coke light, diet soda, sprite zero
Options
Replies
-
for me personally I do not like to drink soda period it caused me to crave sweets. I cut out all soda and I did not magically lose more weight than I was already losing but I feel better and I am not consuming all the extra sodium that those drinks have. I drink only water or seltzer water. The seltzer gives me the bubbles and some brands have a variety of flavors you just have to find the brands that do not have the fake sugar or extra sodium. I like the Canada dry brand. Most people will tell you that sodium is not important but to me it is I try to be below 2500mg per day.0
-
I read a few studies on Aspartame, and I've cut it out completely. I won't even chew gum that has Aspartame in it. I was getting really bad migraines, but as soon as I cut it out, not a single problem since.0
-
hdrenollet wrote: »I read a few studies on Aspartame, and I've cut it out completely. I won't even chew gum that has Aspartame in it. I was getting really bad migraines, but as soon as I cut it out, not a single problem since.
I get migraines from diet soda also. But when dieting, I have not noticed diet soda to negatively affect weight loss.
0 -
I'd say skip the diet sodas. I do not consume anything with artificial sweeteners, in part because they physically make me sick, but also because they are nothing but processed chemicals. I don't drink a lot of soda, so if I want a coke I'll just have a coke. I just stick with water, tea and coffee - any enjoy adding a little juice or lime to my water for flavor.0
-
I drink Diet Coke. It has neither helped nor hindered my weight loss, my cravings, my appetite or my health.0
-
I think some people don't actually understand what correlation means0
-
hdrenollet wrote: »I read a few studies on Aspartame, and I've cut it out completely. I won't even chew gum that has Aspartame in it. I was getting really bad migraines, but as soon as I cut it out, not a single problem since.
And that is definitely a good reason to cut it out, but it doesn't affect 99% of the people in this world negatively so your circumstance can't be applied to everyone. Not saying you tried to do that, just clearing it up.0 -
I drink diet soda every day and have lost over 100lbs. Never hindered me one bit.0
-
I drink mainly water, no flavored soda. I have concocted an awesome homemade limeade using squeezed lemon juice, Perriea (can't spell it right) water and a splash of Rosies lime juice. The sweetener in the lime juice is just enough sweetness to make it palatable. I love it! You have to like sour stuff, however...0
-
I distinctly remember a board like this that got shut down due to ridiculousness that occurred after a while.
There are people who are going to tell you that diet drinks/zero drinks are the devil and grr be afraid and stop drinking them. I had one person preach to me that aspartame causes MS.
There are also people who are going to tell you that drinks like this pose no problems at all.
The only thing I could think (at all) that could be a down side to diet soda is sodium content.
Make your own decision. If you think it will help you to quit soda, then do it. If you want to keep drinking it then that's fine too.0 -
for me personally I do not like to drink soda period it caused me to crave sweets. I cut out all soda and I did not magically lose more weight than I was already losing but I feel better and I am not consuming all the extra sodium that those drinks have. I drink only water or seltzer water. The seltzer gives me the bubbles and some brands have a variety of flavors you just have to find the brands that do not have the fake sugar or extra sodium. I like the Canada dry brand. Most people will tell you that sodium is not important but to me it is I try to be below 2500mg per day.
Diet soda does not have a lot of sodium.
0 -
-
<--- lost 75 pounds while still consuming ridiculous amounts of diet soda
calories in vs calories out0 -
Completely safe to drink, and will not cause weight gain unless it contributes to a calorie surplus.0
-
0
-
-
I'm not arguing for or against the particular studies in question, they may be poorly designed, I don't know. Putting an epidemiological study to the standard of having to "prove" causation is a weak "gotcha!", because that kind of research doesn't make causal claims. It comes up on MFP all the time. (Btw no one positively "proves" anything, even in an experimental study - they provide evidence against a standard hypothesis, and discuss the relative probability of an alternate hypothesis).
Here are reasonable criteria to use in evaluating a correlational study like the ones used in epidemiology (and nutrition, generally):
Bradford Hill criteria
Main article: Bradford Hill criteria
In 1965 Austin Bradford Hill proposed a series of considerations to help assess evidence of causation,[38] which have come to be commonly known as the "Bradford Hill criteria". In contrast to the explicit intentions of their author, Hill's considerations are now sometimes taught as a checklist to be implemented for assessing causality.[39] Hill himself said "None of my nine viewpoints can bring indisputable evidence for or against the cause-and-effect hypothesis and none can be required sine qua non."[38]
Strength: A small association does not mean that there is not a causal effect, though the larger the association, the more likely that it is causal.[38]
Consistency: Consistent findings observed by different persons in different places with different samples strengthens the likelihood of an effect.[38]
Specificity: Causation is likely if a very specific population at a specific site and disease with no other likely explanation. The more specific an association between a factor and an effect is, the bigger the probability of a causal relationship.[38]
Temporality: The effect has to occur after the cause (and if there is an expected delay between the cause and expected effect, then the effect must occur after that delay).[38]
Biological gradient: Greater exposure should generally lead to greater incidence of the effect. However, in some cases, the mere presence of the factor can trigger the effect. In other cases, an inverse proportion is observed: greater exposure leads to lower incidence.[38]
Plausibility: A plausible mechanism between cause and effect is helpful (but Hill noted that knowledge of the mechanism is limited by current knowledge).[38]
Coherence: Coherence between epidemiological and laboratory findings increases the likelihood of an effect. However, Hill noted that "... lack of such [laboratory] evidence cannot nullify the epidemiological effect on associations".[38]
Experiment: "Occasionally it is possible to appeal to experimental evidence".[38]
Analogy: The effect of similar factors may be considered.[38]
They use observation, and rational & statistical analysis to consider the relationship between variables they think may work together. They can never say they for sure do. They don't pretend to.
Outright dismissal of a study of this kind just because it's correlational is actually against science. (There may be good reasons to criticize it, but that's not a fair one.)
The first stage of science is description. That is the aim of these kinds of studies. Then, the next step (if it is possible, it's not, usually, with humans and things like diseases) is to test a hypothesis generated from that description in an experimental study.
And all of these studies build upon each other - and, some exclude others - and together provide "converging evidence" that suggests we can guess, within a range of probability, whether two phenomena are or are not related.0 -
Therealobi1 wrote: »i love coke zero, if its not available i will drink diet coke or sprite zero. Dont want to waste my calories on full fat drinks. It hasnt stopped my progress.
^^^Yes to that! After being on here for 2 weeks, and logging every food or drink that enters my mouth, I quickly realized that I was drinking almost 1/2 my daily cal allowance, and some days drinking my full day's cal allowance!!! I drank a lot of juices, sodas, and the drink that gives me life....SWEET TEA! I thought juice was "better" for me than all of the soda I was drinking, but when I started logging, it became quite clear that ALL of the drinks I had were high in sugar and cals. Why would I want to drink 350 cals? I spend that on my breakfast. SMH, it was very eye-opening to say the least. I drink only water on most days simply because I am not willing to use my precious cals for drinks. If I want something fizzy, I opt for Pelligrino - counts as water and has no cals. Since being on MFP I have had a few Diet Cokes. The taste takes some getting used to, but if I'm out for a meal or something I may have it instead of water - sort of a treat.
0 -
And all of these studies build upon each other - and, some exclude others - and together provide "converging evidence" that suggests we can guess, within a range of probability, whether two phenomena are or are not related.
You gotta take care with that too. Random dice rolls build on each other, but every time you roll the odds reset themselves. My dad has been trying to drill this principle of probability in to me for years. I think I get it now.
What I hope to see in dietary studies in the future is empirical measurement of food intake, longer studies, with more participants. Our gadgets are nearly smart enough to do that for us.0
usually they address possible limitations in the discussion section. did they?
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 402 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 998 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions