Good. Aspartame tastes fucking awful. I’d rather have food that’s less sweet than sweeteners.
Eh. Goes great with alcohol (diet sodas I mean).
Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/watch?v=4yD2IWzr5Ok
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source, check me out at GitHub.
Good bot… … … …Is that a thing?…
i don’t think there’s a goodbot tracker like reddit had, but i’m sure you’re making the bot feel better about itself when you tell it it’s good.
It’ll be interesting to see where this goes, but odds are it will be meaningless - the research is sketchy at best for now.
In my mind with the quality of research out there right now, it will boil down to 3 outcomes:
- If you used a lot of artificially sweetened products to avoid consuming lots of sugar, and you would go back to using the same amount of sugar otherwise, then keep using the sweetener. Sugar is far more likely to cause damage to you.
- If you think you could cut out the aspartame and cut down on sugar, then do that instead.
- If you eat a decent amount of red meat, you may as well continue consuming aspartame. Odds are the meat will cause cancer long before the aspartame does.
The trouble is the news can latch on to the IARC plan to classify it as a class 2B carcinogen (“possibly carcinogenic”). The problem is, the IARC classification is kinda trash for an end user, since it only classifies the quality of the research available. Meat is a class 1 (“known carcinogen”), but so is asbestos and sunlight and alcohol. No one would argue that those are equivalent. Similarly, coffee, pickles and petrol are also 2B classifications. It’s easy for the news to run with “aspartame has been identified as possibly carcinogenic” and be completely correct while also entirely misleading.
I drink diet soda to not drink soda. I drink soda to not do drugs and alcohol. I’d much rather have heroin than diet coke, but I probably shouldn’t ever have that again. So I’ll have a diet coke, on ice please.
Diet Dew instead of coke, but otherwise spot on. I’ve done enough stupid shit that if fake sugar is what kills me, I’ve still managed to deny a few odds.
The red meat part is crucial.
Funny how people are never in a hurry to share those bits.
The thing with most carcinogens is they are cumulative. If people are going to continue to consume lots of red meat, cutting other carcinogens does help.
Obviously, the media would be better from a public health point of view to focus on the red meat. However, the media focuses on news and changes. Red meat has been a known carcinogen for a while. Not to mention bad for the environment and ethically problematic. It’s led to a raise in veganism and vegetarianism and many people have cut red meat in particular or are flexitarian.
The problem with sweeteners in partiyos that many people consume them in an effort to be healthier, cutting their sugar intake. Over time, we’ve found out that they are more problematic than we knew. Risks for diabetes as well as cancer.
I’d settle for a single less sweet option.
The choice always seems to be extremely high in sugar, or even sweeter but with artificial sweeteners.
I like to use a soda stream. I can add co2 to my own water and add whatever I want to use to flavor it. Sometimes I just use a few drops of lime juice, sometimes I use bourbon.
I also like it unflavored. Sometimes all I want is the bubbles.
Bourbon water, that sounds interesting
It was pretty wild to read this while sitting here sipping my carbonated water (yes, courtesy of soda stream) and bourbon.
Alright is someone paying for this misinformation campaign? Every news site I am on is telling me about the fake dangers of a product whose alternative has known real dangers. In a few months some company is going to announce a new artificial sweetener I bet.
Invent a problem and sell you a solution.
You mean you don’t casually drink 14 cans a day? Wow! The great mongering in high.
There are already other sweeteners out there.
Yeah and I am sure whomever is running this campaign is ready and waiting to accuse the others of giving you cancer, provided that they don’t have holdings in any of them of course.
A week ago and there was nothing, today it is everywhere? No way.
However, the NutriNet-Sante study led by researchers at the University of Paris does not show that the risk was caused by aspartame and critics say its design, based on people self-reporting their real-world consumption of sweeteners, is a limitation.Erik Millstone, a professor of science policy at Britain’s University of Sussex, said the French finding, while not authoritative, was likely to have been a factor in the IARC discussion. The French researchers declined to comment. “That’s important – there are new data from new studies,” Millstone said. “Plus, aspartame is just about the most widely used additive on the planet.”
This sounds similar to the recent red meat hate by letting people self report how much red meat they have. Surprise those who eat a lot of fast food burgers that contain red meat are more unhealthy due to dietary choices unrelated to red meat.
I thought it was pretty understood that a sort of animal products is more likely to cause health problems than one without.
Honestly, probably for the best. I hate how sweet diet pepsi tastes.
What are you going to mix your drinks with?
Sugar, lime, mint. Muddled.
Jk, I don’t drink
I’m actually allergic to aspartame, so I’ve been avoiding it for years
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
