The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Bad stuff in diet colas
Dhalphir
don't you open that trapdooryou're a fool if you dareRegistered User regular
don't you open that trapdooryou're a fool if you dareRegistered User regular
Okay, so a long time ago, I completely gave up Coca Cola in exchange for Coke Zero. Not Diet Coke, because that stuff is gross.
So, there is no sugar in my colas, so it isnt going to make me fat. However, I'm sure there is other bad stuff in there, and I drink one can of coke zero each day, every day, with my dinner in the evening.
What is there in my coke zero thats bad, and what health effects do those things have?
So, there is no sugar in my colas, so it isnt going to make me fat. However, I'm sure there is other bad stuff in there, and I drink one can of coke zero each day, every day, with my dinner in the evening.
What is there in my coke zero thats bad, and what health effects do those things have?
0
This discussion has been closed.
Posts
Artificial sweeteners are often linked to cancer, but there's also lot's of studies on them. If you trust the FDA, then the stuff is safe, it wouldn't be sold otherwise.
There's also Benzene which again is linked to cancer and might or might not be in coke in some amounts. Drinking a single can will be way less than the amount you breathe in over the course of a day, so it's probably not a big deal.
Caffeine is obvious, but again, one can a day shouldn't be a big deal.
This article talks about the general effects of artificial sweeteners, but the results seem inconclusive.
You should be good Dhalphir, certainly this is a much better solution to normal cola.
There's no nutritional content to diet coke or coke zero, and it is slightly acidic. I don't think a can a day is going to hurt you.
Coke Zero is actually sweetened with Sucralose (aka Splenda). I would read up on it if you are concerned.
Coke Zero does have a nutritional content because it contains sodium, just no calories.
Some people raise concerns that the sweetness response triggers an expectation in your body for calories that aren't there which they suggest could lead to increased appetite.
As with most things moderation is probably your best bet.
I suspect the Diet-Coke-with-sucralose formula is for a differently branded Coke product. I'm holding a can of Coke Zero right now, and it does indeed contain Aspartame and Acesulfame; no sucralose though. Maybe that's different in the US?
Goodreads
SF&F Reviews blog
I know most of my family prescribes to the idea that artificial sweeteners increase free radicals in your system, which in turn ages you and makes you unhealthy (and is countered by antioxidants). I haven't really researched this very much because I tend to dislike the taste of artificial sweeteners over sugar or (especially) honey anyway.
As a diabetic, I use sucralose daily in my tea and at least for me, I don't get the claims about satiation with artificial sweeteners. I get the satisfaction of sweetening my tea a little, and get to keep my blood glucose under control as well as not take in empty calories. It doesn't lead to me bingeing on sweet stuff or food in general.
That said, it is definitely true that diet soda is still pretty bad for your teeth. There doesn't seem to be a good reason to drink it other than how hard it is not to drink carbonated beverages of some sort. I'm constantly trying to cut back on diet soda, mostly unsuccessfully.
And like everything else, it probably causes cancer.
I'm pretty sure even the worst scare stories about artificial sweeteners wouldn't put one can a day as a risk. Plenty of people use artificial sweeteners in tea and coffee everyday.
And cutting back on carbonated beverages is as easy not buying them! If they aren't in the house then you can't drink them! But then I've never understood the inability some people have to just drink a glass of water when you're thirsty.
At home I drink water. Amusingly, when out and about or at work, a can of soda or diet soda is often easier to come by than a glass of water.
I'll go ahead and just give you a quote from Robb Wolf:
"We know that the beta cells in the pancreas secrete insulin in response to an increase in blood glucose levels. Under ‘normal’ circumstances (and this is the highly simplified, cut to the chase version) in the beta cells, voltage-gated calcium channels are activated in response to an increased ATP:ADP ratio and the closing of ATP-gated potassium channels. The activated calcium channels let calcium into the cells. This triggers the production and export of insulin. When the beta cells are ‘working’ they also require more oxygen in order to function. That was a BRIEF and SIMPLE explanation of what ‘normally’ occurs. Now, let’s see what happens when monoglycerides and saccharin ‘storm the fort’. Instead of the ‘normal’ activation of calcium channels, increased oxygen consumption and release of insulin, the beta cells seem to get a little ‘loopy’ (like too much weed or something), they start releasing reactive oxygen species (ROS). ROS have been linked to inflammation, cell damage, cancer and obesity. All this craziness because of two FDA ‘generally regarded as safe’ (GRAS) additives are present. Things the make you go hmmm…"
(robbwolf.com)
The above is the affect on your body with artificial sweeteners. Obviously no one is perfect and even I have an artificial sweetener every now and then, but I've made it a mission for myself to pay more attention.
As for not being able to stand the taste of water, that may be because of all of the artificial sweeteners used. When someone consumes artificial sweeteners on a daily basis, it changes the taste buds. These sweeteners are 600 times sweeter than the sweetest natural fruit, so our now when our brain thinks "I want something sweet." it won't appreciate anything less than that mega-powered sweetness.
Origin: DustBunny777
3DS: 2836-0103-2102
To be fair though, I was drinking like, 5-10 Coke Zero's a day. Maybe not that many, but it was a lot.
I challenge you to cite an objective study that backs up any of the things you have said, here.
It sounds impressive to talk about reactive oxidation species, but really, oxidation is kind of what your body does. All the time. It's part of your inflammatory response and your general metabolism. Shooting off a completely unqualified statement about "it makes ROS" tells me almost nothing about the oxidative stress that diet sodas are supposed to cause (assuming this guy just isn't exaggerating or making shit up). Eating American-sized portions of meat is probably more destructive in terms of oxidative stress.
Lack of exercise may also contribute to oxidative stress (i.e. being a pasty nerd). Being sedentary makes it hard for your body to cope with stress in general.
Mostly, aspartame breaks down into metabolic byproducts including methanol. Yes, that's the stuff in poorly-distilled moonshine that makes you go blind. No, the amounts you're consuming probably won't make you go blind. Beer also has trace amounts of methanol. At a guess, probably beer might have more methanol in it than whatever small amount happens to be bioavailable from aspartame. So it's probably not a problem unless you're hell bent on guzzling packets of the stuff.
(http://homedistiller.org/intro/methanol/methanol)
Phenylalanine is not a benzene-derivative (insofar as I have the confidence to assert it). It's one of the essential amino acids and I can't imagine any manufacturing process that wants to go the trouble of synthesizing it directly from benzene. It is a problem mostly if you have this condition known as PKU.
Honestly, I find diet sodas to be highly offensive. Sugarless sodas are not sodas. If I can't indulge in the real thing, than I just don't want to have to deal with the nasty chemical after-taste in its knock-off version.
Learn to love coffee and tea. They are most excellent beverages.
To each their own, I suppose!
Origin: DustBunny777
3DS: 2836-0103-2102
It's a pet-peeve for me when people call doing this "natural."
As somebody who is trying to educate himself, if you could provide citations or evidence I would find it very helpful - either stuff causes cancer or it doesn't, so "to each their own" only makes sense if some people prefer cancer...
The response to your post wasn't because anyone thought you were trying to be unhelpful. But well intentioned advice isn't really much use if it's not sound advice. You give the example of your mother, but logically there's plenty of other variables that resulted in her feeling better that had little or nothing to do with artificial sweeteners. Than was simply explaining why the nebulous concept of "natural" isn't really useful from a health perspective. It's such a huge basket to dump whatever vague ideas you want into that it becomes meaningless.
I used the example of my mom, and yes, there could have been some other factor, but its the only part of her life that she changed, so it was some good evidence that there may be something to humans eating real food than frankenfoods. I guess I should just let it go if I'm willing to write a research paper here.
Origin: DustBunny777
3DS: 2836-0103-2102
Well this could definitely be caused by cutting out aspartame, because some people do get headaches from aspartame. Some people get headaches from MSG as well, for example, so cutting it out of their diet would get rid of headaches too. Doesn't mean the other stuff about aspartame is true, but that could be one potential health effect from it.
It's really not as simple as "causes cancer or doesn't". Plenty of stuff that we've been eating for most of human history can be harmful in sufficient amounts. Sodium is necessary for fundamental biological processes, but too much can lead to various health problems. Formaldehyde can be harmful in large enough quantities but exists in trace amounts in many unrefined foods as well as being produced by some of our metabolic processes.
You say it's clear, but it's not really. There's so much ideological baggage tied up in your use of these words, they aren't meaningful from a health perspective.
Fruits (apples, oranges, bananas, kiwi, etc)
Veggies (broccoli, green beans, eggplant, etc)
Beef (grassfed beef)
Chicken (no hormones, free range)
Fish
Lamb
Nuts (almonds, walnuts, macadamia, etc)
Pretty straight forward stuff.
Origin: DustBunny777
3DS: 2836-0103-2102
The general synopsis seems to be:
- 1 coke zero a day is fine
- no coke zero anymore
So, I guess the OP has a general idea of the basic opinions on here.
Origin: DustBunny777
3DS: 2836-0103-2102
I'd go so far as to say, I'd rather eat broccoli and spinach over any fruit save peaches, any time.
All our foods have been genetically modified in some way, even if only through selective breeding and because we need to grow it on land we have cleared of their ecosystems. Chances are, the foods you're eating have been artificially mutated somewhere in their ancestry long before "Frankenfood" ever become a salient political buzz word.
Then we irrigate it and spray it. Even "organic" isn't a great indicator of quality. It just means that pesticides weren't used. If you were to tell me that a potato I'm eating tastes better because it's organic, I'm going to be pretty skeptical.
So yeah. Ideological baggage indeed.
That is not evidence. It's not that people don't appreciate advice. It's just that your advice is rather hotly contested and doesn't seem grounded in research.
One should avoid coke altogether if they want to be healthy.