151–156 of 156 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
all the bad parts of sugar are from the sugar part of it, not some magic poison added by "refining"
That is not evidence. That is assertion
*Be thankful for the American government, it's the best that money can buy." -Christopher Buckley
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but as much as the news is going to pick up this story and blow it out of proportion, I think people should kind of know they are being played with here.
WHO can't be held responsible for headlines put out by newspapers. WHO declared aspartame possibly carcinogenic, putting it in the same class as mobile phone usage That means there is some limited evidence pointing in that direction, but that further studies are needed to confirm this. I don't think this statement is incorrect. In the end is all about the daily dosis, and the possibly increase in cancer (is it 0.005%…
Diet soda and sweeteners behind them are still a scam even if they don’t “cause cancer.” They’re a scam because they still cause insulin response. Pancreas cranks out insulin after tasting the soda, and there no blood sugar to react with. My uncle drank tons of Diet Coke and got pancreatic cancer. Doesn’t mean diet soda caused his pancreatic cancer, but he definitely didn’t loose weight by drinking the stuff.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5118762/ https://www.oatext.com/Blood-glucose-and-insulin-response-to...
But there are also articles that describe what’s called “anticipatory response” to food/drink. I didn’t see an article connecting diet soda in particular to insulin response, but possibly it’s the same for things that only taste sweet.