Educating the public will be hard as well. People lobby the government on behalf of sugar companies. Stevia, a low calory, low GI sugar substitute was unavail

Educating the public will be hard as well. People lobby the government on behalf of sugar companies. Stevia, a low calory, low GI sugar substitute was unavailable in the US until very recently because the sugar companies lobbied the FDA to classify it as a 'drug' or a supplement and needed to be tested ad nauseum before it became available. All this allowed sugar and sweetener companies to prolong the entrance of Stevia into the market and not hit their profits. In addition to actually getting it classified as a drug, there is paid propaganda research out there saying that it is actually bad for you. Some handwaving arguement is presented without much evidence and a giant leap in order to frighten people. On such article can be found here. (done by quick Google search and I am in no way partial to this particular one. I am sure that there are more on the same subject) http://www.30thstreetclinic.com/general-reviews/100-stevia-dangers.html http://www.30thstreetclinic.com/general-reviews/100-stevia-d... When asked about dangers of stevia, this author says that it is dangerous, because it is not approved by the FDA. Hence, there is this vicious circle that even people who will seek out to educate themselves will come across these claims and perhaps continue to use sugar. Educating the public against products of the giant companies is an uphill battle. I am Canadian and Canadian doctors and nutritionists chuckle at this "not approved by the FDA - hence bad" arguement about stevia, but I am sure that if we were a major sugar country that it would be the same here as well.