This 'sugar tax' crap is doing my head in!

I don't know how dangerous it is but i avoid anything with aspartame in it, now, as I've found it's a trigger for my migraines. I suffer less now i avoid the stuff.

I've noticed now shops are promoting sugar free drinks over their sugared alternatives, ie two bottles of diet coke for 2 pound or whatever it was yet the normal coke wasn't on offer. Fine if you can tolerate aspartame I guess.

There are at least some more stevia sweetened drinks out there now, so I have some choice at least.
 
Ah, the classic ‘I don’t know what I’m talking about if I get a single follow up question’ response. Presumably you’ve heard bad things based off when they fed rats or mice large quantities of it? I’m sure you weren’t just chatting **** from a position of ignorance, so please enthral is with your knowledge, my learned friend.

http://bfy.tw/GQGB

Renamed it? What are you drivelling about?

http://bfy.tw/GQGC

Just lol. I am challenging you to prove your statement? I don't need to do my own research as I have seen countless decent sources say it is perfectly safe for human consumption in the amounts used for food/drinks. I'm not doubting myself :confused:

http://bfy.tw/GQGI
 
This is what happens when people vote for authoritarian governments. They want to control your life, to interfere in your everyday choices. Nanny state.

The people get the government they deserve.
 

https://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/Goodfood/Pages/the-truth-about-aspartame.aspx

Aspartame due to all the fake news scare stories has been looked at in depth.

There have been no major findings in terms of risks, if you want to link some peer reviewed journals that provide some kind of solid indication of risk I think i'm going to avoid all half baked health blog nuts who write nonsense....

However, there is some information that consuming sweeteners can increase cravings. I'm not fully up to date though but I looked into this myself a few years back. Unless there is some other ground breaking information that has emerged recently.
 
Aspartame is poison... so it's very bad, for everyone
Ah, the classic ‘I don’t know what I’m talking about if I get a single follow up question’ response. Presumably you’ve heard bad things based off when they fed rats or mice large quantities of it? I’m sure you weren’t just chatting **** from a position of ignorance, so please enthral is with your knowledge, my learned friend.
I know nothing about Aspartame, except that I was once told by a doctor to avoid it as it was potentially carcinogenic.

So I don't touch the stuff.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24436139

One of the top google results. "Potentially carcinogenic - more studies needed. Old studies probably inaccurate." Paraphrasing.

2017 paper: https://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007/978-3-319-26478-3_5-1
 
Last edited:
These sugar free fake sugar nonsense drinks give me a headache. Its 100% a poison if its making my brain hurt. Drank one by pure accident the other day. Horrible stuff. Humans have been eating sugar for thousands of years. Ill be damned if i have to be penalised just because society is trying to sustain the lives of fat people.
 
If you order Coke and they serve you anything but COKE, thats passing off and can get them into proper trouble with licensing. That also goes for being served PESPI when you've asked for COKE
 
These sugar free fake sugar nonsense drinks give me a headache. Its 100% a poison if its making my brain hurt. Drank one by pure accident the other day. Horrible stuff. Humans have been eating sugar for thousands of years. Ill be damned if i have to be penalised just because society is trying to sustain the lives of fat people.
Everything is a poison at the right dose, or if you're allergic to it and just because you get a headache after drinking something doesn't mean it's terrible or going to poison you (you may be slightly sensitive to something else in the drink, or it may just be coincidence).

Also yes, people have been eating sugar for thousands of years, but never in the sort of quantities that we eat it today, or in the sort of refined manner that we do now, there are also many different types of sugars which vary depending on source and how it's been processed and have different effects on the body*.
It used to be the case that any form of refined sugar was expensive and hard to get, so you only tended to take it in small amounts (if any) and got most of your sugar via natural forms such as honey as a sweetener or more commonly the (relatively) small amounts found in fruit, you certainly didn't routinely down 30-40 grams of it in a drink several times a day, then go and have food that had large quantities of it added as part of your daily diet.

One can of coke probably has more refined sugar in it than most people 100 years ago had in the average day.



*One of the reasons American foods use corn syrup (which from memory is incredibly unhealthy for you) in large quantities is because it's virtually a waste product thanks to things like farm subsidies to produce corn that isn't actually profitable to sell for normal food use.
 
Thank god, sick of dealing with liquid sugar in any manifestation. At least i can enjoy my poison of choice without wondering if i'll get fat as well.
 
Yeah this nonsense is ******* me off as well.

Toby Carvery tried to spin me the line they had sold out of cherry pepsi so it wasn't available.
 
One can of coke probably has more refined sugar in it than most people 100 years ago had in the average day.

This statement is surprisingly accurate! Because 1917 was the middle of the first world war there is a decent amount of research into what people were eating, the average working class family (The vast majority of the population) were getting through 3.2lb of sugar a week which equates to somewhere around 50g each per day
 
I know nothing about Aspartame, except that I was once told by a doctor to avoid it as it was potentially carcinogenic.

So I don't touch the stuff.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24436139

One of the top google results. "Potentially carcinogenic - more studies needed. Old studies probably inaccurate." Paraphrasing.

2017 paper: https://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1007/978-3-319-26478-3_5-1

Yea and after all the bad press, they changed the name of it to "Amino Sweet". So if you see anything with that in it, it's actually Aspartame.
 
Yea and after all the bad press, they changed the name of it to "Amino Sweet". So if you see anything with that in it, it's actually Aspartame.
No different to it being sold as nutrasweet in the past. Things get branded because people want to buy a thing, not a chemical.
 
And go back to the 1700 and it was likely around just 5g a day.

Lots of researchers in the field saying the current recommendation off 30g a day is far far to high.
Shame health education is so poor, just look at how many people assume they are fine becuase they are thin. You are at a lower risk.this however doesn't not mean you are fine. NHS also does not do proper testing. Instead using hba1c when they do test this only tells you when your body is allrwady broken. Both pre diabetes and diabetes. Where they could test other things like fasting insulin levels and tell you decades in advance a better risk estimate for you.
 
Yea and after all the bad press, they changed the name of it to "Amino Sweet". So if you see anything with that in it, it's actually Aspartame.
No they haven't, go to the shop and have a look. It's all named aspatame, amino sweet along with several other names are just brand name which is rearely used.

And if your'e worried about that, how about the hundreds of name for sugar.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom