sugar substitutes don't work

[madscientist]

There was just a study that was done and it showed that sugar substitutes like artificial sweeteners don’t work when you want to lose weight. The people who had that stuff didn’t lose any more weight than the people eating the “real” sugar foods. It just didn’t contribute at all. But at the same time there is a higher risk of metabolic syndrome when you use artificial sweeteners. Not worth it. The only reason that they’re called “diet” is because they’re for specialty diets like diabetes, not for weight loss diets. They should change that.

[suzie]

I've been noticing a trend in the research, too. It's surprising that something with no calories in it, or even one or two calories, isn't actually all that weight loss friendly. It makes sense that it would be. I shudder to think about what it does to the body to make it ineffective!

[freddyboy]

Wow, that's the worst marketing scam I ever heard of. They should really stop being allowed to call it "diet" because that really suggests weight loss to me and probably most other people, too.

[PaulLo]

That's shocking. That's one of those things that we'ere told our whole lives will work and then find out that it's complete nonsense.

This is starting to happen on an increasing basis regarding the foods and other products that have come out over the last fifty years or so.

It's starting to make me feel rather surprised that the human race survived the 20th century!

[Gina]

They really don't work! My mother has been on a diet since I was born, pretty much. She is in her 60s and is still dieting. I've only known her to be happy with her weight one time, and that was through weight watchers a long time ago. She still drinks diet soda, no matter what I tell her to try to change her mind. It certainly hasn't done anything for her. It's not meant for a weight loss diet, and if it was, it's a big fail.

[tammybear]

I don't undrestand how sugar substitutes don't work if they don't have any calories in them. If you choose a can of pop that is 0 calories instead of one that has a hundred (or whatever it is that they contain) doesn't that save you a hundred calories and make your dieting easier?

[bigbobby]

what about stevia? That's supposed to be a good substitute and if I understand right, it's natural, too. Has anyone heard if this is good instead of the aspartame, nutrasweet, and all of thsoe?

[tara]

I don't undrestand how sugar substitutes don't work if they don't have any calories in them. If you choose a can of pop that is 0 calories instead of one that has a hundred (or whatever it is that they contain) doesn't that save you a hundred calories and make your dieting easier?

You'd think that's how it would work except that it's not a natural substance so your body reacts strangely to it.
it's especially problematic with insulin production because your taste buds taste something sweet, so your pancreas preemptively releases insulin in anticipation of receiving sugar/glucose, but when it doesn't arrive, it just makes you hungry since you never got the blood sugar.

[madscientist]

It's shocking, isn't it? I've just cut it all out of my life and I don't miss it one bit. I like the taste of real foods anyway.

[anne]

that might be the case for some people, but I have an uncle who dropped 40 pounds just by replacing his sugar with a low-cal substitute sweetener. it's not perfect, but it works sometimes.