UPNetwork  

Go Back   UPNetwork > General Forums > Debate

View Poll Results: How do you down your acid?
Regular 22 84.62%
Diet 4 15.38%
Voters: 26. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-23-2012, 07:34 PM   #1
Doppleganger
我が名は勇者王!
 
Doppleganger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Emina Isle
Posts: 14,198
Send a message via AIM to Doppleganger
Regular vs. Diet

Diabetes v. Cancer

Pick your poison.
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望
今 信じあえる
あきらめない 心かさね
永遠を抱きしめて
Doppleganger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2012, 07:54 PM   #2
Talon87
時の彼方へ
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
Thread title is pretty cryptic. Are you talking about keeping acid reflux in check? I have no idea what you're trying to ask where acid, cancer, and diabetes converge.
Talon87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2012, 08:12 PM   #3
Doppleganger
我が名は勇者王!
 
Doppleganger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Emina Isle
Posts: 14,198
Send a message via AIM to Doppleganger
The topic is about a standardized, bottled carbonated beverage that is naturally or artificially sweetened and treated as a refreshment. It has various acids in its content.

I didn't want to use terms like "soft drink", "soda" or "pop" so as not to invite a value debate as to which nickname is a superior label for the refreshment.

...

I'm super curious about what people are drinking because of the aspartame in diet. I switched off regular sometime two years ago, and with exercise lost ten pounds of weight that's never come back. The risk of chronic sugar intake is well known and a clear hazard to avoid, but the risks associated with aspartame are far less clear, so I want to know if people close in age to me are making similar decisions.
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望
今 信じあえる
あきらめない 心かさね
永遠を抱きしめて
Doppleganger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2012, 08:16 PM   #4
Emi
Barghest Barghest Barghe-
 
Emi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 12,068
Send a message via Skype™ to Emi
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doppleganger View Post
The topic is about a standardized, bottled carbonated beverage that is naturally or artificially sweetened and treated as a refreshment. It has various acids in its content.

I didn't want to use terms like "soft drink", "soda" or "pop" so as not to invite a value debate as to which nickname is a superior label for the refreshment.

...

I'm super curious about what people are drinking because of the aspartame in diet. I switched off regular sometime two years ago, and with exercise lost ten pounds of weight that's never come back. The risk of chronic sugar intake is well known and a clear hazard to avoid, but the risks associated with aspartame are far less clear, so I want to know if people close in age to me are making similar decisions.
Those "various acids" are all weak acids. One of them is naturally found in cell metabolism. They might slightly worsen acid reflex, but they are not strong enough to cause lasting damage.

Aspartame is a big source of controversy. In face, nearly all artificial sweeteners are. I've heard many things about Splenda, such as it has a chlorine(note the -ine, and not the -ide, the would make it an ion), or that it forms formaldehyde in your system. There just has not been enough testing to prove one thing or another.
__________________
Emi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2012, 08:23 PM   #5
Trepie
Cascade Badge
 
Trepie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bask in my disaster!
Posts: 491
Send a message via AIM to Trepie Send a message via MSN to Trepie
When I was a teenager I drank Pop like water. I also gained a ton of weight, caused damage to my teeth, and ended up with terrible sleep patterns. I couldn't drink diet because aspertame bothers my stomach. Then after college I decided it was too detrimental to continue drinking pop and stopped.

Coming out of college I was 240 pounds. 7 years later I'm 150 pounds.

While I can't say all that weight came off because of my self imposed pop ban, I'm positive it had a big effect.

Today if I try to drink a pop I can hardly finish it and usually regret it afterwards. It makes my stomach feel like shit. Either way I prefer a hot cup of tea or an ice cold glass of water to pop any more. So since I rarely drink it, I always drink regular. So I guess that's what I'm voting for.

Pop is bad M'kay.
Trepie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2012, 08:26 PM   #6
Doppleganger
我が名は勇者王!
 
Doppleganger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Emina Isle
Posts: 14,198
Send a message via AIM to Doppleganger
The funny thing about aldehyde forming is alcohol is well known to go through acetyl-aldehyde through the action of alcohol dehydrogenase, and acetylaldehyde is a much greater carcinogen than whatever artificial sweeneters are purported to go through.

I never heard of Splenda as carcinogenic. In fact, if the chlorination process works completely, sucralose shouldn't stimulate any metabolic activity at all, except maybe the action of stomach acid. The risk comes from consuming enough sucralose products so that sucrose contamination becomes biologically significant.
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望
今 信じあえる
あきらめない 心かさね
永遠を抱きしめて
Doppleganger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2012, 08:29 PM   #7
Talon87
時の彼方へ
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
Well, you should already know from talking with me that this is a bit of a false dichotomy. I think what you're interested to know is whether people would rather risk diabetes or cancer, but you should've simply asked that instead of framing it around soda consumption. Because with soda, there is always the third option of not wanting to risk either and so dropping soda consumption period. I feel like the current question is like this: "Chewing tobacco or cigarettes?" Even if people pick cigarettes, it doesn't mean they would pick them over using neither.

The other problem with the question as framed around soda is that it draws inappropriate attention away from your interest about which of two evils it is that most people pick and instead draws it towards debate about the safety of aspartame. Conventional wisdom indicates that aspartame is safe. However, you have to contend with people's fears, paranoia, and so forth. You don't really want to do that, do you? (If you do, then frame the debate around aspartame's safety instead of around cancer vs. diabetes.)

Anyway, now that it's clear what you're asking ...

I would rather risk Type II diabetes than risk cancer. Type II diabetes can almost always be reversed by lifestyle changes. (Non-skin) cancer, on the hand, you're fuckin' fucked without a healthy helping of good luck and modern medicine. TBH, I feel like this should be a no-brainer. ^^; But if others'd rather risk (non-skin) cancer than risk Type II diabetes, let's hear it.
Talon87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2012, 08:43 PM   #8
Doppleganger
我が名は勇者王!
 
Doppleganger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Emina Isle
Posts: 14,198
Send a message via AIM to Doppleganger
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talon87 View Post
Well, you should already know from talking with me that this is a bit of a false dichotomy. I think what you're interested to know is whether people would rather risk diabetes or cancer, but you should've simply asked that instead of framing it around soda consumption. Because with soda, there is always the third option of not wanting to risk either and so dropping soda consumption period. I feel like the current question is like this: "Chewing tobacco or cigarettes?" Even if people pick cigarettes, it doesn't mean they would pick them over using neither.
No, you misunderstand. The topic is about soda and I was just sarcastically referring to the common perception of the tradeoff between HFC and artificial sweeteners. One is all but guaranteed to eventually give one diabetes. The other might be correlated with cancer. Taken to the limit of exaggeration, and one gets the coy tradeoff I opened with.

I was aware of the abstinence argument, but since I'm a soda drinker, it's fair to say I'm right now more interested in those who rationalize drinking soda rather than those who don't. Definitely, there are health benefits to avoiding anything in excess and anything processed, but right now I'm not in a position to drop it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Talon87 View Post
The other problem with the question as framed around soda is that it draws inappropriate attention away from your interest about which of two evils it is that most people pick and instead draws it towards debate about the safety of aspartame. Conventional wisdom indicates that aspartame is safe. However, you have to contend with people's fears, paranoia, and so forth. You don't really want to do that, do you? (If you do, then frame the debate around aspartame's safety instead of around cancer vs. diabetes.)
Well, since diet v. regular is fundamentally a HFC v. artificial sweetener debate, I don't think that's an avoidable sub-debate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Talon87 View Post
I would rather risk Type II diabetes than risk cancer. Type II diabetes can almost always be reversed by lifestyle changes. (Non-skin) cancer, on the hand, you're fuckin' fucked without a healthy helping of good luck and modern medicine. TBH, I feel like this should be a no-brainer. ^^; But if others'd rather risk (non-skin) cancer than risk Type II diabetes, let's hear it.
What about the concerns of, "I don't want to live if I can't enjoy carbohydrates" versus "I'd going to die but I'll die doing what I love"?
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望
今 信じあえる
あきらめない 心かさね
永遠を抱きしめて
Doppleganger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2012, 08:49 PM   #9
Firewater
Volcano Badge
 
Firewater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,727
Send a message via Skype™ to Firewater
Diet sodas taste horrible. Granted, both of those health issues are bad... but I'd take the Diabetes over cancer anyday.
__________________
PASBL: Record: 61-55-8, 361.5 TP, 174 KO, 2.5 SP, Trainer Level 5
My ASB pokes
Firewater is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2012, 10:12 PM   #10
Rangeet
Foot, meet mouth.
 
Rangeet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Beyond the Wall
Posts: 4,362
Send a message via MSN to Rangeet Send a message via Skype™ to Rangeet
Diet Coke tastes better than regular Coke, but regular Pepsi tastes better than diet Pepsi.

And I happen to be at the stage of my life where I don't care about diabeetus or cancer. Yay!
__________________
Spoiler: show
Rangeet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2012, 10:18 PM   #11
Talon87
時の彼方へ
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doppleganger View Post
What about the concerns of, "I don't want to live if I can't enjoy carbohydrates" versus "I'd going to die but I'll die doing what I love"?
What about them? This philosophical one-megaton landmine you've just tripped goes far beyond cancer and carbonated beverages. This debate pertains to hard recreational drugs like heroin or cocaine. It pertains to driving 100 mph down a city street in a contest with others. It pertains to skydiving. It pertains to having sex with prostitutes. It pertains to a lot of things. What is it, generally speaking? It is the philosophical debate about dying young and hard vs. old and soft. It is the question, "Is a life lived without this risk worth living?" And for each and every risk in life, every last one of us asks and answers this question.

So when you ask me, "Is a life without soda worth living," you're really challenging me to address two questions. The first, whether I err on the side of vivacious risk or mundane caution. Second, specifically whether I value soda so much that I think life is not worth living without it.

To the first, I'll answer that I err on the side of caution. I don't use recreational drugs, I don't drink, etc. I drive and take flights and such, but there the risks are seriously outweighed by the positive and practical benefits of driving or flying to my destinations rather than walking or going by horse. For methamphetamines or heroine, yeaaaaaaaaaah no, the risks and certain negative side effects are so totally not worth the euphoria.

To the second question, I'll answer that I (obviously) do not believe soda to be such a beautiful aspect to life that a life without soda is a life not worth living. And as for if someone else answers that to him such a soda-free life is a life not worth living, I say that that's his call. I can respect that different people have different priorities. I would rather be (say) 75% happy for 90 years. But the druggie is willing to die young if it means achieving 100% psychological euphoria. It's all about priorities.
Talon87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2012, 10:55 PM   #12
Ethereal
Creepy Hand Person
 
Ethereal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,988
Send a message via AIM to Ethereal Send a message via MSN to Ethereal Send a message via Skype™ to Ethereal
I don't drink soda because it just tastes/feels pretty gross. If I had to choose, then I's go for real soda.
__________________
Ethereal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2012, 12:33 AM   #13
Loki
The Path of Now & Forever
 
Loki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,304
Real men get diabetes.
Loki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2012, 02:06 AM   #14
deoxys
Fog Badge
 
deoxys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,513
Considering I'm at risk for Diabetes, I would like to try and avoid that if possible. I drink diet because of the 0 calories, though. It's amazing how much of a difference it can make when you are trying to lose weight or eat healthier.
__________________





MAL - Fizzy Bubbles - Twitter



deoxys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2012, 02:13 AM   #15
Rangeet
Foot, meet mouth.
 
Rangeet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Beyond the Wall
Posts: 4,362
Send a message via MSN to Rangeet Send a message via Skype™ to Rangeet
I'm fairly certain it's impossible for anything to have 0 calories
__________________
Spoiler: show
Rangeet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2012, 02:44 AM   #16
Loki
The Path of Now & Forever
 
Loki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rangeetsuper View Post
I'm fairly certain it's impossible for anything to have 0 calories
I have to disagree. Water has no calories. There are also many vegetables which requires your digestive system to use more calories to digest than they give back to your body, virtually making them zero or even negative calorie foods.

Meanwhile, artificial sweeteners bypass calories due to how they break down IIRC. Some become amino acids instead and thus produce no calories. Unfortunately, this is why a lot of artificial sweeteners can end up becoming carcinogens.
Loki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2012, 02:48 AM   #17
Ethereal
Creepy Hand Person
 
Ethereal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,988
Send a message via AIM to Ethereal Send a message via MSN to Ethereal Send a message via Skype™ to Ethereal
The sweeteners in diet soda are just like having olestra for fats your body can't use.

I also don't recall where I've heard this, but diet soda/artificial sweeteners allegedly can make diabetes worse but changing hour our bodies manage sugar.
__________________
Ethereal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2012, 04:24 AM   #18
Emi
Barghest Barghest Barghe-
 
Emi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 12,068
Send a message via Skype™ to Emi
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
The sweeteners in diet soda are just like having olestra for fats your body can't use.

I also don't recall where I've heard this, but diet soda/artificial sweeteners allegedly can make diabetes worse but changing hour our bodies manage sugar.
This is because your body begins to like sugary foods, so drinking something artificially sweetened is more likely to make you eat something with sugar.

The whole concept behind aspartame and sucralose is that they are indigestible in your body. Aspartame isn't even a sugar compound(it is made of amino acids), and sucralose has chlorine(shudder) bonded to it to prevent enzymes from breaking it down. Both are very unlikely to change anything about how our body manages sugar, just as cellulose(fiber), which is made of sugar units, is unlikely to change anything.
__________________
Emi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2012, 04:38 AM   #19
Rangeet
Foot, meet mouth.
 
Rangeet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Beyond the Wall
Posts: 4,362
Send a message via MSN to Rangeet Send a message via Skype™ to Rangeet
Do you know what else has chlorine bonded to it? Common salt!

Your point still stands more or less, but that was kind of stupid.
__________________
Spoiler: show
Rangeet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2012, 04:44 AM   #20
PikaGod
Marsh Badge
 
PikaGod's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,736
Quote:
Originally Posted by blazeVA View Post
chlorine(note the -ine, and not the -ide, the would make it an ion)
I would just like to pop in and correct this. Chloride doesn't mean that it is an ion, that is just the name that is used when naming compounds that contain chlorine, unless I am misinterpreting what you are saying in which case ignore me.
__________________
Fizzy Bubbles: Karmas
PikaGod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2012, 04:53 AM   #21
Emi
Barghest Barghest Barghe-
 
Emi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 12,068
Send a message via Skype™ to Emi
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rangeetsuper View Post
Do you know what else has chlorine bonded to it? Common salt!

Your point still stands more or less, but that was kind of stupid.
Yes, but that is an ionic compound, not a covalent compound. It wasn't stupid, your just strawmanning. Chlorine is absolutely harmless as an ion. And the fact that you said, "bonded", just shows how little you know about it. It is electric attraction, not electron bonding, that makes the Sodium Chloride compound.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PikaGod View Post
I would just like to pop in and correct this. Chloride doesn't mean that it is an ion, that is just the name that is used when naming compounds that contain chlorine, unless I am misinterpreting what you are saying in which case ignore me.
I meant in terms of an ionic compound versus a covalent compound. Ionic compounds tend to be far less dangerous than covalent compounds with chlorine.
__________________
Emi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2012, 05:16 AM   #22
Rangeet
Foot, meet mouth.
 
Rangeet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Beyond the Wall
Posts: 4,362
Send a message via MSN to Rangeet Send a message via Skype™ to Rangeet
Quote:
Originally Posted by blazeVA View Post
Yes, but that is an ionic compound, not a covalent compound. It wasn't stupid, your just strawmanning. Chlorine is absolutely harmless as an ion. And the fact that you said, "bonded", just shows how little you know about it. It is electric attraction, not electron bonding, that makes the Sodium Chloride compound.
I'm fairly certain an ionic bond is still a bond.

Compare with: James Bond.

In any case, I have no idea what you were trying to say in the first place anyway. Let's just agree that this sweeteners aren't always awesome for the human body and get on with it, eh?
__________________
Spoiler: show
Rangeet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2012, 05:20 AM   #23
Emi
Barghest Barghest Barghe-
 
Emi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 12,068
Send a message via Skype™ to Emi
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rangeetsuper View Post
I'm fairly certain an ionic bond is still a bond.

Compare with: James Bond.

In any case, I have no idea what you were trying to say in the first place anyway. Let's just agree that this sweeteners aren't always awesome for the human body and get on with it, eh?
My whole thing with chlorine was just a personal thing. I meant more along the lines with Ethe's post that both were unlikely to cause any metabolic changes. And nothing is truly awesome for the human body Rangeet, so yeah, I agree.
__________________
Emi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2012, 07:04 AM   #24
deoxys
Fog Badge
 
deoxys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,513
Fuck it, I'm just going to drink water and juice from now on.
deoxys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-2012, 07:05 AM   #25
Rangeet
Foot, meet mouth.
 
Rangeet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Beyond the Wall
Posts: 4,362
Send a message via MSN to Rangeet Send a message via Skype™ to Rangeet
Don't drink juice. Too much sugar in juice.

;)
__________________
Spoiler: show
Rangeet is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Lower Navigation
Go Back   UPNetwork > General Forums > Debate


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

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

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

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:56 AM.


Design By: Miner Skinz.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.