No Surprise - Sucralose is Bad for You

TT4KimmyCub
TT4KimmyCub Posts: 1 Member
in Health and Weight Loss
And why am I not surprised by this story?

https://newsweek.com/artificial-sweetner-sucralose-dna-damage-1804008

I mean seriously, how many times have we found out eventually that man-made food ingredients do more harm than good? Funny thing, there is a simple way to determine (though not definitively) if something is okay to eat. Set the food outside and look for insects to start eating it. If insects stay away from it, you should too.

The bigger story of course is just how we "acquire" the taste of toxins, which sounds ridiculous to me. But sadly, it means that by acquiring the taste, we lose an ability to detect harm. In other words, the bad aftertaste of fake sugar should have been enough for us to say "no thanks".
Tagged:
«1

Replies

  • kshama2001
    kshama2001 Posts: 28,055 Member
    TT4KimmyCub wrote: »
    And why am I not surprised by this story?

    https://newsweek.com/artificial-sweetner-sucralose-dna-damage-1804008

    I mean seriously, how many times have we found out eventually that man-made food ingredients do more harm than good? Funny thing, there is a simple way to determine (though not definitively) if something is okay to eat. Set the food outside and look for insects to start eating it. If insects stay away from it, you should too.

    The bigger story of course is just how we "acquire" the taste of toxins, which sounds ridiculous to me. But sadly, it means that by acquiring the taste, we lose an ability to detect harm. In other words, the bad aftertaste of fake sugar should have been enough for us to say "no thanks".

    The bad taste of fake sugar was indeed enough for ME to say "no thanks." :wink:
  • kshama2001
    kshama2001 Posts: 28,055 Member
    While no one here has directly made the case that "my only beverage choices are between high calorie full sugar soda and zero calorie artificially sweetened soda" and "my only dessert/snack choices are between high calorie full sugar baked goods and low calorie artificially sweetened baked goods" I feel there is a strong undercurrent of that sentiment here and wanted to address that.

    I know you guys intellectually know that's not true but that is the vibe I'm getting.

    For those wanting to cut down on sugar without using artificially sweeteners, here's what I do:

    12 oz of coke has 39 grams of sugar. I drink a lot of tea and use 6 grams of sugar for a 14 oz cup. I used to use more sugar and cut back. I could cut back further.

    When I eat full fat and sugar baked goods, I have a smaller portion and add 3 ounces of berries.

    My normal bedtime snack is berries, low fat Greek yogurt, and 20 g of granola. My supermarket was out of the first two recently and I bought full fat (plus more added sugar) yogurt and used a can peaches in heavy syrup that had been languishing in my pantry. This was yummy and a nice change, but added a lot of calories, sugar, and decreased protein. I found an acceptable berry substitute and paid more for my regular yogurt at another store.

    Actually, the berries were more than acceptable, they are amazing! I've had triple berry blends from other brands that weren't nearly as good.

    https://columbia-fruit.com/three-berry-blend/

    They were more per pound than I normally pay for strawberries but less than blueberries.
  • springlering62
    springlering62 Posts: 9,376 Member
    @kshama2001

    Didn’t mean to imply that at all. I enjoy sweets and fruit every day. I’m particularly addicted to two or three large meringues before bed, and those are straight up sugar and egg whites.

    Incorporating low or sugar free products permits more volume elsewhere, and allows me to squeeze in more protein, which is satiating to me.

    I don’t do sugar soft drinks any more, though. Two Coke Zero, max, the second one being if we have burgers, tacos, pizza or the like for dinner.

    Right now, with the AC having been out for a month and parts still backordered, ice water is the tipple du jour.

  • springlering62
    springlering62 Posts: 9,376 Member
    PS: Wyman’s frozen wild blueberries for the win. Especially if topped with a scattering of sweet dark frozen cherries.
  • kshama2001
    kshama2001 Posts: 28,055 Member
    springlering62 wrote: »
    PS: Wyman’s frozen wild blueberries for the win. Especially if topped with a scattering of sweet dark frozen cherries.

    What brand of cherries do you get? Last time I bought frozen cherries it was a store brand and they were not worth buying again.
  • springlering62
    springlering62 Posts: 9,376 Member
    kshama2001 wrote: »
    springlering62 wrote: »
    PS: Wyman’s frozen wild blueberries for the win. Especially if topped with a scattering of sweet dark frozen cherries.

    What brand of cherries do you get? Last time I bought frozen cherries it was a store brand and they were not worth buying again.

    Kroger “preferred selection” or something like that. If you get the regular cherries they’re usually tart, so look for the dark sweet bag.

    Ohh I’m peckish and you just reminded me I have some fresh cherries in the fridge a friend gave us. Yay!!!!
  • ByteLily
    ByteLily Posts: 52 Member
    Sucralose gives me migraines.

    I've read several places that artificial sweeteners affect blood sugar is this not true ?

    Stevia tastes like mint to me.
  • paperpudding
    paperpudding Posts: 9,451 Member
    Why would diabetic associations suggest them if it affected blood sugars?
  • neanderthin
    neanderthin Posts: 10,620 Member
    edited June 2023
    paperpudding wrote: »
    Why would diabetic associations suggest them if it affected blood sugars?

    The ADA allows up to 10% of a persons calories to come from added sugars, which seems to be in pretty much everyone's general guidelines in the western world and suspect it's hard to remove all added sugars in someone's diet but they needed a blanket statement that will work for the vast majority of the population. They also say artificial sweeteners can be used, but also have a limit depending on the demographic like young children, pregnant people, that kind of thing. Artificial sweeteners don't raise glucose levels simply because there's no calories and there's no glucose. I'm sure you can find a study that says it does though. Cheers





  • paperpudding
    paperpudding Posts: 9,451 Member
    No I don't think I could find a reputable study that says it does.

    I am not saying it does at all, quite the opposite.

    That was my whole point, diabetic associations would not suggest it if it did.

    Perhaps I should of posted that as a statement rather than a rhetorical question.
  • neanderthin
    neanderthin Posts: 10,620 Member
    paperpudding wrote: »
    No I don't think I could find a reputable study that says it does.

    I am not saying it does at all, quite the opposite.

    That was my whole point, diabetic associations would not suggest it if it did.

    Perhaps I should of posted that as a statement rather than a rhetorical question.

    Yeah, sorry, I didn't mean you specifically I meant anyone. I should have worded that differently, for sure. I was agreeing with you, with just a little more detail, that's all. Cheers
  • thesawyerbunch
    thesawyerbunch Posts: 22 Member
    Yeah, I've known that sucralose and aspartame are bad for years; that's why I avoid them.
  • Terrania24
    Terrania24 Posts: 11 Member
    The World Health Organization advises against the use of ALL non-sugar sweeteners. They advise this because their systematic review of available evidence suggests that "there may be potential undesirable effects from long-term use of non-sugar sweeteners, such as an increased risk of type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, and mortality in adults." Their advice applies to everyone except those with pre-existing diabetes.
  • paperpudding
    paperpudding Posts: 9,451 Member
    and yet Diabetic Associations do not advise such - because getting BSL's down and losing weight is FAR more important than some insy hypothetical risks
  • paperpudding
    paperpudding Posts: 9,451 Member
    A couple of quotes from linked WHO article

    "Because the link observed in the evidence between NSS and disease outcomes might be confounded by baseline characteristics of study participants and complicated patterns of NSS use, the recommendation has been assessed as conditional, following WHO processes for developing guidelines."

    "Replacing free sugars with NSS does not help with weight control in the long term. People need to consider other ways to reduce free sugars intake, such as consuming food with naturally occurring sugars, like fruit, or unsweetened food and beverages,” says Francesco Branca, WHO Director for Nutrition and Food Safety. "NSS are not essential dietary factors and have no nutritional value. People should reduce the sweetness of the diet altogether, starting early in life, to improve their health."


    and yet many people, including me, have found long term weight management and BSL control using artificial sweeteners - not sure how they can dismiss that obvious reality

    I don't think anyone claims artifical sweeteners are nutritionally benificial and of course one could also re train one's taste bud to prefer things unsweetened - if one wants to.

    But nobody eats them on their own or as a complete food - so not sure why it matters that they have no nutritional value.

    and sure, arguably it is better for those starting early in life to get used to having things not sweet - but that doesnt help adults with established tastes
  • paperpudding
    paperpudding Posts: 9,451 Member
    edited June 2023
    thesawyerbunch wrote: »
    Yeah, I've known that sucralose and aspartame are bad for years; that's why I avoid them.

    Have you read this thread https://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/1308408/why-aspartame-isnt-scary/p1

    Written by a biochemist - so somebody who knows this stuff and doesnt just make blanket unsubstantiated claims

  • Retroguy2000
    Retroguy2000 Posts: 2,044 Member
    edited June 2023
    @paperpudding

    Re this,

    "Replacing free sugars with NSS does not help with weight control in the long term. People need to consider other ways to reduce free sugars intake, such as consuming food with naturally occurring sugars, like fruit, or unsweetened food and beverages,” says Francesco Branca, WHO Director for Nutrition and Food Safety. "NSS are not essential dietary factors and have no nutritional value. People should reduce the sweetness of the diet altogether, starting early in life, to improve their health."

    Sure, that sounds like an ideal. Recommending to start early in life is a bit too late for most obese adults though. For those who are starting from an obese position, I find it hard to believe that NSS doesn't help with weight control. Just the effort of switching from sugar to NSS shows a level of diet commitment, which is likely rewarded with some weight loss.
  • springlering62
    springlering62 Posts: 9,376 Member
    edited June 2023
    I’m just here to confess, I just polished off a whole box of See’s chocolates.

    I will very happily return to my zero cal sweeteners tomorrow and they will still be satisfying and taste good. (Man, I should buy stock in Jordan’s.)

    No regrets, my weekly calorie average still remains well below my daily goal, and I will not burn in either sugar hell or the artificial sweetener one either.

    You can preach at me all you want but as I’ve said before, the benefits of the 100 pounds lost far offsets the “risk” of artificial sweeteners used to get here and maintain.

    And the WHO is not who I would use as my first source for information. But that’s me.

    It really bugs me that so many people come here and preach the benefits of this meal plan, that influencer, some so called detox, or the diet craze du jour and then lose their mind over artificial sweeteners.

Categories