3 ms·

Only reason it is a huge deal is because people absolutely love products with artificial sweeteners. People from all walks of life. I just never got a taste fo

Only reason it is a huge deal is because people absolutely love products with artificial sweeteners. People from all walks of life. I just never got a taste for them, the sweeteners stand out to me as disgusting. I'd much prefer real sugar and simply regulating my intake. So in my mind, the fact that it's even being discussed only affirms my decision to stay away from any artificial sweetener. I noticed recently a vitamin drink I sometimes buy as a last resort contains steviol sweeteners which are based on the stevia plant, that's as far as I'm willing to stretch my own rules.

stavros 3y ago
> So in my mind, the fact that it's even being discussed only affirms my decision to stay away from any artificial sweetener. > I'd much prefer real sugar and simply regulating my intake. You stay away from artificial sweeteners because there's a remote possibility they might be harmful, and prefer sugar, which is demonstrably harmful. Why is that?
- nerdbert 3y ago
  For me it's that aspartame tastes absolutely horrible. I can always pick it out in a drink. Can't stand it.
  - stavros 3y ago
    Same here, I like it with food, but I can't stand it on its own. It has a disgusting metallic aftertaste.
- krisoft 3y ago
  > Why is that? They answer your question: “the sweeteners stand out to me as disgusting.” There are some people who sense different flavours differently. Those who preceive cilantro as soapy is a famous example. Makes sense to me that for some artifical sweeteners would taste off too. Plus our sense of taste is affected by all kind of psychological associations. (For example many people preceive “expensive wine” more flavourfull than the same liquid branded as “cheap wine”.)
  - stavros 3y ago
    But if their decision was only based on taste, how can this discussion affirm it?
    - krisoft 3y ago
      > how can this discussion affirm it? Imagine something always tasted vile to you. So you decide to not consume it, but you see that others are consuming it. Then you learn that some signs point towards it being unhealthy. Would that make you think "I knew it! I tasted the poison" (aka affirming your initial decision) or would it undermine it in your opinion?
      - stavros 3y ago
        Neither, it would do "it always tasted bad to me, and, unrelatedly, it also seems to be bad for you".
- petre 3y ago
  > prefer sugar, which is demonstrably harmful Tastes awful, screws up your gut microbiome, causes glucose intolerance in mice. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/artificial-sweeteners-may-change-our-gut-bacteria-in-dangerous-ways/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/artificial-sweete... If sugar is bad for your health why is it so hard to avoid in foods? And why is it replaced with artificial sweeteners?
- INTPenis 3y ago
  Sugar is as natural as a sweetener gets. It's definitely bad for you, addictive, and all sorts of things, but in small doses...
  - stavros 3y ago
    Why is it relevant how natural it is?
    - revolvingocelot 3y ago
      Why would it not be relevant? Naturally-occurring materials have a much better chance of being biologically uncontroversial when introduced to the human organism -- not that eg cyanogenic glycosides, which can kill you, don't exist in apricots, but some levels of those dangerous compounds can be processed because they've been a component of the natural world for evolutionary time. The idea that modern science, let alone modern-science-as-influenced-by-capitalism, can't properly perceive the consequences of artificial compounds is what TFA is about, and if TFA isn't convincing I invite you to consider PFAS, BPA, or leaded gasoline.

stavros 3y ago

> So in my mind, the fact that it's even being discussed only affirms my decision to stay away from any artificial sweetener. > I'd much prefer real sugar and simply regulating my intake. You stay away from artificial sweeteners because there's a remote possibility they might be harmful, and prefer sugar, which is demonstrably harmful. Why is that?

nerdbert 3y ago
For me it's that aspartame tastes absolutely horrible. I can always pick it out in a drink. Can't stand it.
- stavros 3y ago
  Same here, I like it with food, but I can't stand it on its own. It has a disgusting metallic aftertaste.
krisoft 3y ago
> Why is that? They answer your question: “the sweeteners stand out to me as disgusting.” There are some people who sense different flavours differently. Those who preceive cilantro as soapy is a famous example. Makes sense to me that for some artifical sweeteners would taste off too. Plus our sense of taste is affected by all kind of psychological associations. (For example many people preceive “expensive wine” more flavourfull than the same liquid branded as “cheap wine”.)
- stavros 3y ago
  But if their decision was only based on taste, how can this discussion affirm it?
  - krisoft 3y ago
    > how can this discussion affirm it? Imagine something always tasted vile to you. So you decide to not consume it, but you see that others are consuming it. Then you learn that some signs point towards it being unhealthy. Would that make you think "I knew it! I tasted the poison" (aka affirming your initial decision) or would it undermine it in your opinion?
    - stavros 3y ago
      Neither, it would do "it always tasted bad to me, and, unrelatedly, it also seems to be bad for you".
petre 3y ago
> prefer sugar, which is demonstrably harmful Tastes awful, screws up your gut microbiome, causes glucose intolerance in mice. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/artificial-sweeteners-may-change-our-gut-bacteria-in-dangerous-ways/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/artificial-sweete... If sugar is bad for your health why is it so hard to avoid in foods? And why is it replaced with artificial sweeteners?
INTPenis 3y ago
Sugar is as natural as a sweetener gets. It's definitely bad for you, addictive, and all sorts of things, but in small doses...
- stavros 3y ago
  Why is it relevant how natural it is?
  - revolvingocelot 3y ago
    Why would it not be relevant? Naturally-occurring materials have a much better chance of being biologically uncontroversial when introduced to the human organism -- not that eg cyanogenic glycosides, which can kill you, don't exist in apricots, but some levels of those dangerous compounds can be processed because they've been a component of the natural world for evolutionary time. The idea that modern science, let alone modern-science-as-influenced-by-capitalism, can't properly perceive the consequences of artificial compounds is what TFA is about, and if TFA isn't convincing I invite you to consider PFAS, BPA, or leaded gasoline.