to think that food manufacturers should be forced to use the phrase 'with artificial sweeteners' instead of 'no added sugar'

[MistyValley]

as gullible people may think that they are making a healthy choice when in fact they aren't.

It's downright misleading, many's the time my PFB has been offered squash at a friend's house with the mother saying 'it's okay, it's a no added sugar one'.

It may have no extra sugar, but it's sure as hell packed with dodgy chemicals to make it taste sweet and nasty you loon.

Leaving aside the health issues, I'm someone who finds the taste of artificial sweeteners absolutely vile. We've recently even had to stop buying Schweepes Tonic Water (the non diet version) becasue even that has got the bloody things in it, along with the supermarket own brands. If you want a sweetener free tonic you have to buy the very nice but expensive Fever Tree stuff, which is not so widely available. There are a whole range of products that I carefully avoid, and am also now an avid reader of labels as these horrible things are added to so many products.

personally I LOVE more products with NO ADDED SUGAR that also son't contain artificial sweeteners. So many products are just over sweet for my taste, especially drinks etc. (Lusts for store bought cordials just made with fruit juice etc)

Agree Scuttlebutter.
And I would much rather buy something containing sugar than artificial sweeteners.

Diabetics would surely be looking for labels that say 'Sugar Free' rather than the rather vague 'No Added Sugar', wouldn't they?

YANBU Totally agree with Scuttlebutter and Findingstuff, I always have to read the label carefully to check but have started to assume that if it says 'no added sugar' then it means 'contains artificial sweeteners'

People with diabetes dont need a "sugar free" diet anyway. No added sugar would be fine.

There are some "full sugared" products which also contain artificial sweeteners as well btw. You may want to check your regular brands if its an issue.

I still think 'no added sugar' is too vague to base any nutritional assumptions on.

Except that the product will almost definitely contain artificial sweeteners, of course.

Musksticks, in that case you will know far better than I do that much of the research has been paid for/sponsored by food manufacturers and/or pharmaceutical companies. There is also a massive food industry lobby in the US that puts pressure on regulators. One of sweeteners (is it Sweet and Lo/saccharin?) contains the health warning "Use of this product may be hazardous to your health. This product contains saccharin, which has been determined to cause cancer in laboratory animals." The FDA is the same outfit that approved olestra. yuck.

The current investigation here is being done by Hull Uni and with the FSA and is funded by the government

Op your clearly a loon. there is nothing wrong with Artificial sweetners.

The ingrediants are all clearly defined on the pack. this is the law. the no added suger discription is accurate. They have not added any extra suger.

Also you will be suprised to hear the suger is not bad for you, infact it is vital for a balanced health diet. it is the quantities that some people are having that is bad.

Op YABVU.

I say again where on earth do you get this evidence from that " But my point is that many people just ASSUME it's healthy because it says 'no added sugar '."

you believe that artificial sweetners are a bad thing, no questions asked but others don't.

Dentists promote no added sugar
Change for Life promotes no added sugar as a healthy alternative
The government licenses the use of these artificial sweetners

PEople have the right to agree with them if they like. It doesn't make them stupid.

And as for the poster who apparently has the evidence that they are bad but refuses to share - thats not backing up your point. You might as well not bothered posting anythign.

musksticks, au contraire.

artificial sweeteners are now thought to contribute to obesity. things like corn syrup are very bad for you.

YADNBU.

although you'd get better press if you hadn't mentioned 'loon'.

I agree with the OP, i think the labeling would be better to say what is in a product than what isnt

I am not 'woo' about artifical sweetners but far prefer to stick to sugar. It irritates me when soft drinks etc. have both in...how sweet do things need to be?

so what about the research that says your brain can't monitor the sweeteners like it can sugar and put the brakes on when you've had too much? so when you're eating these crap sweeteners, you tend to eat more.

what about all the negative research around aspartame? saccharin?
etc.

Corn syrup is fructose and there had recently been a stsyemati review published which debunks the link between obesity and fructose.

We have done some post loading studies here warthog and I cant disagree with what you are saying about that.

I also hate artificial sweeteners. They are just so super sweet. Would also rather eat sugar than artifical version.

I think that the long term effects of artificial sweeteners on insulin etc hasn't been fully explored and the so called 'obesity crisis' seems to have come hand in hand with the increase in diet drinks 'no added sugar' products.

yanbu, I would like to see that too.
but I am already checking labels as even the most unsuspecting food/drinks sometimes contain sweeteners. even savoury foods sometimes...

The fructose stuff is in Critical reviews in Food Science and Nutrition if you are looking.

Yanbu. Can't abide the rush to sweeten everything with these hideous artificial sweeteners. They taste sooooooooooo disgusting apart from anything else. Why can't we have full sugar versions of things like tonic water if we want?

Worthog - the Artifical Sugars are not making people Obese. It is the people eating far too much that is making themselves obese. Their diet could be anything and i doubt that artifical sugers will be in all thier foods i.e chips, meat etc.

ha, yes loon was clearly, er, rather strong . As I said, it was for dramatic effect and most of the people I've met who appear to believe that 'no added sugar' is a great thing aren't daft at all.

Which is why I think 'no added sugar' is a disingenous and misleading marketing ploy. It is not a fair reflection of what the product contains, which is 'added artificial sweeteners'.

Ok MistyValley, your friends are clearly ok with the drink its self. if they drank this juice for the rest of thier lives nothing bad will happen to them so what is wrong with having it?

We have found some satiety impact but our reaserch isnt done yet. There is conflicting stuff on satiety after preloading with aspartame. Anton et al. (2010) tested the levels of satiety before and after a meal in patients who had received pre loads of Aspartame and patients who hadn?t. They found no difference in the two groups and concluded that Aspartame did not have an influence on hunger levels. This coincides with further evidence from peer reviewed materials (Mattes 2003, Black, Tanaka, Leiter, Anderson 2003) which also come to the conclusion that Aspartame does not induce hunger. So we are still looking