-2

According to Forbes, the new Amryis's Purecane product is produced is by fermenting sugarcane,

But the Amyris scientists developed a unique method of making Reb-M using fermentation, the basic process we use to make beer, wine, and bread. By using a yeast culture to ferment sustainably-sourced sugarcane, Amyris was able to make very pure, sustainable Reb-M.

Their FAQ repeats this claim and says that the product contains no GMOs,

No. PURECANE™ Brand Sweetener (fermented sugarcane Reb M) is naturally derived from sugarcane grown in Brazil. Using the age-old process of fermentation, we remove the yeast as part of our purification process that enables us to create PURECANE™ Brand Sweetener (fermented sugarcane Reb M). We have received NSF Non-GMO certification on our PURECANE™ No Calorie Sweet Packets.

Their website even claims the product is "all natural" and "NON GMO"

That’s what we said when we discovered a revolutionary way to make sugarcane into an all-natural, zero calorie sweetener.

Is there any outside verification that Reb-M even be made through fermentation of sugarcane? We take a product everyone loves (sugar), ferment it (a 7000 year old natural process) and we get a supremely valuable 0-calorie sweatener only found in trace quantities inside of the "super-sweet steviol glucosides in the stevia plant"? Is there any evidence this claim is true?

Evan Carroll
  • 28,401
  • 42
  • 129
  • 239
  • 2
    Is the question here "can yeast make this", because clearly it can - the proof would be that is is? If you're asking what makes a GMO that would be a different question - chemical products of genetically engineered microbes have never been considered GMOs (as they don't have G and aren't O). – CJR Sep 15 '21 at 19:34
  • The question is _"Can rebaudioside M (Reb M) be made through fermenting natural sugarcane? "_ I don't believe "because clearly it can" is an answer. It's a marketing claim. It's not at clear to me that it can. I didn't believe it before I researched it. I still only believe it because others are claiming similar things. I don't for example see anyone on YouTube telling me how to create this magical yeast and do this, or anyone selling the magical yeast on eBay. – Evan Carroll Sep 15 '21 at 19:44
  • I don't understand - do you think that they're making this chemical with a standard organic synthesis and just lying that they're making it by fermentation? Or do you not believe that the fermentation uses sugarcane as a feedstock? – CJR Sep 15 '21 at 19:51
  • _"standard organic synthesis and just lying that they're making it by fermentation"_ yes, that sounded very likely to me. There is no patent for example on Reb M production with yeast and fermentation https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/Rebaudioside-M#section=Depositor-Supplied-Patent-Identifiers and pubchem shows no methods of production at all for Reb M, (compare to Reb A which lists many and still has none on fermentation). https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/Rebaudioside-A#section=Methods-of-Manufacturing&fullscreen=true – Evan Carroll Sep 15 '21 at 20:05
  • I'm also just an idiot, so if this is your area of expertise I'll stfu. But "because clearly it can" isn't evident to me on the company's claims alone. – Evan Carroll Sep 15 '21 at 20:07
  • I mean it's possible that they're making it by organic synthesis or they're getting it from the natural plant and lying about it. It will cost them a lot more to do it that way (the nice thing about fermentation is that you just have to buy sugar and the organism does all the work). They're publicly traded, so if they're saying it's by fermentation I'd believe them (misleading your investors is still a crime). Hence my argument that it's clearly possible to do if someone is doing it. – CJR Sep 15 '21 at 20:11
  • Taking plant biosynthesis pathways out of plants and sticking them in yeast is kinda what Amyris is known for, so I don't have any reason to doubt that this is a real product. The patent isn't public till it's published, so if they've applied for patents you wouldn't be able to see it yet (and they likely have if this worked). – CJR Sep 15 '21 at 20:13
  • @CJR in your opinion is a product "all natural" and "naturally derived" with "NO GMOs" if the input to it is a genetically modified yeast? I mean, I honestly don't care: the whole GMO thing is pretty absurd to me. But I'm totally convinced this whole product, and the marketing of it is intended to deceive (misguided) customers and investors (herein chumps). Misleading is part of this business. – Evan Carroll Sep 15 '21 at 20:16
  • 1
    "all natural" and "naturally derived" are marketing terms, and "GMO" has a specific meaning (a chemical can't be a genetically modified organism cause no genes and also not an organism). I can think of a bunch of chemicals that are made this way now - 2'fucosyllactose is in every high-end baby formula now ("all natural!") and it's made by fermentation with engineered bacteria. Even if you don't like the marketing terms, they're still making this chemical by fermentation. – CJR Sep 15 '21 at 20:21

1 Answers1

0

A competitor, Cargill, makes similar claims but specifies that the yeast is genetically engineered and "specially crafted" and not natural,

Like Amyris, Cargill looked at the more than 50 different sweet components of the stevia leaf called steviol glycosides. “By adding a few genes to the specially crafted yeast, we enable our yeast to produce the same type of enzymes used by stevia plants,” according to Cargill’s website.

Calling the product "all natural" seems like total marketing wank if the yeast is GMO'd.

Evan Carroll
  • 28,401
  • 42
  • 129
  • 239