Sport Sweeteners

[Chillen]

Overall health is key because one cannot approach fitness only from an obesity/overeating perspective.

In the end, when the disposition in our discussions we comprehend, our health is our lady friend.

Health is wealth.

One's health can be taken like a thief in the night, but one's health, is MORE than just eating right; it is one major ingredient in one's biological composite, but not the necessarily the gate keeper.

We attempt to reduce the odds, but we can not totally eliminate them, because of the many variables involved in determining one's health (such as Mr and Mrs biggie: Family history (genes), and many, many other variables), and the fact that one person can process (a type of food) much different (some good and some not so good) as compared to another.

This is one of the reasons why we have research.

Look around, remove the blinds, and you shall see this is true.

Some have said they use Splenda but as I linked above some of the side effects of these sweeteners have been ignored altogether. Splenda (sucralose) caused shrunken thymus glands (up to 40% shrinkage) and enlarged liver and kidneys.

I have not seen "any" "quality"........research that proves this as fact. And, I have read many concerning Splenda.Your post, lists an opinion, but it not linked to any "quality based research". And, this opinion, I disagree with (when referring to artificial sweeteners as sole proprietor leading to fat gain, obesity). Defies logic.

My diet is better than most. I am totally obsessed with eating good. This is why I have been successful in my diet and fitness goals.

But this doesn't mean I do not have risks.

I get a "thorough" physical every 6 months (great physical and biological condition). I haven't been sick (not even a cold) since November-December 2007.

I am doing something right. Splenda has been right there with me......he, he

Maybe it effects me different as compared to someone else?

Possibly? Yes.

Do you eat wheat bread? Do you eat red meat? Do you eat eggs? Are these commercially based?........Do you think these are healthy, when considering the overall processing and distribution of some of these items, and the preservation of some of these items?

Do you think, the fruit you eat, is devoid of chemicals once you wash it?

Not necessarily.......

We are at risk nearly everyday, in the things we choose to eat, and quite frankly isn't deduced to artificial sweeteners.

Just recently, (on TV yesterday) they said that a corn sweetener found in a lot of commercially based food, has been found to have Mercury in it. The manufacturer knew it, but said nothing. Mercury is seriously poisonous.

What foods contain corn sweeteners? THOUSANDS.

Eat Tuna? or Fish......? Mercury a health risk?

I eat more than 6 to 8 cans per week. I eat a variety of fish.

I am not glowing yet.

We are simply at risk everyday, and we can hope to do is limit the odds.

Actually, I do not know why they call it artificial sweeteners. They are after all made from "naturally mixed and matched items from the earth--scientifically blended.......no?". LOL........I know,,,,,,,

Remember, just about everything is so-called natural (comes from the earth), its the mixing and matching of these so called natural items that causes some problems. In addition, not everything that is natural is healthy. Mushrooms........anyone? No, not that kind either!

Sometimes, I need to hold off on the coffee.

Sometimes I do not.




Best wishes

Chillen

 

[blackbeard]

This is one of the reasons why we have research.

Look around, remove the blinds, and you shall see this is true.

....

I have not seen "any" "quality"........research that proves this as fact. And, I have read many concerning Splenda.Your post, lists an opinion, but it not linked to any "quality based research". And, this opinion, I disagree with (when referring to artificial sweeteners as sole proprietor leading to fat gain, obesity). Defies logic.

Take of the blinds you said and research

With the rising popularity of low carbohydrate diets, and increase in sales of sugar-free foods and drinks, is it any wonder that the market for sugar substitutes is becoming more and more competitive? Products such as NutraSweet, Equal, and Sweet’N Low have been on the shelves for years, even though it is widely known that they do pose some health risks.

Many people — American’s at the top of the list -— consume many times more sugar than recommended in their daily diets, so trying to cut down one’s sugar intake is a worthy goal. Of course, it’s common knowledge that the first step to losing weight is reduction of calories, and sugar is pure calories with no nutritional value. But sugar also acts like a drug, like an addiction, and cutting it out of one’s diet is easier said than done. Not only is there a mental dependence, but there is a physical one also. Sugar affects the body in complex ways—producing serotonin in the brain and causing the insulin spike, which is the ‘sugar rush’ that is the real craving, and the reason sugar addiction is so hard to kick.

Splenda is the newest product in a long line of sweeteners and substitutes promising the taste of sugar without the effects of sugar consumption. This can be construed as true in a literal sense. It is true that Splenda has none of the dangerous effects of sugar on the body - no calories, no insulin boost, no cravings. Unfortunately, while many hundreds of times sweeter than sugar, Splenda poses its own unique health risks and dangers, according to many experts. The fact that the FDA approves or doesn’t approve a particular product, really in no way assures it is safe. Powerful lobbies make their living pushing through products that have no business being in the marketplace, while blocking others that pose an economic threat to investment.

Splenda is different from other sweeteners in that it claims to be ‘made from sugar,’ and ‘natural,’ because Splenda is the trade name for sucralose. Sucralose is a synthetic compound, which — without going into too much scientific detail –is basically sugar modified by adding chlorine atoms. Sucralose, incidentally, was discovered in the 1970s by researchers looking to create a new pesticide. Chlorine is added to many products - drinking water, for example - and does not necessarily render the product dangerous. On the other hand, you are ingesting chlorine, which is not advised in large amounts.

The reason Splenda produces no calories, is that the majority passes through the body without being digested. Most studies show that only around 15% of Splenda is actually digested. The worrisome fact for some researchers is that people with healthier GI systems, will absorb more of the Splenda, and thus more of the dangerous chlorine.

The results of the tests done by Splenda’s manufacturers, McNeil Nutritionals, are also quite worrisome. Their studies revealed that test rodents suffered from dangerous side effects such as shrunken thymus glands, and enlarged livers and kidneys … and there were only short term studies. No long term studies were performed before Splenda was approved by the FDA. One could say that the long-term study is being conducted in households and supermarkets across America, with consumers as the test rodents.

I would not dismiss research by the makers of Splenda’s manufacturers, McNeil Nutritionals as "not being quality research". In fact what would be worrying is that we are taking the word for it that splenda is safe from Splenda's own manufactures. Could they have a vested interest and not tell us everything? We saw what happened with tainted milk from China, just because something has been approved for sale does not mean it is 100% safe.

I'm not scare-mongering but only wish to point out research by the manufactures of Splenda. That certainly doesn't look like an "opinion" to me.

 

[Chillen]

Take of the blinds you said and research



I would not dismiss research by the makers of Splenda’s manufacturers, McNeil Nutritionals as "not being quality research". In fact what would be worrying is that we are taking the word for it that splenda is safe from Splenda's own manufactures. Could they have a vested interest and not tell us everything? We saw what happened with tainted milk from China, just because something has been approved for sale does not mean it is 100% safe.

I'm not scare-mongering but only wish to point out research by the manufactures of Splenda. That certainly doesn't look like an "opinion" to me.

I am not easily scared.

And, I have seen this research before, nor does it change my opinion, which is based a far more research than one.

Been around the block a few times, with artificial sweeteners (or what I term the "bad choice set"). I am aware of the risks. Just as I am aware of the risks in the food we eat other than artificial sweeteners. We just attempt to do the best we can with what we are attempting to accomplish.

I choose to be rather obsessed with eating well and according to plan and place in my fitness goal, and choose to include Splenda for the ride, and have been very successful.

And, I agree, the food we eat is not 100% guaranteed to be safe, nor the foods we take for granted as being healthy, as......being healthy.




Best wishes,

Chillen

 

[blackbeard]

I am not easily scared.

And, I have seen this research before, nor does it change my opinion, which is based a far more research than one.

Been around the block a few times, with artificial sweeteners.

And, I agree, the food we eat is not 100% guaranteed to be safe, nor the foods we take for granted as being healthy, as......being healthy.

Again you are misunderstanding my intentions. My intention is not to "scare you", but to present facts, which you had dismissed as "opinions not based on any "quality based research". When you state you "have seen this research before" you are apparently contradicting your earlier statement which read thus ...

This is one of the reasons why we have research.

Look around, remove the blinds, and you shall see this is true.I have not seen "any" "quality"........research that proves this as fact. And, I have read many concerning Splenda.Your post, lists an opinion, but it not linked to any "quality based research".

In fact the manufacturers of Splenda used to claim splenda was made from sugar so it tastes like sugar and they were sued by the U.S. Sugar Association. The U.S. Sugar Association also has a truth about splenda website and lists some interesting research (which people can read up later).

I'm amazed by your dramatic climb-down but then again contradicting yourself when faced with evidence from Splenda's own manufacturers hardly left you any choice did it? I win. I luv this game.

 

[Chillen]

Again you are misunderstanding my intentions. My intention is not to "scare you",

Your intentions were never misunderstood. I am sorry that you mistook my own intentions which creates the foundation of your erroneous misunderstanding.

but to present facts, which you had dismissed as "opinions not based on any "quality based research". When you state you "have seen this research before" you are apparently contradicting your earlier statement which read thus ...

Some research and studies do not represent facts, let this be understood.

Some research are studies revealing information on the subjects/subject matter being studied, and quite simply the jury (on Splenda) is still out. I don't have my flash drive with me (since we are moving to another home this week) or I could flood this thread with a huge amount of information "for and against" Splenda in various research "studies" that were completed.

Additionally, I could pull many long posts I have made on this subject matter just on the forum, but I do not have the time for this. Take that as you will.

Originally Posted by Chillen
This is one of the reasons why we have research.

Look around, remove the blinds, and you shall see this is true. I have not seen "any" "quality"........research that proves this as fact. And, I have read many concerning Splenda.Your post, lists an opinion, but it not linked to any "quality based research".

Additionally, you are taking my posts, out of order to serve your purpose. The quote was based on your post (number 18), and not any subsequent post by you.

Get it right instead of putting it in improper context to serve your purpose (what ever you choose that to be).

They say "researchers" say, but do not disclose whom the researchers are. I am not willing to take their comments as face value, so accept it.

In fact the manufacturers of Splenda used to claim splenda was made from sugar so it tastes like sugar and they were sued by the U.S. Sugar Association. The U.S. Sugar Association also has a truth about splenda website and lists some interesting research (which people can read up later).

This is irrelevant to "what I thought was an intelligent conversation", until I saw your comment below.

I'm amazed by your dramatic climb-down but then again contradicting yourself when faced with evidence from Splenda's own manufacturers hardly left you any choice did it? I win. I luv this game.

Apparently you only partially read, pick and choose, and put in order my posts, to suit your little game. Again, I said there are pros and cons to Splenda, and one has to make a choice among a "bad choice set", and have made many posts, stating this, and to have one make their own personal choice.

I never climbed down, lol. Nor have I contradicted myself.

You win what? I do not get it. What game? I am not playing a game here. Pat yourself on the back, congrats, you earned an unknown personal medal.

I will not involve myself in this childish win/lose type of game. I feel bad because this could have been a rather good conversation displaying the pros/cons of artificial sweeteners.

But, I walk to the podium while a ripped old man at 48 years old, and I still use Splenda as my choice of artificial sweetener, and rather healthy man at that.

I guess this goes against the research.

Have a nice day. Wish you much luck with your personal goals.


Best regards,

Chillen

 

[Waitwhat?]

Hey Chillen- you are NOT an old man at 48 and if that is you in your avatar I think I'll be switching from Sweet and Low to Splenda first thing in the morning.

 

[Chillen]

Hey Chillen- you are NOT an old man at 48 and if that is you in your avatar I think I'll be switching from Sweet and Low to Splenda first thing in the morning.

Hmm......I might get obese over night.......

That tis' me, and while I used Splenda, an artificial sweetener, possibly linked to obesity. I guess I must be an exception to the alleged facts.

Just got back after moving some things in our new home, and done for the evening.

And, just to clarify just for you Wait:

In reference to the "bad choice set" phrase I floated a few times in a few of my recent and not so recent posts. What this simply means is:

If you want something sweet in your diet or crave something sweet, and its not from whole food items such as Fruits, etc, or so-called natural canned products (with no added sugar, but only its natural sweetness) one really only has two commercially and "widely" available choices (realizing whole and granulated natural sugar cane exists):

Refined White Sugar and Artificial Sweeteners (and the so-called natural Stevia)

Refined white sugar, uh, yes......this too was/is linked to the US obesity problem (I guess Artificial sweeteners are not alone in this regard), and many, many, other "claimed" unhealthy problems.

They share a clear relationship.

Therefore, if one consumes Refined White sugar (because they despise Artificial sweeteners) they too are getting "some of the same inherited and potential health hazards" that artificial sweeteners are claimed to have.

Uh, oh....

Therefore, either choice can be bad.

Refined White Sugar is everywhere in our foods. Persons whom are against artificial sweeteners should look into how refined white sugar is processed.

And if they dog one eating artificial sweetener, lets hope they do not choke on there refined white sugar as they roll the dice, "possibly", with their health. Are you telling me not to consume an artificial sweetener, but yet you are throttling down refined white sugar based products in your diet?

If you are leave me be. Kidding of course.

The take home message: is to make the best possible choice, and use in moderation. And use it "smart" within your diet perimeters.

And, between refined white sugar and artificial sweeteners, I chose Splenda between the two--BAD CHOICES, with some of the defining factors being insulin spikes and trying to improve upon leveling out my blood glucose.

In the defining factors (for my personal dietary goals), refined white sugar didn't make the grade, while Splenda did. It was a bad choice either way, but within my dietary goals, Splenda was the better choice. And, I take it knowing the "potential consequences" because I did some research prior to consumption. And, you can bet Insulin Spikes, and blood glucose are on my radar--for a variety of dietary reasons--therefore, refined white sugar was out, and I decided to remove it completely, and get my fructose and other forms of sugar from Fruit and wholesome food items that didn't contain it nor was a hidden ingredient disguised by another name. But this is just me.


I wanted to clarify that for you.


Best wishes

Chillen

 

[acdc554]

Chillen, you're 48?! Based on that avatar i'd say you were in your low 20's. That is simply inspirational. Nice work man.

 

[blackbeard]

Hey Chillen- you are NOT an old man at 48 and if that is you in your avatar I think I'll be switching from Sweet and Low to Splenda first thing in the morning.

How does that pertain to the argument Waitwhat (more than if you said he inhales petrol or swallows soil)? We were discussing the merits/demerits of splenda. Do you have any supporting scientific arguments/research?

 

[calcium]

Why did you say "so-called natural stevia"?

 

[Waitwhat?]

How does that pertain to the argument Waitwhat (more than if you said he inhales petrol or swallows soil)? We were discussing the merits/demerits of splenda. Do you have any supporting scientific arguments/research?

I wasn't following your discussion with Chillen. I didn't know you were arguing either. I needed advice on what sweetner to put in my coffee (sugar, S&L or Splenda). Chillen said that Splenda worked for him so I thought I'd give it a try. That's all of the research that I have or really need. lol

 

[yodasmith]

Personally, I would rather stay away from splenda, but I'll tell ya', the back and forth about splanda was entertaining to read!

I use SweetLeaf Stevia. I like that it has 0 calories, 0 carbs, and a 0 glycemic index! I understand it is a rather pure stevia product...unilke other stevia products that add various sugars and/or sugar alcohols to their product. I guess the SweetLeaf stevia has worked for me because I have lost about 33 pounds, or so since June, even though I didn't start using it until some time in September,... and I don't use it everyday, but I'm sure it helps! I 've even baked with it!

 

[sexanoe]

i try to cycle through sweeteners: use a little sugar, a little splenda and such
but most of all I try to use as little of it as possible

I'm now proudly to the point where the only sugar I get is whats little thats already in the food

btw Chillen banned???? what?!?!