How bad is diet soda? Will it interact with supplements?
- 04-04-2007, 02:23 PM
How bad is diet soda? Will it interact with supplements?
I try to drink plenty of filtered/bottled water (> 1 gal) a day. However sometimes I want something a little bit sweet and have a diet coke. I understand the increased sodium in such a drink but are there other reason not to have it?
Also, will it undermine any supplements?
Possibly effect an Anabolic Pump?
Right now I am taking AP and DCP (very strict about following the timing rules).
- 04-04-2007, 03:33 PM
Bump on this....Im curious as well. I drink between 1-3 diet sodas on average per day. Lately though, I've been on a minute maid light lemonade kick...E-Pharm Nutrition Representative
- 04-04-2007, 03:58 PM
Diet soda's not the best thing in the world to drink, but I can't imagine one or two per day is going to hurt anything, supplement wise or other.
04-04-2007, 04:50 PM
04-04-2007, 07:13 PM
04-04-2007, 08:00 PM
Diet coke is really bad, puts stress on your liver, causes water retention, etc... Aspartame is really one of your worst enemies. I drink diet Crush as there is sucralose, and is supposed to be better...We don't really know yet..
04-04-2007, 09:46 PM
Any artificial sweeteners that are in "diet products" on the main market are REALLY bad for you. They are now starting to link things like lupus, ms and other disease to them. Think about it they are all chemicals made in a lab . we use stevia or xylital all made from nature. As far as effecting supps don't know. I hope this helps
04-04-2007, 09:54 PM
04-04-2007, 09:58 PM
This whole "natural is good" idea is really bothersome to me.
If you all want to eat natural plants and their derivatives, go eat some Toxicodendron diversilobum. Its natural.
Hell, natural things are linked to disease all of the time. Ever hear about saturated fats and their impact on cardiovascular disease? (Excuse the obvious sarcasm. I'm unable to communicate like a reasonable person when I'm hungry.)
04-04-2007, 10:03 PM
04-04-2007, 10:07 PM
Yes, that's my point. Just because something is traditionally thought of to be "bad for you" doesn't mean it is.
04-04-2007, 10:08 PM
04-04-2007, 10:09 PM
04-04-2007, 10:10 PM
04-05-2007, 09:21 AM
i have actually had first hand experience with a friend of mine. she developed rashes, headaches etc
nothing MAJOR, but at the time no explanation was there.
i came across info on the mercola site about how aspartame and sucralose are freaky bad.
so before doing much more research i asked her to stop the diet soda's for a few days.
4 days later and all her symtoms disaapeared.
and havent returned since she stopped the soda's.
so thats saying something i guess....do your own research and make up your own mind.
the studies done on splenda are a real eye opener...as if you dont hate the FDA already.
04-05-2007, 10:32 AM
Most of the negative publicity that artificial sweetners get is nothing more than hysteria. Kinda the same thing that happens with steroids. There isnt much evidence to support claims that artificial sweetners are bad for you. Also, considering it is FDA regulated, why would it still be used in food products if it were so dangerous?
04-05-2007, 10:39 AM
Diet soda is as big of a threat as mans effect on global warming.
Denying is tantamount to holocaust denial.
04-05-2007, 11:32 AM
04-05-2007, 11:34 AM
04-05-2007, 11:37 AM
it is ofcourse, bu considering how low a dosage, i wonder what would have happened if she dran 3 or 4 cans a day!
also the longest study ON humans lasted only 8 weeks. all studies were funded by them.
and the aspartame story is worse!
04-05-2007, 11:47 AM
If theres one thing in life ive learned it can be stated two ways "you cant have your cake and eat it too" "there are no shortcuts" You change something to fix a problem and you create other problems lifes a trade off, diet pop... just drink water if its a problem for you. Most people for some unknown reason think that by saying "diet coke" they have actually advocated for their bodies, as if they had exercised. "you want a donut" "i shouldnt... but i did have a DIET coke at mcdonalds."
04-05-2007, 11:47 AM
04-05-2007, 12:16 PM
I dont believe that just because the FDA regulates it that it must be healthy. But if it was as evil as some people are lead to believe, I think they would do something about it. I mean, they recalled pet food didnt they??? Dont you think they would do something similar with artificial sweetners, which are supposedly deadly?
04-05-2007, 12:17 PM
04-05-2007, 12:35 PM
04-05-2007, 01:12 PM
I'm not saying the artificial sweeteners are good or bad. Just that you shouldn't look to the FDA to have us good citizens in their best interest. Ultimately, like you said, they are controlled by politicains and money. That includes tobacco and possibly artificial sweeteners as well.
Who knows if we'll ever know the truth about some of the things we ingest.
04-05-2007, 02:57 PM
IMO, we'll have to know one day or another, but the bad news are that it will be replaced eventually (sucralose) that might even be worse. We live in a society that wants to have everything with no effort. Same goes for those too good to be true diet sodas... We want all the sweet taste, without the calories. I have heard about a cop that used to drink 10 diet cokes a day, and was diagnosed with brain cancer. Coincidence? I ain't so sure..
04-05-2007, 06:33 PM
I work in research and things can be changed around to look good. Now the FDA is tough to get through but research is only done for a short time and if things don't die in that time span then it concidered okay. Well these people who are being diagnoed with neuro issues have been consumming diet drinks and /or products for short times or long times. that is my 2 cents
04-06-2007, 04:46 AM
04-06-2007, 04:55 AM
There are lots of reasons that studies for splenda, etc don't go past 8 weeks. For one, nobody cares to fund a super long term research study where a cohort of diet soda drinks are followed over extended periods of time. Its just not a huge concern.
04-06-2007, 09:28 AM
I care. Don't you care about the risks (your health)? What about a 8 week study on tobacco. Hmmm. Tobacco seems to cause no damage on an 8 week study..
04-06-2007, 09:35 AM
04-06-2007, 10:30 AM
Diet sodas would not exist if someone did not demonize sugar.
Sugar is not a poison. People that have problems with sugar are genetically incapable of processing it(diabetics) or they are using way too much (super size me)
The key is individual tolerance (GTF)
and controlled moderation.
The whole sugar is bad campaign started because of shortages due to the fact that sugar trading countries were not friendly toward the US(communists)
Most sugar substitutes are chemically based on industrial byproducts. (carbon bonds or alcohols structures)
04-06-2007, 02:51 PM
for those interested in hearing the mounting evidence against splenda and why it was created(a lot of negative 3rd party studies started appearing on nutrasweet) just google splenda and mercola.
as always, make up your own mind, but always remember. why you think is right may not be.
04-06-2007, 02:58 PM
And yes, damage would be found in an 8 week study of tobacco by the way. Not only would we be able to track damage done by things like carbon monoxide, which out-compete oxygen for binding position on red blood cells, but also pollutants in the smoke and almost immediately track damage done to villi by nicotine, which paralyzes villi--removing their ability to expel the pollutants you coated your lungs in. Cant' blame you for bring up that example though; most people wouldn't know any better.
Damage can be seen from smoking right away--that doesn't mean you'll develop a deadly disease right away though.
04-06-2007, 04:05 PM
04-06-2007, 06:02 PM
the US military does not allow pilots to drink diet soda before they fly because of the dizziness factor!
04-06-2007, 07:05 PM
I wouldn't doubt that at all.
But at the same time, that's not an indication that diet sodas are toxic to everyone.
If aspartame causes some people to have adverse reactions you can add it to the list of natural and healthy things that do as well.
The ONLY argument against aspartame I've ever seen is because of its methanol content, and again, it contains less methanol than an apple (by a factor of 1/2) per packet of aspartame.
There is one instance where that number may vary. If stored at 185 degrees Fahrenheit over the course of MONTHS that number of methanol will increase by about 4 fold.
Lets get real with ourselves here people. Some people can be so sensitive to even niacin (vitamin b3) that amounts most people would have absolutely no problems with will make them super flush, hot, and dizziness.
04-07-2007, 12:25 AM
How many of you guys ensure that the supplements that you take have received a study longer than 8 weeks?
04-07-2007, 10:54 AM
Similar Forum Threads
- By Heavyappetite in forum Nutrition / HealthReplies: 18Last Post: 05-08-2013, 08:54 PM
- By MentalTwitch in forum IGF-1/GHReplies: 26Last Post: 11-29-2009, 06:37 PM
- By Brfish in forum Training ForumReplies: 14Last Post: 07-20-2009, 01:44 AM
- By pjsallday in forum AnabolicsReplies: 15Last Post: 01-14-2007, 09:55 AM
- By snakebyte05 in forum AnabolicsReplies: 14Last Post: 01-02-2005, 12:02 AM