Diet Sodas?
Options
Replies
-
MinuitMinuet wrote: »
But anything "natural" is chemically bonded at the molecular level. When people talk of chemicals, they speak of artificial, but artificial isn't really "bad" in anyway unless there's a health issue with it.MinuitMinuet wrote: »Yes, they are bad for you.
No, they are not bad for you.
Depends on how you are looking at them. Chemicals and fake sugars are never as good as all natural.. Zero calories won't make you gain weight though. And the chances of cancer? Negligible.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I disagree. You can believe how you like and I will continue to believe that God doesn't make mistakes, but man fouls everything up daily. Artificial in my book will always be "not good for you." You may have to drink 100 cans a day for a month to develop major health risks because the amount of aspartame per serving is negligible, and frankly I don't find that enough of a threat to stop partaking once in awhile myself, but that doesn't take away from the truth that artificial is never as good as natural.
How on earth do you find anything to eat? I'm trying to think of any part of the modern diet that hasn't been "fouled up" by man, and the only thing I'm coming up with are wild mushrooms. Maybe some seafood?10 -
But anything "natural" is chemically bonded at the molecular level. When people talk of chemicals, they speak of artificial, but artificial isn't really "bad" in anyway unless there's a health issue with it.MinuitMinuet wrote: »Yes, they are bad for you.
No, they are not bad for you.
Depends on how you are looking at them. Chemicals and fake sugars are never as good as all natural.. Zero calories won't make you gain weight though. And the chances of cancer? Negligible.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Oh! Oh! I've been dying to use this.
21 -
peaceout_aly wrote: »I read that Zevia brand sodas are a good sub for "diet" sodas. Still 0 calories but without the chemicals and supposedly cancer-causing sweeteners. Honestly, your best bet if you're into the whole chemical-avoidance thing is water.
Sorry, but water is also a chemical (H2O) and if you are drinking from the tap chances are there will be chlorine and fluoride in the water (if you are in the US).
ETA: I do enjoy the black cherry Zevia though
4 -
peaceout_aly wrote: »I read that Zevia brand sodas are a good sub for "diet" sodas. Still 0 calories but without the chemicals and supposedly cancer-causing sweeteners. Honestly, your best bet if you're into the whole chemical-avoidance thing is water.
14 -
MinuitMinuet wrote: »
But anything "natural" is chemically bonded at the molecular level. When people talk of chemicals, they speak of artificial, but artificial isn't really "bad" in anyway unless there's a health issue with it.MinuitMinuet wrote: »Yes, they are bad for you.
No, they are not bad for you.
Depends on how you are looking at them. Chemicals and fake sugars are never as good as all natural.. Zero calories won't make you gain weight though. And the chances of cancer? Negligible.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I disagree. You can believe how you like and I will continue to believe that God doesn't make mistakes, but man fouls everything up daily. Artificial in my book will always be "not good for you." You may have to drink 100 cans a day for a month to develop major health risks because the amount of aspartame per serving is negligible, and frankly I don't find that enough of a threat to stop partaking once in awhile myself, but that doesn't take away from the truth that artificial is never as good as natural.
Just because it's natural, doesn't make it's good for you either; just look at arsenic, lead, mercury.... look at potassium, magnesium and more. All natural, all can kill you at certain dosages.
Aspartame is a dipeptide of two naturally occurring amino acids. So yes, while aspartame itself isn't a natural element, it is made of two natural occurring proteins.
And in all honesty, of all of the things that can worsen my health, Aspartame is not one of them.
ETA: 50lbs down all while consuming 40 to 60oz of diet dew a day + 120 to 150oz of water a day as well. All metabolic markers improved. No cravings along the way.
Technically the dipeptide occurs naturally as well, but aspartame has a modified carboxylic termini in the form of a methylation of the ester.
Methylesters are hydrolytically labile though and will quickly be metabolized into methanol (natural) and the aspartyl-phenylalanine dipeptide (also natural).
On a side note humans operate within nature, we are not supernatural and our actions are not supernatural therefore our creations are not supernatural. The processes we employ to create are naturally occurring processes.
The distinction between a molecule purified from a plant (natural) and a molecule created via a process (be it chemical reaction or bacterial synthesis both of which are natural processes) is honestly rather arbitrary and has no bearing on safety or efficacy of said product.34 -
Aaron_K123 wrote: »MinuitMinuet wrote: »
But anything "natural" is chemically bonded at the molecular level. When people talk of chemicals, they speak of artificial, but artificial isn't really "bad" in anyway unless there's a health issue with it.MinuitMinuet wrote: »Yes, they are bad for you.
No, they are not bad for you.
Depends on how you are looking at them. Chemicals and fake sugars are never as good as all natural.. Zero calories won't make you gain weight though. And the chances of cancer? Negligible.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I disagree. You can believe how you like and I will continue to believe that God doesn't make mistakes, but man fouls everything up daily. Artificial in my book will always be "not good for you." You may have to drink 100 cans a day for a month to develop major health risks because the amount of aspartame per serving is negligible, and frankly I don't find that enough of a threat to stop partaking once in awhile myself, but that doesn't take away from the truth that artificial is never as good as natural.
Just because it's natural, doesn't make it's good for you either; just look at arsenic, lead, mercury.... look at potassium, magnesium and more. All natural, all can kill you at certain dosages.
Aspartame is a dipeptide of two naturally occurring amino acids. So yes, while aspartame itself isn't a natural element, it is made of two natural occurring proteins.
And in all honesty, of all of the things that can worsen my health, Aspartame is not one of them.
ETA: 50lbs down all while consuming 40 to 60oz of diet dew a day + 120 to 150oz of water a day as well. All metabolic markers improved. No cravings along the way.
Technically the dipeptide occurs naturally as well, but aspartame has a modified carboxylic termini in the form of a methylation of the ester.
Methylesters are hydrolytically labile though and will quickly be metabolized into methanol (natural) and the aspartyl-phenylalanine dipeptide (also natural).
On a side note humans operate within nature, we are not supernatural and our actions are not supernatural therefore our creations are not supernatural. The processes we employ to create are naturally occurring processes.
The distinction between a molecule purified from a plant (natural) and a molecule created via a process (be it chemical reaction or bacterial synthesis both of which are natural processes) is honestly rather arbitrary and has no bearing on safety or efficacy of said product.
That was really geeky and I don't understand a word of it but you're my favorite, now.
17 -
JeepHair77 wrote: »Aaron_K123 wrote: »MinuitMinuet wrote: »
But anything "natural" is chemically bonded at the molecular level. When people talk of chemicals, they speak of artificial, but artificial isn't really "bad" in anyway unless there's a health issue with it.MinuitMinuet wrote: »Yes, they are bad for you.
No, they are not bad for you.
Depends on how you are looking at them. Chemicals and fake sugars are never as good as all natural.. Zero calories won't make you gain weight though. And the chances of cancer? Negligible.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I disagree. You can believe how you like and I will continue to believe that God doesn't make mistakes, but man fouls everything up daily. Artificial in my book will always be "not good for you." You may have to drink 100 cans a day for a month to develop major health risks because the amount of aspartame per serving is negligible, and frankly I don't find that enough of a threat to stop partaking once in awhile myself, but that doesn't take away from the truth that artificial is never as good as natural.
Just because it's natural, doesn't make it's good for you either; just look at arsenic, lead, mercury.... look at potassium, magnesium and more. All natural, all can kill you at certain dosages.
Aspartame is a dipeptide of two naturally occurring amino acids. So yes, while aspartame itself isn't a natural element, it is made of two natural occurring proteins.
And in all honesty, of all of the things that can worsen my health, Aspartame is not one of them.
ETA: 50lbs down all while consuming 40 to 60oz of diet dew a day + 120 to 150oz of water a day as well. All metabolic markers improved. No cravings along the way.
Technically the dipeptide occurs naturally as well, but aspartame has a modified carboxylic termini in the form of a methylation of the ester.
Methylesters are hydrolytically labile though and will quickly be metabolized into methanol (natural) and the aspartyl-phenylalanine dipeptide (also natural).
On a side note humans operate within nature, we are not supernatural and our actions are not supernatural therefore our creations are not supernatural. The processes we employ to create are naturally occurring processes.
The distinction between a molecule purified from a plant (natural) and a molecule created via a process (be it chemical reaction or bacterial synthesis both of which are natural processes) is honestly rather arbitrary and has no bearing on safety or efficacy of said product.
That was really geeky and I don't understand a word of it but you're my favorite, now.
Hmm well I'll think on how better to present that then, thanks. Over a beer it'd be easy, in text it's hard not to end up sounding like a book.1 -
peaceout_aly wrote: »I read that Zevia brand sodas are a good sub for "diet" sodas. Still 0 calories but without the chemicals and supposedly cancer-causing sweeteners. Honestly, your best bet if you're into the whole chemical-avoidance thing is water.
Stevia is less tested than other sweeteners.
I like some of the Zevia sodas and shop at WF often, so buy them occasionally and enjoy them, but I'd not consider them a "sub" for diet sodas. They ARE diet sodas.8 -
MinuitMinuet wrote: »
But anything "natural" is chemically bonded at the molecular level. When people talk of chemicals, they speak of artificial, but artificial isn't really "bad" in anyway unless there's a health issue with it.MinuitMinuet wrote: »Yes, they are bad for you.
No, they are not bad for you.
Depends on how you are looking at them. Chemicals and fake sugars are never as good as all natural.. Zero calories won't make you gain weight though. And the chances of cancer? Negligible.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I disagree. You can believe how you like and I will continue to believe that God doesn't make mistakes, but man fouls everything up daily.
This sounds like an argument against medicine.
Natural bacteria vs. man-made antibiotic or the like.
Also, not to get into theology, but I'd say if God doesn't make mistakes, making man with a brain capable of figuring things out and inventing things from cooking and agriculture to preserving foods to modern medicine to even ice cream and diet soda is hardly something to be against.16 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »peaceout_aly wrote: »I read that Zevia brand sodas are a good sub for "diet" sodas. Still 0 calories but without the chemicals and supposedly cancer-causing sweeteners. Honestly, your best bet if you're into the whole chemical-avoidance thing is water.
Stevia is less tested than other sweeteners.
I like some of the Zevia sodas and shop at WF often, so buy them occasionally and enjoy them, but I'd not consider them a "sub" for diet sodas. They ARE diet sodas.
Stevia doesn't have as much lab testing as the others, but it has been tested by the South American native tribes for thousands of years (human testing as it were).5 -
Aaron_K123 wrote: »JeepHair77 wrote: »Aaron_K123 wrote: »MinuitMinuet wrote: »
But anything "natural" is chemically bonded at the molecular level. When people talk of chemicals, they speak of artificial, but artificial isn't really "bad" in anyway unless there's a health issue with it.MinuitMinuet wrote: »Yes, they are bad for you.
No, they are not bad for you.
Depends on how you are looking at them. Chemicals and fake sugars are never as good as all natural.. Zero calories won't make you gain weight though. And the chances of cancer? Negligible.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I disagree. You can believe how you like and I will continue to believe that God doesn't make mistakes, but man fouls everything up daily. Artificial in my book will always be "not good for you." You may have to drink 100 cans a day for a month to develop major health risks because the amount of aspartame per serving is negligible, and frankly I don't find that enough of a threat to stop partaking once in awhile myself, but that doesn't take away from the truth that artificial is never as good as natural.
Just because it's natural, doesn't make it's good for you either; just look at arsenic, lead, mercury.... look at potassium, magnesium and more. All natural, all can kill you at certain dosages.
Aspartame is a dipeptide of two naturally occurring amino acids. So yes, while aspartame itself isn't a natural element, it is made of two natural occurring proteins.
And in all honesty, of all of the things that can worsen my health, Aspartame is not one of them.
ETA: 50lbs down all while consuming 40 to 60oz of diet dew a day + 120 to 150oz of water a day as well. All metabolic markers improved. No cravings along the way.
Technically the dipeptide occurs naturally as well, but aspartame has a modified carboxylic termini in the form of a methylation of the ester.
Methylesters are hydrolytically labile though and will quickly be metabolized into methanol (natural) and the aspartyl-phenylalanine dipeptide (also natural).
On a side note humans operate within nature, we are not supernatural and our actions are not supernatural therefore our creations are not supernatural. The processes we employ to create are naturally occurring processes.
The distinction between a molecule purified from a plant (natural) and a molecule created via a process (be it chemical reaction or bacterial synthesis both of which are natural processes) is honestly rather arbitrary and has no bearing on safety or efficacy of said product.
That was really geeky and I don't understand a word of it but you're my favorite, now.
Hmm well I'll think on how better to present that then, thanks. Over a beer it'd be easy, in text it's hard not to end up sounding like a book.
I just decided I want to hear you say all those things while mildly intoxicated. Wyd this weekend?6 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »peaceout_aly wrote: »I read that Zevia brand sodas are a good sub for "diet" sodas. Still 0 calories but without the chemicals and supposedly cancer-causing sweeteners. Honestly, your best bet if you're into the whole chemical-avoidance thing is water.
Stevia is less tested than other sweeteners.
I like some of the Zevia sodas and shop at WF often, so buy them occasionally and enjoy them, but I'd not consider them a "sub" for diet sodas. They ARE diet sodas.
Stevia doesn't have as much lab testing as the others, but it has been tested by the South American native tribes for thousands of years (human testing as it were).
Stevia, the product on the shelf of your supermarket, is a processed and purified plant derivitive. It is as far as chewing on the leaf of a stevia plant as taking aspirin is from chewing on willow bark.
Steviol glycosides are the plant derivitive, but that is just a precursor in a line of processing steps for what you buy in the store which is very different.
Steviol glycoside natural product
Stevia the sweetner:
Similarly aspartyl-phenylalanine natural product
Versus aspartame, the processed store product which is a methylated ester of that precursor
So...what is the difference exactly? Both are chemically modified versions of natural products. Where is that line between synthetic and natural? Is it in the exact process in which the original product is purified or in the steps necessary to modify it? Which chemical modification steps are "natural" and which are "synthetic"? Was it the means by which they were first discovered?
22 -
PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »Aaron_K123 wrote: »JeepHair77 wrote: »Aaron_K123 wrote: »MinuitMinuet wrote: »
But anything "natural" is chemically bonded at the molecular level. When people talk of chemicals, they speak of artificial, but artificial isn't really "bad" in anyway unless there's a health issue with it.MinuitMinuet wrote: »Yes, they are bad for you.
No, they are not bad for you.
Depends on how you are looking at them. Chemicals and fake sugars are never as good as all natural.. Zero calories won't make you gain weight though. And the chances of cancer? Negligible.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I disagree. You can believe how you like and I will continue to believe that God doesn't make mistakes, but man fouls everything up daily. Artificial in my book will always be "not good for you." You may have to drink 100 cans a day for a month to develop major health risks because the amount of aspartame per serving is negligible, and frankly I don't find that enough of a threat to stop partaking once in awhile myself, but that doesn't take away from the truth that artificial is never as good as natural.
Just because it's natural, doesn't make it's good for you either; just look at arsenic, lead, mercury.... look at potassium, magnesium and more. All natural, all can kill you at certain dosages.
Aspartame is a dipeptide of two naturally occurring amino acids. So yes, while aspartame itself isn't a natural element, it is made of two natural occurring proteins.
And in all honesty, of all of the things that can worsen my health, Aspartame is not one of them.
ETA: 50lbs down all while consuming 40 to 60oz of diet dew a day + 120 to 150oz of water a day as well. All metabolic markers improved. No cravings along the way.
Technically the dipeptide occurs naturally as well, but aspartame has a modified carboxylic termini in the form of a methylation of the ester.
Methylesters are hydrolytically labile though and will quickly be metabolized into methanol (natural) and the aspartyl-phenylalanine dipeptide (also natural).
On a side note humans operate within nature, we are not supernatural and our actions are not supernatural therefore our creations are not supernatural. The processes we employ to create are naturally occurring processes.
The distinction between a molecule purified from a plant (natural) and a molecule created via a process (be it chemical reaction or bacterial synthesis both of which are natural processes) is honestly rather arbitrary and has no bearing on safety or efficacy of said product.
That was really geeky and I don't understand a word of it but you're my favorite, now.
Hmm well I'll think on how better to present that then, thanks. Over a beer it'd be easy, in text it's hard not to end up sounding like a book.
I just decided I want to hear you say all those things while mildly intoxicated. Wyd this weekend?
Should I be concerned by the fact that your avatar is a dude who eats people?8 -
Aaron_K123 wrote: »PaulaWallaDingDong wrote: »Aaron_K123 wrote: »JeepHair77 wrote: »Aaron_K123 wrote: »MinuitMinuet wrote: »
But anything "natural" is chemically bonded at the molecular level. When people talk of chemicals, they speak of artificial, but artificial isn't really "bad" in anyway unless there's a health issue with it.MinuitMinuet wrote: »Yes, they are bad for you.
No, they are not bad for you.
Depends on how you are looking at them. Chemicals and fake sugars are never as good as all natural.. Zero calories won't make you gain weight though. And the chances of cancer? Negligible.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I disagree. You can believe how you like and I will continue to believe that God doesn't make mistakes, but man fouls everything up daily. Artificial in my book will always be "not good for you." You may have to drink 100 cans a day for a month to develop major health risks because the amount of aspartame per serving is negligible, and frankly I don't find that enough of a threat to stop partaking once in awhile myself, but that doesn't take away from the truth that artificial is never as good as natural.
Just because it's natural, doesn't make it's good for you either; just look at arsenic, lead, mercury.... look at potassium, magnesium and more. All natural, all can kill you at certain dosages.
Aspartame is a dipeptide of two naturally occurring amino acids. So yes, while aspartame itself isn't a natural element, it is made of two natural occurring proteins.
And in all honesty, of all of the things that can worsen my health, Aspartame is not one of them.
ETA: 50lbs down all while consuming 40 to 60oz of diet dew a day + 120 to 150oz of water a day as well. All metabolic markers improved. No cravings along the way.
Technically the dipeptide occurs naturally as well, but aspartame has a modified carboxylic termini in the form of a methylation of the ester.
Methylesters are hydrolytically labile though and will quickly be metabolized into methanol (natural) and the aspartyl-phenylalanine dipeptide (also natural).
On a side note humans operate within nature, we are not supernatural and our actions are not supernatural therefore our creations are not supernatural. The processes we employ to create are naturally occurring processes.
The distinction between a molecule purified from a plant (natural) and a molecule created via a process (be it chemical reaction or bacterial synthesis both of which are natural processes) is honestly rather arbitrary and has no bearing on safety or efficacy of said product.
That was really geeky and I don't understand a word of it but you're my favorite, now.
Hmm well I'll think on how better to present that then, thanks. Over a beer it'd be easy, in text it's hard not to end up sounding like a book.
I just decided I want to hear you say all those things while mildly intoxicated. Wyd this weekend?
Should I be concerned by the fact that your avatar is a dude who eats people?
I mean...probably not?
ETA today's QOTD: "Office hours are for patients. My kitchen is always open to friends."8 -
I have a diet soda twice a day, so there's nothing wrong with them.0
-
Aaron_K123 wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »peaceout_aly wrote: »I read that Zevia brand sodas are a good sub for "diet" sodas. Still 0 calories but without the chemicals and supposedly cancer-causing sweeteners. Honestly, your best bet if you're into the whole chemical-avoidance thing is water.
Stevia is less tested than other sweeteners.
I like some of the Zevia sodas and shop at WF often, so buy them occasionally and enjoy them, but I'd not consider them a "sub" for diet sodas. They ARE diet sodas.
Stevia doesn't have as much lab testing as the others, but it has been tested by the South American native tribes for thousands of years (human testing as it were).
Stevia, the product on the shelf of your supermarket, is a processed and purified plant derivitive. It is as far as chewing on the leaf of a stevia plant as taking aspirin is from chewing on willow bark.
Steviol glycosides are the plant derivitive, but that is just a precursor in a line of processing steps for what you buy in the store which is very different.
Steviol glycoside natural product
Stevia the sweetner:
Similarly aspartyl-phenylalanine natural product
Versus aspartame, the processed store product which is a methylated ester of that precursor
So...what is the difference exactly? Both are chemically modified versions of natural products. Where is that line between synthetic and natural? Is it in the exact process in which the original product is purified or in the steps necessary to modify it? Which chemical modification steps are "natural" and which are "synthetic"? Was it the means by which they were first discovered?
That was one sexy post. I'm so glad you're back!10 -
...the South American native tribes for thousands of years (human testing as it were).
Also tested and ingested by South American native tribes; tobacco, cocoa, cocaine, ebene, yopo, peyote, morning glory, and ayahuasca. To name a few.
https://www.culturalsurvival.org/publications/cultural-survival-quarterly/hallucinogenic-plants-and-their-use-traditional-societies7 -
I am so confused with all the diet soda threads ongoing right now. I can't keep up, between Diet Soda is evil and keto is AHMAYZING...
Was it a slow week for news stories so the media is pulling in woo and diet fads to keep things going? Maybe tired of reporting on all the political nonsense so they go with health nonsense instead?6 -
WinoGelato wrote: »I am so confused with all the diet soda threads ongoing right now. I can't keep up, between Diet Soda is evil and keto is AHMAYZING...
Was it a slow week for news stories so the media is pulling in woo and diet fads to keep things going? Maybe tired of reporting on all the political nonsense so they go with health nonsense instead?
I’m waiting for inevitable “Help me! I’ve put on 5lbs after doing a Dr Pepper cleanse” thread.6 -
GrumpyHeadmistress wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »I am so confused with all the diet soda threads ongoing right now. I can't keep up, between Diet Soda is evil and keto is AHMAYZING...
Was it a slow week for news stories so the media is pulling in woo and diet fads to keep things going? Maybe tired of reporting on all the political nonsense so they go with health nonsense instead?
I’m waiting for inevitable “Help me! I’ve put on 5lbs after doing a Dr Pepper cleanse” thread.
Is that regular, or diet?2
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 389 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
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 919 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions