Half-truth in advertising Until now, it's been relatively easy to stay away from undesirable sweeteners: Just look for the terms "sucralose," "aspartame," or "high-fructose" on the label of any given product, and if it's listed, put it back. But things are about to get a whole lot more complicated on the sweetener front. Several new products claiming to be "natural sweeteners" are set to launch this year, starting with one called Cweet. It starts out natural enough: This product is primarily derived from an African plant called brazzein. But in order to patent it, the manufacturers have to chemically alter it in some way -- a point that's barely acknowledged in most of the information I've read about it. For example, at the tail end of one of the articles on this new "natural" sweetener comes the following revelation: "…A series of patents have been filed on the ingredient…Some of these reference a synthetically produced peptide." Which makes Cweet about as natural as its spelling. But Cweet's manufacturer claims that since they're using the brazzein fruit as the basis for the product, they can justify referring to it as "natural." So they're forging ahead with their plans to get Cweet on the market later this year, after the FDA has reviewed its application for GRAS (generally recognized as safe) status. Forgive the pun, but something about Cweet just leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Even if it does meet the FDA's requirements for GRAS status, it's still chemically manipulated from its original form. And as Dr. Wright always reminds us, that certainly can't be GOOD for your health. You're much better off sticking to sweeteners like stevia and lo- han that truly live up to their all-natural claims. Sources:
"New natural HI sweetener could rival aspartame, sucralose," FoodNavigator (www.foodnavigator.com), 5/11/07
"Will 'Cweet' be the next big sweetener?" Dr. Mercola's eHealthy News You Can Use (www.mercola.com), 12/1/07 | 
