After reading this on Time.com

If you haven’t already, you may want to reconsider your diet soda
habit—especially if you’re trying to lose weight. A much-buzzed-about
study published in the journal Nature found that non-caloric
sweeteners such as saccharin (Sweet-n-Low), sucralose (Splenda), and
aspartame (Equal) may mess with the gut bacteria that play a key role
in healthy metabolism. Researchers found a link between these
sweeteners, altered gut microbes, glucose intolerance and metabolic
syndrome (both precursors to Type 2 diabetes) in mice and humans.

I followed the link to this. It's nothing new, but worth repeating.
http://www.health.com/health/gallery...ow-away-012615

--
A kitchen without a cook is just a room

On Monday, February 2, 2015 at 3:33:26 PM UTC-6, sf wrote:
> After reading this on Time.com
>
> If you haven't already, you may want to reconsider your diet soda
> habit--especially if you're trying to lose weight. A much-buzzed-about
> study published in the journal Nature found that non-caloric
> sweeteners such as saccharin (Sweet-n-Low), sucralose (Splenda), and
> aspartame (Equal) may mess with the gut bacteria that play a key role
> in healthy metabolism. Researchers found a link between these
> sweeteners, altered gut microbes, glucose intolerance and metabolic
> syndrome (both precursors to Type 2 diabetes) in mice and humans.
>
> I followed the link to this. It's nothing new, but worth repeating.
> http://www.health.com/health/gallery...ow-away-012615


I'm finished with the food police.

"Christopher Helms" > wrote in message
...
> On Monday, February 2, 2015 at 3:33:26 PM UTC-6, sf wrote:
>> After reading this on Time.com
>>
>> If you haven't already, you may want to reconsider your diet soda
>> habit--especially if you're trying to lose weight. A much-buzzed-about
>> study published in the journal Nature found that non-caloric
>> sweeteners such as saccharin (Sweet-n-Low), sucralose (Splenda), and
>> aspartame (Equal) may mess with the gut bacteria that play a key role
>> in healthy metabolism. Researchers found a link between these
>> sweeteners, altered gut microbes, glucose intolerance and metabolic
>> syndrome (both precursors to Type 2 diabetes) in mice and humans.
>>
>> I followed the link to this. It's nothing new, but worth repeating.
>> http://www.health.com/health/gallery...ow-away-012615
>
>
> I'm finished with the food police.

But they are not finished with you.

"sf" > wrote in message
...
>
> After reading this on Time.com
>
> If you haven't already, you may want to reconsider your diet soda
> habit-especially if you're trying to lose weight. A much-buzzed-about
> study published in the journal Nature found that non-caloric
> sweeteners such as saccharin (Sweet-n-Low), sucralose (Splenda), and
> aspartame (Equal) may mess with the gut bacteria that play a key role
> in healthy metabolism. Researchers found a link between these
> sweeteners, altered gut microbes, glucose intolerance and metabolic
> syndrome (both precursors to Type 2 diabetes) in mice and humans.
>
> I followed the link to this. It's nothing new, but worth repeating.
> http://www.health.com/health/gallery...ow-away-012615

Not worth repeating at all and mostly just a bunch of hooey.

On Monday, February 2, 2015 at 4:17:26 PM UTC-6, Pico Rico wrote:
> "Christopher Helms" > wrote in message
> ...
> > On Monday, February 2, 2015 at 3:33:26 PM UTC-6, sf wrote:
> >> After reading this on Time.com
> >>
> >> If you haven't already, you may want to reconsider your diet soda
> >> habit--especially if you're trying to lose weight. A much-buzzed-about
> >> study published in the journal Nature found that non-caloric
> >> sweeteners such as saccharin (Sweet-n-Low), sucralose (Splenda), and
> >> aspartame (Equal) may mess with the gut bacteria that play a key role
> >> in healthy metabolism. Researchers found a link between these
> >> sweeteners, altered gut microbes, glucose intolerance and metabolic
> >> syndrome (both precursors to Type 2 diabetes) in mice and humans.
> >>
> >> I followed the link to this. It's nothing new, but worth repeating.
> >> http://www.health.com/health/gallery...ow-away-012615
> >
> >
> > I'm finished with the food police.
>
> But they are not finished with you.


That's the scary part...

On Monday, February 2, 2015 at 4:36:00 PM UTC-6, Julie Bove wrote:
> "sf" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > After reading this on Time.com
> >
> > If you haven't already, you may want to reconsider your diet soda
> > habit-especially if you're trying to lose weight. A much-buzzed-about
> > study published in the journal Nature found that non-caloric
> > sweeteners such as saccharin (Sweet-n-Low), sucralose (Splenda), and
> > aspartame (Equal) may mess with the gut bacteria that play a key role
> > in healthy metabolism. Researchers found a link between these
> > sweeteners, altered gut microbes, glucose intolerance and metabolic
> > syndrome (both precursors to Type 2 diabetes) in mice and humans.
> >
> > I followed the link to this. It's nothing new, but worth repeating.
> > http://www.health.com/health/gallery...ow-away-012615
>
> Not worth repeating at all and mostly just a bunch of hooey.


Speaking of diet soda, though, I've got a question that maybe someone here can answer. Nobody at work knows what the deal is, and neither do I. Why is it that the 20 oz. bottle of Diet Mountain Dew that I buy at the little cooler thing lists 10 calories on the bottle, but the 24 oz. bottles of Diet Mountain Dew in the six pack that I buy at Kroger lists 0 calories on the bottle? It's the exact same stuff, presumably. It's not that I'm exactly sweating over 10 calories, but still, more Dew should get at least a couple more calories listed. Not zero, at any rate.

On 2/2/2015 12:44 PM, Christopher Helms wrote:
> On Monday, February 2, 2015 at 4:36:00 PM UTC-6, Julie Bove wrote:
>> "sf" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> After reading this on Time.com
>>>
>>> If you haven't already, you may want to reconsider your diet soda
>>> habit-especially if you're trying to lose weight. A much-buzzed-about
>>> study published in the journal Nature found that non-caloric
>>> sweeteners such as saccharin (Sweet-n-Low), sucralose (Splenda), and
>>> aspartame (Equal) may mess with the gut bacteria that play a key role
>>> in healthy metabolism. Researchers found a link between these
>>> sweeteners, altered gut microbes, glucose intolerance and metabolic
>>> syndrome (both precursors to Type 2 diabetes) in mice and humans.
>>>
>>> I followed the link to this. It's nothing new, but worth repeating.
>>> http://www.health.com/health/gallery...ow-away-012615
>>
>> Not worth repeating at all and mostly just a bunch of hooey.
>
>
> Speaking of diet soda, though, I've got a question that maybe someone here can answer. Nobody at work knows what the deal is, and neither do I. Why is it that the 20 oz. bottle of Diet Mountain Dew that I buy at the little cooler thing lists 10 calories on the bottle, but the 24 oz. bottles of Diet Mountain Dew in the six pack that I buy at Kroger lists 0 calories on the bottle? It's the exact same stuff, presumably. It's not that I'm exactly sweating over 10 calories, but still, more Dew should get at least a couple more calories listed. Not zero, at any rate.
>

My guess is that in the 24 oz bottles, a serving size is portioned @ 8
oz while the 20 oz is supposed to be single serve. Maybe anything less
than 5 oz/serving is considered to be zero. It might also be a different
formulation or maybe the more you drink the less calories you get.
Mountain Dew is a most wonderful, magical, potion. Either that, or it's
the caffeine.

"Christopher Helms" > wrote in message
...
On Monday, February 2, 2015 at 4:36:00 PM UTC-6, Julie Bove wrote:
> "sf" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > After reading this on Time.com
> >
> > If you haven't already, you may want to reconsider your diet soda
> > habit-especially if you're trying to lose weight. A much-buzzed-about
> > study published in the journal Nature found that non-caloric
> > sweeteners such as saccharin (Sweet-n-Low), sucralose (Splenda), and
> > aspartame (Equal) may mess with the gut bacteria that play a key role
> > in healthy metabolism. Researchers found a link between these
> > sweeteners, altered gut microbes, glucose intolerance and metabolic
> > syndrome (both precursors to Type 2 diabetes) in mice and humans.
> >
> > I followed the link to this. It's nothing new, but worth repeating.
> > http://www.health.com/health/gallery...ow-away-012615
>
> Not worth repeating at all and mostly just a bunch of hooey.


Speaking of diet soda, though, I've got a question that maybe someone here
can answer. Nobody at work knows what the deal is, and neither do I. Why is
it that the 20 oz. bottle of Diet Mountain Dew that I buy at the little
cooler thing lists 10 calories on the bottle, but the 24 oz. bottles of Diet
Mountain Dew in the six pack that I buy at Kroger lists 0 calories on the
bottle? It's the exact same stuff, presumably. It's not that I'm exactly
sweating over 10 calories, but still, more Dew should get at least a couple
more calories listed. Not zero, at any rate.

---

Just a guess but it might say no calories per serving and not per bottle.

On Monday, February 2, 2015 at 5:05:41 PM UTC-6, Julie Bove wrote:
> "Christopher Helms" > wrote in message
> ...
> On Monday, February 2, 2015 at 4:36:00 PM UTC-6, Julie Bove wrote:
> > "sf" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >
> > > After reading this on Time.com
> > >
> > > If you haven't already, you may want to reconsider your diet soda
> > > habit-especially if you're trying to lose weight. A much-buzzed-about
> > > study published in the journal Nature found that non-caloric
> > > sweeteners such as saccharin (Sweet-n-Low), sucralose (Splenda), and
> > > aspartame (Equal) may mess with the gut bacteria that play a key role
> > > in healthy metabolism. Researchers found a link between these
> > > sweeteners, altered gut microbes, glucose intolerance and metabolic
> > > syndrome (both precursors to Type 2 diabetes) in mice and humans.
> > >
> > > I followed the link to this. It's nothing new, but worth repeating.
> > > http://www.health.com/health/gallery...ow-away-012615
> >
> > Not worth repeating at all and mostly just a bunch of hooey.
>
>
> Speaking of diet soda, though, I've got a question that maybe someone here
> can answer. Nobody at work knows what the deal is, and neither do I. Why is
> it that the 20 oz. bottle of Diet Mountain Dew that I buy at the little
> cooler thing lists 10 calories on the bottle, but the 24 oz. bottles of Diet
> Mountain Dew in the six pack that I buy at Kroger lists 0 calories on the
> bottle? It's the exact same stuff, presumably. It's not that I'm exactly
> sweating over 10 calories, but still, more Dew should get at least a couple
> more calories listed. Not zero, at any rate.
>
> ---
>
> Just a guess but it might say no calories per serving and not per bottle.


Having checked that out during the course of my late night snacking, that does appear to be the case. The 24 oz. size is considered to be two 12 ounce servings and the 20 ounce is probably one and that's what they're probably going by. It looks like a legal hair splitting thing. They probably don't have to list the calories if its that low a number per serving.

Christopher Helms > wrote in
:

> On Monday, February 2, 2015 at 4:17:26 PM UTC-6, Pico Rico wrote:
>> "Christopher Helms" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > On Monday, February 2, 2015 at 3:33:26 PM UTC-6, sf wrote:
>> >> After reading this on Time.com
>> >>
>>
<snip>
>> > I'm finished with the food police.
>>
>> But they are not finished with you.
>
>
> That's the scary part...
>
>

"I've read so much about the bad effects of smoking, eating, and drinking
that I've given up reading."
- Unknown

On 3/02/2015 8:33 AM, sf wrote:
>
> After reading this on Time.com
>
> If you haven’t already, you may want to reconsider your diet soda
> habit—especially if you’re trying to lose weight. A much-buzzed-about

I reconsidered it way back when diet sodas first hit the scene. Looked
at what was in them and said to myself - no way! I did the same thing
many years prior when artificial sweeteners first hit the scene. My
mother was into using "sucaryl tablets" in tea and coffee as a
sweetener. I figured that if I had to put up with that foul taste in
order to sweeten my drink, I'd be better off to learn to live without
sugar sweetened rinks in the first place. I've been both sugar and
artificial sweetener free since the late 60s, IIRC. Whatever nasties I
get, I can safely say it's not attributed to sugar or artificial sweeteners


> study published in the journal Nature found that non-caloric
> sweeteners such as saccharin (Sweet-n-Low), sucralose (Splenda), and
> aspartame (Equal) may mess with the gut bacteria that play a key role
> in healthy metabolism. Researchers found a link between these
> sweeteners, altered gut microbes, glucose intolerance and metabolic
> syndrome (both precursors to Type 2 diabetes) in mice and humans.
>
> I followed the link to this. It's nothing new, but worth repeating.
> http://www.health.com/health/gallery...ow-away-012615
>


--

Xeno.

Alan Holbrook wrote:
>
> "I've read so much about the bad effects of smoking, eating, and drinking
> that I've given up reading."
> - Unknown

lol. Here's a similar quote from Johnny Carson -

"I know a man who gave up smoking, drinking, sex and rich food.
He was healthy right up to the time he killed himself."
- Johnny Carson

"Alan Holbrook" > wrote in message
. 130...

> "I've read so much about the bad effects of smoking, eating, and drinking
> that I've given up reading."
> - Unknown

^5 <g>

--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/shop/

On 2015-02-03 6:59 AM, Xeno wrote:

> I reconsidered it way back when diet sodas first hit the scene. Looked
> at what was in them and said to myself - no way! I did the same thing
> many years prior when artificial sweeteners first hit the scene. My
> mother was into using "sucaryl tablets" in tea and coffee as a
> sweetener. I figured that if I had to put up with that foul taste in
> order to sweeten my drink, I'd be better off to learn to live without
> sugar sweetened rinks in the first place. I've been both sugar and
> artificial sweetener free since the late 60s, IIRC. Whatever nasties I
> get, I can safely say it's not attributed to sugar or artificial sweeteners

We never had many soft drinks in the house when I was a kid and I never
got into the habit or drinking sugary beverages. I remember the first
diet drinks were horrible. There was a nasty after taste that I just
couldn't get past. Some of the newer products are a little easier to
handle but still aren't good. I started drinking tea clear when I was
about 20 and had a job in an alloy plant furnace room and found it was
the only thing that quenched my thirst.

I used to have a little sugar in my coffee but when I was working and
ordering take out coffee I could not get them to put as little sugar as
I wanted so I got it with just cream, later... black. Now I can handle
coffee with a little cream, but I find even small amounts of sugar to be
too sweet for me.



>

On 2/3/2015 9:17 AM, Dave Smith wrote:
> We never had many soft drinks in the house when I was a kid and I never
> got into the habit or drinking sugary beverages. I remember the first
> diet drinks were horrible. There was a nasty after taste that I just
> couldn't get past. Some of the newer products are a little easier to
> handle but still aren't good. I started drinking tea clear when I was
> about 20 and had a job in an alloy plant furnace room and found it was
> the only thing that quenched my thirst.
>
I wasn't raised with soft drinks, either. The only time we had any was
when we lived in Thailand. Mom had orange soda (Green Spot brand or
something like that) delivered so we (my brothers and I) would have
something to drink other than filtered water. They weren't diet sodas,
though. I never did pick up the habit of drinking soda.

> I used to have a little sugar in my coffee but when I was working and
> ordering take out coffee I could not get them to put as little sugar as
> I wanted so I got it with just cream, later... black. Now I can handle
> coffee with a little cream, but I find even small amounts of sugar to be
> too sweet for me.
>
On the rare occasions I drink coffee I take it straight, no sugar, no cream.

Jill