It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Avoiding Artificial Sweeteners? This Study Will Surprise You...

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Sep, 20 2011 @ 11:00 PM

Originally posted by Blaine91555
Truth is always better I think. I like it anyway.

Sucralose is digestible by a many microorganisms once released into the environment. Even though waste water treatment does not remove it, it poses no environmental risks. OK, no problem there.

I would like to see proof of that. We do not need one more synthetic substance in our world that does not break down.

I do not trust anything that is not natural. Like apple seeds....

posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 10:34 AM
When I can, I get reverse osmosis treated water.
I heard nothing is pure like it, hope it's true hehe

I also inform most people I hang around with that take a diet soft drink or aspartame products.
Also when I refuse one of those products, I even say why. "Do you want a gum?" lol

Have you also noticed, most people that use diet are fat?
I have had my doubt about fake sugar and what it does to your body if after you absorb real sugar...
edit on 21-9-2011 by User8911 because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 10:54 AM

Originally posted by predator0187
Aspartame is bad for you, there are plenty of studies out there that prove it.

Ok, the amount is small, I was more disturbed with the fact that it is even in our drinking water. I'm not worried about the amount killing me, I'm worried that is going to be everywhere.


Pred, if you knew how many nanograms of coc aine are in the water, would you drink it?
How about fecal material?
Toe nail fungus?
(sorry for being descriptively gross, but it proves a point)

The problem is that our testing is becoming so fractional, that we find traces of EVERYTHING in drinking water.
Things you really don't want to know about, I'm sure.

They can't afford to scrub the water completely because all our money goes to fund wars for oil. (IMO)
State tax pays for water treatment, I'd assume...or city...and we all know how bankrupt the states are.
Or else ALL treatment facilities would be using reverse osmosis and UV ray water treatments.

Can we do anything about it?

Buy a reverse osmosis filter.
Or a ton of charcoal.

posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 11:25 AM
Confucius say : He who Thinks only of death can not live.
what this meens is you guys spend all your time worryed about dieing what time is left over to enjoy living?
rember when we put the top down and let the wind rush through our hair wile listing to are favert music.
Just pointed the car in any direction and went .the feel of the warm sun .The sounds of the forest.
I bet not a one of you has looked up in wonder at the universe we live in years.
your problems dont even regester in the grand sceam of things so why not put them aside for a day and just enjoy living .You will live longer.
Brought to you by enjoyment for live . me

Live long and prosper.
Confusion says HUUUUUU??????? 100 studies showing every result you could care to see so just pick the one that fits your parnoia

posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 11:31 AM

Originally posted by Blaine91555
Truth is always better I think. I like it anyway.

Sucralose is digestible by a many microorganisms once released into the environment. Even though waste water treatment does not remove it, it poses no environmental risks. OK, no problem there.

100 animal and clinical studies showed no health risks to consuming sucralose. Again no issue.

1 study that used the equivalent of ten thousand of those packets per day for a human on mice found the possibility of genetic damage Hmmmm, I have to wonder how many people are using over ten thousands packets a day? Any of you doing that or know somebody doing that? In fact its less toxic than water. A few die from drinking too much water too fast in a year, but nobody dies from a Splenda overdose. If the alternative is real sugar, its way more dangerous. Even eating too much fruit is more dangerous.

Info from sites peddling fake health products to unsuspecting customers push the charade, using fear in the same way the government uses fear to control behavior. Scare you with an article, sell you a bottle of something that does nothing for a thousand times their cost and they call it a good day. It's also works to sell worthless books and peddle magazines targeted at the same audience. Or, as in the case of this site, they sell you plain old vitamins for hugely inflated prices. They are so overpriced they devote entire pages to explaining why their product, no better than any other is worth many times the price of what are likely better products from reputable companies.

"Nobody ever lost a dime underestimating the intelligence of the American public" (I've seen this quote attributed to P. T. Barnum and others, not sure which is true).

I find the snake oil peddlers and charlatans to be particularly horrible people considering they use fear to trick people into making unwise purchases, along with gimmicks to make you think their stuff is better somehow. Generally their products are more dangerous in fact and often don't have reliable doses. It's about emptying your wallet, not your health.

If you have to choose between a Harvard Study or one done by Dr. (fill in name here) with his Degree from the Denver Institute of Crap (Denver has had a number of phony institutes where you could buy a Degree over the years, beware those who call themselves Dr.) where they bought the degree, go with the Harvard Study. Do yourselves a favor. There are plenty of real issues on these topics, don't let the fake ones empty your wallet.

As to Stevia, it has in fact been banned in many places on earth as it is not known if it is harmful as some early studies showed. It's kind of a take it at your own risk product that is likely safe. Not all natural things are safer just because they are natural. The EU banned it in food. I admit I use it in some kinds of tea where it works. It is bitter and does not work well in all beverages due to the aftertaste. Works well in red sauces though to replace the sugar from wine if you have no wine on hand.

Please find your own sources from reputable sites that are not trying to sell you something for your own protection. I looked heavily into sweeteners a while back and most of what is on the snake oil sites is pure old fashioned garbage. There are even less than honest real MD's peddling crap. Having an MD does not automatically make you honest nor does it stop the person from peddling snake oil.

I have to agree,

a really obese person say 100lb's or more over weight
has better odds with the artificial sugar for loosing weight
then facing diabetes and heart attacks..

Diet drinks are for over weight people on a diet!
Use it only if you must..

posted on Sep, 21 2011 @ 02:37 PM
reply to post by predator0187

Don't the high quality filtration systems filter all such out yielding essentially water equal to distilled?

This is really a concern as such compounds are extremely hazardous to nerves/neurons/brains etc. Particularly over a long period.

posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 10:40 PM
reply to post by BO XIAN

This isn't a'd probably have to drink 10,000 gallons or more to equal the amount they put in diet pop, which some people drink a couple a day. Sensitive enough equipment will detect anything in water.
edit on 30-9-2011 by Turq1 because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 11:12 PM
Thank's for the info OP!

posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 10:59 PM
reply to post by predator0187

No, there's no escaping them.

...which is why we need to clean up the world - not treat the diseases these contaminants cause!

posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 11:40 PM
reply to post by predator0187

If you must choose to worry over something, please make it worth your effort.

Those measurements were in nano units. That's .000000001 x unit.

I'm almost 100% sure there are other things much worse for you than these ultra minute levels of things in the water.

I'd bet this anxiety you are bringing onto yourself is manifesting in your body and causing tension and other problems, for instance. It's well known that the mind affects the body.

Chill out and find your biggest problems and tackle those. You really are sweating the small stuff.

posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 01:27 AM
As others have stated... this is in nanograms. That is an incomprehensibly small amount - like a paperclip compared to a damned mountain.

On to the issue of whether or not sucralose is a "poison:"

Discovered in 1976, sucralose is 600 times sweeter than sugar and does not metabolize to produce energy, thus it does not contain calories. It is the only low calorie sweetener that is made from sugar, which has been changed so passes through the body unchanged and unmetabolized. Substituting for three alcohol groups on the sugar molecule with three chlorine atoms creates sucralose.

Results from over 100 animal and clinical studies included in this FDA approval process unanimously indicated a lack of risk associated with sucralose intake. Acceptable human intakes across all populations have been pinpointed, as noted by Baird, Shephard, Merritt, and Hildick-Smith (2000). The estimated daily intake (EDI) for humans is 1.1mg/kg/day. The intakes acceptable daily intake (ADI) is 16 mg/kg/day. The highest no adverse effects limit (HNEL) is 1500 mg/kg/day (Baird et al., 2000).

Sucralose administration to Sprague-Dawley and COBS CD (SD) BR rats, mice, beagle dogs, monkeys, and eventually humans showed no signs of toxicity, carcinogenicity, or other side effects. Studies ranged from single dose administration to eating trials of over two years. Common methods of administration included oral, gavage, and IV intakes. No adverse reactions were observed at intakes up to 16,000 mg/kg/day in mice or 10,000 mg/kg/day in rats—a dosage equivalent to 1,000 pounds of sucrose administered in a single day to a 165-pound adult (Goldsmith, 2000).

16 grams per kilogram of body weight. Most people are over 50 kilograms - closer to 70 and 80. That's -at least- a DAILY consumption of 800 -grams- (about two pounds) to 1.28 kilograms (about three pounds). For two years.

All that said - I avoid artificial sweeteners. I am not afraid they are poisonous - but I am a supertaster ( ) - artificial sweeteners have a very dry or side-sour taste to them that is simply undesirable.

Sure - it has its advantages. I am excellent at reverse-engineering sauces... but I have a very narrow selection of alcoholic beverages I can tolerate with friends (usually, I just stick to soda, tea, or whatever - I don't get too much crap for it, as I am usually the DD and thus enable continued festivities.

Anyway - I avoid the stuff because it just doesn't taste like sugar. Sugar has a much more soft and 'calcified' (limey?) taste to it when eaten raw. I will admit that splenda is pretty close to sugar... but it just has that off flavor (I suspect the chlorine substitution triggers additional taste receptors that register it as having a 'sour' side-flavor and also trigger the 'dry' sensation - which feels similar, to me, to the 'dry' flavor heavily chlorinated water has).

I agree - I don't see how people can drink it... but I am not concerned about it being a poison of some kind.

posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 02:11 AM
isnt sucralose a sucrose attached to FORMALDEHYDE?

anyways, stevia is the way to go, its natural and not diabetic like 'real' sugar is in excess.

so, how do we get this sucralose/splenda out of tap water? will a carbon fliter work? ie, Brita???

posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 05:12 AM
reply to post by ignant

It's in nanogram amounts. To put that in comparison, that is 0.000000450 grams per liter of water. Greater concentrations of it exist in your local swimming pool from people spilling diet soda on the ground and it getting 'tracked' into the pool. Hardly worth filtering out.

posted on Oct, 5 2011 @ 05:16 AM
I do mybest to avoid artificial sweeteners.. but they are putting them in stuff like tomato sauce and pickle these days..

new topics

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in