Showing posts with label fact check. Show all posts
Showing posts with label fact check. Show all posts

Guest Post By Stephen Richards, Xagave CEO

To further refute Dr. Mercola's fact-less claims about Agave, Stephen Richards the CEO of Xagave takes on Dr. Mercola's Article point by point.

We have recently had a number of people contact us regarding the Mr. Mercola article. His article is truly unfortunate and misguided. Below you will find a point by point showing just how incorrect his claims are. I believe in making claims based upon legitimate, objective, number based criteria and it is clear that Mr. Mercola does not. I cannot speak for all agave nectar but I can speak about Xagave, which is a premium blend of Agave Salmiana (white agave) and inulin from agave tequilana. The simple fact is that Xagave is a versatile, low-glycemic sweetener that can be used for cooking, canning and baking and will save a significant number of calories when used. The calories savings comes from both reduced sugar amounts and reduced fat. This is discussed below. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me and you may reprint this information in your blogs. I address each of his issues on a point by point basis below.

1. Mr. Mercola claims that agave is process from the "starch" of the agave plant and thus the same process is used to derive fructose as HFCS. Here is what he states:
"In spite of manufacturer’s claims, agave "nectar" is not made from the sap of the yucca or agave plant but from the starch of its pineapple-like root bulb. The root is comprised mainly of starch, similar to corn, and a complex carbohydrate called inulin, which is made up of fructose molecules. The process by which agave starch and inulin are converted into "nectar" is VERY similar to the process by which cornstarch is converted into HFCS1."
Response: This is absolutely not true. There is no starch in the agave plant. The agave plant contains fructans including inulin. This prebiotic fiber breaks down into two sugars, fructose and glucose when heated. This is a simple, chemical-free process,very different from the conversion of corn starch to fructose. Remember that corn has no fructose in it, just starch and the starch must be converted through a chemical process to create fructose. This is just not the case with agave. Specifically with Xagave, the fructans are broken down into sugars by introducing GMO-free, organically certified enzymes; thus no heat is used in the process and hence the "Raw".

2. Mr. Mercola claims that the process utlizes genetically modified organisms and various chemical agents. Here is what he says:
"The agave starch is converted into fructose-rich syrup using genetically modified enzymes and a chemically intensive process involving caustic acids, clarifiers, and filtration chemicals"
Response: In this regard, I cannot speak for all agave nectars. With respect to Xagave, we have a GMO free certificate on file and our product is USDA Organically certified as well as Bioagricert Certified (the European equivalent of USDA Organic Certification). In short, there are no genetically modified organisms or chemicals used in the processing of Xagave brand agave nectar. Conversely, HFCS cannot get an organic certification.

3. Mr. Mercola that there are different colors of agave and the differing colors is a result of poor quality. His statement is as follows:
"Due to poor quality control in Mexican processing plants, some of the syrup gets burnt Hence, the darker amber color. Of course, this poor quality control is marketed as an "artisan" variation, like amber beer, when in fact it contains higher levels of toxic impurities that arise from the sugar-heating process."
Response. There are different colors or shades of agave -- light, amber and dark. It is true that the darker the shade, the longer it has been processed, which brings out a stronger agave flavor with honey-nutty-flowery notes to it. It is by no means "burnt" as if it is an accident or under poor quality control situations. This last statement truly shows the ignorance of Mr. Mercola and the statements that he is making. Specifically with respect to Xagave, it is processed in a facility that meet USDA organic certification and European certification requirements. The facility meets Kosher certification, in fact the highest level of Kosher certification which is "Passover certification". It is of the highest quality and I have personally visited the facility several times and reviewed the process. I find Mr. Mercola's comments baseless, demeaning and full of racial overtones.

4. Mr. Mercola claims that agave is bad for you because of it high fructose content and not other nutritional value. He states:
"While agave syrup does have a low-glycemic index, so does antifreeze -- that doesn’t mean it’s good for you. Agave syrup has the highest fructose content of any commercial sweetener -- ranging from 70 to 97 percent, depending on the brand, which is FAR HIGHER than high fructose corn syrup (HFCS), which averages 55 percent"
Response: Besides the utterly ridiculous analogy in which the statement is made, Mr. Mercola again shows his ignorance in hyperbole. Again, I cannot speak for all agaves, but specifically with respect to Xagave, it is comprised of 47% fructose, 17% glucose, 12% inulin, with the balance being water containing vitamins and minerals. Xagave's fructose content is lower than sugar, lower than HFCS and is about the same as honey and Xagave has less total sugars than all these sweeteners. Here is a chart for comparison:

Sweetener Comparison Chart

Item

Fructose

Glucose

Total Sugar***

Calories per 100 grams

Glycemic Index

Sugar*

50%

50%

97%

500

64

Honey

38 to 42%

35 to 40%

80 to 84%

304

62

Date Paste**

32%

34%

70 to 80%

270

103

HFCS

55 to 90%

45 to 10%

100%

370

62

Xagave

47%

17%

64%

308

30 to 35

  • Sugar is actually sucrose, but sucrose, upon consumption breaks down into fructose and glucose in roughly equal parts.
  • *Information was not readily available on date paste, so the author utilized medjool dates as the metric.

*** Total Sugars exceed fructose and glucose because of other sugars such as sucrose and maltose.

Now lets compare the amount of fructose in an apple to Xagave. An average size Fuji Apple (my favorite) weighs between 180 and 300 grams and will contain about 15 to 25 grams of sugar. In a large apple, the 25 grams would be split about 15 to 18 grams of fructose and about 5 to 8 grams of glucose. Two tablespoons of Xagave has about 18 grams of fructose and 3 grams of glucose; thus, two tablespoons of Xagave has about the same fructose of one large apple and less glucose. Lets drill down even further and see how many grams of sugars you would have in one serving of Zucchini Bread on page 49 of Delicious Meets Nutritious -- surprise, it is 1 tablespoon or half the total sugar of an apple!

5. Mr. Mercola claims that it is void of nutrient value. His statement is as follows:
"Nutrient Void. Agave syrup is not a whole food -- it is fractionated and processed, devoid of the nutrients contained in the original, whole plant."
Response: Again, I cannot speak for all agave, but I can for Xagave. Xagave contains inulin, calcium, iron and other vitamins and minerals. One tablespoon of Xagave contains 17% of your daily requirements of calcium. Inulin, a prebiotic fiber, has been shown in numerous studies to improve digestive health, including improved motality, increased calcium absorption, and increased bone density. In addition, in a study by Johns Hopkins University, Inulin was shown to boost your immune system. This study was based upon consumption of 5 grams of inulin per day with 125 persons. The studied showed that the group consuming inulin experienced significantly less diarreha, fever and absentiesm due to illness. Xagave has 2.5 grams per tablespoon. In addition, inulin has been shown to moderate blood sugar levels.

Summary:

Mr. Mercola is so focused on the tree that he misses the forest. Here are the benefits of Xagave, that are based on numbers and objective criteria and supportable. Xagave is sweeter than sugar so you use less and save calories. The caloric savings depends on whether you are cooking, canning or baking but the caloric impact can be significant. I know this for a personal fact because I created most of the recipes in Delicous Meets Nutritious and we, as a company, spent the time calculating the calories in each recipe and compared that to the sugar alternative. For example, our Whole Wheat Pineapple Carrot Cake with Cream Cheese Frosting is 3500 calories less than the traditional sugar recipe and tasted better.

Xagave contains inulin, which the commercial baking industry has been using for years in low fat and low sugar foods to improve the "mouth feel" of foods. This is a little known fact, but in our recipes in Delicious Meets Nutritious you will find that all of our recipes are not only lower in sugar and carbohydrate calories but also lower in fat calories.

Xagave is a low Glycemic Index Food. Xagave is between 30 and 35 on the Glycemic Index and is in the low category. This test was conducted by an independent laboratory -- the actual resorts of the test are copied and incorporated in this article.

Xagave contains Inulin, a prebiotice fiber, that has been shown to improve digestive health. The studies of the benefits of inulin have been conducted by such credible institutions as Johns Hopkins University.

Xagave’s fructose content is lower than sugar, HFCS and roughly equivalent to that of honey and has less glucose and total sugar than all three.

In Response to Maltitol - "Just Say No"

For my first blog post I am going to be writing a critical response to an article on about.com titled "Maltitol: Just Say No," written by Laura Dolson. When I first read this article I immediately questioned the authors good sense or research ability. I am a fiend for scientific research, when someone makes a claim about a product or ingredient I want to see that claim backed up. The suppliers of Maltitol are staffed by highly educated people and advanced laboratories, because they have to be. The FDA closely monitors the claims they make, and they have to prove that they are accurate. If you want more information about different sweeteners, a good place to start would be the Calorie Control Council Website.

Going through her article point by point, Laura says:

"Although claims are often made that maltitol has little impact on blood sugar, this turns out not to be the case."
I beg to differ, Maltitol is much more slowly absorbed and some is not absorbed at all! A spike in blood sugar is unusual with Maltitol and is likely due to other ingredients that are being used with it.

"Although our bodies do not absorb all the calories in maltitol, this substance does provide us with 2 to 3 calories per gram, compared to the 4 calories per gram of sugar."
The figure of 2.1 calories per gram has been confirmed by the Calorie Control Council and the FDA. In 1999, FDA agreed officially that a value of 2.1 calories per gram was acceptable.

"In particular, maltitol syrup has a glycemic index of 52, which approcaches that of table sugar at 60. The powdered form has a glycemic index of 36.."
36 is the correct number for maltitol crystals and powder because they are pure maltitol.

"Maltitol is not as sweet as sugar. Estimates run from 75% - 90% of the sweetness of sugar..."
I have been producing products for 25 years, and in all my recipes I use 90% as my guide in adjusting the sweetness of a recipe. Even Sugar.org, a informational site promoting sugar uses the 90% figure.

"Maltitol can cause intestinal discomfort...If you decide to eat products with maltitol, you'd be wise to start with a small amount and judge the reaction"

Some people do experience discomfort with Maltitol, almost always this is do to excessive consumption. Watch the daily recommended level of consumption, if by chance you eat a whole cake at one seating you can expect a little stomach trouble! If you are sensitive the crystal form of Maltitol is better. A small glass of milk or ice cream with Maltitol sweetened products can help as well.

"The best alternatives to products with Maltitol are usually made with erythritol....but almost any other sugar alchohol is at least a little better than Maltitol.."
Erythrital is fine, but it is also very expensive and can only be used up 15% of total recipe as it returns to crystals! Sugar alchols are graded for recommended daily consumption, maltitol and zylitol are about even. Sorbitol, mannitol, and lactitol be cautious. The fact is that Maltitol is a safe and delicious product, and chances are if you have ever eaten sugar free candy or reduced calorie chocolate you have had Maltitol.