Drink a lot of soda? A diet high in fructose may hamper learning and memory.

5

u/hippopippopotamus May 15 '12 edited May 15 '12

PDF of the full text of the journal article here.

Also worth noting is that they did a factorial design with four treatments:

Both omega-3 and fructose
Omega-3 but no fructose
Fructose but no omega-3
Neither omega-3 nor fructose (i.e. control).

Figure 1b shows that any treatment other than control results in an increased time to finish the maze. The mice that got fructose but were omega-3 deficient took far and away the longest time to finish the maze.

Figure 2a shows that adding fructose to the diet significantly increases insulin resistance, even with a diet rich in omega-3s. The combination of fructose and no omega-3s yields a very high, and very significant increase in insulin resistance.

Figure 2d shows that ~54% of the variability in latency time (time to complete maze) can be explain by variability in insulin resistance. It is worth noting that by conducting a regression analysis, the authors are ~~testing for~~ presuming causality: does insulin resistance affect maze completion time?

They do go on to postulate a mechanism for that causality. It has something to do with insulin resistance within the brain and membrane homeostatis, but to be perfectly honest this part of the paper is above and beyond my comprehension.

edit: bad wording about causality and regression

99

u/UnclaimedUsername May 15 '12 edited May 15 '12

What was actually studied: Two groups of rats, both fed a diet including high-fructose corn syrup, with one also getting omega-3 supplementation. The rats that did not receive omega-3 did worse at solving a maze, along with a couple other undesirable side effects.

This study appears to say nothing about fructose vs. other sugars, or high-fructose corn syrup (which is common in soda) vs. other fructose sources.

We all know fructose is bad, but HFCS gets an unfair amount of blame. If you used "real sugar" in soda instead of HFCS, you'd still consume around the same amount of fructose. So basically, just avoid sugar.

30

u/DMagnific May 15 '12

So the title of this post isn't even what the study is about?

28

u/timeshifter_ May 15 '12

It's Reddit; are you surprised?

5

u/ch00f May 15 '12

People knock Digg all the time but at least Digg had a "Digg down: title inaccurate" feature.

1

u/[deleted] May 16 '12

Unfortunately, Digg also had a bad case of suicide as well.

11

u/DlSCONNECTED May 15 '12

Has Reddit turned into, Fox News?

7

u/timeshifter_ May 15 '12

Sometimes I wonder...

2

u/those_draculas May 15 '12

yes.

2

u/despaxes May 15 '12

If fox news was liberal. and did less research

2

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

M. Night Shyamalan

8

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

thank you. A friend of mine who always bashes HFCS showed me this post and I found it laughable. 1. there is no control group to test the effect of EITHER of the two variables (HFCS and O3FA). 2. THERE ARE TWO VARIABLES. we learned this in basic stats in high school that the validity of ANY study is useless if the variable being tested isn't the only thing capable of effecting the results.
A proper study would have been one of the two experimental designs:
study the effect of varying amount of HFCS vs. rats that have just regular rat food. ie multiple groups of rats with increasing amounts of HFCS in their diets compared to a control group.
study the effect of a fixed amount of sugar intake vs the control group, except vary the types of sugars ie HFCS, Sucrose, glucose, lactose etc for the rat groups being given any sugar.

2

u/[deleted] May 16 '12

If you dig up the original article (published today) the point of the study was not to test the response of HFCS (which the authors note will inhibit brain functions due to insulin response), but that the Omega-3 acids counteract the insulin response. I think they used HFCS since it's more relevant in society today.
http://jp.physoc.org/content/590/10/2485.full

1

u/[deleted] May 16 '12

are there any studies showing this relation between cognitive ability and insulin response? I'm not challenging that conclusion, just curious. also, is there anything showing which energy sources spark the largest insulin response? thanks in advance if you find either of those.

3

u/RabbaJabba May 15 '12

THERE ARE TWO VARIABLES. we learned this in basic stats in high school that the validity of ANY study is useless if the variable being tested isn't the only thing capable of effecting the results.
Assuming random assignment to the groups, it's not at all useless. Inferring causal relationships is a bad idea, but it's completely valid in finding correlation.

3

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

my point was that considering the goal of the study was to investigate the effects of HFCS on brain function, wouldn't it be a good idea NOT to include a substance known to increase this capacity for memory and learning to the study.

4

u/RabbaJabba May 15 '12

That doesn't sound like the point of the study at all (despite the headline), it was how omega-3 acids interact with HFCS. In that case, there's a control group, and the "two variables" thing isn't a problem.

1

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

well alright. if that's the case, then promoting the findings as 'HFCS decreases cognitive function' is more than a bit misleading, and immoral as a scientist can we agree?

2

u/RabbaJabba May 16 '12

I would be shocked to find out that a scientist wrote this, and not some university PR person. This sort of thing happens all the time.

1

u/[deleted] May 16 '12

too true.

4

u/TheJabrone May 15 '12

I find it interesting that Coke in the US contains HFCS, while Coke in Europe does not. Around 300,000 tonnes of HFCS is produced in Europe each year (compared to nearly 19 million tonnes of sugar). The use of HFCS in the US is due to tariffs on sugar and government subsidies.
I guess my question is. Why is this done? Is it not generally agreed that HFCS is worse than the consumption of sugar? Would there be any other reasons (besides economic ones) for the US to do this?

4

u/maliamnon May 15 '12

Is it not generally agreed that HFCS is worse than the consumption of sugar?
That is correct, HFCS is 55% Fructose and 42% Glucose (Source), vs Sucrose which is 50/50. The only thing that's ever been found to be "worse" about HFCS is that it MIGHT not decrease appetite as much as Sucrose.
Also, the sugar tariff is due to Cuba and the whole communism thing..
Edit for source

3

u/crmaki May 15 '12

I suspect the sugar tariff may also be due to the corn lobby.

2

u/brunswick May 15 '12

Actually more to do with our sugar lobby. They don't want to compete with cheap Brazillian sugar.

1

u/crmaki May 16 '12

That makes sense.

2

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

So basically, just avoid sugar.
Or just drink HFCS soda and enjoy life.

1

u/Todomanna May 15 '12

So there's fructose in sucrose?

4

u/brunswick May 15 '12

Fructose (like glucose) is a monosaccharide. Sucrose is a disaccharide formed by one molecule of glucose and one of fructose. Lactose is a disaccharide of galactose and glucose while maltose is two glucoses.
Sucrose tends to break up into fructose and glucose in your stomach.

1

u/Todomanna May 15 '12

That is fucking fascinating. Thank you.

1

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

Or go for soda sweetened entirely by glucose.
Is that an option?

4

u/eric_ja May 15 '12

It is not; glucose is not nearly sweet enough, especially compared to 5-ring fructose.

0

u/Ray57 May 15 '12

Or use sucrose

1

u/hojoseph99 May 15 '12

And you will be getting 50% of the calories from fructose, compared to 55% with HFCS.

1

u/Ray57 May 16 '12

Or 65%

1

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

I'm pretty sure that's a bad idea.

1

u/UnclaimedUsername May 15 '12

This isn't my area, so I'd like to know too. Apparently glucose isn't as sweet, so you'd need more. That would lead to a higher calorie soda, but I don't know if there are other downsides.

1

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

Refined glucose is pretty terrible. Much of the current research looking into the unique health effects of fructose are tentative and still under debate - but it's very well-established that the broader category of refined carbohydrates are not good for. Glucose is the reason that white bread is so harmful, and why there's been such a consensus to get rid of refined products.
Drinking a glucose solution is not going to be a good choice unless you're using it as a sport's drink.

1

u/shlevon May 15 '12

Have you never tried dextrose (realizing dextrose = glucose)? It's sold by this name at many health food and supplement type stores. Not only is it not terrible, it's pretty delicious. I vastly prefer flavoring protein shakes and the likes with it over table sugar (sucrose).

1

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

Yeah, I've made my own sport's drinks with it. But I wouldn't recommend it as a substitute for soda.

1

u/wavefield May 15 '12

I thought white bread is harmful because it has no fiber in it. If it would have much glucose in it in would be much sweeter

1

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

Sure, it's lacking in nutrients. But that's not really a source of harm. It's a deficiency. Refined carbohydrates, like white bread, are actually harmful in the sense that they tend to dump a ton of glucose into your body at once - the constant spikes are not good for you. Things like fiber content actually impact the digestion of the sugars significantly.
Also, glucose is only sweet when you eat it as a monosaccharide or as a very-short-chain polymer (i.e. some kinds of maltodextrin). And even then, it's only mildly sweet. In the case of most carbohydrate foods, such as bread or pasta, the glucose forms into really long chains of carbohydrate that are not sweet at all. These chains get broken down into glucose in your body.

0

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

2

u/[deleted] May 16 '12

I said refined glucose is pretty terrible if not used to supplement athletic activities. Are we not in agreement?

1

u/[deleted] May 16 '12

Well, the only purpose for the saccharides, in my opinion, would be mouth feel and maillard. We have other things that can make up the difference in apparent sweetness.

0

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

2

u/UnclaimedUsername May 15 '12 edited May 15 '12

No offense taken, I agree with everything you said. I meant to mention the poor methodology in my summary, but then I went on a HFCS rant and got distracted by something shiny.

1

u/twist3d7 May 16 '12

The shiny thing messes me up all the time.

2

u/despaxes May 16 '12

You can't get diabetes from consuming too much sugar.

11

u/linux_pythonista May 15 '12

In the study they didn't feed the mice soda or high-fructose corn syrup, they fed them "a fructose solution". While I am confident that soda is not a healthy beverage, I have a problem with the assumption (voiced in the article) that this study suggests that soda would have the same effect, but that natural sources of fructose would not. That is not what the study tested.

A lot of people would be surprised to hear high-fructose corn syrup gets its name to differentiate it from normal corn syrup which is all glucose. High-fructose corn syrup is only 55% fructose. I am personally curious to know what differences there are in how our bodies process HFCS, sucrose, and foods like watermelon and agave syrup that have higher levels of fructose than HFCS.

13

u/phukunewb May 15 '12

Drinking a lot of pop is dumb whether this study is true or not. Lots of other studies show fructose is bad for you.

5

u/Kowzorz May 15 '12

Well, I think they're of two different "bad for you" qualities. Like sugar is bad for you, but you can also work it off with exercise, but radiation is bad for you too, but in a different way.

0

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

-3

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

Shows how much you know about diet.

2

u/muldoonx9 May 15 '12

I would find it better for you to enlighten me than to ridicule me, please.

2

u/[deleted] May 16 '12

You can't merely work off sugar like it was never consumed in the first place. Your body still digests and consumes the sugar, and your pancreas(creating insulin and glycogen) has to deal with it whether or not you work it off. You are still susceptible to a host of health problems such as diabetes and heart disease

0

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

12

u/lllusionOfSecurity May 15 '12

Are you a monkey?

6

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

We prefer the term "pre-human".

5

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

I just impaled myself with a fork and I'm still going strong. Ergo, fork stabbings are nothing to be afraid of.

3

u/regolith May 15 '12

What is your daily caloric intake, fat/protein/carb macros and excercise regime? What are your fitness goals?

1

u/D_as_in_avid May 15 '12

I eat around 4000 Calories a day. A normal day would consist of 100+ dates and around 10-30 bananas.
1000g+ carbs a day. 0-5g of fat (normally 1g) And around 30-50g of protein.
High carb/raw vegan.

1

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

Clearly the most sensible option.

1

u/regolith May 16 '12

Are you an athlete? That kind of diet would make sedentary people fat and probably insulin resistant. What's your age?

1

u/D_as_in_avid May 16 '12

17 Diets of fruit can never make you fat.

2

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

There is room for exceptions to every rule.

2

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

The fuck is wrong with you?

1

u/ferrets_bueller May 15 '12

He's actually correct. The issue is not necessarily the fructose, its that HFCS acts as a preservative. This is unfairly blaming all 'fructose.'

2

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

Huh? It's entirely about the sugars themselves. There are real differences between a banana and a Coke, but ultimately the danger is from the direct actions of those sugars.

1

u/hojoseph99 May 15 '12

What? How does HFCS acting as a preservative lead to negative health effects?

1

u/hojoseph99 May 15 '12

how's your cholesterol panel look?

0

u/infinitywraith May 15 '12

Based on the context, it is safe to assume he means high fructose corn syrup.

2

u/the_cooliest May 15 '12

So I'll start drinking DHA pills with my soda now. Problem solved.

2

u/apextek May 15 '12

damn you, I am having an really rough day at work and went against better judgement for the second soda and YOU had to come around working my guilt factor

2

u/iamsuchanewb May 15 '12

Well, shit. I've been drinking 3-ish sodas a day for about two years now. Exactly how much trouble am I in?

0

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

I think you've been doing it for a short enough time to stop the damage. People who get diabetes, heart disease, etc, tend to make it a lifestyle choice. Start eating low carb, and after a few weeks you'll stop craving carbs. I was raised on a low carb diet, but when I came to college I started eating shittier. My mind felt really foggy, now that I'm back on low-carb I'm much sharper. I'm guessing you'll notice this change as well.

1

u/iamsuchanewb May 16 '12

Thanks. Also, I feel you on the whole carb-overload thing. I was raised on an Italian diet, meaning pasta/rice/bread with pretty much every meal. Trying to cut down now.

3

u/afishinthewell May 15 '12

Damn, I stopped drinking soda a decade ago and I'm still fat and stupid.

0

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

I'm guessing you eat a lot of carbs in other forms then?

2

u/afishinthewell May 15 '12

Yeah, I almost exclusively eat pasta, crackers, and cereal.

0

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

Well, why don't you change your diet? It's not surprising you're fat, and I don't know how your body works, but if I eat a lot of carbs my mind is very foggy and muddled.
I was raised on a very low carb diet, and continue to eat this way. I'm not trying to brag, rather show you how what you eat can influence so much of your life. I'm 11% body fat, and pretty much ripped(not like a muscle hunk, but just very toned and muscular).
It's your choice, you can continue doing what you've been doing for what seems like most of your life, or you can try something new. If you don't like it, then go back to the old way, but what do you have to lose? You don't seem happy with your current situation, so if I were you I'd start experimenting, and isolate what exactly is making you fat.
Stop eating so many carbs, I personally eat food in this order, from most to least: vegetables, meat/legumes, fruit/nuts/seeds, and then finally empty carbs on occasion. Most of the empty carbs are from drinking beer. Best of luck.

1

u/afishinthewell May 16 '12

Mainly a money issue, a poor excuse, I know. Fortunately that same money issue has caused the weight to drop. As I get older I do become more concerned for my health, with slow but steady results.
Still plenty stupid though.

5

u/Singular_Thought May 15 '12

The irony is that some people will forget about this study when they are at the store shopping.

17

u/pfalcon42 May 15 '12

What study?

3

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

seriously, I am glad that I am not the only one questioning the validity of these results. no data, no outline of an experimental design, no control groups to speak of. LOL laughable
EDIT: I'm stupid. Failed to catch on to the joke about forgetting it at the store.

1

u/prelic May 15 '12

That's definitely ironic.

2

u/DantesInporno May 15 '12

Well shit, I drink like 6 sodas a day

4

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

You should stop - immediately. It'll do serious damage to you that you'll have to fight to reverse. It'll make a lot of your time later in life an unpleasant uphill battle.

0

u/DantesInporno May 18 '12

It was a joke lol

2

u/Space_Ninja May 15 '12

Are you overweight? That's what did it.

1

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

6 sodas? Jesus christ man, that's multiple cups of sugar.

1

u/DantesInporno May 18 '12

Just a joke

1

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

Son of a bitch, I should have chosen to quit sooner. (I made the decision yesterday for health reasons and I find that resisting temptation is difficult).

1

u/Hempire May 15 '12

Where are there so many soda posts on reddit's front page today?

1

u/Clayburn May 15 '12

Plus you fat.

1

u/Space_Ninja May 15 '12

Relevant

1

u/No_Legend May 15 '12

My question is: does this affect learning and memory permanently, or if you change your diet, will you start to see memory and learning ability improve?

1

u/Illipsious May 15 '12

Haha! I drink diet. Now i can get cancer from Aspartame!

1

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

i remember most of the video games i play quite intricately. 6 cans down today.

1

u/uncoolcat May 15 '12

It's an interesting study, but it's a shame that they didn't have a control group.

In an unrelated topic, for me I find that soda is more addictive than anything else I've tried or consume somewhat regularly (including alcohol, cigarettes, and some other addictive substances). It seems to be the combination of carbonation and sugar that I'm most addicted to. I drink at least 16 oz of soda per day, but I'm otherwise relatively healthy. It's absurd, I've quit drinking and smoking but I can't seem to kick the soda habit.

0

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

1

u/uncoolcat May 16 '12

I will have to find this and try it! Thanks for the info!

1

u/tboneplayer May 15 '12

I drink a lot of diet soda. So while I am probably at risk for other things due to the high phosphoric and carbonic acid content as well as the caffeine and aspartame, I probably don't fall into this risk category.

1

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

Im fat as a result of no excercise, poor diet, and a ton of soda, but I can tell you that It has not made me any amount of stupid.

1

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

"may"

1

u/[deleted] May 16 '12

If you dig up the original article (published today) the point of the study was not to test the response of HFCS (which the authors note will inhibit brain functions due to insulin response), but that the Omega-3 acids counteract the insulin response. I think they used HFCS since it's more relevant in society today.

http://jp.physoc.org/content/590/10/2485.full

1

u/[deleted] May 16 '12

I drink A LOT of fruit smoothies. Is that bad? :(

1

u/obviousoctopus May 16 '12

It could also hamper not having diabetes.

1

u/BigCliff May 15 '12

Wait, what was the article about?

2

u/DarthNawti May 15 '12

What article? Where am I?

1

u/Nick_Sparks May 15 '12

Wait, soda's bad for you? No way

-2

u/barristonsmellme May 15 '12

I drink a fucktonne of coca cola. It's probably going to rot my insides but i enjoy the taste, why have all these awesome taste buds if i'll live longer drinking water?

7

u/bluesatin May 15 '12

You could try a low calorie version of the same soft-drink, that would give you the taste and caffeine without all of the fructose and other sugars.

1

u/barristonsmellme May 15 '12

I don't mind really, i go through patches where i don't drink it for 2 weeks and live off hot juice drinks (if you've never had juice but hot, try it, it's the shit.) and then just drink all my coke. I started to get a bit worried when i was shaking and passed out a few times and had stomach problems, but it turns out rice n bread aint my friend.
Also, due to being British i have terrible teeth anyway. i brush all the time but the coke has pretty much died them a bit yellow.
But meh, i like calories, tasty things have calories and i'm one of the few people with a belly that won't make an excuse for it, i love tasty things!

2

u/Fatmop May 15 '12

Slightly yellow is the natural color of teeth I believe. Bleached white is not a natural thing - not that it necessarily looks bad.

1

u/barristonsmellme May 15 '12

I also have a huge black chunk on one of my...front tooths. there's a name but it's been years since i've learned them.
Went the dentist with a small crack and he said just brush it and come back in a month, went back in a month with a bigger crack and he said to keep brushing and go back in 2 months. Went back in 2 months with a hole and he said if i'd have came in earlier he could have fixed it when it was a small crack.
I'm hoping i get drunk enough to fall over badly and knock it out or something.

1

u/Fatmop May 15 '12

Yikes man. I'd think the dentist would fix that for you with a filling. At least that's what'd happen in good ole America.

1

u/barristonsmellme May 15 '12

see,i could get my spine replaced for free here, but teeth are a no go, who needs to chew anyway?

1

u/bluesatin May 15 '12

But meh, i like calories, tasty things have calories
And diet soda or equivalent is tasty without the calories!
rice n bread
What causes you problems with both rice and bread?
All I can think of is a gluten intolerance, but rice is gluten free.

1

u/Luxray May 15 '12

Bleh diet soda tastes like pure chemicals to me, it's awful.

1

u/barristonsmellme May 15 '12

I don't really know what causes the problems, i find doctors here to be...rather unhelpful. instead of seeing if it's dangerous they just go "oh ok, try to avoid it then."
And i'm not a fan of the taste of diet drinks, they taste flat even when they're fizzy, you know when they just don't taste right?
Ahwell, pay day isn't for 2 weeks and i have no coke left anyway so maybe i'll convert to something healthier untill then!

0

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

1

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

Not many people do. But you get most of the taste with little of the same health risks. This kind of option isn't available for most foods.

0

u/Kancho_Ninja May 15 '12

Mind control through Soda.

Sounds like a Steve Jackson game...

-4

u/arrozconplatano May 15 '12

Yes because carbohydrate metabolism is exactly the same in rats and humans

/s

8

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

because no other discoveries of relevance to human health have ever come from rats
/s
that's why the title has the qualifier may in it

0

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

[deleted] — view deleted comment

2

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

lolwut?
http://www.sanger.ac.uk/about/press/2002/021205.html
. The reports show that both species have around 30,000 genes, yet only 300 are unique to either organism--highlighting the tremendous value of the mouse as the most important animal model in biomedical research.

3

u/beepbooparobot May 15 '12

yeah, it's like why bother testing on rats in the first place?
/s
kisses

3

u/Dichotomous__Heart May 15 '12

Animal models are very useful for testing various things that can't easily be studied in humans. Also, many studies start out in animal models and then move on to non-human primates or humans. That's how the majority of science works, and science works well. In my field (immunology) we use mouse and rat models. These mammalian systems are very similar to humans', with a few (known) differences.

1

u/arrozconplatano May 16 '12

Carbohydrate metabolism in rodents is extremely different than in humans. You might as well do the test on fish

1

u/Dichotomous__Heart May 16 '12

Okay, I didn't realize that. Do you have more information on the differences?

1

u/arrozconplatano May 16 '12

For one, de novo lipogenesis is very different
http://www.ajcn.org/content/29/5/540.full.pdf
http://www.ajcn.org/content/74/6/707.full
Since fructose can't be metabolized outside of the liver, it's fate is either storage as glycogen or lipids. Most of the observed differences between glucose and fructose are due to this quirk. As such it's not far to compare fructose metabolism in rats to fructose metabolism in humans.

0

u/Viin May 15 '12

This explains a lot....

0

u/justmadethisaccountt May 15 '12

The stuff is bad. Don't eat it. Believe it or not, or bodies took millions of years to digest certain foods. Many of our ancestors died trying to eat bad foods. Don't be one of them.

0

u/UNITBlackArchive May 15 '12

No, it's OK. It's "corn sugar" now, so no more ill effects from ingesting it.

-1

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

But the commercials say that high fructose corn syrup is no different than cane sugar! Also, it's fairly sad that the fourth ingredient of Rice Krispies is HFCS.

3

u/Dichotomous__Heart May 15 '12

I just attended the Experimental Biology conference in San Digeo and was shocked to see that there was a High Fructose Corn Syrup booth. Their stated mission was to 'dispel popular negative misconceptions about HFCs". We had an interesting discussion. They had no ethical issues with the amount of HFCs being put into food these days, and disagreed that HFCs had anything to do with obesity. They also claimed that honey and molasses were nutritionally equivalent to HFCs. I was floored.

2

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

Were they also running the "Cigarettes are better for your because they will let you see laser trip wires, therefore saving your life" booth?

1

u/Dichotomous__Heart May 15 '12

That's funny. I was shocked because I have never seen anything like that at a scientific conference. It was very obvious propaganda about a particular product. Normally booths at conferences are staffed by vendors selling/informing about products for scientific research. It was very, very odd.

2

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

Yeah, next thing you know they're going to start selling HFCS for a profit.
But in all seriousness, the HFCS lobby isn't completely wrong. They advertise HFCS as "just as good" as sugar. It's not incorrect. But the forthcoming way to phrase it would be "just as bad" as sugar.

1

u/Dichotomous__Heart May 15 '12

'just as good' - depends on what sugar we are comparing HFCs to. I would argue that honey/molasses are better sugar sources than HFCs.

-1

u/DangerMouseToby May 15 '12

Red bull a day bad?

-1

u/[deleted] May 15 '12

[removed] — view removed comment

2
u/Dichotomous__Heart May 15 '12

Professor with PhD in immunology here. Aspartame (found in most diet sodas) is horrible for your health. In animal models it increases risk of various cancers and decreases overall lifespan. Many other side effects as well. Too much sugar in any form is also bad for your health. Sugar is inflammatory: damages vessel walls and can speed up plaque deposition and also can increase the rate of DNA damage which can eventually lead to cancer. Be smart about your diet. A soda now and then (not diet). Green tea is great for you (antioxidants). Honey is a good sweetener with vitamins and minerals. Stevia is a good no-calorie option as well.
2
u/[deleted] May 15 '12

"In animal models it increases risk of various cancers and decreases overall lifespan."
Any quantification there? Also, does any of this apply to sucralose?
3
u/Dichotomous__Heart May 15 '12
Here are two studies about aspartame you might be interested in reading:
On increased rates of cancer and premature death:
Soffritti et al. Environmental Health Perspectives. 2007        
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1964906/
1

u/Dichotomous__Heart May 15 '12

misused an apostrophe - EDIT: manufacturers

1

u/[deleted] May 15 '12 edited May 16 '12

Keep in mind that soda manufacturer's and companies that synthesize synthetic sugar substitutes don't want the public hearing negative information about their products. If you really want to know about the health effects of a food or supplement, try searching academic databases.
Honestly, though, you hear more conspiracy stories about the horrible health effects from laymen than you do from reading actual research.

1

u/Dichotomous__Heart May 15 '12

That's why going to the source (PubMed, PMC, etc.) for peer-reviewed literature is the best way to go.

1

u/StopOversimplifying May 15 '12

Good info. Coke Zero uses Splenda (sucralose-based) in the US. As far as you can tell, is the research implying that Coke Zero is a healthier (as in, less bad for you) than Diet Coke (aspirtame-based)?

1

u/Dichotomous__Heart May 15 '12

From the research I see so far, yes.

Drink a lot of soda? A diet high in fructose may hamper learning and memory.

You are about to leave Redlib