3 ms·

There are 3500 calories in a pound. Each can of soda has 170 calories. Switching to diet soda makes a difference. Even if you have only one can of soda a day

There are 3500 calories in a pound. Each can of soda has 170 calories. Switching to diet soda makes a difference. Even if you have only one can of soda a day (it's usually more), you'll lose 1.45 pounds a month. Now, if you all of a sudden substitute those 170 calories with some other junk, you just ruined it all. Eliminate the stupid calories and be smart. It's a science. It works. I lost 35 pounds in 60 days doing this. Other than that, this article is completely silly and complicates what is otherwise a simple formula. Reduce calories, increase exercise,and stay dedicated. Anything else is a distraction.

ghshephard 17y ago
Actually, the entire point of the article is that you _won't_ eliminate the stupid calories by drinking Diet-beverages, but instead will consume more of them _because_ you are drinking Diet-Beverage. They have some data to back it up: "We found that reducing the correlation between sweet taste and the caloric content of foods using artificial sweeteners in rats resulted in increased caloric intake, increased body weight, and increased adiposity" I find their thesis entirely believable, and it would be a fairly easy thing to do a controlled study on. Why people believe that they can somehow control what they eat through "willpower" or "dedication" is something I continue to find interesting - doesn't this type of control come from the brain? This article shows that with an fMRI, your brain will actually be able to determine caloric intake of an artificially sweetened beverage - the implication being that you will then be directed to increase your caloric intake, and, as a result of consuming artificially sweetened beverages, you will consume _more_ calories than you would have if you hadn't consumed that artificially sweetened beverage. Presumably for each persons metabolism their is something that tricks the brain into believing _more_ calories have been consumed, and causes you to consume fewer calories as a result. I think the foundation of diets like Atkins/Zone, is that by consuming high(er) Fat/Protein diets, you are hacking your brain into thinking it has eaten more than if you hadn't eaten those foods.
- radu_floricica 17y ago
  I'm guessing it depends on the kind of diet. If you want to loose weight short term and you watch what you eat or you follow a program, then the calorie gain from drinking diet sodas is great. Even more, you can have the occasional sweet thing without ruining the diet. If you want a long term, mostly maintaining diet, then yes, the side-effects can become important. And to answer your willpower question: yes, it comes from the brain. But we have many "brains". And the one you use in a strict, short-term weight loss diet has very little in common with the every day "I feel like having a snack and it's ok" brain.
  - Kirby 17y ago
    I think this nails it. If you're part of a conscious diet and watching calories, diet soda can be a good choice, because you're _explicitly_ controlling for the effect the study is about - the false sweet causing cravings and ultimately more calorie consumption. It might follow, though, that the diet soda makes the rest of the diet more difficult. If you're just subbing in diet soda for regular and not paying particular attention to overall diet, though, this study argues that you'll overall lose, as the diet soda increases your cravings for sweet and, left unchecked, you'll gain weight. Seems plausible. (I don't worry too much personally, since I'm part of the population to which artificial sweeteners are not palatable. I'd rather drink water, and I do quite often.)
- akeefer 17y ago
  Their thesis, that it increases cravings in certain ways, is reasonable. The implication that people behave like rats with absolutely no ability to reflect upon or control those cravings, however, is not. I'm also one of those people that lost weight (a small amount in my case, but I didn't have that much to lose) by switching to drinking diet soda. It allowed me to satisfy a certain type of craving (to drink something with taste other than water and to satisfy some need for something sweet) without adding calories to my diet; it's possible it instilled other cravings in me for sweet things, but I've found those far easier to ignore. Not all cravings/desires/impulses are created equally.
  - timwiseman 17y ago
    The implication that people behave like rats with absolutely no ability to reflect upon or control those cravings, however, is not. The implication that all people behave that way is clearly false. The implication that a substantial percentage behvae as if they have no ability to reflect upon or control those cravings is probably true.
- mhd 17y ago
  "We found that reducing the correlation between sweet taste and the caloric content of foods using artificial sweeteners in rats resulted in increased caloric intake, increased body weight, and increased adiposity" Compared to what and by what amounts? Is the increase in caloric intake bigger than the amount of calories you save by not drinking the non-diet version of the soda? I would guess not. This sounds similar to the fears of being dehydrated by coffee...

ghshephard 17y ago

Actually, the entire point of the article is that you _won't_ eliminate the stupid calories by drinking Diet-beverages, but instead will consume more of them _because_ you are drinking Diet-Beverage. They have some data to back it up: "We found that reducing the correlation between sweet taste and the caloric content of foods using artificial sweeteners in rats resulted in increased caloric intake, increased body weight, and increased adiposity" I find their thesis entirely believable, and it would be a fairly easy thing to do a controlled study on. Why people believe that they can somehow control what they eat through "willpower" or "dedication" is something I continue to find interesting - doesn't this type of control come from the brain? This article shows that with an fMRI, your brain will actually be able to determine caloric intake of an artificially sweetened beverage - the implication being that you will then be directed to increase your caloric intake, and, as a result of consuming artificially sweetened beverages, you will consume _more_ calories than you would have if you hadn't consumed that artificially sweetened beverage. Presumably for each persons metabolism their is something that tricks the brain into believing _more_ calories have been consumed, and causes you to consume fewer calories as a result. I think the foundation of diets like Atkins/Zone, is that by consuming high(er) Fat/Protein diets, you are hacking your brain into thinking it has eaten more than if you hadn't eaten those foods.

radu_floricica 17y ago
I'm guessing it depends on the kind of diet. If you want to loose weight short term and you watch what you eat or you follow a program, then the calorie gain from drinking diet sodas is great. Even more, you can have the occasional sweet thing without ruining the diet. If you want a long term, mostly maintaining diet, then yes, the side-effects can become important. And to answer your willpower question: yes, it comes from the brain. But we have many "brains". And the one you use in a strict, short-term weight loss diet has very little in common with the every day "I feel like having a snack and it's ok" brain.
- Kirby 17y ago
  I think this nails it. If you're part of a conscious diet and watching calories, diet soda can be a good choice, because you're _explicitly_ controlling for the effect the study is about - the false sweet causing cravings and ultimately more calorie consumption. It might follow, though, that the diet soda makes the rest of the diet more difficult. If you're just subbing in diet soda for regular and not paying particular attention to overall diet, though, this study argues that you'll overall lose, as the diet soda increases your cravings for sweet and, left unchecked, you'll gain weight. Seems plausible. (I don't worry too much personally, since I'm part of the population to which artificial sweeteners are not palatable. I'd rather drink water, and I do quite often.)
akeefer 17y ago
Their thesis, that it increases cravings in certain ways, is reasonable. The implication that people behave like rats with absolutely no ability to reflect upon or control those cravings, however, is not. I'm also one of those people that lost weight (a small amount in my case, but I didn't have that much to lose) by switching to drinking diet soda. It allowed me to satisfy a certain type of craving (to drink something with taste other than water and to satisfy some need for something sweet) without adding calories to my diet; it's possible it instilled other cravings in me for sweet things, but I've found those far easier to ignore. Not all cravings/desires/impulses are created equally.
- timwiseman 17y ago
  The implication that people behave like rats with absolutely no ability to reflect upon or control those cravings, however, is not. The implication that all people behave that way is clearly false. The implication that a substantial percentage behvae as if they have no ability to reflect upon or control those cravings is probably true.
mhd 17y ago
"We found that reducing the correlation between sweet taste and the caloric content of foods using artificial sweeteners in rats resulted in increased caloric intake, increased body weight, and increased adiposity" Compared to what and by what amounts? Is the increase in caloric intake bigger than the amount of calories you save by not drinking the non-diet version of the soda? I would guess not. This sounds similar to the fears of being dehydrated by coffee...