1
Some time ago, I read an argument, which was very interesting.
A bunch of people say sugar substitutes aren't safe, wait, and I'm stupid after listening to it.
Because since I broke my shoulder and did not run, my weight has been more than 200 pounds, can be so fat, not without reason, high carbs and high fat plus not good sleep all day surfing and sedentary less exercise, lack of the same can not do.
Many people ask me about my life plan after the age of 40, and I always find it funny, because I am not sure that I will live to this age.
The only positive part of my current life, or the last stubbornness, is that the drink is either not drunk, and the drink is only sugar substitute, 0 calories.
Thank you sugar substitute, save my weight, save my blood sugar, if it were not for the development of sugar substitute, I would have rushed to 300.
Thank you sugar substitute, and thank you sugar substitute for the furniture of my house.
Many people say that sugar substitutes are not good.
I hurried to check a bunch of information, and I thought it was ridiculous.
First of all, the sugar substitute, in any case, is better than boiled water, this everyone has no opinion, to be healthy, definitely still drink boiled water.
But in the same way, the risk of this thing depends on who to compare, how to compare, what dose ratio.
If sugar substitutes are risky and sweeteners are sinful, then isn't sugar going to hell?
No, we'll have to dig up a parking lot on the eighteenth floor.
First, let's talk about the safety of sugar substitutes.
I don't think the five words "sugar substitutes are unsafe" have no meaning.
It's not that sugar substitutes are safe or unsafe, but these five words, meaningless.
These five words are full of stereotypes and prejudices like "all people who study history will plan graves", "those who engage in chemistry are terrorists", and "Shandong people will excavate", because we Shandong people not only can excavate, but also eat onions.
When you discuss the safety of sugar substitutes, the first thing is, translate and translate, what is sugar substitutes?
There has never been a substance called sugar substitute.
Sugar substitute is actually a concept that means that you don't want to eat sugar or can't eat sugar, but you are hungry, so you use various methods to sweeten sugar.
Some people say that sugar substitutes are not safe, so they should eat less or not eat sugar substitutes, but they did not tell me which sugar substitute is not safe, and there are too many types of sugar substitutes.
Is a high-power sweetener or a low-power sweetener unsafe?
Is it a natural sweetener or a synthetic sweetener that is not safe?
Are sugar alcohols, or are sulfonamides unsafe?
Without saying the whole thing, it creates an atmosphere that has developed for more than a hundred years and has given birth to a series of achievements, and should be killed with a stick.
It is also argued that synthetic sweeteners are unsafe, and saccharin is risky and carcinogenic.
That doesn't make any more sense.
The first generation of artificial sweeteners, saccharin, was invented in 1879.
The second generation of artificial sweeteners, cyclamate, was invented in 1937.
1965 third generation, aspartame.
Fourth generation in 1967, Acesulfametic.
Fifth generation, 1976, sucralose.
In 1993, the sixth generation, New Sweet came out.
It is the sixth generation of New Sweet, which was officially approved as a new food additive species after countless tests in 2003, and it has been almost two decades.
Is it possible that countries can allow it to be added to food, and it should have passed the test.
You say sodium saccharin, cyclamate, there is a risk, this I found, there is indeed a thing, but grasping these two to say that sugar substitutes are ugly, about the same as saying that the entire mushroom industry is damned, because there are indeed some kinds of mushrooms you will die after eating.
It is about the same as saying that humans are disgusting creatures, because it is true that human species are diverse, and some people have too many XPs, and some people have come to Bengal lizards, unless they are lizard people exorcists, otherwise there is no way to explain.
What's more, sugar substitutes are not only artificial sweeteners, natural sweeteners have also gone to the sea, steviol glycosides, xylitol, erythritol, tagose, maltitol these products, but also more.
Synthetic products are not good, what is the matter with natural sweeteners?
In addition, we have to talk about science, the molecular formulas of arabinose sugar, erythritol, neosweet and sodium saccharin, in addition to having carbon chains, there is, that is, the relationship between Kaspersky and Pakistan.
What does it matter?
There is a kiba relationship.
2
See here, you think I'm in Quay Sugar?
No, I'm just talking about some basic things you should know when you've been in high school.
I don't think the sugar substitute is perfect, the sugar substitute problem is more.
Is milk perfect? Some people are still lactose intolerant, and as soon as I drink milk, I become a spray warrior.
Are peanuts perfect? It can still be that someone is allergic to the point of suffocation.
No one thing is perfect, just like sugar, it is originally a good thing, but I never thought that people could have such a fast time of material abundance, and human beings could actually eat sugar and have problems.
The same goes for sugar substitutes.
It is the result of scientific development and progress to a certain extent, the beginning of its birth, it announced that the sweet curse of sugar can be lifted, the future study of sweeteners in this field of scientists, is to strive in safety, taste, sweetness, energy, price and other dimensions, for people in the cane candy sugar and other traditional sweet substances, and strive to explore more possibilities.
I'm quite content with that.
I believe that if some products prove to be unsuitable for widespread consumption, or have various shortcomings, it proves that this is a wrong path, and everyone should explore other directions and continue to move forward.
Because technology must be iterative, science must progress.
The meaning of science is to enable human beings to have a choice, to be able to have both and to want.
If I were to return to those days of sugar addiction, in my current state, I would die if I didn't make a fuss.
So I'm still a conclusion that sugar substitutes aren't perfect, but sugar is really.
Whether a site on a structural formula is a methyl ethyl group to the electron or a methoxy group, or a nitro group that absorbs electrons, whether it is left-handed or right-handed, the physical and chemical properties may vary greatly.
Whether there is a safety risk to a certain sugar substitute needs to be studied for a long time and a specific structural formula of it for a long time.
One insecurity negates the entire field, a misleading and unsubstantiated statement.
This kind of behavior I would like to call it choking on food, cutting enough to fit, spilling the child and the bath water together, and opening the eyes with a chainsaw for constipation.
Penicillin was born, and there may be people in the future who have the problem of antibiotic resistance, but this is a problem of human abuse of tools, not the sin in the tool itself, which does not mean that human beings should rely on immunity again to fight germs.
Sugar substitutes are the same, it is a matter of degree.
3
That goes along with the argument that "sugar substitutes are not safe", and then goes forward to many media arguments, which I think is absurd.
A lot of arguments are that which experts, which which universities, did a XXX study that proved that sugar substitutes are XX risky.
To be honest, I see this way of thinking and I want to laugh.
When discussing scientific issues, those who do not cite sources are treated as farts.
Give the citation source, but it is a statistical content, that is, to see a music, I am a man who has written statistical jokes in the Eight Classics, statistics is one of the most publicly falsified disciplines in the world, as long as you don't face, take the number is shameless enough, the measurement standard is subjective enough, and you can get any conclusion.
Take the classic french study of 100,000 people who proved that sugar substitutes may increase the risk of cancer, in order to conclude that sugar substitutes are not safe.
I'll help find the original text.
The Science and Technology Daily published in the 004th edition of March 30, 2022, "Eating sugar substitutes or increasing the risk of cancer", said,
The study obtained data on the sex, age, education level, medical history, diet, lifestyle, health data and other data of these people, and obtained 3358 new cancer cases among these people, with an average age of 59.5 ± 12.2 years at the time of diagnosis, which proved that sugar substitutes or increased risk of cancer.
Why do I say watch a piece of music?
Big brother, not to mention that it is not controlled by this experimental control of variables, consider other factors.
You look at the age of onset of this little sixty years old, even if he doesn't drink anything, he is also a high incidence of cancer, you don't believe you to ask you about the insurance around you, this age still sells them serious illness insurance?
This age allows insurance companies to have a group of people who are unwilling to take premiums, and guess whether the insurance company is stupid or not?
If you follow this algorithm, at this age, their neighbor's dog has a pups, which will also lead to a high incidence of cancer.
His eating of Ollie also led to a high incidence of cancer.
At three o'clock in the morning, he changed his backflip in the toilet and ate egg cakes, which would also lead to a high incidence of cancer.
Let me even give you an example.
For example, everyone did a control test, a thousand people who drank hand-ground coffee every day, and a thousand people who did not drink coffee, after tracking and research, found that the former was healthier.
Can you prove that hand-ground coffee is good for good health?
No, have you ever considered that the former may be richer than the latter, his material conditions are here, he supports drinking coffee every day, he is living a good life, so it is easier to be healthier than the latter?
Isn't this an atypical attribution fallacy?
It's clear that it's not coffee that makes him healthy, it's money.
So really, statistics is something that really dresses up.
The same problem of poor information recurred in my research, and I found that many papers with inconclusive content were directly helped by researchers to sentence sugar substitutes to death.
For example, the English at the end of this, let's take a look. （To establish a causal link, replication in other large-scale prospective cohorts and mechanistic investigations are needed. ）
What the paper means is that it may not be safe and requires large-scale investigations.
It is not difficult for scientific research to find the "possibility", and it is difficult to prove the "can" in one hammer, because scientific research is very rigorous.
Sugar substitute is not an absolutely safe choice, I know, sugar substitute problematic papers I read a lot, but directly summarized a it is not safe, this is not right.
This scientist needs to study the distance of several years and decades, and we can't open our mouths and arrive.
There are even some arguments that make me really confused.
For example, you can get fat when you drink sugar-free drinks, because this thing has a sweet taste, induces your brain to secrete insulin, makes you digest more carbs, so it is fatter.
Big brother, I'm really stupid about that.
First of all, the sugar-free drinks you drink, are they no sweeteners, or sugar substitutes, or cane-free drinks?
You drink a product that doesn't have sucrose but has lactose, and you end up getting fat, is it a sugar problem or a pot of sugar substitutes?
You have a big appetite and eat half a pot of rice, is it sugar substitutes that make you fat, or carbs that make you fat?
Sugar substitutes are not absolutely safe, but because sugar has made iniquity, it has shot sugar substitutes, which is a bit confusing to me.
Around the mainstream view, I looked up some literature, taking the more commonly used sucralose as an example.
Following such a literature, I found a paper that found that after rats were fed sucralose, the beneficial intestinal flora decreased;
Subsequently, more stimulating literature, such as the Sasaki study, found that sucralose 200 mg per kilogram of body weight fed rats, which caused damage to the DNA in the rats' stomach and lungs.
Not only sucralose, but he has done research on the other 39 additives.
Looks horrible, right?
But if you have been to high school and have a basic understanding of logic, it is difficult to conclude that sucralose is indeed unsafe for the human body.
Because the conclusion is that there is no temporary effect on humans, it needs to be further studied, and it has an effect on mice, and it cannot be proved that it must have an effect on the human body.
Dogs can't eat chocolate yet.
In addition, anything that talks about toxicity aside from the dose is hooliganism.
Drinking too much water can also directly drink you to death.
When I counted the dosage problem, I even wanted to laugh.
Or take the paper above.
If I were an eighty-kilogram man with 17 mg of sucralose per 100mL of sugar-free cola, even if the results of the mouse experiment were applicable to me, I only needed to drink 1882 bottles of sugar-free Coke a day, and my DNA would go wrong.
Big brother, I can drink almost a ton of water every day, the lung leaves can be drunk and floated up, will I care if there is a problem with sugar substitutes?
I first considered the problem of genetic locks, and I had to push the glasses to sigh a mortal wisdom.
4
Take this line of thinking and push it back.
Now there are many arguments that tell me that sugar substitutes are not safe and sugar substitutes are not good.
Regardless of an absurd conclusion, a bunch of arguments that can't be hammered, how exactly to create the conclusion that sugar substitutes are not safe;
Are you trying to imply that you drink sugar substitutes is fake self-discipline, fart use no, want to drink sweet, or have to drink sugary drinks.
Big brother, I really want to be pure health, I will only drink boiled water;
If I become a slave to sugary drinks because of this idea, that is, because of itchy feet, suspected of having athlete's foot and directly amputation?
Scientists are bald, just to make you feel at ease to eat sweet, are you worthy of people's hair?
There are many papers with problematic sugar substitutes.
But sugar has problems with the papers, and more.
Not to mention the problem of repetition of academic terms, but in this amount of literature, sugar drinks are really enough to go to hell.
Good fellow, Satan has to have the name of sugar drink tattooed on his back.
Open the specific paper to see, this fucking is not right.
Sugar substitutes are risky or still need to be studied, and score different ingredients, and sugar has risks, this is all conclusive, who in the end put Ollie on the former pants?
I will not attach these literatures on whether sugary drinks are good or not for the human body.
Take the flora just mentioned, sugar substitute is good and evil is influential, to your sugar here direct indicators are abnormal.
Even when I went downstairs for a day, casually bought a few bottles of sugary drinks, and then looked at the ingredient list to calculate, I was really stupid.
The World Health Organization is pressing its head to call for reduced sugar intake, less than 25g of sugar per day, and children under three years of age should not consume free sugar.
But big brother, the sugar content of your bottle of sugar carbonated drinks, directly dry people's sugar intake for one or two days.
What other juice, what yogurt sugar content, but also so high that the mother does not know.
Sugar substitutes may not be safe.
But these drinks and juices have sugar drinks, which is really fatal.
Co-author of these manufacturers who sell sugar drinks, the nationality of the United Nations?
There was even mention of sugary drinks being taxed, and practitioners in various countries began to boycott wildly.
Big brother, that's boring.
Regarding the fact that sugar is not healthy, there are sugar drink manufacturers and capitals who know better than anyone, how come you are stupid when you go to the step of sugar?
Co-authoring is not about your rice bowl, my health is not important;
It's about your rice bowl, I rely on sugar substitutes to discipline or paralyze myself, is it not to cherish myself?
Looking further down, I also found some interesting information about the black history of the American Sugar Association.
For example, how they sponsored some scientific research that diluted the impact of sugar on the risk of coronary heart disease.
Then wronged to the fat head.
And how to use money to open the way, so that sugar increases the risk of heart disease and stroke research faded.
In practice, it turns out that 600,000 US dollars is enough to buy the conscience of some scientists.
I don't know english well, so I don't translate these contents.
But I really want to say one thing.
Sugar substitutes are not good things, but sugar has to go to hell.
To be healthy I only drink water, I don't touch either.
I've fallen to the point of drinking sugar substitutes, and you've told me it's not good to get out of my life.
Ordinary food still has to say that it is zero card, sugar substitute drink naked dare to directly label the nutrition ingredient list 0 card, you can not always say that people do not understand the advertising law?
5
Sugar substitutes are really a lot of problems, and sugar substitutes are definitely not as healthy as drinking water.
But it can be washed up on a large scale, and it is not because it is grabbing the rice bowl with sugar drinks.
Although almost all sugar-free beverage manufacturers have sugar-free product lines, the cost of mastering a high-quality sugar substitute supply chain can be too high.
Looking up the industry data again, I find it even more interesting.
This is the trend of the use of sweeteners in domestic sugar substitute products in recent years.
One of the sugar substitutes, not familiar?
Yes, erythritol.
First of all, this thing, Ann is not safe?
Sugar alcohols put the risk of diarrhea, but it's already one of the safest sweeteners available.
It is not a new thing, it is the product of enzyme fermentation, and coincidentally, there is no related metabolic enzyme in the human body, and after it enters the body, it cannot be fermented and utilized, and finally it is excreted with urine.
It can be said that it is a high-speed walk back and forth, and it does not stop at half a point.
Here are two literatures, which are not harmful to teeth.
Since it is safe and extremely low in heat, why was it not widely used in the past, and now it is hot?
Expensive.
Its sweetness is 0.6-0.7 times that of sucrose, and the sweetness that five dollars can produce can be produced by sucrose, and it costs 23 yuan, not to mention the anti-heaven thing of fructose syrup.
The cost gap of five times faster is here, how is it compared to sucrose?
Not to mention how to compare with aspartame, which is often tens of millions of times the sweetness of sucrose, and the high-power sweetener ratio of the extremely high sweetness ratio?
Aspartame is a sweetener that costs too little, and some sugar drink manufacturers also like this sweetener because it is really cheap.
The problem of erythritol is expensive, but after erythritol and sucralose solve the problems of taste, cost, safety, and calories, consumer cognition can really pry the coffin board with sugar drinks as soon as it changes.
You look at the current 0 calorie beverage recipe sheet, very clear changes.
In the past, sugary drinks mastered the definition of sweetness, and now the definition is changing.
Growth rates don't lie.
In turn, the size of the entire sugar-free market began to increase.
Looking at the sugar industry again, the trend gradually declined.
Here is a question of sugar consumption.
Whether in China or the United States, 60% of sugar is used for industrial consumption, of which 90% of industrial sugar is used for beverages, canned food, quick-frozen rice noodles and other products.
In the past, the main driver of sugar demand growth was driven by sugar drinks.
This part of the market is also the main market for sugar substitute products.
Substitute sugar and sugar, we have indeed reached the moment of confrontation, for sugar drink manufacturers, the more terrifying point is that against Japan, the growth space of domestic sugar-free drinks is too large.
The market is so big, you die, I live.
To put it bluntly, this is the ass war.
While the market size of high-power sweeteners is gradually increasing, natural sweeteners have also begun to seize the sugar substitute market.
As mentioned earlier, there are also a lot of good and uneven products in the sugar substitute, and they have to be rolled.
According to the ternary biological calculation of erythritol producer, the market space of a product of erythritol in the future is as high as 41.7 billion yuan.
6
At this time, in fact, things have logic.
Whether sugar substitutes are good or not is no longer a simple scientific problem, but actually a commercial problem.
And under the guise of health.
In the past, when playing with sugar to make money, why did no one mention health, and they were busy counting money?
Now the war between sugar generation and sugar, forcing everyone to do sugar-free product lines, have to increase the cost, and start to lift the pants artist one by one?
The last one who pretended to be like this was still selling alcohol.
Oh yes, to say unhealthy, alcohol is recognized as unhealthy by people all over the world.
I said it here for the third time, sugar substitutes are compared to water, unhealthy, and it is recommended to drink boiled water for health.
But sugar substitutes are also healthier than sugar.
Even thinking about it another layer, I think I am a little aggrieved, big brother, am I looking forward to drinking sugar-free drinks to lose weight?
I want to drink sweet and dare not be fat, I have fallen to drinking sugar substitutes, you still tell me that it is not healthy.
I don't even care about health.
It's that I'm tired, I want to drink something sweet, the price can be smaller, can be cooler.
This mouthful of sweet water is the source of my happiness, it is a thought of mine.
If you cool it, you can make me bleed back.
Don't talk about higher desires, then I can't control it.
I have been reduced to real sugar and dare not play with my life to drink, and now I rely on drinking sugar substitute to comfort myself, you stand tall and white, and tell me that sugar substitute is not good, this is not real self-discipline.
Why do I use you to explain it to me? I use you to manage me?
You'll read my list of papers first.
The war between sugar substitutes and sugar will continue indefinitely, but it is important to give consumers the choice.
I am self-disciplined today and drink boiled water.
Hungry tomorrow, drink sugar substitutes.
The day after tomorrow let go of myself, then I will drink sugar.
Is the point of what to drink? The point is that I have the opportunity to choose.
What sugar drinks are mixed with sugar-free drinks, I don't care how many manufacturers die, what I want is that I have a choice.
All the vendors who try to interfere with consumer choice, damn it.
The sources of reference for the full text are as follows:
【1】. 【Dongxing Securities】"Sugar-free" series of reports (II): The rise of sugar generation
【2】. Cathrina H. Edwards, Megan Rossi, Christopher P. Corpe, Peter J. Butterworth, Peter R. Ellis, The role of sugars and sweeteners in food, diet and health: Alternatives for the future,Trends in Food Science & Technology,Volume 56,2016,Pages 158-166, ISSN 0924-2244,
【3】. Jiaxin Zhang, Sugar Substitutes or Increased Risk of Cancer, Science and Technology Daily, March 30, 2022, 004th edition
【4】. Eloi Chazelas, Charlotte Debras, Bernard Srour, Léopold K. Fezeu, Chantal Julia, Serge Hercberg, Mélanie Deschasaux, Mathilde Touvier, Sugary Drinks, Artificially-Sweetened Beverages, and Cardiovascular Disease in the NutriNet-Santé Cohort, Journal of the American College of Cardiology, Volume 76, Issue 18,2020,Pages 2175-2177,ISSN 0735-1097,
【5】. ZHAO S Q, BAO Z X, JIANG X, et al. Research Progress on Biosafety of Artificial Sweetener Sucralose[J]. Chinese Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 2018, 34(22):3.
【6】. ABOU DONIA M B， EI MASＲY E M， ABDEL ＲAHMAN A A， et al. Splenda alters gut microflora and increases intestinal P－glycoprotein and cytochrome P － 450 in male rats［J］. J Toxicol Environ Health A， 2008， 71( 21) : 1415 － 1429.
【7】. SASAKI Y F， KAWAGUCHI S， KAMAYA A， et al. The comet assay with 8 mouse organs: Ｒesults with 39 currently used food additives［J］ . Mutation Ｒesearch，2002，519( 1－2) : 103－119
【8】. Djésia Arnone, Caroline Chabot, Anne-Charlotte Heba, Tunay Kökten,Bénédicte Caron, Franck Hansmannel, Natacha Dreumont, Ashwin N. Ananthakrishnan, Didier Quilliot, Laurent Peyrin-Biroulet, Sugars and Gastrointestinal Health, Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology,2021,,ISSN 1542-3565,
【9】. Michael D. Kendig, Kyoko Hasebe, Róisín McCague, Frances Lee, Sarah-Jane Leigh, Ria Arnold, Margaret J. Morris, Adolescent exposure to a solid high-fat, high-sugar ‘cafeteria’ diet leads to more pronounced changes in metabolic measures and gut microbiome composition than liquid sugar in female rats,Appetite, Volume 172,2022,105973, ISSN 0195-6663,
【10】. World Health Organization. (2015). Guideline: sugars intake for adults and children. World Health Organization
【11】. World Health Organization. Regional Office for Europe. (2019). Ending inappropriate promotion of commercially available complementary foods for infants and young children between 6 and 36 months in Europe: a discussion paper outlining the first steps in developing a nutrient profile model to drive changes to product composition and labelling and promotion practices in the WHO European Region. World Health Organization. Regional Office for Europe.
【12】. World Health Organization. Regional Office for Europe. (2021). Expert meeting on improving drinking-water consumption for decreasing the intake of sugar-sweetened beverages and reducing plastic waste: meeting report, 27-28 February 2020, Moscow, Russian Federation. World Health Organization. Regional Office for Europe.
【13】. Sugar Industry and Coronary Heart Disease Research: A Historical Analysis of Internal Industry Documents.JAMA Internal Medicine,2016,176 (11):1680
【14】. Sugar industry sponsorship of germ-free rodent studies linking sucrose to hyperlipidemia and cancer: An historical analysis of internal documents[J]. PLoS biology, 2017, 15(11): e2003460.
【15】. 【Ipsos】Research on consumer sugar reduction behavior and attitudes
【16】. 【Guojin Securities】Basic chemical industry research: sugar substitute: under the trend of consumption upgrading, products bloom in a hundred flowers
【17】. 【Northeast Securities】C Ternary (301206): Global hegemon of erythritol, hidden champion of the 0 sugar era
【18】. Palinthorn Nagsuwanchart, Siriruk Nakornchai, Sroisiri Thaweboon, Rudee Surarit,Mogroside, palatinose, erythritol, and xylitol differentially affect dental plaque pH in caries-active and caries-free children: An in vitro study,Pediatric Dental Journal,Volume 31, Issue 3,2021,Pages 242-247,ISSN 0917-2394,
【19】. Riina Runnel, Kauko K. Mäkinen, Sisko Honkala, Jana Olak, Pirkko-Liisa Mäkinen, Rita Nõmmela, Tero Vahlberg, Eino Honkala, Mare Saag, Effect of three-year consumption of erythritol, xylitol and sorbitol candies on various plaque and salivary caries-related variables,Journal of Dentistry,Volume 41, Issue 12,2013,Pages 1236-1244,ISSN 0300-5712,