Is diet soda worse for you than regular?

psbfan9

psbfan9

Audioholic Samurai
Eh, this is all because the interdimensional shape-shifting lizards can't decide if they want to fatten us up or kill us off, so they're doing both at the same time. :eek: :rolleyes:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
j_garcia

j_garcia

Audioholic Jedi
Not to get too far off-topic, but that's a bunch of baloney. There's no way the farmers who "accidentally" ended up with Monsanto seed did so accidentally. These guys so carefully protect their stock and genetic lines it's ridiculous. It's trivial to "accidentally" end up with some Monsanto seeds from the next farm's fields and "accidentally" plant them in your own.
IIRC it is soybeans, not corn that are the subject of those legal issues for farmers. Monsanto basically patented soybeans and in order to control the market, they enforce their position by using their patent to force everyone else out of the market with big dollar lawyers. Monsanto is a customer of my former employer and I told them they would need to send their cases to someone else because I would not help them.
 
Last edited:
jinjuku

jinjuku

Moderator
Not to get too far off-topic, but that's a bunch of baloney. There's no way the farmers who "accidentally" ended up with Monsanto seed did so accidentally. These guys so carefully protect their stock and genetic lines it's ridiculous. It's trivial to "accidentally" end up with some Monsanto seeds from the next farm's fields and "accidentally" plant them in your own.
I think you missed the point. The genetically modified stocks are going to cross pollinate. Monsanto I believe has erroneously gone after farmers that have fields planted that tested genetically positive for Monsanto's GMO crops even though they weren't from re-seeding from prior growth.

I think what Monsanto and other 'crop science' companies are doing is scary in two areas: One the law of unintended consequence in GMO and two the fact that they now own and have privatized seed stock.
 
avnetguy

avnetguy

Audioholic Chief
I like diet soda, don't really like the taste of the regular stuff anymore but I never really did. Of course I drink very little of it, unlike my overly high coffee consumption. :)

Steve
 
S

skers_54

Full Audioholic
I am not a chemist, but one of my CAD students was and he explained what the difference is, and it is on a very small scale that ultimately has a big effect. The way I understood what he said is: HFCS is a 5 carbon chain while cane/natural sugar is a 6 carbon chain. Your body breaks them down and deals with these carbons in pairs. That means with the HFCS, no matter what you do, 20% of it is not easily processed by the body. Instead of being able to be stored for later use like the other two pairs, the one orphaned has no immediate use and so it basically becomes fat.

*That does not mean natural sugar is good for you :) It just isn't as bad.
No offense, but your student is incorrect. Fructose is a naturally occurring sugar found in many fruits and actually composes half of cane sugar (which is primarily sucrose). Both fructose and glucose are 6 carbon sugars; glucose is arranged as a hexagon while fructose is a pentagon with an additional carbon branching from the ring.

Glucose actually gets converted to fructose early in its metabolism, meaning glucose and fructose are handled identically except for the initial 2-3 steps. Metabolizing either produces the same energy and end products (2 CO2 molecules as waste and 2 sets of carbon pairs for further metabolism or storage as fat). Both are equally likely to be stored as fat.

The issue with HFCS is its high caloric content and low cost. It is metabolized identically to raw sugars.

Source: Bachelor's degrees in biomedical engineering and biochemistry, 3+ years of med school
 
newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top