4 ms·

I wonder whether even if there is a causal link, the diet version will still be healthier (for low values of healthy) than the sugary version. I tend to think s

• zzzcpan 8y ago
  > A mystery to me is why they haven't asked about consumption of sugary drinks at the same time. Obviously because sugary drinks manufacturers are paying for the article and the "study".
  • owlninja 8y ago
    Link?
  • swah 8y ago
    But Coke sells Coke, Diet Coke, juices and bottled water. What difference does it make to them?
    • Matticus_Rex 8y ago
      They're more dominant in cola than they are in orange juice.
• deegles 8y ago
  I had a coworker who insisted diet sodas were worse for you than regular sodas. I just don't understand how people reach that kind of conclusion.
  • close04 8y ago
    I guess it's because other scientists and studies say low-calorie sweeteners can lead to weight gain or increase the risk of developing type 2 diabetes, and in lab experiments aspartame exposure lead to increased lymphoma and leukemia. It's not that obvious which study is right and which maybe had a flawed methodology, or which is the result of correlation rather than causation. A random example that does not definitively settle anything but is enough to make you keep asking the question [0]. And one common sense argument is that many people consume way more diet sodas than they would regular ones. Since they have no sugar and almost no calories the assumption is that there is no danger to consume more of them, they are "healthy". Since artificial sweeteners have their own sets of risks in mechanisms that are perhaps even less understood, suddenly this assumption is that more dangerous. It could be jumping from the frying pan into the fire. [0] https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1038/oby.2008.284 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1038/oby.2008.28...
    • JoeAltmaier 8y ago
      Right! Good point! The study should not be per-person risk, but per-bottle risk to answer that question. How much more does one can of diet Pepsi put your health at risk than the regular kind? Its the question we must answer when faced with the soda cooler at the gas station. But the study gives a different, not-very-actionable per-average-person-lifetime answer.
      • close04 8y ago
        No study at this time has quantified the risk of sugary vs. diet sodas. They just point out that each one increases the risk of specific medical problems but with no certain indication of which one is worse or by how much. And even deciding what worse means is a big deal. They can simply kill you or decrease your quality of life in different ways. Doesn't make one better. It's the same recently with cigarettes and e-cigs. Determining smoking or drinking coke is bad compared to not doing it is relatively straight forward. Determining what's better out of 2 alternatives that just harm you in different ways and that weren't studied enough is harder. If you want to play it safe go for none of them.
    • 8y ago
  • francisofascii 8y ago
    I believe the sugar industry was successful in creating the perception that artificial sweeteners can cause cancer. One of the first, sodium cyclamate, was in fact, banned.
• yoz-y 8y ago
  > A mystery to me is why they haven't asked about consumption of sugary drinks at the same time. That would have allowed to get much more interesting correlations. I suppose because there already is a consensus that sugary drinks are bad for people and cause all the mentioned problems. Now the eye turns on the sugarless ones. However a comparison would be indeed welcome.
  • lolc 8y ago
    It is quite possible that people who drink diet coke also drink coke. So separating the groups could have been interesting.