Fat people should probably try lactulose - a zero-calory (indigestible) sweet syrup (somewhat similar to maple syrup) with prebiotic and laxative properties. Besides being tasty it can actually make their guts healthier so their ghrelin (hunger hormone) secretion can decrease and their leptin (fullness hormone) secretion can increase.
Laxative artificial sweeteners have the problem that people don't dose food as carefully as medicine. I'm reminded of the famous Haribo maltitol gummy bears, which when eaten more than about 20 at a time would cause a...powerful laxative effect.
Low-Calorie Sweetener Use and Risk of Abdominal Obesity Among Older Adults
51–53 of 53 posts
Re: Low-Calorie Sweetener Use and Risk of Abdominal Obesity Among Older Adults
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
The difference is that one choice of sweetener is inherently bad for those trying to lose weight, while the other choice of sweetener puts the burden of fault for weight gain on a lack of self control. We're humans. Not wanting to eat bitter food all the time is natural and should not be faulted. Losing weight shouldn't have to be a strenuous ascetic chore, so choosing to consume something sweet isn't the mental fail…
When someone puts sugar in my tea or coffee it genuinely ruins it for me, but I eat sweet things faily rarely and so haven't developed the tolerance and/or addiction to that flavour. Could it be that not eating sugar isn't so much of a strenuous ascetic chore, but rather it's the reduction in sugar intake which is particularly (albeit temporarily) awkward?
My comment wasn't against not eating / drinking sweet thing things. My comment was anti-anti-sweet things (which is not the same as pro-sweet things in certain systems of logic)
One doesn't need to have an addiction to sweet things to want to enjoy sweet things every once in a while, though I admit that "addictions" to sweet things exist (namely my father, whom I have a hard time breaking him away from that addiction).
The point was mainly that there is a certain brand of health and fitness that says one must suffer / become a stoic ascetic in order to make progress, and it's this brand of health and fitness that is counter productive. Yes, maybe it works for many people, but it doesn't work for everyone.
I'm perfectly happy living a rather Spartan life; my 70 year old father is not and it's very difficult to change his stubborn mind.
Another way of putting it is that if you say that the only way to health and fitness is to climb over this 50 ft. wall, then you're going to get far fewer people actually putting in the effort to do so. Artificial Sweeteners are the large hand holds on the climbing wall, before they're ready to switch over.
And yes, if your goal is body recomposition, then macronutrition and caloric intake is far more important than this "artificial sweeteners make you fatter" voodoo magic nonsense.
Re: Low-Calorie Sweetener Use and Risk of Abdominal Obesity Among Older Adults
#53I am frustrated by the dismissal of this study in the comments. I think the burden of proof clearly lays on the claim that using artificial sweeteners is a healthier alternative to sugar. It seems fairly certain that is not the case.
That's not what this study is about. There are already plenty of studies showing weight loss or reduced weight gain when consuming low calorie sweeteners vs sugar. And there are no ill health effects such as causing cancer, which a lot of people still believe. https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/healthy-drinks/...
Here's a quote from the link you sent:
> The health effects of LCS are inconclusive, with research showing mixed findings.