Why We Use Raw Cane Sugar Instead of Sugar Substitutes

Sugar is one of the most contested ingredients in food right now. The wellness industry has spent the last decade telling people that sugar is the enemy and that alternatives — stevia, erythritol, monk fruit, allulose — are the smarter choice. We disagree, and we think the reasoning matters.

What Raw Cane Sugar Actually Is

Raw cane sugar is minimally processed cane juice that's been crystallized and dried without the heavy refining that produces white table sugar. The result retains small amounts of molasses, minerals, and the natural compounds present in the cane plant. It's not a health food in large quantities, but it's a real, whole-food ingredient with a clear origin and a straightforward production process.

More importantly, raw cane sugar tastes like sugar. It has depth. It has warmth. It complements the flavor of raw cacao in a way that no sugar substitute does.

The Problem with Sugar Substitutes

Sugar substitutes come in two categories: artificial sweeteners (sucralose, aspartame, saccharin) and so-called natural alternatives (stevia, monk fruit, erythritol, allulose). The first category has well-documented concerns about gut microbiome disruption and metabolic effects that we won't get into here. The second category is presented as obviously superior — natural, safe, zero-calorie. The reality is more complicated.

A 2023 study published in Nature Medicine found that erythritol — one of the most popular sugar alcohols in the keto and low-carb market — was associated with increased cardiovascular risk in a large observational study. The researchers measured elevated erythritol levels in people who experienced major cardiac events. The study was observational and not definitive, but it was significant enough to generate serious scientific discussion.

Stevia and monk fruit are generally considered safe, but they come with their own issues: a bitter, metallic aftertaste that many people find unpleasant, and a flavor profile that simply doesn't work in a product like raw cacao. The bitterness of stevia competes with the natural bitterness of cacao rather than complementing it.

The Dose Question

The argument for sugar substitutes is essentially about dose — that by eliminating sugar calories, you're doing something net positive for your health. This is a reasonable argument if you're consuming large quantities of sweetened food and drink every day. But a serving of Gullinn Kürt contains a moderate amount of raw cane sugar — less than most commercial hot chocolate mixes, which often rely on heavily sweetened powders to mask the flat flavor of processed cocoa.

When you start with raw cacao that has genuine depth and complexity, you don't need to compensate with sugar. Our blends are sweetened to complement the cacao, not to cover it up. The sugar quantity is meaningful but not excessive.

What We Believe About Ingredients

Our approach to ingredients is straightforward: every item on our label should be something you recognize from a kitchen. Raw cacao, raw cane sugar, real spices, real fruit. No artificial anything. No ingredients that require a chemistry background to evaluate.

Raw cane sugar clears that bar. It's been used in food for centuries. Its production is well understood. Its effects in the body at moderate quantities are well established. We'd rather use a real ingredient in a thoughtful quantity than a novel substitute with a shorter track record and a flavor profile that competes with the product it's sweetening.

If you're managing blood sugar for medical reasons, we understand that raw cane sugar may not work for you, and we respect that decision. But for everyone else — we'd encourage skepticism about the idea that any sweetener with zero calories is automatically the healthier choice. The research is still catching up to the marketing.