-
Please Remember: Members are only permitted to share their own experiences. Members are not qualified to give medical advice. Additionally, everyone manages their health differently. Please be respectful of other people's opinions about their own diabetes management.
diet cherry coke
- Thread starter am64
- Start date
- Status
am64
Well-Known Member
- Relationship to Diabetes
- Type 2
F
FM001
Guest
Not seen the diet version of cherry coke
There is a suggestion that the sweeteners in diet versions of sodas such as aspartame are not good for us. Some researchers are for and some against. It is also said that the sweeteners increase our hunger as would normal sugars.
The other worry is that the chemicals in them leech calcium from our bones.
http://www.webmd.com/osteoporosis/features/soda-osteoporosis
It's like most things so moderation is the key.
The other worry is that the chemicals in them leech calcium from our bones.
http://www.webmd.com/osteoporosis/features/soda-osteoporosis
It's like most things so moderation is the key.
robert@fm
Much missed member
- Relationship to Diabetes
- Type 2
I'm surprised to see the "artificial sweeteners are toxic" myth, here of all places. 🙄
FACT: No artificial sweetener has ever been shown to be harmful at a sensible dose level, or even at levels 10x or 100x what anybody would actually use -- not even the cyclamates, which is why the former ban on them was repealed. The only experiments which have demonstrated harm were done at such ridiculously huge dose levels (equivalent to a human consuming kilograms of the stuff every day) as to render the whole exercise meaningless and pointless, for anything is toxic if a large enough dose is given -- even water. Oxygen is lethal at dose levels not far above those needed to sustain life, so the same "logic" which says that we shouldn't use sweeteners also says that we should all stop breathing. 🙂
It's ironic that the crackpot websites have singled out aspartame for particular vilification, because its breakdown products are two amino acids (aspartic acid and phenylalanine) which occur naturally and copiously in nearly all foods; it is probably thus the safest of all sweeteners. Some nutcases have siezed upon the fact that a small amount of methanol is also produced, ignoring the fact that the amount of methanol in an aspartame-sweetened diet drink is only about half that in the same size serving of fresh orange juice. (A few nutcases haven't ignored this last fact, but have attempted to explain it away by claiming that "artificial" methanol is more than twice as harmful as "natural" methanol, but this is of course nonsense; methanol is methanol, regardless of source. And methanol isn't a cumulative poison, so you'd have to drink gallons of orange juice at a single sitting to suffer the effects -- except that you'd die of water intoxication long before you did.)
It's notable that all the anti-aspartame websites lean heavily on the ever-popular Post Hoc fallacy, e.g. "My dad consumed masses of aspartame-sweetened drinks and he died of cancer, therefore aspartame causes cancer". As one myth-debunking website pointed out, this ignores all the millions who drink a similar or greater amount and don't get so much as a headache.
And it wouldn't surprise me if there were aspartame bans in the US; bear in mind that this is the country in which at least one town legislature passed a local law making pi equal to 3, "thereby" (as one commentator pointed out) "making all circle calculations in that town either illegal or wrong". Likewise, bans by supermarkets here of artificial sweeteners from their own-brand products prove only that whoever is responsible has been reading the wrong websites.
Artificial sweeteners are a lot safer than sugar, especially for us lot.
FACT: No artificial sweetener has ever been shown to be harmful at a sensible dose level, or even at levels 10x or 100x what anybody would actually use -- not even the cyclamates, which is why the former ban on them was repealed. The only experiments which have demonstrated harm were done at such ridiculously huge dose levels (equivalent to a human consuming kilograms of the stuff every day) as to render the whole exercise meaningless and pointless, for anything is toxic if a large enough dose is given -- even water. Oxygen is lethal at dose levels not far above those needed to sustain life, so the same "logic" which says that we shouldn't use sweeteners also says that we should all stop breathing. 🙂
It's ironic that the crackpot websites have singled out aspartame for particular vilification, because its breakdown products are two amino acids (aspartic acid and phenylalanine) which occur naturally and copiously in nearly all foods; it is probably thus the safest of all sweeteners. Some nutcases have siezed upon the fact that a small amount of methanol is also produced, ignoring the fact that the amount of methanol in an aspartame-sweetened diet drink is only about half that in the same size serving of fresh orange juice. (A few nutcases haven't ignored this last fact, but have attempted to explain it away by claiming that "artificial" methanol is more than twice as harmful as "natural" methanol, but this is of course nonsense; methanol is methanol, regardless of source. And methanol isn't a cumulative poison, so you'd have to drink gallons of orange juice at a single sitting to suffer the effects -- except that you'd die of water intoxication long before you did.)
It's notable that all the anti-aspartame websites lean heavily on the ever-popular Post Hoc fallacy, e.g. "My dad consumed masses of aspartame-sweetened drinks and he died of cancer, therefore aspartame causes cancer". As one myth-debunking website pointed out, this ignores all the millions who drink a similar or greater amount and don't get so much as a headache.
And it wouldn't surprise me if there were aspartame bans in the US; bear in mind that this is the country in which at least one town legislature passed a local law making pi equal to 3, "thereby" (as one commentator pointed out) "making all circle calculations in that town either illegal or wrong". Likewise, bans by supermarkets here of artificial sweeteners from their own-brand products prove only that whoever is responsible has been reading the wrong websites.
Artificial sweeteners are a lot safer than sugar, especially for us lot.
Northerner
Admin (Retired)
- Relationship to Diabetes
- Type 1
...And it wouldn't surprise me if there were aspartame bans in the US; bear in mind that this is the country in which at least one town legislature passed a local law making pi equal to 3, "thereby" (as one commentator pointed out) "making all circle calculations in that town either illegal or wrong".
Thanks for the info Robert 🙂 As for pi - surely, only in America could this happen?!!
robert@fm
Much missed member
- Relationship to Diabetes
- Type 2
You seem to be confusing Coke Zero with Pepsi Max. 😛
To my mind all diet drinks are OK (see reply just posted), with the exception of Diet Coke, which I reckon is fit only for unblocking drains, and probably would be good at it. 😱 Coke Zero/Diet Pepsi taste much better, but for me it's Pepsi Max for the win. 🙂 Sodastream's diet range is also quite good; the Cranberry and Raspberry is a great accompaniment for chicken or turkey, and I also like the Blackcurrant and Zero Cola concentrates.
Thanks for the info Robert 🙂 As for pi - surely, only in America could this happen?!!
Are any diet drinks ok - I only ever drink water; couple of cups a tea a day - not quite sure what else I can have; how about sugar free cordial??🙂
Diet cherry coke has been around for AGES. Had it years ago. Easy to get hold of in Tescos. We were told ALL diet drinks, fizzy or squash are fine when my son was still in hospital. The dietician has since confirmed this. Robinson's Special R are all sugar free (lids are normally blue on the sugar free ones) and they do all sorts of flavours. You can get sugar free flavoured waters too if you don't really enjoy plain water.
robert@fm
Much missed member
- Relationship to Diabetes
- Type 2
Mention of Coke Zero has by association (Coke Zero was launched in the UK the week that I was hospitalised with diabetic nephropathy) brought to mind a letter I read in the New Scientist magazine the week it was launched; the chair of the Soil Association was calling on the UK Parliament to ban aspartame on the (to my mind spurious) ground that "it provides no nutritional benefit". I reckon this shows that he had never heard of Type 2 diabetes, or else doesn't understand its full implications; as we here know, Type 2 is nearly always diagnosed late in life, and by that time the patient has usually acquired a deeply-ingrained sweet tooth which doesn't magically disappear on diagnosis. Use of artificial sweeteners allows us to gratify that craving without having to resort to dangerous carbs such as sugar, and I for one can't see a much greater nutritional benefit than that. 😛
Hence, I have been boycotting organic products ever since. (Not that it makes much difference anyway, since organic isn't actually any better than inorganic; it's just overhyped and overpriced.)
Hence, I have been boycotting organic products ever since. (Not that it makes much difference anyway, since organic isn't actually any better than inorganic; it's just overhyped and overpriced.)
Robster65
Senior Member
- Relationship to Diabetes
- Type 1
You get free dirt with it 🙄
I would suspect that the Pi=3 thing is also an urban myth. But I tend to take all things I read such as that with a pinch of (inorganic) salt. There's so many conspiracy theorists who will spread their brand of paranoia that they quickly become 'fact'.
Thanks for clearing it up. 🙂
Rob
- Status