THE CONTROVERSIES SURROUNDING STEVIA: MYTHS VS FACTS
By Elizabeth Fourie
INTRODUCTION
Stevia, renowned globally as a natural, zero-calorie sweetener, finds itself subject to numerous myths and misunderstandings that have generated contentious dialogues surrounding its use. This blog aims to debunk some of these misconceptions and present a balanced, evidence-based viewpoint on stevia.
MYTH 1: STEVIA IS AN ARTIFICIAL SWEETNER
Fact: Stevia is often classified alongside artificial sweeteners due to its zero-calorie feature, resulting in the misunderstanding that it’s a man-made product. On the contrary, stevia is derived from the leaves of the Stevia rebaudiana plant. The sweetness we taste comes from the glycosides in the plant’s leaves. These are extracted and purified to produce the stevia sweeteners we commonly find in stores.
MYTH 2: STEVIA IS DETRIMENTAL TO HEALTH
Fact: Some people may experience minor digestive issues with high consumption of stevia, but various organisations, including the World Health Organisation and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, generally consider it safe for human consumption. Research indicates that stevia does not have a significant impact on blood sugar levels, potentially benefiting individuals with diabetes or those looking to manage their sugar intake.
MYTH 3: STEVIA LEAVES A BITTER AFTERTASTE
Fact: Some individuals perceive a bitter aftertaste with stevia, likely due to the steviol glycosides at high concentrations. However, processing methods used by most stevia brands aim to minimise this bitterness, and the taste experience can vary significantly among individuals.
MYTH 4: STEVIA IS A "MIRACLE" SWEETNER
Fact: Despite its advantages, it’s vital to avoid overselling stevia as a ‘miracle’ solution to health issues. Like any food, it should be part of a balanced, varied diet. Its role in weight management or blood sugar control depends largely on wider dietary and lifestyle habits.
MYTH 5: STEVIA CAUSES INCREASED FOOD CRAVINGS
Fact: It’s argued that calorie-free sweeteners like stevia can trick our bodies into wanting more food, potentially leading to overeating and weight gain. However, current scientific evidence on this topic is mixed and does not conclusively show that stevia increases appetite or food intake. It’s crucial to remember that individual responses can differ, and overall diet and lifestyle choices play a much larger role in maintaining a healthy weight and managing food cravings.
CONCLUSION
In summary, stevia is a natural, zero-calorie sweetener that provides a valuable alternative for those seeking to reduce their sugar intake. Even so, it is not a miracle product and should be consumed as part of a balanced diet. And, as with all health matters, consultation with a healthcare professional or nutritionist is recommended to tailor dietary choices to individual health needs.
[1]K Philippaert, et al, ‘Steviol glycosides enhance pancreatic beta-cell function and taste sensation by potentiation of TRPM5 channel activity’ (2013) Nature Communications, 4, 1693
[2]World Health Organisation, ‘Safety evaluation of certain food activities: Steviol glycosides’ (2008) WHO Food Additives Series, 60. EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to Food, ‘Safety of the proposed extension of use of steviol glycosides (E 960) as food additive’ (2015) EFSA Journal, 13(6), 4146
[3] A Romo-Romo, et al, ‘Effects of the Intake of Stevia rebuadiana (Bertoni) Extracts on Glycemia and Glucose Absorption in Rats: A Mathematical Model’ (2016) Journal of Food Science, 8(11), H2811-H2817
[4] P Samuel,et al, ‘Stevia leaf to stevia sweetener: Exploring its science, benefit, and future potential’ (2018) The Journal of Nutrition, 148(7), 1186S-1205S
[5]CI Heck, and EG de Mejia, ‘Yerba Mate Teas: a comprehensive review on chemistry, health implications, and technological considerations’ (2017) Journal of Food Science, 72(9), R138-R151
[6]PJ Rogers, et al, ‘Uncertain about non-nutritive sweeteners and appetite: the consequences for food intake and weight’ (2017) Proceeding of the Nutrition Society, 75(3), 227-231
