I have always been a fan of root beer. When my sister and I were kids, our intake of sugary drinks was actively monitored by our mom and so there wasn't much in the way of soda in our house. When we'd go out to eat, my dad would often get a root beer while we had to content ourselves with milk. We'd beg for sips from his glass on those occasions and so I associate root beer with comfortable family outings and special treats.

When I heard that Thomas Kemper, craft brewer of quality sodas (out of my hometown of Portland, OR) had developed a low calorie root beer that was sweetened with Splenda and honey, I was really excited to taste it. The box arrived last week with three artfully arranged bottles of soda and I popped the whole thing into the fridge to chill.

A couple of hours later it was cool and ready to taste (I must say that drinking soda out of a glass bottle is far more satisfying than out of a can). Twisting off the cap, I took a long pull and swallowed. It was nice and fizzy, but sadly didn't live up to the flavor profile of Thomas Kemper's sugar version of root beer. It is missing the sharpness that root beer typically delivers. This product is totally drinkable and for those folks who are watching their calorie and sugar intake, I would say that it's a terrific option. But personally, I would rather have a single, sugar-based root beer once a month than drink this version on a more frequent basis.

This root beer is available starting this month, and they will be following it up with low calorie versions of their ginger ale and black cherry soda in April.

Think you're helping your weight loss because you're saving calories with artificial sweeteners?

Put down that pink/yellow/blue packet and step away from your latte.

New research from scientists at Purdue University claim that artificial sweeteners, long thought to aid in dieting, actually makes it tougher to lose weight. Because sweet foods normally prompt the body to get ready to take in a lot of calories, the body gets confused when the taste of sweetness from an artificial sweetener is not followed by a calorie flux. You'll eventually end up eating more, or burning fewer calories.

Guess that means I'm going back to plain old sugar.

Citizens for Health, a national consumer group, is concerned that the artificial sweetener Splenda is causing side effects and making consumers ill. Though it isn't stated which specific side effects people are experiencing, the group is lobbying for additional research to be conducted on sucralose, the sweetening component of Splenda.

Merisant, the makers of Equal and NutraSweet, believe that the company which makes Splenda, McNeil Nutritionals, is misleading the public with their tagline "made from sugar so it tastes like sugar."

The Chairman of Citizens for Health, Jim Turner, has stated, "I encourage consumers to contact us if they have suffered any side effects from the use of the chlorinated artificial sweetener Splenda and to join us in demanding that FDA immediately conduct case studies on possible side effects from its use."

But that's what I eat every single day. And I'm only counting the tea I drink, not actual food.

I'm not a coffee drinker, I'm a tea drinker, so I'm probably healthy in that way, since tea has been proven to have many good health benefits. And I use fat free milk in my tea too. But the sugar. Oh, the sugar. I have 4 packets in each cup of tea that I make, and I have around 4 cups a day. That can't be good for me, can it? (And that's an average day - there have been some days when I've had 5 or 6 cups.)

I've tried sugar substitutes. I'm a fan of Splenda, though I can't get used to using it in tea (sorry). The other substitues don't do anything for me. I know, I know, I could either have flavored teas (nah, never liked them), or go without any sugar in the tea at all. No sugar? That's just crazy talk.

Somewhere around 25% of coffee drinkers in the US now prefer their coffee with a flavor, such as hazelnut or vanilla, and at least that many use calorie-free sweeteners in place of sugar on a regular basis. Splenda's new Flavor Blends for Coffee combine those concepts. They are packets of sweetener flavored to taste like French Vanilla, Hazelnut and Mocha, allowing consumers to "customize hot beverages at home or on the go with no calories."

The Flavor Blends only launched this week, so they might not be in stores in your area yet, but for fans of Splenda, they sound very promising. They will be ideal for using at the office, rather than going out to Starbucks for a high-calorie (and relatively high-cost) mocha. Their small size also allows them be tucked into a purse or coat pocket when traveling, but they will work well for regular home use, too.

Stevia is not a sweetener that is approved for use by the FDA. It is actually classified as a dietary supplement, an herb, that happens to be sweeter than sugar and can be - and is - used as a sweetener. It is all natural, has no calories (or carbs) and is getting more and more popular, though it makes up only a small portion of the non-sugar sweetener market.

Its popularity is due to an increased awareness for the product, thanks to well-placed advertisements and hard work on the part of the SweetLeaf Stevia brand's LA marketing firm, which has made sure that high end restaurants and even stores carry the product, prompting even more coverage from newspapers and magazines.

The only problem with Stevia, according to both the manufacturers and consumers, is that it is still hard to find. Not all stores carry it. Some stores, like Trader Joe's, try to make the product easily visible, but because it is an herb, it is often stocked in the supplements aisle in other stores, not in the section of the market with the sugars and sweeteners. Clearly this is not a huge setback, however, because the sales of the sweetener are steadily increasing. In the last year alone, they have increased almost 40%, though overall sales are only one tenth of the sales of Splenda, the top selling non-sugar sweetener.

If the interest in the product keeps growing at this rate - and it seems likely to - we could see Stevia become more widely available and used in more packaged products in place of artificial sugars.

Dr. Biggles, who blogs primarily about the wonders of meat at Meathenge, will occasionally diverge from his carnivorous inclinations and post something a little bit different. Fortunately for his readers, posts like this one, about a batch of no-sugar-added Blackberry Jam, are equally satisfying. Made from fresh blackberries and apples, as the apples provide pectin to keep the jam together, the reason the jam is sugarless and was sweetened with Splenda is that it was made to be shared with a diabetic. Although the recipe had no real sugar added to it, it sounds as though it turned out perfectly and was a hit with everyone- diabetic or not. If you pick up a bunch of fresh berries and can't think of wh

Aside from the claim of "Zero calories!", which may or may not be considered a benefit, Splenda can not be considered to be "health food." The popular artificial sweetener is just that: artificial. This week, however, the FDA decided that some foods that use Splenda can claim limited health benefits because of the fact that they contain the sweetener. Following a request from the McNeil Nutritionals, which manufactures Splenda , the FDA is allowing products made with Splenda to state that they do not promote tooth decay. The claim cannot be made for the sweetener alone. Companies that wish to make use of the health claim must use the following wording: Frequent eating of foods high in sugars and starches as between-meal snacks can promote tooth decay. Sucralose, the sweetening ingredient used to sweeten this food, unlike sugars, does not promote tooth decay.

Last year, retail giant Wal-Mart pulled Splenda brand products from its shelves and began to test market a product called Altern. Altern is Wal-Mart's own brand of the artificial sweetener sucralose. According to CNN, a spokesperson for Wal-Mart revealed that the company is planning to have all of its supercenters fully stocked with Altern by the end of this month, while a spokesperson from Tate & Lyle, the company that distributes Splenda, issued a statement assuring investors that this new product would have no effect on its own sucralose division.

Despite the T&L assurance, it seems likely that Splenda would experience some drop off in direct-to-consumer sales as Wal-Mart replaces its products. Altern's release should not have an effect on the use of Splenda by food and drink manufacturers, however.

There is no widely accepted definition of the word "natural" as far as the Food and Drug Administration is concerned. Many products use the term in their marketing but contain synthetic ingredients and the vast majority of people would support an  official definition. Smaller majorities favored basing the definition on the amount of processing that a product undergoes or how exactly the raw material is altered. The Sugar Association has been lobbying the FDA to adopt an official standard - such as the USDA has for beef and poultry - for some time to try and prevent manufactured sugar substitutes, like Splenda, from labeling themselves as a natural product. "Natural" is defined by the USDA as any product "containing no artificial ingredient or added color and [that] is only minimally processed (a process which does not fundamentally alter the raw product)."

My lemonade taste test generated a flurry of responses. It seems that quite a few people have opinions about the sugar derived substitute and even though Splenda has been around for a while now, I don't think I'm the only one who never really used it at home. The lemonade worked out pretty well, with the Splenda tasting very good, even when compared to the sugar-sweetened version. One comment on my previous post suggested that sweetening plain yogurt might be a more interesting way to use the sweetener.

Did you know that Splenda is 600 times sweeter than sugar? I didn't and probably put a bit too much Splenda into that batch of yogurt. At least, I think I put too much Splenda in. Though the artificially sweetened yogurt wasn't unpleasant, the taste of sweetness overwhelmed the actual flavor of the yogurt, reminding me almost exactly of commercially sweetened products. The yogurt sweetened with sugar was sweet, but the sweetness enhanced the tang and flavor of my yogurt, rather than masking it. I would use Splenda again, but would be very conservative in how much I used so the flavor wouldn't compete with the yogurt. In this round of Splenda vs. sugar, though, sugar definitely comes out ahead.

[Photo by Nicole Weston]

I'm already thinking about this month's Sugar High Friday: Low Sugar Edition. I like the challenge of coming up with recipes to fit a theme. But low sugar? I'll cut back on fat in a heartbeat, but I have to say that I would be hard pressed to give up sugar for any length of time unless I absolutely had to. Of course, one dessert does not a commitment make. Nevertheless, I wanted to know what I was up against, so I devised a little taste test with some fresh lemonade.

Let me first say that this was not scientific at all. It was not a blind taste test; I simply made two batches of lemonade and sweetened one with Splenda brand sweetener and one with sugar. Both batches tasted very good. The one with regular sugar tasted a little more complex, with the sugar having an obvious presence. The Splenda sweetened lemonade tasted a little brighter and more tart - it was difficult to measure how much I wanted to add from those little packets - but not artificial at all. The sugar version might have tasted a little bit more homemade, but the Splenda batch was very good, as well.

As far as ability to sweeten lemonade, I declared the test between Splenda and sugar a tie. Then I enjoyed the rest of my experiment with a bowl of chips on the side.

[Photo by Nicole Weston]