stevia sweetner????

lukesmom

Hey I'm trying to eat more healthily, lose weight and exercising three times a week.
I'd love to cut out sugar from my coffee and tea. I hear so much about aspartame in candarel and how bad it is so I bought the tesco stevia sweetener. Is this okay because a quick Google search gives very conflicting opinions about stevia. Would love your opinions, thank you.

generic2012

Aspartame is fine, it is generally bashed by the same people who bash GMOs, gluten, sugar, vaccines etc. Stevia is fine too, although you should check if it's pure stevia you've bought as they usually mix it with other sweeteners which do contain calories (stevia is zero calorie and 300-400 times sweeter than sugar). Aspartame and stevia aren't good or bad but if you want to lower calories, when they replace added sugar, they are a net good. Just bear in mind that there are only 16 calories in a teaspoon of sugar so just not adding sugar to your tea or coffee will make no noticeable difference to your weight loss.

lukesmom

Thank you its the tesco brand stevia 2 calories per tsp. Have it in my coffee at the moment and it tastes fine. It contains maltodextrin.

jane82

Hate to be that guy but two weeks of having no sugar and that coffee will taste just as good to you.
I find sugar or any of them tablets in general give you a bit of energy for a half hour then you slightly crash and spend the day needing sweet stuff.
Scientifically I have no idea if its better than sugar there is alot of stuff over the years that claims to be better than it is though. Take "low fat foods" for instance.
At the end of the day if you are drinking 12 coffees a day and cant have them without sugar try tea.
Coffee like sugar makes you crash a bit and makes you think you need more all throughout the day.
If you never had that first coffee for breakfast youd feel better at lunchtime than if you had one. Its a vicious circle. Im rambling on to myself. Ill still hit post incase there is anything of worth here but its probably the ramblings of a miracle food sceptic.
Good luck on your weightloss keep at it and think long term.

thegreatiam

generic2012 wrote: »

Just bear in mind that there are only 16 calories in a teaspoon of sugar so just not adding sugar to your tea or coffee will make no noticeable difference to your weight loss.

+1
calories per day without sugar in tea 1500

calories per day with sugar in tea (assuming 5 cups) 1580

op: unless you diet is 99% perfect and the only place you can improve is a teaspoon of sugar in your tea then you are making mountains out of molehills here. just drink the tea with sugar, simply cut down on the number of cups you have a day.

stop worrying about the tiny details of your diet think about the bigger picture.

lukesmom

thegreatiam wrote: »

+1
calories per day without sugar in tea 1500

calories per day with sugar in tea (assuming 5 cups) 1580

op: unless you diet is 99% perfect and the only place you can improve is a teaspoon of sugar in your tea then you are making mountains out of molehills here. just drink the tea with sugar, simply cut down on the number of cups you have a day.

stop worrying about the tiny details of your diet think about the bigger picture.

Okay thanks. The weight loss and fitness camp I've signed up to, a nutritionist advised us to cut out sugar from tea and coffee that's why I was wondering about the stevia I bought.

generic2012

Be very wary when taking advice from a 'nutritionist'. Anyone can legally call themselves a nutritionist after doing a short course, or even without doing one, so can be totally un-qualified. Dieticians, however, have university qualifications (4 year Bachelor Degree in Nutrition and Dietetics/3-year Science Degree followed by a Masters in Nutrition and Dietetics), and is protected by law (ie. if you say your a dietician and you're not, you'll be sued). Lots of people here on boards know a lot more than a lot of nutritionists. I would take anything nutritionists say with a grain of salt and double check everything yourself, maybe listen to their fitness advice more so than their dietary advice. Earlier I saw that you started a thread about a low fat turkey recipe because you're on a low fat/low calorie diet for a few weeks. There are lots of people on this site who would tell that it is a very short sighted and unhealthy way to go about weight loss, and that it is highly irresponsible of someone to advice some one to do that.

When a company/person makes money by helping people lose weight they advertise by announcing how much weight former customers lost, they want to get the biggest number they can. It is possible lose a total 10kg of weight through; muscle, glycogen and water loss, lowering your metabolism, causing you to become lethargic and sickly and even gain fat. They can then put 'lukesmom lost a whopping 10kgs in 8 weeks!' on a poster and not be lying. Where as if you did weights, strengthened your bones (lowering your risk osteoporosis because of their increased density), put on some muscle (which will hold more glycogen and also results in a healthier, higher metabolism) and lose fat you could possibly (depending where you currently are) gain weight. Even though you are far, far healthier with that bit of extra weight (but less fat, and 'better' looking) they can't say 'our weight loss program helped lukesmom put on 2kg of weight!'.

Not saying its a conspiracy or anything but if you're a nice person that wants to help people get as healthy as possible, you wont last too long as a business. People don't like lots of information, so they want to find the easiest way to define health and a nice looking body, so they use numbers to do it. The lower the better. That's why you're often times better listening to people who have no financial incentive to help you (as long as they have evidence!!).

the groutch

I'd be more concerned about the effects of the caffeine on my body than a little bit of sugar.

lukesmom

generic2012 wrote: »

Be very wary when taking advice from a 'nutritionist'. Anyone can legally call themselves a nutritionist after doing a short course, or even without doing one, so can be totally un-qualified. Dieticians, however, have university qualifications (4 year Bachelor Degree in Nutrition and Dietetics/3-year Science Degree followed by a Masters in Nutrition and Dietetics), and is protected by law (ie. if you say your a dietician and you're not, you'll be sued). Lots of people here on boards know a lot more than a lot of nutritionists. I would take anything nutritionists say with a grain of salt and double check everything yourself, maybe listen to their fitness advice more so than their dietary advice. Earlier I saw that you started a thread about a low fat turkey recipe because you're on a low fat/low calorie diet for a few weeks. There are lots of people on this site who would tell that it is a very short sighted and unhealthy way to go about weight loss, and that it is highly irresponsible of someone to advice some one to do that.

When a company/person makes money by helping people lose weight they advertise by announcing how much weight former customers lost, they want to get the biggest number they can. It is possible lose a total 10kg of weight through; muscle, glycogen and water loss, lowering your metabolism, causing you to become lethargic and sickly and even gain fat. They can then put 'lukesmom lost a whopping 10kgs in 8 weeks!' on a poster and not be lying. Where as if you did weights, strengthened your bones (lowering your risk osteoporosis because of their increased density), put on some muscle (which will hold more glycogen and also results in a healthier, higher metabolism) and lose fat you could possibly (depending where you currently are) gain weight. Even though you are far, far healthier with that bit of extra weight (but less fat, and 'better' looking) they can't say 'our weight loss program helped lukesmom put on 2kg of weight!'.

Not saying its a conspiracy or anything but if you're a nice person that wants to help people get as healthy as possible, you wont last too long as a business. People don't like lots of information, so they want to find the easiest way to define health and a nice looking body, so they use numbers to do it. The lower the better. That's why you're often times better listening to people who have no financial incentive to help you (as long as they have evidence!!).

The workout we did was using kettle bells. What's unhealthy about a low fat turkey curry with brown rice???

generic2012

lukesmom wrote: »

The workout we did was using kettle bells. What's unhealthy about a low fat turkey curry with brown rice???

Nothing, low fat diets are unhealthy.

lukesmom

generic2012 wrote: »

Nothing, low fat diets are unhealthy.

Here's my diet

Porridge with honey and linseeds, flaxseeds and sunflower seeds or pancakes made with buckwheat flour and eggs topped with fruit or maple syrup

Wholemeal pitta with some ham/scrambled egg

Homemade curry with brown rice or grilled fish brown rice and a salad

Snacks include oatcakes with nut butter/fruit and nuts/natural yoghurt with blueberries and honey

Lots of water

jane82

Seems decent enough could be better but that depends really what your goals are. Somebody will tell you to take out the porridge but that all depends how far you wanna go.
Main thing is take note of your portion sizes and then try get them down abit.
Porridge and snacks is what Id suggest trying to have smaller portions of.
It takes time stick at it and in a few months you will have sustainably lost a fair bit of weight.

lukesmom

jane82 wrote: »

Seems decent enough could be better but that depends really what your goals are. Somebody will tell you to take out the porridge but that all depends how far you wanna go.
Main thing is take note of your portion sizes and then try get them down abit.
Porridge and snacks is what Id suggest trying to have smaller portions of.
It takes time stick at it and in a few months you will have sustainably lost a fair bit of weight.

Thanks a million.

silverharp

generic2012 wrote: »

Just bear in mind that there are only 16 calories in a teaspoon of sugar so just not adding sugar to your tea or coffee will make no noticeable difference to your weight loss.

firstly people normally drink 3ish cups or more a day, also as sugar causes an insulin spike, the calories of that particular spoon might not be that important, however if the cumulative effect is that you hit the fridge late evening then then that is where the damage will be done.

generic2012

silverharp wrote: »

firstly people normally drink 3ish cups or more a day, also as sugar causes an insulin spike, the calories of that particular spoon might not be that important, however if the cumulative effect is that you hit the fridge late evening then then that is where the damage will be done.

Non sequitur

runawaybishop

thegreatiam wrote: »

+1
calories per day without sugar in tea 1500

calories per day with sugar in tea (assuming 5 cups) 1580

op: unless you diet is 99% perfect and the only place you can improve is a teaspoon of sugar in your tea then you are making mountains out of molehills here. just drink the tea with sugar, simply cut down on the number of cups you have a day.

stop worrying about the tiny details of your diet think about the bigger picture.

Small sustainable steps are exactly what people should be looking at. Cutting out sugar in tea/coffee is a good one to start with.

thegreatiam

runawaybishop wrote: »

Small sustainable steps are exactly what people should be looking at. Cutting out sugar in tea/coffee is a good one to start with.

There is no point in worrying about a total of 100 calories a day unless the rest of the diet is fine. Unless you can post a 100 % perfect diet that no one can adjust then there is no point dropping sugar.
An accumulation of many small changes will make a big difference you're right, however 5 spoons of sugar a day is not a small change its a tiny change. And the op has bigger things to look at rather than the inclusion of sugar in her tea or not.

The theme of most of your threads lukesmom is low fat options. To me this suggests that you don't have a complete grasp on your nutrition I'd be more inclined to say you have to focus on the bulk of your diet before you start worrying about the minutia.

Even so, if you could post a perfect diet I would still suggest keeping the tea the same and just drinking fewer cups a day. Learn to include it into your diet rather than substitute. Tea for most people is filling more than a nutritional need. It's ritualistic and comforting. Stevia instead of sugar is going to change the way tastes and it won't fulfil the satisfaction. If you just want the caffeine then drop the tea all together and take caffeine pills. If not take green tea.

A few cups of tea with is not going to matter in the big picture.

MaceFace

thegreatiam wrote: »

There is no point in worrying about a total of 100 calories a day unless the rest of the diet is fine. Unless you can post a 100 % perfect diet that no one can adjust then there is no point dropping sugar.
An accumulation of many small changes will make a big difference you're right, however 5 spoons of sugar a day is not a small change its a tiny change. And the op has bigger things to look at rather than the inclusion of sugar in her tea or not.

The theme of most of your threads lukesmom is low fat options. To me this suggests that you don't have a complete grasp on your nutrition I'd be more inclined to say you have to focus on the bulk of your diet before you start worrying about the minutia.

Even so, if you could post a perfect diet I would still suggest keeping the tea the same and just drinking fewer cups a day. Learn to include it into your diet rather than substitute. Tea for most people is filling more than a nutritional need. It's ritualistic and comforting. Stevia instead of sugar is going to change the way tastes and it won't fulfil the satisfaction. If you just want the caffeine then drop the tea all together and take caffeine pills. If not take green tea.

A few cups of tea with is not going to matter in the big picture.

3 cups with one teaspoon of sugar a day over a year is about 17000 calories. 5 lbs!
#justsaying

generic2012

MaceFace wrote: »

3 cups with one teaspoon of sugar a day over a year is about 17000 calories. 5 lbs!
#justsaying

How do you work that out?

MaceFace

generic2012 wrote: »

How do you work that out?

16 cals a cup
16*3*7*52

generic2012

MaceFace wrote: »

16 cals a cup
16*3*7*52

but how did u work out that 1700 calories over the space of a year is 5lbs?

MaceFace

generic2012 wrote: »

but how did u work out that 1700 calories over the space of a year is 5lbs?

Its 17000 not 1700.

generic2012

MaceFace wrote: »

Its 17000 not 1700.

Sorry, but how did u work out that 17000 calories over the space of a year is 5lbs?

MaceFace

generic2012 wrote: »

Sorry, but how did u work out that 17000 calories over the space of a year is 5lbs?

3500 cal = 1 lb
?????

I find that cutting out cold turkey is usually better and easier than messing with substitutes
I've never been one to put sugar in my coffee though and a vanilla capuccino is a rare treat

I've also found that cutting it down to <20g a day gives me much better energy in general particularly in the afternoon; the <20g includes anything from fruit or whatever

hey lukesmom - how are ye?

your diet sounds very healthy and tasty too - providing you're doing the exercise.

I am a qualified fitness teacher for many years.... I believe if you get the exercise right the weight more or less looks after itself. So in other words your exercise can become your diet. I used to do a lot of running and this especially applies with running..... I could eat a horse afterwards and not put on weight (well not literally!).

I gave up sugar during Lent years ago in tea and coffee. The tea was a breeze and the coffee took about a week to get used to. Now I gag if I take a sip of someone elses coffee that has sugar in it. Its FAR nicer without sugar if you can just get over the initial hurdle. I love maple syrup and use organic Agave as a sweetner - not Steevia.

A little of what you fancy does you good and keeps you in good humour too - which is a must! Good luck :-)

generic2012

MaceFace wrote: »

3500 cal = 1 lb
?????

That's total non-sense, just think about that rationally. What would be the implications if that were true?

jane82

Wait if I cut 843 or so calories a day can I lose 10kg in 3 months?

generic2012

jane82 wrote: »

Wait if I cut 843 or so calories a day can I lose 10kg in 3 months?

According to maceface, yes. But I wouldn't be too hopeful if I was you.

MaceFace

generic2012 wrote: »

That's total non-sense, just think about that rationally. What would be the implications if that were true?

Huh?
http://www.caloriesperhour.com/tutorial_pound.php

jane82

generic2012 wrote: »

According to maceface, yes. But I wouldn't be too hopeful if I was you.

Well to be honest if I lost 10 kilo id probably need to put on 9.5 kilo. But for an overweight person would this work?

lukesmom

[Deleted User] wrote: »

hey lukesmom - how are ye?

your diet sounds very healthy and tasty too - providing you're doing the exercise.

I am a qualified fitness teacher for many years.... I believe if you get the exercise right the weight more or less looks after itself. So in other words your exercise can become your diet. I used to do a lot of running and this especially applies with running..... I could eat a horse afterwards and not put on weight (well not literally!).

I gave up sugar during Lent years ago in tea and coffee. The tea was a breeze and the coffee took about a week to get used to. Now I gag if I take a sip of someone elses coffee that has sugar in it. Its FAR nicer without sugar if you can just get over the initial hurdle. I love maple syrup and use organic Agave as a sweetner - not Steevia.

A little of what you fancy does you good and keeps you in good humour too - which is a must! Good luck :-)

Thank you for such a positive post. I'm doing intensive fitness classes three nights a week and I'm loving it. They are very tough and in a group setting but I always feel better after them.

generic2012

jane82 wrote: »

Well to be honest if I lost 10 kilo id probably need to put on 9.5 kilo. But for an overweight person would this work?

No, the 3,500 calories is 1 pound of body fat thing is a myth, wrong on many levels AS There are many things it doesn't take in to account. Overweight people will lose more weight in the same amount of time as people who don't weigh as much because they have higher metabolisms, more fat to burn (the more fat you have the higher percentage of fat you will burn compared to muscle), they have more water weight, their diets are usually worse so a 'healthy' diet is a far bigger change to them than to a slightly overweight person.

jane82

generic2012 wrote: »

No, the 3,500 calories is 1 pound of body fat thing is a myth, wrong on many levels AS There are many things it doesn't take in to account. Overweight people will lose more weight in the same amount of time as people who don't weigh as much because they have higher metabolisms, more fat to burn (the more fat you have the higher percentage of fat you will burn compared to muscle), they have more water weight, their diets are usually worse so a 'healthy' diet is a far bigger change to them than to a slightly overweight person.

But if I knew a guy that had a goal of 10kg in 3 months. He was 80 or so kg would it be possible if he was severely motivated. Ive no idea I never needed to lose 10kg.

generic2012

jane82 wrote: »

But if I knew a guy that had a goal of 10kg in 3 months. He was 80 or so kg would it be possible if he was severely motivated. Ive no idea I never needed to lose 10kg.

No it's a flawed formula, it's a meaningless number, it's just thrown around by people, it has no basis in reality. That's why throwing around misinformation like that is so dangerous, an average height man of 80kg going down to 70kg in 3 months would be disastrous for him.

Se1251an

Didn't work out for poor Lydia

MaceFace

generic2012 wrote: »

No it's a flawed formula, it's a meaningless number, it's just thrown around by people, it has no basis in reality. That's why throwing around misinformation like that is so dangerous, an average height man of 80kg going down to 70kg in 3 months would be disastrous for him.

I am thinking whether it is worth continuing with this as the nonsense you are coming out with and looking for holes using extremely narrow criteria makes me think this will go around in circles and just drive me crazy.

I always look at Lyle on these topics as they are well researched.

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/the-fundamentals-of-fat-loss-diets-part-1.html

Since the start of Jan I have been doing keto. Recently went back to carbs. My weight is down just under 30 lbs. Very little muscle loss. Now about 15% bf.
Hardly disastrous...

jane82

generic2012 wrote: »

No it's a flawed formula, it's a meaningless number, it's just thrown around by people, it has no basis in reality. That's why throwing around misinformation like that is so dangerous, an average height man of 80kg going down to 70kg in 3 months would be disastrous for him.

so realistically how long will it take him to get down 10kg.

MaceFace

jane82 wrote: »

so realistically how long will it take him to get down 10kg.

Jan 13 - I was 208 lbs
This morning - 180 exactly.

generic2012

MaceFace wrote: »

I am thinking whether it is worth continuing with this as the nonsense you are coming out with and looking for holes using extremely narrow criteria makes me think this will go around in circles and just drive me crazy.

I always look at Lyle on these topics as they are well researched.

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/the-fundamentals-of-fat-loss-diets-part-1.html

Since the start of Jan I have been doing keto. Recently went back to carbs. My weight is down just under 30 lbs. Very little muscle loss. Now about 15% bf.
Hardly disastrous...

I'd have no problem with that.

Here's Lyle tearing apart your theory on the 3,500 calories is a pound non-sense so -
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/the-energy-balance-equation.html

Fair play on the weight loss, being keto its definite that its not all fat, I'm not saying you think it is at all, I meant using your formula to try and lose 10kg of fat would be disastrous.

MaceFace

generic2012 wrote: »

I'd have no problem with that.

Here's Lyle tearing apart your theory on the 3,500 calories is a pound non-sense so -
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/the-energy-balance-equation.html

Fair play on the weight loss, being keto its definite that its not all fat, I'm not saying you think it is at all, I meant using your formula to try and lose 10kg of fat would be disastrous.

Firstly at no stage did I say that a person would lost 5 lbs of fat. Now regardless of what you think, 1 lb of fat contains 3500 calories as an approximation.
Im also not sure what you mean by a formula. I never gave one.

Now on to the article you reference, which i have read before. Lyle is basically saying that cutting 500 calories a day does not equal 1 pound fat loss over a week. No one said it would. Of course lbm will be lost as well. And of course there are many other factors at play but they are so specific that unless you want to confuse a normal person, it is best to ignore.

Now to be specific about this thread and the topic at hand, the thermic effect of sugar for tea would be at least in the mid nineties.
You said that it is not worth worrying about sugar in tea. By just cutting out sugar and not replacing it with anything other calories, a person should expect that they would be about the 5lbs I mentioned lower in weight than they would otherwise have been.
Much of this should be fat and some will be everything other stuff.

Now if you want the formula I use, my deficit is no more than 31 cals per pound of body fat. Of course the problem with this is I don't know what my exact body fat is, nor do I know what me tdee is.
That is why general guidelines are used.

runawaybishop

thegreatiam wrote: »

There is no point in worrying about a total of 100 calories a day unless the rest of the diet is fine. Unless you can post a 100 % perfect diet that no one can adjust then there is no point dropping sugar.
An accumulation of many small changes will make a big difference you're right, however 5 spoons of sugar a day is not a small change its a tiny change. And the op has bigger things to look at rather than the inclusion of sugar in her tea or not.

I don't really subscribe to this belief, i think its an easy positive change to make and i don;t see any reason you wouldn't make it. Sure, its not going to make a big difference but every little helps

thegreatiam

runawaybishop wrote: »

I don't really subscribe to this belief, i think its an easy positive change to make and i don;t see any reason you wouldn't make it. Sure, its not going to make a big difference but every little helps

Primarily because tea is more than nutrition. It's a pleasure or a ritual. Change the ritual for the sake of 10 calories and you take away the purpose.
Better to just reduce the number of cups a day so each one you take still satisfies

I just prefer to see people understand their nutrition and know how to include things like tea with sugar and some biscuits or whatever else they choose rather than eliminate them completely.

I'm usually having this discussion with my missus who has that mentality towards her diet. "I can't have this or that" usually it results in her obviously hating what she is eating and quickly going back to old habits. Why not just have the treats the way you like them just figure them into your whole diet.

Of course if you like tea with stevia then great. Carry on with it, there isn't really any draw back. But I still think it's such a small thing that it's not going to matter if you do or do not.

Besides, you can easily make up for it in other ways. Have 70g of pasta at dinner instead of 75g

lukesmom

I stopped the stevia and continued using sugar in my tea. I've lost 5lbs this week from healthy eating and exercising.

runawaybishop

thegreatiam wrote: »

Primarily because tea is more than nutrition. It's a pleasure or a ritual. Change the ritual for the sake of 10 calories and you take away the purpose.
Better to just reduce the number of cups a day so each one you take still satisfies

I just prefer to see people understand their nutrition and know how to include things like tea with sugar and some biscuits or whatever else they choose rather than eliminate them completely.

I'm usually having this discussion with my missus who has that mentality towards her diet. "I can't have this or that" usually it results in her obviously hating what she is eating and quickly going back to old habits. Why not just have the treats the way you like them just figure them into your whole diet.

Of course if you like tea with stevia then great. Carry on with it, there isn't really any draw back. But I still think it's such a small thing that it's not going to matter if you do or do not.

Besides, you can easily make up for it in other ways. Have 70g of pasta at dinner instead of 75g

I don't notice any difference between sugar and sweeteners so it makes sense to swap them out - there are only positives. Sounds like people enjoy sugar though, not tea

thegreatiam

runawaybishop wrote: »

I don't notice any difference between sugar and sweeteners so it makes sense to swap them out - there are only positives. Sounds like people enjoy sugar though, not tea

I say I'm lucky as to not have developed a tea/ coffee habit. But on the occasions when I do want a cuppa it needs to be made exactly to my preferences loads of milk and 5 sugars. Luckily I have a cup maybe once a week.