this post was submitted on 25 Dec 2023
298 points (89.8% liked)

News

23387 readers
2144 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 110 points 11 months ago (6 children)

1, it's aspartame

2, Mice aren't humans, and routinely, things that happen in mice do not happen in humans. It is not at all indicative of anything and can really only be used as a hint better than nothing for looking into similar effects in humans.

You don't need to change your diet, and you certainly don't need to replace it with sugar.

[–] LetterboxPancake 79 points 11 months ago (1 children)

*But drinking a glass of water from time to time won't kill you either.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 11 months ago (4 children)

Comment paid for Big Aspartame.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 11 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

I see the Nutrasweet Lobbyists Association is here too!

[–] [email protected] 9 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Big aspertame made that account 6 months ago, posted 1300 unrelated comments, just for this one moment...

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago
[–] [email protected] 9 points 11 months ago (1 children)

How much is Big Sugar paying you?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

Considering the patent was held by Monsanto, and all the decades of concerns have been raised by independent researchers but shut down by lobbying...

Well, I mean, who can you trust to not hide that they're making poison if not Monsanto?

[–] [email protected] 8 points 11 months ago (6 children)

Removing all forms of added sugar would probably make everyone feel better. Even minimizing natural sugar intake.

Sugar is terrible, there’s no doubt about it. Artificial or otherwise.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

there's little research to show sugar dangers to be more than correlation

fat people eat a lot of sugar. fat people also eat a lot. eating a lot is how you get fat, drinking calories just happens to be a fast track to getting fat. diet soda happens to be physiologically like drinking water. fat people drink diet instead of sugar coke thats already 200-1000 calories of their day GONE with very very minimal change.

then those fat people supplement the lost sugars with more food and they gain weight. then you get studies showing GUYS DIET SODA CAUSES WEIGHT GAIN (in fat people)

but no its not the sugar its not the macros its YOU eating too much and you can eat less to lose weight that's just simple science. body types, "nuance", "bad metabolism". none of that shits real it all stems from shitty dietary choices and lack of muscle.

all of this to say unless theres medical issues or medical intervention your weight and body type is 100% in your control should you choose to take control

[–] cocobean 2 points 11 months ago (2 children)

How about all the research that shows sugar is addictive AF

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

self control is a thing everything is addictive in some facet refined sugars just happens to trigger a stronger dopamine response than other things.

but in the end of the day self control is necessary nobody can control you except you. so dont blame sugars addicitiveness for being overweight if you are. its solely an overeating issue.

[–] cocobean 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I feel like you underestimate addiction. "Self control" is what's needed to not start smoking; but it takes something stronger to quit smoking, I think -- a more refined willpower than simple "self control".

And sure, it's something a person could cultivate and train on their own with time and focus. But so are most other things. "Why aren't you good at drawing? All you need to do is practice every day! it's simple."

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

nicotine is chemically addictive sugar is not.

im a stoner and can assure you the way to quit smoking something that isnt chemically addictive is cold turkey will-power babey. ive taken long breaks when needed with months of straight use 24/7 down to zero for months. its all mind over matter.

im also shredded now because slight caloric deficit and healthy eating is also straight will power mind over matter to consistently eat a slight deficit and well for months. and i do a rigourous calisthenics strength routine consistently to supplement thus I'm quite ripped.

shit even for my cut i completely quit eating added sugars cold turkey i didnt eat any aside from the occasional if i was given something for like 4 months. it was also pretty easy and made occasional sweets taste better and fruits/veggies were gas.

people make shit up as excuses like "ohh im skinny fat its too late", "i dont have time in between my laying down and netflix binge". no body types dont exist. never have never will stop using excuses. if you want to be lazy accept the fact YOU ARE LAZY theres no other excuse than you being lazy. which is chill being lazy is fun sometimes (remember im a stoner) but don't pretend its for some other reason its all on YOU.

everyone thinks oh its too hard i cant do it. but no youre just lazy and weak willed and im not joking. you can do anything if you want to thats the beauty of life. things don't come easy if you see someone doing crazy shit that's probably a conglomeration of years of hard work and dedication. they probably started looking and thinking like you til they woke up.

WAKE UP you dont need to be fat, your metabolism doesn't need to suffer with age, your joints dont need to get worse. all of this happens from a lack of training and poor diet NOT age. age provides the time for your body to degrade you have to prevent that degration. I FUCKING HATE when people say your metabolism will slow down and youll get fat eventually. bitch no ill never be like you.

also finally, i am a drug addict i know about addiction trust me. I've quit some shittier things it takes effort but in the end of the day still its on YOU to quit nobody can quit for you.

[–] cocobean 1 points 11 months ago

nicotine is chemically addictive sugar is not.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. If you mean a sugar addiction is more like a gambling addiction than a nicotine addiction, I don't think that's the case; you can find studies that claim sugar addiction is "opiate-like". There are also some sensational claims like "sugar is more addictive than cocaine", though that seems like more of a stretch to me.

I'm glad to hear you are in great shape, and it's clear you tie a lot of self worth to physical fitness. But I would caution you not to use that as an excuse to look down on others.

[–] Apollo 1 points 11 months ago

Of course sugar is addictive as fuck - you would literally die without it.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Absolutely nothing wrong with a diet high in fruit and veg, both of which contain significant amounts of sugar.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 11 months ago (2 children)

You are correct, the caveat "added sugar" or added sweetener in this case is the important bit.

Fructose doesn't have the same health effects of sucrose for some reason and the sugar you eat in fruit and veg come with fiber which helps keep our blood sugar from spiking.

I was shocked to learn that dates, which are basically candy, have a pretty reasonable glycemic index.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Except that guy wrote:

Even minimizing natural sugar intake.

Which precludes fruit and a good deal of veg.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

Fair point. Have a happy new year!

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Fructose doesn’t have the same health effects of sucrose for some reason

That's because fructolysis has a slightly different pathway and fate as compared to glycolysis, which results in far lower efficiency of conversion. Meaning glucose gets converted into more calories than fructose does.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

Fascinating! It is astounding to me how we know some of this stuff and how there is so much we have left to discover

[–] Ataraxia 0 points 11 months ago

Fruits make me just as sick as any other source of sugar. Fruit is just candy in a natural wrapper.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Not to mention that the gene pool of these lab mice is super small. Source: my brother is a PhD biochemist and lectured me often on this shit when I said, "hey, look at this study!"

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

The small gene pool is done on purpose. The mice are supposed to be as close to clones as possible so that you can have control populations and be confident that the results weren't affected by certain genes and mutations in the test population.

The size of the gene pool isn't really an issue though because they can be bred however it's required for tests. They have quite a lot of control over the genetics of those lab mice.

Testing for a cure for diabetes? They can produce mice that are almost guaranteed to develop diabetes that you can then try to cure.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

Such a small groups are fine for initial investigation, they have enough of a size to be acceptable statistically for most of the performed studies. I don't think they'd get approval from ethical committee overseeing animal experiments without initial study like this to conduct something on very high groups.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 11 months ago

I am a relatively recent transplant from the red place, I can tell I ain't in Kansas anymore, actual good information being up voted so cool.

Aspartame is, because of all the claims against it, the single most studied food substance known, and it seems to somehow keep coming okay. There are a lot of studies with really bad methods that were a smear job attempt but science doing what it does they were labeled for what they are and disregarded. Is it possible to be allergic and a reaction to be anxiety sure, but that is not on the food.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Guarantee the study also states that you have to consume an ungodly amount of it too...

News reports grab on to stuff like this all the time. Like what they did with safrole.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 11 months ago (2 children)

The article actually states how much. 15% of the daily recommended amount.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 11 months ago (2 children)

There's a daily recommended amount for mice? Or was that 15% of the recommended amount for humans, which would be massive for mice?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (2 children)

15% of humans recommended amount. It's in the article.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Actually no, the keyword is equivalent, so adjusted for body weight.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

Ah I think you're right.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

So 15% for a 60 kilogram human, on the lower end, would be the daily recommended amount for a 9 kilogram creature. A mouse weighs around 0.025 kilograms. So, that amount for the mice is for something 360 times larger.

Obviously it's more complicated than that with differing metabolisms and the like, but as a rough estimate, wow. That's a lot.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago

I'm baffled by your willingness to elaborate at length about this, but not read the article where this is explained. Misinforming everyone in the process.

When a sample of mice were given free access to water dosed with aspartame equivalent to 15 percent of the FDA's recommended maximum daily amount for humans, they generally displayed more anxious behavior in specially designed mood tests.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

It's the equivalent of the human daily dose. So adjusted for body weight. Loosely translated, it would be 15% of the daily recommended dose for mice.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I stand corrected! That's a ridiculously small amount!

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Just in case you missed it, we discussed below that that's the 15% daily recommended amount for a human. That they gave to the mice. A creature several hundred times smaller.

So you were right in the first place.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago

No, it's the equivalent dose.

When a sample of mice were given free access to water dosed with aspartame equivalent to 15 percent of the FDA's recommended maximum daily amount for humans, they generally displayed more anxious behavior in specially designed mood tests.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

Can you cite your sources? This excerpt from the published article suggests you're wrong:

The FDA recommended maximum DIV for aspartame for humans is 50 mg/kg (33). Based on allometric conversion utilizing pharmacokinetic and body surface area parameters (43), the mouse equivalent of the human DIV is 615 mg/kg/d. Therefore, the male mice received a daily aspartame dose equivalent to 14.0%, 7.0%, and 3.5% of the FDA recommended human DIV, and the females received a dose equivalent to 15.5%, 7.7%, and 3.9% of the human DIV.