I.cant.skip.my.coffee.

Dr Oz recommends 1T of coconut oil and 1t of grass fed organic butter. I make a cup of coffee and pour the coffee and coconut oil and butter with a packet of stevia in the blender. Blend for 30 seconds til frothy. It tastes good and is great for the brain.

I do this every morning but not because Dr. Oz says so

That 250 calorie coffee gets me through the first 4-5 hours of waking. I've never been a breakfast person, but my coffee, ever since I was 12, has been a daily.

ETA: I use 1 T each of butter and coconut oil, 5 drops of EzSweets & 1.5 oz of half & half.
If that's wrong, I don't want to be right :laugh:

I'm not concerned with the whole 'sugar substitutes = death'

Coffee doesn't have calories -- only what you put into it. I usually have at least 2 cups a day with 1% or skim milk and 2 splenda. I did go back to having sugar at home -- it's one of these "sugar in the raw" products, but limit myself to two spoonfuls, which is only 30 calories. I don't even count it. It's when you are heavy on the half and half, lots of sugar, etc., or you have a drink from a coffee shop -- all those something cinos. The iced ones are unbelievably high calorie. When I order coffee at a coffee shop, it's usually with skim and 2 splenda.
I teach at a unversity and watch my students carrying around these $4.00 concoctions and envy them both their pocket money and the ability to consume that many calories in a beverage yet stay thin.

No. There is nothing "wrong" with coffee and splenda. It fits easily into calorie goals and the Splenda is fine unless you are eating half you body weight in it.

Nothing wrong with coffee (assuming it does not mess up your sleep). Nothing wrong with splenda (especially if it helps you adhere to your intake targets).

Do not change to coconut oil or worry about the small amount of trans fat or the dairy or the lab rats or any other non issue. :laugh:

But we have to worry about the lab rats, where would we be without them?!

Seriously tho, rats aside, use of artificial sweeteners such as in diet soda have been directly linked to larger waistlines, and are known to have some serious neurotoxic effects. I'm all for finding ways to lower calories, but at what cost? Maybe in small amouns it's not an issue, but with as much coffee as I drink I wouldn't risk it.

Meh, to each their own.

Please could you show where sucralose (splenda), or any artificial sweetener for that matter has been linked to be a cause for expanding waistlines. What serious neurotoxic effects (other than or people with PKU, which is not actually due to a neurotoxic effect anyway) would they be?

I have cut back on my creamer and sugar... Maybe a Tbsp or two of creamer (logged in) and Truvia only if I want it sweeter. Otherwise, creamers are sweet enough...

Do not change to coconut oil or worry about the small amount of trans fat or the dairy or the lab rats or any other non issue. :laugh:

But we have to worry about the lab rats, where would we be without them?!

Seriously tho, rats aside, use of artificial sweeteners such as in diet soda have been directly linked to larger waistlines, and are known to have some serious neurotoxic effects. I'm all for finding ways to lower calories, but at what cost? Maybe in small amouns it's not an issue, but with as much coffee as I drink I wouldn't risk it.

Meh, to each their own.

Please could you show where sucralose (splenda), or any artificial sweetener for that matter has been linked to be a cause for expanding waistlines. What serious neurotoxic effects (other than or people with PKU, which is not actually due to a neurotoxic effect anyway) would they be?

Certainly. Now, I know how this works, people have their opinions and are unlikely to change them. You can probably find a study that says almost anything, but a quick google search yields several articles, even specifically related to Splenda that references some studies...

http://www.prevention.com/food/healthy-eating-tips/health-risks-sucralose


From what I can tell, people have nothing to gain from releasing studies that show harmful effects of artificial foods. It just depends on who you want to believe, but I can see where some studies are biased or flawed that claim these foods to be "safe" (such as those presented to the FDA for approval) and they tend to be funded by the food companies themselves, like in the case of Aspartame.

I am not saying one way is right or wrong, just that everyone should do their own research and form their own opinions.


Here's just one link about Aspartame being related to increased obesity, but again a quick google search and you will find dozens more... the reasoning as I have come to understand it, the "neurotoxic" effect is that it deteriorates the part of your brain that controls appetite.

http://www.mpwhi.com/aspartame_confession_at_diabetic_conference.htm

Do not change to coconut oil or worry about the small amount of trans fat or the dairy or the lab rats or any other non issue. :laugh:

But we have to worry about the lab rats, where would we be without them?!

Seriously tho, rats aside, use of artificial sweeteners such as in diet soda have been directly linked to larger waistlines, and are known to have some serious neurotoxic effects. I'm all for finding ways to lower calories, but at what cost? Maybe in small amouns it's not an issue, but with as much coffee as I drink I wouldn't risk it.

Meh, to each their own.

Please could you show where sucralose (splenda), or any artificial sweetener for that matter has been linked to be a cause for expanding waistlines. What serious neurotoxic effects (other than or people with PKU, which is not actually due to a neurotoxic effect anyway) would they be?

Certainly. Now, I know how this works, people have their opinions and are unlikely to change them. You can probably find a study that says almost anything, but a quick google search yields several articles, even specifically related to Splenda that references some studies...

http://www.prevention.com/food/healthy-eating-tips/health-risks-sucralose


From what I can tell, people have nothing to gain from releasing studies that show harmful effects of artificial foods. It just depends on who you want to believe, but I can see where some studies are biased or flawed that claim these foods to be "safe" (such as those presented to the FDA for approval) and they tend to be funded by the food companies themselves, like in the case of Aspartame.

I am not saying one way is right or wrong, just that everyone should do their own research and form their own opinions.


Here's just one link about Aspartame being related to increased obesity, but again a quick google search and you will find dozens more... the reasoning as I have come to understand it, the "neurotoxic" effect is that it deteriorates the part of your brain that controls appetite.

http://www.mpwhi.com/aspartame_confession_at_diabetic_conference.htm

The first link is an article - no sources and nothing to show it causes weight gain.

FDA is not the only 'food governing' agency

Related =/= causes. Responses on appetite are highly individual and less relevant when not ad lib eating. There are various studies to show both an increase and a decrease in caloric intake when ingested on ad lib eating.

Increase in appetite is not a severe neurotoxic effect.

That links in that second link do not show any causation and do not actually link to any peer reviewed studies. They link to other articles that also do not contain any links to peer reviewed studies.

The first link is an article - no sources and nothing to show it causes weight gain.

FDA is not the only 'food governing' agency

Related =/= causes. Responses on appetite are highly individual and less relevant when not ad lib eating. There are various studies to show both an increase and a decrease in caloric intake when ingested on ad lib eating.

Increase in appetite is not a severe neurotoxic effect.

That links in that second link do not show any causation and do not actually link to any peer reviewed studies. They link to other articles that also do not contain any links to peer reviewed studies.

Exactly my point, you do not have interest in doing research to find any information that goes against your current beliefs, and that is perfectly fine. Not going to argue, or try to "convert" anyone to my way of thinking, just trying to share information here and get different points of view across.

That first article does mention a study though, and again those were just quick links selected from a google search. Studies are out there, and you can find them only if you want to, which clearly you do not.

Enjoy your Splenda.

You made the claim, you back it up.

Or, you can settle for crappy 'research' if you want by believing at face value people's blogs and articles.

You make a huge assumption there - that I have not done the research. I even took the time to click through to try to find research in your links...did you?

If studies are that easy to find, why don't you go and get them - then a proper discussion can be had about what is actually shown by them.

I drink two my two cups of coffee a day. No way I would ever give that up. :noway: