Quizzes & Puzzles20 mins ago
Sugar
Excuse me if this is a sill question .
I and her indoors was talking this morning about the need to reduce our sugar intake .
A bottle of soft drink contains 76 g of sugar - If you dilute it with water , does the 76 g sugar decreases or does it remain the same ?
I and her indoors was talking this morning about the need to reduce our sugar intake .
A bottle of soft drink contains 76 g of sugar - If you dilute it with water , does the 76 g sugar decreases or does it remain the same ?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Bazile. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.I understand that a lot of "sugar free" drinks contain Aspartame to provide the sweetness taste which I gather is worse for you healthwise than the original sugar.
http:// article s.merco la.com/ sites/a rticles /archiv e/2011/ 08/03/j ust-how -bad-is -aspart ame.asp x
http://
The same amount of sugar remains, but its concentration is diluted. If you were to consume all of the revised,diluted volume you would consume all the sugar that was originally there.
Just wanted to add one link, following Waks link to Mercola re the safety of Aspartame. I really would urge anyone not to use Mercola as an authoritative source for anything other than fear-mongering or conspiracy theories. Aspartame is possibly one of the most reviewed and tested food additives ever,and every review, every study points to its safety, unless you are one of the very few poor unfortunates around the globe who suffers from PKU, a very rare heritable condition.
http:// www.foo d.gov.u k/multi media/p dfs/asp artameo pinion. pdf
In fact the EU have recently conducted yet another review in 2013, full results of which are to be published in 2014, but which fully support the findings from its last review in 2002, which was that Aspartame was safe. It's a tiresome "controversy" and it really should be put to bed.
Just wanted to add one link, following Waks link to Mercola re the safety of Aspartame. I really would urge anyone not to use Mercola as an authoritative source for anything other than fear-mongering or conspiracy theories. Aspartame is possibly one of the most reviewed and tested food additives ever,and every review, every study points to its safety, unless you are one of the very few poor unfortunates around the globe who suffers from PKU, a very rare heritable condition.
http://
In fact the EU have recently conducted yet another review in 2013, full results of which are to be published in 2014, but which fully support the findings from its last review in 2002, which was that Aspartame was safe. It's a tiresome "controversy" and it really should be put to bed.
Acesulfame K is another sweetener, with a similar level of sweetness to aspartame, compared to sucrose ( about 200 times sweeter).
Nowadays, you will often find a blend of 2 sweeteners in fizzy drinks, simply because it would appear through taste and preference tests that the blend of sweeteners can cancel out that "artificial" or bitter aftertaste that some people have reported with sweeteners.
As to safety - There have been many safety tests,mostly animal studies, conducted over the decades since it was first found, and all conclude it is safe with no immediate or long term adverse risks. There has been 1 study where it was claimed that it might be a carcinogen, but that claim did not stand scrutiny.
Bottom line - I have every confidence that such sweeteners are perfectly safe, unless you have PKU (aspartame), or are drinking 100s of cans of fizzy drinks per day :)
http:// ec.euro pa.eu/f ood/fs/ sc/scf/ out52_e n.pdf
Nowadays, you will often find a blend of 2 sweeteners in fizzy drinks, simply because it would appear through taste and preference tests that the blend of sweeteners can cancel out that "artificial" or bitter aftertaste that some people have reported with sweeteners.
As to safety - There have been many safety tests,mostly animal studies, conducted over the decades since it was first found, and all conclude it is safe with no immediate or long term adverse risks. There has been 1 study where it was claimed that it might be a carcinogen, but that claim did not stand scrutiny.
Bottom line - I have every confidence that such sweeteners are perfectly safe, unless you have PKU (aspartame), or are drinking 100s of cans of fizzy drinks per day :)
http://
Lazygun, Here's another one of Mercola's efforts for you to discredit if you wish, particularly the part which says:-
Credible Evidence Validates Corporate Fraud and Manipulation.
As Dr. Mercola says, the majority of the tests in the USA are carried out by the people and companies who make the product and it is their own interest to prove it to be OK.
I think he talks a lot of sense about many things which obviously upsets the manufacturers.
http:// product s.merco la.com/ sweet-m isery-D VD/?e_c id=2013 1206Z2_ DNL_YRP _3& utm_sou rce=dnl &ut m_mediu m=email &ut m_conte nt=yrp3 &ut m_campa ign=201 31206Z2 &et _cid=DM 34505&a mp;et_r id=3586 33053
Credible Evidence Validates Corporate Fraud and Manipulation.
As Dr. Mercola says, the majority of the tests in the USA are carried out by the people and companies who make the product and it is their own interest to prove it to be OK.
I think he talks a lot of sense about many things which obviously upsets the manufacturers.
http://
Its not compelling, Wak. Its just fear-mongering. He presents no credible evidence whatsoever.
You want to believe this stuff,well thats up to you of course- but I would expect most people to want to base their belief on credible,reliable evidence rather than scare-mongering and conspiracy theory - and thats all Mercola is.
You want to believe this stuff,well thats up to you of course- but I would expect most people to want to base their belief on credible,reliable evidence rather than scare-mongering and conspiracy theory - and thats all Mercola is.
Agreeing to differ suggests a kind of equivalence in the respective arguments. I do not think that is true here. If you think Mercola is offering you straight, unbiased, reliable health information you would be incorrect.
He deliberately fosters conspiracy theories and scare-mongering and has done for years- and he does this to make money, peddling over-priced "mercola-approved" supplements and services to any of the credulous that are taken in by the act. He is a quack, plain and simple, and in my opinion a dangerous one.
So no, I do not think I can "agree to disagree" :)
He deliberately fosters conspiracy theories and scare-mongering and has done for years- and he does this to make money, peddling over-priced "mercola-approved" supplements and services to any of the credulous that are taken in by the act. He is a quack, plain and simple, and in my opinion a dangerous one.
So no, I do not think I can "agree to disagree" :)
Hot off the press; Opinion from the latest European Food Safety Agency. Most thorough review of all the evidence and studies conducted on Aspartame and its risks. Verdict; Safe, except for patients with the rare disorder PKU
http:// www.efs a.europ a.eu/en /press/ news/13 1210.ht m
http://