MAHA!

[WrestlingRasta]

2 minutes ago, Caveira said:

Also.  You’re the one who seems to be outraged a bit.  It’s just selective to your topics. 

Not outraged at all, just thought you would be man enough to understand making fun of hospitalized little kids is a bit of a low blow.  I was wrong.  It happens. Enjoy 

Edited 15 hours ago by WrestlingRasta

[JimmySpeaks]

Someone pretending to be on the high road again.  

[1032004]

Chances Kyle Dake drinks raw milk?  I’m going 100% (although at least he’s healthy)

Edited 15 hours ago by 1032004

[WrestlingRasta]

Six more states add snap waivers (WV, Florida, Colorado, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas). This too is a very good move by DHHS. 

[1032004]

10 hours ago, WrestlingRasta said:

Six more states add snap waivers (WV, Florida, Colorado, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas). This too is a very good move by DHHS. 

Good idea, but who is deciding what’s “healthy”?

[1032004]

For example, going back to the Diet Soda debate, it looks like Texas is including artificial sweeteners in its items that will be excluded.

[WrestlingRasta]

14 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

Good idea, but who is deciding what’s “healthy”?

People with knowledge, years of experience and extensive research.

[WrestlingRasta]

7 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

For example, going back to the Diet Soda debate, it looks like Texas is including artificial sweeteners in its items that will be excluded.

Artificial sweetners are not excluded.   The ban in Texas will be on artificial sweeteners and/or more than five grams of sugar.    Why determine the artificial sweeteners are unhealthy?   Well let's break that down, starting with the very first word.......artificial

[1032004]

4 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

Artificial sweetners are not excluded.   The ban in Texas will be on artificial sweeteners and/or more than five grams of sugar.    Why determine the artificial sweeteners are unhealthy?   Well let's break that down, starting with the very first word.......artificial

By “excluded,” I meant “banned.”

I’m still not sure if the science on artificial sweeteners is really settled.  Again, if you have a study or two you’d like to share I’d love to read them.  

 

[WrestlingRasta]

5 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

By “excluded,” I meant “banned.”

I’m still not sure if the science on artificial sweeteners is really settled.  Again, if you have a study or two you’d like to share I’d love to read them.  

 

I don't have any filed away at the click of a button, but there are methods to search if one is interested. But in order to get down to the truth of things, one would have to conduct such a search with subjectivity, with the intent to learn, not search with the intent of confirmation bias.   As we all know, it's not difficult to produce a study that yields the results that we want, so one has to go about it with scrutiny of what they are reading. 

Edited 2 hours ago by WrestlingRasta

[WrestlingRasta]

But getting back to common sense.....maybe the initiative is to cut out, or drastically reduce, the intake of sodas across the board....diet, regular, sweeteners that are chemicals, sweeteners that are refined, or even sweeteners that are raw and natural, and replace them with.....I don't know.....water?

[1032004]

52 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

I don't have any filed away at the click of a button, but there are methods to search if one is interested. But in order to get down to the truth of things, one would have to conduct such a search with subjectivity, with the intent to learn, not search with the intent of confirmation bias.   As we all know, it's not difficult to produce a study that yields the results that we want, so one has to go about it with scrutiny of what they are reading. 

Top responses I get for a simple search for “are artificial sweeteners unhealthy”

1. https://health.clevelandclinic.org/whats-worse-sugar-or-artificial-sweetener
 

This points out some of the theories people say they’re bad, but doesn’t really have data to back it up.  And at least admits it doesn’t, as people often point to studies saying things like “artificial sweeteners are ASSOCIATED with some negative health outcomes,” but good chance that’s more likely because people that eat/drink artificial sweeteners probably eat a lot of other crap too.

A doctor quoted in this article also makes the claim that artificial sweeteners lead to overeating.  This has not been proven, and in fact numerous studies show consuming artificial sweeteners IN PLACE OF sugar actually results in weight loss (some studies even show weight loss compared to water).

2. https://www.health.com/best-and-worst-artificial-sweeteners-7974926
 

quote:

Artificial sweeteners can be a healthy way to add sweetness without sugar, but not all sugar substitutes are created equal. Some artificial sweeteners offer sweetness without introducing unwanted or potentially unhealthy chemicals or additives into your diet.

Still, some studies link artificial sweeteners to an increased risk of health conditions like diabetes and heart disease.12 However, research is mixed, and some evidence points to the potential benefits, even for people at risk of these conditions. For example, people with diabetes might use artificial sweeteners to help manage their blood sugars. Others might use them for dental health or weight loss. Still, some nonnutritive substitutes are better than others.3

 

I don’t know if I’d go as far as saying they’re “healthy,” but I feel pretty confident in saying the jury is still out on them being “unhealthy.”

 

3. https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/nutrition-and-healthy-eating/in-depth/artificial-sweeteners/art-20046936
 

In general, artificial sweeteners are safe in limited amounts for healthy people, including pregnant people. But limit or cut out sugar substitutes:

• If you're living with a rare genetic disease called phenylketonuria. Foods and drinks with aspartame can lead to serious health problems.
• If you have a bowel disease. Using sugar substitutes might make your symptoms flare up

Health benefits linked to sugar substitutes

If you replace added sugar with sugar substitutes, it could lower your risk of getting tooth decay and cavities.

Sugar substitutes also don't raise the level of sugar in the blood.

For adults and children with overweight or obesity, sugar substitutes also might help manage weight in the short term. That's because sugar substitutes often are low in calories or have no calories. But it's not clear whether sugar substitutes can help people manage their weight over the long term.

 

Over time, it's most important to eat a healthy diet and get exercise.

 

Health concerns linked to sugar substitutes

Health agencies have clarified that sugar substitutes do not cause serious health problems.

Sugar substitutes also are not linked to a higher risk of cancer in people. Studies dating back to the 1970s linked the artificial sweetener saccharin to bladder cancer in rats. Since then, research has shown that those findings don't apply to people.

 

Some research on long-term, daily use of artificial sweeteners suggests a link to a higher risk of stroke, heart disease and death overall. But other things people do, or healthy habits that people don't do, may be the cause of the higher risk.

Other research is looking at long-term use of sugar substitutes and the gut. Many focus on how the gut and brain communicate. Researchers are checking to see if sugar substitutes affect cravings for sweets, the way people feel hunger and how the body manages blood sugar.

Sugar alcohols, stevia and luo han guo can cause bloating, gas and diarrhea. The amount of sugar alcohol that causes these symptoms varies from person to person.

In general, it is safest to take in small amounts of sugar substitutes. And it's best to use sugar substitutes for a short time, or just every once in a while. So try to cut back if you use them a few times a day.

 

The bottom line

Artificial sweeteners can be a short-term way to help some people lessen their use of sugar and lose or manage weight. In general, sugar substitutes are safe for healthy adults.

But be aware of how sugar substitutes affect your food and drink choices. These ingredients may get your tastebuds used to sweetness. And that can make drinking enough water a challenge.

 

 

Mayo Clinic is pretty reputable, no?  They don’t seem to agree that “artificial sweeteners are bad, it’s common sense.”

 

 

This was also one of the top results and I thought provided a good summary of what my current understanding is, with references:

https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/artificial-sweeteners-good-or-bad#bottom-line
 

Overall, the use of artificial sweeteners poses few risks and may even have benefits for weight loss, blood sugar management, and dental health.

These sweeteners are especially beneficial if you use them to decrease the amount of added sugar in your diet.

That said, the likelihood of negative effects can vary by individual and depend on the type of artificial sweetener consumed.

Some people may feel bad or experience negative effects after consuming artificial sweeteners, even though they are safe and well tolerated by most people.

[WrestlingRasta]

8 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

Top responses I get for a simple search for “are artificial sweeteners unhealthy”

1. https://health.clevelandclinic.org/whats-worse-sugar-or-artificial-sweetener
 

This points out some of the theories people say they’re bad, but doesn’t really have data to back it up.  And at least admits it doesn’t, as people often point to studies saying things like “artificial sweeteners are ASSOCIATED with some negative health outcomes,” but good chance that’s more likely because people that eat/drink artificial sweeteners probably eat a lot of other crap too.

A doctor quoted in this article also makes the claim that artificial sweeteners lead to overeating.  This has not been proven, and in fact numerous studies show consuming artificial sweeteners IN PLACE OF sugar actually results in weight loss (some studies even show weight loss compared to water).

2. https://www.health.com/best-and-worst-artificial-sweeteners-7974926
 

quote:

Artificial sweeteners can be a healthy way to add sweetness without sugar, but not all sugar substitutes are created equal. Some artificial sweeteners offer sweetness without introducing unwanted or potentially unhealthy chemicals or additives into your diet.

Still, some studies link artificial sweeteners to an increased risk of health conditions like diabetes and heart disease.12 However, research is mixed, and some evidence points to the potential benefits, even for people at risk of these conditions. For example, people with diabetes might use artificial sweeteners to help manage their blood sugars. Others might use them for dental health or weight loss. Still, some nonnutritive substitutes are better than others.3

 

I don’t know if I’d go as far as saying they’re “healthy,” but I feel pretty confident in saying the jury is still out on them being “unhealthy.”

 

3. https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/nutrition-and-healthy-eating/in-depth/artificial-sweeteners/art-20046936
 

In general, artificial sweeteners are safe in limited amounts for healthy people, including pregnant people. But limit or cut out sugar substitutes:

• If you're living with a rare genetic disease called phenylketonuria. Foods and drinks with aspartame can lead to serious health problems.
• If you have a bowel disease. Using sugar substitutes might make your symptoms flare up

Health benefits linked to sugar substitutes

If you replace added sugar with sugar substitutes, it could lower your risk of getting tooth decay and cavities.

Sugar substitutes also don't raise the level of sugar in the blood.

For adults and children with overweight or obesity, sugar substitutes also might help manage weight in the short term. That's because sugar substitutes often are low in calories or have no calories. But it's not clear whether sugar substitutes can help people manage their weight over the long term.

 

Over time, it's most important to eat a healthy diet and get exercise.

 

Health concerns linked to sugar substitutes

Health agencies have clarified that sugar substitutes do not cause serious health problems.

Sugar substitutes also are not linked to a higher risk of cancer in people. Studies dating back to the 1970s linked the artificial sweetener saccharin to bladder cancer in rats. Since then, research has shown that those findings don't apply to people.

 

Some research on long-term, daily use of artificial sweeteners suggests a link to a higher risk of stroke, heart disease and death overall. But other things people do, or healthy habits that people don't do, may be the cause of the higher risk.

Other research is looking at long-term use of sugar substitutes and the gut. Many focus on how the gut and brain communicate. Researchers are checking to see if sugar substitutes affect cravings for sweets, the way people feel hunger and how the body manages blood sugar.

Sugar alcohols, stevia and luo han guo can cause bloating, gas and diarrhea. The amount of sugar alcohol that causes these symptoms varies from person to person.

In general, it is safest to take in small amounts of sugar substitutes. And it's best to use sugar substitutes for a short time, or just every once in a while. So try to cut back if you use them a few times a day.

 

The bottom line

Artificial sweeteners can be a short-term way to help some people lessen their use of sugar and lose or manage weight. In general, sugar substitutes are safe for healthy adults.

But be aware of how sugar substitutes affect your food and drink choices. These ingredients may get your tastebuds used to sweetness. And that can make drinking enough water a challenge.

 

 

Mayo Clinic is pretty reputable, no?  They don’t seem to agree that “artificial sweeteners are bad, it’s common sense.”

 

 

This was also one of the top results and I thought provided a good summary of what my current understanding is, with references:

https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/artificial-sweeteners-good-or-bad#bottom-line
 

 

Overall, the use of artificial sweeteners poses few risks and may even have benefits for weight loss, blood sugar management, and dental health.

These sweeteners are especially beneficial if you use them to decrease the amount of added sugar in your diet.

That said, the likelihood of negative effects can vary by individual and depend on the type of artificial sweetener consumed.

Some people may feel bad or experience negative effects after consuming artificial sweeteners, even though they are safe and well tolerated by most people.

Those are the 'top' responses you get?  You said yourself the science is unsettled but those just happen to be the 'top' responses you get?   Okay I'll do a little trial, type in the exact same words, and if those are the top responses I get I will be sure to let you know.  

[1032004]

10 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

Those are the 'top' responses you get?  You said yourself the science is unsettled but those just happen to be the 'top' responses you get?   Okay I'll do a little trial, type in the exact same words, and if those are the top responses I get I will be sure to let you know.  

The first 3 were the top 3, the last one was #6.   I do not use Google as my preferred search engine btw

edit: and yes I would say those links are pretty consistent with the science being unsettled

Edited 1 hour ago by 1032004

[Caveira]

10 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

Those are the 'top' responses you get?  You said yourself the science is unsettled but those just happen to be the 'top' responses you get?   Okay I'll do a little trial, type in the exact same words, and if those are the top responses I get I will be sure to let you know.  

Lovely trial.  My first response is:

on iPhone 

Harvard so diff response.    Tailored answers to your identity on your device 

on work Mac device 

Mayo Clinic is first answer 

Edited 1 hour ago by Caveira

[1032004]

5 minutes ago, Caveira said:

Lovely trial.  My first response is:

on iPhone 

Harvard so diff response.    Tailored answers to your identity on your device 

on work Mac device 

Mayo Clinic is first answer 

I’m confused, is he saying that the Cleveland Clinic, Health.com, and the Mayo Clinic are somehow biased to my prior opinions?

[WrestlingRasta]

1. "mixed evidence" from CoPilot

2. from the cleveland clinic, discussing research connecting artificial sweeteners to diabetes, hypertension, metabolic syndrome, mood disorders, mental stress, autism, early menstruation, and other effects

3. From Health.com...not so much a dive into whether or not they are bad for you but rather list the top 10 sweeteners and a little description of each.   In each, there is a segment on 'research has triggered concerns' in some form or another

4. From the Mayo Clinic, the same article you posted.  You either didn't read all the way through, or you cherry picked the hell out of it.  Here are a few other excerpts: Some research on long-term, daily use of artificial sweeteners suggests a link to a higher risk of stroke, heart disease and death overall.

 

• If you're living with a rare genetic disease called phenylketonuria. Foods and drinks with aspartame can lead to serious health problems.
• If you have a bowel disease. Using sugar substitutes might make your symptoms flare up.

And then finally, their "bottom line"

Artificial sweeteners can be a short-term way to help some people lessen their use of sugar and lose or manage weight. In general, sugar substitutes are safe for healthy adults.

But be aware of how sugar substitutes affect your food and drink choices. These ingredients may get your tastebuds used to sweetness. And that can make drinking enough water a challenge.

 

Products made with sugar substitutes also may give you the wrong message about processed foods. A snack labeled low sugar or no sugar may not be the most nutritious choice. Whole foods, such as fruits and vegetables, usually have the best mix of nutrients for the body.

5. The healthline article you posted, and again cherry picked the hell out of.   For example, you didn't include the section that talked about links to depression and seizures, or the section that talked about detoriating gut health which leads to weight gain, poor blood sugar control, metabolic syndrome, weakened immune system. 

 

So my point of posting all of this, is not to convince you personally that artificial sweeteners are not a good choice, but to....well I will just go back to what I said above..."But in order to get down to the truth of things, one would have to conduct such a search with subjectivity, with the intent to learn, not search with the intent of confirmation bias."  (which would include cherry picking information out of articles you look up to only focus on the information that would provide that confirmation bias) 

 

 

[Caveira]

Just now, WrestlingRasta said:

CoPilot

Who’s copilot?   Azure?  Just curious a lot of these helper ai tools are called copilot these days 

[WrestlingRasta]

1 minute ago, Caveira said:

Who’s copilot?   Azure?  Just curious a lot of these helper ai tools are called copilot these days 

Not sure honestly.  I am not too astute with all of this AI stuff.   Just the first thing that popped up. (I closed out the page) 

[Caveira]

18 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

I’m confused, is he saying that the Cleveland Clinic, Health.com, and the Mayo Clinic are somehow biased to my prior opinions?

Crap my answer was deleted so re writing it.  
 

im saying that search engines try to figure out who you are.  Not necessarily by name but your preferences.     My work device and my personal device produced diff results for the same question for that reason.  I didn’t post the articles because I didn’t consider the content as part of the experiment just that the top answers were different.    I liked that part of the experiment.   
 

Tis why guys like rv may say …. That stuff is or isn’t on my feed.   That’s partial reality that they know he prefers left leaning stuff….

Consider using incognito mode on your browser and disable any cookies or other stuff to try to minimize this behavior.    
 

it’s also why people think their “phones” listen to them.   Something like a
 

work lap top with:

work email and personal email 

a personal iPhone with 

work email and personal email + let’s say work contact phone #s etc.   

they tie that shyte together pretty easily. 

Public Wi-Fi + geo special can detect you standing in Walgreens looking in an aisle with pregnancy tests etc….  And hmmmmm.   What can I market to this dude based on that.   What ads on Facebook should I show you if you visited an ED site or whatever.  
 

all of that is tracked and sold by tech companies.  

 

[1032004]

11 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

1. "mixed evidence" from CoPilot

2. from the cleveland clinic, discussing research connecting artificial sweeteners to diabetes, hypertension, metabolic syndrome, mood disorders, mental stress, autism, early menstruation, and other effects

3. From Health.com...not so much a dive into whether or not they are bad for you but rather list the top 10 sweeteners and a little description of each.   In each, there is a segment on 'research has triggered concerns' in some form or another

4. From the Mayo Clinic, the same article you posted.  You either didn't read all the way through, or you cherry picked the hell out of it.  Here are a few other excerpts: Some research on long-term, daily use of artificial sweeteners suggests a link to a higher risk of stroke, heart disease and death overall.

 

• If you're living with a rare genetic disease called phenylketonuria. Foods and drinks with aspartame can lead to serious health problems.
• If you have a bowel disease. Using sugar substitutes might make your symptoms flare up.

And then finally, their "bottom line"

Artificial sweeteners can be a short-term way to help some people lessen their use of sugar and lose or manage weight. In general, sugar substitutes are safe for healthy adults.

But be aware of how sugar substitutes affect your food and drink choices. These ingredients may get your tastebuds used to sweetness. And that can make drinking enough water a challenge.

 

Products made with sugar substitutes also may give you the wrong message about processed foods. A snack labeled low sugar or no sugar may not be the most nutritious choice. Whole foods, such as fruits and vegetables, usually have the best mix of nutrients for the body.

5. The healthline article you posted, and again cherry picked the hell out of.   For example, you didn't include the section that talked about links to depression and seizures, or the section that talked about detoriating gut health which leads to weight gain, poor blood sugar control, metabolic syndrome, weakened immune system. 

 

So my point of posting all of this, is not to convince you personally that artificial sweeteners are not a good choice, but to....well I will just go back to what I said above..."But in order to get down to the truth of things, one would have to conduct such a search with subjectivity, with the intent to learn, not search with the intent of confirmation bias."  (which would include cherry picking information out of articles you look up to only focus on the information that would provide that confirmation bias) 

 

 

So looks like your results were pretty much the same as mine?

I wasn’t cherry picking, I was summarizing.  I included some of the comments claiming they’re bad.  In fact, some of the “other excerpts” from the Mayo Clinic article you posted and claimed I cherry-picked, I had already posted…

So, it looks like you’re the one trying to confirm your bias.  You keep saying it’s “common sense” that they’re bad, I’m literally saying I’m undecided and am willing to change my mind, and have asked you multiple times to provide something to back up your opinion and you have not.  These articles certainly do not, they call out some of the reasons why people think they’re bad, but also call out reasons people think they’re not bad.

[1032004]

Just now, Caveira said:

Crap my answer was deleted so re writing it.  
 

im saying that search engines try to figure out who you are.  Not necessarily by name but your preferences.     My work device and my personal device produced diff results for the same question for that reason.  I didn’t post the articles because I didn’t consider the content as part of the experiment just that the top answers were different.    I liked that part of the experiment.   
 

Tis why guys like rv may say …. That stuff is or isn’t on my feed.   That’s partial reality that they know he prefers left leaning stuff….

Consider using incognito mode on your browser and disable any cookies or other stuff to try to minimize this behavior.    
 

it’s also why people think their “phones” listen to them.   Something like a
 

work lap top with:

work email and personal email 

a personal iPhone with 

work email and personal email + let’s say work contact phone #s etc.   

they tie that shyte together pretty easily. 

Public Wi-Fi + geo special can detect you standing in Walgreens looking in an aisle with pregnancy tests etc….  And hmmmmm.   What can I market to this dude based on that.   What ads on Facebook should I show you if you visited an ED site or whatever.  
 

all of that is tracked and sold by tech companies.  

 

I use DuckDuckGo which doesn’t save your searches 

[1032004]

18 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

 

 

Products made with sugar substitutes also may give you the wrong message about processed foods. A snack labeled low sugar or no sugar may not be the most nutritious choice. Whole foods, such as fruits and vegetables, usually have the best mix of nutrients for the body.

 

This is literally the only excerpt from the Mayo Clinic article that you posted that I didn’t.  Fruits and vegetables are better than products with artificial sweeteners?  No way!

The argument for artificial sweeteners is that they can be a good replacement for sugar.  Notably, as I called out when linking the articles, most of the research that “associates” artificial sweeteners with negative outcomes, doesn’t compare it to sugar.  When it is compared to sugar, it has actually often been found in multiple studies to provide positive outcomes.

[WrestlingRasta]

5 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

So, it looks like you’re the one trying to confirm your bias.  You keep saying it’s “common sense” that they’re bad, I’m literally saying I’m undecided and am willing to change my mind, and have asked you multiple times to provide something to back up your opinion and you have not.  

Not at all accurate:

1) I specifically said I am not trying to convince you of anything, but merely talking at this point about doing the research subjectively. I will acknowledge you quoted more from the Mayo article than I originally realized, went back and looked and will correct that.  
 

2) “Common sense”.  Artificial, manufactured food vs natural raw whole food. I don’t know what you want me to provide that shows common sense. 
 

3) I have listed more than “common sense” as for the basis of my opinion. I also listed years, decades actually, of taking the subject very very seriously and studying it as such, I don’t think I can go back and find the material I have studied over the last 30 some years to provide for you.  I also stated personal experience.  I’m not sure what you would like me to provide in that sense.  I mean, I have a picture from kayaking last weekend I could post to show what kinds of effects my choices have had, but I don’t think we wanna go there. 

[Bigbrog]

Maybe this is already known but thought I'd mention that with most things there isn't necessarily a "good" or "bad" debate about a substance, but rather when does that substance become "bad"...how much of something is what causes something to become "bad".  Nearly every substance known becomes "bad" at some point if too much of it is ingested...whether taken to much at once (aka water toxicity), or over a period of time (aka cigarettes).