Aspartame / Sucralose - Good or bad?

[Jade]

Clinical trial studies of sucralose have shown it to be mostly safe, although there isn't much in the way of long term studies yet, so who knows what they will find. The only possible thing I've found with it was that it may cause migraines in a very small subset of people.
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/c...90623/PDFSTART

Aspartame is a little more dangerous. It triggering migraines is not really a surprise as it does have an effect on the brain. It has always been recommended not to give to children as it can have an effect on brain development as I recall. It also apparently has been linked to hypertension and Grave's disease (overactive thyroid) (although major symptoms are probably due to people who use extremly high amounts).
If you want to keep away from sugar, sucralose seems like a better way than aspartame.

Personally I like the crystal light powders, but I find most pre-prepared drinks with sucralose way to sweet for me.

[Swarly]

Originally Posted by Prototype

I was thinking about this earlier today. If it's so bad for you, would it be on the shelves? I doubt the Aspertame Lobbiest pay off the government to allow them to stay on the shelves (ala Smokes).

probably exactly what people thought about cigarettes being sold back in the day

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by photon

I like sucralose based diet pops and crystal light packets, i know water is better for me but I've managed to completely kick drinks with calories but having a Pepsi Max or Diet A&W still keeps me off the bad stuff.

In fact I can't stand the taste of regular pop now!

Just be sure it is doing what you intend. From what my doctor told me the fact that it has few calories doesn't matter so much; because of how your body then reacts to sugar when you do get it. He essentially said that he believes based on the studies he has read that drinking diet pop does no more for you than drinking regular pop.

I then asked him if I was better off drinking a 1/2 can of regular pop over a full can of diet, and he told me yes. So now I use the small cans and make sure I also have water on hand to quench the thirst.

In previous threads I had mentioned that I couldn't stand the taste of water; so now I add a couple of drops of lemon juice to give it some flavour.

[Table 5]

I wish they sold those tiny cans of pop in more places...you almost never see them anywhere outside of a big box grocery store or something.

[Tower]

stevia is a great subsitute...

Doesn't make a company a lot of money but it works well and I don't believe there are any side effects.

[edn88]

So, I would think for any person who drinks a lot of pop, the potential perils of asparteme are way less than the known perils of being overweight and diabetic.

Originally Posted by ken0042

Just be sure it is doing what you intend. From what my doctor told me the fact that it has few calories doesn't matter so much; because of how your body then reacts to sugar when you do get it. He essentially said that he believes based on the studies he has read that drinking diet pop does no more for you than drinking regular pop.

I then asked him if I was better off drinking a 1/2 can of regular pop over a full can of diet, and he told me yes. So now I use the small cans and make sure I also have water on hand to quench the thirst.

In previous threads I had mentioned that I couldn't stand the taste of water; so now I add a couple of drops of lemon juice to give it some flavour.

That makes no sense. It is proven that sugar substitutes do not trigger an insulin release (or at least very small amounts) as regular sugar does. So I can't figure out what angle your doctor is working from.

As with any drug or man made substitute there can be side effects in SOME. I don't think, based on my reading that any of them are particularly bad for you in moderate amounts. I wouldn't go drinking 200 cans of diet soda a day, nor would I want to eat 10 lbs of flax seed a day.

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by Prototype

I was thinking about this earlier today. If it's so bad for you, would it be on the shelves? I doubt the Aspertame Lobbiest pay off the government to allow them to stay on the shelves (ala Smokes).

I'm not as picky when it comes to pop. I'll drink whatever, but lately it's been Coke Zero or Diet Pepsi...

Originally Posted by Tower

stevia is a great subsitute...

Doesn't make a company a lot of money but it works well and I don't believe there are any side effects.

Actually that is probably exactly what happens. Coke/Pepsi probably have a pretty big lobby with the FDA. Could you imagine what would happen if all the sudden Aspartame became illegal or deemed hazardous to your health? Imagine those lawsuits.

Stevia is already a substitute in Japan in their drinks. It is actually illegal in the States to use it as an artificial sweetener in drinks. Not sure exactly why that is and why Japan is on the opposite side of the fence with regards to it. I've never seen a pre-mixed drink in Canada with Stevia, but I know that some health food stores sell Stevia in little packets for tea and some protein powders are sweetened with it.

From what I've read about Stevia, it sounds like it would be a good idea to switch over to it in drinks. It appears to be safe from the studies done from it.

Keep in mind this is coming from a guy who pounds back diet coke/pop.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

It is actually illegal in the States to use it as an artificial sweetener in drinks. Not sure exactly why that is and why Japan is on the opposite side of the fence with regards to it.

No idea, but Im sure it's probably along the lines of how cane sugar has crazy high tarrifs to safeguard the gigantor corn industry...

[Cawz]

Originally Posted by arsenal

But no, I haven't stopped consuming aspartame. I drink diet pop more than any other pop, since I find regular pop far to sweet.

I find it too sweet as well, but I just dilute my regular pop with lots of ice.

...and some rum.

[NuclearFart]

Originally Posted by Bent Wookie

That makes no sense. It is proven that sugar substitutes do not trigger an insulin release (or at least very small amounts) as regular sugar does. So I can't figure out what angle your doctor is working from.

As with any drug or man made substitute there can be side effects in SOME. I don't think, based on my reading that any of them are particularly bad for you in moderate amounts. I wouldn't go drinking 200 cans of diet soda a day, nor would I want to eat 10 lbs of flax seed a day.

Yes, the study the doctor is referring to is the one where they noticed that people who consumed diet pop, actually ended up consuming more calories/day, then the people who drank regular pop.

The theory is because you mentally trigger a release of digestive hormones in anticipation of the expected "sugars", but there are no digestible sugars ingested, and thus your body undergoes a craving for carbohydrates to sop up the extra hormones. The problem is that these replacement carbohydrates are often more complex than simple sugars, taking longer to cancel the hormone effect, and creating a time lag between consumption and feeling full. End result is that you ingest a bunch of extra carbohydrates from elsewhere (ie. other foods) to satiate the craving, effective canceling the benefit without you realising it, and taking in more calories then you might have otherwise. Then you factor in that most people who eat "diet" foods are already overweight and do not understand what a normal portion is, and you've made a problem worse.

Contrast that with someone who knowingly eats the natural sugar, satiates more efficiently and quickly, thereby limiting the urge to consume carbohydrates elsewhere.

Bottom line from that study is to recognize that the artificial sweetner may behave like a carbohydrate appetite stimulant, and regulate your consumption accordingly.

[Ice]

Originally Posted by ken0042

Just be sure it is doing what you intend. From what my doctor told me the fact that it has few calories doesn't matter so much; because of how your body then reacts to sugar when you do get it. He essentially said that he believes based on the studies he has read that drinking diet pop does no more for you than drinking regular pop.

I then asked him if I was better off drinking a 1/2 can of regular pop over a full can of diet, and he told me yes. So now I use the small cans and make sure I also have water on hand to quench the thirst.

In previous threads I had mentioned that I couldn't stand the taste of water; so now I add a couple of drops of lemon juice to give it some flavour.

It might be a good idea for you to get a second opinion from and endocrinologist so you can learn exactly how your diet affects your blood sugar and your potential for diabetes. Drinking half a can of regular soda contains so many grams of sugar and carbs that there is no way that is better for you than a full can of diet soda. Its also not a bad idea to visit a nutritionist who specializes in diabetes. Whether you have the disease or want to prevent it, you need to learn about what types of food you need to avoid to prevent the damage done when you consume more grams of sugar/carbs than your body can wrap in insulin as you metabolize it.

My husband was diagnosed with juvenile diabetes as a child and is remarkably healthy and free of organ/foot/eye damage. But if he was following the advice of your doctor and choosing less sugar over no sugar, that would likely not be the case. Artifical sweeteners do not raise insulin levels. I can say this with confidence as I know my husband uses them and he tests his blood sugar about 8 times per day. If aspartame was spiking his blood sugar, it would be pretty obvious. If he drank a half a can of soda, his blood sugar would spike into the 300's. That is dangerous.

[Winsor_Pilates]

There is a new mixture that is part brown sugar and part splenda coming soon!!

[Ashartus]

I try to avoid aspartame; for one it gives me headaches, and then there are the various other health concerns - some are of the 'urban myth' variety, but others not so much. There are some animal studies linking it with cancer at doses not much higher than what some people get from their diet pop - no real evidence in humans yet, but since it can take 30 years or so for chemical-induced cancer to manifest that could change. Personally I'd rather not take chances with it; to put things in perspective, I have a background in toxicology, and have no problem using (approved) pesticides/herbicides in my back yard, but don't touch aspartame.

Sucralose (Splenda) so far appears to be safe (emphasis on "so far"). I think it tastes awful though - I can tell right away if something I'm eating or drinking has sucralose.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by Table 5

No idea, but Im sure it's probably along the lines of how cane sugar has crazy high tarrifs to safeguard the gigantor corn industry...

I agree. I used to drink about a pop a day, but then stopped almost completely. Now when I do want one, I find myself sick of it after half a can.

[LIP MAN]

Can't believe this hasn't come up here, but Donald Rumsfeld was a key figure for aspartame being approved. Since he only has the average Joe's interest at heart, here's the Wickie article, but there's lots of info on the interweb:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspartame

Thanks Don!!!

[llama64]

I've become wary of artificial sweetners (thought I will still consume them). In most cases, I try to use real sugar, just not as much as I might have in the past.

The reason for this is that Splenda is actually a combination of sucralose and maltodextrin. The latter has an incredibly high glycemic index, which should more or less be avoided by just about everyone. Sucralose itself is relatively decent, but I'm seeing more products using Splenda instead of just sucralose. Aspartame is just simply disgusting and I can't fathom how anyone can say it tastes good (whether it's past due or not). But that's just me.

Personally I think it makes more sense to consume natural sugars and avoid alot of the refined and artificial crap. This includes High Fructose Corn Syrup, which I'm convinced is possibly the most damaging substance in our food chain.