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

Aspartame is not that bad? (2022)

dynomight.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 267 posts

Re: Aspartame is not that bad? (2022)

#231

Post by ErroneousBosh »

mmastrac wrote: post #173
ErroneousBosh wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not "I don't like the taste". It is "these taste like they're contaminated with antifreeze". They taste like they've been intentionally adulterated with the stuff they use to stop people drinking poisonous things.

That's exactly my experience. What's interesting is that the taste is also very similar to the taste/sensation I get when I have a viral infection.

You know what, it's exactly what everything tasted like the week that I discovered that grown-ups could catch hand, foot and mouth from their children and also what my toddler was so upset about.

Re: Aspartame is not that bad? (2022)

#232

Post by ErroneousBosh »

throw4847285 wrote: post #179
ErroneousBosh wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not "I don't like the taste". It is "these taste like they're contaminated with antifreeze". They taste like they've been intentionally adulterated with the stuff they use to stop people drinking poisonous things.

You're underestimating how gross it was to me at first.

Did it taste like the bitterest thing you've ever tasted in the world that made you want to vomit your insides out?

Re: Aspartame is not that bad? (2022)

#233

Post by Groxx »

tptacek wrote: post #93
kakacik wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or... you know, there could be some little actual effort in shedding such addiction (sugar ain't that hard), build a bit of character and walk off better off in many regards. Winning against addiction won't kill you, break you or similar damage but makes you (much) stronger and healthier as a bonus. Why do people shy away from such things? But no, lets do everything possible just to keep the comfortable crappy couch…

There's nothing wrong with HFCS either, at least not that isn't also wrong with sugar. This is all just naturalist fallacy stuff.

The HFCS stuff always feels weird to me. Like sure, there's glycemic index impact, it is measurably different, etc... but I feel like people don't realize that "high" fructose is different only by a few percent from table sugar, and is "high" only because it's being compared to regular corn syrup.

Like... HFCS-42 is 42% fructose. That's lower than cane / table sugar, which is 50%. If you really think fructose is the problem, HFCS-42 is an improvement. Or even better, embrace regular corn syrup because it has little to no fructose normally! It's nearly 100% glucose! (This is why 42% is "high")

And if it's glycemic index that people are worried about, throw in a tiny amount of dissolvable fiber in your drink and it'll lower that by more than the sugar balance affects it.

None of it makes sense.

Re: Aspartame is not that bad? (2022)

#235

Post by amelius »

bitwize wrote: post #221
amelius wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny, I have this with Coke Zero (which I believe uses stevia), but not with aspartame. The sale of this stuff should be prohibited, especially on long intercontinental flights.

Coke Zero is sweetened with aspartame and phosphoric acid. It's just formulated differently to avoid the taste associated with Diet Coke, which some find unpleasant.

Strange, Google says this:

> Coca-Cola updated the recipe for Coca-Cola Zero Sugar in the US, quietly adding stevia to the existing blend of aspartame and acesulfame potassium (Ace-K) in late 2023/early 2024

Did they change it back?

Re: Aspartame is not that bad? (2022)

#236

Post by tredre3 »

robotomo wrote: post #151
cwnyth wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've wondered this myself. The aftertaste on some of them is vile. The disappointing thing is that so many products use them when they reduce sugar, but sometimes I just want a reduced sugar product without any additional sweeteners. That seems hard to find these days.

I've been curious about the just-less-sugar idea myself. Like how would a Coca-Cola "dry" taste? Maybe the fact that nobody is offering this just means it doesn't taste good.

Coca-Cola tried at least twice to market half-sugar Coke (C2 and Life). But instead of just doing half-sugar, they added aspartame and stevia respectively to compensate...

Re: Aspartame is not that bad? (2022)

#237

Post by petra »

n8cpdx wrote: post #185
petra wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For those who want diet cola without aspartame, there's an alternative: https://sodastream.com/products/diet-cola-4-pack

If you’re concerned with aspartame, why wouldn’t you be concerned about sucralose and acesulfame potassium?

If someone feels aspartame makes them feel bad, they can try something else, and see how it makes them feel.

That was the point behind my comment.

Re: Aspartame is not that bad? (2022)

#239

Post by hawk_ »

tptacek wrote: post #44
hawk_ wrote: post #7

An important missed angle is the effect of artificial sweeteners on gut microbiome. They cause intestinal inflammation which is relevant for IBD sufferers. My take is that I don't miss out on much by being conservative with food, as we still don't understand these complex interactions well enough. What's the harm in sticking to a balanced whole diet of ingredients that were available to our ancestors 200years or more…

How would that work? It's hydrolized into its constituents, which are present in higher quantities in apples and chicken and other foods, in the upper GI. Do you have a cite for this?

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39475342/ - mouse colitis model

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41137210/ - inflammation pathways

Re: Aspartame is not that bad? (2022)

#240

Post by inexcf »

mmastrac wrote: post #87
tsimionescu wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're conflating two different things. Unless you have some very weird genetic condition, it does taste sweet to you. That is, it activates the same sweet receptors on your tongue and in other parts of your mouth that sugar activates - and more or less to the same extent (relative to concentration). However, sugar isn't simply a sweet taste. It also has some amount of flavor, and so do the artificial sweeteners, and…

It absolutely does not. The places on my tongue that taste sweet and the places that taste aspartame are completely different (the latter strongly at back of my throat, sugar strongly on my tongue).

It's a long standing myth that there are different taste regions on the tongue.
Post reply on HN