I always find it amusing that people have been like “well it doesn’t cause weight loss!”
It doesn’t.
Is it water better than diet soda? Absolutely. But no one is replacing water with diet soda. They’re replacing coke with Diet Coke. Or whatever.
Which means fewer calories which means potential weight loss (or for lower weight gain. CICO.) the problem is that most people who drink doet sodas tend to have a lot of other dietary habits that are equally awful as slamming back a 12 pack of Mountain Dew everyday…(eew.)
As for aspartame causing cancer… I dunno. But I’m guessing it’s lower than the threat being obese makes. S
But no one is replacing water with diet soda. They’re replacing coke with Diet Coke. Or whatever.
You’d be surprised.
not really. there are plenty of people that don’t drink water. at all… if they’re just not asking for kidney stones, then they’re replacing it with other things. sugar’d up soda being the most likely.
It doesn’t cause weight loss, but empty calories in your diet will cause weight gain. If they hadn’t switched, they’d probably be even heavier than they already are.
artificial sweeteners causes your brain to crave sugar and you end up eating more sugar elsewhere.
https://www.bing.com/search?q=artificial+sweeteners+and+sugar+cravings&pc=MOZB
citation needed
That’s still just a self-control issue on your caloric intake regardless.
Okay, corruption like that should be corrected. Regardless, there’s no scientific evidence that aspartame is harmful. Let alone a biochemical reason for why a dipeptide of two amino acids, phenylalanine and aspartic acid, that dissociates in the stomach into its constituent components and some byproducts would be harmful in the first place.
Unless you have phenylketonuria, but you have much bigger problems in that case and, if that is the case for you, kudos on being at an age and capability to read and understand this post, you are incredible.
Edit: Also, just noticed the part about US Right To Know, which is a well known anti-science group that’s been pushing pseudoscience and fearmongering about other topics, such as biotechnology, for years. So them being involved here raises questions.
I don’t get it. What would be Coke’s motive here? Wouldn’t they be cutting into their own sales if aspartame was shown as terrible for you?
They released the study that said it wasn’t so bad. That article was a mashed wreck, though, so I could be mistaken
If it’s the report I think they’re referring to, it basically said Aspartame is possibly carcinogenic but safe at normal consumption levels.
It raised a lot of doubt around Aspartame being carcinogenic without going so far as to deem it non carcinogenic, concluding that more studies are needed.
I wouldn’t call it overwhelmingly positive for Coke but it’s not hurting them.
There have been dozens of studies over multiple decades looking into aspartame and have found it isn’t carcinogenic. One Coke-funded study one way or the other doesn’t change the massive body of research.
If the truth is that it’s a carcinogen, a WHO report saying it’s fine in small amounts would be overwhelmingly positive for Coke, I’d say. Just like tobacco companies being behind the studies showing the “healthiness” of vaping as an alternative, even though it might decrease cigarette sales a bit.
Broo I knew something was off about that saga. Pretty bold, Coke.
