NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #27/NN_1992_27.iso/spool/talk/bizarre/38506

Internet Message Format | 1992-11-17 | 1.6 KB

Xref: sparky talk.bizarre:38506 sci.chem:4671
Path: sparky!uunet!portal!cup.portal.com!James_J_Kowalczyk
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: talk.bizarre,sci.chem
Subject: Re: should be taken only on the advice of a physician
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 92 21:42:41 PST
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
References:  <gerald.721942839@gerald>
Lines: 28

[e-mail] (Gerald Oskoboiny)
>For the last week or so, I've been substituting a "Tea. Earl Grey. Hot."
>for my afternoon coffee. Instead of using normal sugar, I decided to use
>the little yellow packets of "Sugar Twin[tm]" instead. I like using this
>substitute, because it jumps around a lot when I add it to the tea, as
>if it is alive. Sugar just clumps at the bottom.
>
>Today, I read the fine print on the package:
>
>        Contains dextrose 66.5%, sodium cyclamate 33.0%, and
>        silicon dioxide 0.5% and should be taken only on the
>        advice of a physician.
>
>Why would anyone use this chemical junk as a substitute for sugar? Just
>because it's "only 2 calories"? I could probably eat my shoes without
>gaining much weight, but that doesn't mean they would be good for me.
>
>Gerald

I'd worry more about the dozens of alkaloids in the Earl Grey tea than
about what is in the Sugar Twin.  People use Sugar Twin because it tastes
a lot like sugar (probably because it *is* mostly a sugar), and has
fewer calories than sucrose.

Jim Kowalczyk, Ph.D.                     [e-mail]
Senior Research Chemist
Eisai Research Institute
Andover, MA  01810