Mars Bars, KitKats, And Dairy Milk Chocolates To Get Smaller In New Sugar Crackdown

[Garacesh]

I can't speak for whether sucralose does or does not trigger insulin production, but I thought the go-to sweetener was aspartame? Sucralose AFAIK (and I'm happy to be proven wrong) is mostly found in powdered sugar substitutes and not already in stuff?

Whilst that doesn't make it any potentially less harmful, it does limit our exposure to it.

 

Exercise while watching TV

Don't watch TV

Play Ingress

ded gaem

 

Edit:

Source: XKCD

Edited February 7, 2017 by Garacesh

[Duranis]

Really? "When study participants drank sucralose, their blood sugar peaked at a higher level than when they drank only water before consuming glucose. Insulin levels also rose about 20 percent higher. So the artificial sweetener was related to an enhanced blood insulin and glucose response."

I'd say that (my link) is a reasonable study which shows there is some correlation, even if the cause is not yet understood.

It's not a reasonable study though. It's a single study with 17 people and the results are the complete opposite to pretty much every major study already done on it (including by the likes of the FDA). Not to mention their methodology was flawed as was their reporting.

 

For a couple of much more methodical studies take a look at some of the links below (there have been a TON of studies done on it):

https://www.andeal.org/worksheet.cfm?worksheet_id=251763

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14647086

 

and the FDA report, but if you can read your way through that without falling asleep your a better man than me

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-1998-04-03/pdf/98-8750.pdf

 

This probably bugs me more than it should because I have had massive arguments with my sister in law about it. My Mrs had gestational diabetes and the SIL basically accused her of poisoning the baby because she had foods with artificial sweeteners in and "they cause cancer and will mess with your blood sugar level, its been proven and your hurting the baby". I wont repeat exactly what I told her here but it included telling her not to base her life on BS clickbait she read on facebook which is what this study reads like (and the original link was based around what some BS merchant was passing off to sell a book).

 

Edit:

 

I agree it is really hard to get exercising as an adult. I started doing the couch to 5K which I was actually really enjoying but I had major breathing issues after about 3 weeks of it, the Doctors didn't care so I pretty much had to give it up. Going to start again in the summer as I think the cold/damp air was a problem.

 

I'm also taking up learning blacksmithing alongside metal and woodworking. I always wanted to learn to do something practical and swinging a hammer for a few hours is surprisingly good exercise.

Edited February 7, 2017 by Duranis

[pcstru]

It's not a reasonable study though. It's a single study with 17 people and the results are the complete opposite to pretty much every major study already done on it (including by the likes of the FDA).

Their P value was 0.03 or less, (in other words the chances that the results are just chance is ~1/33 ), so the fact that the study was only 17 patients does not invalidate the fact of a metabolic response in insulin production. I'd agree that the study has a very limited scope but it nicely falsifies the claim you made that any claim to a link between sweeteners and insulin production is "BS" and "an outright lie".

Not to mention their methodology was flawed as was their reporting.

That would be worth elaborating on - an actual detailed criticism of the study, but ... you didn't, you just claim it and then move swiftly on. Perhaps in the absence of a detailed critique you might care to share your qualifications or give some other reason why you are an authority readers should believe in preference to Dr's Pepino et al?

 

Looking at your links, the first one is a study of 26 individuals, 13 with diabetes 13 without, the conclusion was : ""These results support the conclusion that sucralose consumption does not adversely affect short-term blood glucose control in indiviudals with diabetes".

 

That is not saying there is no effect on insulin production, just that there is no adverse short term effect.

[6Foot2]

Link: Austerity bites? Less chocolate for your money as packets shrink

 

Confectionery firm Mars is shrinking the pack size of favourite sweets including Maltesers, M&M’s and Minstrels by up to 15% in the latest example of an industry trend that is shortchanging shoppers.

 

It is the second time within a year that Mars has reduced the number of Maltesers in its sharing bags, which now weigh in at just 93g. Last autumn packs of Maltesers, billed as the lighter way to enjoy chocolate, shrank from 121g to 103g...

[Arthur]

Cadbury's Dairy Milk is about to get a lot healthier

 

Chocoholics who are struggling to curb their sugar habit, we've got some great news. Next year, Cadbury will launch a new version of its iconic purple-wrapped Dairy Milk with 30% less sugar.

 

It's part of the confectionery giant's plan to tackle the obesity crisis, including childhood obesity, in the UK – and it's been in the making for two years.