Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Study: Artificial sweeteners toxic to digestive gut bacteria

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 137 posts

Re: Study: Artificial sweeteners toxic to digestive gut bacteria

#31

Post by datavirtue »

vezycash wrote: post #21
nervousvarun wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Processed foods + sedentary lifestyles = perfect storm. Pretty obvious "something" happened in the 70s and we've been on this ride ever since: https://nchspressroom.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/obesity.gi...

If someone is sick, they'll become slow. All they'll want to do is lie down some place quiet. Watch kids, healthy kids. After a meal, all they want to do is run, talk, jump - move. Sitting still is the last thing they want to do. My point is perhaps, sedentary behavior is caused by something, a symptom outside the control of those afflicted by it. Here are some culprits we could explore: Schooling: Being trained, for…

Refined oils, fat, and animal protien cause arterial hardening immediately, lasting for several hours. Keep ingesting and you end up with heart disease....arteries filled with plaque restricting blood flow, raspiration, mental function. Ingesting refined sugar and flour causes an insulin spike (make fat out of carbs!) that lasts for hours causing a crash and repeated cravings for...more carbs. This leads to diabetes. Cancer needs sugar and animal protien to live.

Check out China study.

Re: Study: Artificial sweeteners toxic to digestive gut bacteria

#32

Post by dvfjsdhgfv »

It looks like the study confirms what we already knew. It would be more interesting to see what happens with what are considered more healthy alternatives, such as xylitol or erythritol. They seem to be "mostly fine", but more research would be very beneficial given that people use them more and more.

Re: Study: Artificial sweeteners toxic to digestive gut bacteria

#34

Post by dvfjsdhgfv »

qwerty456127 wrote: post #25

The article doesn't say which sweeteners did they study and this is a very bad style. Fortunately it links to an article on EurekAlert which in its turn links to the actual scientific paper (doi.org/10.3390/molecules23102454). It says aspartame, sucralose, saccharine, neotame, advantame and acesulfame potassium-k (ace-k) (BTW at least saccharine and ace-k are already known to be carcinogenic AFAIK) were tested agains…

> erythritol (looks, feels and cooks almost exactly like sugar)

The taste is quite different though.

Re: Study: Artificial sweeteners toxic to digestive gut bacteria

#35

Post by AnIdiotOnTheNet »

unstuckdev wrote: post #17
searine wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. Most of that white powder in a sugar packet is dextrose filler.

How is dextrose in a sugar packet filler? That makes no sense to me. Maybe it's just a confusion of terms.

I believe parent meant a packet of Splenda, not actual sugar. However, it would not be surprising if packets of "sugar" actually contained dextrose as a bulking agent.

Re: Study: Artificial sweeteners toxic to digestive gut bacteria

#36

Post by qwerty456127 »

dvfjsdhgfv wrote: post #34
qwerty456127 wrote: post #25

The article doesn't say which sweeteners did they study and this is a very bad style. Fortunately it links to an article on EurekAlert which in its turn links to the actual scientific paper (doi.org/10.3390/molecules23102454). It says aspartame, sucralose, saccharine, neotame, advantame and acesulfame potassium-k (ace-k) (BTW at least saccharine and ace-k are already known to be carcinogenic AFAIK) were tested agains…

> erythritol (looks, feels and cooks almost exactly like sugar) The taste is quite different though.

Perhaps. This is subjective. But I could hardly tell the difference.

Re: Study: Artificial sweeteners toxic to digestive gut bacteria

#37

Post by abakker »

qwerty456127 wrote: post #25

The article doesn't say which sweeteners did they study and this is a very bad style. Fortunately it links to an article on EurekAlert which in its turn links to the actual scientific paper (doi.org/10.3390/molecules23102454). It says aspartame, sucralose, saccharine, neotame, advantame and acesulfame potassium-k (ace-k) (BTW at least saccharine and ace-k are already known to be carcinogenic AFAIK) were tested agains…

FWIW, Erithritol doesn't taste like sugar to me, and tends to give me a headache. I've found that any of those "sugar alcohols" are really unpleasant for me. Not sure if this experience is shared by others, but I thought I would add my anecdote.

Re: Study: Artificial sweeteners toxic to digestive gut bacteria

#38

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

qwerty456127 wrote: post #25

The article doesn't say which sweeteners did they study and this is a very bad style. Fortunately it links to an article on EurekAlert which in its turn links to the actual scientific paper (doi.org/10.3390/molecules23102454). It says aspartame, sucralose, saccharine, neotame, advantame and acesulfame potassium-k (ace-k) (BTW at least saccharine and ace-k are already known to be carcinogenic AFAIK) were tested agains…

Yeah, I'd be interested to know the effect of something like stevia extract on gut bacteria.

Re: Study: Artificial sweeteners toxic to digestive gut bacteria

#40

Post by saiya-jin »

vezycash wrote: post #21
nervousvarun wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Processed foods + sedentary lifestyles = perfect storm. Pretty obvious "something" happened in the 70s and we've been on this ride ever since: https://nchspressroom.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/obesity.gi...

If someone is sick, they'll become slow. All they'll want to do is lie down some place quiet. Watch kids, healthy kids. After a meal, all they want to do is run, talk, jump - move. Sitting still is the last thing they want to do. My point is perhaps, sedentary behavior is caused by something, a symptom outside the control of those afflicted by it. Here are some culprits we could explore: Schooling: Being trained, for…

You are looking for reasons outside of "me". It's "they" (aka school), caused by "that" (food/chemical) and so on.

Not that it might not contribute, actually I would be surprised if it didn't somehow, but - its "us". You, me, everybody. We are lazy, we are overworked, we just sit on our asses whole day, lack sleep, eat junk food, drink crappy drinks, we know damn well we should exercise often but still we don't because blah blah. All these are personal decisions.

Anybody can look for excuses to feel a victim of the evil world and genes, or one can do something about it. Steps are crystal-clear these days, and super simple. Results are 100% guaranteed to get your life better, live longer etc. No excuse is good enough.

Post reply on HN