|
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 |
|
Thread Tools |
11-23-2012, 07:34 PM | #1 |
我が名は勇者王!
|
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 |
11-23-2012, 07:54 PM | #2 |
時の彼方へ
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.
__________________
|
11-23-2012, 08:12 PM | #3 |
我が名は勇者王!
|
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 |
11-23-2012, 08:16 PM | #4 | |
Barghest Barghest Barghe-
|
Quote:
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.
__________________
|
|
11-23-2012, 08:23 PM | #5 |
Cascade Badge
|
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. |
11-23-2012, 08:26 PM | #6 |
我が名は勇者王!
|
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 |
11-23-2012, 08:29 PM | #7 |
時の彼方へ
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.
__________________
|
11-23-2012, 08:43 PM | #8 | |||
我が名は勇者王!
|
Quote:
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:
Quote:
__________________
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 |
|||
11-23-2012, 08:49 PM | #9 |
Volcano Badge
|
Diet sodas taste horrible. Granted, both of those health issues are bad... but I'd take the Diabetes over cancer anyday.
|
11-23-2012, 10:18 PM | #11 | |
時の彼方へ
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
|
Quote:
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.
__________________
|
|
11-24-2012, 12:33 AM | #13 |
The Path of Now & Forever
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,304
|
Real men get diabetes.
|
11-24-2012, 02:06 AM | #14 |
Fog Badge
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.
__________________
|
11-24-2012, 02:44 AM | #16 | |
The Path of Now & Forever
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,304
|
Quote:
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. |
|
11-24-2012, 02:48 AM | #17 |
Creepy Hand Person
|
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. |
11-24-2012, 04:24 AM | #18 | |
Barghest Barghest Barghe-
|
Quote:
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.
__________________
|
|
11-24-2012, 04:44 AM | #20 |
Marsh Badge
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,736
|
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
|
11-24-2012, 04:53 AM | #21 | |
Barghest Barghest Barghe-
|
Quote:
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.
__________________
|
|
11-24-2012, 05:16 AM | #22 | |
Foot, meet mouth.
|
Quote:
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 |
|
11-24-2012, 05:20 AM | #23 | |
Barghest Barghest Barghe-
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
11-24-2012, 07:04 AM | #24 |
Fog Badge
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,513
|
Fuck it, I'm just going to drink water and juice from now on.
|
Lower Navigation | ||||||
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
|
|