• FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    I always find it amusing that people have been like “well it doesn’t cause weight loss!”

    It doesn’t.

    Is it water better than diet soda? Absolutely. But no one is replacing water with diet soda. They’re replacing coke with Diet Coke. Or whatever.

    Which means fewer calories which means potential weight loss (or for lower weight gain. CICO.) the problem is that most people who drink doet sodas tend to have a lot of other dietary habits that are equally awful as slamming back a 12 pack of Mountain Dew everyday…(eew.)

    As for aspartame causing cancer… I dunno. But I’m guessing it’s lower than the threat being obese makes. S

  • Cleverdawny@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Aspartame, when it hits your intestines, immediately decomposes into 40% phenylalanine, 40% aspartic acid, and 20% methanol. Phenylalanine and aspartic acid are nutritious amino acids, otherwise known as protein. Since aspartame is so much sweeter than sugar, it’s used in quantities small enough to make the methanol intake levels from a can of diet soda lower than what you would get from a cup of fruit juice.

    There’s no real danger.

    • naught@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 year ago

      From the reporting I saw, it can be a problem if you drink like gallons of the drinks every day, which can actually happen irl, but is not common. Worth pointing out but not a cause for concern

      • Cleverdawny@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Aspartame isn’t what is giving you the migraine. It’s either psychosomatic or something else in the beverage you drank. Unless you receive a migraine when you drink fruit juice.

        As to whether you believe me or not, uhh, I don’t know how to nicely put this. Factual reality doesn’t change just because you feel it should be different. The metabolic products of aspartame and its digestion are well understood. It never reaches your bloodstream intact.

        • blackberries33@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          There is no way for me to know if you are an expert or an otherwise trustworthy source of information on this topic. You are a random person on the internet, who did not cite any sources. I should not automatically believe any explanation you offer.

          There is no need to be condescending.

          • Cleverdawny@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I don’t think you should, but I do think that Googling the metabolism of aspartame would be warranted if you want to be educated on the subject, rather than discarding it.

            https://www.greenfacts.org/en/aspartame/l-3/aspartame-3.htm

            That’s your information on the metabolism.

            As to amount you’ll intake, the average can of diet soda contains 0.18g of aspartame according to Wikipedia.

            According to the UK, fruit juice contains an average of 140mg/L of methanol naturally, due to fermentation of sugars in fruits. That means that 12 oz of fruit juice will contain an average of .05g of methanol, while an average soda would contain .036g of methanol.

            Here are the other metabolites of aspartame:

            Phenylalanine (essential amino acid) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenylalanine

            Aspartic acid (non-essential amino acid) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspartic_acid

            Amino acids are proteins. The difference between an essential and a non-essential amino acid is that while our bodies require both to live, we produce non-essential amino acids but must intake essential amino acids through our food.

      • Tikiporch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        You know what, I get a migraine when I spend more than 10 minutes with my mother-in-law. Just because you don’t, doesn’t mean she can’t give you cancer.

  • Silverseren@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Okay, corruption like that should be corrected. Regardless, there’s no scientific evidence that aspartame is harmful. Let alone a biochemical reason for why a dipeptide of two amino acids, phenylalanine and aspartic acid, that dissociates in the stomach into its constituent components and some byproducts would be harmful in the first place.

    Unless you have phenylketonuria, but you have much bigger problems in that case and, if that is the case for you, kudos on being at an age and capability to read and understand this post, you are incredible.

    Edit: Also, just noticed the part about US Right To Know, which is a well known anti-science group that’s been pushing pseudoscience and fearmongering about other topics, such as biotechnology, for years. So them being involved here raises questions.

  • MorgoFett@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I don’t get it. What would be Coke’s motive here? Wouldn’t they be cutting into their own sales if aspartame was shown as terrible for you?

    • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      They released the study that said it wasn’t so bad. That article was a mashed wreck, though, so I could be mistaken

      • stealthnerd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        If it’s the report I think they’re referring to, it basically said Aspartame is possibly carcinogenic but safe at normal consumption levels.

        It raised a lot of doubt around Aspartame being carcinogenic without going so far as to deem it non carcinogenic, concluding that more studies are needed.

        I wouldn’t call it overwhelmingly positive for Coke but it’s not hurting them.

        • Silverseren@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          There have been dozens of studies over multiple decades looking into aspartame and have found it isn’t carcinogenic. One Coke-funded study one way or the other doesn’t change the massive body of research.

        • ivanafterall@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          If the truth is that it’s a carcinogen, a WHO report saying it’s fine in small amounts would be overwhelmingly positive for Coke, I’d say. Just like tobacco companies being behind the studies showing the “healthiness” of vaping as an alternative, even though it might decrease cigarette sales a bit.

    • JustAManOnAToilet@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’d imagine getting early knowledge of the report long before its release could be a huge benefit if it turned out they needed to do some damage control.

  • jaschen@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    Fuck the WHO. They are also in bed with the China CCP. Taiwan handled COVID like a boss and was not allowed to even show up to the conversation.