Cane juice vs table sugar

Some “organic” products contain this cane juice. I was just wondering what is the difference between this “super healthy substance” and “white death table sugar”. not too much difference… BE AWARE AND TAKE CARE:

Sugar cane juice is the juice extracted from pressed sugarcane. It is consumed as a beverage worldwide, and especially in regions where sugarcane is commercially grown such as Southeast Asia, South Asia, and Latin America.
Evaporated cane juice is a loosely defined term which can include combinations of sugars including fructose, glucose and white sugar (sucrose). It is perceived to be less processed than white sugar, leading some to claim it is healthier.[1] However, nutritional benefits are minimal; evaporated cane juice can contain trace amounts of vitamins and minerals but has the same amount of calories as table sugar[2] and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration defines evaporated cane juice as any sweetener derived from sugar cane syrup,[3] and therefore it might be heavily processed. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration recommends that “evaporated cane juice” not be listed as an ingredient on food labels because it is not a commonly used name and does not meet the USDA definition of “juice”

They are both equally as harmful…the chemical compound of processed sugar is similar to heroin. If you like sweet stuff and want an insulin safe alternative - stevia, agave syrup and also Sommersweet (Suzanne Sommers product which has the best flavor and you can bake with it the best but it is pricey and hard to find) are the best)

Also lots of tricky names for the same thing - fructose, dextrose ( things that end is -ose), corn sugar, HFG, high fructose corn syrup, evaporated cane sugar.

[QUOTE=synergyjasmine;57929] insulin safe[/QUOTE]

Insulin safe??? What does that mean?

Vic

[QUOTE=synergyjasmine;57929]
Also lots of tricky names for the same thing - fructose, dextrose ( things that end is -ose), corn sugar, HFG, high fructose corn syrup, evaporated cane sugar.[/QUOTE]

Exactly! Tricky names:)

I like xylitol and stevia as a substitute.

insulin safe means safe for diabetics who do not want their blood sugar level to rise.

Stevia is awesome from a health perspective but it is hard to bake with since it doesn’t carmelize and it tends to have a wierd aftertaste.

One of my favorite stevia recipes

Take 4 cups butternut squash and boil. Then put in cuisanart and put in 4 T butterscotch schnapps, 2 T vanilla, 1 T stevia and blend. Put in oven in a dish and bake 35 min on 350. Can be served warm or cold. Make more than you expect since it is so yummy you will want more. I guess having alcohol in there technically makes is a sugar desert since alcohol is a form of sugar.

What is citymonth?

[QUOTE=Adler;60502]Yes CityMonk both are harmful and not good for health. So i must say here take care and be aware, because it is a matter of health.[/QUOTE]

Well, that mens everything is good on moderation;) even “natural” not refined sugars.

I love cane juice…here in the penh there are sugar cane juice sellers on may street corners…and some mobile ones…Yuummm…fresh squished sugar cane with a little lime and lots or crushed ice…served in a plastic bag with a straw…very refreshing on a hot day.
I know it is just sugar…but it has got to be better than packaged soft drinks…

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/17/magazine/mag-17Sugar-t.html?_r=1

On May 26, 2009, Robert Lustig gave a lecture called “Sugar: The Bitter Truth,” which was posted on YouTube the following July. Since then, it has been viewed well over 800,000 times, gaining new viewers at a rate of about 50,000 per month, fairly remarkable numbers for a 90-minute discussion of the nuances of fructose biochemistry and human physiology.
Q. and A With Gary Taubes

The author answered reader questions on the Well blog.
Multimedia

What the average American consumes in added sugars:
Graphic
High-Fructose Corn Syrup Consumption
Graphic
Sugar Consumption
Related

Sweet and Vicious (May 1, 2011)
Times Topic: Sugar

Enlarge This Image
Kenji Aoki for The New York Times

Lustig is a specialist on pediatric hormone disorders and the leading expert in childhood obesity at the University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine, which is one of the best medical schools in the country. He published his first paper on childhood obesity a dozen years ago, and he has been treating patients and doing research on the disorder ever since.

The viral success of his lecture, though, has little to do with Lustig’s impressive credentials and far more with the persuasive case he makes that sugar is a “toxin” or a “poison,” terms he uses together 13 times through the course of the lecture, in addition to the five references to sugar as merely “evil.” And by “sugar,” Lustig means not only the white granulated stuff that we put in coffee and sprinkle on cereal — technically known as sucrose — but also high-fructose corn syrup, which has already become without Lustig’s help what he calls “the most demonized additive known to man.”

It doesn’t hurt Lustig’s cause that he is a compelling public speaker. His critics argue that what makes him compelling is his practice of taking suggestive evidence and insisting that it’s incontrovertible. Lustig certainly doesn’t dabble in shades of gray. Sugar is not just an empty calorie, he says; its effect on us is much more insidious. “It’s not about the calories,” he says. “It has nothing to do with the calories. It’s a poison by itself.”

If Lustig is right, then our excessive consumption of sugar is the primary reason that the numbers of obese and diabetic Americans have skyrocketed in the past 30 years. But his argument implies more than that. If Lustig is right, it would mean that sugar is also the likely dietary cause of several other chronic ailments widely considered to be diseases of Western lifestyles — heart disease, hypertension and many common cancers among them.

The number of viewers Lustig has attracted suggests that people are paying attention to his argument. When I set out to interview public health authorities and researchers for this article, they would often initiate the interview with some variation of the comment “surely you’ve spoken to Robert Lustig,” not because Lustig has done any of the key research on sugar himself, which he hasn’t, but because he’s willing to insist publicly and unambiguously, when most researchers are not, that sugar is a toxic substance that people abuse. In Lustig’s view, sugar should be thought of, like cigarettes and alcohol, as something that’s killing us.

This brings us to the salient question: Can sugar possibly be as bad as Lustig says it is?

well… good article, and the guy does a good job educating people…

But I still not getting (maybe because I’m a foreigner :wink: [B] why [U]high fructose corn syrup HFCS-90 (90% fructose) [/U] is considered an evil, and [U]agave nectar (92% fructose) [/U]is super-natural-healthy for -you thing…?)[/B]
(for the convince lets assume organically grown corn)

hmmmm… good question. Did you see the youtube video? He makes a pretty convincing case against HFC…I’m not a sugar expert…I went one week without refined sugar and I felt more energetic, more calm…I did have stevia that week though…try going a few days without it…and notice how you feel…try only having agave nectar and no refined sugars and just notice how you feel…