Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.

Sweetener - Good or Bad?

123468

Replies

  • MountainMomma58
    MountainMomma58 Posts: 44 Member
    My opinion is my opinion, thus not wrong. Many, many articles about what chemicals do to your body, possible effects on the immune system, cancer links, weight gain, fatigue, etc. If you don't believe it, fine.
  • Baddogbeanie
    Baddogbeanie Posts: 210 Member
    it's Stevia for me all the way.
  • GaleHawkins
    GaleHawkins Posts: 8,159 Member
    GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »
    vingogly wrote: »
    theycallmenass2013 wrote: »
    Try xylitol or erythritol. Both are 100% natural, has zero calories, zero GI and are also safe for people with diabetes. Also tooth friendly and helps with weight loss. The only draw back is it is a little pricey but do your shopping on amazon or ebay and you will get a good price.

    Xylitol affects my GI tract, erythritol doesn't appear to bother me at all. Other sugar alcohols are even worse, 2-3 pieces of certain sugar-free candies and I'm running to the bathroom.

    I'm the exact opposite. I'm fine with xylitol, but erythritol and I don't get along well at all.

    So we all agree they can be both good and bad depending on each person's experience with sweeteners?
  • AnvilHead
    AnvilHead Posts: 18,343 Member
    The_Enginerd wrote: »
    MountainMomma58 wrote: »
    My opinion is my opinion, thus not wrong. Many, many articles about what chemicals do to your body, possible effects on the immune system, cancer links, weight gain, fatigue, etc. If you don't believe it, fine.
    You seem to be having a great deal of difficulty separating options from facts.

    Opinions:
    • I prefer diet soda.
    • I prefer the taste of butter.

    "Fact" (heavy emphasis on the quotes):
    • There seem to be many more neurological problems through the decades as more and more chemical additives have been added to our food.
    • What chemicals do to your body, possible effects on the immune system, cancer links, weight gain, fatigue, etc.

    Oxymoron: My opinion is that our bodies are not made to digest chemicals.

    If you present something as a fact, you better be prepared to back up that statement. With good quality sources and data. Especially in a debate forum.

    The biggest difference between opinions and facts is that you're entitled to your own opinion - but you're not entitled to your own facts.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    edited October 2016
    MountainMomma58 wrote: »
    My opinion is my opinion, thus not wrong. Many, many articles about what chemicals do to your body, possible effects on the immune system, cancer links, weight gain, fatigue, etc. If you don't believe it, fine.

    How are you defining "chemicals" here? Because in that everything is a chemical, I don't get how you can say they are all bad. I mean, some obviously are not, at least in moderation (H2O). Others (arsensic), are, or at least are in much much smaller amounts than with H2O.

    As for our bodies not being made to digest chemicals, this sounds a bit like we are getting into religion or at least intelligent design (whether we were made with any purpose is a statement of faith, period, not a fact), but the fact is that (again) EVERYTHING we digest is a chemical.
  • bpetrosky
    bpetrosky Posts: 3,911 Member
    GaleHawkins wrote: »
    GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »
    vingogly wrote: »
    theycallmenass2013 wrote: »
    Try xylitol or erythritol. Both are 100% natural, has zero calories, zero GI and are also safe for people with diabetes. Also tooth friendly and helps with weight loss. The only draw back is it is a little pricey but do your shopping on amazon or ebay and you will get a good price.

    Xylitol affects my GI tract, erythritol doesn't appear to bother me at all. Other sugar alcohols are even worse, 2-3 pieces of certain sugar-free candies and I'm running to the bathroom.

    I'm the exact opposite. I'm fine with xylitol, but erythritol and I don't get along well at all.

    So we all agree they can be both good and bad depending on each person's experience with sweeteners?

    Please stop telling us what we agree or disagree about. How about you state your own case and let others state theirs.
  • cerise_noir
    cerise_noir Posts: 5,468 Member
    edited October 2016
    MountainMomma58 wrote: »
    My opinion is my opinion, thus not wrong. Many, many non scientific scaremongering articles with no scientific proof about what chemicals do to your body, possible effects on the immune system, cancer links, weight gain, fatigue, etc. If you don't believe it, fine.

    Fixed it for ya.

    0 calories apparently causes weight gain, not eating at a calorie surplus..
    :laugh:
  • stevencloser
    stevencloser Posts: 8,911 Member
    MountainMomma58 wrote: »
    My opinion is my opinion, thus not wrong. Many, many articles about what chemicals do to your body, possible effects on the immune system, cancer links, weight gain, fatigue, etc. If you don't believe it, fine.

    Of course your opinion can be wrong. If you say "in my opinion the Sky is green" that is wrong.
  • Carlos_421
    Carlos_421 Posts: 5,132 Member
    Hornsby wrote: »
    86mqwwetwvug.jpg

    Such an awesome quote.
  • GaleHawkins
    GaleHawkins Posts: 8,159 Member
    bpetrosky wrote: »
    GaleHawkins wrote: »
    GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »
    vingogly wrote: »
    theycallmenass2013 wrote: »
    Try xylitol or erythritol. Both are 100% natural, has zero calories, zero GI and are also safe for people with diabetes. Also tooth friendly and helps with weight loss. The only draw back is it is a little pricey but do your shopping on amazon or ebay and you will get a good price.

    Xylitol affects my GI tract, erythritol doesn't appear to bother me at all. Other sugar alcohols are even worse, 2-3 pieces of certain sugar-free candies and I'm running to the bathroom.

    I'm the exact opposite. I'm fine with xylitol, but erythritol and I don't get along well at all.

    So we all agree they can be both good and bad depending on each person's experience with sweeteners?

    Please stop telling us what we agree or disagree about. How about you state your own case and let others state theirs.

    But I stated nothing so how was I telling anyone anything?
  • GaleHawkins
    GaleHawkins Posts: 8,159 Member
    telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/21/two-diet-drinks-a-day-could-double-the-risk-of-diabetes-study-fi/

    Two diet drinks a day could double the risk of diabetes, study finds
  • Alyssa_Is_LosingIt
    Alyssa_Is_LosingIt Posts: 4,696 Member
    GaleHawkins wrote: »
    telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/21/two-diet-drinks-a-day-could-double-the-risk-of-diabetes-study-fi/

    Two diet drinks a day could double the risk of diabetes, study finds

    Oh yeah, this must be why they are recommended to diabetics by the American Diabetes Association: http://www.diabetes.org/food-and-fitness/food/what-can-i-eat/making-healthy-food-choices/what-can-i-drink.html

    And since when does correlation imply causation?
  • GaleHawkins
    GaleHawkins Posts: 8,159 Member
    Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »
    GaleHawkins wrote: »
    telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/21/two-diet-drinks-a-day-could-double-the-risk-of-diabetes-study-fi/

    Two diet drinks a day could double the risk of diabetes, study finds

    Oh yeah, this must be why they are recommended to diabetics by the American Diabetes Association: http://www.diabetes.org/food-and-fitness/food/what-can-i-eat/making-healthy-food-choices/what-can-i-drink.html

    And since when does correlation imply causation?

    Who said anything about causation of anything in the article.
  • GaleHawkins
    GaleHawkins Posts: 8,159 Member
    Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »
    GaleHawkins wrote: »
    Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »
    GaleHawkins wrote: »
    telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/21/two-diet-drinks-a-day-could-double-the-risk-of-diabetes-study-fi/

    Two diet drinks a day could double the risk of diabetes, study finds

    Oh yeah, this must be why they are recommended to diabetics by the American Diabetes Association: http://www.diabetes.org/food-and-fitness/food/what-can-i-eat/making-healthy-food-choices/what-can-i-drink.html

    And since when does correlation imply causation?

    Who said anything about causation of anything in the article.

    Literally the title of the article. "Two Diet Drinks a Day Could Double the Risk of Diabetes, Study Finds "

    "Double" is used as a verb, with the subject being "Diet Drinks", which grammatically means that the subject is performing the verb.

    It's a fear-mongering click-bait article based on a retrospective study that found a correlation. It means nothing other than the Telegraph is making money from all the clicks it is getting.

    And one of the "experts" had this incredibly scientific statement to make:
    Tam Fry, from the National Obesity Forum, said: “This is yet another warning that sweetened drinks, though appearing harmless on the surface, can mess things up inside you. Why should you want to take that risk when a glass or two of water will slake your thirst and not put your health in jeopardy? "

    Yes, when I want to make sure I sound smart and credible I use the phrase "can mess things up inside you."

    But it does not claim Diet Drinks "does" cause diabetes. There could be other factors beyond the diet drinks coming into play. The bottom line is drinking a liter a day is associated with a 10 fold risk of diabetes. I think the decrease in fertility is a concern to many older women wanting to have a baby.

    "Prof Christine Williams, Professor of Human Nutrition, University of Reading, said the findings were "very interesting" with both types of drinks appearing to have a large effect on diabetes risks.

    “Even when the findings were adjusted to account for other factors that could explain the findings, such as greater energy intake, higher BMI or poor diet, the risks remained significantly higher for the higher intake groups," she said,

    “A most interesting finding was that the higher risk was the same for both sweetened and artificially sweetened beverages, suggesting that greater risk of diabetes was not directly related to higher calorie intake, or adverse metabolic effects of sugar (in the form of sucrose) from the sweetened drinks."

    Last year, a study by Harvard University suggested that two cans of fizzy pop could increase the risk of heart attacks and strokes.

    The study found the drinks raised the risk of heart attacks by one third and the risk of strokes by one sixth.

    Other studies have linked sugary drinks to a raised risk of prostate cancer.

    A 15-year study found those drinking 300ml of fizzy drinks daily had a 40 per cent higher chance of the disease.

    Earlier this week, a study found women who regularly consume soft drinks may be reducing their chances of getting pregnant.

    The study of 524 patients found a link between artificial sweeteners, such as those used in “diet” sodas, and lower fertility rates, while use of sugar in soft drinks and added to coffee was associated with poorer quality of eggs and embryos.

    One of Britain’s leading fertility experts described the findings as “highly significant”, and warned women not to underestimate the effects of food additives on their likelihood of conception."

This discussion has been closed.

Categories