posted 02-25-2003 09:09 AM            

Judge for yourself.

I prefer cyclamates ordered from Canada, but have gotten good weight loss with LOTS of aspartame in my Crystal Light, Diet Jello, and diet sodas.

posted 02-25-2003 06:55 PM            

As to studies meeting any of the usual, even casual, standards for what makes for scientific research, I have been looking for a long time, and haven't found one. Not one. What I do keep seeing is internet messages like those, above. But I keep seeing internet messages that Bill Gates wants to pay me $220 for every email I get you to send to him, too.

Same for the notion that the sweetness of an artificial sweetener causes an insulin rush as if it were sugar. Many researchers have studied this issue, looking for this effect. They fail, over and over again, to find it. It doesn't happen.

(Oh by the way, I am an Atkins dieter, and I've never used Splenda, and drink diet snapple and other nutrasweet beverages all day. With all the cracks at Atkins, how did he get blamed 'cause his recipes use Splenda??!!!? I've never seen the internet rumors about aspartame repeated by the Atkins web sites. and no, I have no commercial interest in any sweetener or food, or ATkins, at all.)

Since the saccharine/cyclamate scares of the sixties and seventies (also false scares as it turned out), artificial sweeteners have been extremely closely examined, variously banned and unbanned, studied from every angle at ridiculous doses, by multiple countries with varying commercial or agricultural biases for or against, and so on. Aspartame is one of the most studied food additives in use today (and believe me, you are probably eating dozens of additives in your "normal" diet each day. Very few of these have been studied as thoroughly as have articifical sweeteners, including aspartame.)

It is not dangerous. It does NOT break down into formaldehyde. Where did this ideas come from? A tiny amount of methanol is released when it is metabolized, but it is a miniscule amount compared to the amount your body produces naturally every day in the gut (yes, it does. your gut produces formaldehyde, too, by the way.). You wouldn't even be able to measure this methanol breakdown product in vivo, as it would be lost in the more massive amounts there naturally.

Aspartame is made by combining, and breaks down into, two amino acids, aspartic acid and phenylalanine. Unless you have PKU--a rare but serous disease which makes you unable to digest phenylalanine,--these are very useful amino acids. [And if you do have PKU, aspartame would be the least of your worries, as there are huge quantities of this amino acid in many common foods, especially meats.] The two amino acids in aspartame are in pretty tiny quantities, since we eat artificial sweeteners as a condiment or flavoring, not as a main dish. Otherwise we'd probably be telling people to eat extra nutrasweet, not avoid it, as a protein booster. Joke, folks.

Some people are sensitive to almost any food or food additive (natural or synthetic) that you can name, but with that said, aspartame or nutrasweet is one of the most studied and least irritating or toxic chemicals out there. The health risks cannot possibly compare to the known and easily measured health risks of being overweight. There is no excuse for continuing to drink sugared soda, for example, if you want to trim down.

Unless you are somehow especially sensitive to, maybe allergic to, this or another artificial sweetener, it is crazy to continue to use sugar in any dish or drink when substitution is possible. Unless what you want to do is gain weight.

whew. glad I got that off my chest.

Let's get back to real issues. Like, how do we lose those last five pounds, after all? now THAT's a matter worthy of some serious scientific study.

sean

posted 02-28-2003 07:20 PM            

I was speaking in general. The HUGE number of people who have been studied taking this or other synthetic sweeteners is now awe-inspiring. We have studied more thousands of people for sweeteners than for any cancer drug or any other chemical you can imagine. They are, as a group, safer than peanuts. This doesn't mean that some folks will not react horribly. Some might--you did. You will of course avoid any chemical or food that did this to you in the future.

I'd never preach substituting research for good sense. And, synthetic food additives ARE scary--i try to buy organic produce when i can, even though I drink diet cold drinks. (I didn't say I was consistent.)

But even given your examples, its good to remember not to generalize from one or a few cases. To learn general lessons, you need to look at the population in general. Studies involving hundreds or more folks. Then, still, each of us has to be sensible about our own case. After all, some of us can react mortally to peanuts. Or brocolli. Or, you name it.

So, I encourage using ANYthing that cuts down on sugar intake--the real monster in our society's current dietary habits, I believe. I think more people have been made sick by sugar--even if sometimes its just dental illness--than by these sugar substitutes.

And, its hard not to react to some of the nonsense that gets spread around about aspartame. Of course, it was once the same for saccharine, and cyclamates, too. Makes me wonder if some sugar growers aren't sitting up at night inventing alarmist dirt to spread about artificial sweeteners. Hey, just kidding!

posted 03-01-2003 10:36 PM            

oh well.

This is one example of why urban myths and internet myths are resistant to cure--folks who WANT to believe them simply will. No matter what.