Artificial sweeteners, for and against

[uart]

Are you able to expand on that, ie what is it about phenylalanine that you don't like?

Yeah it's just an amino acid, I don't think it's a problem for most people. Some people however have a specific condition where they can't metabolize it, called Phenylketonuria (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenylketonuria), which is why I think they sometimes warn about its presence on some food labels.

 

[uart]

I don't see a firm distinction between natural and artificial anything, as we are all part of the natural environment,

Yes I understand that. I was really talking about the distinction between compounds that have been present in commonly eaten foods for millennia as opposed to things that, prior to being synthesized in a laboratory in recent decades, had never before been ingested. Acute effects of single large doses aside, the former it seems would be much less likely to have any unforeseen consequences of long term usage than the latter.

 

[ButtterflyLady]

Yes I understand that. I was really talking about the distinction between compounds that have been present in commonly eaten foods for millennia as opposed to things that, prior to being synthesized in a laboratory in recent decades, had never before been ingested. Acute effects of single large doses aside, the former it seems would be much less likely to have any unforeseen consequences of long term usage than the latter.

That makes logical sense. However, there is a problem when people choose medicinal products solely on the basis that they perceive them as natural, while products they perceive as unnatural are rejected, despite much better evidence of effectiveness and safety. Relating this back to sweeteners, I am comfortable using artificial ones because the information that is available to me suggests that they are not harmful enough for me to avoid, while sugar is harmful to me, because it raises my BG and contributes to weight gain. I prefer to consider the options according to adequate evidence rather than whether something is natural or not. I keep an open mind though, so if I see adequate evidence of harm, I'm prepared to change my behaviour.

 

[graj0]

I have a question about aspartame, AKA Nutrasweet (in the UK anyway) and about to change it's name again, possibly because of it's reputation being affected by opinions voiced mainly on the internet. The question is:-

Why was a product that was refused FDA approval for several years suddenly approved when Ronald Reagan became president and appointed a new FDA director (Arthur Hayes Hull) who overrode the recommendations of the FDA's own scientists, granting approval? I know it was only coincidence (was it) that Donald Rumsfeld was the CEO of GD Searle (developer and manufacturer of aspartame) at the time, his career is well documented, as is his vow to "call in his markers" when approval had originally be refused. Rumsfeld became Secretary for Defense and Hull left the FDA under allegations of impropriety, later taking a position with Burston-Marsteller, the chief public relations firm for both Monsanto and GD Searle (Monsanto acquired Searle in '85).

So, nothing to be concerned about there then.

 

[andcol]

Are you able to expand on that, ie what is it about phenylalanine that you don't like?

Yes sure. I seem to snore and have more restless nights (although no longer the sleep apnoea) on the days that I have drinks with it in. I do not snore on those days when I do not drink it. No proof that that is the cause but is too freakingly coincidental for it not to be. My body just seems to not like it or something else that is in the drink along with it (who knows what other **** that put in it). So normally I just try to stick to teas and coffee. Oh BTW drinking it a lunch time doesnt seen to cause an issue so whatever it is has gone out my system by 12 hours

 

[ButtterflyLady]

I have a question about aspartame, AKA Nutrasweet (in the UK anyway) and about to change it's name again, possibly because of it's reputation being affected by opinions voiced mainly on the internet. The question is:-

Why was a product that was refused FDA approval for several years suddenly approved when Ronald Reagan became president and appointed a new FDA director (Arthur Hayes Hull) who overrode the recommendations of the FDA's own scientists, granting approval? I know it was only coincidence (was it) that Donald Rumsfeld was the CEO of GD Searle (developer and manufacturer of aspartame) at the time, his career is well documented, as is his vow to "call in his markers" when approval had originally be refused. Rumsfeld became Secretary for Defense and Hull left the FDA under allegations of impropriety, later taking a position with Burston-Marsteller, the chief public relations firm for both Monsanto and GD Searle (Monsanto acquired Searle in '85).

So, nothing to be concerned about there then.

Do you have a link to the source of that info? Because I'm skeptical about everything until I consider its source. Even if the assertions are true, I'm not sure what relevance they have, because I prefer to base my decisions on scientific studies.

 

[noblehead]

Hi Noblehead,
Funny you mention this stuff.. & the barley version too.? (I was going to bring this up at some point?)
"Real fruit in every drop" on the front of the packaging.
We keep it in the house. My wife likes it as a "night drink" by the bed. But I hardly drink it anymore..
I feel it raises my BG slightly.? Especially since sorting my basal..

Probably drink 3-4 glasses a day of the Robinson's No Added Sugar range @Jaylee, the one I like the best is the Orange & Mango flavour which has 0.7g of carbs per 100ml of concentrate, can't say I've noticed any bg rise.

 

[Jaylee]

Probably drink 3-4 glasses a day of the Robinson's No Added Sugar range @Jaylee, the one I like the best is the Orange & Mango flavour which has 0.7g of carbs per 100ml of concentrate, can't say I've noticed any bg rise.

Orange & mango. I know the one!

I'm more inclined to opt for pink grapefruit.. More tart to my taste.
Normally have a couple of glasses during the course of home maintenance or a glug after a hot day coming in from work!
Blood wise. It seems to stabilise or slow down what would/could have been a drop, till I manage to eat..?

 

[Jaylee]

That makes logical sense. However, there is a problem when people choose medicinal products solely on the basis that they perceive them as natural, while products they perceive as unnatural are rejected, despite much better evidence of effectiveness and safety. Relating this back to sweeteners, I am comfortable using artificial ones because the information that is available to me suggests that they are not harmful enough for me to avoid, while sugar is harmful to me, because it raises my BG and contributes to weight gain. I prefer to consider the options according to adequate evidence rather than whether something is natural or not. I keep an open mind though, so if I see adequate evidence of harm, I'm prepared to change my behaviour.

Hi,

Don't take this the wrong way.. (You know I love yer contributions.)
But aren't you just looking for a way to "justify" a compound that in essence fools the taste buds into making something more agreeable & legitimate regarding the sweetness..?
With out going into the "bad press" sugar has these days. But it's just substituting one thing for another..

I have seen similar issues & debates on "legal highs"...

I also hope you can chuckle at my dark sense of irony when I pull you up on an earlier quote. It's actually "manners maketh man."
The quote you mentioned originally in Latin referencing toxicology goes back even further, translates differently. ''sola dosis facit venenum''.

 

[graj0]

Do you have a link to the source of that info?

Apart from the fact that when I met my wife in the early 80s, she and at least 10 of our joint friends all worked for G.D. Searle while all of this was going on, so I remember it from then. I remember them all being so happy when approval was obtained because they were surprised but delighted that the financial future of G.D. Searle was assured. There's a good article on the history of it's development written by Arthur M. Evangelista, a former FDA Investigator, but it's worth having a Google. You can decide which bits to believe and which bits to ignore. Obviously key words should include things like "aspartame", "Reagan", "FDA", "Rumsfeld" and in whatever combination takes your fancy.

 

[Teddysmum]

Orange & mango. I know the one!

I'm more inclined to opt for pink grapefruit.. More tart to my taste.
Normally have a couple of glasses during the course of home maintenance or a glug after a hot day coming in from work!
Blood wise. It seems to stabilise or slow down what would/could have been a drop, till I manage to eat..?

You shouldn't have grapefruit, if on statins.

 

[Jaylee]

You shouldn't have grapefruit, if on statins.

Thanks for the tip.! But I'm not on statins...
Though to be fair, I had heard something like that about cranberries too?

Just insulin & the associated hardware & paraphernalia to administer & monitor the effects/performance of the aforementioned.

 

[Dizz]

You shouldn't have grapefruit, if on statins.

I know you shouldn't have it on some blood pressure meds.

 

[hankjam]

Never been keen on art sweeteners and when diagnosed just adapted to black tea and coffee and lots of water, with some red wine and neat gin, as a tippling drink rather than GnT. Used to bake a lot but not really done much since and not really interested in trying the art sweeteners.... yet.

 

[ButtterflyLady]

Apart from the fact that when I met my wife in the early 80s, she and at least 10 of our joint friends all worked for G.D. Searle while all of this was going on, so I remember it from then. I remember them all being so happy when approval was obtained because they were surprised but delighted that the financial future of G.D. Searle was assured. There's a good article on the history of it's development written by Arthur M. Evangelista, a former FDA Investigator, but it's worth having a Google. You can decide which bits to believe and which bits to ignore. Obviously key words should include things like "aspartame", "Reagan", "FDA", "Rumsfeld" and in whatever combination takes your fancy.

So, no link then.

 

[mrspuddleduck]

@CatLadyNZ, just wanted to say what a brilliant thread! I am so confused about artificial sweeteners, hate the taste of them all, avoid them except for an occasional DC, but want to find something to use in baking that's safe(ish) and palettable! Thank you! Sue xx

 

[Jaylee]

This is a great thread!

I'm glad the subject has been brought up.
The anecdotal referencing the use of this stuff alone has convinced me I did the "right thing" leaving it off the shopping list....

 

[graj0]

You shouldn't have grapefruit, if on statins.

Or should it be "You shouldn't have statins if on grapefruit". Slightly tongue in cheek, but on a more serious note, something I found intriguing is what the FDA have to say.

"The major risk of mixing statins and grapefruit is increasing the side effects of the drugs. The FDA reports that this could put you at risk for muscle breakdown, liver damage and kidney failure.


Statins also carry other risks, such as digestive problems, increased blood sugar and neurological side effects, including confusion and memory loss, according to Mayo Clinic. Women and people over 65 years old are at a higher risk of developing side effects from statins."

So, if you are at risk of increasing the side effects of taking statins just by eating grapefruit, then these are side effect that the FDA accept are present even if you never look at a grapefruit again.

I think I like my first statement, don't take statins if you like grapefruit.

Oh, and BTW, grapefruit seems to increase the side effects of several drugs

 

[graj0]

So, no link then.

There are many and I'm inviting you to look at them by using the keywords I've suggested, it's not difficult. That way, as I have already said, you can make your own mind up whether you believe the link or not. I have suggested an article written by Arthur M. Evangelista called "History of Aspartame", that's a good place to start. If you then Google his name and the word "aspartame" there is a page with loads of links, the very first link contains further links to other articles that he has written.

 

[ButtterflyLady]

There are many and I'm inviting you to look at them by using the keywords I've suggested, it's not difficult. That way, as I have already said, you can make your own mind up whether you believe the link or not. I have suggested an article written by Arthur M. Evangelista called "History of Aspartame", that's a good place to start. If you then Google his name and the word "aspartame" there is a page with loads of links, the very first link contains further links to other articles that he has written.

I'm not going to bother googling for the evidence that should be provided to back up a claim that's made. The burden of proof is on the one making the claim. I find claims about the danger of artificial sweeteners to be conspiracy-theory based.

This is just a general comment, not directed at anyone in particular: if anyone wants to convince me that these products really are dangerous to the population as a whole, when taken at the recommended/usual amounts, then they would need to provide links to scientific literature of a sufficient standard. Because I have read articles referring to studies that meet this standard, and they have found that products like aspartame are safe (for everyone except people with phenylketonuria). For example:
https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/are-artificial-sweeteners-safe/

Another source with extensive information about aspartame is this relatively recent letter from the FDA. I think if the FDA had wrongly approved it in 1981, they've had plenty of time to rectify that:
http://www.snopes.com/medical/toxins/aspartame.asp

Aspartame is one of the most frequently searched topics on snopes.com. When snopes says claims that a product represents widespread danger are unfounded, then I find that convincing. They have no interest in being fooled.