51–60 of 78 posts
Aspartame gives me headaches, but I like the taste of sucralose and ace-K (acesulfame potassium) together. They help to cover each others' funny aftertaste. But Pepsi One is discontinued, and I can't find any other colas like that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>artificial sweeteners stimulate appetite and promote weight gain Just like all studies seeking to link artificial sweeteners to weight gain, it's a correlational argument that is not specific to artificial sweeteners. The "neurobiology of food reward" is the exact same for sugar and artificial sweeteners unless you happen to be purposefully depriving yourself of calories, in which case the sweetener cannot be blamed…
>The "neurobiology of food reward" is the exact same for sugar and artificial sweeteners i beg your pardon. With sugar you're pretty much getting the glucose injection into bloodstream, all the energy producing machinery starts working and you get the feeling of your body being fed. There is no such blood-glucose level feedback in case of artificial sweeteners. So whatever havoc they wreck, i stay out of it :)
I said when you are not deprived of calories, meaning that if you still maintain adequate food intake throughout the day, there is no deleterious effect from the sweetener.
Yes, if you drink nothing but diet soda all day and then eat a giant meal right before bed, that is probably not a healthy dietary cycle. But again, you can hardly blame that on the sweetener itself.
In reality, I'm not sure this happens all that often. What's more common is reports of "sugar cravings" that increase with consumption of artificial sweeteners. It seems to vary from person to person, but obviously if that happens to you then you would be a fool to continue consuming them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"When it comes to pop, I usually stick to cola..." As someone not from the Northeastern USA what does that even mean? Pop, cola, soda and more regularly "coke" (the word not the brand) are all used to refer to soft drinks in general.
In this case, "cola" indicates a particular flavor[1] of soft drink (Coca-Cola and Pepsi being the most popular). [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kola_nut
>Despite the name, the primary modern flavoring ingredients in a cola drink are sugar, citrus oils (from oranges, limes, or lemon fruit peel), cinnamon, vanilla, and an acidic flavorant.[2][3]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The substitutes are to help sell more soda. To sell the notion that you can drink sweet syrupy drinks without being unhealthy. I think the parent understands. I don't think the comment is directed at soda companies or researchers, but the consumers leery of artificial sweeteners.
You, too, have ignored my point about sugar being unhealthy. It's not the fact that soda tastes "sweet" or "syrupy"; it's the fact that it's loaded with calories from sugar.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Is there any reason not to just use artificial sweeteners besides unfounded fears in the public? artificial sweeteners stimulate appetite and promote weight gain http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2892765/pdf/yjbm... Aspartame and depression: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8373935 SURVEY OF ASPARTAME STUDIES: CORRELATION OF OUTCOME AND FUNDING SOURCES http://www.dorway.com/peerrev.html >And would all th…
Now compare that against the hundreds of papers describing the negative impact of sugar consumption. You're comparing subtle, little understood second order effects to a first order caloric increase due to sugar intake that we know is the leading cause in the modern obesity epidemic. N=40 single studies demonstrating minor differences can't compete with the massive body of evidence against caloric sweeteners.
Why don't they just use xylitol/isomalt or any of the other natural, calorie-free, nice tasting sugars? Presumably because they're expensive, but if sold in bulk I'm sure they could bring prices down acceptably...
As someone who has purchased bags of xylitol and added them to lemonade, tea, etc.: It's because it tastes bad. Odd that any sugar could taste bad, but it's true. It's not _that_ expensive, but normal sugar is so cheap (not to mention HFCS, which has got to be even cheaper) that price is still a plausible issue. But more likely, the taste preferences of Americans is just so sweet that we can't appreciate xylitol as a…
I wonder why there's such an obsession with ZERO calories. Why not a middle ground? Maybe you could achieve a better flavor and attract health conscious people with like 50 calories.
Isn't that what Coke is trying with Coke Life?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Take it up with the author. My point was to dispute the GP poster's assertion that random public persons' concerns are unfounded. The existence of such studies absent a firm conclusion from the studies makes it an open question.
I'm sorry, this is completely ridiculous. You are literally saying that since the article you chose to cite does not support your argument, that I should instead go argue with the author of the peer-reviewed journal article? Really?!? That's the best defense of your argument you can muster?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Is there any reason not to just use artificial sweeteners besides unfounded fears in the public? artificial sweeteners stimulate appetite and promote weight gain http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2892765/pdf/yjbm... Aspartame and depression: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8373935 SURVEY OF ASPARTAME STUDIES: CORRELATION OF OUTCOME AND FUNDING SOURCES http://www.dorway.com/peerrev.html >And would all th…
>artificial sweeteners stimulate appetite and promote weight gain Just like all studies seeking to link artificial sweeteners to weight gain, it's a correlational argument that is not specific to artificial sweeteners. The "neurobiology of food reward" is the exact same for sugar and artificial sweeteners unless you happen to be purposefully depriving yourself of calories, in which case the sweetener cannot be blamed…
I'm not into psych/medical research, but even in the hard sciences it is often difficult to have enough data to point to a conclusion so unambiguously as to be obvious
>If anyone has actual evidence of failure to disclose a conflict of interest in a published study, then it should be reported to the relevant institutions, not used as a platform to denounce all research on a topic.
That sounds wonderful but in the real world moneyed interests have and use their means to promote their worldview. Medicine, food, and diet-related markets are lousy with overly ambitious marketers and outright frauds. I did not "denounce all research on a topic" I was responding to another poster who appeared to want to dismiss anyone's concerns about the potential health risks of artificial sweeteners.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or even non-artificial, like stevia. We use it as a sweetener and it's pretty good. Or is there some regulatory barrier?
Coke Life is sweetened with Stevia, but I don't know how wide spread a distribution it has.