Artificial Sweetener Are Bad
79For years, artificial sweeteners have been hailed as the dieter's dream come true. Great taste. No calories. What could be better?
Problem: The sweeteners have not lived up to their publicity. Most don't really taste all that good. And the more tests we conduct, the more bad news we get about their adverse effects on our health.
The truth about: Saccharin. Widely available as Sweet-'nLow. The first noncaloric artificial sweetener, saccharin was discovered in 1879, when it was accidentally produced by a student at Johns Hopkins University.
Saccharin is used in canned fruits and chewing gums and in unexpected places, including toothpaste. Its use has declined somewhat since the advent of newer sweeteners (see below).
Pros: 350 times sweeter than sugar.
Cons: Produces a bitter aftertaste. Saccharin creates a slightly increased risk of bladder cancer in humans. Products containing saccharin are required to carry a warning label regarding the cancer risk.
- Acesulfame K. Widely available as Sunette and Sweet-One.
The newest substance to be approved for use as a tabletop sweetener. It has not yet been approved for any additional uses.
Pros: 200 times sweeter than sugar.
Cons: Although it has not been thoroughly tested, long-term rat studies produced lung, breast and other tumors. It may slightly increase the risk of cancer and should not have been approved.
- Aspartame. Widely available as Equal and NutraSweet. Used in soft drinks and in countless types of diet foods. It breaks down at high temperatures, however, and can't be used in baked or cooked foods.
Pros: 150 to 200 times sweeter than sugar.
Cons: Early tests showed that aspartame may have caused an increased incidence of brain tumors in rats. (Other animals tested showed no tumors.)
A board of public inquiry revoked the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) 1974 approval of aspartame on the grounds that the research did not conclusively show that aspartame does not cause brain tumors. Three of five members of an FDA panel selected to review the board's decision agreed with it. But the FDA commissioner overturned the board's decision and reapproved aspartame anyway.
The rat study has not been repeated, so the question of brain-tumor risk remains unresolved. Also, the medical literature is peppered with reports of headaches and other reactions associated with aspartame.
Recommended: People who seem to be sensitive to aspartame should avoid it. Products containing aspartame also must carry a warning label for people with phenylketonuria (PKU), a genetic problem that afflicts one in 20,000 people. People with PKU can't metabolize a component of aspartame.
Warning for travelers:
Cyclamate, a popular sweetener in the 1950s and 1960s, was banned in the US in 1970. It was linked to bladder cancer, shrinking testes and other health risks in laboratory animals.
But US manufacturers still market cyclamate to many other countries, where it is used alone, or combined with saccharin. When you travel, read labels very carefully to avoid products that contain cyclamate.
Do we really need them?
More and more evidence shows that artificial sweeteners are not all they're cracked up to be.
Reasons:
- Each presents some health risk.
- Despite the popularity of artificial sweeteners, people are consuming more sugar than ever.
Theory: Sugar substitutes may be stimulating our appetite for sugar.
- Although artificial sweeteners have no calories, they have no nutritive value either. Bottom line: Most people probably would be better off using moderate amounts of sugar.
One teaspoon of sugar contains fewer than 25 calories. Used in moderation, its only adverse effect (except in people with diabetes and some other medical conditions) is to promote tooth decay, which is easily preventable and treatable.
OTHER STUDIES SEEN ON THE INTERNET CONTRADICT YOUR FINDINGS !
I strongly believe that sweeteners are making our bodies worse. Sweetener is a chemical, and while it may have less calories than sugar, it is far worse. It is really bad for you, even worse than sugar. Uh, so how does that work? It doesn't!
Even though sweeteners are supposed to be better, they don't taste nicer and are worse for you than sugar. I agree, with the research I've done I know that sugar is better than artificial chemicals.
Though I have researched a lot about artificial sweeteners and have found many different opinions, I have finally come to a conclusion. While sweeteners contain no sugar, they are a chemical, and 100% FAKE. Thay have no calories, but many are a health risk and are dangerous to animals and us. If you're smart, you would keep your body healthy.
I don't know much about artificial sweeteners, but now I do! There are lot's of different opinons of course, but I learnt a lot just from your page. Thank you!
I'm not really sure what to believe. Some people don't really think it matters, but some do. I now realise that sweeteners are fake and are a chemical, and I don't have diet cokes or sprite zeros anymore.
Thanks, now I'll be more careful when drinking coffe!!
duuuude, sweeteners are BAD (:
Thanks for this i.m.o. well-balanced article. The long and short of it is that neither sugar nor artificial sweeteners are harmful when used in moderation. Trouble is, some of us have problems with moderation.
Why does everybody think that just because something is a 'chemical' it is automatically bad for you? Just because its not Natural? Sugar is a chemical too - 12 atoms of carbon, 22 of hydrogen, and 11 of oxygen.
Aspartame contains methanol which breaks down in the system to produce many metabolites, one of which is formeldahyde. To defend harmful artificial sweeteners with the argument that they are made up of a different arrangement of the same atoms is as ignorant as saying "the FDA approved it so it must be safe.
Artificial sweeteners are WORSE than sugar! Sugar is only bad for you when over consumed. Your body uses sugar for energy fist because it is easily metabollized. Think about it why is sugar in pretty much any natural food? Why do you want to eat something that tastes like a cats pooper? Just stop eating so much junk food if your a fat whale and stop being lazy. Oh and has anyone ever wondered why the only people that drink diet soda are fat? Maybe cause if you cut out all the sugar in your diet you body stores ever little bit it does get as fat for a rainy day
the better i can limit my 6 year old son from artifical sweetners, the less his allergies act up
As a chemistry major at a prestigious American university (currently ranked in the top thirty according to newsweek), I can safely say that there is little to no risk of using the artifical sweetener saccharin specifically. I have been working for months and doing research on this sweetener, and the negative health effects were specific to rats because of a unique metabolistic chemical in their bodies that will cause cancer in the presence of saccharin. This is NOT present in humans. Also, for those who do not understand the word chemical, sugar (glucose) is also a chemical (to be accurate, everything is a chemical or made up of chemicals). Finally, 10 years ago the warning labels were removed because the FDA found CONCLUSIVELY that it does not cause cancer in humans.
As a food scientist, the more articles written by laymen and the more comments posted by the public I read (concerning foods,additives,nutrition etc) the more I realise that the majority of people, including the author of this article, are dim-witted, uneducated conspiracy theorists.
No comments:
Post a Comment