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.
2 diet drinks a day associated with 26% increase in mortality study finds
SwindonJogger
Posts: 325 Member
in Debate Club
What do you make of this study of 450,000 people by the World HealthOrganisation?
“Consuming two diet drinks a day could increase the risk of early death by more than a quarter, the World Health Organisation has warned.
The global study of more than 450,000 adults in 10 countries - including the UK - found that daily consumption of all types of soft drinks was linked with a higher chance of dying young.
But the rates for those drinking artificially-sweetened beverages were significantly higher than those consuming full sugar versions, the WHO research found.
Their experts today said consumers were better off sticking with water.
The research, which tracked participants for an average of 16 years, is the largest study to examine links between soft drink consumption and mortality.
The new research found death rates among those consuming at least two diet drinks a day were 26 per cent higher than among those who had less than one month.
This group also saw their chance of being killed by cardiovascular disease rise by 52 per cent.”
Experts said it was possible that people drinking diet drinks were doing so because they were obese or had diseases such as diabetes, but said the study had tried to adjust for that.
Professor Mitchell Elkind, incoming president of the American Heart Association, said "other studies have suggested biological mechanisms may include an impact on insulin signalling in the liver.
The study, led by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, part of WHO, was observational - meaning it did not prove that the drinking habits caused the higher death risks.
I drink 2 to 5 diet drinks a day on average and find this large study has given me pause for thought.
“Consuming two diet drinks a day could increase the risk of early death by more than a quarter, the World Health Organisation has warned.
The global study of more than 450,000 adults in 10 countries - including the UK - found that daily consumption of all types of soft drinks was linked with a higher chance of dying young.
But the rates for those drinking artificially-sweetened beverages were significantly higher than those consuming full sugar versions, the WHO research found.
Their experts today said consumers were better off sticking with water.
The research, which tracked participants for an average of 16 years, is the largest study to examine links between soft drink consumption and mortality.
The new research found death rates among those consuming at least two diet drinks a day were 26 per cent higher than among those who had less than one month.
This group also saw their chance of being killed by cardiovascular disease rise by 52 per cent.”
Experts said it was possible that people drinking diet drinks were doing so because they were obese or had diseases such as diabetes, but said the study had tried to adjust for that.
Professor Mitchell Elkind, incoming president of the American Heart Association, said "other studies have suggested biological mechanisms may include an impact on insulin signalling in the liver.
The study, led by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, part of WHO, was observational - meaning it did not prove that the drinking habits caused the higher death risks.
I drink 2 to 5 diet drinks a day on average and find this large study has given me pause for thought.
4
Replies
-
Link?0
-
So, if my risk was 5%, it's now risen to 6.25%. Meh. I'll risk it.
The media loves to exaggerate scientific studies. It's all about selling ad space/air time.
24 -
-
SwindonJogger wrote: »What do you make of this study of 450,000 people by the World HealthOrganisation?
“Consuming two diet drinks a day could increase the risk of early death by more than a quarter, the World Health Organisation has warned.
The global study of more than 450,000 adults in 10 countries - including the UK - found that daily consumption of all types of soft drinks was linked with a higher chance of dying young.
But the rates for those drinking artificially-sweetened beverages were significantly higher than those consuming full sugar versions, the WHO research found.
Their experts today said consumers were better off sticking with water.
The research, which tracked participants for an average of 16 years, is the largest study to examine links between soft drink consumption and mortality.
The new research found death rates among those consuming at least two diet drinks a day were 26 per cent higher than among those who had less than one month.
This group also saw their chance of being killed by cardiovascular disease rise by 52 per cent.”
Experts said it was possible that people drinking diet drinks were doing so because they were obese or had diseases such as diabetes, but said the study had tried to adjust for that.
Professor Mitchell Elkind, incoming president of the American Heart Association, said "other studies have suggested biological mechanisms may include an impact on insulin signalling in the liver.
The study, led by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, part of WHO, was observational - meaning it did not prove that the drinking habits caused the higher death risks.
I drink 2 to 5 diet drinks a day on average and find this large study has given me pause for thought.
The bolded above has been the counterpoint every time one of these studies comes out. This seems very likely to be the case as NO study has ever proved a direct link between diet soda and early death. Causation vs correlation.
20 -
Sorry, forgot to add the link;
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/article-abstract/2749350
ah, thank you Puffbrat, beat me to it.0 -
Well this is a good discussion with the woo button disabled
.
My thoughts on diet soda has generally been this: while there are obvious limitations to observational studies in that they measure correlation and not causation, there has been consistent large scale studies released over many years that have shown that diet soda drinkers tend to have worse long term health outcomes than non-diet soda drinkers. Again, this could be caused by something other than the diet soda, as it is hard to isolate that completely from a person. For instance diet soda drinkers could be more likely to partake in something else that actually causes mortality issues, and that would still show in a diet soda study.
But the correlation is strong enough and consistent enough that I don't think we can just wave our hand away at it. I rarely drink diet soda in part because of the studies out there about it. I tend not to be a big soda drinker in general, so avoiding all soda in general, diet or not, except for rare occasions, isn't that difficult for me. I'd rather avoid something I am not that crazy about than "correlation is not causation" myself to an early grave over it.
However we all have our things. I don't care what studies you show me out there about red meat, eggs, and bacon, I'm gonna still eat them. And not be terribly friendly to studies against them. I think that's just general human nature.6 -
SwindonJogger wrote: »What do you make of this study of 450,000 people by the World HealthOrganisation?
“Consuming two diet drinks a day could increase the risk of early death by more than a quarter, the World Health Organisation has warned.
The global study of more than 450,000 adults in 10 countries - including the UK - found that daily consumption of all types of soft drinks was linked with a higher chance of dying young.
But the rates for those drinking artificially-sweetened beverages were significantly higher than those consuming full sugar versions, the WHO research found.
Their experts today said consumers were better off sticking with water.
The research, which tracked participants for an average of 16 years, is the largest study to examine links between soft drink consumption and mortality.
The new research found death rates among those consuming at least two diet drinks a day were 26 per cent higher than among those who had less than one month.
This group also saw their chance of being killed by cardiovascular disease rise by 52 per cent.”
Experts said it was possible that people drinking diet drinks were doing so because they were obese or had diseases such as diabetes, but said the study had tried to adjust for that.
Professor Mitchell Elkind, incoming president of the American Heart Association, said "other studies have suggested biological mechanisms may include an impact on insulin signalling in the liver.
The study, led by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, part of WHO, was observational - meaning it did not prove that the drinking habits caused the higher death risks.
I drink 2 to 5 diet drinks a day on average and find this large study has given me pause for thought.- "Experts said it was possible that people drinking diet drinks were doing so because they were obese or had diseases such as diabetes, but said the study had tried to adjust for that." Tried? What the heck does that mean?
- This is strictly correlative. I would guess that people who are already at obesity-level of risk was a big factor. But there are myriad factors that can increase or decrease your statistical risk of death, and not only is there no way they controlled for all those factors, the statistical risk of death over a population doesn't translate exactly to each individual, because of all those myriad factors.
- As quiksylver mentioned, I'd guess the average person's risk of "dying young" is relatively small. A 25% increase in a small percentage is still a small percentage. They like to state it like that so it sounds dramatic, but it's not. This is like when they reported that eating bacon increased your colon cancer risk by 17% and people flipped out, because they didn't do the math. Regular risk of 7% increased 17% is still only 8%.
9 - "Experts said it was possible that people drinking diet drinks were doing so because they were obese or had diseases such as diabetes, but said the study had tried to adjust for that." Tried? What the heck does that mean?
-
"Results In total, 521 330 individuals were enrolled. Of this total, 451 743 (86.7%) were included in the study, with a mean (SD) age of 50.8 (9.8) years and with 321 081 women (71.1%). During a mean (range) follow-up of 16.4 (11.1 in Greece to 19.2 in France) years, 41 693 deaths occurred. Higher all-cause mortality was found among participants who consumed 2 or more glasses per day (vs consumers of <1 glass per month) of total soft drinks (hazard ratio, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.11-1.22; P < .001), sugar-sweetened soft drinks (HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.01-1.16; P = .004), and artificially sweetened soft drinks (HR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.16-1.35; P < .001). Positive associations were also observed between artificially sweetened soft drinks and deaths from circulatory diseases (≥2 glasses per day vs <1 glass per month; HR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.30-1.78; P < .001) and between sugar-sweetened soft drinks and deaths from digestive diseases (≥1 glass per day vs <1 glass per month; HR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.24-2.05; P < .001)"
The full article was behind a paywall so I only read the summary. I find it interesting that the comparisons in the results summary are usually greater than or equal to 2 drinks per day compared with less than 1 per month. That is a huge range. I agree with SuzySunshine that you can't read causation into this, especially when looking at such a huge sample over a long period of time. I would need to read the full article including methods and results before concluding much more than saying it may not be a great idea to drink 2 or more soft drinks every day.2 -
"Results In total, 521 330 individuals were enrolled. Of this total, 451 743 (86.7%) were included in the study, with a mean (SD) age of 50.8 (9.8) years and with 321 081 women (71.1%). During a mean (range) follow-up of 16.4 (11.1 in Greece to 19.2 in France) years, 41 693 deaths occurred. Higher all-cause mortality was found among participants who consumed 2 or more glasses per day (vs consumers of <1 glass per month) of total soft drinks (hazard ratio, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.11-1.22; P < .001), sugar-sweetened soft drinks (HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.01-1.16; P = .004), and artificially sweetened soft drinks (HR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.16-1.35; P < .001). Positive associations were also observed between artificially sweetened soft drinks and deaths from circulatory diseases (≥2 glasses per day vs <1 glass per month; HR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.30-1.78; P < .001) and between sugar-sweetened soft drinks and deaths from digestive diseases (≥1 glass per day vs <1 glass per month; HR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.24-2.05; P < .001)"
The full article was behind a paywall so I only read the summary. I find it interesting that the comparisons in the results summary are usually greater than or equal to 2 drinks per day compared with less than 1 per month. That is a huge range. I agree with SuzySunshine that you can't read causation into this, especially when looking at such a huge sample over a long period of time. I would need to read the full article including methods and results before concluding much more than saying it may not be a great idea to drink 2 or more soft drinks every day.
Imagine the difference in lifestyles between those two extremes.5 -
People drinking diet drinks are likely trying to lose weight or eat less calories.
As has been already mentioned, the correlation is there because of the causes of death.
They would be at risk of circulatory diseases because of obesity.
They would be at risk of digestive diseases due to obesity from high intake of food with poor nutrition (being the most common form of malnutrition).
And many more mixtures of these.
In 2012, only 36 of 177 countries had average weights that were not overweight. No countries had average weights that were underweight.
You can check your own measurements/average against other countries data in 2012. (I'd love to see this updated.)
https://www.bbc.com/news/health-18770328
2 -
quiksylver296 wrote: »So, if my risk was 5%, it's now risen to 6.25%.
It's a smaller effect than that: Their result says that, if your risk of dying from cancer was 0.1%, drinking two sodas (sugar or artificial) every day increases it to 0.126%. This is always the problem with quoting an increased risk for something that has a pretty low risk.
(Note that they do not quote the rate of getting cancer, which is pretty high, unfortunately. They only consider the risk of dying from cancer, which is considerably lower, fortunately.)1 -
SwindonJogger wrote: »What do you make of this study of 450,000 people by the World HealthOrganisation?
“Consuming two diet drinks a day could increase the risk of early death by more than a quarter, the World Health Organisation has warned.
The global study of more than 450,000 adults in 10 countries - including the UK - found that daily consumption of all types of soft drinks was linked with a higher chance of dying young.
But the rates for those drinking artificially-sweetened beverages were significantly higher than those consuming full sugar versions, the WHO research found.
Their experts today said consumers were better off sticking with water.
The research, which tracked participants for an average of 16 years, is the largest study to examine links between soft drink consumption and mortality.
The new research found death rates among those consuming at least two diet drinks a day were 26 per cent higher than among those who had less than one month.
This group also saw their chance of being killed by cardiovascular disease rise by 52 per cent.”
Experts said it was possible that people drinking diet drinks were doing so because they were obese or had diseases such as diabetes, but said the study had tried to adjust for that.
Professor Mitchell Elkind, incoming president of the American Heart Association, said "other studies have suggested biological mechanisms may include an impact on insulin signalling in the liver.
The study, led by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, part of WHO, was observational - meaning it did not prove that the drinking habits caused the higher death risks.
I drink 2 to 5 diet drinks a day on average and find this large study has given me pause for thought.
Bolded the important part.
Correlation =/= causation.3 -
Putting down grass seed increases the probability of rain next day by 67.4%.
Or did the forecast of rain tomorrow influence the decision to put down grass seed?
My other reservations is lumping all artificial sweeteners together when they are a very diverse group of compounds. The likelihood of all acting in the same way to me seems highly unlikely which pushes me more to the suspicion that the people (and their entire lifestyle) are the problem.
If I worked for Tate & Lyle (I don't BTW!) you could present the same observational study as suggesting that drinking full sugar versions of soft drinks is "good" for you (or at least better). Don't suppose that suggestion would gain much traction.
But OP on a personal level if you are concerned and bearing in mind we live in a country with a safe water supply then the advice to drink more water instead certainly has merit. A lot of that merit is on the cost and the environmental impact of the transport and packaging of soft drinks though.10 -
The media loves to scare people. It's profitable0
-
weatherwoman94 wrote: »The media loves to scare people. It's profitable
The original article is published in JAMA, a very reputable journal. The press can run with it (which they always do, regardless of the quality of the science), but in this case, the science is pretty good. Still, the indicated increased risk is small (<1.2x), it could certainly be a correlation to other factors, and the paper shows that it is nearly zero for the members of the study identified as "active."
6 -
I drink diluted Crystal Light. In other words... water. Hopefully the plastics leaching into the water supply won't kill me3
-
90% of people polled stated that propaganda is effective.5
-
90% of people polled stated that propaganda is effective.
Fear and/or quick assumptions are more energy-efficient than thinking slowly when faced with a lion on the savannah.
Fear is not much help if you endlessly want to prove a negative.
Thinking slowly about nutrition can lead to better results.
Actually, today the WHO recommended more information on nutrition in health services.
https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/04-09-2019-stronger-focus-on-nutrition-within-health-services-could-save-3.7-million-lives-by-20250 -
-
SwindonJogger wrote: »What do you make of this study of 450,000 people by the World HealthOrganisation?
Experts said it was possible that people drinking diet drinks were doing so because they were obese or had diseases such as diabetes, but said the study had tried to adjust for that.
That bolded is the rub. A lot of epidemiology studies try to fix for these confounders, but there is a huge problem in that there can be multiple confounders that don't stack linearly. For example, not only are diet drink consumers more likely to be overweight, they're more like to be smokers. Well now it means you have to try to fix the statistics not just for smokers or for overweight, but that increase slice of overweight smokers, where overweight smoking might be drastically worse for health than just linearly combining the risks of the two.7 -
Jthanmyfitnesspal wrote: »
Car accident almost got me. I want to put death off as long as I can.4 -
I lost 20% body weight from being overweight through diet and excercise. One of the BIG things I changed was eliminating soda and zero sugar Monster energy drinks. I’m hoping I gained back some mortality. The only thing I drink now is water, green tea, and roasted barley tea. That’s it.2
-
I lost 20% body weight from being overweight through diet and excercise. One of the BIG things I changed was eliminating soda and zero sugar Monster energy drinks. I’m hoping I gained back some mortality. The only thing I drink now is water, green tea, and roasted barley tea. That’s it.
If you eliminated regular soda, sure. If both your soda and zero sugar monster were non-caloric, they didn't really contribute in a direct physiological sense to your weight loss.
The weight loss means you've almost certainly increased your life expectancy.1
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K 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
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions