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

Aspartame sweetener to be declared possible cancer risk by WHO, say reports

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 584 posts

Re: Aspartame sweetener to be declared possible cancer risk by WHO, say reports

#211

Post by taeric »

saalweachter wrote: post #176
jjoonathan wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tobacco is an all-natural plant product backed by longstanding tradition! How could it possibly be bad for your health? Ugh, if we hadn't banned them from advertising they would absolutely be using this angle and it would absolutely be working.

Isn't this essentially part of the not-quite-marketing for marijuana? It's not highly processed like tobacco cigarettes, it's just natural?

Well, it is more than a little insane how much worse cigarettes were from the things that were added to it. Even more crazy, to me, to consider how nicotine is by and large not what made them bad. Such that I'm honestly not clear on why there aren't more uses of that.

Re: Aspartame sweetener to be declared possible cancer risk by WHO, say reports

#212

Post by graypegg »

fluidcruft wrote: post #70
kergonath wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Silica can cause cancer, in the form of asbestos fibres or silica dust. Yet, it’s safe to drink from a glass, have windows at home, and walk on sand. A lot of factors matter besides chemical composition.

Are you suggesting that aspartame in food has a different physical form that prevents it from entering the body?

It’s the dose that makes the poison maybe?

Re: Aspartame sweetener to be declared possible cancer risk by WHO, say reports

#214

Post by CydeWeys »

jncfhnb wrote: post #213

Do other people feel like aspartame introduces a tangible viscosity into drinks? I feel like it’s like drinking slime

The opposite. Real sugar makes a drink much more viscous. Fake sugar leaves the mouth feel thin.

Re: Aspartame sweetener to be declared possible cancer risk by WHO, say reports

#215

Post by hombre_fatal »

xormapmap wrote: post #209
IshKebab wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah that's like saying "sandwiches are just ground up wheat, plus a ton of delicious filling to make them taste good"

Most bread you get from a supermarket (even outside the US) is highly processed garbage, as are many common sandwich fillings (mayo, salami, margarine). The typical sandwich is probably up there with many of the other least healthy things you could eat, so yeah, ground up wheat with filling to make it taste good is probably fair.

I don’t see how that’s the case except for a fear of “processing”. I plug two slices of commercial whole wheat store bought bread into Cronometer and it has an impressive mineral breakdown and 14% of the day's nutrient needs.

Re: Aspartame sweetener to be declared possible cancer risk by WHO, say reports

#216

Post by Waterluvian »

cameldrv wrote: post #66
shrubble wrote: post #54

Donald Rumsfeld was famously influential in getting aspartame's approval ; however more of the story behind this can be found here: https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/8846759/Nill,_As... In 1984 the year after aspartame's approval for soft drinks, the company that held the exclusive patent on it, sold $600 million worth (1984 dollars) of it. Myself the truly distasteful part is the use of neotame (a follow-o…

> Myself the truly distasteful part is the use of neotame (a follow-on to aspartame) on animal feed, to get animals to eat feed that they normally would not; for instance, if the feed is rancid or otherwise in a condition/taste that normal animal instincts, would have the animal reject the food... True for human food as well. Maybe it’s not rancid, but food science can make terrible ingredients taste great. Take Dori…

Or HP sauce.

Honestly I see it as a feature if we can move product that’s otherwise garbage, as long as it’s not dangerous. Reminds me of “omg do you know what’s in hotdogs?!” Hotdogs are a success story.

Re: Aspartame sweetener to be declared possible cancer risk by WHO, say reports

#217

Post by vvilliamperez »

jncfhnb wrote: post #213

Do other people feel like aspartame introduces a tangible viscosity into drinks? I feel like it’s like drinking slime

I think what you experiencing is an overproduction of saliva to dissolve what your body thinks is sugar.

Re: Aspartame sweetener to be declared possible cancer risk by WHO, say reports

#218

Post by tptacek »

LegitShady wrote: post #34
jxidjhdhdhdhfhf wrote: post #21

Reminder that bacon is already a known carcinogen for those worrying about artificial sweeteners but happily eating processed meats.

It’s actually sodium nitrite that’s carcinogenic (after being exposed to high heat), and I can find bacon without sodium nitrite here pretty much at every grocery store.

Sodium nitrate converts to sodium nitrite over the course of a cure; that's why Prague Powder #2 is used for long-term cures.

Re: Aspartame sweetener to be declared possible cancer risk by WHO, say reports

#219

Post by monkpit »

dham wrote: post #206
lotsofpulp wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Considering that sugar and excess consumption of carbohydrates is the number 1 health problem around the world, is it possible that the risks of low calorie sweeteners are not sufficient to outweigh the benefits of low calorie sweeteners?

I was just explaining this to my wife while we've been on keto. Yes, artificial sweeteners are bad, let's try to avoid them if possible, but if consuming some aspartame in jello helps us stay on keto and lose belly fat, then the benefits outweigh the risk.

Artificial sweeteners may[0] adversely affect the gut microbiome.

However, other studies suggest that artificial sweeteners break down so quickly that they never reach the gut.

It needs more research, but personally I choose to favor sugar over sweeteners, and just limit my consumption of sugar.

[0] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8156656/

Post reply on HN