3 Fat Chicks on a Diet Weight Loss Community  

Go Back   3 Fat Chicks on a Diet Weight Loss Community > Diet Central > Packaged Meals and Clinics - Nutrisystem, Medifast, Jenny Craig, Etc > Ideal Protein Diet

Interesting article on sweeteners

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-14-2012, 09:26 PM   #1
started IP 3/30/12
 
sanaroph's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 200

S/C/G: see ticker

Height: 5' 4"

Default Interesting article on sweeteners

4 best and 3 worst sweeteners

The Best:

Stevia
Sugar alcohols
Honey (I recommend Manuka honey, or raw honey in very small quantities)
Pure glucose

The Worst:

Aspartame
Agave (which I would expand to include all sources of fructose)
Sucralose (Splenda)

Quote:
Only two human trials on sucralose were completed and published prior to the FDA approving Splenda for human consumption, and these two trials included a total of just 36 human subjects. Worse yet, the longest running trial lasted only four days, and looked at sucralose in relation to tooth decay, not human tolerance. As for determining the absorption of Splenda into the human body, a mere eight men were studied.

Based on that singular human study, the FDA allowed the findings to be generalized as being representative of and regarded as "safe" for the entire human population!

Well there goes the Mio that I just started drinking. Guess I will go back to putting lime in my water


Fruit Serving Size Grams of Fructose
Limes 1 medium 0
Lemons 1 medium 0.6
__________________
wk#1 - 10, wk#2 - 4.6, wk#3 - 2, wk#4 -4, wk#5 -0.2, wk#6 -3, wk#7 -1.6, wk#8 -3.4, wk#9 -3.6, wk#10 -1.2, wk#11 - 3.6


Don't exchange what you want MOST for what you want at the moment.

Last edited by sanaroph : 05-14-2012 at 09:28 PM.
sanaroph is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2012, 10:33 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
kaplods's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Wausau, WI
Posts: 13,371

S/C/G: SW:394/310/180

Height: 5'6"

Default

The quote is factually untrue as well as exceedingly misleading. While it is possible (and just possible, I wouldn't bet money on it) that there may have been only two human trials in the USA, I WOULD be willing to bet a substantial amount of money (if I had a substantial amount of money to wager - unfortunately I don't) that there were many human studies before the FDA approved Sucralose (they just may not have been in the USA).

In the five minutes I was willing to spend on "research," I was able to verify that the FDA approved Splenda SEVEN YEARS after it had been approved in Canada FIVE YEARS after it was approved in Australia, TWO YEARS after it was approved in New Zealand, and it has since been approved in over 80 countries. It seems incredibly unlikely that Canada, Australia, and New Zealand hadn't done human trials before approving it in their own countries (possible, I suppose - but not very likely).



As I said, I wouldn't bet money that there are only two USA studies, but I wouldn't be very concerned if there were if instead the research was done in Canada, Australia, New Zealand and (where sucralose was approved first, and these aren't backwoods nations. There may also be research from other countries respected in the scientific community.

I find it very difficult to believe that by 1998 when the FDA approved sucralose (when Canada had been using sucralose for seven years) that there had only been two long-term studies completed. If I ever end up with an afternoon with absolutely nothing better to do, I might search for some actual studies to disprove the quote. And I certainly encourage anyone with more free time than I have to do a bit of searching, and I bet within a few days we'll have citations listed here for many, many more than two human studies and study terms of longer than four days. (Big Hint: start looking in Canada, Australia, and New Zealand where sucralose was approved before the FDA approved it in the USA).
__________________
My Etsy shop (currently closed for the summer)

http://www.dreamstormdesigns.etsy.com
etsy link by permission from 3fc! Want to add yours? Ask them!

Last edited by kaplods : 05-14-2012 at 10:42 PM.
kaplods is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2012, 11:29 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
JoesHotWife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Johnstown, Pennsylvania
Posts: 162

S/C/G: High-258/224.5/135

Height: 5' 4"

Default

Quote from Medecine.net: The most misunderstood fact about sucralose is that it is nothing like sugar even though the marketing implies that it is. Sucralose was actually discovered while trying to create a new insecticide. It may have started out as sugar, but the final product is anything but sugar. According to the book Sweet Deception, sucralose is made when sugar is treated with trityl chloride, acetic anhydride, hydrogen chlorine, thionyl chloride, and methanol in the presence of dimethylformamide, 4-methylmorpholine, toluene, methyl isobutyl ketone, acetic acid, benzyltriethlyammonium chloride, and sodium methoxide, making it unlike anything found in nature. If you read the fine print on the Splenda web site, it states that "although sucralose has a structure like sugar and a sugar-like taste, it is not natural."
__________________
JoesHotWife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2012, 11:49 PM   #4
04/23/12~Kara
 
Kaypix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 638

S/C/G: 194.8/171.2/135

Height: 5'7"

Default

So is natural good or bad then?
Kaypix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2012, 12:01 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
kaplods's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Wausau, WI
Posts: 13,371

S/C/G: SW:394/310/180

Height: 5'6"

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoesHotWife View Post
Sucralose was actually discovered while trying to create a new insecticide.
Uhhh, NOPE!

Sucralose was actually discovered by researchers working for a Brittish sugar refinery. A company that produces sugar and food additives (no insecticides before or since the Splenda discovery that I could find - but hey if anyone does find any evidence that the company also makes insecticides, please post verifiable evidence. It surely would be awesomely ironic if it were true).

... but really, which is more likely - researchers at a food additive company discovering a new food additive while trying to create a new food additive - or food additive researchers deciding to create an insecticide (for a food additive company which doesn't produce insecticides?) and just by happenstance accidentally discovering a (wait for it)

food additive?

Geez, it seems that the stranger the rumor, the more likely people are to believe it's true.
__________________
My Etsy shop (currently closed for the summer)

http://www.dreamstormdesigns.etsy.com
etsy link by permission from 3fc! Want to add yours? Ask them!

Last edited by kaplods : 05-15-2012 at 12:57 AM.
kaplods is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2012, 12:45 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
kaplods's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Wausau, WI
Posts: 13,371

S/C/G: SW:394/310/180

Height: 5'6"

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaypix View Post
So is natural good or bad then?
Depends entirely on the substance and the situation.

There are many natural substances like hemlock, bella donna, ammonia (all you have to do to make ammonia is let urine sit until it breaks down) that are or can be poisonous.

And many unnatural substances (like many disinfectants, antibiotics, vaccines and other medications) that can be quite beneficial.

Foxglove? Natural, but poisonous. Can be used as a heart medication, but digitalis (unnatural, but derived or modeled after the component in foxglove) makes a better medication because the dose can be standardized. With foxglove, the active ingredient is difficult to standardize so getting the dosage right is very tricky (and potentially fatal).

Also, the objective danger from food additives is much lower than for environmental toxins, yet people are more concerned about food additives than environmental toxins, because the perceived risk is higher with ingestibles but the ACTUAL risk and harm is much higher with ingredients in cosmetics, fragrances, and household cleaners.

It's ironic that in general, more people are more likely to avoid aspartame and carbonated beverages, than ingredients in shampoos, cleaners, fragrances, fabric softeners, and cosmetics which are well known to cause or contribute to cancers, birth defects, respiratory illness, autoimmune diseases, skin irritation....

And more people die every year from the direct result of "natural" dietary supplements (especially natural stimulants used for weight loss) than can be indirectly or remotely attributed to carbonated water and artificial sweeteners.
__________________
My Etsy shop (currently closed for the summer)

http://www.dreamstormdesigns.etsy.com
etsy link by permission from 3fc! Want to add yours? Ask them!
kaplods is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2012, 11:30 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
galpal445's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Iowa
Posts: 165

S/C/G: 249.4/see ticker/152

Height: 5'6"

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kaplods View Post
Depends entirely on the substance and the situation.

And more people die every year from the direct result of "natural" dietary supplements (especially natural stimulants used for weight loss) than can be indirectly or remotely attributed to carbonated water and artificial sweeteners.
Thank you so much KAPLODS for being a voice of reason.

I get so upset when folks find this type of information on the internet and assume it is truth and then spread that information without actually verifying it in a responsible manner. We cannot just blindly accept everything we are told, especially when there is so much misinformation out there.

Here is a link to what Michael P. Ciell, Clinical Director at Ideal Protein has to say about Sucralose. Just click on the "Sucralose" link.
http://www.ihpweightloss.com/index_files/Page345.htm
__________________
________________

My blog: http://idealproteinjourney.wordpress.com/

galpal445 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2012, 02:49 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
JoesHotWife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Johnstown, Pennsylvania
Posts: 162

S/C/G: High-258/224.5/135

Height: 5' 4"

Default

Everyone is free to believe what they want. The information is out there if one takes the time to do the research and is open to the fact that sometimes people lie to us for profit. FOR ME, the bottom line is if nature made it and man didn’t fool with it (i.e. spray it to kill something or rearrange its molecules to do something nature never intended), it is likely a good food choice. In my opinion, the entire obesity issue is due to man fooling with the food supply. Hydrogenating oils to make them shelf stable, creating high fructose corn syrup to make things sweeter (and cheaper), removing the germ from wheat then having to enrich it to make it have food value, genetically modifying seeds so they can be sprayed with Roundup and won’t die… Our bodies were not designed to deal with these types of foods and chemicals. If we were eating fresh natural products, none of us would have a weight issue. Nothing in this world happens without a consequence. It is up to each person to discover, for themselves, what they believe the truth is and then to decide if the risks outweigh the benefits. My need to reduce my weight, outweighed the risk from the use of artificial sweeteners while on IP. I choose to use stevia if I need additional sweetness in things, and do not plan to be on IP longer than necessary. This is MY choice based on the research I have done and my beliefs. As I said, each person must decide what is right for them.

I have no problem if you disagree with me. You have YOUR opinion. Your opinion is valuable, just as mine is, but if you choose to disagree, please do so respectfully. None of us need to be attacked for expressing a concern over using a CHEMICAL in our food or for sharing websites and quotes with a point of view that differs from yours.
__________________

Last edited by JoesHotWife : 05-15-2012 at 02:51 PM.
JoesHotWife is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2012, 03:13 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
CassiR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 396

S/C/G: 143/120/120

Height: 5'1

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoesHotWife View Post
Everyone is free to believe what they want. The information is out there if one takes the time to do the research and is open to the fact that sometimes people lie to us for profit. FOR ME, the bottom line is if nature made it and man didnít fool with it (i.e. spray it to kill something or rearrange its molecules to do something nature never intended), it is likely a good food choice. In my opinion, the entire obesity issue is due to man fooling with the food supply. Hydrogenating oils to make them shelf stable, creating high fructose corn syrup to make things sweeter (and cheaper), removing the germ from wheat then having to enrich it to make it have food value, genetically modifying seeds so they can be sprayed with Roundup and wonít dieÖ Our bodies were not designed to deal with these types of foods and chemicals. If we were eating fresh natural products, none of us would have a weight issue. Nothing in this world happens without a consequence. It is up to each person to discover, for themselves, what they believe the truth is and then to decide if the risks outweigh the benefits. My need to reduce my weight, outweighed the risk from the use of artificial sweeteners while on IP. I choose to use stevia if I need additional sweetness in things, and do not plan to be on IP longer than necessary. This is MY choice based on the research I have done and my beliefs. As I said, each person must decide what is right for them.

I have no problem if you disagree with me. You have YOUR opinion. Your opinion is valuable, just as mine is, but if you choose to disagree, please do so respectfully. None of us need to be attacked for expressing a concern over using a CHEMICAL in our food or for sharing websites and quotes with a point of view that differs from yours.
Have you read Lean Secrets by Brenda Turner? She talks about this topic intensely and firmly believes that pesticides/chemicals that people with lab coats put into our food causes obesity. It's not far fetched. Our liver's are not equipped to handle detoxing all these chemicals we are putting into our bodies and so our metabolism and hormones are screwed. It's so true. A clean diet with no chemicals/pesticides is the best way to get lean. Our bodies were never equipped to handle this stuff and our metabolisms and hormones are proof of that! Good points, Joe'shotwife.
__________________
-Cassi



Up 8lbs since May. Reboot time!
CassiR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2012, 03:31 PM   #10
Project Hot! Lets do this
 
lovesouthbeach's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Edmonton. AB
Posts: 3

S/C/G: 185/177/135

Height: 5'8

Default

I did some research I think sweeteners are ok to use. I hope so its in everything I drink pretty well, my coke zero and so on =/
lovesouthbeach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2012, 03:47 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Momto2cs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,729

S/C/G: 177/145/145

Height: 5'8"

Default

In Canada most things are sweetened with sucralose-even Popsicles that are labeled low in sugar.
Ip packets all have sucralose if they are sweet.
Stevia may be natural, but it's currently not approved in Canada as a food sweetener. It can only be sold separately.
There is so much nutritional misinformation out there.

It all started with the lie that fat makes us fat! We should never have stopped eating eggs and replaced then with whole wheat toast!
Momto2cs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2012, 04:53 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Sewmam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Central Illinois
Posts: 980

S/C/G: 300/152/154

Height: 5 ft 5.525 inches

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoesHotWife View Post
I have no problem if you disagree with me. You have YOUR opinion. Your opinion is valuable, just as mine is, but if you choose to disagree, please do so respectfully. None of us need to be attacked for expressing a concern over using a CHEMICAL in our food or for sharing websites and quotes with a point of view that differs from yours.
I completely agree with you. A vigorous debate is one thing, but some of the things said in this thread are inappropriate for this forum.
__________________




Started Phase 1 January 2011, Phase 2 for 4 weeks, Phase 3 for 2 weeks; started Phase 4 March 27, 2012 !!!!! Yahoo!
Sewmam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2012, 02:39 PM   #13
Fluffy, Not Fat
 
Bunny Gal's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Fort Collins, CO
Posts: 22

S/C/G: 180

Height: 5'7"

Default

I just started the Ideal Protein Diet and my doc told me to go out and buy Walden Farm's products, which are loaded with sucralose. I am getting horrible headaches every single time I use any of the IP diet products containing sucralose (bars, puddings, etc.) and also all of the WF products. I have a terrible allergy to aspartame, which gives me the same debilitating headaches. My doc says my body is just going thru "withdrawal" and to continue to eat the sucralose products. Did some research and I tend to agree with JoesHotWife: I think this sucralose stuff is what is giving me the headaches, and I intend to avoid ALL food with it in there! I'm just going to avoid sweeteners 100% and stick with veggies and lean proteins.
Bunny Gal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2012, 04:31 PM   #14
Started IP 12/30/11
 
purple sky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: CA
Posts: 743

S/C/G: 160/125/130 Phase 4!!!

Height: 5'

Default

It seems like if you wait long enough, something that is good for you will end up being very bad for you and vice versa. I remember when Agave was touted as a wonderful alternative to sugar and honey. Then, real sugar was the best. But, for some of us we know what sugar does to us so we have to avoid it. I, personally, am not a fan of Splenda. If nothing else, I just don't like the taste but it was a big deal for people when it came onbaord as it has allowed a lot of people the ability to consume sweet products. Years ago, eggs were bad and to this day, it's still in the back of my mind and I never had a cholesterol problem.

Things seem to ebb and flow and the fear around food is a little tricky these days. I don't want to hate food. We probably all know people who smoked, drank or had soda everyday and lived to their 70's 80's or 90's. So, it's not one size fits all.

I lean natural whenever possible so Stevia talks to me. I get no headaches and no cravings and I am thankful for that. I also liked agave when I used it. And I love soda with real sugar. I thought it was the best thing ever.
__________________


WI#1: 1.8 WI#2: 5.0 lighter clothes WI#3: 2.2tom WI#4: 1.6 WI#5: 2.6 WI#6: 1.4 WI#7: 2.6 WI#8: 1.8tom WI#9: 1.2 WI#10: 2.8 WI#11: 1.2 WI#12: 1.2 WI#13: 1.8tom WI#14: 2.8
starting goal weight: 130. Goal met 4.5.12
Phase 2 WI#15: 0.6 WI#16: 2.2 WI#17: 0.2tom Phase 3 WI#18: 1.2 WI#19: 0.6
Started Phase 4 on 5.11.12 at 125
purple sky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2012, 04:43 PM   #15
Fluffy, Not Fat
 
Bunny Gal's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Fort Collins, CO
Posts: 22

S/C/G: 180

Height: 5'7"

Default

I agree with you, Purple Sky! I too have tried Stevia and have had no issues whatsoever. To me it's sort of scary to eat something made out of a test tube with its molecules all re-arranged so your body doesn't know what it's dealing with.... hmmmm! Give me natural products (even sugar) any day of the week. I just wish I could go back to plain ol' sugar on this diet, but I'm willing to substitute Stevia when needed and see if that does the trick. Thanks for the reply!
Bunny Gal is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Posts by members, moderators and admins are not considered medical advice
and no guarantee is made against accuracy.


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Interesting article: Artificial Sweeteners and Obesity TheWalrus Weight Loss Support 16 06-17-2009 04:42 PM
Interesting article about the evils of soda ~ or pop for Canucks ;) Jillegal 100 lb. Club 16 03-07-2006 04:48 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:34 PM.






Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.3.2