Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Low-Carb Studies & Research / Media Watch > Low-Carb War Zone
User Name
Password
FAQ Members Calendar Mark Forums Read Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31   ^
Old Fri, Sep-28-12, 06:53
ncrn122's Avatar
ncrn122 ncrn122 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 408
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 212/175/150 Female 66
BF:
Progress: 60%
Default

[QUOTE=Nancy LC]

That's my biggest problem of the very simple sort of thought process that goes into the "Artificial Sweeteners are poison" comments that pop up. They generally sound hysterical at worst and ignorant at best.

QUOTE]

Thanks...I'll try to remember that the next time I have a reaction! I'm not allergic....just ignorant!!!!!!!!
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #32   ^
Old Fri, Sep-28-12, 08:36
Nancy LC's Avatar
Nancy LC Nancy LC is offline
Experimenter
Posts: 25,843
 
Plan: DDF
Stats: 202/185.4/179 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 72%
Location: San Diego, CA
Default

Quote:
Thanks...I'll try to remember that the next time I have a reaction! I'm not allergic....just ignorant!!!!!!!!

The ignorance is lumping all non-caloric sweeteners into one category. The hysteria is assumption that they're all poisonous to everyone and it's one's duty to the internet to issue exclamation point filled warnings. Do you fit that description?

If you're allergic, you're allergic. Nothing wrong with that. Avoid whatever you're allergic to. No one here would criticize you for that. If you chose to avoid all sweeteners for whatever reason that's fine too. However, if you lump everything into one incredibly broad category and making erroneous, sweeping generalizations, I might say something.
Reply With Quote
  #33   ^
Old Sat, Sep-29-12, 06:20
ncrn122's Avatar
ncrn122 ncrn122 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 408
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 212/175/150 Female 66
BF:
Progress: 60%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nancy LC
The ignorance is lumping all non-caloric sweeteners into one category. The hysteria is assumption that they're all poisonous to everyone and it's one's duty to the internet to issue exclamation point filled warnings. Do you fit that description?

If you're allergic, you're allergic. Nothing wrong with that. Avoid whatever you're allergic to. No one here would criticize you for that. If you chose to avoid all sweeteners for whatever reason that's fine too. However, if you lump everything into one incredibly broad category and making erroneous, sweeping generalizations, I might say something.


I believe if you will read the posts, I refered to two sweeteners as a problem. The same two that the OP had problems with.
Say whatever you want. I may listen.
Reply With Quote
  #34   ^
Old Sat, Sep-29-12, 16:01
Nancy LC's Avatar
Nancy LC Nancy LC is offline
Experimenter
Posts: 25,843
 
Plan: DDF
Stats: 202/185.4/179 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 72%
Location: San Diego, CA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ncrn122
I believe if you will read the posts, I refered to two sweeteners as a problem. The same two that the OP had problems with.
Say whatever you want. I may listen.

I wasn't even responding to you. I don't know why you decided I was singling you out.
Reply With Quote
  #35   ^
Old Sat, Sep-29-12, 19:49
gonwtwindo's Avatar
gonwtwindo gonwtwindo is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 6,671
 
Plan: General Low Carb
Stats: 164/162.6/151 Female 5'3"
BF:Sure is
Progress: 11%
Location: SoCal
Default

Originally Posted by Gonwtwndo (my words in red)

Quote:
Originally Posted by gonwtwindo
I don't doubt you had these problems and good for you for figuring out what to do to rid of them.

My 2 cents is, poison for one person isn't poison for every other person as well. I lost 60 lbs using splenda in my coffee and at least one glass of Crystal Light a day and doubt I could have had that success without them. Luckily, it's not poison for me, and I'm 60
.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Honesty
With all of the people in this thread so quick to default my claims based on the same logic as this post I found it mildly funny that no one did the same to you. Well, I clearly said "for me". I didn't say it was that way for everyone. You lost weight avoiding sugar by using something that you don't fully understand. That's presumptuous, at best. You accept that it's widely used and therefore must be safe. Not to mention many clinical trials proving it IS safe. This is a common issue with these products. No one faults you for that, and I'm glad you found a way to get to your goal. Saying it's not poison for you though is a bit naive. LOL

How a poison affects each individual could be vastly different. You also state that you used these products in light moderation. Would you also claim that a cigarette is not poison? No, because tobacco is proven to cause lung cancer and is associated with many other cancers and diseases. Your post is the equivalent of saying "I only smoked one cigarette a day and didn't get lung cancer so it's not harmful to me". No, because tobacco is proven to cause lung cancer and is associated with many other cancers and diseases, and AS are not proven to cause any harm. I wish it worked that way, I truly do. Whatever damage this product has done to you might be mild, and it might not, but just because you show a lack of symptoms doesn't mean it's good for you or not harmful. No one has said it's 'good' for you. You are saying to assume AS are harmful for everyone in spite of lack of any scientific evidence. That, to me, is a good example of being naive/not fully understanding.


*unsubscribes to this thread* lol

Last edited by gonwtwindo : Sat, Sep-29-12 at 19:56.
Reply With Quote
  #36   ^
Old Sun, Sep-30-12, 03:05
tragedian tragedian is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 944
 
Plan: atkins '72 -now ketogenic
Stats: 260/181.4/140 Female 5'8"
BF:
Progress: 65%
Location: Baltimore, MD, USA
Default

If AS overuse were more "fun", this conversation wouldn't be taking place. Case in point; booze. Raise your hand if you think it's not a toxic, poisonous, lethal substance? But it's fun, so...

Okay, now raise your hand if you think AS are all health foods? Anyone take AS supplements? Have you met your RDA of AS today? No? Uh oh, better stop by vitamin shoppe and stock up on your AS enhanced daily multivitamins.

Anyway, the AS scaremonger stuff all over the internet is hilarious to me. Most of you know about the meds I take, I originally went LC because they caused a side effect that was literally, medically intolerable and only LC eating controls it. But guess what? They don't do that for everyone. Not everyone who uses AS is cheating death. But, I guess people who have bad experiences want to share their story, and that's okay, I guess.
Reply With Quote
  #37   ^
Old Sun, Sep-30-12, 08:19
Nancy LC's Avatar
Nancy LC Nancy LC is offline
Experimenter
Posts: 25,843
 
Plan: DDF
Stats: 202/185.4/179 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 72%
Location: San Diego, CA
Default

I've never been able to figure out why, of all the things we eat and do that have real risk that's is demonstrable, well-known, warned against, that the non-caloric sweetener things, which really hasn't garnered much suspicion for most of them, causes such hand wringing.

You'll find the same people posting "warnings" over sweeteners who still smoke, don't wear safety belts, drive recklessly, drink and drive, text and drive and so on. In their minds (some of them anyway), sweeteners seem to pose the biggest danger.

*shrug*

It's human nature. Frankly, I think honey, sugar, agave are more cancer causing and deadly than most artificial sweeteners (provided you don't have an allergy to the sweetener). We're starting to get a pretty good idea of what fructose does to our bodies over a lifetime and it isn't pretty at all.

Last edited by Nancy LC : Sun, Sep-30-12 at 08:57.
Reply With Quote
  #38   ^
Old Sat, Oct-06-12, 08:21
bobiam bobiam is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 886
 
Plan: NANY
Stats: 503/405/175 Male 72 inches
BF:plenty :)
Progress: 30%
Location: Northern Illinois
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nancy LC
Why would one assume that if one has a bad reaction to one thing that everything in that very category is equally bad?

That's my biggest problem of the very simple sort of thought process that goes into the "Artificial Sweeteners are poison" comments that pop up. They generally sound hysterical at worst and ignorant at best.

Xylitol, Erythritol, Stevia, Lo Han and many, many more are nothing like Aspartame or Sucralose. There must be several dozen different sweeteners now. Some from herbs, fruit, fermentation, birch trees, and so on. Many of them are commonly found in nature.

is there any actual scientific evidence that suggests so called natural sweeteners are less harmful than artificial ones? I have never seen any actual evidence to that effect. the only evidence I have actually seen suggests quite strongly that AS are generally safe for virtually everyone in the quantities most people will ingest.
Reply With Quote
  #39   ^
Old Sat, Oct-06-12, 08:46
Nancy LC's Avatar
Nancy LC Nancy LC is offline
Experimenter
Posts: 25,843
 
Plan: DDF
Stats: 202/185.4/179 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 72%
Location: San Diego, CA
Default

They usually get the "Generally recognized as safe" because they're found in things people eat all the time, like fruit. So if there are tests I'm unaware of them.

But if something hasn't ever been shown to be harmful to people, like Sucralose, then how can you show that something else is safer? It doesn't really make sense.

Look at how many people something like wheat affects and yet few people would even dream of denouncing it like they do non-caloric sweeteners.
Reply With Quote
  #40   ^
Old Sat, Oct-06-12, 13:05
KDH's Avatar
KDH KDH is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,247
 
Plan: Atkins/Taubes
Stats: 270/168/160 Female 5'7"
BF:
Progress: 93%
Location: Dallas, TX
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Solidadund
6 to 10 cans a day? Even water in excess can be toxic. You also have a sampling error. How do you know it wasn't some other ingredient in the drinks that caused you a problem, maybe salt, a dye, flavoring....?

I would also wonder about a doctor who could not diagnose kidney problems. If staying away from artificial sweetener works for you good deal, but you have no actual proof that they had anything to do with your problems.



I thought aspartame was giving me migraines. Ended up being the red dye, which is in EVERYTHING is seems. Even stuff that isn't red. Although I never reached the heroic proportions of diet soda intake the OP reported, I can drink/eat as much artificial sweetener as I like without obvious side effects, as long as there is no "red dye no.40" on the ingredient list.

I do realize that such things may be bed for me. However, I know for 110% absolute certainty that sugar/HFCS IS bad for me. And I'm human, and sometimes want sweet dammit. So it's the artificial/"poison" route for me, every time.
Reply With Quote
  #41   ^
Old Sat, Oct-06-12, 13:12
KDH's Avatar
KDH KDH is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,247
 
Plan: Atkins/Taubes
Stats: 270/168/160 Female 5'7"
BF:
Progress: 93%
Location: Dallas, TX
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Honesty

It was mainly 6 cans, I should have used that rather than the "-10" to signify weekends out and such. Which 6 8oz cans of soda wouldn't really be excessive, especially to the point of toxicity.



Where do you find 8oz cans of diet soda? I'd love to get some, but only ever see Sprite, Coke, etc. Never diet. Always 12oz and up around here!
Reply With Quote
  #42   ^
Old Mon, Oct-15-12, 23:00
betsywcnm's Avatar
betsywcnm betsywcnm is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 37
 
Plan: atkins
Stats: 198/145/145 Female 64 inches
BF:
Progress: 100%
Location: Seattle, WA
Default

I have lost ~60# on low carb and kept it off for over a year. I also have headaches/fuzzy head with aspertame but have been using several packets of saccharin (sweet and low) a day in tea for years. I have heard very little about problems with saccharin...it doesn't seem to bother me or make me crave carbs (like real carbs DO). Does anyone have info/thoughts on it?
Reply With Quote
  #43   ^
Old Sat, Oct-20-12, 06:46
Sayria Sayria is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 391
 
Plan: Mixture .. mainly Paleo
Stats: 168/163/120 Female 62 inches
BF:
Progress: 10%
Default

Great story; thanks for posting. I have read bad reports about artificial sweeteners and steer clear of them. However, I do chew on sugar free gum and that contains artificial sweetener. I also used to have low calorie tonic water, but that is as bad. Mind you, the ordinary tonic water has some of that sweetener added. I have the gum to freshen my mouth ... but .... now I will make sure that I don't have it. Many thanks.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:08.


Copyright © 2000-2024 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.