It uncovered eight WHO panelists involved with assessing safe levels of aspartame consumption who are beverage industry consultants who currently or previously worked with the alleged Coke front group, International Life Sciences Institute (Ilsi).

Their involvement in developing intake guidelines represents “an obvious conflict of interest”, said Gary Ruskin, US Right-To-Know’s executive director. “Because of this conflict of interest, [the daily intake] conclusions about aspartame are not credible, and the public should not rely on them,” he added.

  • DarkWasp@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    54
    ·
    1 year ago

    I was under the impression the research showed that there was a risk but you needed to consume an exorbitant amount to get there. Around 20+ cans of coke a day which the majority of people don’t do.

    • Fluke@discuss.online
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      The World Health Organization said it was safe up to a certain level. The people in the WHO who said that work for Coca-Cola.

      This means we can’t rely on the recommendation, and the actual “safe” amount may be much lower than that. The article goes into good depth and gives counterarguments too.

      It is important to note that in reality there is no safe amount for a carcinogen. Sometimes a threshold is set to reduce risk to a reasonable amount in necessary workplace exposure or medical treatments.

      The truth is, I think we’ll all eventually realize any sweetener should be seen as candy, not a thirst quencher.

      • Kingofthezyx@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Thank you being basically the only person in the thread who actually read the article.

        The part where they said “aspartame is probably bad” wasn’t the corrupt part. The corrupt part was when they put an addendum saying “a little bit of cancer is okay as a treat”

      • edric@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I read somewhere that asparteme doesn’t accumulate and just passes through the body, which was an argument for having a regular intake below the threshold to be not a risk. With this revelation though, that seems sus now too.

        • towerful@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think that’s what this is about.
          It doesn’t mean aspartame is bad and we are all going to die.
          It means that perhaps the safe limits, risk reductions etc need to be re-assessed for them to be with regard to actual harm reduction… instead of the current possibility of “just enough harm that coke doesn’t get blamed, but good profit can still be extracted” that these coke associates may-or-may-not have influenced.

          It calls recommendations into doubt as opposed to the actual raw science.
          AFAIK, aspartame has been widely studied. If it was a substance of actual risk, it would have been highlighted.

    • HuddaBudda@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      Don’t want to share my life story, but I did for a time, got to about a twelve pack and a half a day of diet coke when I was 20.

      My reward was not weight loss, but an a-fib. and half a life expectancy.

      I don’t blame the diet coke because I was the one buying and drinking it. But it is important people understand that something is wrong in that stuff.

      Just as I wouldn’t blame cigarettes for giving me lung cancer, but I would want others to know it can.

      • ShakeThatYam@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        47
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Apart from the aspartame, that’s also like 900mg of caffeine a day, which is over twice the recommended amount, and 700mg of sodium.

        • HuddaBudda@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yup. what else can I say except poor self control and shortcuts are a mean combination.

          I eat a lot healthier now, but that mistake isn’t one that just goes away.

            • SharkEatingBreakfast@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              Unmedicated, I would crave soda like a fucking sugar tick. I’d eat until I was sick, then eat some more. Actually rotted a bunch of my teeth with my shitty habits and poor self-control. Needed several root canals… ugh…

              Medicated, I have soda maybe once per month or every other month. I don’t have uncontrollable cravings for sugar anymore. It’s fucking great!!

              • can@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                1 year ago

                I think self medicating with caffeine may have been part of it. Congrats on the cutting back.

                  • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Personally it doesn’t even do that, it just literally does nothing whatsoever to me.

                    I have popped 200mg of caffeine pills and chewed a 4mg nicotine gum and the only effect is that the gum makes me cough.

      • Doug7070@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        1 year ago

        Not to defend diet coke (any kind of soda is not healthy for you, regardless), but I would generally assume that drinking 144oz (assuming 18x8oz cans/day) of any type of beverage that isn’t plain old water would tend to cause some level of serious health effects, given that’s more than your entire general recommended daily fluid intake from all sources. I feel like the general takeaway is that most food and drink is bad for you in excess, and companies constantly slapping “diet/low fat/low carb/etc.” labels on junk food products that are marginally healthier than their peers gives a false impression that you can have your cake and eat it too in terms of negative health effects from these foods/drinks.

        • TWeaK@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s basically how I’ve felt about it. If you’re getting too much sugar from drinking soda, the correct response is to drink less soda - not substitute the sugar with something that tricks your body into thinking it’s sweet.

          • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            But this ignores that people want to drink soda, and sugar-free soda lets them do that while also not consuming vast vast vast amounts of pointless calories.

            You have to balance enjoyment with health, not doing so is why most diets fail, if you force yourself into a healthy diet that makes you sad you will almost inevitably end up falling back to the junk food because it makes you happy.

            • TWeaK@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              People want to eat lots of fat, sugary foods but that doesn’t mean they should.

              Certainly, it’s about balancing enjoyment with health. However I think it’s important to listen to what your body is telling you, when it’s telling you you’re having too much of something.

              • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Honestly not sure what your point is here, you seem to have ignored my argument and replied with a non-sequiteur.

                Yeah, people should listen to their bodies, and their bodies say that they want to drink soda.
                Now, is it better to drink soda with a shitload of calories, or soda with like 3 calories?

                Most people have not trained themselves to pull off intuitive eating and thus their bodies just crave fats and carbs, so the best thing to do to improve their diet is to satisfy those cravings while consuming fewer calories.

                This then provides an excellent motivation to re-calibrate your cravings as you realize that it is, in fact, possible to eat healthily without being miserable.

                • TWeaK@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  The body isn’t saying it wants soda. There is no drive from the body for soda. The body might want sugar, but it’s also saying it’s having too much. The brain is saying it likes the taste of soda, but taste isn’t nutrition.

                  Most people have not trained themselves to pull off intuitive eating and thus their bodies just crave fats and carbs, so the best thing to do to improve their diet is to satisfy those cravings while consuming fewer calories.

                  The best thing to do to improve their diet is to improve their diet. The point is to learn that those cravings aren’t right, so you can learn to identify your body’s real cravings are. If you keep drinking diet soda you may be less likely to make meaningful change, at best you’re delaying it.

      • redtea@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        You should absolutely blame the Diet Coke and the execs that push it. Almost every aspect of eating the food we need to live is distorted by people trying to make as much money as possible at the expense of our health. They know it. They spend billions doing it. You likely wouldn’t have been consuming it or so much of it if it wasn’t on every billboard and commercial and was at the back of the store in plain boxes without the big ‘sale’ or ‘bogof’ stickers. It doesn’t have to be this way and you shouldn’t blame yourself or any other individual for a social problem.

    • Hot Saucerman@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Around 20+ cans of coke a day which the majority of people don’t do.

      This guy has never met an American. Ever heard of a Big Gulp? We literally had private companies engineer bigger soda cups to handle how much fucking soda Americans drink.

      • jonsnowman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        31
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I dont necessarily disagree with your overall point about Americans drinking a lot of soda, but I don’t think pointing out that a company makes a cup a little smaller than 3 cans of soda is a very strong counterargument to the claim that it takes 20+ to be harmful…

        • Hot Saucerman@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          The largest Big Gulp is 50oz and when I was a kid, people leaned on free refills for them. A 50oz is almost a whole 2-liter.

          You’re not wrong, it’s not the best example, but I’ve seen people go through numerous Big Gulps a day.

          Hell, when I worked overnight as a security guard, one of my fellow guards who drink an entire 2-liter of Mountain Dew to himself every night.

          It’s hard for me to think about because I can’t even get through a whole 16oz without stopping halfway because it’s too syrupy.

          • chakan2@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            A 2 liter a day is still miles away from the amount you’d need to drink to reach unsafe levels.

            I think you’d have to drink 3+ a day before you’re at unsafe levels if you’re 150lbs (and…well…if we are shitting on eating habits, 150 is a very light American).

          • AnonStoleMyPants@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Holy balls that’s a large cup wtf. How popular are they? I mean, you see them in movies but that’s all the info I can draw from lol.

      • DarkWasp@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is fair lol. I’m Canadian and when I was 17-20 I’d consume around 4-6 cans a day which was a crazy amount to myself and most people. 20+ seems nuts just financially.

        • CIWS-30@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Agree. Even recently, I would have up to 5-6 cans worth myself (have since cut down a lot), but alongside the financial cost, there’s also the acid eating away at your stomach lining and the excess caffeine to worry about alongside the Aspartame.

          Frankly, given the stomach issues and acid reflux that too much soda can give you, I would imagine that people (even sodaholics) would have to stop much sooner than 20 due to all the other issues involved with sodas before the problems with Aspartame would even come into the picture.

          Not to say that I’m not leery of Aspartame, but diet Soda has other major issues beside it.

          • chakan2@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            The soda acid thing is also a myth. The PH level of your stomach acid is much higher than soda.

            Edit: Yes, had that backwards…but my point stands…stomach acid is more acidic than soda. It’s not an issue.

            Yes…I concur, it’s terrible for your teeth.

            • VulKendov@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              Lower pH means stronger acid. Soda is not more acidic than you stomach acid. The real danger that the acidity of soda poses is to your teeth.

              • Hot Saucerman@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                And considering the knock-on effects to the rest of your body from your teeth, it’s not an issue to sneeze at.

            • downpunxx@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              cut a stomach open, spread the stomach acid on a painted car hood, eat that shit right off. saying it’s the same ph as stomach acid, is like saying 1 of a thing is safe but 2 of the same thing has to be safe as the 1 thing. idiocy. and said with such confidence. ah the internetz, such a boon to humanity.

      • HughJanus@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        We literally had private companies engineer bigger soda cups to handle how much fucking soda Americans drink.

        This is a really weird statement. Like it was some sort of feat of engineering to manufacture larger cups.

        • Hot Saucerman@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Very arguably, with 1970’s manufacturing standards, and how much 32 ounces of liquid weighs, it was an engineering feat at the time. So much so that the originals looked more like a milk carton.

          https://physicalculturestudy.com/2017/08/31/the-history-of-the-big-gulp/

          Potts’s desperation caught the attention of Coca-Cola, who in 1976 sent representatives to the merchandise manager with a strange proposition. Coca Cola wanted to create a new 32 ounce cup for their drinks, a previously unheard of amount. The largest size at the time was 20 ounces, and even that was considered to be monstrous. Instinctively Potts refused, claiming that the Cups were “too damn big” and in Potts’s defence, he was right. The design for the 32-ounce cups was square on the bottom and resembled your average milk cartoon.

      • Madison_rogue@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        A Big Gulp is 30 ounces, 20 cans of coke is 240 ounces of soda. That’s a lot of Big Gulps. That said the Double Gulp, the largest size 7-11 offers, tops out at 50 ounces. Yet you’d have to drink almost five of those to reach 20 cans.

        in 2018 The United States consumption of soda per capita was 38.87 gallons per year, or 13.6 ounces of soda per day. Which was down from 45.5 gallons per year in 2010.

      • ours@lemmy.film
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Remind me of the “Parks and rec” joke about “child-sized soda”: it’s the size of a small child!