.
Feedback

Holiday Sugar and the Immune System

By the end of the year we are sick of so much sugar! The good news is that there are healthy and natural sugar alternatives.

It’s that time of year again, when sugary treats are all around. Halloween kicked us off and carries us right through Thanksgiving and Christmas holiday season.  While we all know the sugary treats are bad for our waist-lines, did you know that sugar also suppresses our immunity? Studies have shown that simple sugars such as glucose, table sugar, fructose, and even honey directly affect our immune system. When 100 mg of sugar is consumed (the amount of two sodas) the ability of white blood cells to consume bacteria was decreased by 50 percent. As well, the high consumption of sugar also inhibits the white bloods cells to destroy bacteria by 40%. Combine the higher amount of sugar consumption with the change of weather and the stress of the holidays and it becomes a perfect trifecta for illness. Also, recently a study showed that countries with high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) in their food supply had a 20 percent higher prevalence of type 2 diabetes than those that did not use HFCS, suggesting an association with diabetes independent of total sugar intake and obesity levels. So what can we do?

The wonderful thing is that we do not have to totally abandon the sweetness of sugar in order to be healthy. We just need to replace it with better alternatives. While giving up sugar is very difficult, replacing it is now very easy.

The good news is that all sugar is not the same. Complex carbohydrates found in vegetables, fruits, and grains showed no effect on the immune system. But for most of us, when a sugar craving hits, a carrot stick or apple slice just won’t cut it.

On the market today are two healthy and natural alternatives to sugar that not only taste good but have also been proven to be beneficial. These are two natural, organic sugar alternatives that are sweet, easy to use and cook with: stevia and xylitol. They may sound like chemicals but they are completely natural and have been proven not only safe but beneficial for our well-being.

The best sweetener to use is Stevia (Stevia rebaudiana) which an herb that has been used in South America for hundreds of years. It is calorie-free, which means it has no effect on our bodies' production of insulin. Stevia, in its powdered concentrate, is 300 times sweeter than sugar, so only tiny amounts are needed for sweetening.

There have not been any reports of toxicity with stevia, which is consumed by millions of people daily. The only thing that puts off  people from using stevia more  is that it can taste a little bitter in drinks and in some recipes, but this can be overcome by using another wonderful sweetener, called xylitol, in combination with stevia for ideal sugar replacement.

Xylitol is also a natural substance found in fibrous vegetables and fruit, as well as in corn cobs and various hardwood trees, like birch. Relatively high quantities of xylitol are found in plums, raspberries and cauliflower. Even though xylitol is derived from fruits and vegetables, it is not the same as fructose. Xylitol is a five-carbon sugar, which means that it is anti-microbial, whereas all other forms of sugar are six-carbon sugars, which cause bacterial and fungi overgrowth.

Xylitol
looks, feels and tastes exactly like sugar but that’s where similarity ends. While sugar wreaks havoc on the body, xylitol heals and repairs. It also builds immunity.

Some of the benefits of using xylitol as a sugar substitute:

  • Glycemic index of 7 (sucrose is 60)
  • Minimal effect on blood sugar and insulin levels
  • Inhibits yeast, including Candida Albicans (it actually helps fight candida)
  • Inhibits plaque and dental cavities by 80 percent (dentists use it and recommend xylitol toothpaste)
  • Retards demineralization, and promotes re-mineralization, of tooth enamel
  • Unlike many artificial sweeteners, it leaves no unpleasant aftertaste.

 Here are some recipe links that use stevia and xylitol as sugar substitutes:

http://www.stevia.com/Stevia_Recipes.aspx

http://www.epicdental.com/t-xylitol-recipes.aspx

http://foodandspice.blogspot.com/2011/10/quick-and-easy-brownies-with-xylitol.html


Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/022692_sugar_xylitol_stevia.html#ixzz2731rx9hn

 Dr. Jared Newman is a Chiropractor and Internal Health Specialist at Newman Chiropractic and Wellness in Encinitas. He has been trained and certified by the Loomis Institute of Enzyme Nutrition to recognize and analyze signs and symptoms of a patients’ problem. He uses that analysis to examine the body for mechanical and nutritional stressors that are a result of a compromised digestive system. He is able to help many people who have structural problems which cause pain and also help them obtain optimal internal health through enzyme supplementation, proper nutrition and digestion of the food they eat. www.NewmanChiroSD.com

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Encinitas Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Vicki Campbell June 17, 2013 at 04:42 pm
Prop A will help residents and stop greedy developers from buying city council. Vote YES
Rick Moore June 18, 2013 at 09:27 am
I wholeheartedly agree with the recommendation that folks read the initiative. When you readRead More sections 6 and 9, you will see that Prop A sets a 30-foot or 2-story ceiling across the entire city, overriding lower height limits in many areas. The Downtown Specific Plan limits residences to 22-26 feet, as detailed on the DEMA website, so Prop A would actually allow the building of taller homes. It makes no exemptions or allowances for historic buildings like La Paloma, church towers or other structures over 30 feet high; the only exceptions are medical complexes and public high schools (see clause 6.2). Rebuilding or renovating (more than 50%) would require expensive public votes. Should the SRF be required to pay for an election to rebuild the Lotus Tower? Such contingencies are allowed for in our Historic Overlay Zone, which would clearly be overridden by Prop A. So is the Encinitas Preservation Association's plan to convert one of the boathouses to a museum. Again, Prop A would require an election (see section 4.1, clause e), which the EPA cannot afford. Prop A would thus favor large developers who have the money, time, lawyers and other resources to campaign for their project. How many nonprofits and small businessmen can afford to spend a minimum $30,000 just to get their project on a general election ballot (upwards of $300,000 for a special election like this one)? Yes, folks, please read the initiative, especially Section 9, which lays waste to anything that conflicts with it. That's why this has been dubbed Propzilla. I trust that most Encinitas citizens are smart enough to see that this meausre is deeply flawed, problematic and counter-productive. We can find much better ways to limit growth and preserve community character.
BlueAngel2 June 18, 2013 at 10:20 am
SAVE ENCINITAS FROM RANCID DEVELOPERS. VOTE YES ON PROP A!
BlueAngel2 June 15, 2013 at 09:47 pm
It would NOT surprise me. I thought we dumped Stocks. Why is he still around?
Encinitas YES on A June 16, 2013 at 02:44 pm
My YES on Prop. A sign was stolen yesterday. Other YES on Prop. A signs are disappearing. YetRead More another deceptive and untruthful mailer from the opponents of Prop. A was in my mail box. There's a shrillness and desperation in their opposition. They can't rely on facts and fair play. Polling data not looking good?
BlueAngel2 June 16, 2013 at 03:17 pm
YES ON PROP A will be victorious!
BlueAngel2 June 8, 2013 at 11:20 am
It just goes to show if Stocks or any of his puppets are involved, you will not hear the truth aboutRead More this proposition. They continue to confuse the issue. Please do not throw your vote away to ruin our city and enhance the developer's pockets who do not care what they do to our beautiful Encinitas. Vote YES on PROP A!
TB-ENC June 7, 2013 at 02:01 pm
How is this not a racist group with Hispanics in California at 14 million second behind whites atRead More 14.8 million. We only need one chamber to represent all Californians.
BlueAngel2 June 8, 2013 at 02:09 pm
So any group other than white is a racist group?
Miranda Klassen June 5, 2013 at 10:39 am
Congrats to all on the groundbreaking. Reesey has done an incredible job with making Lux what it isRead More today!
BlueAngel2 June 4, 2013 at 10:40 am
Vote YES on PROP A! The City Council is not experienced in real estate, zoning, construction orRead More development to make decisions for us.
CardiffCreature June 4, 2013 at 10:44 am
Prop A will not control growth. It will make sure that BOTH the council and the public get toRead More directly weigh in on the deals being brokered between big developers and the city. This won't end the indirect developer subsidies, but it sure will help.
Lynn Marr June 6, 2013 at 02:26 am
Yes, it will help to slow growth, by making sure that the public approves raising height limits orRead More upzoning, for developments over the parameters of a MAXIMUM of 30 ft. and two stories. Lower set height limits will not be repealed, because they are not in conflict with the initiative or the General Plan. David Ahlgren's fear and speculation is not backed up by one single fact. He just raises the usual building industry "mantra" of alleged risks created by unnamed "unintended consequences." Council's attempt at a preemptive ordinance does NOT guarantee that will be placed on the ballot in 2014, and does NOT eliminate other loopholes such as the "less-than-5-acre" exception, the "categorization of intensity of use" exception, and the height limit exception. The only loophole that Council's drafted ordinance affects is Council's ability to vote by a 4/5 supermajority on upzoing if it is done with respect to a "significant public benefit." Not only is Council's recently drafted ordinance NOT guaranteed, in that a future Council could reverse it, if it is not enacted through a public vote, but also Council's attempt at preempting the "right to vote on upzoning and raising height limits initiative" DOESN"T eliminate the other loopholes that still exist in our General Plan, Policy 3.12., which exceptions I've spelled out, here.
Lynn Marr June 6, 2013 at 02:37 am
An initiative to Prop A has worked in Escondido, without any lawsuits. "In the 26-yearRead More history of Encinitas, no council has ever used this provision to approve a major project without first a vote of the people." That's completely untrue. The North 101 and Downtown Encinitas Specific Plans were pushed through by the Planning Department, the Planning Commission and a supermajority of past Council AGAINST the wishes of citizens, against years of feedback from Specific Action Review Committees (Sparc)s and Community Advisory Boards (CABs), who wanted to stay with the limits of the General Plan of two stories, 30 ft, MAX, with certain exceptions, consistent with the Initiative! Just posting your opinion without any supporting evidence, Mr. Stocks, is only hurting your "cause." We and everyone we know, all our friends and neighbors, are voting YES on A! Voting YES is best if you want to take back your ability to help slow growth and to take back local control. Yes on A is a vote for Democracy and against insider influence and spinmaster jive promoted by marketing masters of misinformation, attempting to manipulate the uninformed masses with distortions of the truth. We don't need to be spoon-fed our opinions, but can think for ourselves, and act to protect and preserve our community character and our quality of life.
Greg Hay June 6, 2013 at 07:19 pm
Lies, lies and more lies. That's all the supporters of "No on Prop A" can come up with.Read More Even their slogan is weak and devoid of anything of substance… "It's not what it seems"… Really, THAT'S your argument against it?
BlueAngel2 June 6, 2013 at 07:22 pm
YES on PROP A which is NOT deeply flawed and very well written.