The Evils of Chewing Gum?

[Guest guest]

So, I have a confession to make....I am addicted to Dentyne Ice Peppermint gum.

I just love the stuff. However, I don't think it's very good for me...can

anyone tell me if the following ingredients are truly bad--ie, do you think I'm

actually ingesting any of the stuff?

Ingredients: Sorbitol, Maltitol, Gum Base, Mannitol, Artificial and Natural

Flavoring, Acacia, Glycerin, Softeners, Titanium Dioxide (color), Acesulfame

Potassium, Aspartame and Candelilla Wax.

I'd love to find an alternative, but the Peelu stuff from the HFS was totally

nasty (didn't stick together while I chewed--major yuck!)

TIA,

[Guest guest]

everything you ever didn't want to know about aspertame

http://www.sweetpoison.com/

not only FM but possibly MS as well connected to this stuff

mike e

[Guest guest]

I'd agree, you are better off with gum with sugar than with

aspartame however by far the worst issue regarding gum is the

constant stimulation of the digestive system. Everytime you are

chewing you are stimulating your body to produce digestive enzymes

in the mouth and stomach along with acid production in the stomach.

This is not a process designed to occur all day long it is supposed

to be in effect for 20min to 1/2 hour and once digestion is complete

it is to be off. Chewing gum does not allow this process to shut

down as it should.

DMM

http://www.cedarcanyonclinic.com

feel free to visit and subscribe to the No Baloney Newsletter

covering current health issues weekly. See back issues in the

article archive.

[Guest guest]

Hi Dr. Mike:

> I'd agree, you are better off with gum with sugar than with

> aspartame however by far the worst issue regarding gum is the

> constant stimulation of the digestive system. Everytime you are

> chewing you are stimulating your body to produce digestive enzymes

> in the mouth and stomach along with acid production in the stomach.

> This is not a process designed to occur all day long it is supposed

> to be in effect for 20min to 1/2 hour and once digestion is complete

> it is to be off. Chewing gum does not allow this process to shut

> down as it should.

I've heard of this concept before and have also read it mentioned on other

list groups, but I'm wondering if you know where the orginal idea comes

from? I'd be interested to read about how that knowledge was gained because

it seems to conflict with what Dr. Beaumont wrote about in his book

Experiments and Observations of the Gastric Juice.

TIA,

Marla

[Guest guest]

>

> That usually there is no gastric juices in the stomach when there

is no food inside the stomach. Gastric juices are released in the

>stomach only when> food actually touches it inside. Also, the

stomach only produces a certain> amount of gastric juice at a time so

that if you eat too much, the excess> food does not get digested

properly because there's not enough gastric juice

> to go around. So, from that, it doesn't seem like there is a

continual flow> of acids in the stomach. It shuts off even if there

> is still more food to> digest.

That disagrees with all the current textbooks. Even with no food in

the stomach there's some production of gastric juice. Gastric juice

will be stimulated by smelling, tasting, chewing, swallowing,

distention of the stomach by food, amino acids, a pH above 3,

probably some other things that I skipped over. If there's more food

to digest, it keeps producing acid.

[Guest guest]

Well, Dr. Beaumont made his observations through the stomach of a man who

was actually alive and healthy. is St. was shot and had a hole

in his stomach that didn't completely close. Dr. Beaumont studied St.

's stomach for about two years. He was actually able to look inside

his stomach and stick a thermometer in there every day. St. lived

with him. Beaumont fed him and housed him while he did his experiments.

Beaumont made observations of the weather, the different types of foods he

fed St. , etc. Beaumont retrieved gastric juices from St. 's

stomach regularly and stated that the way he was able to obtain gastric

juice was by attaching a piece of bread to his probe and rubbing it in the

lining of the stomach, otherwise there was no gastric juice to gather. Not

even if he tried to stimulate the stomach by touch without the food

attached. Hunger paid doesn't mean there's gastric juice in the stomach.

Beaumont addresses that as well, just as saliva in the mouth doesn't mean

that there's gastric juice in the stomach either. This is why I'm

interested in learning where the other information comes from and how that

knowledge was gained. Were actual observations made like Beaumont's or are

these theories?

Marla

----- Original Message -----

From: Roman <r_rom@...>

< >

Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 8:06 PM

Subject: Re: Re: The Evils of Chewing Gum?

> I think this is true. I am sometimes really aware when

> my digestive juices start to be produced. And that can

> be caused by a smell or a thought of food. It can also

> probably get produced when a regular time of day

> comes. I get a feeling of a subtle pain or something

> like that in the stomach when that happens.

>

> Oh, and remember Pavlov's experiments with a dog? No

> food, just a bell!

>

> Roman

>

>

> --- darkstardog <darkstar@...> wrote:

> > That disagrees with all the current textbooks. Even

> > with no food in

> > the stomach there's some production of gastric

> > juice. Gastric juice

> > will be stimulated by smelling, tasting, chewing,

> > swallowing,

> > distention of the stomach by food, amino acids, a pH

> > above 3,

> > probably some other things that I skipped over. If

> > there's more food

> > to digest, it keeps producing acid.

>

>

[Guest guest]

> Well, Dr. Beaumont made his observations through the stomach of a

man who was actually alive and healthy. is St. was shot

and had a hole> in his stomach that didn't completely close.

Yes, Beaumont is famous.

Yes, they have done actual research since then.

[Guest guest]

> Yes, Beaumont is famous.

> Yes, they have done actual research since then.

>

Thanks, I'm interesting in reading the studies. Do you have any references

that I can read? I'm interested how the studies were conducted,when and by

whom, and why Beaumont's work seems so contradictory. Were they done on

live humans? How? I realize that Beaumont only studied one live human, and

it's possible there are deviations, so this is interesting to me.

Marla

[Guest guest]

> Thanks, I'm interesting in reading the studies. Do you have any

references> that I can read? I'm interested how the studies were

conducted,when and by> whom, and why Beaumont's work seems so

contradictory. Were they done on> live humans? How? I realize that

Beaumont only studied one live human, and> it's possible there are

deviations, so this is interesting to me.

>

There have to be so many different studies - way too many to list.

I'm not sure what the best thing would be for you to do to find the

ones you're interested in. You could try looking up various topics in

pubmed, or start with a medical physiology textbook. It would help if

you have a university nearby with medical or biological journals in

their library.

Here's the URL for pubmed:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi

Here's one pubmed reference I pulled up in a few seconds - it's an

abstract but unfortunately they don't tell how they did the

measurements in this abstract and the whole paper isn't online. They

made some kind of measurement of stomach acid though. Is this the

kind of thing you're interested in?

" Gastroenterology 1986 Feb;90(2):428-33

Role of thought, sight, smell, and taste of food in the cephalic

phase of gastric acid secretion in humans.

Feldman M, CT.

The relative importance of thought, sight, smell, and taste of food

in the cephalic phase of gastric acid secretion has not been studied

systematically. We found that discussing appetizing food for 30 min

(without sight, smell, or taste) increased acid secretion from 4 to

13 mmol/h in healthy human subjects (p less than 0.001) and also

increased serum gastrin concentrations significantly

(p less than 0.02). Discussing food resulted in an acid secretory

response that averaged 66% +/- 10% of the response to modified sham

feeding, which activates thought, sight, smell, and taste. Discussing

topics other than food (e.g., current events, sports) did not

increase acid secretion significantly. The sight of appetizing food

(without smell or taste), the smell of appetizing food

(without sight or taste), or the combination of sight and smell

(without taste) also increased acid secretion and serum gastrin

concentrations significantly. However, sight and smell were

significantly less potent stimulants of acid secretion than sham

feeding, with responses averaging only 23%-46% of the

response to sham feeding. These studies indicate that thinking about

food is a potent stimulant of gastric secretion in healthy humans.

Moreover, the sight and smell of food increase gastric acid secretion

and serum gastrin concentrations, probably by provoking thoughts

related to food. "

Here's another one; again the paper isn't available online.

" Gut 1993 Apr;34(4):537-43

Cephalic phase of colonic pressure response to food.

J, Raimundo AH, Misiewicz JJ.

Department of Gastroenterology and Nutrition, Central Middlesex

Hospital, London.

A cephalic phase of colonic pressure response to food was sought in

five normal subjects (mean age (22.6) years, 22-24), studied on six

separate occasions by recording intraluminal pressures in the

unprepared sigmoid colon. Gastric acid secretion was measured

simultaneously by continuous aspiration through a nasogastric tube.

After a 60 minute basal period, one of five 30 minute food

related cephalic stimuli, or a control stimulus was given in random

order; records were continued for a further 120 minutes. The cephalic

stimuli were: food discussion, sight and smell of food without taste,

smell of food without sight or taste, sight of food without smell or

taste, and modified sham feeding; the control stimulus was a

discussion of neutral topics. Colonic pressures were expressed as

study segment activity index (area under curve, mm Hg.min) derived

by fully automated computer analysis. Gastric acid output was

expressed as mmol/30 min. Food discussion significantly (p < 0.02,

Wilcoxon's rank sum test) increased colonic pressure activity

compared with control or basal activity. Smell of food without sight

or taste also significantly (p < 0.03) increased the colonic pressure

activity compared with control and basal periods. Sham feeding

and sight and smell of food without taste significantly (p < 0.02 and

p < 0.03) increased colonic pressures compared with control but not

basal activity. The increase in colonic activity after sight of food

without smell or taste was not significantly different from control

or basal activity (p = 0.44 and p = 0.34).

Food discussion was the strongest colonic stimulus tested.(ABSTRACT

TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS) "

The effect on stomach acid isn't described in the abstract (maybe

it's in the truncated part) but as you can see they measured it to go

along with their colonic measurements.

I'm putting these examples in more to show that people are actually

measuring these things than to make any point about the stomach.

You would need to look at a number of references to see the different

ways that research might be done on the stomach - I'm sure there are

many approaches. Using radio-transmitting pH electrodes in capsules

that can be swallowed or pH electrodes on wires that can be lowered

into the stomach are two other ways of measuring acidity in the

stomach.

(One textbook I have does say that many of Beaumont's observations

and conclusions remain unchanged today.)

[Guest guest]

-

In addition to what everyone else has said (aspartame is genuinely

horrible, and you should avoid it at all cost, and constant stimulation of

the digestive system is a very bad idea) I think no amount of refined sugar

is really acceptable.

>Ingredients: Sorbitol, Maltitol, Gum Base, Mannitol, Artificial and

>Natural Flavoring, Acacia, Glycerin, Softeners, Titanium Dioxide (color),

>Acesulfame Potassium, Aspartame and Candelilla Wax.

The sugar alcohols -- like sorbitol, maltitol and mannitol -- can

potentially be pretty nasty. They don't seem to affect everyone equally,

but they feed bad bugs in the gut and they can cause diarrhea. I suspect

that over time, even people who don't initially seem to have a problem with

them will come to react poorly.

Also, any time you see " natural flavoring " or, I think, even " artificial

flavoring " , it's almost certainly code for " excitotoxins " , substances which

act on the brain like aspartame does.

I also wonder what " softeners " are.

Acesulfame potassium is ace k, a relatively new artificial sweetener. It's

almost certainly far better than aspartame, and appreciably better than

sucralose, but it's probably not good for you nonetheless. I believe

there's some indication it might be a carcinogen.

A whole pile of bad news, huh? <g>

BTW, I _finally_ took your advice and went to that little India are you

suggested, and found an outstanding Indian market. It's on the east side

of Lex between 28th and 29th, and they have all sorts of tempting treats,

though most of them unfortunately have unfortunate ingredients like canola

oil and sugar. I still found all sorts of things to bring home, though,

including a couple brands of coconut milk to try. Unfortunately, no Kara

coconut cream. I've had no luck finding that anywhere, online or off.

Anyway, thanks for the tip!

-