DIET SODA IS JUST AS HARMFULL TO OLDER FOLKS AS REGULAR SODA August 6, 2007

Country-pop radio stalwart Kim Mitchell likes to say “might as well go for a soda, nobody hurts” well, I’ve got two things to say to Mr. Mitchell-first off- get a boys name. Secondly, if that soda’s diet and you’re going for one every day- you may as well be going for a Big Mac.

We all know that regular soda is no good for you. However, the rise of diet soda was built on the promise of low calories and less sugar (or a different type of sugar) and you would be led to believe that while drinking diet soda wasn’t exactly healthy, it wasn’t nearly as damaging as drinking the occasional bottle of traditional soda.

The Circulation Journal has published the findings of a study titled “Soft Drink Consumption and

Risk of Developing Cardiometabolic Risk Factors and the Metabolic Syndrome in Middle-Aged Adults.” A veritable slew of health blogs have been discussing the results and it looks very clear that diet soda is a big sham.

Discussing the study, the GetFitSource Blog stated ““People who drank one or more diet sodas each day developed the same risks for heart disease as those who downed sugary regular soda.” The person who wrote the post was seemingly furious over the blatant false advertising indicated by the addition of a “diet” label to the name. There is nothing that’s diet at all about these drinks.

“Needless to say this is somewhat of a surprising result since it’s definitely counter intuitive that the diet colas would have the same impact as fully sweetened sodas given the massive calories contained in the latter. Not surprisingly, a representative from the American Beverage Association opined: “How can something with zero calories that’s 99 percent water with a little flavoring in it … cause weight gain?”

The study also concluded that individuals who “drank one or more sodas a day diet or regular had an increased risk of metabolic syndrome, compared to those who drank sodas infrequently.” In terms of your heart health- diet sodas are conclusively as bad as traditional sodas.

The CardioBlog noted that this increase in Metabolic Syndrome translated into another troubling symptom- obsesity. Their latest post on this study noted that “What’s more, compared to those who drank less than one soda a day, those who drank one or more were at a 30% greater risk becoming obese and had a 25% greater chance of developing high cholesterol.”

The Disease Proof Blog was also incensed about the hurtful effects of diet soda. Joel Fuhrman M.D, the writer of the post, seemed to imply that the use of artificial sweetener was responsible for the bulk of the damage. He quoted a recent post in another medical blog that said…

“Despite its widespread use, there is a surprising lack of human clinical trials evaluating its safety. Unlike with saccharin, no evidence has been reported that stevioside and its metabolites are carcinogenic. However, animal reports of nephrotoxicity do exist.”

Are the carcinogenic effects of artificial sweeteners baring unknown repercussions on millions of American hearts? The signs are increasingly pointing to yes.

Cool Whip Free is free of everything except high-fructose corn syrup and lies! July 8, 2007

We all remember Cool Whip as a summertime treat riding high on pile of strawberries and pound cake. These days, you’d be lucky to find a strawberry shortcake that wasn’t made in China! Well, that might be a bit of an exaggeration, but you (and Lou Dobbs) get my point. It seems like we all knew Cool Whip couldn’t actually be good for us, which was why our moms only served it every few weeks or so. These days, in our anything-goes dietary culture, Kraft Foods has launched a new type of Cool Whip that is supposedly a lot healthier. They call it Cool Whip Free.

I saw it at the supermarket not too long ago and after having a quick look at the nutritional information, I realized that this Cool Whip wasn’t really free of anything-especially sugar! Am I the only one who finds it aggravating that companies can promote something as healthy or imply a health-benefit with a name when the product isn’t actually healthy?

Although the blogosphere has been pretty quiet about this one I found a post about a very similar experience that somebody over at FitSugar had with Cool Whip Free. “Cool Whip Free may be low in carbs and low in calories, but it is not free of a few things I try to avoid. The top four ingredients are: water, corn syrup, hydrogenated vegetable (coconut and palm kernel oils), and high fructose corn syrup.”

The author of that post actually bought the Cool Whip before they took it home and realized that it wasn’t some form of dessert miracle. Her level of disgust rose quickly, it seems.

My favorite touch, however, is the asterisks Kraft added to the right of the ingredient “partially hydrogenated oil.” The asterisk leads me to a little informational gem of a footnote that reads, “Adds a negligible amount of fat.” Thanks, Kraft I feel so much better about the fact that you can use partially hydrogenated oil, keep the amount per serving to below 0.5 gram, and still claim your product is trans fat free.

And besides, have you ever noticed how there’s two ways to say Cool Whip. Some people, us northerners mostly, plainly say Cool-Whip as two separate words. But I’ve noticed that southerners and people from back east have a tendency to kind of link the two words together. I’d never thought anybody else had ever noticed that until I was watching some cartoon show with my irresponsible grandson. Suddenly, I see a baby and a talking dog conversing on something that had been bothering me for the better part of 20 years.

What an age we live in.