Is diet coke good for you?
Options
Replies
-
Nothing is bad in true moderation. But if you are drinking more than 1/day I would reconsider. Water is better for you and diet coke can trigger some weird reactions consuming more food calories, and I also personally feel, after researching, that overconsumption of soda of any kind leads to bone density issues and kidney stones.1
-
Nothing is bad in true moderation. But if you are drinking more than 1/day I would reconsider. Water is better for you and diet coke can trigger some weird reactions consuming more food calories, and I also personally feel, after researching, that overconsumption of soda of any kind leads to bone density issues and kidney stones.
I was drinking 4-6 cans a day during my weight loss phase and never had any weird reactions? Also, diet soda is like 99% water.5 -
-
linsey0689 wrote: »It's not good for you. But I think trying to cut out everything is not good. A couple a week IMO is okay
why is it not "good" for you?
I think they mean it doesn't add nutritional benefit (vitamins, minerals or macro).
in that case yes, but who drinks diet coke in an effort to get nutrients??????????2 -
I love this debate almost as much as the “McDouble is the cheapest, most nutritious, and bountiful food that has ever existed in human history” debate.
If drinking diet drinks doesn't have a knock on effect on causing over eating (for various reasons) then have at it. It will help keep you hydrated if nothing else.3 -
rheddmobile wrote: »rheddmobile wrote: »Studies have found that those who drink diet soda consume more calories total than those who consume regular soda. It seems to confuse the body's hunger response. If you have no weight problems it won't hurt you, but why would you drink it if you had no weight problems, since it tastes nasty?
Myself and many others here have lost weight and maintained while drinking diet soda. I drink it because I prefer to save my calories for food.
Do what works for you. Your experience is not typical. Look it up. Or ignore science, no skin off my nose. But there is actual evidence that for most people swapping to diet soda does not lead to weight loss.
I've read the studies. Every one of them only shows correlation, not causation. Correlation just shows that two data sets somehow correspond with each other, there's no evidence positively linking a cause to an outcome. It could be that those who consume more diet soda consume more calories because they're obese and trying to lose weight, and drinking diet soda is one way they're attempting to cut calories. It could be because, as others have mentioned, they mistakenly believe that diet soda allows them to consume more calories in other food because the soda contains less calories. But nothing in any of the studies positively establishes that diet soda causes weight gain or consumption of more calories. Correlation does not equal causation.
For example, I see a lot of obese people exercising. Therefore, I could conclude by correlation that exercise makes you obese. We all know that exercise isn't the cause of obesity, though.
Here are some other things that correlation has shown. Tell me if you believe they also show causation:
Death by falling out of a wheelchair correlate to the cost of a bag of potato chips:
Total golf course revenue correlates to the per capita consumption of cheese:
Deaths caused by lightning correlate to the per capita consumption of beef:
See, this is why companies should lower the cost of potato chips. Let's protest.4 -
I love this debate almost as much as the “McDouble is the cheapest, most nutritious, and bountiful food that has ever existed in human history” debate.
If drinking diet drinks doesn't have a knock on effect on causing over eating (for various reasons) then have at it. It will help keep you hydrated if nothing else.
That was a debate? Just no. Lordy.0 -
I've been at both sides of this debate, mainly because I'm paranoid. I started drinking diet soda because I missed soda even though I rarely drank it to begin with. I'm obsessed with bottled water - even more than I am with food. However, even though I barely drank soda, I wanted some... but I always hated diet soda, but I heard Diet Dr Pepper doesn't have much of an after-taste and tastes almost like the original - I agree, it does. I found out I love Diet Cherry Dr Pepper even more. I drank one a day, about, and continued to lose substantial amounts of weight (1.5-2lbs per week or more). I quit drinking it because I got paranoid after reading silly things about diet soda. Ironically, I think I am plateauing now because I think the diet soda was helping to subdue/suppress my appetite. I felt less hungry because I was getting some flavor from the diet soda, so I wasn't craving flavor and feeling the need to eat 24/7. So, for me, diet soda helps and I think am going to go grab one right now and get back to drinking them because they were helping my weight loss a lot.3
-
-
The thing about 'diet' foodstuffs (at least here in America) is that most of them are not truely zero calories. The FDA allows companies to put '0 calories' on the package as long as it has less than 5 calories per serving.
So there are usually 1-4 calories in most calorie free things.
Which isn't going to have an affect on the average consumer's weight loss.
But if you ARE using massive numbers of 'zero' calorie substitutes in your diet and find that you've plateaued, it might be a good idea to reassess the situation. If you are drinking 50 diet cokes every day I might argue there are already some issues with your diet.
(Personally I log them as '4 calories'.)0 -
rolenthegreat wrote: »The thing about 'diet' foodstuffs (at least here in America) is that most of them are not truely zero calories. The FDA allows companies to put '0 calories' on the package as long as it has less than 5 calories per serving.
So there are usually 1-4 calories in most calorie free things.
Which isn't going to have an affect on the average consumer's weight loss.
But if you ARE using massive numbers of 'zero' calorie substitutes in your diet and find that you've plateaued, it might be a good idea to reassess the situation. If you are drinking 50 diet cokes every day I might argue there are already some issues with your diet.
(Personally I log them as '4 calories'.)
that means that one would have to drink 100 diet cokes a week to see a weekly increase of 400 calories per week from consuming diet soda..
seems a hair ludicrous to me..4 -
rheddmobile wrote: »Studies have found that those who drink diet soda consume more calories total than those who consume regular soda. It seems to confuse the body's hunger response. If you have no weight problems it won't hurt you, but why would you drink it if you had no weight problems, since it tastes nasty?
Think about this........overweight people drink diet soda....people who drink diet soda consume more calories. Could it be that overweight people consume more calories?8 -
From the Nation Institues for Health, here's just one write up that includes references to several very well run studies – – including the decades-long nurses study. It is a desperately dry piece of writing, but if you are truly interested in whether artificial sweeteners are "good for you "or not, you might want to plow through this:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2892765/
Here's part of the summary at the very end of the article:
"Sweetness decoupled from caloric content offers partial, but not complete, activation of the food reward pathways. Activation of the hedonic component may contribute to increased appetite. Animals seek food to satisfy the inherent craving for sweetness, even in the absence of energy need. Lack of complete satisfaction, likely because of the failure to activate the postingestive component, further fuels the food seeking behavior....
Lastly, artificial sweeteners, precisely because they are sweet, encourage sugar craving and sugar dependence. Repeated exposure trains flavor preference [54]. A strong correlation exists between a person’s customary intake of a flavor and his preferred intensity for that flavor. Systematic reduction of dietary salt [55] or fat [56] without any flavorful substitution over the course of several weeks led to a preference for lower levels of those nutrients in the research subjects. In light of these findings, a similar approach might be used to reduce sugar intake."1 -
From the Nation Institues for Health, here's just one write up that includes references to several very well run studies – – including the decades-long nurses study. It is a desperately dry piece of writing, but if you are truly interested in whether artificial sweeteners are "good for you "or not, you might want to plow through this:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2892765/
Here's part of the summary at the very end of the article:
"Sweetness decoupled from caloric content offers partial, but not complete, activation of the food reward pathways. Activation of the hedonic component may contribute to increased appetite. Animals seek food to satisfy the inherent craving for sweetness, even in the absence of energy need. Lack of complete satisfaction, likely because of the failure to activate the postingestive component, further fuels the food seeking behavior....
Lastly, artificial sweeteners, precisely because they are sweet, encourage sugar craving and sugar dependence. Repeated exposure trains flavor preference [54]. A strong correlation exists between a person’s customary intake of a flavor and his preferred intensity for that flavor. Systematic reduction of dietary salt [55] or fat [56] without any flavorful substitution over the course of several weeks led to a preference for lower levels of those nutrients in the research subjects. In light of these findings, a similar approach might be used to reduce sugar intake."
nope, not even going to go there..
dopamine center response does not equal addiction or dependence...9 -
From the Nation Institues for Health, here's just one write up that includes references to several very well run studies – – including the decades-long nurses study. It is a desperately dry piece of writing, but if you are truly interested in whether artificial sweeteners are "good for you "or not, you might want to plow through this:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2892765/
Here's part of the summary at the very end of the article:
"Sweetness decoupled from caloric content offers partial, but not complete, activation of the food reward pathways. Activation of the hedonic component may contribute to increased appetite. Animals seek food to satisfy the inherent craving for sweetness, even in the absence of energy need. Lack of complete satisfaction, likely because of the failure to activate the postingestive component, further fuels the food seeking behavior....
Lastly, artificial sweeteners, precisely because they are sweet, encourage sugar craving and sugar dependence. Repeated exposure trains flavor preference [54]. A strong correlation exists between a person’s customary intake of a flavor and his preferred intensity for that flavor. Systematic reduction of dietary salt [55] or fat [56] without any flavorful substitution over the course of several weeks led to a preference for lower levels of those nutrients in the research subjects. In light of these findings, a similar approach might be used to reduce sugar intake."
MAY!!! MAY!!! MAY!!
Also, in plain English... if you like flavors, you pursue those flavors.7 -
No in my opinion it is very unhealthy. But it has zero calories so no it shouldn't make you gain weight. I drink some diet dr pepper every now and then if i want some caffeine in the afternoons and don't feel like having coffee2
-
-
-
From the Nation Institues for Health, here's just one write up that includes references to several very well run studies – – including the decades-long nurses study. It is a desperately dry piece of writing, but if you are truly interested in whether artificial sweeteners are "good for you "or not, you might want to plow through this:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2892765/
Here's part of the summary at the very end of the article:
"Sweetness decoupled from caloric content offers partial, but not complete, activation of the food reward pathways. Activation of the hedonic component may contribute to increased appetite. Animals seek food to satisfy the inherent craving for sweetness, even in the absence of energy need. Lack of complete satisfaction, likely because of the failure to activate the postingestive component, further fuels the food seeking behavior....
Lastly, artificial sweeteners, precisely because they are sweet, encourage sugar craving and sugar dependence. Repeated exposure trains flavor preference [54]. A strong correlation exists between a person’s customary intake of a flavor and his preferred intensity for that flavor. Systematic reduction of dietary salt [55] or fat [56] without any flavorful substitution over the course of several weeks led to a preference for lower levels of those nutrients in the research subjects. In light of these findings, a similar approach might be used to reduce sugar intake."
I think the Nurse's Study is interesting, but it is a correlation study, so hardly a response to the points being made herein. Again, fat people are more likely to switch to diet -- makes sense to me.
This is the key bit from the article you cited:
"Several large scale prospective cohort studies found positive correlation between artificial sweetener use and weight gain."
Note: cohort studies can't do more than find correlations. They cannot find causation. Are other things in common between people who drink diet vs. those who do not?
Also: "A double blind study subjected 55 overweight youth to 13 weeks of a 1,000 Kcal diet accompanied by daily capsules of aspartame or lactose placebo. Both groups lost weight, and the difference was not significant. Weight loss was attributed to caloric restriction [27]. Similar results were reported for a 12-week, 1,500 Kcal program using either regular or diet soda [28]. Interestingly, when sugar was covertly switched to aspartame in a metabolic ward, a 25 percent immediate reduction in energy intake was achieved [29]. Conversely, knowingly ingesting aspartame was associated with increased overall energy intake, suggesting overcompensation for the expected caloric reduction [30]. Vigilant monitoring, caloric restriction, and exercise were likely involved in the weight loss seen in multidisciplinary programs that included artificial sweeteners [31,32]."
This all supports the points, again, being made by those saying diet soda can be helpful if you are logging calories.
The bit you quoted assumes there is something to explain (which I don't think there is, I think the above explains it sufficiently) and then poses one unsupported hypothesis. It does not support a claim that diet soda makes you fat.
I also think this is interesting given the usual arguments (which I disagree with) for sugar addiction: "Increasing evidence suggests that artificial sweeteners do not activate the food reward pathways in the same fashion as natural sweeteners....
These pilot investigations are consistent with a revised hypothesis: Sweetness decoupled from caloric content offers partial, but not complete, activation of the food reward pathways. Activation of the hedonic component may contribute to increased appetite."
This final claim is not only unsupported, but seems inconsistent with the evidence relied on, which says that this does not happen when the artificial sweetener is substituted covertly.8
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 388 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 917 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions