What really astonishes me in these comments are the number of people who feel that other people who prefer “real sugar” (which includes corn syrup in this specific context) should have to justify themselves. A large percentage of people would rather forego a sweet thing all together than to deal with the aftertaste of fake sugar (which includes stevia, natural or not. I actually use some to cut the amount of sugar in my coffee, but it sure as heck is not sugar).

As far as labeling, it does seem that the real sugar contingent has an uphill battle. Appeals to the health risks of aspartame, saccharine, sucralose, stevia, etc. will be met with the response that high fructose corn syrup is worse. While that response is a poor argument in my opinion, it has just enough logic in it to muddy the waters. And “the market” doesn’t look likely to solve the problem based on the direction things have gone since the original post.

While a modern English-speaker might not be surprised to hear that appeals to “aesthetics” generally fall on deaf ears when it comes to regulatory matters, one might consider that the original Greek word “aisthesthai” means “perceive.” The association of the word “aesthetics” with beauty and art has its origins in 18th century German usage. While I may personally feel that stevia in cinnamon bread is an aesthetic abomination, you may disagree. What you cannot disagree with is that I immediately *perceive* any fake sugar, and that could easily be tested empirically. For me, the difference between fake and real sugar is as substantial as say, the difference between pears and peaches. For example, I might prefer peaches in my cottage cheese to pears, but NOT if the peaches contain sucralose and the pears don’t. In other words, for a good portion of the population, whether something has fake sugar in it concretely determines what we perceive it TO BE. And adequate labeling in the marketplace should reflect what something IS. While we surely cannot accommodate every idiosyncrasy in sense perception, if the presence of some ingredient ruins a food for half the population, we should have a label for that.

I don’t care. If a food or drink is sweetened with anything that is not a true sugar, whether artificial or natural in origin (HFCS is still a sugar), I don’t want it.

The once every few weeks I decide to treat myself with a sugary drink, I really don’t want to be surprised by the disgusting back of the throat sweetness that just won’t go away when I accidentally drink something that claims to either be naturally sweetened, or completely un-indicated, and it turns out to contain stevia.

Sucralose isn’t quite as nasty tasting to me, and I might not always notice it’s there, but I still avoid it out of principle, like all the other fakers. If my diet contains too many calories, I’d prefer to correct it by eating less sugars, not eating fake ones.

Also of note is the generic term: Natural and Artificial flavors.
Guess what one of the Natural Flavors is: Beaver Anus Sweat Gland Extract!
Look up Vanilla and Raspberry

Really it sucks spending so much time reading through ingredients, I hate being allergic. Luckily, if I miss it or I get something at a restaurant with it, I know instantly, and usually only have some scratchy throat or such.

I am all about science, but fake sugar has not ended well in the past, it can’t end well in the future.