U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Health and Wellness
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 10-26-2011, 06:19 PM
 
Location: where you sip the tea of the breasts of the spinsters of Utica
8,299 posts, read 12,671,218 times
Reputation: 8058

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by stan4 View Post
They have been shown to negatively influence the balance of insulin and leptin.

An analysis of the medical literature on this topic was recently reported in the June 2010 issue of the Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine, with a number of interesting findings about artificial sweeteners and weight.
Do you have a direct link to that? All I could find was an indirect link to an article in a different journal about whether a tax on soft drinks could reduce childhood obesity. It didn't have anything at all about artificial vs natural sweeteners (though I have read about some preliminary studies on that).

Quote:
In this paper, we present the first evidence of whether soft drink
taxes are linked with consumption decisions and weight outcomes of
children and adolescents. ........................Moderator cut: can only quote 1-2 sentences and provide link . It is possible that
there is a tax rate threshold at which consumers' reactions are greatly
magnified, so it is unclear whether consumer substitution patterns
would be sufficiently different with large tax changes to reduce total......full article at
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q...TSN5B7stIEeJUw

Last edited by SouthernBelleInUtah; 11-13-2011 at 11:37 AM..

 
Old 10-26-2011, 07:49 PM
 
Location: In a house
13,253 posts, read 38,305,561 times
Reputation: 20198
Leptin is not indicated as a -cause- of obesity, so the point is moot. See here:
Leptin and Beyond: An Odyssey to the Central Control of Body Weight
From the Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine, March 2010.
Note especially this paragraph:
Quote:
Considering both leptin deficiency and unresponsiveness account for obesity in mouse models, it was expected that leptin deficiency would be a major factor in obese humans. Indeed, low leptin levels were found in a small but significant fraction of obese humans (5 percent to 10 percent) [3]. Moderator cut: 1-2 sentences plus link .
Which translates, loosely, to: "We really aren't sure what role leptin plays in obesity, and it's worth exploring further."

That was published three months before your June article. I'm going to reach a bit and make the assumption that they didn't make any miraculously fast discoveries within the three month period between March and June.

Last edited by SouthernBelleInUtah; 11-13-2011 at 11:37 AM..
 
Old 10-26-2011, 07:55 PM
 
Location: In a house
13,253 posts, read 38,305,561 times
Reputation: 20198
I'm reading the article in question - June 2010:
Gain weight by

Right there at the very top, in the abstract:
Quote:
While people often choose “diet” or “light” products to lose weight, research studies suggest that artificial sweeteners may contribute to weight gain.
Italics and bold is mine. My explanation for that:
The studies don't make any conclusion, and the author is very clear on this throughout his article.
Also, "may contribute" to weight gain doesn't mean "causes" weight gain. The two phrases have -very- different meanings.

Also, having read further down, you would see that the author, in addition to the result of the double-blind test with 55 overweight kids and various other research studies, indicates that it's -the increase in overcompensation in eating habits- that leads to the weight gain and not the sweetener itself.

In short, knowingly using artificial sweetener (such as diet sodas) contributes to consumers fooling themselves into thinking they can eat more fattening foods, because they're having a diet soda. And it is THIS that causes the resulting obesity. In other words, it's mostly psychological. Diet-soda-drinking weight-gainers, are gaining weight, because they are convincing themselves that "one more bite of cheesecake won't hurt, since I'm drinking diet soda."
 
Old 10-26-2011, 08:35 PM
 
34 posts, read 48,332 times
Reputation: 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnonChick View Post
I'm reading the article in question - June 2010:
Gain weight by

Right there at the very top, in the abstract:
Italics and bold is mine. My explanation for that:
The studies don't make any conclusion, and the author is very clear on this throughout his article.
Also, "may contribute" to weight gain doesn't mean "causes" weight gain. The two phrases have -very- different meanings.

Also, having read further down, you would see that the author, in addition to the result of the double-blind test with 55 overweight kids and various other research studies, indicates that it's -the increase in overcompensation in eating habits- that leads to the weight gain and not the sweetener itself.

In short, knowingly using artificial sweetener (such as diet sodas) contributes to consumers fooling themselves into thinking they can eat more fattening foods, because they're having a diet soda. And it is THIS that causes the resulting obesity. In other words, it's mostly psychological. Diet-soda-drinking weight-gainers, are gaining weight, because they are convincing themselves that "one more bite of cheesecake won't hurt, since I'm drinking diet soda."
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not bad assumtion, I never thought of it that way; And it very easy to get fattening foods;
But, Through out my very sick life;
Everyone that I "seen" "drinking" deit pop, was fat, never lost weight, and "didn't" lose weight "until" they STOPPED drinking deit pop;---jacel0---
 
Old 10-26-2011, 09:09 PM
 
Location: where you sip the tea of the breasts of the spinsters of Utica
8,299 posts, read 12,671,218 times
Reputation: 8058
Yes, but it did show more studies than I thought were done on it, Chick. I'd thought it was just one or two studies recently.

Here's the conclusion, with my boldfacing:

Quote:
These pilot investigations are consistent with a revised hypothesis: Sweetness decoupled from caloric content offers partial, but not complete, activation of the food reward pathways. Activation of the hedonic component may contribute to increased appetite. Animals seek food to satisfy the inherent craving for sweetness, even in the absence of energy need. Lack of complete satisfaction, likely because of the failure to activate the postingestive component, further fuels the food seeking behavior. Reduction in reward response may contribute to obesity. Impaired activation of the mesolimbic pathways following milkshake ingestion was observed in obese adolescent girls [45].

Lastly, artificial sweeteners, precisely because they are sweet, encourage sugar craving and sugar dependence. Repeated exposure trains flavor preference [54]. A strong correlation exists between a person’s customary intake of a flavor and his preferred intensity for that flavor. Systematic reduction of dietary salt [55] or fat [56] without any flavorful substitution over the course of several weeks led to a preference for lower levels of those nutrients in the research subjects. In light of these findings, a similar approach might be used to reduce sugar intake. Unsweetening the world’s diet [15] may be the key to reversing the obesity epidemic.
So in my opinion there's enough evidence at this time to discourage artificial sweeteners AS A METHOD OF WEIGHT CONTROL in those who have normal glucose tolerance (especially young people), and who drink large amounts of soda every day. Of course it still wouldn't be appropriate for diabetics to have heavily sugared drinks.

The article concludes that it would be best to cut down on all sweeteners so that the "hedonic pathway" problem doesn't get activated as much, and that might reduce obesity in the general population. Looks like Stan might have been onto something when he said "The problem is that people want too much sweet stuff so they HAVE to ditch the cane sugar in favor of the artificial crap so they don't get nailed with the calories.

The CORRECT answer is to only consume natural sugar and IN SMALL AMOUNTS.

Soda is not for every day. It's a once in a while treat. Not part of this delicious breakfast."
 
Old 10-27-2011, 03:05 AM
 
34 posts, read 48,332 times
Reputation: 13
Woof; -- Made a very good point; Quoted;
Yes, but it did show more studies than I thought were done on it, Chick. I'd thought it was just one or two studies recently.
Here's the conclusion, with my boldfacing:

Quote:
So in my opinion there's enough evidence at this time to discourage artificial sweeteners AS A METHOD OF WEIGHT CONTROL in those who have normal glucose tolerance (especially young people), and who drink large amounts of soda every day. Of course it still wouldn't be appropriate for diabetics to have heavily sugared drinks.

The article concludes that it would be best to cut down on all sweeteners so that the "hedonic pathway" problem doesn't get activated as much, and that might reduce obesity in the general population. Looks like Stan might have been onto something when he said "The problem is that people want too much sweet stuff so they HAVE to ditch the cane sugar in favor of the artificial crap so they don't get nailed with the calories.

The CORRECT answer is to only consume natural sugar and IN SMALL AMOUNTS.

Soda is not for every day. It's a once in a while treat. Not part of this delicious breakfast."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But getting "people" to stop a "habit" -like stop eating sweets- would be very very hard;
They won't even listen to facts; It took you - Woof-, a while, but you finnaly seen the light;
You have come to the same conclusion I stated in the beginning; --THANK YOU--;---jacel0---
 
Old 10-27-2011, 03:24 AM
 
Location: Chicago
38,696 posts, read 91,841,741 times
Reputation: 29574
This thread makes me stabby.
 
Old 10-27-2011, 06:46 AM
 
Location: Texas
44,266 posts, read 55,648,488 times
Reputation: 73370
Look, I don't think anyone can argue that the farther away you stay from processed foods, the better off you are. That includes artificial sweeteners (and the stuff they are in).

Then again, we all take risks in life.
 
Old 10-27-2011, 05:46 PM
 
Location: where you sip the tea of the breasts of the spinsters of Utica
8,299 posts, read 12,671,218 times
Reputation: 8058
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacel0 View Post
....
But getting "people" to stop a "habit" -like stop eating sweets- would be very very hard;
They won't even listen to facts; It took you - Woof-, a while, but you finnaly seen the light;
You have come to the same conclusion I stated in the beginning; --THANK YOU--;---jacel0---
Not really - what you said was that artificial sweeteners are actually poisonous. What I'm saying is that there's some evidence it may be counter-productive for losing weight - I don't believe they are actually toxic in any noticeable way. And for diabetics, sugar would definitely be more toxic than artificial sweeteners.
 
Old 10-27-2011, 06:32 PM
 
Location: Texas
44,266 posts, read 55,648,488 times
Reputation: 73370
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woof View Post
Not really - what you said was that artificial sweeteners are actually poisonous. What I'm saying is that there's some evidence it may be counter-productive for losing weight - I don't believe they are actually toxic in any noticeable way. And for diabetics, sugar would definitely be more toxic than artificial sweeteners.
Again. It is the dose that makes the poison. For anyone.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:30 AM.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top