Diet Cokes ?
Replies
-
BruinsGal_91 wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »Calliope610 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »tomdomurat wrote: »Do you or someone you know have a young baby....Would you give them DIET COKE??.... WHY NOT?!
Do you see animals in nature drinking Diet Coke?..... WHY NOT?!
If you have a dog and/or cat, would you give them Diet Coke?.... WHY NOT?!
These are "chemical" ingredients of Diet Coke:
Carbonated water, caramel color, aspartame, phosphoric acid, potassium benzoate (to protect taste), natural flavors, citric acid, caffeine.
Aspartame:
What appears to happen is that when a person eats something artificially sweetened, your body knows the difference. It knows there are no calories to deal with, so leptin is not released to trigger satiety.
And when leptin is not released, ghrelin continues to be released, causing us to eat more.
This leads to weight gain instead of loss.
Caramel Color:
Caramel coloring uses a combination of sulfites and ammonium.
This concentrated dark brown mixture of chemicals does not occur in nature.
Phosphoric Acid:
Phosphoric acid in its pure form is a colorless, odorless crystal extracted from rocks with sulfuric acid or by burning off elemental phosphorus and adding water to the byproduct.
It’s a corrosive acid and can form toxic fumes when it comes into contact with alcohols, ketones and other organic compounds.
It’s used in fertilizers, livestock feed, soaps, polishes, dyes, polishing metals and in many other nonfood products.
It’s added to soft drinks to provide a sharper, tangy taste and to help slow the growth of molds and bacteria in sugary formulas.
Potassium Benzoate:
Potassium benzoate is a chemical preservative that is commonly added to some foods and drinks, but most notably soft drinks.
It is an effective preservative because it blocks the growth of some bacteria, yeast and mold.
Caffeine:
Linked to many side affects such as Insomnia, Nervousness, Restlessness, Irritability, Stomach upsets, Fast heartbeat, Muscle tremors.
This is a joke, right? This has to be a joke. Those first three lines..... I can't even. Is this the logic we are supposed to use? So the only things we are allowed to eat or drink are the things we feed babies, domesticated animals, and that wild animals would have access to and choose for themselves? That's really going to limit my dinner menu... Dry Dog food? Nope. Baby can't chew it. Pureed baby food? Nope - the deer can't open the Gerber jar with their hooves. Well crap.
My dog eats cat crap? So following @tomdomurat's logic, do I have to feed my kids cat crap?
Mine does too!!!! So disgusting. Well, I hope my kids are ready for what's on the menu for tonight!
Let them eat cake.
Kitty litter cake, that is!
Here's the recipe:
http://www.kristianhoffman.com/kitty-litter.htm
I love that it was made clear that you should use a NEW little box, and a NEW litter scoop :laugh:
It's waaay too realistic looking. Especially the 'poop' hanging off the edge of the tray. The person who made it has obviously met my cat. Though to be perfectly accurate, there would also be fake litter sprayed around the tray as well as in it.
Mine too. I don't know how they manage it.0 -
nutmegoreo wrote: »BruinsGal_91 wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »Calliope610 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »tomdomurat wrote: »Do you or someone you know have a young baby....Would you give them DIET COKE??.... WHY NOT?!
Do you see animals in nature drinking Diet Coke?..... WHY NOT?!
If you have a dog and/or cat, would you give them Diet Coke?.... WHY NOT?!
These are "chemical" ingredients of Diet Coke:
Carbonated water, caramel color, aspartame, phosphoric acid, potassium benzoate (to protect taste), natural flavors, citric acid, caffeine.
Aspartame:
What appears to happen is that when a person eats something artificially sweetened, your body knows the difference. It knows there are no calories to deal with, so leptin is not released to trigger satiety.
And when leptin is not released, ghrelin continues to be released, causing us to eat more.
This leads to weight gain instead of loss.
Caramel Color:
Caramel coloring uses a combination of sulfites and ammonium.
This concentrated dark brown mixture of chemicals does not occur in nature.
Phosphoric Acid:
Phosphoric acid in its pure form is a colorless, odorless crystal extracted from rocks with sulfuric acid or by burning off elemental phosphorus and adding water to the byproduct.
It’s a corrosive acid and can form toxic fumes when it comes into contact with alcohols, ketones and other organic compounds.
It’s used in fertilizers, livestock feed, soaps, polishes, dyes, polishing metals and in many other nonfood products.
It’s added to soft drinks to provide a sharper, tangy taste and to help slow the growth of molds and bacteria in sugary formulas.
Potassium Benzoate:
Potassium benzoate is a chemical preservative that is commonly added to some foods and drinks, but most notably soft drinks.
It is an effective preservative because it blocks the growth of some bacteria, yeast and mold.
Caffeine:
Linked to many side affects such as Insomnia, Nervousness, Restlessness, Irritability, Stomach upsets, Fast heartbeat, Muscle tremors.
This is a joke, right? This has to be a joke. Those first three lines..... I can't even. Is this the logic we are supposed to use? So the only things we are allowed to eat or drink are the things we feed babies, domesticated animals, and that wild animals would have access to and choose for themselves? That's really going to limit my dinner menu... Dry Dog food? Nope. Baby can't chew it. Pureed baby food? Nope - the deer can't open the Gerber jar with their hooves. Well crap.
My dog eats cat crap? So following @tomdomurat's logic, do I have to feed my kids cat crap?
Mine does too!!!! So disgusting. Well, I hope my kids are ready for what's on the menu for tonight!
Let them eat cake.
Kitty litter cake, that is!
Here's the recipe:
http://www.kristianhoffman.com/kitty-litter.htm
I love that it was made clear that you should use a NEW little box, and a NEW litter scoop :laugh:
It's waaay too realistic looking. Especially the 'poop' hanging off the edge of the tray. The person who made it has obviously met my cat. Though to be perfectly accurate, there would also be fake litter sprayed around the tray as well as in it.
Mine too. I don't know how they manage it.
They're cats. They plan that *kitten*.3 -
gwenster89 wrote: »So in other words, none of those studies prove what they were purported to prove. As usual.
Okay, I can admit defeat. I assumed the relationship was causative, not correlative, from rumblings on the street, not studies I had sat down and read. Baseline, I don't think we should be eating and drinking stuff with a million ingredients that's artificially created in a lab. I'm a farmer and I'll totally admit my bias that I believe in the power of whole foods and want everyone, especially my sisters around the world, to jump on the bandwagon. And I'm not anti soda or diet soda! Just anti evil corporations like Coca Cola and PepsiCo. Didn't mean to insult anyone, just jumped the gun, and I apologize.8 -
gwenster89 wrote: »So in other words, none of those studies prove what they were purported to prove. As usual.
Okay, I can admit defeat. I assumed the relationship was causative, not correlative, from rumblings on the street, not studies I had sat down and read. Baseline, I don't think we should be eating and drinking stuff with a million ingredients that's artificially created in a lab. I'm a farmer and I'll totally admit my bias that I believe in the power of whole foods and want everyone, especially my sisters around the world, to jump on the bandwagon. And I'm not anti soda or diet soda! Just anti evil corporations like Coca Cola and PepsiCo. Didn't mean to insult anyone, just jumped the gun, and I apologize.
The generic diet cola I'm drinking right now has 8, also starts with water.5 -
amandapleighse92 wrote: »they are terrible for you! they make you hungry and make you crave sugar. Plus they have been linked to cancer. WATER is the best. To me it's easiest to skip the diet soda and tackle the root of the problem by not drinking soda. Or at least start cutting back and in time you can stop completely. They are terrible for you an to me every calorie I hold very dear. If I can cut it out I do so. Lots of girls drink diet cokes though and hell they are skinny, Chemicals beats calories they say!
The only way you could be more wrong is if you added "The earth is flat" to the end of your post.
Wait - The earth's not flat?!? Sonofa....8 -
I feel like this argument follows me everywhere I go.
Poor, abused chemistry. Misquoted and misreferenced, fear-mongered chemistry.12 -
I have been drinking diet coke since I was 4 years old. I have to say I really truly love it and will probably never give it up entirely. However, just like anything, it's best in moderation. Caramel coloring, aspartame, metal packaging, etc -> I feel having more than 2-3 a day could have a negative effect in some manner down the road. I used to drink about a liter per day, but I have cut back and drink about 1 glass every 2 days, which I make at home with soda stream (and actual Diet Coke brand fountain syrup, lucky me!). It has never affected my weight or cravings that I can tell, but I would have to assume that water is always what's best for you, so I've gotten quite used to drinking a lot more ice water these days and enjoying my diet coke as a bubbly treat0
-
My husband can drink diet soda no problem...He only drinks them in moderation (like when we are out at a restaurant). At home we typically only drink water.
I, however, can't have anything with aspartame in it. A few years ago, I was drinking diet green tea. I hated plain water, and it had zero calories. After months of drinking it, I started experiencing vision problems, numbness in my legs (started walking with a limp), and debilitating migraines. My doctor thought I had M.S. Thousands of dollars in medical tests later, we figured out it was aspartame poisoning. Some people just don't do well with it...I'm one of them.
I was excited when pepsi took aspartame out, just to experience soda again. However, I can't handle the carbonation, and end up feeling bloated after drinking it. LOL, I'll just stay away from it, but I don't begrudge anyone that can handle it2 -
It's the daily flogging!4
-
snickerscharlie wrote: »
Let them eat cake.
Kitty litter cake, that is!
Here's the recipe:
http://www.kristianhoffman.com/kitty-litter.htm
Sidebar:
I love that cake. I've made it for many a Halloween party. And just a word of advise, Little Debbie Fudge Brownies make a much, much more realistic looking cat poop than the Tootsie Rolls. Here's two of mine.
Now back to the discussion.10 -
I avoid pop/soda all together now. I was addicted for a good 10 years. It makes me retain ALOT OF WATER. So recently i quit pop all together and im 1 month off of it, it doesnt make you gain weight..it just makes you retain water. theres a difference. i personally dont have anything against them
I have to wonder how much you were drinking because one can has less sodium than a chicken breast6 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »Calliope610 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »tomdomurat wrote: »Do you or someone you know have a young baby....Would you give them DIET COKE??.... WHY NOT?!
Do you see animals in nature drinking Diet Coke?..... WHY NOT?!
If you have a dog and/or cat, would you give them Diet Coke?.... WHY NOT?!
These are "chemical" ingredients of Diet Coke:
Carbonated water, caramel color, aspartame, phosphoric acid, potassium benzoate (to protect taste), natural flavors, citric acid, caffeine.
Aspartame:
What appears to happen is that when a person eats something artificially sweetened, your body knows the difference. It knows there are no calories to deal with, so leptin is not released to trigger satiety.
And when leptin is not released, ghrelin continues to be released, causing us to eat more.
This leads to weight gain instead of loss.
Caramel Color:
Caramel coloring uses a combination of sulfites and ammonium.
This concentrated dark brown mixture of chemicals does not occur in nature.
Phosphoric Acid:
Phosphoric acid in its pure form is a colorless, odorless crystal extracted from rocks with sulfuric acid or by burning off elemental phosphorus and adding water to the byproduct.
It’s a corrosive acid and can form toxic fumes when it comes into contact with alcohols, ketones and other organic compounds.
It’s used in fertilizers, livestock feed, soaps, polishes, dyes, polishing metals and in many other nonfood products.
It’s added to soft drinks to provide a sharper, tangy taste and to help slow the growth of molds and bacteria in sugary formulas.
Potassium Benzoate:
Potassium benzoate is a chemical preservative that is commonly added to some foods and drinks, but most notably soft drinks.
It is an effective preservative because it blocks the growth of some bacteria, yeast and mold.
Caffeine:
Linked to many side affects such as Insomnia, Nervousness, Restlessness, Irritability, Stomach upsets, Fast heartbeat, Muscle tremors.
This is a joke, right? This has to be a joke. Those first three lines..... I can't even. Is this the logic we are supposed to use? So the only things we are allowed to eat or drink are the things we feed babies, domesticated animals, and that wild animals would have access to and choose for themselves? That's really going to limit my dinner menu... Dry Dog food? Nope. Baby can't chew it. Pureed baby food? Nope - the deer can't open the Gerber jar with their hooves. Well crap.
My dog eats cat crap? So following @tomdomurat's logic, do I have to feed my kids cat crap?
Mine does too!!!! So disgusting. Well, I hope my kids are ready for what's on the menu for tonight!
Let them eat cake.
Kitty litter cake, that is!
Here's the recipe:
http://www.kristianhoffman.com/kitty-litter.htm
I know it's off topic but I couldn't not share this picture of me enjoying my 27th birthday cake. (fyi My hair is wet, not greasy.)
ETA And my nephew's reaction...
8 -
PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »Calliope610 wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »tomdomurat wrote: »Do you or someone you know have a young baby....Would you give them DIET COKE??.... WHY NOT?!
Do you see animals in nature drinking Diet Coke?..... WHY NOT?!
If you have a dog and/or cat, would you give them Diet Coke?.... WHY NOT?!
These are "chemical" ingredients of Diet Coke:
Carbonated water, caramel color, aspartame, phosphoric acid, potassium benzoate (to protect taste), natural flavors, citric acid, caffeine.
Aspartame:
What appears to happen is that when a person eats something artificially sweetened, your body knows the difference. It knows there are no calories to deal with, so leptin is not released to trigger satiety.
And when leptin is not released, ghrelin continues to be released, causing us to eat more.
This leads to weight gain instead of loss.
Caramel Color:
Caramel coloring uses a combination of sulfites and ammonium.
This concentrated dark brown mixture of chemicals does not occur in nature.
Phosphoric Acid:
Phosphoric acid in its pure form is a colorless, odorless crystal extracted from rocks with sulfuric acid or by burning off elemental phosphorus and adding water to the byproduct.
It’s a corrosive acid and can form toxic fumes when it comes into contact with alcohols, ketones and other organic compounds.
It’s used in fertilizers, livestock feed, soaps, polishes, dyes, polishing metals and in many other nonfood products.
It’s added to soft drinks to provide a sharper, tangy taste and to help slow the growth of molds and bacteria in sugary formulas.
Potassium Benzoate:
Potassium benzoate is a chemical preservative that is commonly added to some foods and drinks, but most notably soft drinks.
It is an effective preservative because it blocks the growth of some bacteria, yeast and mold.
Caffeine:
Linked to many side affects such as Insomnia, Nervousness, Restlessness, Irritability, Stomach upsets, Fast heartbeat, Muscle tremors.
This is a joke, right? This has to be a joke. Those first three lines..... I can't even. Is this the logic we are supposed to use? So the only things we are allowed to eat or drink are the things we feed babies, domesticated animals, and that wild animals would have access to and choose for themselves? That's really going to limit my dinner menu... Dry Dog food? Nope. Baby can't chew it. Pureed baby food? Nope - the deer can't open the Gerber jar with their hooves. Well crap.
My dog eats cat crap? So following @tomdomurat's logic, do I have to feed my kids cat crap?
Mine does too!!!! So disgusting. Well, I hope my kids are ready for what's on the menu for tonight!
Let them eat cake.
Kitty litter cake, that is!
Here's the recipe:
http://www.kristianhoffman.com/kitty-litter.htm
I know it's off topic but I couldn't not share this picture of me enjoying my 27th birthday cake. (fyi My hair is wet, not greasy.)
OMG!! LOL3 -
gwenster89 wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »gwenster89 wrote: »gwenster89 wrote: »i'm sure tons of people have been able to lose weight and keep drinking diet soda but it's soooooo bad for youuuuuuu. the chemicals in it seriously mess with your head and there have been a ton of studies to prove this. like, not just one fringe study with iffy results, but truly countless studies.
i used to be a hopeless diet coke addict and then i finally switched to seltzer. i realized that when i craved diet coke, the fizziness of seltzer totally did the trick. there are also tons of diet sodas that are sweetened with natural zero-calorie sweeteners like stevia instead of aspartame. or you can drink kombucha! it does have sugar but it's processed by yeast and bacteria so it doesn't cause the same insulin spike.
Feel free to post some of those totally countless studies which show it's soooooooo bad for youuuuuuu.
oops I completely meant to. here's a bunch:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1038/oby.2008.284/full
http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/32/4/688.short
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.355.2133&rep=rep1&type=pdf
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/53/4/872.short
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/09/150911094912.htm
and one article that isn't from a peer-reviewed journal or academic institution buttttt it's jillian michaels, and she's the *kitten*...
http://www.jillianmichaels.com/fit/lose-weight/myth-diet-soda
there are a bunch more. just type it into google scholar. it's all about just eating whole foods, man. the point is, these giant corporations want to keep you addicted to this stuff so you keep buying it. they put stuff in it that messes with your head. i think someone else mentioned that... the artificial sweeteners actually make you more hungry and crave more soda. point is, it's full of garbage. and like i said, there are totally other diet sodas out there that just don't have all the crap in them! my favorite is blue sky not a shaming thing at all. believeeeee me, i speak from experience.
From your first link:Possible explanations for our findings
There may be no causal relationship between AS use and weight gain. Individuals seeking to lose weight often switch to *kitten* in order to reduce their caloric intake. AS use might therefore simply be a marker for individuals already on weight-gain trajectories, which continued despite their switching to *kitten*. This is the most obvious possible explanation of our findings.
Any good scientific study should explore sources of error. If you read the rest of the study, and the actual numbers, and not just take a tiny quote out of it, there's still a very strong correlation between diet soda consumption and weight gain.
With that said, I'm not interested in getting in an argument about it. This is a place for mutual support, not to be yet another source of endless trolling. You asked for articles, and I provided. Be well.
Correlation never equals causation.
And, I drink no soda at all.
Murder rates and ice cream sales have an almost perfect correlation...somehow I don't think making ice cream illegal is the answer
That reminds me. Behold all these wonderfully correlated things. (There's correlation! Therefore there's causation, right? RIGHT?!) http://twentytwowords.com/funny-graphs-show-correlation-between-completely-unrelated-stats-9-pictures/5 -
tomdomurat wrote: »Do you or someone you know have a young baby....Would you give them DIET COKE??.... WHY NOT?!
For the same reason I wouldn't give steak to a young baby. Babies have specific dietary needs (caloric, high nutrient, soft/liquid foods).
Do you see animals in nature drinking Diet Coke?..... WHY NOT?!
Probably because animals in nature lack the following:
sufficient intelligence to follow a recipe, let alone create one themselves
pressurized CO2
opposable thumbs
On that note, though, do you see animals in nature using the internet? What are you doing here?
I have seen animals eat their own poop, though. Must mean that eating poop is good for you.
I've also never seen animals cook their food.
If you have a dog and/or cat, would you give them Diet Coke?.... WHY NOT?!
Because it's too expensive to waste it on an animal that is just as happy with plain water.
As to the rest of your ridiculous claims about the evils of the chemikillz in Diet Coke, I'm just rolling my eyes at the ill-informed fear mongering.8 -
futuresize8 wrote: »Oh...but I DO wonder this - was it Pepsi that recently removed aspartame from their diet sodas? If it's not bad for you, why remove it?
Not a great analogy.2 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »tomdomurat wrote: »Do you or someone you know have a young baby....Would you give them DIET COKE??.... WHY NOT?!
Do you see animals in nature drinking Diet Coke?..... WHY NOT?!
If you have a dog and/or cat, would you give them Diet Coke?.... WHY NOT?!
These are "chemical" ingredients of Diet Coke:
Carbonated water, caramel color, aspartame, phosphoric acid, potassium benzoate (to protect taste), natural flavors, citric acid, caffeine.
Aspartame:
What appears to happen is that when a person eats something artificially sweetened, your body knows the difference. It knows there are no calories to deal with, so leptin is not released to trigger satiety.
And when leptin is not released, ghrelin continues to be released, causing us to eat more.
This leads to weight gain instead of loss.
Caramel Color:
Caramel coloring uses a combination of sulfites and ammonium.
This concentrated dark brown mixture of chemicals does not occur in nature.
Phosphoric Acid:
Phosphoric acid in its pure form is a colorless, odorless crystal extracted from rocks with sulfuric acid or by burning off elemental phosphorus and adding water to the byproduct.
It’s a corrosive acid and can form toxic fumes when it comes into contact with alcohols, ketones and other organic compounds.
It’s used in fertilizers, livestock feed, soaps, polishes, dyes, polishing metals and in many other nonfood products.
It’s added to soft drinks to provide a sharper, tangy taste and to help slow the growth of molds and bacteria in sugary formulas.
Potassium Benzoate:
Potassium benzoate is a chemical preservative that is commonly added to some foods and drinks, but most notably soft drinks.
It is an effective preservative because it blocks the growth of some bacteria, yeast and mold.
Caffeine:
Linked to many side affects such as Insomnia, Nervousness, Restlessness, Irritability, Stomach upsets, Fast heartbeat, Muscle tremors.
<sigh>
I wouldn't give a baby or a puppy or a kitten vodka, either. Not sure what your point is.
This.
I would not give a baby caffeine either, but there is nothing wrong with the caffeine.5 -
ronjsteele1 wrote: »ronjsteele1 wrote: »paperpudding wrote: »ronjsteele1 wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »For some people it does cause cravings, for other it doesn't. You just have to go by how diet soda effects you personally.
I'm one of those people that is/was greatly affected by artificial sweeteners. It did affect my cravings, I did gain a tremendous amount of weight drinking them (b/c it affects cravings which affected my appetite). And to top it off, the AS gave me a severe case of pancreatitis while pregnant (not a good thing!). Needless to say, I abruptly stopped my 6-8 can a day diet coke habit 15+ years ago and can't touch artificial sweeteners (they still affect me). That said, I still like a fizzy drink once in awhile so I drink Blue Sky Root Beer sweetened with stevia. Neither stevia nor xylitol seem to affect me. But I don't drink it often. Maybe one a week. I'm a water girl mostly. Because of my experience (and plenty of reading), I am firmly in the corner of the stuff is crap and no one should touch it. But like Christine said, not everyone is affected the way I was.
After such experiences I understand why you are in the camp of YOU shouldnt drink it ( although you could of experimented with drinking less than 8 cans a day - you know, context, dosage) but I dont understand why you are in the camp of " no-one should touch it" - given, as you said yourself, it doesnt affect everyone the way it affected you.
That is like someone saying I have an anaphylactic reaction to peanuts so I am in the camp of they are bad for ME - nobody would dispute that.
But most people dont go on to say therefore nobody should touch them.
Oh, no kidding. The issue was, I literally craved Diet Coke so I drank it like water. Any sort of diet soda would satisfy the need but I preferred Diet Coke. That's where I do think that aspartame does have addictive possibilities because there's nothing else in it that would indicate that kind of pull.
I can too understand why you choose not to drink diet soda, but saying Aspartame has addictive possibilities implies that it's possibly a drug. However, one will most likely never steal to get a hit of Aspartame, or go into a recovery program and say, "I'm an addict and I've been clean of Aspartame for ten days."
There is nothing at all wrong with Aspartame, just as there is nothing wrong with diet coke, but it's all about what is right or wrong for the individual. Obviously, for you, Aspartame and diet coke are not the best choices because they do make you hungrier.
I like Aspartame and diet coke, but I use neither because (1) Aspartame exacerbates my IBS and (2) diet coke, and any carbonated drinks, exacerbates my acid reflux.
I am firmly in the camp that aspartame is not safe. I don't care if others want to fill their bodies with it. So be it. But I do not believe it is safe and I do not believe AT ALL that this issue is settled in the health community. Having read plenty on how aspartame got approved by the FDA was just the beginning (besides my own experience). The FDA lists 92 side effects of aspartame. No thank you. To each his own. People can drink away all they want. My issue is the attacks on people that are putting out another view point. I do not bow at the feet of "studies" because a huge majority of them are backgrounded by the industry themselves. I believe nothing coming out of the FDA. They are completely corrupt as far as I'm concerned.
That said, I do not go around telling people they CAN'T drink it. But I have no issue with others posting the reasons why they believe it's bad for someone either. People on this forum can't seem to allow both sides of an issue to be laid out and for others to read and decide for themselves what to believe. There are those here that like to think they have science on their side. I'll try not to laugh the day the health community comes out and says they screwed up and this stuff is crap for people and oh, yes, aspartame is not only addictive but it does cause one to gain weight and have issues with their blood sugar, etc. etc . etc. And if they never do, then I will happily say I was wrong. But until then, I continue to stand on the side of "it's crap and not good for anyone." The FDA is notorious for backtracking on things they once approved for human consumption. I see aspartame as one of those things that is eventually going to come home to roost on the FDA's doorstep.
Be well......
Understood.
But, you did imply it's a drug.
I have no idea why your post was flagged.
Even though I don't agree with you, I rather like your tenacity.2 -
gwenster89 wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »gwenster89 wrote: »gwenster89 wrote: »i'm sure tons of people have been able to lose weight and keep drinking diet soda but it's soooooo bad for youuuuuuu. the chemicals in it seriously mess with your head and there have been a ton of studies to prove this. like, not just one fringe study with iffy results, but truly countless studies.
i used to be a hopeless diet coke addict and then i finally switched to seltzer. i realized that when i craved diet coke, the fizziness of seltzer totally did the trick. there are also tons of diet sodas that are sweetened with natural zero-calorie sweeteners like stevia instead of aspartame. or you can drink kombucha! it does have sugar but it's processed by yeast and bacteria so it doesn't cause the same insulin spike.
Feel free to post some of those totally countless studies which show it's soooooooo bad for youuuuuuu.
oops I completely meant to. here's a bunch:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1038/oby.2008.284/full
http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/32/4/688.short
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.355.2133&rep=rep1&type=pdf
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/53/4/872.short
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/09/150911094912.htm
and one article that isn't from a peer-reviewed journal or academic institution buttttt it's jillian michaels, and she's the *kitten*...
http://www.jillianmichaels.com/fit/lose-weight/myth-diet-soda
there are a bunch more. just type it into google scholar. it's all about just eating whole foods, man. the point is, these giant corporations want to keep you addicted to this stuff so you keep buying it. they put stuff in it that messes with your head. i think someone else mentioned that... the artificial sweeteners actually make you more hungry and crave more soda. point is, it's full of garbage. and like i said, there are totally other diet sodas out there that just don't have all the crap in them! my favorite is blue sky not a shaming thing at all. believeeeee me, i speak from experience.
From your first link:Possible explanations for our findings
There may be no causal relationship between AS use and weight gain. Individuals seeking to lose weight often switch to *kitten* in order to reduce their caloric intake. AS use might therefore simply be a marker for individuals already on weight-gain trajectories, which continued despite their switching to *kitten*. This is the most obvious possible explanation of our findings.
Any good scientific study should explore sources of error. If you read the rest of the study, and the actual numbers, and not just take a tiny quote out of it, there's still a very strong correlation between diet soda consumption and weight gain.
With that said, I'm not interested in getting in an argument about it. This is a place for mutual support, not to be yet another source of endless trolling. You asked for articles, and I provided. Be well.
Correlation never equals causation.
And, I drink no soda at all.
Murder rates and ice cream sales have an almost perfect correlation...somehow I don't think making ice cream illegal is the answer
And, if it did, I would be in soooo much trouble because I love my ice cream.1 -
My husband can drink diet soda no problem...He only drinks them in moderation (like when we are out at a restaurant). At home we typically only drink water.
I, however, can't have anything with aspartame in it. A few years ago, I was drinking diet green tea. I hated plain water, and it had zero calories. After months of drinking it, I started experiencing vision problems, numbness in my legs (started walking with a limp), and debilitating migraines. My doctor thought I had M.S. Thousands of dollars in medical tests later, we figured out it was aspartame poisoning. Some people just don't do well with it...I'm one of them.
I was excited when pepsi took aspartame out, just to experience soda again. However, I can't handle the carbonation, and end up feeling bloated after drinking it. LOL, I'll just stay away from it, but I don't begrudge anyone that can handle it
Really? I've never heard of that before. Can you share how the doc came to that conclusion?
Glad it wasn't MS, though.0 -
Aaron_K123 wrote: »ronjsteele1 wrote: »ronjsteele1 wrote: »paperpudding wrote: »ronjsteele1 wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »For some people it does cause cravings, for other it doesn't. You just have to go by how diet soda effects you personally.
I'm one of those people that is/was greatly affected by artificial sweeteners. It did affect my cravings, I did gain a tremendous amount of weight drinking them (b/c it affects cravings which affected my appetite). And to top it off, the AS gave me a severe case of pancreatitis while pregnant (not a good thing!). Needless to say, I abruptly stopped my 6-8 can a day diet coke habit 15+ years ago and can't touch artificial sweeteners (they still affect me). That said, I still like a fizzy drink once in awhile so I drink Blue Sky Root Beer sweetened with stevia. Neither stevia nor xylitol seem to affect me. But I don't drink it often. Maybe one a week. I'm a water girl mostly. Because of my experience (and plenty of reading), I am firmly in the corner of the stuff is crap and no one should touch it. But like Christine said, not everyone is affected the way I was.
After such experiences I understand why you are in the camp of YOU shouldnt drink it ( although you could of experimented with drinking less than 8 cans a day - you know, context, dosage) but I dont understand why you are in the camp of " no-one should touch it" - given, as you said yourself, it doesnt affect everyone the way it affected you.
That is like someone saying I have an anaphylactic reaction to peanuts so I am in the camp of they are bad for ME - nobody would dispute that.
But most people dont go on to say therefore nobody should touch them.
Oh, no kidding. The issue was, I literally craved Diet Coke so I drank it like water. Any sort of diet soda would satisfy the need but I preferred Diet Coke. That's where I do think that aspartame does have addictive possibilities because there's nothing else in it that would indicate that kind of pull.
I can too understand why you choose not to drink diet soda, but saying Aspartame has addictive possibilities implies that it's possibly a drug. However, one will most likely never steal to get a hit of Aspartame, or go into a recovery program and say, "I'm an addict and I've been clean of Aspartame for ten days."
There is nothing at all wrong with Aspartame, just as there is nothing wrong with diet coke, but it's all about what is right or wrong for the individual. Obviously, for you, Aspartame and diet coke are not the best choices because they do make you hungrier.
I like Aspartame and diet coke, but I use neither because (1) Aspartame exacerbates my IBS and (2) diet coke, and any carbonated drinks, exacerbates my acid reflux.
I am firmly in the camp that aspartame is not safe. I don't care if others want to fill their bodies with it. So be it. But I do not believe it is safe and I do not believe AT ALL that this issue is settled in the health community. Having read plenty on how aspartame got approved by the FDA was just the beginning (besides my own experience). The FDA lists 92 side effects of aspartame. No thank you. To each his own. People can drink away all they want. My issue is the attacks on people that are putting out another view point. I do not bow at the feet of "studies" because a huge majority of them are backgrounded by the industry themselves. I believe nothing coming out of the FDA. They are completely corrupt as far as I'm concerned.
That said, I do not go around telling people they CAN'T drink it. But I have no issue with others posting the reasons why they believe it's bad for someone either. People on this forum can't seem to allow both sides of an issue to be laid out and for others to read and decide for themselves what to believe. There are those here that like to think they have science on their side. I'll try not to laugh the day the health community comes out and says they screwed up and this stuff is crap for people and oh, yes, aspartame is not only addictive but it does cause one to gain weight and have issues with their blood sugar, etc. etc . etc. And if they never do, then I will happily say I was wrong. But until then, I continue to stand on the side of "it's crap and not good for anyone." The FDA is notorious for backtracking on things they once approved for human consumption. I see aspartame as one of those things that is eventually going to come home to roost on the FDA's doorstep.
Be well......
You realize that publically and vehemently disagreeing with someone is not the same as "silencing" them right? Telling someone "I think you are wrong and here is why" is not somehow akin to abridging their freedom of speech. You clearly are free to post whatever you want, you however have no say in how people will respond to what you post.
Freedom of speech does not mean protection from people telling you you are wrong in public.
I, for one, disagree with your concerns about aspartame...I think it is legitimately safe. Times where people go around warning others of how toxic or dangerous aspartame is I tend to try to correct them or at least talk with them about it and see exactly in what way they consider aspartame to be dangerous (how it is dangerous, by what mechanism, dangerous dosage etc) and how they came to that belief. Honestly to date conversations I've had it just seems to be based on fear of being mislead by corporations or the government and not actually based on any specific data. Basically its a belief bred from fear that we are being fed misinformation to support profits rather than based on any actual study. "Studies" are often named but in vague non specific terms, as in "studies exist that say blah" with no citation to said study and if study is cited no indication the person actually read the study they cited. In most cases its a copy paste of a blog they read that claimed a study showed that aspartame was dangerous where the person only read the blog, not the study itself. Often times the person who wrote the blog didn't read the study either but rather read it from a different blog and did the same thing.
I think you are wrong to be concerned about aspartame, I think you are wrong to pubically state that you think it is dangerous and me saying that is not somehow preventing you from speaking. If you choose not to defend your position when you have it questioned, that is your choice.
I actually have no issue with what you stated here about freedom to disagree, your disagreement with me regarding aspartame, etc. But if you go back and look at most of these posts where people "disagree" with someone, that is not how the post is written. It is written (as you said) as "so and so is wrong." Not, "I disagree and this is why" and then proceed to list their reasons why. Where I choose to take my information from is different then where someone else may choose to get their info from (for the sake of easier writing let's just say the "alternative" vs "medical" because it's easier that way - although there are probably other choices of words that would work). Mr. or Mrs. Medical has a tendency to very nastily say that Mr. or Mrs. Altie is flat out wrong. Period, end of story. Not that they disagree with the person and their reasons why (then listing the studies, articles, etc to try to prove their point). By stating it as they do, they are in effect shutting down the conversation so others can read both sides, do whatever additional reading/studying they wish to do and then come to their own conclusion. It shuts the conversation down in three ways. 1) It gets really tiring trying to swim uphill. Therefore, if I can't present the side I'm on with the links or whatever that I consider worthy of consideration then why bother? and 2) Rather then challenging the subject matter (which can have worthy and useful debate), the fight is over source material. And 3) You just told me above that you think it's wrong for me to publicly state I think aspartame is unsafe. How does that not shut down the conversation? If you're saying I should not state it publicly then you are in essence saying I should not present any of the reasons I (or anyone else) thinks that to be true. If you really believe that, you are basically saying that you think whatever source material you may present could very possibly not stand up to the source material I present on any given subject. Why not let people see both sides (and sources) and decide for themselves?
I'm not going to fight for space or time if all someone is going to say is something, or someone, is "woo" (who the heck came up with that word anyway?). My life is busy. If I'm going to have lively, worthy debate with someone, I want it to at least be worth my time. If both sides can't be presented b/c one side is yelling "it's woo" instead of actually talking about the subject at hand (pick a subject - acupuncture, hpathy, supplements, aspartame, etc) and why they do or don't think it's valid, then it's not worth my time. I can get one sided yelling from the TV news if I want that. No one is going to learn from that. If I'm going to debate, I at least want both sides to be presented so that others reading it can gather information to do further research for themselves. It starts with the source of each person's information. I do not believe most medical sources and you (meaning generic "you") don't believe in any (or all?) alternative sources. That is each person's right. Again, my issue is with what happens when someone tries to present an alternative source and Mr. or Mrs. Medical shouts it down as "woo." If one is confident in what they believe, then let both sides be posted without venom (because it does get venomous here) and let the individual read and decide. So perhaps the issue is how Mr. or Mrs. Medical states their case as absolute fact (not saying the alties aren't guilty of this as well but I don't see it *as often* with the alties) when the truth of the matter is, the answer to most of these questions is probably somewhere in the middle of both the alternative and the medical. If someone presented their case as, "these are the sources I'm using to base my judgement on ......." that is a whole lot more civil and leaves a lot of room for debate over, "you're wrong." "I think you're wrong and here's why," leaves a ton of room for source material and debate. It also leaves open for someone else to come back and disagree with their side. The back and forth from that can yield much more information (studies, articles, links, etc) for people to look at then the current state of a lot of these threads. So there's a big difference with what is being presented as disagreement and what is being stated as fact. And the difference goes back to what one considers relevant sources of information. As one of my favorite sayings goes - being on the left or the right of the road still puts one in the ditch. I feel pretty confident this applies to most of life. I include myself in that ditch digging because I lean heavily towards all things alternative and very little that is medical, because of my life experiences (we are all formed by our experiences in one way or another). But trust me when I say I was screaming for a doctor the day I broke my leg and tore every ligament and tendon in my ankle. On that day, at that hour, there was nothing alternative about me.
And Aaron, thank you. Your last post is one of the calmest, most reasoned posts I've read of yours. I appreciate your words were well thought out, not accusatory, and left plenty of room for me to respond with (what I hope) is coming across as calmness and honesty.2 -
Well here's my personal experience with drinking diet soda. I'm 65 years old and have been drinking the stuff since it first came out (fresca in the late 60's early 70's?) I have no health problems that could in any way be attributed to artificial sweetener, it doesn't make me fat, crave sugar or hungry. Granted I don't drink many multiple cans of it a day, but still. N=1
I don't think the soda companies are taking any particular sweetener out of their drinks, I think they're developing new drinks with whatever sweetener is popular at the moment ( for instance stevia, for those who can't/won't drink aspartame but feel stevia is a more natural alternative). I could be wrong but I think that's what I read. And no, I'm not citing my sources, so don't take it as ground truth
I have a couple of pre-teen nephews who would KILL to have the poop-cake for their birthdays! The only thing it's missing is a little pile of poop next to the box for when the box isn't clean enough for picky-cat to set his dainty little paws in.5 -
Well here's my personal experience with drinking diet soda. I'm 65 years old and have been drinking the stuff since it first came out (fresca in the late 60's early 70's?) I have no health problems that could in any way be attributed to artificial sweetener, it doesn't make me fat, crave sugar or hungry. Granted I don't drink many multiple cans of it a day, but still. N=1
I don't think the soda companies are taking any particular sweetener out of their drinks, I think they're developing new drinks with whatever sweetener is popular at the moment ( for instance stevia, for those who can't/won't drink aspartame but feel stevia is a more natural alternative). I could be wrong but I think that's what I read. And no, I'm not citing my sources, so don't take it as ground truth
I have a couple of pre-teen nephews who would KILL to have the poop-cake for their birthdays! The only thing it's missing is a little pile of poop next to the box for when the box isn't clean enough for picky-cat to set his dainty little paws in.
Ahhh, Fresca. My mom used to drink that when I was in single digits. As a child, I always assumed that it was a "regular" soda since there wasn't a bottle of Diet Fresca available in the store. LOL. I was shocked when I got older and learned the truth. And that it was grapefruit. Hehe4 -
Wynterbourne wrote: »Well here's my personal experience with drinking diet soda. I'm 65 years old and have been drinking the stuff since it first came out (fresca in the late 60's early 70's?) I have no health problems that could in any way be attributed to artificial sweetener, it doesn't make me fat, crave sugar or hungry. Granted I don't drink many multiple cans of it a day, but still. N=1
I don't think the soda companies are taking any particular sweetener out of their drinks, I think they're developing new drinks with whatever sweetener is popular at the moment ( for instance stevia, for those who can't/won't drink aspartame but feel stevia is a more natural alternative). I could be wrong but I think that's what I read. And no, I'm not citing my sources, so don't take it as ground truth
I have a couple of pre-teen nephews who would KILL to have the poop-cake for their birthdays! The only thing it's missing is a little pile of poop next to the box for when the box isn't clean enough for picky-cat to set his dainty little paws in.
Ahhh, Fresca. My mom used to drink that when I was a in single digits. As a child, I always assumed that it was a "regular" soda since there wasn't a bottle of Diet Fresca available in the store. LOL. I was shocked when I got older and learned the truth. And that it was grapefruit. Hehe
I'm not a fan of grapefruit-flavored things so I thought it tasted kind of nasty, but as a teen I was on a perpetual diet and it let me not have to chose between drinking soda with my friends and eating. I was in heaven when the first diet colas came out!
eta: I'm still mystified as to why it had to be grapefruit of all flavors. Why not orange or grape?3 -
ronjsteele1 wrote: »Aaron_K123 wrote: »ronjsteele1 wrote: »ronjsteele1 wrote: »paperpudding wrote: »ronjsteele1 wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »For some people it does cause cravings, for other it doesn't. You just have to go by how diet soda effects you personally.
I'm one of those people that is/was greatly affected by artificial sweeteners. It did affect my cravings, I did gain a tremendous amount of weight drinking them (b/c it affects cravings which affected my appetite). And to top it off, the AS gave me a severe case of pancreatitis while pregnant (not a good thing!). Needless to say, I abruptly stopped my 6-8 can a day diet coke habit 15+ years ago and can't touch artificial sweeteners (they still affect me). That said, I still like a fizzy drink once in awhile so I drink Blue Sky Root Beer sweetened with stevia. Neither stevia nor xylitol seem to affect me. But I don't drink it often. Maybe one a week. I'm a water girl mostly. Because of my experience (and plenty of reading), I am firmly in the corner of the stuff is crap and no one should touch it. But like Christine said, not everyone is affected the way I was.
After such experiences I understand why you are in the camp of YOU shouldnt drink it ( although you could of experimented with drinking less than 8 cans a day - you know, context, dosage) but I dont understand why you are in the camp of " no-one should touch it" - given, as you said yourself, it doesnt affect everyone the way it affected you.
That is like someone saying I have an anaphylactic reaction to peanuts so I am in the camp of they are bad for ME - nobody would dispute that.
But most people dont go on to say therefore nobody should touch them.
Oh, no kidding. The issue was, I literally craved Diet Coke so I drank it like water. Any sort of diet soda would satisfy the need but I preferred Diet Coke. That's where I do think that aspartame does have addictive possibilities because there's nothing else in it that would indicate that kind of pull.
I can too understand why you choose not to drink diet soda, but saying Aspartame has addictive possibilities implies that it's possibly a drug. However, one will most likely never steal to get a hit of Aspartame, or go into a recovery program and say, "I'm an addict and I've been clean of Aspartame for ten days."
There is nothing at all wrong with Aspartame, just as there is nothing wrong with diet coke, but it's all about what is right or wrong for the individual. Obviously, for you, Aspartame and diet coke are not the best choices because they do make you hungrier.
I like Aspartame and diet coke, but I use neither because (1) Aspartame exacerbates my IBS and (2) diet coke, and any carbonated drinks, exacerbates my acid reflux.
I am firmly in the camp that aspartame is not safe. I don't care if others want to fill their bodies with it. So be it. But I do not believe it is safe and I do not believe AT ALL that this issue is settled in the health community. Having read plenty on how aspartame got approved by the FDA was just the beginning (besides my own experience). The FDA lists 92 side effects of aspartame. No thank you. To each his own. People can drink away all they want. My issue is the attacks on people that are putting out another view point. I do not bow at the feet of "studies" because a huge majority of them are backgrounded by the industry themselves. I believe nothing coming out of the FDA. They are completely corrupt as far as I'm concerned.
That said, I do not go around telling people they CAN'T drink it. But I have no issue with others posting the reasons why they believe it's bad for someone either. People on this forum can't seem to allow both sides of an issue to be laid out and for others to read and decide for themselves what to believe. There are those here that like to think they have science on their side. I'll try not to laugh the day the health community comes out and says they screwed up and this stuff is crap for people and oh, yes, aspartame is not only addictive but it does cause one to gain weight and have issues with their blood sugar, etc. etc . etc. And if they never do, then I will happily say I was wrong. But until then, I continue to stand on the side of "it's crap and not good for anyone." The FDA is notorious for backtracking on things they once approved for human consumption. I see aspartame as one of those things that is eventually going to come home to roost on the FDA's doorstep.
Be well......
You realize that publically and vehemently disagreeing with someone is not the same as "silencing" them right? Telling someone "I think you are wrong and here is why" is not somehow akin to abridging their freedom of speech. You clearly are free to post whatever you want, you however have no say in how people will respond to what you post.
Freedom of speech does not mean protection from people telling you you are wrong in public.
I, for one, disagree with your concerns about aspartame...I think it is legitimately safe. Times where people go around warning others of how toxic or dangerous aspartame is I tend to try to correct them or at least talk with them about it and see exactly in what way they consider aspartame to be dangerous (how it is dangerous, by what mechanism, dangerous dosage etc) and how they came to that belief. Honestly to date conversations I've had it just seems to be based on fear of being mislead by corporations or the government and not actually based on any specific data. Basically its a belief bred from fear that we are being fed misinformation to support profits rather than based on any actual study. "Studies" are often named but in vague non specific terms, as in "studies exist that say blah" with no citation to said study and if study is cited no indication the person actually read the study they cited. In most cases its a copy paste of a blog they read that claimed a study showed that aspartame was dangerous where the person only read the blog, not the study itself. Often times the person who wrote the blog didn't read the study either but rather read it from a different blog and did the same thing.
I think you are wrong to be concerned about aspartame, I think you are wrong to pubically state that you think it is dangerous and me saying that is not somehow preventing you from speaking. If you choose not to defend your position when you have it questioned, that is your choice.
I actually have no issue with what you stated here about freedom to disagree, your disagreement with me regarding aspartame, etc. But if you go back and look at most of these posts where people "disagree" with someone, that is not how the post is written. It is written (as you said) as "so and so is wrong." Not, "I disagree and this is why" and then proceed to list their reasons why. Where I choose to take my information from is different then where someone else may choose to get their info from (for the sake of easier writing let's just say the "alternative" vs "medical" because it's easier that way - although there are probably other choices of words that would work). Mr. or Mrs. Medical has a tendency to very nastily say that Mr. or Mrs. Altie is flat out wrong. Period, end of story. Not that they disagree with the person and their reasons why (then listing the studies, articles, etc to try to prove their point). By stating it as they do, they are in effect shutting down the conversation so others can read both sides, do whatever additional reading/studying they wish to do and then come to their own conclusion. It shuts the conversation down in three ways. 1) It gets really tiring trying to swim uphill. Therefore, if I can't present the side I'm on with the links or whatever that I consider worthy of consideration then why bother? and 2) Rather then challenging the subject matter (which can have worthy and useful debate), the fight is over source material. And 3) You just told me above that you think it's wrong for me to publicly state I think aspartame is unsafe. How does that not shut down the conversation? If you're saying I should not state it publicly then you are in essence saying I should not present any of the reasons I (or anyone else) thinks that to be true. If you really believe that, you are basically saying that you think whatever source material you may present could very possibly not stand up to the source material I present on any given subject. Why not let people see both sides (and sources) and decide for themselves?
I'm not going to fight for space or time if all someone is going to say is something, or someone, is "woo" (who the heck came up with that word anyway?). My life is busy. If I'm going to have lively, worthy debate with someone, I want it to at least be worth my time. If both sides can't be presented b/c one side is yelling "it's woo" instead of actually talking about the subject at hand (pick a subject - acupuncture, hpathy, supplements, aspartame, etc) and why they do or don't think it's valid, then it's not worth my time. I can get one sided yelling from the TV news if I want that. No one is going to learn from that. If I'm going to debate, I at least want both sides to be presented so that others reading it can gather information to do further research for themselves. It starts with the source of each person's information. I do not believe most medical sources and you (meaning generic "you") don't believe in any (or all?) alternative sources. That is each person's right. Again, my issue is with what happens when someone tries to present an alternative source and Mr. or Mrs. Medical shouts it down as "woo." If one is confident in what they believe, then let both sides be posted without venom (because it does get venomous here) and let the individual read and decide. So perhaps the issue is how Mr. or Mrs. Medical states their case as absolute fact (not saying the alties aren't guilty of this as well but I don't see it *as often* with the alties) when the truth of the matter is, the answer to most of these questions is probably somewhere in the middle of both the alternative and the medical. If someone presented their case as, "these are the sources I'm using to base my judgement on ......." that is a whole lot more civil and leaves a lot of room for debate over, "you're wrong." "I think you're wrong and here's why," leaves a ton of room for source material and debate. It also leaves open for someone else to come back and disagree with their side. The back and forth from that can yield much more information (studies, articles, links, etc) for people to look at then the current state of a lot of these threads. So there's a big difference with what is being presented as disagreement and what is being stated as fact. And the difference goes back to what one considers relevant sources of information. As one of my favorite sayings goes - being on the left or the right of the road still puts one in the ditch. I feel pretty confident this applies to most of life. I include myself in that ditch digging because I lean heavily towards all things alternative and very little that is medical, because of my life experiences (we are all formed by our experiences in one way or another). But trust me when I say I was screaming for a doctor the day I broke my leg and tore every ligament and tendon in my ankle. On that day, at that hour, there was nothing alternative about me.
And Aaron, thank you. Your last post is one of the calmest, most reasoned posts I've read of yours. I appreciate your words were well thought out, not accusatory, and left plenty of room for me to respond with (what I hope) is coming across as calmness and honesty.
Hpathics believe that medicine gets stronger when you add water and shake it just so we're clear...I promise that homeopathy is the ultimate snake oil and there is nothing anyone can possibly say other than "it makes me feel better" which means nothing so...
Sorry, personal pet peeve there.7 -
ronjsteele1 wrote: »So perhaps the issue is how Mr. or Mrs. Medical states their case as absolute fact (not saying the alties aren't guilty of this as well but I don't see it *as often* with the alties)
This statement just goes to show how much our own biases affect our perception of reality. I would have said the exact same thing but with the roles reversed. I see a lot more "You MUST give up XXX" from the "Alties".7 -
This is pretty dense, so let me try to clarify, since I want to make sure that what I am taking from it is correct.ronjsteele1 wrote: »I actually have no issue with what you stated here about freedom to disagree, your disagreement with me regarding aspartame, etc. But if you go back and look at most of these posts where people "disagree" with someone, that is not how the post is written. It is written (as you said) as "so and so is wrong." Not, "I disagree and this is why" and then proceed to list their reasons why.
I'm puzzled by this, because I have seen (1) reason after reason explaining why people think aspartame is safe, why the concern that it causes hunger or cravings doesn't apply across the board (and is easily seen to be a problem or not), and (2) clear explanations of why the various links put up as "evidence" for why diet soda or artificial sweeteners are unhealthy fail to actually support those claims.
Thus, it seems that your issue isn't that people haven't defended their views, but that instead of phrasing it as "I disagree" (as if it were a discussion over whether or not canned tuna is disgusting -- it is, btw) vs. "I believe you are wrong" or "aspartame IS safe." Therefore, it seems that you are the one wanting to limit the debate, not the people who you are arguing with. You -- again, if I am understanding you correctly -- think it is somehow wrong or impolite or "silencing" to assert that a particular position is the correct one, vs. just my opinion.
IMO, however, some things are just my opinion or personal reaction (I find I eat fewer calories naturally if I don't snack, YMMV). Others are true or false (if you claim Cairo is the largest city in Illinois, I am happy to say you are wrong; if you claim Moby-Dick was written by Nathaniel Hawthorne and only attributed to Herman Melville, I am again willing to say that I believe you are wrong). On food things, if you say that you find it beneficial to your mental approach to do a 2 day juice fast, well, whatever, I am willing to believe that works for you, even though I disagree that's it's generally beneficial. If you claim that doing a juice fast is important because you need to rest the bodily organs and detox to lose, I believe you are wrong. If you tell me that eating 1200 calories but 60% from carbs will make me gain weight, again, you are wrong. I don't just disagree, I strongly believe, based on evidence that I don't believe you can counter, that you are wrong.Where I choose to take my information from is different then where someone else may choose to get their info from (for the sake of easier writing let's just say the "alternative" vs "medical" because it's easier that way - although there are probably other choices of words that would work). Mr. or Mrs. Medical has a tendency to very nastily say that Mr. or Mrs. Altie is flat out wrong. Period, end of story.
Okay, what I am getting from this is that for whatever reason you don't trust standard science and medicine and prefer what is called "alternative medicine"--ditch medical treatments and go with herbal remedies and that kind of thing, perhaps. If so, I do think that on at least certain things (one example, the anti-vaxx movement, although I am not saying you would agree with that, or any of the other more offensive examples that discredit "alternative medicine" and anti medical rhetoric in my mind), are wrong and should be called out as such. It's not just a matter of disagreement, because it's not just a matter of opinion--some things are supported by evidence and the scientific method and that general type of approach and others are not. That's not to say that it's wrong to find pleasure or helpful aspects of things not scientifically supported (I feel better eating mostly whole foods and getting my meat and, to the extent possible, produce from local farms. NOT because I think there's some provable benefit, but because it helps me feel in tune with my environment, seasons, so on. Other reasons too, but I wouldn't deny that's part of it.)Therefore, if I can't present the side I'm on with the links or whatever that I consider worthy of consideration then why bother?
But didn't you present links? I saw lots of links presented as "proof" of things they didn't actually support and then a discussion of what they actually said. I also see people questioning or treating as not serious debate the posting of links to poor, dishonest, non-credit sources (i.e., things like FoodBabe). To me, this is akin to my dad sending me a chain email about some crazy thing that 5 seconds of research shows is not true (and which seemed non credible on its face). If I send back an email saying "not true, here's evidence of what the real story, and here's evidence about the problematic source your email was drawing on," and he gets upset because who's to say my source is better than his, we kind of are at an impasse. Now, if you want to live your life (or he does) relying on such sources, that's your business, but if they are placed in debate as legitimate sources (let's say someone cites Justin Bieber's Twitter account as a reference), then pointing out that that is a bad source IS an important part of discussion and letting others decide what's right.Rather then challenging the subject matter (which can have worthy and useful debate), the fight is over source material.
But again, this is important. If my dad tells me that an email he got from a known partisan source says that Obama likes to kill kittens, do I really have to search out evidence disproving that Obama kills kittens (or that he does so joyfully, anyway)? Or isn't it reasonable for me to say that's not a trustworthy source, no trustworthy sources have reported such a thing, and the burden is on someone making the claim to support it. For example, if someone says the FDA reports 98 known side effects of aspartame, it should be trivially easy to point to the FDA listing them and identifying them in an official source, no?You just told me above that you think it's wrong for me to publicly state I think aspartame is unsafe. How does that not shut down the conversation?
Not speaking for Aaron, but I think that when you assert that aspartame is unsafe, that that assertion is wrong. I am not saying you shouldn't be able to say it, of course.
Now, personally, I would not assert that something is unsafe when I know that the evidence doesn't support that and I know I don't actually know that to be true (or even have strong reason to believe that is true). I find that irresponsible, and similarly when people come on MFP and say things like " you must not eat after 6 pm or you will get fat," that they are rather irresponsibly repeating things they must know they don't really have good reason to believe are true. I don't know why people do this. It's one of my biggest frustrations on MFP, truly -- I do not understand why people do it, how they can possibly think they know these things they assert so certainly (but which are usually so ridiculous or supported by such weak or non existent evidence). If I could only teach people not to be so willing to spread lies I'd be happy, as I think we'd have a better civil society, fewer people following for idiotic scams, and on and on. And it might help with weight loss too, who knows.
Back to aspartame, if I were you, I'd probably say that I thought it had had bad effects on me (perhaps given how much I consumed) and that I think it could have those effects on others.
That said, that does not mean I would choose to silence you or think you should be silenced or that you should not be part of the discussion (although I think others should respond instead of pretending it's all just about personal preference with no way to make a judgment as to the truth, which is a profoundly anti-intellectual position). Again, as Aaron said, disagreement, even strong disagreement, is not silencing.
If I have misunderstood what you were trying to say, please do correct me; it was unintentional.13 -
Wynterbourne wrote: »Well here's my personal experience with drinking diet soda. I'm 65 years old and have been drinking the stuff since it first came out (fresca in the late 60's early 70's?) I have no health problems that could in any way be attributed to artificial sweetener, it doesn't make me fat, crave sugar or hungry. Granted I don't drink many multiple cans of it a day, but still. N=1
I don't think the soda companies are taking any particular sweetener out of their drinks, I think they're developing new drinks with whatever sweetener is popular at the moment ( for instance stevia, for those who can't/won't drink aspartame but feel stevia is a more natural alternative). I could be wrong but I think that's what I read. And no, I'm not citing my sources, so don't take it as ground truth
I have a couple of pre-teen nephews who would KILL to have the poop-cake for their birthdays! The only thing it's missing is a little pile of poop next to the box for when the box isn't clean enough for picky-cat to set his dainty little paws in.
Ahhh, Fresca. My mom used to drink that when I was a in single digits. As a child, I always assumed that it was a "regular" soda since there wasn't a bottle of Diet Fresca available in the store. LOL. I was shocked when I got older and learned the truth. And that it was grapefruit. Hehe
I'm not a fan of grapefruit-flavored things so I thought it tasted kind of nasty, but as a teen I was on a perpetual diet and it let me not have to chose between drinking soda with my friends and eating. I was in heaven when the first diet colas came out!
eta: I'm still mystified as to why it had to be grapefruit of all flavors. Why not orange or grape?
I love Fresca. My office has all kinds of weird soda flavors (including Tab sometimes), and when I first came I was all excited to see Fresca. I think that's when I first learned it was grapefruit. I went on a Fresca tear for a while until the novelty wore off.2 -
The only diet pop I can seem to handle is root beer. And I have one like 2x a year lol0
-
ronjsteele1 wrote: »Aaron_K123 wrote: »ronjsteele1 wrote: »ronjsteele1 wrote: »paperpudding wrote: »ronjsteele1 wrote: »Christine_72 wrote: »For some people it does cause cravings, for other it doesn't. You just have to go by how diet soda effects you personally.
I'm one of those people that is/was greatly affected by artificial sweeteners. It did affect my cravings, I did gain a tremendous amount of weight drinking them (b/c it affects cravings which affected my appetite). And to top it off, the AS gave me a severe case of pancreatitis while pregnant (not a good thing!). Needless to say, I abruptly stopped my 6-8 can a day diet coke habit 15+ years ago and can't touch artificial sweeteners (they still affect me). That said, I still like a fizzy drink once in awhile so I drink Blue Sky Root Beer sweetened with stevia. Neither stevia nor xylitol seem to affect me. But I don't drink it often. Maybe one a week. I'm a water girl mostly. Because of my experience (and plenty of reading), I am firmly in the corner of the stuff is crap and no one should touch it. But like Christine said, not everyone is affected the way I was.
After such experiences I understand why you are in the camp of YOU shouldnt drink it ( although you could of experimented with drinking less than 8 cans a day - you know, context, dosage) but I dont understand why you are in the camp of " no-one should touch it" - given, as you said yourself, it doesnt affect everyone the way it affected you.
That is like someone saying I have an anaphylactic reaction to peanuts so I am in the camp of they are bad for ME - nobody would dispute that.
But most people dont go on to say therefore nobody should touch them.
Oh, no kidding. The issue was, I literally craved Diet Coke so I drank it like water. Any sort of diet soda would satisfy the need but I preferred Diet Coke. That's where I do think that aspartame does have addictive possibilities because there's nothing else in it that would indicate that kind of pull.
I can too understand why you choose not to drink diet soda, but saying Aspartame has addictive possibilities implies that it's possibly a drug. However, one will most likely never steal to get a hit of Aspartame, or go into a recovery program and say, "I'm an addict and I've been clean of Aspartame for ten days."
There is nothing at all wrong with Aspartame, just as there is nothing wrong with diet coke, but it's all about what is right or wrong for the individual. Obviously, for you, Aspartame and diet coke are not the best choices because they do make you hungrier.
I like Aspartame and diet coke, but I use neither because (1) Aspartame exacerbates my IBS and (2) diet coke, and any carbonated drinks, exacerbates my acid reflux.
I am firmly in the camp that aspartame is not safe. I don't care if others want to fill their bodies with it. So be it. But I do not believe it is safe and I do not believe AT ALL that this issue is settled in the health community. Having read plenty on how aspartame got approved by the FDA was just the beginning (besides my own experience). The FDA lists 92 side effects of aspartame. No thank you. To each his own. People can drink away all they want. My issue is the attacks on people that are putting out another view point. I do not bow at the feet of "studies" because a huge majority of them are backgrounded by the industry themselves. I believe nothing coming out of the FDA. They are completely corrupt as far as I'm concerned.
That said, I do not go around telling people they CAN'T drink it. But I have no issue with others posting the reasons why they believe it's bad for someone either. People on this forum can't seem to allow both sides of an issue to be laid out and for others to read and decide for themselves what to believe. There are those here that like to think they have science on their side. I'll try not to laugh the day the health community comes out and says they screwed up and this stuff is crap for people and oh, yes, aspartame is not only addictive but it does cause one to gain weight and have issues with their blood sugar, etc. etc . etc. And if they never do, then I will happily say I was wrong. But until then, I continue to stand on the side of "it's crap and not good for anyone." The FDA is notorious for backtracking on things they once approved for human consumption. I see aspartame as one of those things that is eventually going to come home to roost on the FDA's doorstep.
Be well......
You realize that publically and vehemently disagreeing with someone is not the same as "silencing" them right? Telling someone "I think you are wrong and here is why" is not somehow akin to abridging their freedom of speech. You clearly are free to post whatever you want, you however have no say in how people will respond to what you post.
Freedom of speech does not mean protection from people telling you you are wrong in public.
I, for one, disagree with your concerns about aspartame...I think it is legitimately safe. Times where people go around warning others of how toxic or dangerous aspartame is I tend to try to correct them or at least talk with them about it and see exactly in what way they consider aspartame to be dangerous (how it is dangerous, by what mechanism, dangerous dosage etc) and how they came to that belief. Honestly to date conversations I've had it just seems to be based on fear of being mislead by corporations or the government and not actually based on any specific data. Basically its a belief bred from fear that we are being fed misinformation to support profits rather than based on any actual study. "Studies" are often named but in vague non specific terms, as in "studies exist that say blah" with no citation to said study and if study is cited no indication the person actually read the study they cited. In most cases its a copy paste of a blog they read that claimed a study showed that aspartame was dangerous where the person only read the blog, not the study itself. Often times the person who wrote the blog didn't read the study either but rather read it from a different blog and did the same thing.
I think you are wrong to be concerned about aspartame, I think you are wrong to pubically state that you think it is dangerous and me saying that is not somehow preventing you from speaking. If you choose not to defend your position when you have it questioned, that is your choice.
And Aaron, thank you. Your last post is one of the calmest, most reasoned posts I've read of yours.
Perception is an interesting thing. I have found all of Aaron's posts to be calm, reasoned and full-to-the-brim with legitimate science.11
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions