False assumption, I don't need to show anything and am not promoting nor rejecting stevia, just encouraging people to DO THEIR OWN research and decide. I AM however a proponent of Natural Law and natural plants as healing and good for us. Genesis 1:29 As we were created, plants are our best food and medicine. Once processing by man begins, you can't be sure of what you are getting, or if it is detrimental or not without doing a deep dive on specific sources and processes of a particular product. No need to attack and rant, just present your research/experience. When I was a child I learned about many healing plants. My mother smoked comfrey to counteract the bad effects of a tobacco smoking habit. btw I was a diabetic for decades, and have beat diabetes and many other serious health issues including RA.
If you counter someone's personal experience with "there have been many studies that say the opposite" then yes, you need to show us what you are talking about, because several of us came here and said this is not true for those of us actually using it.
So because YOU or even a couple or even a few expressed an opinion, no one is supposed to question or comment in any way that might trigger you? My personal experience with processed stevia is it makes me dizzy and I have beat diabetes without it. Coconut, maple cinnamon and not needing any sweetener is my preference, not processed stuff. About your demands, I see it completely different. No one owes you proof of anything especially a discussion board comment... it is called personal responsibility to research, read and discuss MANY sources because no person should base an opinion on one or two sources. This is a discussion board, not the place to write dissertations and theses to prove anything to someone who is closed to discussion. Merely pointing out sources that say something contrary or where one might research is not your license to scream "source" or "you need to do" this or that... get a grip. Any one can go to pubmed or sciencedigest or researchgate and do searches. Plus not all people have the same experiences--we are not all sensitive or allergic or thriving on the same things. Differences of opinion for the purposes of discussion should be welcome. Again, even tho I agreed partially with your 'experience' [the grow and make your own part only], you seem to have conflicting actions vs what you are pushing, and seemed bent on countering /arguing [NOT my problem, good luck with that].
Again you prove that you aren't even comprehending my posts based on your own comments. You are arguing with me about PROCESSED stevia after I went into an in-depth explanation that processed stevia isn't stevia, i explained how our deceptive laws and deceptive advertising got truvia sued. I explained the ways studies are manipulated so if you cite studies as a counter argument then yes I'd want to know which ones so i could see what they actually used in their experiments, and that insults you somehow? For you to turn around and preach personal responsibility as a response shows you simply don't want to continue the discussion the moment you were asked to show us your source. I explained that I grow my own stevia. I don't ingest processed stevia, and an extract isn't processed, it's a traditional form of preservation. The white granules are processed and only have to contain 1% stevia to be labeled stevia. So if you ingested that crap, it's not the stevia that made you dizzy, it's the other ingredient making up the 99%. You are so argumentative it's hard to even take you seriously.
False assumption, I don't need to show anything and am not promoting nor rejecting stevia, just encouraging people to DO THEIR OWN research and decide. I AM however a proponent of Natural Law and natural plants as healing and good for us. Genesis 1:29 As we were created, plants are our best food and medicine. Once processing by man begins, you can't be sure of what you are getting, or if it is detrimental or not without doing a deep dive on specific sources and processes of a particular product. No need to attack and rant, just present your research/experience. When I was a child I learned about many healing plants. My mother smoked comfrey to counteract the bad effects of a tobacco smoking habit. btw I was a diabetic for decades, and have beat diabetes and many other serious health issues including RA.
If you counter someone's personal experience with "there have been many studies that say the opposite" then yes, you need to show us what you are talking about, because several of us came here and said this is not true for those of us actually using it.
So because YOU or even a couple or even a few expressed an opinion, no one is supposed to question or comment in any way that might trigger you? My personal experience with processed stevia is it makes me dizzy and I have beat diabetes without it. Coconut, maple cinnamon and not needing any sweetener is my preference, not processed stuff. About your demands, I see it completely different. No one owes you proof of anything especially a discussion board comment... it is called personal responsibility to research, read and discuss MANY sources because no person should base an opinion on one or two sources. This is a discussion board, not the place to write dissertations and theses to prove anything to someone who is closed to discussion. Merely pointing out sources that say something contrary or where one might research is not your license to scream "source" or "you need to do" this or that... get a grip. Any one can go to pubmed or sciencedigest or researchgate and do searches. Plus not all people have the same experiences--we are not all sensitive or allergic or thriving on the same things. Differences of opinion for the purposes of discussion should be welcome. Again, even tho I agreed partially with your 'experience' [the grow and make your own part only], you seem to have conflicting actions vs what you are pushing, and seemed bent on countering /arguing [NOT my problem, good luck with that].
Again you prove that you aren't even comprehending my posts based on your own comments. You are arguing with me about PROCESSED stevia after I went into an in-depth explanation that processed stevia isn't stevia, i explained how our deceptive laws and deceptive advertising got truvia sued. I explained the ways studies are manipulated so if you cite studies as a counter argument then yes I'd want to know which ones so i could see what they actually used in their experiments, and that insults you somehow? For you to turn around and preach personal responsibility as a response shows you simply don't want to continue the discussion the moment you were asked to show us your source. I explained that I grow my own stevia. I don't ingest processed stevia, and an extract isn't processed, it's a traditional form of preservation. The white granules are processed and only have to contain 1% stevia to be labeled stevia. So if you ingested that crap, it's not the stevia that made you dizzy, it's the other ingredient making up the 99%. You are so argumentative it's hard to even take you seriously.