Artificial sweeteners - any correlation with diabetes?

Thanks for the input!

Hi all,

thanks a lot for the input. I've looked at the links, and for now it seems that the correlation is in fact not causation.

And a little advice for Old Bob: seeing the widespread "deployment" of AS, the claims about their evil, lethal nature seem to be maybe a tad overstated, as people are actually living longer today than at any other point in history. If your comments weren't made purely for satirical purposes and you're actually serious about it, you might want to reconsider your sources and/or fact snippets. Thanks anyway, if only for bringing out some of the more rational responders.
 
Most picked on sweetener is aspartame.

Articial sweeteners aren't so "artificial".

We need to examine a few facts here. Aspartame is not the only substance that breaks down into methanol and then into formaldehyde, and finally into water & carbon dioxide. It is also not the only way you get amino acids (aspartic acid, phenylalanine) in your body.

Aspartame breaks down into methanol and amino acids. Methanol is broken down to formaldehyde. Formaldehyde is then always turned to formic acid. The formic acid is then always turned into water and carbon dioxide. The key ingredient here is actually something that breaks down into methanol, and remember that the final product is actually water and carbon dioxide. Even breathing leaves you with water and carbon dioxide. Remember, the process your body goes through is methanol-formaldehyde-formic acid-water & carbon dioxide.

What else goes through this process in your body? Juice. Fruit. Vegetables. Wine. A serving of tomato juice the same sizes as a can of diet cola will produce about five times the methanol (which is what converts into formaldehyde) in your body as the aspartame in the diet cola. Fruits, fruit juices, vegetables, wine and beer will also produced methanol when digested. The chemical plant in your body can handle it, even in excess.

Studies have tested how aspartame is converted into methanol. One study showed that consumption of 2000 milligrams of aspartame - that's 10 cans of diet soda - had no effect on the amount of methanol present in the bloodstream. You can drink 10 cans of diet soda at once and not get poisoned. The normal levels of methanol in the bloodstream are not affected, and you just keep on processing it all into carbon dioxide and water (which is then eliminated from the body).

The link contains a lot more information, and I recommend everyone read it. Please forward this email on to help alieve the anti-aspartame hysteria. http://tafkac.org/ulz/nutrasweet.html

What is aspartame? It's made up of essential and non-essential amino acids (and methanol) that also occurs naturally in the body. Any time you eat any kind of protein (protein is made up of amino acids) you will get these amino acids So, whether or not you eat "synthetic" aspartame, your body always has these ingredients inside. It's normal. We all need protein to function. This is how aspartame was discovered. A scientist found that these amino acid combinations were sweet. So protein will get you amino acids (aspartic acid, phenylalanine), and fruits and vegetables will get you methanol. No matter what, unless you starve yourself of all essential nutrients, you will get these substances in your body whenever you eat something.
http://www.rosalindfranklin.edu/cms/biochem/walters/sweet/aspartame.html

Other myths about aspartame: http://www.snopes.com/humor/iftrue/antpoison.asp

Oh, and please don't be misled by all the people that can sell you stuff to save you from aspartame/formaldehyde poisoning. If you need to be saved from aspartame/formaldehyde poisoning (ingestion of something that the body converts into carbon dioxide and water), then you need to be saved from breathing too. Also, rembember that we humans have been eating vegetables and fruits since our inception, and have dealt with the methanol/formaldehyde conversions in our bodies since our inception. We are equipped to deal with it every day of our lives.


This is why aspartame was put to the test and then permitted to be used as a sweetener, because good studies show it is safe, and there was every reason in the world it was safe in the first place. There is no reason to call it poison, unless you also want to call other regular everyday food poison too. None of it is poisonous as our bodies are equipped to break down, use, handle, and eliminate every bit of it safely, just like it has ever since humans and other animals have eaten fruits, vegetables, and proteins all of their lives.

Now. Should we go onto dihydrogen monoxide? That chemical can get a bad rap too, but it does actually kill people every day...

 
Eos, while true, this does not address the point whether artificial sweeteners play a role in diabetes. Its clear they play no primary role, but if they effect appetite regulation and therefore obesity, there may be a connection. If.
 
I've been using AS (saccharine, 2 tablets in every cup & about 2 tablespoonsful of aspartame based sweetener sprinkled on my corn flakes every morning) in my tea for about 35 years & because diabetes runs in my family, I've been tested for diabetes regularly - negative every time and, while I might not be :rolleyes: the smartest or steadiest bloke around, I don't suffer from Parkinsons or Alzheimers - I keep my brain fairly active.
 
The pathway that "tastes" sugar is strictly neural - the taste buds on the tongue that detect sweet are stimulated and they send nerve impulses to the sensory area of the brain. I am pretty sure that he detection that triggers insulin excretion is not chemical rather than neural; the islets have no neural connections that I know of. Since I'm not an expert in physiology I cannot rule out an interaction between taste and insulin production, but I think it is far-fetched. Much more cogent, as Ben Burch points out, is the effect of AS on obesity, which definitely does have an effect on insulin production, but inasmuch as use of ASs rather than sugar will reduce iobesity (all other effects being equal) it would tend to be for the batter rather than for the worse.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom