Stevia and the FDA

The following information came from the Wikipedia article. Now, generally wikipedia is not a great source, since anyone can go in and edit, so it's important to check sources. In this case, this information can be found with a simple google (or bing) search from other places. I opted to post this from Wikipedia since it was a lot of information in one place :)

"In 1991, after receiving an anonymous industry complaint, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) labeled stevia as an "unsafe food additive" and restricted its import. The FDA's stated reason was "toxicological information on stevia is inadequate to demonstrate its safety." This ruling was controversial, as stevia proponents pointed out that this designation violated the FDA's own guidelines under which natural substances used prior to 1958, with no reported adverse effects, should be generally recognized as safe (GRAS) as long as the substance was being used in the same way and format as prior to 1958.

Stevia occurs naturally, requiring no patent to produce it. As a consequence, since the import ban in 1991, marketers and consumers of stevia have shared a belief that the FDA acted in response to industry pressure. Arizona congressman Jon Kyl, for example, called the FDA action against stevia "a restraint of trade to benefit the artificial sweetener industry." To protect the complainant, the FDA deleted names in the original complaint in its responses to requests filed under the Freedom of Information Act.

Stevia remained banned until after the 1994 Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act forced the FDA in 1995 to revise its stance to permit stevia to be used as a dietary supplement, although not as a food additive — a position that stevia proponents regard as contradictory because it simultaneously labels stevia as safe and unsafe, depending on how it is sold.

Although unresolved questions remain about whether metabolic processes can produce a mutagen from stevia in animals, let alone in humans, the early studies nevertheless prompted the European Commission in 1999 to ban stevia's use in food in the European Union pending further research. Singapore and Hong Kong have banned it also. More recent data compiled in the safety evaluation released by the World Health Organization in 2006 suggest that these policies may be obsolete.

In December 2008, the FDA gave a "no objection" approval for GRAS status to Truvia (developed by Cargill and The Coca-Cola Company) and PureVia (developed by PepsiCo and the Whole Earth Sweetener Company, a subsidiary of Merisant), both of which use rebaudioside A derived from the Stevia plant."

Now then... isn't it interesting that the FDA broke its own rules regarding substances generally regarded as safe as long as the substance was used the same way now as it was before 1958? And isn't it interesting that they did so to protect big name companies, such as those that manufacture sugar cane sugar, aspartame, and other big name sweeteners? Not really. I'd say it's par for the course. They're doing the same to HCG being used for weight loss. Regardless of the fact that HCG when used in conjunction with a very specific diet has been causing people to lose weight for over 50 years, and regardless of the fact that those same people have kept the weight off (except for a small percentage of people who went right back to gorging themselves after they were finished with the diet), the FDA continues to state that there is no evidence of HCG causing or contributing to weight loss. There has been a mountain of scientific studies done in other countries, proving the efficiency of the HCG diet, yet here in the good old US of A, the FDA continues to try and block its use for weight loss purposes, using their 2 or 3 measly studies, that weren't even done properly, including such things as not refrigerating the HCG (required for the injections) and premixing large batches, which rendered the HCG useless (the injections have to be mixed immediately prior to injecting as the HCG quickly breaks down and is completely useless if not immediately injected.

I guess my point is this: Just because the FDA says something, that doesn't make it true. What's the motivation? Who is the big company that benefits from what the FDA says? There are people from the big meat companies on the board of the FDA, as well as people from the dairy company, and big name pharmecuticals. The thing to remember is that the FDA doesn't want you to be thin. Look at the slope here: if you're fat, and I'm talking obese here, not just a few pounds too heavy, you're very likely to have underlying issues, such as diabetes (Insulin producers profit), high blood pressure (pharmecutical companies profit) and other health problems. You may even be prone to heart attack (aspirin companies profit, as well as other medication companies producing heart medication. If you're overweight at all, you may be trying to lose weight with pills (weight loss pill companies profit), shakes (those companies profit), or other things found at the supplement store (that store profits... which in turn profits all companies that have their product at the store). So you see... being fat is best for our economy, because you spend more money!! So, all kidding aside, the FDA really is out to get you :)