Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.

Sweetener - Good or Bad?

Options
1…678911

Replies

  • Carlos_421
    Carlos_421 Posts: 5,132 Member
    Options
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    Carlos_421 wrote: »
    GaleHawkins wrote: »
    Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »
    GaleHawkins wrote: »
    Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »
    GaleHawkins wrote: »
    telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/21/two-diet-drinks-a-day-could-double-the-risk-of-diabetes-study-fi/

    Two diet drinks a day could double the risk of diabetes, study finds

    Oh yeah, this must be why they are recommended to diabetics by the American Diabetes Association: http://www.diabetes.org/food-and-fitness/food/what-can-i-eat/making-healthy-food-choices/what-can-i-drink.html

    And since when does correlation imply causation?

    Who said anything about causation of anything in the article.

    Literally the title of the article. "Two Diet Drinks a Day Could Double the Risk of Diabetes, Study Finds "

    "Double" is used as a verb, with the subject being "Diet Drinks", which grammatically means that the subject is performing the verb.

    It's a fear-mongering click-bait article based on a retrospective study that found a correlation. It means nothing other than the Telegraph is making money from all the clicks it is getting.

    And one of the "experts" had this incredibly scientific statement to make:
    Tam Fry, from the National Obesity Forum, said: “This is yet another warning that sweetened drinks, though appearing harmless on the surface, can mess things up inside you. Why should you want to take that risk when a glass or two of water will slake your thirst and not put your health in jeopardy? "

    Yes, when I want to make sure I sound smart and credible I use the phrase "can mess things up inside you."

    But it does not claim Diet Drinks "does" cause diabetes.

    But it does claim that they cause an increased risk of diabetes when, in fact, they only correlate with an increased risk.

    This is intellectual dishonesty because, as we all know, correlation does not equal causation.

    I don't think the actual study claims that, just the internet article.

    Right. Just illustrating that the article is making false claims not substantiated by the study.
  • KrazyKrissyy
    KrazyKrissyy Posts: 322 Member
    Options
    I don't think so. I use Walden Farms almost every day by the way. No bad after taste either (in my opinion), and hasn't hindered any results.
  • Aaron_K123
    Aaron_K123 Posts: 7,122 Member
    Options
    100df wrote: »
    I have been assured by cancer doctors numerous times that diet coke (artificial sweetners) does not cause cancer.

    In terms of good or bad, limiting how much diet coke I consume makes it easier to stay within my calorie goal. I am not sure why but believe it is related to the artificial sweetners and caffeine. I have no idea if there is science behind this but limiting diet coke isn't harmful so it's what I do as help for the calorie goal and sleeping.

    I have tried baking with artificial sweetners without what I consider successful results. I'd rather have the sugar and count the calories.

    I agree that is perfectly reasonable. I think that diet drinks are completely harmless however I'm not going to try to argue with someone's individual tastes that they for some reason must drink diet soda. If you find diet soda isn't compatible with your diet or goals then by all means avoid it.
  • Aaron_K123
    Aaron_K123 Posts: 7,122 Member
    edited October 2016
    Options
    Carlos_421 wrote: »
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    Carlos_421 wrote: »
    GaleHawkins wrote: »
    Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »
    GaleHawkins wrote: »
    Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »
    GaleHawkins wrote: »
    telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/21/two-diet-drinks-a-day-could-double-the-risk-of-diabetes-study-fi/

    Two diet drinks a day could double the risk of diabetes, study finds

    Oh yeah, this must be why they are recommended to diabetics by the American Diabetes Association: http://www.diabetes.org/food-and-fitness/food/what-can-i-eat/making-healthy-food-choices/what-can-i-drink.html

    And since when does correlation imply causation?

    Who said anything about causation of anything in the article.

    Literally the title of the article. "Two Diet Drinks a Day Could Double the Risk of Diabetes, Study Finds "

    "Double" is used as a verb, with the subject being "Diet Drinks", which grammatically means that the subject is performing the verb.

    It's a fear-mongering click-bait article based on a retrospective study that found a correlation. It means nothing other than the Telegraph is making money from all the clicks it is getting.

    And one of the "experts" had this incredibly scientific statement to make:
    Tam Fry, from the National Obesity Forum, said: “This is yet another warning that sweetened drinks, though appearing harmless on the surface, can mess things up inside you. Why should you want to take that risk when a glass or two of water will slake your thirst and not put your health in jeopardy? "

    Yes, when I want to make sure I sound smart and credible I use the phrase "can mess things up inside you."

    But it does not claim Diet Drinks "does" cause diabetes.

    But it does claim that they cause an increased risk of diabetes when, in fact, they only correlate with an increased risk.

    This is intellectual dishonesty because, as we all know, correlation does not equal causation.

    I don't think the actual study claims that, just the internet article.

    Right. Just illustrating that the article is making false claims not substantiated by the study.

    Fair enough but I feel the need to make that correction. The reason is there are lots of people who say "well some studies say this but other studies say the opposite so who knows" when in fact generally speaking its one internet article says this about a study and one internet article says that about a study while the actual studies themselves don't make causative claims at all. Refering to a study saying something that actually some unscientifically trained blogger said while citing a study just reinforces that "you can find a study that claims anything" feel that people refer to when they dismiss science as just another opinion.

    Its because their exposure to science has been opinion, opinion not from the actual studies but they didn't read the study...they read an opinion piece from an internet blogger who claimed its what a study said.

    Main reason why its so critical to seek out primary sources and not just take someones opinion of them as the same thing as the source itself.
  • Carlos_421
    Carlos_421 Posts: 5,132 Member
    Options
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    Carlos_421 wrote: »
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    Carlos_421 wrote: »
    GaleHawkins wrote: »
    Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »
    GaleHawkins wrote: »
    Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »
    GaleHawkins wrote: »
    telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/21/two-diet-drinks-a-day-could-double-the-risk-of-diabetes-study-fi/

    Two diet drinks a day could double the risk of diabetes, study finds

    Oh yeah, this must be why they are recommended to diabetics by the American Diabetes Association: http://www.diabetes.org/food-and-fitness/food/what-can-i-eat/making-healthy-food-choices/what-can-i-drink.html

    And since when does correlation imply causation?

    Who said anything about causation of anything in the article.

    Literally the title of the article. "Two Diet Drinks a Day Could Double the Risk of Diabetes, Study Finds "

    "Double" is used as a verb, with the subject being "Diet Drinks", which grammatically means that the subject is performing the verb.

    It's a fear-mongering click-bait article based on a retrospective study that found a correlation. It means nothing other than the Telegraph is making money from all the clicks it is getting.

    And one of the "experts" had this incredibly scientific statement to make:
    Tam Fry, from the National Obesity Forum, said: “This is yet another warning that sweetened drinks, though appearing harmless on the surface, can mess things up inside you. Why should you want to take that risk when a glass or two of water will slake your thirst and not put your health in jeopardy? "

    Yes, when I want to make sure I sound smart and credible I use the phrase "can mess things up inside you."

    But it does not claim Diet Drinks "does" cause diabetes.

    But it does claim that they cause an increased risk of diabetes when, in fact, they only correlate with an increased risk.

    This is intellectual dishonesty because, as we all know, correlation does not equal causation.

    I don't think the actual study claims that, just the internet article.

    Right. Just illustrating that the article is making false claims not substantiated by the study.

    Fair enough but I feel the need to make that correction. The reason is there are lots of people who say "well some studies say this but other studies say the opposite so who knows" when in fact generally speaking its one internet article says this about a study and one internet article says that about a study while the actual studies themselves don't make causative claims at all. Refering to a study saying something that actually some unscientifically trained blogger said while citing a study just reinforces that "you can find a study that claims anything" feel that people refer to when they dismiss science as just another opinion.

    Its because their exposure to science has been opinion, opinion not from the actual studies but they didn't read the study...they read an opinion piece from an internet blogger who claimed its what a study said.

    Main reason why its so critical to seek out primary sources and not just take someones opinion of them as the same thing as the source itself.

    Exactly. You and I completely agree on that point.
  • jondspen
    jondspen Posts: 253 Member
    edited October 2016
    Options
    stevencloser wrote: »
    jondspen wrote: »
    I know there are a lot of people who will say aspartame is safe...but for me it was causing severe leg aches. I try to stay away from them as much as possible. I either go without, substitute with something else (honey, agave, etc.), or use the sugar and just adjust my calories for the day.

    Luckily, I have never been big on sweets. We owned a grocery store growing up, but instead of raiding the candy isle, I always wanted a slice of longhorn colby....love cheese! :)

    I'm always surprised at experiences like that. Because aspartame doesn't even leave your digestive tract as aspartame, it gets immediately broken apart into its parts and those parts you ingest in quantities thousands of times higher every single day. How is it supposed to do anything in your legs? Or for the other poster their neurological system?

    Honestly, I can't answer your question. I did not major in biology, or get my PhD in biochemistry, so I am ignorant on many of the processes involved in converting chemicals to energy inside a living organism. I DO KNOW that there are these people called DOCTORS who study this stuff, do scientific research, and publish their findings in peer reviewed publications, where others can conduct the same experiments and replicate the findings.

    I also know that hydrogen peroxide is H2O2, which is just hydrogen and oxygen. Hell, it's almost water!!! So by your argument, a person can also injest hydrogen peroxide, and since it is broken down in the liver by Catalase into water and an oxygen molecule...neither of which are poisonous...then hydrogen peroxide is not poisonous. Yet we know that Hydrogen Peroxide is POISONOUS to humans, and you CAN DIE from it.

    Just because the body can eventually break it down into something that is ok...doesn't mean that it is not dangerous or harmful to the body. Perhaps it's the initial chemical, perhaps it's what is released into the body during the break down process, perhaps it's one of the chemicals left after the breakdown; I don't know. All I do know is my experience with the stuff and SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH that has found aspartame is not benign.
    http://www.medicinenet.com/artificial_sweeteners/page8.htm

    Logic = 1
    Stevencloser = 0
  • Alyssa_Is_LosingIt
    Alyssa_Is_LosingIt Posts: 4,696 Member
    edited October 2016
    Options
    jondspen wrote: »
    stevencloser wrote: »
    jondspen wrote: »
    I know there are a lot of people who will say aspartame is safe...but for me it was causing severe leg aches. I try to stay away from them as much as possible. I either go without, substitute with something else (honey, agave, etc.), or use the sugar and just adjust my calories for the day.

    Luckily, I have never been big on sweets. We owned a grocery store growing up, but instead of raiding the candy isle, I always wanted a slice of longhorn colby....love cheese! :)

    I'm always surprised at experiences like that. Because aspartame doesn't even leave your digestive tract as aspartame, it gets immediately broken apart into its parts and those parts you ingest in quantities thousands of times higher every single day. How is it supposed to do anything in your legs? Or for the other poster their neurological system?

    Honestly, I can't answer your question. I did not major in biology, or get my PhD in biochemistry, so I am ignorant on many of the processes involved in converting chemicals to energy inside a living organism. I DO KNOW that there are these people called DOCTORS who study this stuff, do scientific research, and publish their findings in peer reviewed publications, where others can conduct the same experiments and replicate the findings.

    I also know that hydrogen peroxide is H2O2, which is just hydrogen and oxygen. Hell, it's almost water!!! So by your argument, a person can also injest hydrogen peroxide, and since it is broken down in the liver by Catalase into water and an oxygen molecule...neither of which are poisonous...then hydrogen peroxide is not poisonous. Yet we know that Hydrogen Peroxide is POISONOUS to humans, and you CAN DIE from it.

    Just because the body can eventually break it down into something that is ok...doesn't mean that it is not dangerous or harmful to the body. Perhaps it's the initial chemical, perhaps it's what is released into the body during the break down process, perhaps it's one of the chemicals left after the breakdown; I don't know. All I do know is my experience with the stuff and SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH that has found aspartame is not benign.
    http://www.medicinenet.com/artificial_sweeteners/page8.htm

    Logic = 1
    Stevencloser = 0

    @jondspen
    http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1308408/why-aspartame-isnt-scary/p1
  • queenliz99
    queenliz99 Posts: 15,317 Member
    Options
    stevencloser wrote: »
    If I had a penny for every time someone made a post like that and backed it up with either a blog article without citations or a study they either didn't read or understand, I'd be a very rich mouse.

    With fabulous abs!!
  • phildog50
    phildog50 Posts: 31 Member
    Options
    One unrated sweetener that I prefer is the monk fruit, i.e. Nectress or Monk Fruit in the raw. It is the ONLY artificial sweetener that tastes/looks like sugar out of the packet. ZERO calories.
    http://www.intheraw.com/products/monk-fruit-in-the-raw
  • J72FIT
    J72FIT Posts: 5,948 Member
    Options
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    jondspen wrote: »
    stevencloser wrote: »
    jondspen wrote: »
    I know there are a lot of people who will say aspartame is safe...but for me it was causing severe leg aches. I try to stay away from them as much as possible. I either go without, substitute with something else (honey, agave, etc.), or use the sugar and just adjust my calories for the day.

    Luckily, I have never been big on sweets. We owned a grocery store growing up, but instead of raiding the candy isle, I always wanted a slice of longhorn colby....love cheese! :)

    I'm always surprised at experiences like that. Because aspartame doesn't even leave your digestive tract as aspartame, it gets immediately broken apart into its parts and those parts you ingest in quantities thousands of times higher every single day. How is it supposed to do anything in your legs? Or for the other poster their neurological system?

    Honestly, I can't answer your question. I did not major in biology, or get my PhD in biochemistry, so I am ignorant on many of the processes involved in converting chemicals to energy inside a living organism. I DO KNOW that there are these people called DOCTORS who study this stuff, do scientific research, and publish their findings in peer reviewed publications, where others can conduct the same experiments and replicate the findings.

    I also know that hydrogen peroxide is H2O2, which is just hydrogen and oxygen. Hell, it's almost water!!! So by your argument, a person can also injest hydrogen peroxide, and since it is broken down in the liver by Catalase into water and an oxygen molecule...neither of which are poisonous...then hydrogen peroxide is not poisonous. Yet we know that Hydrogen Peroxide is POISONOUS to humans, and you CAN DIE from it.

    Just because the body can eventually break it down into something that is ok...doesn't mean that it is not dangerous or harmful to the body. Perhaps it's the initial chemical, perhaps it's what is released into the body during the break down process, perhaps it's one of the chemicals left after the breakdown; I don't know. All I do know is my experience with the stuff and SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH that has found aspartame is not benign.
    http://www.medicinenet.com/artificial_sweeteners/page8.htm

    Logic = 1
    Stevencloser = 0

    You talk about scientific evidence and then you link to a dot.com website that has blog articles written by who knows who that fail to cite anything to back up what they are saying. In this case written by a dietician as an opinion piece. Here is a claim made early in the article

    "One hundred percent of the research performed by the company who makes aspartame confirmed aspartame's safety, whereas 92% of the independently funded research found problems with consuming aspartame. Other reports of federal employees working for the companies responsible for the testing and distribution of aspartame are cited on all of the sites and books opposing the use of aspartame."

    Which is an incredible claim to make and something that they should definately back up with some citations...do that do that? No, of course they don't. They don't source this claim and they don't provide citations to what studies they are even refering to. This is someone's internet blog that was put up for profit, this is not a scientific resource at all. It cites nothing, it makes claims but does not back any of them up with anything other than more claims. The evidence that it is dangerous? The fact that people have written books about it being dangerous is the evidence that is given.

    The current scientific consensus is that aspartame is not toxic or dangerous to humans at all.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17828671

    Your claims about hydrogen peroxide are a total nonsequitar. hydrogen peroxide isn't metabolized, its is a reactive oxygen species that has to get dealt with by enzymes such as catylase that deal with reactive oxygen species. Reactive oxygen species in and of themselves can cause damage to macromolecules such as DNA by reactiong with them chemically, they are dangerous and we know that. It enters the body as an oxygen radical, it doesn't have to be metabolised to become dangerous it is dangerous as it is which in and of itself causes damage so yes, of course it is toxic. Aspartame isn't some reactive species that is inheriently damaging...its a methylated dipeptide...there is nothing about that that is inheriently dangerous. So the only way you could claim it is dangerous is to say the body somehow does something to it to convert it to something that IS dangerous at which point you'd have to back that claim up by some sort of mechanistic explanation as to how followed by evidence.

    Hydrogen peroxide is, like other peroxides, a reactive oxygen species that can interact with hydrocarbons and break bonds thus causing damage to important molecules such as proteins, DNA and RNA. Yes enzymes like catylase exist to help mitigate this by sequestering and dealing with peroxides but they just mitigate the damage, they don't prevent it entirely and the more peroxides your exposed to the greater the damage will be...we understand that. What is the mechanism of damage caused by aspartame exactly...can you walk me through that?

    Yeah I'm not gonna hold my breath waiting for the response...
  • lyndawhite2010
    lyndawhite2010 Posts: 5 Member
    Options
    I don't have any facts or citations; all I know is how it makes me feel. I drank Diet Mountain Dews since I was 15. The aspartame built up so much in my bloodstream that it made my feet and legs swell and hurt! and 2 weeks after I quit about 3 years ago it stopped. This was before I started losing weight.

    Splenda's okay in small amounts but any more than that, it gives me terrible gas pains.

    Stevia makes my heart race just like caffeine, which I quit (caffeine, that is) at the same time I quit the diet Dew.

    So I just stay away from all of it and use sugar in small amounts, very rarely.
  • sparklyglitterbomb
    sparklyglitterbomb Posts: 458 Member
    edited October 2016
    Options
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    jondspen wrote: »
    stevencloser wrote: »
    jondspen wrote: »
    I know there are a lot of people who will say aspartame is safe...but for me it was causing severe leg aches. I try to stay away from them as much as possible. I either go without, substitute with something else (honey, agave, etc.), or use the sugar and just adjust my calories for the day.

    Luckily, I have never been big on sweets. We owned a grocery store growing up, but instead of raiding the candy isle, I always wanted a slice of longhorn colby....love cheese! :)

    I'm always surprised at experiences like that. Because aspartame doesn't even leave your digestive tract as aspartame, it gets immediately broken apart into its parts and those parts you ingest in quantities thousands of times higher every single day. How is it supposed to do anything in your legs? Or for the other poster their neurological system?

    Honestly, I can't answer your question. I did not major in biology, or get my PhD in biochemistry, so I am ignorant on many of the processes involved in converting chemicals to energy inside a living organism. I DO KNOW that there are these people called DOCTORS who study this stuff, do scientific research, and publish their findings in peer reviewed publications, where others can conduct the same experiments and replicate the findings.

    I also know that hydrogen peroxide is H2O2, which is just hydrogen and oxygen. Hell, it's almost water!!! So by your argument, a person can also injest hydrogen peroxide, and since it is broken down in the liver by Catalase into water and an oxygen molecule...neither of which are poisonous...then hydrogen peroxide is not poisonous. Yet we know that Hydrogen Peroxide is POISONOUS to humans, and you CAN DIE from it.

    Just because the body can eventually break it down into something that is ok...doesn't mean that it is not dangerous or harmful to the body. Perhaps it's the initial chemical, perhaps it's what is released into the body during the break down process, perhaps it's one of the chemicals left after the breakdown; I don't know. All I do know is my experience with the stuff and SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH that has found aspartame is not benign.
    http://www.medicinenet.com/artificial_sweeteners/page8.htm

    Logic = 1
    Stevencloser = 0

    You talk about scientific evidence and then you link to a dot.com website that has blog articles written by who knows who that fail to cite anything to back up what they are saying. In this case written by a dietician as an opinion piece. Here is a claim made early in the article

    "One hundred percent of the research performed by the company who makes aspartame confirmed aspartame's safety, whereas 92% of the independently funded research found problems with consuming aspartame. Other reports of federal employees working for the companies responsible for the testing and distribution of aspartame are cited on all of the sites and books opposing the use of aspartame."

    Which is an incredible claim to make and something that they should definately back up with some citations...do that do that? No, of course they don't. They don't source this claim and they don't provide citations to what studies they are even refering to. This is someone's internet blog that was put up for profit, this is not a scientific resource at all. It cites nothing, it makes claims but does not back any of them up with anything other than more claims. The evidence that it is dangerous? The fact that people have written books about it being dangerous is the evidence that is given.

    The current scientific consensus is that aspartame is not toxic or dangerous to humans at all.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17828671

    Your claims about hydrogen peroxide are a total nonsequitar. hydrogen peroxide isn't metabolized, its is a reactive oxygen species that has to get dealt with by enzymes such as catylase that deal with reactive oxygen species. Reactive oxygen species in and of themselves can cause damage to macromolecules such as DNA by reactiong with them chemically, they are dangerous and we know that. It enters the body as an oxygen radical, it doesn't have to be metabolised to become dangerous it is dangerous as it is which in and of itself causes damage so yes, of course it is toxic. Aspartame isn't some reactive species that is inheriently damaging...its a methylated dipeptide...there is nothing about that that is inheriently dangerous. So the only way you could claim it is dangerous is to say the body somehow does something to it to convert it to something that IS dangerous at which point you'd have to back that claim up by some sort of mechanistic explanation as to how followed by evidence.

    Hydrogen peroxide is, like other peroxides, a reactive oxygen species that can interact with hydrocarbons and break bonds thus causing damage to important molecules such as proteins, DNA and RNA. Yes enzymes like catylase exist to help mitigate this by sequestering and dealing with peroxides but they just mitigate the damage, they don't prevent it entirely and the more peroxides your exposed to the greater the damage will be...we understand that. What is the mechanism of damage caused by aspartame exactly...can you walk me through that?

    tenor.gif
  • GaleHawkins
    GaleHawkins Posts: 8,160 Member
    Options
    lyndawhite2010 wrote: »
    I don't have any facts or citations; all I know is how it makes me feel. I drank Diet Mountain Dews since I was 15. The aspartame built up so much in my bloodstream that it made my feet and legs swell and hurt! and 2 weeks after I quit about 3 years ago it stopped. This was before I started losing weight.

    Splenda's okay in small amounts but any more than that, it gives me terrible gas pains.

    Stevia makes my heart race just like caffeine, which I quit (caffeine, that is) at the same time I quit the diet Dew.

    So I just stay away from all of it and use sugar in small amounts, very rarely.

    healthychoices4life.com/aspartame-poisoning-stole-20-years-of-good-health-.html

    @lyndawhite2010 welcome to MFP forums.

    Clearly a number of other people based on this article and the many comments to the article have health related issues from aspartame and other sweeteners. Best of success in learning the best foods to eat to recover your health. It may take a while but after we find out what NOT to eat/drink we have a shot at recovering.

Categories