 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsGeneral TopicsLow CarbWeightWatchers WeightAdviser.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Weight Loss Forum / General Topics / June 2004Where you CAN'T find Sweet-n-Low....
I just saw a TV commercial for Sweet-n-Low, in which they show aliens on another planet using their product. During said commercial, they claim "Sweet-n-Low is EVERYWHERE!" I'm here to tell you it's NOT. I think there should be a web site where people can add the name and information nationwide about public establishments wherein you CANNOT flavor your iced tea with a "pink one." In Tucson Arizona there is a WONDERFUL sandwich place called Beyond Bread. Absolutely the BEST sandwiches you've ever had. My wife LOVES the place, and wants me to take her there all the time. I love their sandwiches, but actually tell her, "Let's go someplace else. Remember, honey, they don't have Sweet-n-Low there." She usually ends up winning (those sandwiches are REALLY good) but I almost always put up a fight. If nine people think it's worthy, I'll create the web site.... Best regards, Pat > I just saw a TV commercial for Sweet-n-Low, in which they show aliens > on another planet using their product. During said commercial, they [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > If nine people think it's worthy, I'll create the web site.... Just curious as to what you'd use the Sweet-n-Low in? I say this because I have never used a packet of sugar or any other sweetener in a restaurant. In fact at home I might use sweeteners once or twice a year in some recipe.  SignatureType 2 http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ > > I just saw a TV commercial for Sweet-n-Low, in which they show aliens > > on another planet using their product. During said commercial, they [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > have never used a packet of sugar or any other sweetener in a restaurant. > In fact at home I might use sweeteners once or twice a year in some recipe. Just curious as to why the OP can't just carry a bunch of packs of her sweetener of choice with her. Now if you couldn't *get* unsweetened iced tea, that would be a drag, but this seems to me to be a non-issue with a little self-reliance. Martha SignatureBegin where you are - but don't end there. > Just curious as to why the OP can't just carry a bunch of packs of her sweetener of choice with her. Now if you couldn't *get* unsweetened iced tea, that would be a drag, but this seems to me to be a non-issue with a little self-reliance. Sometimes in the southern USA it's difficult, but still not impossible, to get your iced tea served w/o any sweetener (usually a lot of sugar) in it. bj > Sometimes in the southern USA it's difficult, but still not impossible, to > get your iced tea served w/o any sweetener (usually a lot of sugar) in it. I haven't had any problem in TX, except for the fact that they ask us "sweet or unsweet" and can't seem to distinguish the response. So I started responding, "no sugar" and haven't had a problem since. Signaturejamie (jamiemck@newsguy.com) "There's a seeker born every minute." Coffee or tea are very common uses for them. In news:10bqgm86v5q9na1@corp.supernews.com, Julie Bove <jnospambove@bestweb.net> stated | Just curious as to what you'd use the Sweet-n-Low in? I say this | because I have never used a packet of sugar or any other sweetener in [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] | Type 2 | http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ > Coffee or tea are very common uses for them. Oh. I can't stand any kind of sweetener in my coffee or tea. Ruins the taste, I think. SignatureType 2 http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ > I just saw a TV commercial for Sweet-n-Low, in which they show aliens > on another planet using their product. During said commercial, they [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > Best regards, > Pat If it's so important to have Sweet and Low, then why not carry a few packets just in case rather than skip going to places you love? >> I just saw a TV commercial for Sweet-n-Low, in which they show aliens >> on another planet using their product. During said commercial, they [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >If it's so important to have Sweet and Low, then why not carry a few packets >just in case rather than skip going to places you love? Beat me to it :-) Cheers, Alan, T2 d&e, Australia. Remove weight and carbs to email. SignatureEverything in Moderation - Except Laughter. > If it's so important to have Sweet and Low, then why not carry a few packets > just in case rather than skip going to places you love? do that with splenda! here are far fewer restaurants that offer splenda than the pink crap > If it's so important to have Sweet and Low, then why not carry a few packets > just in case rather than skip going to places you love? I always carry my own Splenda for example. Lotsa people do this. It's not a big deal. > I just saw a TV commercial for Sweet-n-Low, in which they show aliens > on another planet using their product. During said commercial, they > claim "Sweet-n-Low is EVERYWHERE!" I'm here to tell you it's NOT. There are better sweeteners. Stevia is a natural plant that is 10 - 12 times sweeter then sugar( the extract is 300 times sweeter ), has virtually no calories, has been used by Native Americans safely for centuries and has been used safely by Japan for over 2 decades. There are also sugar alchohols like xlyotol ( sp? ) that do not pass through the intestine so are non caloric. > > I just saw a TV commercial for Sweet-n-Low, in which they show aliens > > on another planet using their product. During said commercial, they [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > by Native Americans safely for centuries and has been used safely by > Japan for over 2 decades. Nonsense! Let's not get back to this again! > There are also sugar alchohols like xlyotol ( sp? ) that do not pass > through the intestine so are non caloric. They're also laxatives. SignatureType 2 http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ Steve wrote in message ... >There are better sweeteners. > >Stevia is a natural plant that is 10 - 12 times sweeter then sugar( the >extract is 300 times sweeter ), has virtually no calories, has been used >by Native Americans safely for centuries and has been used safely by >Japan for over 2 decades. . . .and is banned as a food additive in the U.S. and Europe because it is regarded as too dangerous. BTW: I note that the stomach cancer rate in Japan is about 8 times higher than the stomach cancer rate in the U.S. and the liver cancer rate is about 14 - 17 times higher. Regards Old Al > Steve wrote in message ... > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > . . .and is banned as a food additive in the U.S. and Europe because it > is regarded as too dangerous. It was banned for a while back in the 80's. It is not banned anymore and hasn't been for a while. You can get it through any health food store or online. > BTW: I note that the stomach cancer rate in Japan is about 8 times higher > than the stomach cancer rate in the U.S. and the liver cancer rate is about > 14 - 17 times higher. Citations? Do you have any evidence that it is from Stevia use? I heard the same statistics used to blame Janpanese consumption of large amounts of sodium. I also heard soy used as the culprit for these statistics. Steve More false crap from Momma Betty's Stevia pushing scammers YES, it IS illegal to import it it is illegal to sell it as a sweetener it is illegal to sell it in foods Like all the snake oil scams, it , like Ephedra was, and bitter orange still is, salable as a "supplement". In MOST of the world, it is outright BANNED AND you scamming piece of pond scum, Saccharine was never banned. >> Steve wrote in message ... >> [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > Steve Signature"...in addition to being foreign territory the past is, as history, a hall of mirrors that reflect the needs of souls observing from the present" Glen Cook > YES, it IS illegal to import it No, it's not. From the FDA's documentation, "If stevia is to be used in a dietary supplement for a technical effect, such as use as a sweetener or flavoring agent, and is labeled as such, it is considered an unsafe food additive. However, in the absence of labeling specifying that stevia is being or will be used for a technical effect, use of stevia as a dietary ingredient in a dietary supplement is not subject to the food additive provisions of the FD&C Act." http://www.fda.gov/ora/fiars/ora_import_ia4506.html Here's a billion dollare idea: Sell a carbonated, cola flavored "dietary supplement" which is unsweetened but contains the supplement stevia. --Hua Kul huaREMOVEkul@hotmail.com A lot of what has been said about stevia is out of date and/or flat out wrong. Stevia is a native American herb whose leaves are 10 times sweeter then sugar. The extracts are 300 times sweeter then sugar. The leaves and the extracts have virtually no calories. Given these things, given that stevia is a natural product -> not a sweetner made in a chemlab, and that stevia requires only a fraction of the processing that sugar does makes many people believe its FDA status as a supplement rather then a sweetener is a result of the sugar growers lobbying the FDA. Japan and Europe have been using it for about 20 years. The Paraguay Indians have used the plant for several centuries. I originally mentioned it in this thread in the spirit of being helpful. I am not selling anything. If you are interested in learning more about stevia I recommend this book: Stevia Rebaudiana : Natures Sweet Secret by David Richard ISBN: 1890612154 It is packed with citations and it is not published by a company whose business has anything to do with stevia. SignatureSteve http://www.geocities.com/beforewisdom/ "The great American thought trap: It is not real unless it can be seen on television or bought in a shopping mall" I am not sure that I speak for myself alone, but the stevia issue has been around for at least 8 years, and no one has been able to show any value of this stuff for a diabetic. Why don't you leave the diabetics alone, and quit trying to shove your spam at us. Everything someone disagrees with you, and the whole issue has been debated for years, you and your kind have always come back with limp arguments, or character assassination. We really don't need this kind of reasoning, and since the bottom line appears that you want to capitalize from our troubles, it appears that we don't need you. >A lot of what has been said about stevia is out of date and/or flat out >wrong. Grateful to be back. Eddie MD OTF > I am not sure that I speak for myself alone, but the stevia issue has been > around for at least 8 years, and no one has been able to show any value of this > stuff for a diabetic. I wasn't suggesting it for diabetics in particular. 8 year old nutrition might not be accurate IMHO > Why don't you leave the diabetics alone, and quit trying > to shove your spam at us. One more time. I am not selling a product. Get over yourself. Steve http://www.geocities.com/beforewisdom/ "The great American thought trap: It is not real unless it can be seen on television or bought in a shopping mall" One more time No one believes you SO Take your spam and f.ck OFF <betty drool snipped> Signature"...in addition to being foreign territory the past is, as history, a hall of mirrors that reflect the needs of souls observing from the present" Glen Cook >> I am not sure that I speak for myself alone, but the stevia issue has been >> around for at least 8 years, and no one has been able to show any value of this >> stuff for a diabetic. > >I wasn't suggesting it for diabetics in particular. 8 year old >nutrition might not be accurate IMHO and yet you want us to place credence in your claim that it has been used by indians for centuries? http://www.fda.gov/ora/fiars/ora_import_ia4506.html >> Why don't you leave the diabetics alone, and quit trying >> to shove your spam at us. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >"The great American thought trap: It is not real unless it can be seen >on television or bought in a shopping mall" RIGHT Steve and I have a bridge for sale, cheap > A lot of what has been said about stevia is out of date and/or flat out > wrong. <Betty drool snipped> YES Steve, EVERYTHING you say is fraudulent Signature"...in addition to being foreign territory the past is, as history, a hall of mirrors that reflect the needs of souls observing from the present" Glen Cook Not exactly. http://www.cspinet.org/nah/4_00/stevia.html Jennifer > A lot of what has been said about stevia is out of date and/or flat out > wrong. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Japan and Europe have been using it for about 20 years. The Paraguay > Indians have used the plant for several centuries. > Given these things, given that stevia is a natural product -> not a > sweetner made in a chemlab, and that stevia requires only a fraction of > the processing that sugar does makes many people believe its FDA status > as a supplement rather then a sweetener is a result of the sugar growers > lobbying the FDA. Horseshit. Unrefined stevia leaves taste like crap, and well-refined stevia extract certainly takes at least much processing as refined sugar does. I do use it sometimes combined with another sweetener, because it mainly has a sweet aftertaste that isn't too satisfying without another sweetener, unless you use dextrose-padded stevia packets which pretty much negates the point of using stevia in the first place. > Stevia Rebaudiana : Natures Sweet Secret > by David Richard > ISBN: 1890612154 I've had it for years. As you mentioned "outdated" information, that book was published in 1996, and several of the toxicity studies and documents listed in the bibliography for the European Commission's 1999 rejection of stevia were published in 1996 through 1999, after Richard's book was written. Signaturejamie (jamiemck@newsguy.com) "There's a seeker born every minute." A further problem with the Stevia pushers. The FDA does not regulate the purity of any of the "supplements" SO. much of what is sold as "refined Stevia" is plain sugar with a little anise flavor added. SO much easier that actually processing the real stuff. >>Given these things, given that stevia is a natural product -> not a >>sweetner made in a chemlab, and that stevia requires only a fraction of [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > rejection of stevia were published in 1996 through 1999, after Richard's > book was written. Signature"...in addition to being foreign territory the past is, as history, a hall of mirrors that reflect the needs of souls observing from the present" Glen Cook > The Paraguay Indians have used the plant for several centuries. The Paraguay Indians chewed the whole leaves (which taste like crap), for several centuries, therefore the highly refined stevia extract (the only stevia that doesn't taste like crap) is safe and "natural?" By this logic, cocaine is "safe and natural" because Peruvian Indians chewed coca leaves for hundreds of years. Signaturejamie (jamiemck@newsguy.com) "There's a seeker born every minute." http://www.fda.gov/ora/fiars/ora_import_ia4506.html cc'd by email More crap from the Stevia pushers YES oh stevia pusher, under the snake oil exemption you can sell it, but YOU CAB NOT IMPORT IT. You >>YES, it IS illegal to import it > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > --Hua Kul > huaREMOVEkul@hotmail.com Signature"...in addition to being foreign territory the past is, as history, a hall of mirrors that reflect the needs of souls observing from the present" Glen Cook > cc'd by email > > More crap from the Stevia pushers > > YES oh stevia pusher, under the snake oil exemption you can sell it, but > YOU CAB NOT IMPORT IT. Yes, you cab. "GUIDANCE : Districts may detain without physical examination all products identified on the attachment to this alert. If review of the labeling or import paperwork reveals stevia leaves, stevioside, or products containing stevioside, districts may detain these items without physical examination, unless explicitly labeled as a dietary supplement, or for use solely as a dietary ingredient in the manufacture of a dietary supplement product." http://www.fda.gov/ora/fiars/ora_import_ia4506.html --Hua Kul Steve wrote in message ... >> Steve wrote in message ... >> [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > >Steve 1. Stevia is banned as a food additive in U.S. and Europe. http://www.fda.gov/ora/fiars/ora_import_ia4506.html http://www.cspinet.org/nah/4_00/stevia.html ". . . .Cancer. In the laboratory, steviol can be converted into a mutagenic compound, which may promote cancer by causing mutations in the cells? genetic material (DNA). . . .? 2. Stomach/Liver Cancer rates in Japan are extraordinarily high http://www.truehealth.org/acompar1.html 3. Who knows if the cancer-causing compounds derived from Stevia contribute to high cancer rates in Japan. Who cares? *** The point is that the Japanese government doesn't care! **** Thus the fact that Stevia is permitted as an OTC food additive in Japan does not testify to its safety. The Japanese government is extraordinarily cavalier about the health, welfare and safety of its citizens. Regards Old Al > Steve wrote in message ... > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > . . .and is banned as a food additive in the U.S. and Europe because it > is regarded as too dangerous. Was banned......years and years ago......as was saccharine( aka sweet-n-low ) Stevia has since proved safe. Beyond 20 years of heavy use in Japan it has also been used heavily in Europe and for hundreds of years by Paraguay Indians. It is sold in just about every health food store I have been in and I live in the US. > BTW: I note that the stomach cancer rate in Japan is about 8 times higher > than the stomach cancer rate in the U.S. and the liver cancer rate is about > 14 - 17 times higher. I've heard high consumption of sodium blamed for these statistics. I've also heard high consumption of soy blamed for these statistics. Do you have any evidence that Japanese stomach cancer is caused by what you say it is caused by? Do you have any citations for your statistics. > > Steve wrote in message ... > > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Was banned......years and years ago......as was saccharine( aka > sweet-n-low ) Now you're lying Steve! > Stevia has since proved safe. Beyond 20 years of heavy use in Japan it > has also been used heavily in Europe and for hundreds of years by > Paraguay Indians. It's banned in Europe. Another lie! > It is sold in just about every health food store I have been in and I > live in the US. Yeah. That's because it is illegal to sell it as a food. <snip> SignatureType 2 http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ > Was banned......years and years ago......as was saccharine( aka > sweet-n-low ) Saccharin was never banned in the US. Perhaps you're thinking of cyclamates, which was banned for one dubious study. Saccharin *almost* was banned for one dubious study (IIRC from the same source), but due to public outcry it was not banned. Cyclamates are under consideration for being unbanned in the US, as users of Canadian Sweet'n Low have not all developed horrible cancers grown two heads in the last 30 some-odd years since the US banned it. > Stevia has since proved safe. Beyond 20 years of heavy use in Japan it > has also been used heavily in Europe and for hundreds of years by > Paraguay Indians. Refined stevioside extracts (being mostly what is sold, because the leaf itself tastes like crap), was not used for hundreds of years by anybody. Saccharin, however has been in widespread use for 100 years, and for half of that period it was the only artificial sweetener available to diabetics. No health hazards have been found except the dubious study finding bladder cancer in a strain of lab rodents bred to be susceptible to bladder cancer. Signaturejamie (jamiemck@newsguy.com) "There's a seeker born every minute." >There are better sweeteners. Amazing, it looks such an innocuous statement. Watching to see; hopefully nothing. But I doubt it *sigh*. Cheers, Alan, T2 d&e, Australia. Remove weight and carbs to email. SignatureEverything in Moderation - Except Laughter. > There are better sweeteners. "Better" is an individual thang. I like aspartame. It's got nothing to do with which is healthier or whatnot, it just has to do with... I like aspartame. Most "cheap" places only have saccharin cause it's cheap. Most "good" places have sucralose cause it's the current favorite of msot folks. Therefore, I carry aspartame in my purse, so I can have the sweetener I want. SignatureAs you accelerate your food, it takes exponentially more and more energy to increase its velocity, until you hit a limit at C. This energy has to come from somewhere; in this case, from the food's nutritional value. Thus, the faster the food is, the worse it gets. -- Mark Hughes, comprehending the taste of fast food SCAM ALERT Another crossposting Stevia troll pushing poison Look a.shole take your Stevia and shove it - pushing poison in the diabetes this NG is not appreciated AND, as to sugar alcohols - lots of people have problems with them > <more sock puppet sh.t snipped> Signature"...in addition to being foreign territory the past is, as history, a hall of mirrors that reflect the needs of souls observing from the present" Glen Cook > SCAM ALERT > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > diabetes this NG is not appreciated > AND, as to sugar alcohols - lots of people have problems with them Stevia is not poison, there is ample documentation that it is a safe sweetner for those who care to look. My mentioning of it was in the spirit of a friendly tip. I gain or lose nothing if people choose to use it. You post is gratuitiously rude, misinformed, and narrow minded. Steve > Stevia is not poison, there is ample documentation that it is a safe > sweetner for those who care to look. There is more than ample documentation pointing out the dangers of it. > My mentioning of it was in the spirit of a friendly tip. I gain or lose > nothing if people choose to use it. How is telling us to eat poison a friendly tip? Do you even have diabetes? > You post is gratuitiously rude, misinformed, and narrow minded. And yours is just misinformed and narrow minded. SignatureType 2 http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ SCAM ALERT II more lies from Momma Betty and her Stevia Trolls Stevia is POISON It is BANNED in most of the world It is illegal to import it into the US It is illegal to sell it as a food it is illegal to sell it as a sweetener There is NO "documentation" that it is at all safe, just fraudulent claims by spammers like Steve >> SCAM ALERT >> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Steve Signature"...in addition to being foreign territory the past is, as history, a hall of mirrors that reflect the needs of souls observing from the present" Glen Cook > > SCAM ALERT > > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Stevia is not poison, there is ample documentation that it is a safe > sweetner for those who care to look. I don't have a canister in front of me right now, but doesn't the Curves Protein Shake contain stevia? Maybe I'm remembering wrong. If it is one of the ingredients, how do they get away with that if it's banned? Lee > My mentioning of it was in the spirit of a friendly tip. I gain or lose > nothing if people choose to use it. > > You post is gratuitiously rude, misinformed, and narrow minded. > > Steve <snip>> > I don't have a canister in front of me right now, but doesn't the > Curves Protein Shake contain stevia? Maybe I'm remembering wrong. If > it is one of the ingredients, how do they get away with that if it's > banned? > > Lee I doubt it However, if you give us the name f the product and it's manufacturer, we will be happy to notify the FDA and have them charged. Signature"...in addition to being foreign territory the past is, as history, a hall of mirrors that reflect the needs of souls observing from the present" Glen Cook ><snip>> >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > However, if you give us the name f the product and it's manufacturer, we > will be happy to notify the FDA and have them charged. Protein shakes fall under "supplements", I believe and it's okay to use stevia as a supplement ingredient as long as they don't say it's used as a sweetener. Signaturejamie (jamiemck@newsguy.com) "There's a seeker born every minute." > I just saw a TV commercial for Sweet-n-Low, in which they show aliens > on another planet using their product. During said commercial, they [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > If nine people think it's worthy, I'll create the web site.... stupidest idea i've heard all day. why can't you take your own damn sweet and low with you if you need it that badly? >> If nine people think it's worthy, I'll create the web site.... > >stupidest idea i've heard all day. why can't you take your own damn >sweet and low with you if you need it that badly? Concise, to the point, and totally offensive response. Feel better now? Bye, twit. X-post cut, so I'm afraid I won't see your predictable response. I'll just have to suffer the deprivation. Cheers, Alan -- > >> If nine people think it's worthy, I'll create the web site.... > > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > X-post cut, so I'm afraid I won't see your predictable response. I'll > just have to suffer the deprivation. you think it's a great idea or something? the guy's too f.cking lazy to carry his own artificial sweetener and you think that's ... what? worth defending? you must be almost as bright as he is. If you mean that particular restaurant doesn't have a sweetener you prefer/want to use, then complain to the owner. If you mean that S&L isn't available in the area, then complain to S&L's company. Or carry your own. bj > I just saw a TV commercial for Sweet-n-Low, in which they show aliens > on another planet using their product. During said commercial, they [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > Best regards, > Pat one word... Splenda :-) > I just saw a TV commercial for Sweet-n-Low, in which they show aliens > on another planet using their product. During said commercial, they [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > Best regards, > Pat Where you can't find splenda... most places! Starbucks uses it now... which is great. > one word... > > Splenda > > :-) >Where you can't find splenda... most places! >Starbucks uses it now... which is great. hence, I carry my own. :-) >> one word... >> >> Splenda >> >> :-) Me too! :o) > >Where you can't find splenda... most places! > >Starbucks uses it now... which is great. > > hence, I carry my own. :-) > I just saw a TV commercial for Sweet-n-Low, in which they show > aliens on another planet using their product. During said > commercial, they claim "Sweet-n-Low is EVERYWHERE!" I'm here to > tell you it's NOT. One place where you cannot find Sweet 'n'Low, my apartment. I prefer Sugar Twin. SignatureMarc http://www.marcmywords.com - "Traffic was stopped in New York City for over two hours yesterday About 30 years ago I was traveling through the Midwest and I stopped in a cafe for breakfast. I asked for some coffee and Sweet and Low. The waitress came back with coffee and a HUGE sweet roll. Before I could send it back my wife ate it! Whatever ever happened to Cyclamate? I loved cyclamate! >>I just saw a TV commercial for Sweet-n-Low, in which they show >>aliens on another planet using their product. During said [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > One place where you cannot find Sweet 'n'Low, my apartment. I > prefer Sugar Twin. Signaturehttp://homepage.mac.com/mkatzman/ >About 30 years ago I was traveling through the Midwest and I stopped in >a cafe for breakfast. I asked for some coffee and Sweet and Low. The >waitress came back with coffee and a HUGE sweet roll. Before I could >send it back my wife ate it! >Whatever ever happened to Cyclamate? >I loved cyclamate! Best post in this thread :-) Cheers, Alan, T2 d&e, Australia. Remove weight and carbs to email. SignatureEverything in Moderation - Except Laughter. cc'd by email Many years ago, thre was a study that seemed to link cyclamateds with a chance of cancer, and the FDA pulled it. The study was later found not to be accurate, but, by then, Monsanto had geared up Nutrisweet in the US, so they never reintroduced cyclamates. It is still available in Canada > About 30 years ago I was traveling through the Midwest and I stopped in > a cafe for breakfast. I asked for some coffee and Sweet and Low. The [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >> One place where you cannot find Sweet 'n'Low, my apartment. I >> prefer Sugar Twin. Signature"...in addition to being foreign territory the past is, as history, a hall of mirrors that reflect the needs of souls observing from the present" Glen Cook > Whatever ever happened to Cyclamate? > I loved cyclamate! It's still in use in Canada, in Canadian Sugar Twin. You can mailorder it from www.globaldrugs.com Signaturejamie (jamiemck@newsguy.com) "There's a seeker born every minute." > It's still in use in Canada, in Canadian Sugar Twin. > You can mailorder it from www.globaldrugs.com 33% sodium cyclamate. Yumm! Does come with a health warning. SignatureMarc http://www.marcmywords.com - Brother Maynard! Bring out the Holy Hand Grenade! I think the reason that the sweet in low isn't in a lot of places is because they want to save costs every which way they can. I won't drink tea unless they have sweet n low. Paul > I just saw a TV commercial for Sweet-n-Low, in which they show aliens > on another planet using their product. During said commercial, they [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > Best regards, > Pat > I just saw a TV commercial for Sweet-n-Low, in which they show aliens > on another planet using their product. During said commercial, they [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > Best regards, > Pat Pat, I personally cannot STAND the taste of sweet n low. To me it tastes like salt. I bring my own sweetener along for tea or coffee, because so many places still serve it. A few rare places use both, but almost nobody has splenda. So I bring my own in a little packet in my handbag for hubby and me. SignatureRegards, Evelyn Have you heard of the NO-CARB Diet for 2004? NO C-heney NO A-shcroft NO R-umsfeld NO B-ush (to reply to me personally, remove 'sox") oh my, i must borrow this! : Have you heard of the NO-CARB Diet for 2004? : : NO C-heney : NO A-shcroft : NO R-umsfeld : NO B-ush > oh my, i must borrow this! > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > : NO R-umsfeld > : NO B-ush But, it's missing the final line, ".....and ABSOLUTELY NO RICE!". Lee That's pretty damned gay. I like splenda, and I can put several packs in my purse to take with me everywhere. Not a difficult thing... > I just saw a TV commercial for Sweet-n-Low, in which they show aliens > on another planet using their product. During said commercial, they [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > Best regards, > Pat : That's pretty damned gay. i truly don't get this expression! rosie read and post wrote: > : That's pretty damned gay. > > i truly don't get this expression! It's a method of insulting a particular thing by insulting an entire group of people unrelated to the thing you're insulting. It's indicative of someone with extremely poor aim. Likely very low intelligence as well. SignatureAs you accelerate your food, it takes exponentially more and more energy to increase its velocity, until you hit a limit at C. This energy has to come from somewhere; in this case, from the food's nutritional value. Thus, the faster the food is, the worse it gets. -- Mark Hughes, comprehending the taste of fast food i figured as much! Signaturerosie Have you heard of the NO-CARB Diet for 2004? NO C-heney NO A-shcroft NO R-umsfeld NO B-ush : rosie read and post wrote: : [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] : It's indicative of someone with extremely poor aim. Likely very low : intelligence as well. "That's so gay..." I've heard that from the younger people. I don't know where it got started, but I really definitely don't approve of it. Come to think of it, "lame" is in common parlance now but has similar origins. Now nobody thinks of it when they say "lame", because few people use "lame" anymore to refer to someone with a physical disability. Then again, "gay" used to mean happy. I think that poster meant to say "queer" not "gay" weird = queer but then some people think queer = homosexual and then of course homosexual = gay Dave > "That's so gay..." > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Then again, "gay" used to mean happy. Nope. Every kid from my nephew to Kyle, Stan, Cartman and Kenny on South Park say "gay" when my generation would say "lame" or "stupid". Tonia 221/179/130 > I think that poster meant to say "queer" not "gay" > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > > > Then again, "gay" used to mean happy. > I think that poster meant to say "queer" not "gay" > > weird = queer > but then some people think queer = homosexual and then of course homosexual > = gay That was a pretty common expression used by teenagers in the 80's, at least in the Seattle area. Most of the ones I heard use it were using it in reference to things like a guy carrying a purse, wearing a pink shirt, curling or tinting their hair, wearing makeup, etc. Then there were the others who probably just used it because they thought it was a cool thing to say and had no idea what it meant. SignatureType 2 http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ > I think there should be a web site where people can add the name and > information nationwide about public establishments wherein you CANNOT > flavor your iced tea with a "pink one." [snipped] > If nine people think it's worthy, I'll create the web site.... If you're too weak to carry a few sweetener packets, I don't think a website is going to fix that. When I was young and my grandmother had diabetes NO restaurants had saccharin. She had enough sense to carry saccharin tablets with her for her tea. Signaturejamie (jamiemck@newsguy.com) "There's a seeker born every minute." aspartame > saccharin. sucralose >>>>>>>>> saccharin Saccharin is one of the most disgusting, foul, nasty *ss tastes I've ever subjected my poor body to. To me it tastes kind of this chemical flavor that does not register correctly on the taste buds... but some confuse this enigma flavor for a "sweet" taste. In addition to the chemical aka "sweet" taste, there is that HORRIBLE bitter / salty aftertaste. I would rather do without sweets if saccharin were my only choice. My sister actually likes that pink crap BETTER than blue or even yellow. Can you saccharin people please tell me WHY anyone still would use it, when there are numerous zero-calorie alternatives available that taste way better? Don't tell me you actually think saccharin tastes better than aspartame, or *gasp* sucralose? How can this be? The yellow packets are a god send for me. They taste almost exactly like sugar, plus I love the color & logo :). > I just saw a TV commercial for Sweet-n-Low, in which they show aliens > on another planet using their product. During said commercial, they [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > Best regards, > Pat > aspartame > saccharin. > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > The yellow packets are a god send for me. They taste almost exactly > like sugar, plus I love the color & logo :). I used to love Tab because of the nice bitter aftertaste the saccharine provided. I had to stop drinking the stuff when I was pregnant because saccharine crosses the placenta. I then moved to another state after I had the baby and couldn't find any Tab. So I just drank Diet Coke. I then moved to yet another state and was able to find Tab. I bought some and drank it. It didn't taste the same. It wasn't bad, but in fact it tasted pretty much like Diet Coke. I read the label. They are now making it with a combination of saccharine and Aspartame. Not worth paying the extra price to get it because I no longer get that nice bitter aftertaste I love! I know several others who were also hard core Tab drinkers before they made the change and they too loved the bitterness. SignatureType 2 http://users.bestweb.net/~jbove/ Because these things taste different to different people. In news:79154ab9.0406051827.494cfc70@posting.google.com, Aurora <aurora46@hotmail.com> stated | aspartame > saccharin. | [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] | The yellow packets are a god send for me. They taste almost exactly | like sugar, plus I love the color & logo :). > Saccharin is one of the most disgusting, foul, nasty *ss tastes I've ever subjected my poor body to. > Can you saccharin people please tell me WHY anyone still would use it, when there are numerous zero-calorie alternatives available that taste way better? Because we don't have the same reaction you do. I don't think it tastes foul. It doesn't give me any problems. I think it's fine. bj > > Saccharin is one of the most disgusting, foul, nasty *ss tastes I've ever > subjected my poor body to. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > I think it's fine. > bj For me, works best when combined with other sweeteners! Actually, I hate the Splenda taste in beverages! (Just the packet form, the others are nice.) Aurora, Taste is not an absolute, it is a matter of taste just because YOU don't like it doesn't mean others don't. > aspartame > saccharin. > [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] >>Best regards, >>Pat Signature"...in addition to being foreign territory the past is, as history, a hall of mirrors that reflect the needs of souls observing from the present" Glen Cook Sweet’N Low is made from sugar. Sweet’N Low Granulated Sugar Substitute – Packets Ingredients: Nutritive Dextrose, 3.6% http://www.sweetnlow.com/packets/index.html Uh, Marshall, learn to READ, it is NOT sugar, it is saccharine > Sweet’N Low is made from sugar. > Sweet’N Low Granulated Sugar Substitute – Packets [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > http://www.sweetnlow.com/packets/index.html Signature"...in addition to being foreign territory the past is, as history, a hall of mirrors that reflect the needs of souls observing from the present" Glen Cook It is both. > Uh, Marshall, learn to READ, it is NOT sugar, it is saccharine > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >> >> http://www.sweetnlow.com/packets/index.html SignatureWes Groleau Even if you do learn to speak correct English, whom are you going to speak it to? -- Clarence Darrow |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.