just science related topics. please contribute
note: clickbait sources/headlines aren't liked generally. I've posted crap sources and later deleted or edit to improve after complaints. whoops, sry
Rule 1) Be kind.
lemmy.world rules: https://mastodon.world/about
I don't screen everything, lrn2scroll
At the risk of coming off like I’m criticizing, wasn’t I told to substitute my choices of fats, with margarine, and low-fat alternatives that were instead laden with other problems ? Oh, and the sugar alternatives like aspartame, and Splenda?
Forgive my skepticism. But I’m much healthier after a decade of going back to butter, sugar, and less processed foods? My medical chart is all I need for confirmation of my choices.
Encouraging news though.
Margarine I can understand, but aspartame is likely the most rigorously studied food additive of all time. Anecdotally and in contrast to your experience, I've been healthier since I swapped sugar in drinks to artificial sweeteners. But if it works for you, the numbers are the numbers, so keep at it. I once lost 20 pounds over the course of a year in highschool by swapping my lunch for a pack of Twinkies. Turns out calories in<calories out works no matter what you eat.
You can both be right, because trying to make more conscious health decisions is what actually made you healthier.
I'm not going to say you're wrong about aspartame being safe because I don't know for sufe, but I question whether you're right. The fact that Donald Rumsfeld was the CEO of the company that held the patent, couldn't get it approved then magically got it approved after his buddy Ronald Reagan appointed him to a position where he could do so makes me wonder if it ever should have been approved.
Aspartame itself is completely safe, but recent studies have found all artificial sweeteners have metabolic effects. It's not that the chemicals themselves are hazardous, as you say aspartame in particular has been very rigorously studied, but that it appears the body uses the sweet taste as a signal to change insulin production.
Is it better to have a diet pop than sugar pop? Definitely and I prefer Diet Coke these days, Classic feels like drinking syrup.
However it's even healthier just to drink water, or non-caloric, unsweetened drinks like coffee or tea. Soft drinks are supposed to be a treat and not a food group, I drink maybe one a week.
It sounds like this is specifically for people with hypertension that require low sodium diets. In the case of someone who's already in a high risk category the calculus is probably a bit different.
There are no studies linking salt with any health issues. It's just a lunacy of one very loud man.
There are copious studies showing the link between excess salt and hypertension and heart disease. This has been well established for decades
Mmm, nope - https://youtu.be/HMsbl22gQLg
I suggest you watch that video again. He agrees that high sodium increases blood pressure. Most of his points are about how it affects people differently and other lifestyle factors that affect blood pressure such overall diet and exercise.
Yeah, but high sodium means you eat kilos of it every day. No one does that. NO ONE!
This works because those are also electrolytes that most people are likely to be low in. The human body needs salt and we don't actually have a problem with too much salt these days. Most canned food has gone lite salt and heavy sugar to cover up the lack of salt.
Does the fediverse have any communities for keto or low carb/high protein?
Sugar is used to cover up excess salt not instead of salt. They are counter flavors that tend to cancel each other.
Sugar and salt can both extend shelf life as well so increasing both can increases shelf life without changing the flavor much.
They also both make you thirsty so soda manufacturers tend to increase both in sych to keep the taste about the same but make the soda far less thirst quenching.
Salt isn't a flavor, it's a flavor enhancer.
I respond to every single one of these that pop up because we are still working on corporate backed bad science. Salt is not bad for you, neither is fat. Sugar is always bad for you and the amount of it you need for it to stop food from going bad is almost hilarious. What canned foods use is a combination of things, one of them being the actual canning process, the combination of boiling to kill as much as possible and then vacuum sealing it means that as long as there is no break in the seal the food is good basically til the end of time.
Y'all motherfuckers need some Alton Brown. Regular table salt does not really have its own flavor or spice, it enhances the flavor of whatever it's combined with, for example when you eat just salt, what you taste is your own saliva.
@rdyoung @Hugin
Which corporations funded the bad salt science you failed to provide any reference to? I can find oodles of peer reviewed science that says excess salt contributes to coronary disease and strokes.
Which corporations funded the bad fat science you failed to provide any reference to? I can find oodles of peer reviewed science that says excess fat contributes to coronary disease, obesity and cancer.
Bye bye nonsense and disinformation.
In some individuals, it doesn't affect every person the same. There are people who are completely immune to salt, including in ridiculous amounts.
Of course the average will still show an increase in blood pressure, but it's like a percentage was affected by salt and another group was not, it's a bimodal distribution
Salty sweet sour bitter umami. Those are the 5 flavors. Everything else is smell.
As far as salt being bad for you the poison is in the dosage. To little is bad and so is to much.
Does the fediverse have any communities for keto or low carb/high protein?
I hope not, ketobro pseudoscience is a blight on the web
We need to call it a Salternative.
Don't forget MSG! It gets a bad image, but is Delicious and NOT poison.
EDIT: shit, what a terrible typo. that was not meant to be funny/sarcasm - it was meant to be literal, that MSG is delicious and basically safe.
Sorry..
It gets a bad image, but is poison?
ugh... terrible typo that happens all the time when i'm typing, my fingers constantly skip "not" when I say it in my head.
It especially put it on chips that have no flavor - or when the chips are only lightly salted.
Works wonders!
How is it poison? I've read that your body metabolizes msg better than salt, and msg is more potent meaning you can use less salt if you add a tiny bit of msg.
Pretty sure it's a typo, since it's a self contradicting statement
yes, exactly... thank you. spammed replies to everyone because I cant let things go
ugh... terrible typo that happens all the time when i'm typing, my fingers constantly skip "not" when I say it in my head.
So the salt alternative is mostly salt and rock salt?
Cool finding (replication, rather?)
It's a shame that potassium thing (or whatever else is in there) tastes like butt.
If you arent acclimated to it and additives like acids arent added sure but there are decent salt substitutes on the market
This study sought to assess the effects of a salt substitute (62.5% NaCl, 25% KCl, and 12.5% flavorings) on incidence of hypertension and hypotension among older adults with normal blood pressure.
Lol so the salt substitute is still nearly 2/3 salt. This study sounds like bullshit that wouldn't be replicated in the real world, participants knew they might be getting reduced salt food and thus were more likely to accept it. In day to day life people would still generally prefer the saltier foods.
The foods wouldn't be saltier. Potassium chloride tastes similar to sodium chloride. It even seems saltier. Odds are you wouldn't notice the difference using their substitute over straight salt.
Fair enough, I'm still highly skeptical of this study. I haven't read the full paper, but if they're replacing salt weight for weight I don't think it's much good replacing it with 2/3 NaCl.
Really, we need to ween people off added salt altogether. We don't need any extra salt, food has enough of it already, and having it in processed food is more about marketing and exploiting addiction than anything else.
That's fair. I also don't know the extent of their use of the substitute, whether it was a total replacement or just basic at-home cooking, or even a replacement for added salt.
Depending on the proportion replaced, 1/3 could be a pretty big change. But I agree that it would be more effective to reduce it at the source.
Sounds like people are getting salty about salt.