3 ms·
> we have decades of studies proving what natural food does to the bodies You are making the false assumption "natural" foods are a correlated group as far as
by slededit 10y ago
> we have decades of studies proving what natural food does to the bodies
You are making the false assumption "natural" foods are a correlated group as far as health goes. This is empirically false (ignoring the fact that natural has no scientific definition to begin with). Studying sucrose won't inform you of the dangers of cyanide though both are "natural".
- technojunkie 10y agoTo stay on topic, I'm not talking about anything other than stevia coming from leaves of Stevia rebaudiana whereas sugar comes from sugarcane. The process by which these two plants grow is natural and not synthetic. I'm not getting into the pointless debate about food being "natural", which I think is complete marketing hype.
- slededit 10y agoThe point is that research on sugarcane has little to no bearing on what research on stevia would uncover. The fact we think sugarcane is safe is not evidence in favor of stevia. Just because both happened to evolve with little human interference doesn't correlate their effects on the body in any way. The exception is if we can prove the two operate under the same fundamental mechanisms within the body. But there's nothing different about natural growing plants and man made substances under this sort of research. A molecule is a molecule.