Tag: Sugar vs artificial sweeteners

According to the World Health Organization (WHO), long-term use of non-sugar sweeteners (NSS) can lead to an increased risk of chronic diseases, a finding that adds complexity to the long-held belief that artificial sugar is a harmless substitute for regular sugar. This critical question requires a balanced look at the science to separate fact from myth and empower healthier choices.

According to food science, the density and surface tension of a liquid are the primary factors influencing its carbonation. So, does diet soda have less carbonation? The surprising answer is often the opposite, with many diet sodas actually having a more intense, longer-lasting fizz than their regular counterparts due to differences in their chemical makeup.

According to a 2024 review in *Healthline*, while drinks with artificial sweeteners may offer fewer calories, their long-term health effects, such as a potential link to type 2 diabetes, remain a subject of ongoing debate. This has many people asking: Are zero sugar drinks as bad as sugar?

According to sports nutrition experts, the combination of sodium and glucose in electrolyte drinks can improve the absorption of water and electrolytes through the small intestine, accelerating rehydration during intense exercise. This means that for endurance athletes, knowing what electrolyte drinks have real sugar is a crucial component of their performance strategy. While many modern formulas rely on artificial sweeteners, several options still use natural sugars for effective hydration and energy replenishment.

According to the World Health Organization, regular consumption of non-sugar sweeteners like those in Sweet'N Low has no long-term benefits for body fat reduction in adults or children. This raises a key question for many health-conscious consumers: which is worse, sugar or Sweet'N Low?

According to the World Health Organization, replacing free sugars with non-sugar sweeteners (NSS) does not aid in long-term weight control and may increase the risk of certain health conditions. This statement fuels the ongoing debate about the safety and benefits of popular sugar substitutes, like Splenda (sucralose), compared to traditional sugar.

According to the World Health Organization (WHO), replacing sugars with intense low-calorie sweeteners may be associated with an increased risk of type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular diseases. The question, "Is zero sugar actually better?" is more complex than simply swapping calories for chemicals, and understanding the full picture is crucial for making informed dietary choices.

According to the Cleveland Clinic, if you are comparing what's worse, artificial sweeteners may be far more detrimental to your long-term health than sugar. The long-running debate over whether sugar or artificial sweeteners pose a greater risk is complex, with both having significant drawbacks when consumed in excess.

According to the Coca-Cola website, a 12 oz can of regular Coke has 39 grams of sugar and 140 calories, while Diet Coke has zero sugar and zero calories. This stark difference leads many to wonder: what is healthier, full fat Coke or Diet Coke?

Between 2009 and 2012, over 41% of U.S. adults reported using artificial sweeteners, often found in flavored water packets, as a way to reduce sugar intake. The key question many face is: are flavored water packets healthier than soda, or just a different kind of sweet habit?