Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Skepticism, Science & Pseudoscience

Showing Original Post only (View all)

LostOne4Ever

(9,619 posts)
Fri Jul 31, 2015, 01:45 AM Jul 2015

The Evidence Supports Artificial Sweeteners Over Sugar [View all]

[div class="excerpt" style="background-color:#dcdcdc; padding-bottom:5px; border:1px solid #bfbfbf; border-bottom:none; border-radius:0.4615em 0.4615em 0em 0em; box-shadow:3px 3px 3px #999999;"]The Evidence Supports Artificial Sweeteners Over Sugar[div class="excerpt" style="background-color:#f0f0f0; border:1px solid #bfbfbf; border-top:none; border-radius:0em 0em 0.4615em 0.4615em; box-shadow:3px 3px 3px #999999;"][center][/center]
JULY 27, 2015

Aaron E. Carroll

In the last few years, I’ve watched a continuing battle among my friends about which is worse for you: artificial sweeteners or sugar. Unless you want to forgo all beverages that are sweet, you’re going to run into one of these. Rather than rely on anecdote or myth, we can inform this debate with research.

The available evidence points to the fact that there appears to be a correlation between sugar consumption and health problems; none can be detected with artificial sweeteners.

Let’s start with artificial sweeteners. These have, for decades, been attacked as harmful chemicals. But everything is a “chemical,” and not all of them are bad for us. One of the oldest artificial sweeteners is saccharin. Starting in the 1980s, Congress mandated that any product containing it be accompanied by the following: “Use of this product may be hazardous to your health. This product contains saccharin, which has been determined to cause cancer in laboratory animals.”

But what was the basis for this decision? A review article published in The Annals of Oncology in 2004 noted that more than 50 studies had been published looking at saccharin in rats. Twenty of these were “one generation” studies, meaning that they did not look at the rats’ offspring. In only one of those studies did huge amounts of saccharin produce cancer, and it was in a type of rat that is frequently infected with a bladder parasite that would leave it susceptible to saccharin-induced bladder cancer...

[font style="font-family:'Georgia','Baskerville Old Face','Helvetica',fantasy;" size=4 color=teal]More at link.

Just another nail in the coffin of the people who insist that artificial is always bad, natural is always good. Now, please excuse me as I go drink another can coke zero and enjoying all the weight I lost since I switch to it from real cokes.[/font]

14 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
My issue with artificial sweetener Rainforestgoddess Jul 2015 #1
Soda Stream is great Warpy Jul 2015 #2
I love my soda stream for that reason as well. progressoid Aug 2015 #5
That's good, too Warpy Aug 2015 #6
You will get no disagreement from me on that LostOne4Ever Jul 2015 #3
Yup Rainforestgoddess Jul 2015 #4
I find that hard to believe. SheilaT Aug 2015 #7
Actually its the Phosphoric acid (not the sweeteners) that leeches Ca LostOne4Ever Aug 2015 #8
A far better choice would be plain water. SheilaT Aug 2015 #9
My problem is the taste. drm604 Aug 2015 #10
This Lordquinton Aug 2015 #13
But they taste like shit. Codeine Aug 2015 #11
Not just taste but also mouth-feel NickB79 Aug 2015 #14
I seldom drink soda at all. Archae Aug 2015 #12
Latest Discussions»Culture Forums»Skepticism, Science & Pseudoscience»The Evidence Supports Art...»Reply #0