Is soda really "evil"?

Darrelkun

They also talked about diet soda and how it is still unknown about (at the release of this study). Artificial sweeteners, they say, do not have calories, but also have little to no nutritional value, and may subject a person to desiring stronger sweets in their appetites. They say it is unknown and highly controversial as of the publication of their study. Further research is needed.

thank you.

Hey guys, were these the studies you wanted everyone to look at? :laugh:

Slightly bothersome that this was the only part highlighted. That study was published in 2010. It is now 2013. There is a possibility that research (that I had not yet stumbled across) has been published since this paper.

Dear sir, you are actually the only person that listed sources. And thank you for doing so.

I cited too...

Mslmesq

@ beach. I first pointed out to you that the studies probably don't tell people they will die if they drink it and asked if that was what you were implying. Then I asked, not referring to any study in particular, if your comment that 'I've read plenty of them' and 'you can only read so many', would close you off to new studies.

Not sure how your response that my 'argument' (which I'm not trying to enter either an argument or debate wit you) was not cogent. It seems more like a non response to what I said. But that is ok. You don't have to respond to it either.

Well I'm not Beach, but I do agree with him. After so many of these threads, unless a study is new I'm not particularly interested. What I do personally is keep up with Science Based Medicine, because they review a lot of newer studies and they often point out flaws that I wouldn't know were there.

For those of us who aren't scientists but who still want to do our research, it helps to have sources who are knowledgeable in study design and/or medicine.

Allright, technically though you never answered my question regarding whether you ever read a single one of the studies cited. But, I would be willing to take a look at your carefully studied science research. Perhaps you would like to share the links along with who funded the studies?

I'm sorry I didn't see where you had asked me if I had read them. Yes I have read some of them. Many of them are irrelevant-- they're rat studies or they're confirming things I've already mentioned are "unsettled" as of right now, like triggering headache and causing satiety issues. The human studies that do show adverse effects are talking about HUGE dosages of aspartame. The dosage makes the poison, so they say.

I linked my source above. It has references. I'm not aware of who funded the studies (and it's my bedtime so I'm not going to go through and check), but they come from a wide variety of peer-reviewed journals.

I have satisfied myself at this time that aspartame in moderate amounts is safe. Everything I've read from major medical establishments have come to the same conclusion. I'm not much for conspiracy theory either-- if most scientists and doctors say that aspartame is safe, I'm not going to assume that they're all being paid off by Monsanto.

I didn't catch a link. If you have one or want to supply it tomorrow, I'd be interested. In the interim, good night.

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/aspartame-truth-vs-fiction/

Ok, irrespective of your other completely inappropriate post, I took a look here at your link.

This is an opinion written by someone who, much like you, states he's studied the issue and aspartame is safe. He cites no particular study and makes reference to no study either. This helps me about as much as your opinion does.

I get that you hold that opinion and feel strongly about it. Obviously others feel strongly in a different way. But at least they can reference actual studies that have been conducted.

Mslmesq

They also talked about diet soda and how it is still unknown about (at the release of this study). Artificial sweeteners, they say, do not have calories, but also have little to no nutritional value, and may subject a person to desiring stronger sweets in their appetites. They say it is unknown and highly controversial as of the publication of their study. Further research is needed.

thank you.

Hey guys, were these the studies you wanted everyone to look at? :laugh:

Slightly bothersome that this was the only part highlighted. That study was published in 2010. It is now 2013. There is a possibility that research (that I had not yet stumbled across) has been published since this paper.

Dear sir, you are actually the only person that listed sources. And thank you for doing so.

I cited too...

You definitely did. I apologize. And I only highlighted the one part cause it discussed diet soda. I did find the rest interesting as well. Thank you for your post!

tigersword

It is difficult to use pubmed to find the desirable articles to support a case. Sometimes because the key words do not align (typing in 'soda' often pulled up articles by a man named Soda, haha) and two, because a lot of articles linked to pubmed are not free for public viewing.

Here's one, though, that I found interesting.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3738277/
Papandreou D, Andreou E, Heraclides A, Rousso I (2013). Is beverage intake related to overweight and obesity in school children? Hippokratia 17(1): 42-46.


This study looked at the consumption of fruit juice without sugar added, fruit juice with sugar added, soft drinks and milk (whole, half-and-half, 2%, 1%, skim) in their correlations to obesity in children.

Basically it states that sugary drinks (fruit juice with sugar added, soft drinks, etc.) were found in statistically significant higher consumption of obese children than normal and overweight children. Children consuming sugary drinks were found to be over 2.5 times more likely to develop obesity. They also pointed out that these sugary drinks may trigger genetic predispositions to fat development.

Other drinks (100% fruit juice with no sugar added and milk) were not statistically significant between normal, overweight, or obese children. They concluded these drinks are not affecting the development of obesity.


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3518794/

Qibin Q, Chu AY, Kang JH, Jensen MK, Curhan GC, Pasquale LR, Ridker PM, Hunter DJ, Willett WC, Rimm EB, Chasman DI, Hu FB, Qi L (2012). Sugar-sweetened beverages and genetic risk of obesity. N Engl J Med. 367(15): 1387-1396.

This study concluded that higher sugary drinks resulted in higher genetic associations of BMIs across adult men and women individuals. They found that increased sugary drink intake resulted in increased risk of obesity allele frequency (meaning how likely they were, genetically, to develop diabetes).

For their sugar-sweetened drinks, they included caffeinated colas, caffeine-free colas, carbonated non-cola soft drinks, and noncarbonated sugar-sweetened drinks (lemonade, fruit drinks). For artificially-sweetened drinks, they included caffeinated, caffeine-free, and noncarbonated low-calorie drinks.

Interestingly enough, they noted that dietary and exercise changes did not buffer the individuals from this risk allele increase. (So eating better to accommodate drinking a pepsi does not seem to be as effective as you might think.)

According to Table 3 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3518794/table/T3/ ) sugar drinks were statistically significant in increasing BMI (in science, we accept any p-value below 0.05 as ‘significant’, while rejecting any number higher than this. As you can see on the right, sugar-drinks have p-values below 0.05 (meaning they are significantly contributing), whereas artificial drinks had p-values above 0.05 (meaning they were not significantly contributing).

They concluded that if a person were to drink these beverages less than once a month, they will have half the risk of someone who drinks one every day. Genetic susceptibility is also something to consider when drinking these drinks, as some people are more prone to react genetically to
sugary beverages than others.


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2862465/

Malik VS, Popkin BM, Bray GA, Despres JP, Hu FB (2010). Sugar sweetened beverages, obesity, type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease risk. Circulation 121(11): 1356-1364.

This study found a positive association between sugary drinks and weight-gain of obese individuals. They also found in a study focusing on black women who consumed at least one sugary drink a day were 83% more likely to develop type 2 diabetes than those that only drank one once a month. Although they also noted one study which contradicted this information, stating no significant correlation existed for individuals between sugary drink consumption and type 2 diabetes after a 9 year follow up. But, this study was done on heavier and older participants. Popkin et al.’s conclusion is that, maybe once BMI is higher, sugary drinks do not have as strong of an effect on the consumer.

MetSyn was also reported to increase with soft drink (regular and diet soda) consumption; once a day versus once a month increased by 39%. However, Popkin et al. commented that it was more likely the regular contributing most of the change.

They say that as of 2010 the data was limited on sugary drink and heart disease interactions. But, there was some evidence starting to indicate that sugary drinks may also increase the development of hypertension, inflammation, and clinical cardiovascular heart disease.
They add that studies have also pointed at sugary drink intake to weight gain to be a much higher contribution than solid food.

Sugary drinks lead to rapid increases in blood glucose levels as well as insulin production and a higher glycemic load. They can both lead to glucose intolerance and insulin resistance. Fructose can lead to increased blood pressure. Reactive oxygen species (which are really bad; they destroy your cells and proteins and tissues) were significantly increased when fructose and glucose were consumed (according to Ghanim et al. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17384340). Fructose also increases blood uric acid.

Something I found cute was at the end they talked about water intake, and how it’s better and why. It made me chuckle because it should be a ‘no duh’, but the information still made me smile.

They also talked about diet soda and how it is still unknown about (at the release of this study). Artificial sweeteners, they say, do not have calories, but also have little to no nutritional value, and may subject a person to desiring stronger sweets in their appetites. They say it is unknown and highly controversial as of the publication of their study. Further research is needed.

This post is getting long, so I will end it here. But here are some more readings if you are interested.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3210834/

Malik VS, Schulze MB, Hu FB (2006). Intake of sugar-sweetened beverages and weight gain: a systematic review. Am J Clin Nutr. 84(2): 274-288.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3192470/

Malik VS and Hu FB (2011). Sugar-sweetened beverages and health: where does the evidence stand? Am J Clin Nutr. 94(5): 1161-1162.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3151731/

Mozaffarian D, Hao T, Hu FB (2011). Changes in diet and lifestyle and long-term weight gain in women and men. N Engl J Med. 364(25); 2392-2404.

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/115/2/e223.long
Welsh JA, Cogswell ME, Rogers S, Rockett H, Mei Z, Grummer-Strawn LM (2005). Overweight among low-income preschool children associated with the consumption of sweet drinks: Missouri, 1999-2002. PEDIATRICS 155(2): 223-229.

thank you.

Hey guys, were these the studies you wanted everyone to look at? :laugh:

Not really, I much prefer clinical studies, done with actual controls, not epidemiological studies that rely on subject recall and food surveys to draw very shaky correlations that ultimately mean nothing.

I mean, after all, the average temperature of the Earth has increased while the average number of pirates has decreased, so pirates must have been preventing global warming, right?

nitza53

I think you might mean celiac disease? ROFLMAO

dfortier17

Regular Soda drinks (those with sugar) are bad in that they have no nutritional value other than sugar.
Diet drinks have aspartame and therefore have very few or zero calories. So they are colored carbonated water with taste. Anything in moderation is probably OK. No reputable medical/scinetific study has shown a health concern with this. Obese people and diabetic people are asked to drink these diet drinks (if they feel the urge or want to spoil themselves once in a while). The carbonation itsel is not bad. Some people do not tolerate aspartame for a variety of reasons. But for most people - completely safe and a good way to not add calories to your day. You can safely enjoy one from time to time.

slim4health56

Either tell me it's ok or try to convince me to stop drinking it with facts about how horrible it is. (please tell me it's ok I love soda)

Dear OP:

I stick to my initial post and encourage you to Google the subject. You will need to make up your own mind and I hope you do so armed with facts. If nothing else, listen to your mother…she doesn’t buy this stuff, right?

Dear OP et al: As predicted, portions of this thread have deteriorated…someone wanted references…I gave references …someone else complained that the references were not current. Okay, well, perhaps we should demand more research to determine if tobacco usage still causes cancer…after all, most of that research is pretty old, too. Older, in fact, than the research on aspartame I listed. So, while some of you are throwing the baby out with the bath water, someone else will have to foot the bill for this redundant research.

The facts of how aspartame was approved by the FDA (after two failed attempts) is quite fascinating…for those of you who have open minds, I encourage you to check it out. I won’t include any reference to the facts here, as this goes back decades, ergo probably too old to be relevant, right? (and frankly not germane to the OPs question). And, as to my Monsanto reference, why did they sell their aspartame patent?

To each their own, but I for one will continue to read both sides of any argument when it comes to my health to make an informed decision and it has nothing to do with fear mongering…I just call it being an educated consumer. (Fear mongering? Cheap shot with absolutely no basis in reality). Me thinks some of you dost protest too much…

Dear sir, you are actually the only person that listed sources. And thank you for doing so.

I'm a Ms, but you are entirely welcome. (Disclaimer - I'm also an "old" Ms., so that probably makes me irrelevant, too! Ha! :drinker: )

kazsjourney

I find for myself I seem to crave carbs more when I drink it, but if I didnt have that issue I would still drink it (and it never previously stopped me losing weight)

nomeejerome

Oh my......

xRiverX

why are some ppl so an4l? all she wanted to know was if its bad for you lol geez louise lol

tigersword

Either tell me it's ok or try to convince me to stop drinking it with facts about how horrible it is. (please tell me it's ok I love soda)

Dear OP:

I stick to my initial post and encourage you to Google the subject. You will need to make up your own mind and I hope you do so armed with facts. If nothing else, listen to your mother…she doesn’t buy this stuff, right?

Dear OP et al: As predicted, portions of this thread have deteriorated…someone wanted references…I gave references …someone else complained that the references were not current. Okay, well, perhaps we should demand more research to determine if tobacco usage still causes cancer…after all, most of that research is pretty old, too. Older, in fact, than the research on aspartame I listed. So, while some of you are throwing the baby out with the bath water, someone else will have to foot the bill for this redundant research.

The facts of how aspartame was approved by the FDA (after two failed attempts) is quite fascinating…for those of you who have open minds, I encourage you to check it out. I won’t include any reference to the facts here, as this goes back decades, ergo probably too old to be relevant, right? (and frankly not germane to the OPs question). And, as to my Monsanto reference, why did they sell their aspartame patent?

To each their own, but I for one will continue to read both sides of any argument when it comes to my health to make an informed decision and it has nothing to do with fear mongering…I just call it being an educated consumer. (Fear mongering? Cheap shot with absolutely no basis in reality). Me thinks some of you dost protest too much…

Aspartame was approved on its first attempt. The approval was later rescinded while questions about the studies used were reexamined, and the approval was reinstated after the studies were further validated. Please, if you're going to make comments on things, you really need to go beyond just Google. Anybody can post anything they want on a website that turns up in a Google search.

Here, an official GAO report on the entire aspartame approval process. http://archive.gao.gov/d28t5/133460.pdf

0somuchbetter0

I never really developed a taste for soda. When I was a kid I only had it when I had a stomach virus, so I associate it with nausea. Along those lines, an occasional soda for a hangover or morning sickness did wonders for me. Since I generally don't like it, I just don't drink it. I drink lots of water, one or two cups of black coffee a day, and wine on the weekends. That's about it.

I've seen friends struggle with soda addiction and I know that sugar-filled drinks (not just soda but also sports drinks, juice, etc.) are a problem with kids in terms of obesity and tooth decay. With that in mind, being a mom, I limit my kids' access to those drinks. They have one juice pouch (100% juice) a day, milk at breakfast and dinner, and water the rest of the time. They think sodas are "too spicy" and that's ok with me. I won't stop them from drinking sodas when they're older if they really want them, but I hope the fact that we're not a "soda household" now will keep them from from developing a 2-liter-a-day-soda habit that they struggle with in the future.

harleygroomer

I wouldn't call it evil BUT

---

I quit drinking them because of the sodium in them. Now I drink one and I can feel it the next day, but I have also taken salt from my diet as well--except for eggs--eggs are disgusting. That is not to say that I don't have the occasional
soda--but like all foods keep moderation in mind.

Melissa22G

MMMMMMMMMmmmmmm soda.

MrSeriousguy

As Much as I love Soda, I had to stop drinking it. Diet is fine but I lost allot of weight just avoiding it. Also they aren't great for your teeth.

tigersword

I'm tired of the "not good for your teeth" argument. It's merit less.

Strawberries, lemons, limes, tomatoes, and vinegar are all bad for your teeth also, as are cherries, grapes, oranges, in fact, just about every fruit is bad for your teeth due to the acidity.

mrmagee3

I'm tired of the "not good for your teeth" argument. It's merit less.

Strawberries, lemons, limes, tomatoes, and vinegar are all bad for your teeth also, as are cherries, grapes, oranges, in fact, just about every fruit is bad for your teeth due to the acidity.

I'm not sure I understand your argument here. Because other acidic things are bad for your teeth, the argument that soda is bad for your teeth is without merit?

MooseMcDowell

Listen....they are going to bury me with a can of Dr. Pepper in my casket - that's how much I love soda. It's my only vice in life, really.

I got my "4 a day" habit down to 3 a week, that's the line for me when it comes to quality of life. You have to figure out what's important to you and make it happen, while at the same time keep every day worth getting out of bed for. I'm sure you know what the answer is when it comes to you.

Mslmesq

I'm tired of the "not good for your teeth" argument. It's merit less.

Strawberries, lemons, limes, tomatoes, and vinegar are all bad for your teeth also, as are cherries, grapes, oranges, in fact, just about every fruit is bad for your teeth due to the acidity.

That is true. Of course, unlike soda, they do contain other nutrients that are recommended in one's daily diet.

Haven't had a traditional soda in over three years now and I don't miss it at all. If that bothers someone else cause it threatens their lifestyle or their way of thinking, too darn bad!!!

On the other hand, if someone really loves soda, they should decide what they are comfortable with individually and incorporate it as they see fit.

tigersword

I'm tired of the "not good for your teeth" argument. It's merit less.

Strawberries, lemons, limes, tomatoes, and vinegar are all bad for your teeth also, as are cherries, grapes, oranges, in fact, just about every fruit is bad for your teeth due to the acidity.

I'm not sure I understand your argument here. Because other acidic things are bad for your teeth, the argument that soda is bad for your teeth is without merit?

Yes. It is without merit, because if you brush your teeth and practice good dental hygiene, soda isn't bad for your teeth, any more so than any other food. You don't hear people saying to avoid lemons because they are bad for your teeth. In fact, people usually suggest lemons as a substitute.