Diet Cokes ?

Options
1…6791112…14

Replies

  • queenliz99
    queenliz99 Posts: 15,317 Member
    Options
    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!

    dczaw9vm734o.jpg

    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.)

    5w61lzvm6e9a.jpg

    OMG!! LOL
  • SLLRunner
    SLLRunner Posts: 12,942 Member
    Options
    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.
  • SLLRunner
    SLLRunner Posts: 12,942 Member
    Options
    ronjsteele1 wrote: »
    SLLRunner 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. :)
  • SLLRunner
    SLLRunner Posts: 12,942 Member
    Options
    ogtmama wrote: »
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    gwenster89 wrote: »
    diannethegeek wrote: »
    gwenster89 wrote: »
    AnvilHead 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. :D
  • SLLRunner
    SLLRunner Posts: 12,942 Member
    Options
    smicci1 wrote: »
    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.
  • ronjsteele1
    ronjsteele1 Posts: 1,064 Member
    Options
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    ronjsteele1 wrote: »
    SLLRunner 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.
  • Wynterbourne
    Wynterbourne Posts: 2,222 Member
    edited November 2016
    Options
    mph323 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 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
  • mph323
    mph323 Posts: 3,565 Member
    edited November 2016
    Options
    Wynterbourne wrote: »
    mph323 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?
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    Options
    mph323 wrote: »
    Wynterbourne wrote: »
    mph323 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.
  • Intentional_Me
    Intentional_Me Posts: 336 Member
    Options
    The only diet pop I can seem to handle is root beer. And I have one like 2x a year lol

Categories