Agave Nectar
-
art
- Posts: 102
- https://cutt.ly/meble-kuchenne-wroclaw
- Joined: Thu 20 Oct 2005 00:01
Agave Nectar
would agave nectar be fine to replace of sugar in the fruit juices?
Why would you want to consume that instead of regular sugar? (I suppose its way more expensive than regular sugar)
If this sugar has not been refined thoroughly, it may contain 'dirty' (protein-containing) components. In the case of sugars less 'cooked' is not better, because the refining process is to 'flush out' everything except for the pure sugar. And you dont want any other molecules in this processed product.
If this sugar has not been refined thoroughly, it may contain 'dirty' (protein-containing) components. In the case of sugars less 'cooked' is not better, because the refining process is to 'flush out' everything except for the pure sugar. And you dont want any other molecules in this processed product.
Agave nectar is an excellent substitute for sugar.
It is much lower on the glycemic index. I believe it is even lower than a raw orange.
Rather than using a cup of sugar, you would only need 1/3 or 1/4 a cup of agave.
It has no protein and the bottle I bought says that is was specially produced at temperatures below 115 degrees.
It is much lower on the glycemic index. I believe it is even lower than a raw orange.
Rather than using a cup of sugar, you would only need 1/3 or 1/4 a cup of agave.
It has no protein and the bottle I bought says that is was specially produced at temperatures below 115 degrees.
Lower on the glycemic index does not at all mean better.MJ wrote:Agave nectar is an excellent substitute for sugar.
It is much lower on the glycemic index.
You first need to know its exact contents; what simple and/or complex sugars does it contain. Some complex sugars are nasty.
How is that?Rather than using a cup of sugar, you would only need 1/3 or 1/4 a cup of agave.
What makes you think this to be true?
Agave nectar is produced from the cores of the agave cactus plant. Due to recent mass public interest in the sweetener, modern processing techniques have taken over the production of agave nectar, and many products are less than satisfactory when considering health.
), one of the polysaccharides and a considered soluble fiber in agave nectar is said to reduce the speed at which the sugar in agave nectar is absorbed, so that may account for why the agave is said to have a low glycemic index.
Anyway, whatever the case between agave and the orange, the inulin in the agave may cause it to have a slightly (if at all) lower glycemic index than sugar (although there is less actual sugar in one tablespoon of refined sugar than one tablespoon of agave nectar). However, agave nectar is still a sugar and should still be regarded as a sugar, so the necessary steps ought to be taken to prevent a rise in blood sugar.
Pros:
- Agave nectar contains the polysaccharide inulin, which may (as discussed above) cause it to have a lesser effect on blood sugar levels than sucrose.
- The polysaccharide inulin is also an excellent food source for beneficial microorganisms that reside in the gut. Inulin is not digested by the human body and passes into the intestines where bacteria degrade it into fructooligosaccharides (FOS) that can be readily metabolized by the bacteria. FOS are a much more potent food source for beneficial flora than sucrose or glucose, sugars which also tend to feed harmful microorganisms such as yeasts and molds.
- Agave nectar contains trace amounts of several minerals (although other sweeteners such as, say, molasses, tend to contain much greater quantities), and it does have mentionable (although not considerable) levels of calcium (low enough to comply with the theory of osteoporosis that's associated with this site)
- Agave nectar may be more ecologically sustainable when compared to many of the greater sugar producing enterprises. If one is environmentally concious, they may choose agave nectar over refined white sugar, although today many cane sugar producers are switching to less destructive methods.
- Truely raw agave nectar is sought after by the raw foodies to maintain their "raw lifestyle." It also may be free of substances produced during heated processing.
Cons:
- This product certainly is more expensive than regular sugar (at least almost all commercial brands are). Prices are expected to further inflate due to the movement in Mexico where entire agave farms are being torn up so the land can be used to grow the more profitable corn (for ethanol).
- Unless it is truely raw, agave nectar contains residual amounts of protein that may pose a threat to someone very susceptible to acne.
On another note:
When I write "truely raw" agave nectar, I'm speaking of the clear, colorless extract from the agave plant that has never been heated. Commercial agave nectar may be labled as raw, but many have an amber or golden hue. This is indicative of either heated processing or the use of corn syrup to cheaply increase the volume of agave nectar. If you are looking for pure, raw agave nectar, it should be clear and colorless (or as clear and colorless as possible-- some may be slightly tinted).
All in all, if you are willing to pay, agave nectar may provide some benefits over white sugar. For me, I'll stick with fruit.
The carbohydrate composition of agave nectar is almost 1:1 glucose to fructose, 8:1 glucose+fructose to sucrose, and 8:1 glucose+fructose to polysaccharides. The agave plant stores its energy in the form of fructins, so the polysaccharide content is mostly inulin and very little starch.RRM wrote:Is that nectar purely sugars?
Agave nectar contains residual protein from the agave plant (about 1 gram per cup, if i remember correctly). In truely raw agave nectar, this amount of protein should pose no problem. However, many brands marketed as raw aren't truely raw and pure agave nectar, and that residual protein may be a concern to those very susceptible to acne.MJ wrote:It has no protein.
This claim is speculative, because we do not know the quantity of agave nectar in comparison to one orange. If we were comparing one tablespoon of agave nectar to one orange (both containing about 15-17 grams of sugar), I would say the agave has a higher glycemic index because the agave contains a higher %glucose to fructose than the orange (assuming sucrose in both the agave nectar and the orange is hydrolized). Glucose tends to initiate the release of insulin whereas fructose is insulemic. The orange is also higher in both soluble and insoluble fiber, which slows the absorption of the sugars into the bloodstream. Inulin (not insulinIt is much lower on the glycemic index. I believe it is even lower than a raw orange.
), one of the polysaccharides and a considered soluble fiber in agave nectar is said to reduce the speed at which the sugar in agave nectar is absorbed, so that may account for why the agave is said to have a low glycemic index. Anyway, whatever the case between agave and the orange, the inulin in the agave may cause it to have a slightly (if at all) lower glycemic index than sugar (although there is less actual sugar in one tablespoon of refined sugar than one tablespoon of agave nectar). However, agave nectar is still a sugar and should still be regarded as a sugar, so the necessary steps ought to be taken to prevent a rise in blood sugar.
There really aren't any incredible reasons to use agave nectar over cane sugar.RRM wrote:Why would you want to consume that instead of regular sugar? (I suppose its way more expensive than regular sugar)
If this sugar has not been refined thoroughly, it may contain 'dirty' (protein-containing) components. In the case of sugars less 'cooked' is not better, because the refining process is to 'flush out' everything except for the pure sugar. And you dont want any other molecules in this processed product.
Pros:
- Agave nectar contains the polysaccharide inulin, which may (as discussed above) cause it to have a lesser effect on blood sugar levels than sucrose.
- The polysaccharide inulin is also an excellent food source for beneficial microorganisms that reside in the gut. Inulin is not digested by the human body and passes into the intestines where bacteria degrade it into fructooligosaccharides (FOS) that can be readily metabolized by the bacteria. FOS are a much more potent food source for beneficial flora than sucrose or glucose, sugars which also tend to feed harmful microorganisms such as yeasts and molds.
- Agave nectar contains trace amounts of several minerals (although other sweeteners such as, say, molasses, tend to contain much greater quantities), and it does have mentionable (although not considerable) levels of calcium (low enough to comply with the theory of osteoporosis that's associated with this site)
- Agave nectar may be more ecologically sustainable when compared to many of the greater sugar producing enterprises. If one is environmentally concious, they may choose agave nectar over refined white sugar, although today many cane sugar producers are switching to less destructive methods.
- Truely raw agave nectar is sought after by the raw foodies to maintain their "raw lifestyle." It also may be free of substances produced during heated processing.
Cons:
- This product certainly is more expensive than regular sugar (at least almost all commercial brands are). Prices are expected to further inflate due to the movement in Mexico where entire agave farms are being torn up so the land can be used to grow the more profitable corn (for ethanol).
- Unless it is truely raw, agave nectar contains residual amounts of protein that may pose a threat to someone very susceptible to acne.
On another note:
When I write "truely raw" agave nectar, I'm speaking of the clear, colorless extract from the agave plant that has never been heated. Commercial agave nectar may be labled as raw, but many have an amber or golden hue. This is indicative of either heated processing or the use of corn syrup to cheaply increase the volume of agave nectar. If you are looking for pure, raw agave nectar, it should be clear and colorless (or as clear and colorless as possible-- some may be slightly tinted).
All in all, if you are willing to pay, agave nectar may provide some benefits over white sugar. For me, I'll stick with fruit.
But all depends on the amount anyway, so not really a pro.CY wrote:Pros:
- Agave nectar contains the polysaccharide inulin, which may (as discussed above) cause it to have a lesser effect on blood sugar levels than sucrose.
Why would it feed only beneficial flora and not harmful flora?CY wrote:- The polysaccharide inulin is also an excellent food source for beneficial microorganisms that reside in the gut. Inulin is not digested by the human body and passes into the intestines where bacteria degrade it into fructooligosaccharides (FOS) that can be readily metabolized by the bacteria. FOS are a much more potent food source for beneficial flora than sucrose or glucose, sugars which also tend to feed harmful microorganisms such as yeasts and molds.
The intake of minerals is hardly an issue on this diet (maybe for normal diets it is), so not really a pro.CY wrote:- Agave nectar contains trace amounts of several minerals (although other sweeteners such as, say, molasses, tend to contain much greater quantities), and it does have mentionable (although not considerable) levels of calcium (low enough to comply with the theory of osteoporosis that's associated with this site)
HmmmCY wrote:- Truely raw agave nectar is sought after by the raw foodies to maintain their "raw lifestyle." It also may be free of substances produced during heated processing.
-
summerwave
- Posts: 274
- Joined: Sat 13 Sep 2008 22:47
refined fructose; levulose; etc.
Is this scientifically sound? (in re: fructose vs. levulose):
http://www.naturalnews.com/024892.html
http://www.naturalnews.com/024892.html
-
summerwave
- Posts: 274
- Joined: Sat 13 Sep 2008 22:47
further confusion
....
The wildnerness family naturals agave is made by Nekutli.
"Traditionally, Agave syrup is a very dark, thick liquid with a characteristic smell and strong flavor. It is dark because, during the evaporating process, some of the sugars caramelize and Maillard reactions occur causing a cross-linking between sugars and amino acids. These reactions occur because high temperatures are used to evaporate the aguamiel. (>90 °C, 194 °F). The strong flavor and aroma of traditional agave syrup is caused by the high concentration of salts (calcium, magnesium, sodium, potassium, etc.). The syrup is high in fructose and dextrose because the larger carbohydrates undergo a thermal hydrolysis into the monosaccharides."
Traditional agave (agua miel) is made by boiling (not available in US), their agave is made by enzyme hydrolysis, it turns the natural sugar's into fructose, a synthetic sugar.
"Wilderness Family Naturals' Raw Agave Nectar is not heated. You will find it very light in color and extremely mild tasting. Absolutely no carmelization or cross linking of sugars and proteins occurs during the process. It is sent to the enzymatic reactor. In this tank, a natural enzyme is added to the sugars to break them down into fructose and dextrose."
Synthetically made enzymes convert unsweet substances into refined fructose, a sweetener linked with many diseases. Real sweetener from agave plants, (Agua Miel) not available in the US, has like they say, a strong flavor. This is a new sweetener, refined fructose, and it is not safe to consume.
~~~~~~~~~~
This is the second part of the above email (the site has bolded and italicized the comments):
It says right on this page http://www.wildernessfamilynaturals.com/agave.htm
Fructose 70-75%. This is the stuff that give lab rats disease.
"First, my understanding is the term levulose is synonymous with
fructose. "
Levulose is not the same as fructose. Levulose is recognized by the body, fructose is not. Fructose is the reverse isermization of levulose.
"Levulose is metabolized in the liver and its uptake is not regulated by insulin."
Fructose, not levulose is metabolized in the liver because it's poisonous. Liver processes poisons.
"Third, regarding Volcanic blue agave nectar, claims are made for it
stating it is "diabetic friendly" based on its measured glycemic index. "
The government does not approve this term, and it is NOT diabetic friendly. High fructose is highly dangerous to diabetics.
"Volcanic blue agave syrup is that it provides a long lasting source of energy with no
side effects except moderate appetite suppression."
This is high fructose agave syrup. It's not better nor safer than high fructose corn syrup. Stay away from this product if you want to be healthy.
The wildnerness family naturals agave is made by Nekutli.
"Traditionally, Agave syrup is a very dark, thick liquid with a characteristic smell and strong flavor. It is dark because, during the evaporating process, some of the sugars caramelize and Maillard reactions occur causing a cross-linking between sugars and amino acids. These reactions occur because high temperatures are used to evaporate the aguamiel. (>90 °C, 194 °F). The strong flavor and aroma of traditional agave syrup is caused by the high concentration of salts (calcium, magnesium, sodium, potassium, etc.). The syrup is high in fructose and dextrose because the larger carbohydrates undergo a thermal hydrolysis into the monosaccharides."
Traditional agave (agua miel) is made by boiling (not available in US), their agave is made by enzyme hydrolysis, it turns the natural sugar's into fructose, a synthetic sugar.
"Wilderness Family Naturals' Raw Agave Nectar is not heated. You will find it very light in color and extremely mild tasting. Absolutely no carmelization or cross linking of sugars and proteins occurs during the process. It is sent to the enzymatic reactor. In this tank, a natural enzyme is added to the sugars to break them down into fructose and dextrose."
Synthetically made enzymes convert unsweet substances into refined fructose, a sweetener linked with many diseases. Real sweetener from agave plants, (Agua Miel) not available in the US, has like they say, a strong flavor. This is a new sweetener, refined fructose, and it is not safe to consume.
~~~~~~~~~~
This is the second part of the above email (the site has bolded and italicized the comments):
It says right on this page http://www.wildernessfamilynaturals.com/agave.htm
Fructose 70-75%. This is the stuff that give lab rats disease.
"First, my understanding is the term levulose is synonymous with
fructose. "
Levulose is not the same as fructose. Levulose is recognized by the body, fructose is not. Fructose is the reverse isermization of levulose.
"Levulose is metabolized in the liver and its uptake is not regulated by insulin."
Fructose, not levulose is metabolized in the liver because it's poisonous. Liver processes poisons.
"Third, regarding Volcanic blue agave nectar, claims are made for it
stating it is "diabetic friendly" based on its measured glycemic index. "
The government does not approve this term, and it is NOT diabetic friendly. High fructose is highly dangerous to diabetics.
"Volcanic blue agave syrup is that it provides a long lasting source of energy with no
side effects except moderate appetite suppression."
This is high fructose agave syrup. It's not better nor safer than high fructose corn syrup. Stay away from this product if you want to be healthy.
-
summerwave
- Posts: 274
- Joined: Sat 13 Sep 2008 22:47
source of above
Wow; the composing process somehow deleted my lengthy header for the last message--
The above is from a blog for the US website Toothsoap.com, a natural-foods site that recommends dental care that centers on brushing the teeth with plain soap. The site comments on other natural-food trends and products; hence the above posting. The comments above are by a reader to the site and were posted by Toothsoap.
I cannot make headway in this in terms of the information about refined fructose. I have eaten refined fructose in small amounts, and it seemed fine. However, I for the most part use raw honey as a sweetener.
It is very interesting to read the above; I would simply like to know more about refined fructose, since I would rather add this than white sugar if I use a refined sugar in juices, as it is a monosaccharide and therefore requires no digestion; it is easier on the lower intestine, where sucrose normally is broken into monosaccharides. I have had candida in the past and my lower intestine is sensitive to complex carbohydrates and sugars such as sucrose.
The above is from a blog for the US website Toothsoap.com, a natural-foods site that recommends dental care that centers on brushing the teeth with plain soap. The site comments on other natural-food trends and products; hence the above posting. The comments above are by a reader to the site and were posted by Toothsoap.
I cannot make headway in this in terms of the information about refined fructose. I have eaten refined fructose in small amounts, and it seemed fine. However, I for the most part use raw honey as a sweetener.
It is very interesting to read the above; I would simply like to know more about refined fructose, since I would rather add this than white sugar if I use a refined sugar in juices, as it is a monosaccharide and therefore requires no digestion; it is easier on the lower intestine, where sucrose normally is broken into monosaccharides. I have had candida in the past and my lower intestine is sensitive to complex carbohydrates and sugars such as sucrose.
I would take it easy on the fructose. It goes a different pathway and your fructose intake needs to be in balance with your glucose intake.
But sure, a balanced fructose intake is safe; fructose is present in most foods.
But sure, a balanced fructose intake is safe; fructose is present in most foods.
Fructose is a completely natural occuring sugar.summerwave wrote: ... it turns the natural sugar's into fructose, a synthetic sugar.
True, fructose concentrates bring the body out of balance.... refined fructose, a sweetener linked with many diseases.
Thats nonsense. There is a pathway for utilizing fructose for energy. Hence it is very well recognised.Levulose is recognized by the body, fructose is not.
My God, that guy is taking things out of perspective.it's poisonous.
And valuable nutrients.Liver processes poisons.
I agree.High fructose is highly dangerous to diabetics.
-
summerwave
- Posts: 274
- Joined: Sat 13 Sep 2008 22:47
fructose
In fact your response is what I thought, too.... The 'science' of what the poster is saying seems bizarre; I did not understand how this could be so! (especially with regard to the liver....)