57
submitted 1 week ago by moretruth@lemmy.ml to c/news@lemmy.world

What I don't get is why it took them decades to figure this out. Why have they been giving us sugar substitutes without understanding what they have been doing to us? Why were these approved for use in the first place?

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] CM400@lemmy.world 108 points 1 week ago
[-] shittydwarf@piefed.social 43 points 1 week ago

The real mvp right here, fuck headlines like this

[-] capt_wolf@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago

But if they just put it in the title, people won't click and get bombarded with ads! Think of the big corporations!

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Punk_face@lemmy.zip 11 points 1 week ago

But…isn’t sorbitol a laxative??

[-] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago

I learned that one the hard way with some delicious sorbitol candies as a teenager.

[-] TheLowestStone@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago

Yes. Its also a sweetener.

[-] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

all the -tols are laxatives, you heard ethyrthiol, i think its one of the potent ones that cause laxative effects the most. i heard tons of people were getting cramps or diarrhea for people who sensitive. some people are mildly affected by it, and some has no effect.

[-] Veedem@lemmy.world 24 points 1 week ago

Sorbitol-degrading Aeromonas bacterial strains convert the sugar alcohol into a harmless bacterial byproduct.

“However, if you don’t have the right bacteria, that’s when it becomes problematic. Because in those conditions, sorbitol doesn’t get degraded and as a result, it is passed on to the liver,” he said.

Pretty big caveat but the sensationalist headline is all people will see.

[-] KiwiTB@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago
[-] doughless@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago

And after they had depleted the zebrafish's gut microbiota.

[-] HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago

Do you think scientists start doing qualitative testing on humans first???

[-] KiwiTB@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

No, but I do expect people to assume this is based on humans which it isnt. If this research eventually gets there then we can see what it says, but for now it's just another click bait article.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] network_switch@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 week ago

The article doesn't read as very concerning. Too much of anything usually means bad. Under the right conditions anything can be bad. Figuring out what can be bad and when it can be bad can often take decades. Don't stress too much on trying to optomize out anything that can do you harm in a diet. You'd have nothing left to eat and even the greatest collective of biologist getting together to make the greatest nutritional shake meal replacement would probably miss something that causes issues decades down the line or people drink too much and overdose

[-] smegger@aussie.zone 3 points 1 week ago

Tbh I am betting that it's gonna come out that they've known about the health risks all along, but they tried to ignore/cover it up for profit reasons.

[-] medgremlin@midwest.social 2 points 1 week ago

Copied from another posting of this article:

The headline (and the article for that matter) are very sensationalist and I don’t think they’ve presented this in a balanced way. They are discussing how sorbitol behaves in zebrafish with limited data presented on human biochemistry, and they discuss it in a vacuum without quantifying the amount of sorbitol it takes to cause a problem. Yes, any substance in excess can be harmful, but the amount of sorbitol in food compared to the amount of high fructose corn syrup makes it the substantially lesser evil. The artificial sweeteners are vastly more potent than actual sugar, so you don’t need very much of it to get the same amount of sweetness. High fructose corn syrup is used in massive amounts in food and is much worse for you on the scale that either substance would be consumed.

[-] ameancow@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

The scientific paper grift chain: get private funding from a company to publish a paper, use wild methodology, have the shit denounced and condemned by mainstream academia but not before every fucking news outlet in the world puts out a headline "BREAKING: SCIENTIFIC PAPER LINKS EATING SALAD TO BRAIN-EXPLODING DISEASE"

Never mind that to get this evidence they had to inject a marmot with enough salad dressing directly into its skull to make it explode thousand-island grey matter across its cage.

[-] turmacar@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

There's a whole cycle of perverse incentives with University Press.

The underlying research is necessary and valuable but the marketing arm of universities blow everything out of proportion.

[-] DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Give up sugar. Try it, and tell me it isn't addictive.

Give up all sweeteners, because keeping them just makes you crave more, making it much harder.

I gave up sugar, and most fruits except berries. It made staying at my ideal weight MUCH easier. I really don't need to think about it, I weigh myself every few weeks, and I'm always at my ideal weight. Exercise is the other part of the equation, I think we need to do both.

[-] drunkpostdisaster@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago

Oh who fucking cares? Everything we eat and breath is poison now. There is no saving anyone anymore.

[-] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Excuse me but I'm a better cook than that. Delicious poison is on the menu

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 06 Dec 2025
57 points (90.1% liked)

News

33646 readers
535 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS