Artificial sweeteners
Replies
-
So how does the "simple" line work when you process stevia leaf from a plant in a process plant to make stevia extract ?My line on it is simple: If it came from an actual plant, eat it. If it was made by some guy WORKING in a plant, don't eat it.
Everything that humans touch is evil, and the more human handling that is involved in processing a product, the more evil the product becomes because it absorbs our human evil in the process. But our evil can be ameliorated by reducing the number of products that have been extensively handled by humans ... thus, we are engaged in a moral struggle with ourselves; it's not just about food. The world would be a much better place without us in it, since we are the fount of everything unnatural and corrupt. Since Stevia is processed by humans, it's evil to a degree, but not as evil as something which has been created solely in a lab. Hope that clears things up.
I believe this kind of back-to-nature eco-theology system has much in common with 2,000 year old Gnostic theology: the universe is an abortion created by an evil and crazy emanation of the true God, named the Demiurge. Our task (according to the Gnostics) is to escape this distorted creation and return the divine sparks within us to the realm of pure spirit. Eco-theology has basically replaced the Demiurge with ourselves: the world is tainted because we're mad creators usurping the true God, and the best thing we can do is rid it of ourselves.
Written as I sip my tea sweetened with Nectresse ...
0 -
I get migraines that put me to sleep from artificial sweeteners. I avoid them at all costs.
I look at this way, is this something I would feed my kids and feel good about? If not, then don't eat it.
I am not "ok" with giving my kids artificial sweeteners, sodas and processed foods. Guess what, they are not missing anything.
In fact, its funny how they relate themselves and their health to their friends that eat fast food, sodas, etc... and how their friends are always sick and/or depressed along with being overweight.0 -
I've been using Equal in my coffee for 20+ years. Been drinking Diet Coke for longer. I don't have cancer. My kids weren't born with 3 heads. It's not evil. Unless you have a sensitivity to artificial sweeteners, like some people do, there's nothing wrong with them. It's just a matter of personal taste.0
-
Absolutely terrible. They are made in a lab. Anything that is not natural or sounds like a chemistry experiment will never be easily digestible.
Stick to honey or stevia to sweeten.0 -
I've been using Equal in my coffee for 20+ years. Been drinking Diet Coke for longer. I don't have cancer. My kids weren't born with 3 heads. It's not evil. Unless you have a sensitivity to artificial sweeteners, like some people do, there's nothing wrong with them. It's just a matter of personal taste.
This is true. However, even stopping diet soda and you will notice a hell of a weight difference. "DIET" does not mean healthier or better calories.0 -
No artifical sweeteners for me,due to migraines.Have learned to live with it & use regular sugar in very small amounts.Flavored waters or SF iced tea works for me.
Do they aggravate migraines? I suffer with them and would have to stay clear of the artificial sweeteners if that's the case
For what it's worth, they cause migraines for me, but if they are not the cause of the migraine, they probably won't aggravate it.
To the OP, for what it's worth, the research is still out on whether or not artificial sweeteners are bad for you. Some studies showed a correlation between cancer and lab rodents, but the amount of Aspartame they fed the rodents were more than any human could ever possibly consume. For me, I suffer from migraines so I can't use them. However, even if they didn't trigger them, I would avoid them. For me the research that shows that your body digests tries to digest artificial sweeteners as if they were real are the concerning parts. I'd rather have the calories and have my body be able to digest them properly than save the calories and have my body be unable to process it.
For ideas as to what I am talking about:
http://www.purdue.edu/uns/html4ever/2004/040629.Swithers.research.html (for what it's worth, when your body loses the ability to count calories, it tends to mean that your body believes that you've consumed more calories than it has, and processes fat accordingly)
http://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/artificial-sweeteners-sugar-free-but-at-what-cost-2012071650300 -
Keep in mind that you should try a little bit of any artificial sweetener, before using it in large amounts, to make sure you won't react. After making muffins one day with Truvia, I found out the hard way that I'm allergic to stevia.0
-
Absolutely terrible. They are made in a lab. Anything that is not natural or sounds like a chemistry experiment will never be easily digestible.
Stick to honey or stevia to sweeten.
Fiber isn't easily digestible ... That's the whole point of including it in your diet ... And it isn't made in a lab.
I also wasn't aware that what something sounds like was related to its digestibility, toxicity, or anything else. As has been repeated ad nauseum in these forums, a lot of "natural" things are very bad for you ... And a lot of things made in a lab are perfectly innocuous.0 -
Absolutely terrible. They are made in a lab. Anything that is not natural or sounds like a chemistry experiment will never be easily digestible.
Stick to honey or stevia to sweeten.
Fiber isn't easily digestible ... That's the whole point of including it in your diet ... And it isn't made in a lab.
I also wasn't aware that what something sounds like was related to its digestibility, toxicity, or anything else. As has been repeated ad nauseum in these forums, a lot of "natural" things are very bad for you ... And a lot of things made in a lab are perfectly innocuous.
Ah, the natural fallacy... Processing is bad! Unless it's fermentation of alcohol, or the processing involved in making stevia extract, or processing to make tofu or soy milk, or the processing known as cooking, or canning or smoothie-making... SELECTIVE natural fallacy.0 -
Absolutely terrible. They are made in a lab. Anything that is not natural or sounds like a chemistry experiment will never be easily digestible.
Stick to honey or stevia to sweeten.
Natural doesn't mean healthy. Natural can be harmful as well.
Something made in a factory or lab can be good for you... they can be lifesaving.
There is no real answer. Everyone needs to use what works best for their calorie budget, their budget and their body.0 -
I've been using Equal in my coffee for 20+ years. Been drinking Diet Coke for longer. I don't have cancer. My kids weren't born with 3 heads. It's not evil. Unless you have a sensitivity to artificial sweeteners, like some people do, there's nothing wrong with them. It's just a matter of personal taste.
This is true. However, even stopping diet soda and you will notice a hell of a weight difference. "DIET" does not mean healthier or better calories.
Not drinking diet pop will not make someone lose weight. Diet means lower calories or fat than their regular counterpart. Diet pop has 0 calories and therefore won't change your weight.0 -
Anything sweet is evil. Sugar is evil. Aspartame is evil. Honey is evil. All sweeteners, both foreign and domestic are evil. Never eat or drink anything sweet ever again. End thread.0
-
http://groceries.asda.com/asda-estore/catalog/sectionpagecontainer.jsp?skuId=910000523895&departmentid=1214921923813&aisleid=1214921925099&startValue=''
You get it is Asda, its not banned in the UK0 -
Absolutely terrible. They are made in a lab. Anything that is not natural or sounds like a chemistry experiment will never be easily digestible.
Stick to honey or stevia to sweeten.
Natural doesn't mean healthy. Natural can be harmful as well.
Something made in a factory or lab can be good for you... they can be lifesaving.
There is no real answer. Everyone needs to use what works best for their calorie budget, their budget and their body.
I'd like to get anyone who embraces all things natural to be denied anything unnatural should they ever end up in hospital...0 -
Absolutely terrible. They are made in a lab. Anything that is not natural or sounds like a chemistry experiment will never be easily digestible.
Stick to honey or stevia to sweeten.
Natural doesn't mean healthy. Natural can be harmful as well.
Something made in a factory or lab can be good for you... they can be lifesaving.
There is no real answer. Everyone needs to use what works best for their calorie budget, their budget and their body.
I'd like to get anyone who embraces all things natural to be denied anything unnatural should they ever end up in hospital...
I understand how everyone wants to eat natural things thinking they are good for you... which in most cases they are however I hate when someone says they will not consume anything that is not natural. So would they not use Advil, Tylenol, flu medicine, vitamins, and other various medications? Would they not allow a doctor to give them lifesaving medications? Do they not use shampoos, conditioners, cleansers, lotions, etc when those are made in a factory and full of chemicals which get absorbed through your skin when used?
You cannot cut out everything factory or lab made and keep perfect health.0 -
Artificial sweeteners are terrible for you. They cause massive unhealthy cravings, they bloat you up like a balloon and they can cause your bladder to become sensitive to where you are running to the bathroom all the time for a wee. As soon as I started kicking out the diet coke I was drinking, all these symptoms went away and it was easier to stay on track and just feel healthier over all.0
-
I dislike the taste of artificial sweeteners for the most part. Honestly, just use the real thing if it's just a little sugar in your coffee. The calories don't add up to be all that much.0
-
Artificial sweeteners are terrible for you. They cause massive unhealthy cravings, they bloat you up like a balloon and they can cause your bladder to become sensitive to where you are running to the bathroom all the time for a wee. As soon as I started kicking out the diet coke I was drinking, all these symptoms went away and it was easier to stay on track and just feel healthier over all.
These issues do happen to some people but not everyone. Some people are sensitive to sweeteners... some are not and have no issues with them.0 -
Yuck yuck YUCK!
I personally can not stand the taste of artificial sweeteners. They don't taste like sugar at all and they just leave a nasty aftertaste.
If I had to choose between real sugar and fake crap I'd go real all day long. Sugar in the raw if it was available.0 -
Everything is bad for you if you have too much... When issues form over these products it's because you take someone who is a sugar junky and try to make them use artificial sweeteners. Great idea, except they aren't using one half a pack up to 2 packages per drink,no, they are using 4+ for EVERY drink they drink that day.
I use 1 packet of Sweet and Low for 1 quart of liquid, that's not much at all, but it's enough sweet for me, and I DO have a sweet tooth, but I have weaned myself from that sweet craving. It takes over a year to do it, but you can do it. My drinks don't have to be sweet anymore. Getting anything at McDonald's is hard to do because it's like syrup there.
I once seen a young man (age 21) put 8 packets of sweetener in a unsweetened koolaid. Yep... it's insane...
Anyway, unless you are using raw or organic sweeteners, you may just as well use sugar, or artificial stuff, because it's all pretty much unhealthy for you.0 -
After some reading, as far as I can tell it's not going to be an easily settled matter.
For one thing, nearly all of these artificial sweetners are trademarked substances. Because of this they aren't given to many independent studies.
To be cleared for market they have to prove that -- at least in the short term -- they are not dangerous/poisonous. The company of the trademark does research to prove this fact, is approved for sale, and there you go. The trademarked company has little reason to continue to research for long term physiological impact, because such studies would hold the potential of discovering something that could possibly lessen the value of their trademarked product. Why would they want to do something that could lessen the value of their trademarked product? They wouldn't. So they don't. After all, it's impossible to be accused of covering up what you legitimately do not know... so what motive is there to inquire?
Independent studies are rarely allowed, because the trademarked company won't sign off on it (which is required if it's a trademarked product. See: Mosanto and anyone trying to study round-up-resistant plants). Trademark owners frown on allowing their products out for independent research for the same reason as the previous statement. No company wants to damage the value of its trademark.
The government doesn't do studies because they don't have the funding to and because interested lobbyists would be against it (and besides where does the funding come from but from the lobbyists? ) So the government says it's the corporation's responsibilty to run the studies. The corporation says it's the government's responsibility to run such studies, as the corporation has met all the requirements of them (and aren't they always characterised as ornerous requirements). Having done everything required to be to be cleared for sale, everyone feels they've met their minimal obligations, end of the road. Done and done (only nothing is done... which is fine with all involved).
Then, to further muddy the waters, you have the whisper campaigns of one group against another group all because of what serves their own product/lobby/whatever.
The net result is that that there are very few verifiable independent studies on this subject. We can all speculate and we all have our opinions. But if reaching for verifiable, peer reviewed facts... by default or by design, there aren't many to go to. Actual evidence is sparse -- which neither says that there is a problem or that there isn't. It's an unknown. And absense of evidence is not evidence of absense. We simply don't know.
What this ends with is that no one can say with any degree of certainty because there simply isn't enough publically available research on the subject to actually say with any degree of certainty. What we know is that they are considered safe for consumption because they've been shown in the short term to not cause damage. The rest is unknown.
Use our own best judgement.
In the absense of much good science on the subject, our own judgement is as good as anyone else's. Anyone who claims to know for a certainty must either work for the research department of one of the companies holding the trademarks or is simply stating their opinion.
(Personally, I avoid them more often than not (but use them on rare occasions), but that's just my own personal opinion. There isn't a great deal of hard science saying that I must).0 -
Artificial sweeteners are terrible for you. They cause massive unhealthy cravings, they bloat you up like a balloon and they can cause your bladder to become sensitive to where you are running to the bathroom all the time for a wee. As soon as I started kicking out the diet coke I was drinking, all these symptoms went away and it was easier to stay on track and just feel healthier over all.
No they don't.
No, that's untrue.
Bloat you up? I think you're thinking of "too much soda" not "too much sweetener."
That's kooky. Also a "too much soda / water / caffeine" thing.
Drink what you want.0 -
Artificial sweeteners are terrible for you. They cause massive unhealthy cravings, they bloat you up like a balloon and they can cause your bladder to become sensitive to where you are running to the bathroom all the time for a wee. As soon as I started kicking out the diet coke I was drinking, all these symptoms went away and it was easier to stay on track and just feel healthier over all.
No they don't.
No, that's untrue.
Bloat you up? I think you're thinking of "too much soda" not "too much sweetener."
That's kooky. Also a "too much soda / water / caffeine" thing.
Drink what you want.
Some people have an intolerance to artificial sweeteners and can probably cause them to bloat up.
I have a friend who can't eat or drink anything with artificial sweeteners in it. She has a really bad reaction to them.0 -
I have to say that I love the artificial sweeteners debate. Yes, right now there are so many conflicting "studies" that are done proving/disproving whether or not they're bad for you, yes they cause cancer, no they don't cause cancer. 7 lab rats got fat when put on an artificial sweetener diet only, 2 lab rats died etc. etc. etc.
I personally try to avoid the stuff as much as possible because I feel that they are bad for you. No one will know what the true long term effects of these chemicals are doing to your body until 50 years from now when research is better and they find out that wow! They were actually bad for you all along!
There are a lot of things out there that are passed through the FDA and deemed "safe" only to find out several years later that they in fact were wrong with their findings.
Please don't ask me to "provide research on what I stated above" because there is none. This is just my thoughts and my opinions on the subject.
I also stay away from HFCS because that **** really is bad for you. (and please see above for my *disclaimer*):flowerforyou:0 -
So many conflicting studies? I'd like to see ONE with direct correlation between sweeteners and any form of cancer in HUMANS (i'm not a mouse, never have been a mouse and never will be a mouse).
Go!0 -
I have to say that I love the artificial sweeteners debate. Yes, right now there are so many conflicting "studies" that are done proving/disproving whether or not they're bad for you, yes they cause cancer, no they don't cause cancer. 7 lab rats got fat when put on an artificial sweetener diet only, 2 lab rats died etc. etc. etc.
I personally try to avoid the stuff as much as possible because I feel that they are bad for you. No one will know what the true long term effects of these chemicals are doing to your body until 50 years from now when research is better and they find out that wow! They were actually bad for you all along!
There are a lot of things out there that are passed through the FDA and deemed "safe" only to find out several years later that they in fact were wrong with their findings.
Please don't ask me to "provide research on what I stated above" because there is none. This is just my thoughts and my opinions on the subject.
I also stay away from HFCS because that **** really is bad for you. (and please see above for my *disclaimer*):flowerforyou:
This is total nonsense. And don't ask me to prove it is nonsense. It is nonsense because I say it is.0 -
Some people have an intolerance to artificial sweeteners and can probably cause them to bloat up.
I have a friend who can't eat or drink anything with artificial sweeteners in it. She has a really bad reaction to them.
The key is SOME. A distinct minority of people.
The poster I was replying to was using the pronoun "you" when they meant "me" when they were describing how artificial sweeteners affect her.
Also, why are they called "artificial sweeteners" still? They're actually[/B} sweeteners...0 -
Some people have an intolerance to artificial sweeteners and can probably cause them to bloat up.
I have a friend who can't eat or drink anything with artificial sweeteners in it. She has a really bad reaction to them.
The key is SOME. A distinct minority of people.
The poster I was replying to was using the pronoun "you" when they meant "me" when they were describing how artificial sweeteners affect her.
Also, why are they called "artificial sweeteners" still? They're actually[/B} sweeteners...
Exactly. Peanuts, dairy, fruit etc all make people bloat up too - should they be called out as bad too?0 -
sweeteners affect her.
Also, why are they called "artificial sweeteners" still? They're actually[/B} sweeteners...
Not sure, but, taking a wild guess (I.e. I do not know, just speculating) , it may be that sugar is grandfathered as FDA GRAS, and the others aren't? (Though I would think stevia would be).
re: GRASOn January 1, 1958, the FDA established the Food Additives Amendment of 1958, with a list of 700 food substances that were exempt from the then new requirement that manufacturers test food additives before putting them on the market. {...}0 -
So many conflicting studies? I'd like to see ONE with direct correlation between sweeteners and any form of cancer in HUMANS (i'm not a mouse, never have been a mouse and never will be a mouse).
Saccharin, by the way, was banned in the 1970s as a carcinogen. It's since been delisted as a carcinogen as the result of further study. In general, there don't seem to be any studies that demonstrate a link to human cancer for ANY artificial sweetener. See:
http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Risk/artificial-sweeteners0
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