Crystals, I'd been using a mixture of two pink and one blue packets, which produced an extremely sweet mixture- the sort where you get a whiff of the combined dust and it's like a mouthful of sugar. The immediate switch to stevia was not pleasant simply because it didn't appear to match this high powered combination. I also found that it had that odd aftertaste. But once I'd spent a couple weeks using it, I quickly became accustomed to the taste.It still isn't nearly as strong, but I've acclimated to the subtler sweetness, and the only time that I get the aftertaste is if there's too much relative to whatever I'm sweetening.
At this point I would personally say stevia is no worse than any other sweetener out there, artificial, zero calorie, or otherwise: each one has their own benefits, pitfalls, and risks, and it's entirely up to the individual to find out what both satisfies their cravings for sweet stuff and offers an acceptable level of risk.
What Happened to Splenda?
By: Happy Married Guy | Wed, 10/28/2009 - 14:00
Personally, I love Splenda/Sucralose. It tastes great...no aftertaste and is relatively unblemished by scientific research. (Even the conspiracy nuts don't seem too hard on it)
What niche does Stevia even hope to fill? This has always confused me. It is a product with an admitted (and nasty) aftertaste and the FDA looks pretty sketchy.