New No Carb Sweetener on the Market......

I see what you're saying but I guess I don't know why something that is
plant based and is sweet would have a cool mouth feel to it..........mint I
could see but usually only processed substances have that, at least in my
experience.

Carol j

"UsenetID" wrote in message
...
"Carol J" wrote in message
. ..
This new product has a cool mouth feel to it too, and that actually puts
me
off of it a bit but not sure why......I guess cuz sugar doesn't do that so
wondering if it's so natural, why would it cause that effect.........any
opinions?

Natural substances taste different than other natural substances is my
guess. Don't know why a cool mouth feel would cause suspicion, just because
sugar doesn't do it? Maybe I'm reading your post wrong...but I don't expect
anything to taste exactly like sugar, except sugar.

--
His,
Shrinkin' Sherry
lowcarb.owly.net

"Susan" wrote in message
...
It's not about tasting exactly like sugar, the cooling effect (I get it if
I use erythritol in creaming things) is creepy and ruins the whole eating
experience.


I actually like that cool feeling - just a matter of taste I guess . But
I don't bake that often these days, mostly I put it on my hot cereal or in
my chocolate bark candy.

--
Sherry
lowcarb.owly.net

Sherry, I have been reading that xylitol kills dogs. Causes liver
failure I believe.




On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 00:26:22 -0400, "UsenetID"
wrote:

"Carol J" wrote in message
...
.......something called "Swerve"........anyone have any experience with
it?
A lady from a new local organic cafe type place. They specialize in
protein
smoothies, they sell products and they are a restaurant....anyways, she
passed around samples of this new product and it really tasted good I
thought. Pricy, a lb bag is about $13. but for herbal tea I think it
would
be great. But as always, any new products on the market, I am leery
about.

Carol J


I googled it. Most of their claims sound similar to xylitol (beneficial
bacteria, all natural from plant sources). There are quite a few websites
about it. Googling Zeratol, their trademarked product brand, came up with
nothing. This is the first I've heard of it. Kinda pricy (I pay half again
as much for a 5# bucket of xylitol - and get a great bucket in the bargain
G) but if it's 0g carbs it might be worth it for some things? I'd try
it...especially if their claim of no intestinal discomfort is true...

"Deke" wrote in message
...

Sherry, I have been reading that xylitol kills dogs. Causes liver
failure I believe.

I've read that also, we are very careful with our 3 dogs (and cat) and
anything with xylitol in it. It makes me wonder about the difference
between xylitol and the other SA's that, presumably, don't kill dogs?

And, interestingly enough, my mother's dog's name is Deke . He's a
splendid little fellow...

--
Sherry
lowcarb.owly.net

Deke wrote:
Sherry, I have been reading that xylitol kills dogs. Causes liver
failure I believe.



Sounds like another one of those "internet rumors" that circulate
wildly, get repeated endlessly, and swamp the search engines
overpowering valid and dull data that doesn't get repeated for the
thrill of it and the fear of it.

Science is boring, rumors are real fun.

================================================== ====================

http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2007...d-to-blog.html

XYLITOL KILLS DOGS ?????????????


Jordan McCollum Says:
March 6th, 2007 at 10:16 am

SNIP

“An example: have you seen news coverage stating that xylitol kills
dogs? Guess what—it doesn’t. There is scant anecdotal evidence of
xylitol’s negative effects—including cases where dogs that ate huge
amounts of gum and chocolate with their xylitol. The truth is, there
have been studies done for decades, and even feeding dogs a diet of 20%
xylitol over two years didn’t kill them (ref).

“You can’t find anything exonerating xylitol until page three of Google
SERPs for ‘xylitol dog.’ Disclosu my husband works for a xylitol
company. Imagine if they had a blog that customers, potential customers
and the media read could find easily. A blog post exposing a popular
myth—why, that sounds like textbook linkbait. A press release? Probably
not. Without a blog, they’ll have to wait until Snopes covers it—and
even then, it’s too late now [months and months after the urban legend
has been covered by mainstream media] to even begin to undo the damage
already done to their product image.”

My husband’s employer did release a press release within days of the
mainstream media stories. It’s even lower in the SERPs than the dense
research exonerating xylitol cited above. If they had a blog, I maintain
that they could much more easily, adeptly and appropriately address
consumers’ (and pet owners’) fears in a place and a way that customers
(and media) would actually read.

"Jbuch" wrote in message
...
Sounds like another one of those "internet rumors" that circulate wildly,
get repeated endlessly, and swamp the search engines overpowering valid
and dull data that doesn't get repeated for the thrill of it and the fear
of it.

Science is boring, rumors are real fun.

================================================== ====================

http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2007...d-to-blog.html

XYLITOL KILLS DOGS ?????????????


Jordan McCollum Says:
March 6th, 2007 at 10:16 am

SNIP

“An example: have you seen news coverage stating that xylitol kills dogs?
Guess what—it doesn’t. There is scant anecdotal evidence of xylitol’s
negative effects—including cases where dogs that ate huge amounts of gum
and chocolate with their xylitol. The truth is, there have been studies
done for decades, and even feeding dogs a diet of 20% xylitol over two
years didn’t kill them (ref).

“You can’t find anything exonerating xylitol until page three of Google
SERPs for ‘xylitol dog.’ Disclosu my husband works for a xylitol
company. Imagine if they had a blog that customers, potential customers
and the media read could find easily. A blog post exposing a popular
myth—why, that sounds like textbook linkbait. A press release? Probably
not. Without a blog, they’ll have to wait until Snopes covers it—and even
then, it’s too late now [months and months after the urban legend has been
covered by mainstream media] to even begin to undo the damage already done
to their product image.”

My husband’s employer did release a press release within days of the
mainstream media stories. It’s even lower in the SERPs than the dense
research exonerating xylitol cited above. If they had a blog, I maintain
that they could much more easily, adeptly and appropriately address
consumers’ (and pet owners’) fears in a place and a way that customers
(and media) would actually read.

My information came from the AVMA, one would think their professionals
wouldn't base their findings and warnings on internet rumors. I don't know
who marketingpilgrim.com is, I'm familiar with the American Veterinary
Medical Association. Anyone can search their site (www.avma.org) and read
their array of literature (Journal of the AVMA articles on site, with cites)
and obviously choose which expert opinion has more meaning for their own
pets.
--
Sherry
lowcarb.owly.net

Deke wrote:
Sherry, I have been reading that xylitol kills dogs. Causes liver
failure I believe.
================================

Clinical Relevance—Although xylitol causes hypoglycemia in dogs, hepatic failure after ingestion has not previously been reported.
Note that there is no statement of how much Xylitol was ingested per
dog. So, the deadliness of this stuff remains unknown.


Abstract
Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association
October 1, 2006, Vol. 229, No. 7, Pages 1113-1117
doi: 10.2460/javma.229.7.1113

Acute hepatic failure and coagulopathy associated with xylitol ingestion
in eight dogs

Eric K. Dunayer, MS, VMD; Sharon M. Gwaltney-Brant, DVM, PhD, DABVT
American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Animal Poison
Control Center, 1717 S Philo Rd, Ste 36, Urbana, IL 61802-6044.
(Dunayer, Gwaltney-Brant)
Address correspondence to Dr. Dunayer.

Case Description—8 adult dogs were evaluated for treatment of lethargy
and vomiting after ingestion of xylitol, a sugar alcohol used as a
sweetener in various products.

Clinical Findings—In addition to vomiting and lethargy, 5 of the dogs
had widespread petechial, ecchymotic, or gastrointestinal tract
hemorrhages. Common clinicopathologic findings included moderately to
severely high serum activities of liver enzymes, hyperbilirubinemia,
hypoglycemia, hyperphosphatemia, prolonged clotting times, and
thrombocytopenia. Necropsies were performed on 3 dogs and severe hepatic
necrosis was found in 2. In the third dog, histologic examination
revealed severe hepatocyte loss or atrophy with lobular collapse.

Treatment and Outcome—Treatments varied among dogs and included IV
administration of fluids; plasma transfusions; and, if indicated,
administration of dextrose. Three dogs were euthanatized, 2 dogs died, 2
dogs made a complete recovery, and 1 dog was recovering but was lost to
follow-up.

Clinical Relevance—Although xylitol causes hypoglycemia in dogs, hepatic
failure after ingestion has not previously been reported. Because an
increasing number of consumer products contain xylitol, clinicians
should be aware that ingestion of xylitol can have serious,
life-threatening effects.

UsenetID wrote:


My information came from the AVMA, one would think their professionals
wouldn't base their findings and warnings on internet rumors. I don't know
who marketingpilgrim.com is, I'm familiar with the American Veterinary
Medical Association. Anyone can search their site (www.avma.org) and read
their array of literature (Journal of the AVMA articles on site, with cites)
and obviously choose which expert opinion has more meaning for their own
pets.

The abstract of the article in question is posted in a parallel thread.
I did check the expert opinion.

Here is what the paper itself is supposed to describe -- also from the
AVMA website.

From their October 1, 2006 issue.


The authors did a dabase search - they didn't personally treat any of
these dogs said to be suffering from Xylitol exposure.

The data are national and span the years 2003 to 2005.

The number of dogs reported to suffer from xylitol exposure is growing
from just 70 in 2004 to 170 in 2005.....

I wonder how many dogs suffer from chocolate exposure and how many
fatalities there are. Do you know?

Dogs can't digest stuff harmless to humans. But too many owners do feed
doggies special treats like sugar, chocolate, and many other "treats".

Cats are smarter and won't eat sugar.

"The fact that xylitol-containing products can cause problems in dogs is
a relatively new find," Dr. Gwaltney-Brant said, explaining that the
sweetener had already been tied to low blood sugar in dogs—but not liver
failure. "Once you start looking at something, you see a lot more of it."


---------------------------------------

In the report, Drs. Dunayer and Gwaltney-Brant, staff members at the
Animal Poison Control Center of the American Society for the Prevention
of Cruelty to Animals in Urbana, Illinois, used the Control Center's
data base to gather information on eight dogs that were treated between
2003 and 2005 after eating products containing xylitol. Each dog became
ill, and while three of the dogs survived, five of the pets either died
or had to be euthanized because of liver failure possibly stemming from
xylitol ingestion.



Dr. Gwaltney-Brant said three additional dogs that ingested xylitol
after the study was conducted either died or had to be euthanized after
becoming ill. All three, Dr. Gwaltney-Brant said, had liver failure.
Dr. Gwaltney-Brant described the potential negative xylitol effects on
dogs as a "species difference."


"People only absorb a certain percentage of xylitol," she said. "The
human body doesn't even notice it. However, in dogs, xylitol triggers
significant insulin release, which drops the blood sugar. It is
definitely a species difference. People aren't in danger from sugar-free
gum containing xylitol; dogs are."


The number of xylitol-related pet exposures is on the rise, according to
Dr. Gwaltney-Brant, partly because of increased awareness, but more so
because xylitol is being used in more products. The
incidence of reported xylitol exposures climbed from 70 in 2004 to 170
in 2005. As of August, the Poison Control Center reported 114 cases of
xylitol exposure this year.


"This is the tip of the iceberg now," she said. "Anything that is
sugar-free could potentially have substituted xylitol for the original
sweetener."


The extent of xylitol's potential effects on the liver are new—and
certainly not good news—for dogs, their owners and veterinarians.
"The fact that xylitol-containing products can cause problems in dogs is
a relatively new find," Dr. Gwaltney-Brant said, explaining that the
sweetener had already been tied to low blood sugar in dogs—but not liver
failure. "Once you start looking at something, you see a lot more of it."

"Jbuch" wrote in message
...
The abstract of the article in question is posted in a parallel thread. I
did check the expert opinion.

Here is what the paper itself is supposed to describe -- also from the
AVMA website.

From their October 1, 2006 issue.

The authors did a dabase search - they didn't personally treat any of
these dogs said to be suffering from Xylitol exposure.

The data are national and span the years 2003 to 2005.

The number of dogs reported to suffer from xylitol exposure is growing
from just 70 in 2004 to 170 in 2005.....

I wonder how many dogs suffer from chocolate exposure and how many
fatalities there are. Do you know?

Dogs can't digest stuff harmless to humans. But too many owners do feed
doggies special treats like sugar, chocolate, and many other "treats".

Cats are smarter and won't eat sugar.

"The fact that xylitol-containing products can cause problems in dogs is a
relatively new find," Dr. Gwaltney-Brant said, explaining that the
sweetener had already been tied to low blood sugar in dogs—but not liver
failure. "Once you start looking at something, you see a lot more of it."


---------------------------------------

In the report, Drs. Dunayer and Gwaltney-Brant, staff members at the
Animal Poison Control Center of the American Society for the Prevention of
Cruelty to Animals in Urbana, Illinois, used the Control Center's data
base to gather information on eight dogs that were treated between 2003
and 2005 after eating products containing xylitol. Each dog became ill,
and while three of the dogs survived, five of the pets either died or had
to be euthanized because of liver failure possibly stemming from xylitol
ingestion.



Dr. Gwaltney-Brant said three additional dogs that ingested xylitol after
the study was conducted either died or had to be euthanized after becoming
ill. All three, Dr. Gwaltney-Brant said, had liver failure.
Dr. Gwaltney-Brant described the potential negative xylitol effects on
dogs as a "species difference."


"People only absorb a certain percentage of xylitol," she said. "The human
body doesn't even notice it. However, in dogs, xylitol triggers
significant insulin release, which drops the blood sugar. It is definitely
a species difference. People aren't in danger from sugar-free gum
containing xylitol; dogs are."


The number of xylitol-related pet exposures is on the rise, according to
Dr. Gwaltney-Brant, partly because of increased awareness, but more so
because xylitol is being used in more products. The
incidence of reported xylitol exposures climbed from 70 in 2004 to 170 in
2005. As of August, the Poison Control Center reported 114 cases of
xylitol exposure this year.


"This is the tip of the iceberg now," she said. "Anything that is
sugar-free could potentially have substituted xylitol for the original
sweetener."


The extent of xylitol's potential effects on the liver are new—and
certainly not good news—for dogs, their owners and veterinarians.
"The fact that xylitol-containing products can cause problems in dogs is a
relatively new find," Dr. Gwaltney-Brant said, explaining that the
sweetener had already been tied to low blood sugar in dogs—but not liver
failure. "Once you start looking at something, you see a lot more of it."

Yeah, that's what I was talking about...so I still wonder, why xylitol and
not other SA's...

Something else
interesting...http://www.ivis.org/proceedings/navc...A/005.asp?LA=1
briefly mentions the use of xylitol in treating bovine ketosis. Just as an
aside .


--
Sherry
lowcarb.owly.net

UsenetID wrote:
"Jbuch" wrote in message
...

The abstract of the article in question is posted in a parallel thread. I
did check the expert opinion.

Here is what the paper itself is supposed to describe -- also from the
AVMA website.

From their October 1, 2006 issue.

The authors did a dabase search - they didn't personally treat any of
these dogs said to be suffering from Xylitol exposure.

The data are national and span the years 2003 to 2005.

The number of dogs reported to suffer from xylitol exposure is growing
from just 70 in 2004 to 170 in 2005.....

I wonder how many dogs suffer from chocolate exposure and how many
fatalities there are. Do you know?

Dogs can't digest stuff harmless to humans. But too many owners do feed
doggies special treats like sugar, chocolate, and many other "treats".

Cats are smarter and won't eat sugar.

"The fact that xylitol-containing products can cause problems in dogs is a
relatively new find," Dr. Gwaltney-Brant said, explaining that the
sweetener had already been tied to low blood sugar in dogs—but not liver
failure. "Once you start looking at something, you see a lot more of it."


---------------------------------------

In the report, Drs. Dunayer and Gwaltney-Brant, staff members at the
Animal Poison Control Center of the American Society for the Prevention of
Cruelty to Animals in Urbana, Illinois, used the Control Center's data
base to gather information on eight dogs that were treated between 2003
and 2005 after eating products containing xylitol. Each dog became ill,
and while three of the dogs survived, five of the pets either died or had
to be euthanized because of liver failure possibly stemming from xylitol
ingestion.



Dr. Gwaltney-Brant said three additional dogs that ingested xylitol after
the study was conducted either died or had to be euthanized after becoming
ill. All three, Dr. Gwaltney-Brant said, had liver failure.
Dr. Gwaltney-Brant described the potential negative xylitol effects on
dogs as a "species difference."


"People only absorb a certain percentage of xylitol," she said. "The human
body doesn't even notice it. However, in dogs, xylitol triggers
significant insulin release, which drops the blood sugar. It is definitely
a species difference. People aren't in danger from sugar-free gum
containing xylitol; dogs are."


The number of xylitol-related pet exposures is on the rise, according to
Dr. Gwaltney-Brant, partly because of increased awareness, but more so
because xylitol is being used in more products. The
incidence of reported xylitol exposures climbed from 70 in 2004 to 170 in
2005. As of August, the Poison Control Center reported 114 cases of
xylitol exposure this year.


"This is the tip of the iceberg now," she said. "Anything that is
sugar-free could potentially have substituted xylitol for the original
sweetener."


The extent of xylitol's potential effects on the liver are new—and
certainly not good news—for dogs, their owners and veterinarians.
"The fact that xylitol-containing products can cause problems in dogs is a
relatively new find," Dr. Gwaltney-Brant said, explaining that the
sweetener had already been tied to low blood sugar in dogs—but not liver
failure. "Once you start looking at something, you see a lot more of it."


Yeah, that's what I was talking about...so I still wonder, why xylitol and
not other SA's...

Something else
interesting...http://www.ivis.org/proceedings/navc...A/005.asp?LA=1
briefly mentions the use of xylitol in treating bovine ketosis. Just as an
aside .




I think it is too early to actually tell much. The summary of the paper
pretty much said about the same thing....

It is probably wise to caution people about their dogs eating "undoggy"
foods such as sugars, fake sugars, chocolate (evidently Baker's
Chocolate is the most damaging form - several times more potent than
milk chocolate).

My risk point of view is that about 10 people (USA)per year die of snake
bites.

About 10,000 per year from firearms.

About 35,000 per year from automobiles

So, 100 to 200 dogs per year by fake sugar isn't an alarming thing.

There must be thousands of dogs per year killed by cars.

I am out of death statistics for humans and dogs.

My friends worry about my getting bitten by snakes and dying whenever I
go backpacking. I don't.

Jim