Guest guest Posted December 23, 2003 Report Share Posted December 23, 2003 Hi folks: Wanting to find out more about sucralose I did a search and came up with this. It is five years old but answered all the questions I had about it: http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/9804/01/sweetener/index.html Season's greetings to everyone! Rodney. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 30, 2003 Report Share Posted December 30, 2003 I think sucralose is great to an extent. If people are already use to suger and start taking sucralose instead of normal sugar, I find its a good substitute (in terms of calories). If you havent had sugar for a long time and start taking sucralose you might get this craving for sugar, sugary foods. Sugary taste is addictive, at least for some people Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 30, 2003 Report Share Posted December 30, 2003 Hi Andy, I, like you, have managed to lose a great deal of weight, 83 lbs, improved all lipids and autoimmune labs, and STILL drink my caffeine in the morning, add Splenda to my cocoa and salad dressings, use a small amount of butter, eat bacon about once a month, had 8 Cherry sour balls yesterday, and a handful of potato chips last week. I don't drink enough water, and I have an occasional stress cigarette snuck outside in the 25 degree temps (at least I can't finish it because it is so cold). I use real whipping cream in my cocoa, and I salt every food that looks like it needs it. I cook my meat, I cut my salad greens instead of tearing them. What I have given up completely is alcohol, white flour for the most part and with the occasional relapse, sugar. I eat virtually no rice, pasta, potatoes (except for the chips last week), and mostly no other grains or breads except specially prepared as low carb. When I use fats, I use small amounts and carefully chosen. I eat a lot of nuts. Vegetables, meat and fruit and nuts are a large part of main foods. I really like my lifestyle and it gives me comfort to know that I have achieved a lot of success, beaten cravings for more processed foods and eat smaller amounts of food all the while exercising a lot more. I liked the attitude expressed in your post. Kim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 30, 2003 Report Share Posted December 30, 2003 My thought has always been, why use anything that doesn't promote nutrition? If you remove the salt and sweetener from products you get a chance to taste what you're eating. Regards. ----- Original Message ----- From: temma675 Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 2:52 AM Subject: [ ] Re: Sucralose I think sucralose is great to an extent. If people are already use to suger and start taking sucralose instead of normal sugar, I find its a good substitute (in terms of calories).If you havent had sugar for a long time and start taking sucralose you might get this craving for sugar, sugary foods. Sugary taste is addictive, at least for some people Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 30, 2003 Report Share Posted December 30, 2003 --- In , " jwwright " <jwwright@e...> wrote: > My thought has always been, why use anything that doesn't promote > nutrition? If you remove the salt and sweetener from products you > get a chance to taste what you're eating. *****And if you add salt and sweetener to products, you get a chance to taste what you're eating also. It's just that what you are eating is then salted and sweetened. What is the problem with that, if one has no health issues wherein salt and sweetener will cause physiological upset? I'm suggesting that both ways of eating can be entertained, in moderation, if the body is able to handle such. There seems to be, in the nutrition field, a mindset known as the Nutrition Police (or Food Nazis when a less gentle tone is employed). Following that perspective, eating one Cinnabon every month or two, is STILL perceived as the 'kiss of death.' Even Dr. Roy Walford is guilty of this, using the term " criminal " to describe the act of giving a child *a* Twinkie. Sugar, salt, other additives, they are probably not the best thing for the human body. They clearly don't contribute to physiological health and, within very strict limits, only tiny amounts are needed for the body to function optimally. But they may contribute (again, using wise moderation) to PSYCHOLOGICAL health, to a state of mind that is flexible, open, and capable of enjoying life without profound restrictions. I have been dropping, on average, 1 lb of bodyfat (primarily) per week for 30+ weeks, and my blood profiles have moved from average to good to very good during that time. And I have been able to use salt, sugar, artificial sweeteners, and a host of other " no-no's " with practiced moderation. Clearly an entirely abstemious lifestyle is not necessary to achieve the biomarkers of 'health' proposed with the CRON diet. If I eschewed ALL of the no-no's would my health be even better? Who knows! Perhaps. Perhaps my body would be in a state of supreme health and my enjoyment of life would be marginally diminished by a pervasive, ongoing sense of deprivation. All I'm suggesting here is what I believe Francesca, and several others have consistently offered up: eat a wide variety of foods, mostly UNprocessed, focusing on fruits, vegetables, whole grains and lean protein while avoiding as often as possible high refined, processed foodstuffs and overly-fat items. The occasional treat will take care of itself. The body, when in good health and well-cared for the majority of the time, has no problem dealing with the occasional " interloper " (such as some candy, cake, ice cream, or even fried chicken!). Enjoy your life ~ in which varied eating is pleasurable part. Cheers to all and a Wonderful New Year! ~andy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 30, 2003 Report Share Posted December 30, 2003 Kim; congrats on striking a good balance! We do not advocate extremism here and whatever changes one makes (however small) are an improvement on the way to better health. In your case, your diet has certainly worked wonders for you. on 12/30/2003 12:27 PM, kimlynette@... at kimlynette@... wrote: > Hi Andy, > I, like you, have managed to lose a great deal of weight, 83 lbs, improved > all lipids and autoimmune labs, and STILL drink my caffeine in the morning, > add > Splenda to my cocoa and salad dressings, use a small amount of butter, eat > bacon about once a month, had 8 Cherry sour balls yesterday, and a handful of > potato chips last week. I don't drink enough water, and I have an occasional > stress cigarette snuck outside in the 25 degree temps (at least I can't finish > it > because it is so cold). I use real whipping cream in my cocoa, and I salt > every food that looks like it needs it. I cook my meat, I cut my salad greens > instead of tearing them. What I have given up completely is alcohol, white > flour > for the most part and with the occasional relapse, sugar. I eat virtually no > rice, pasta, potatoes (except for the chips last week), and mostly no other > grains or breads except specially prepared as low carb. When I use fats, I use > small amounts and carefully chosen. I eat a lot of nuts. Vegetables, meat and > fruit and nuts are a large part of main foods. I really like my lifestyle and > it > gives me comfort to know that I have achieved a lot of success, beaten > cravings for more processed foods and eat smaller amounts of food all the > while > exercising a lot more. I liked the attitude expressed in your post. > Kim > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 30, 2003 Report Share Posted December 30, 2003 Hi Andy, I guess I got to be a "Food Nazi" after years of eating stuff that made me sick. Then I begin to ask logical questions why do I eat these things? Why did we have to lose weight, eg? Why not stay the same weight you achieved eating the "good"stuff, living the "good" life? I don't find sweeteners healthy or unhealthy, just unnecessary. But, If I want a sweetener (to avoid deprivation), I'll use sugar. Regards. ----- Original Message ----- From: Andy Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 11:13 AM Subject: [ ] Re: Sucralose > My thought has always been, why use anything that doesn't promote > nutrition? If you remove the salt and sweetener from products you > get a chance to taste what you're eating."What is the problem with that, if one has no health issues wherein salt and sweetener will cause physiological upset? <snip> I have been dropping, on average, 1 lb of bodyfat (primarily) per week for 30+ weeks, and my blood profiles have moved from average to good to very good during that time." ~andy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 31, 2003 Report Share Posted December 31, 2003 Not when compared to nothing. ----- Original Message ----- From: Warren Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2003 9:42 AM Subject: RE: [ ] Re: Sucralose Excess calories are toxic and decrease lifespan. That is the entire message of CR in one sentence.Sucralose is made from sugar, is sweeter than sugar, carries no penalty of caloric toxicity, and is healthier than eating empty calories (of sugar).Thus Sucralose meets the criterion of being anexcellent addition to a CR diet.-- Warren Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 31, 2003 Report Share Posted December 31, 2003 Your statements are sounding a bit " Food Nazi " -ish.... There may be no justification for artificial sweeteners for you, but that doesn't make it a universal truth. >From: " jwwright " <jwwright@...> >Reply- >< > >Subject: Re: [ ] Re: Sucralose >Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 12:04:16 -0600 > >All excess calories decrease lifespan and that does not justify using >artificial sweeteners. > >Regards. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 31, 2003 Report Share Posted December 31, 2003 --- In , " jwwright " <jwwright@e...> wrote: All excess calories decrease lifespan and that does not justify using artificial sweeteners. *****Why does the use of artificial sweeteners require justification? Why is it an issue for anyone other than one's self (and perhaps for children under one's care)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 4, 2004 Report Share Posted January 4, 2004 And what scientific source do you base your " understanding " on? on 1/3/2004 11:54 PM, L. s at freecellchick@... wrote: > My understanding is that Sucralose depressess and shrinks the thymus. it's > not worth it. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 25, 2008 Report Share Posted September 25, 2008 I'm not sure exactly what has caused the weight lose. I combination of depression/anxiety, stomach problems/candida & bacteria/loss of appetite/nausea, reduced intake of breads and sugar. I have elevated mercury levels as well. Believe me, if I could go back to the way I felt last year and be 215lbs, I'd do it in a second. I should also point out that I'm 6'4 " so 160 is way too thin for a 6'4 " male in my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.