sugar

It is fairly standard practice for companies to try to give their customers what they want, even if it makes no sense. Perhaps the most notable recent example was Johnson and Johnson,
Some junk science studies can be difficult to detect. Some, however, require no effort at all. Here we have one shining example of the latter not that you could tell from all the media hype surrounding this nonsense. The new Nature article, claiming that artificial sweeteners might contribute to obesity, seemed to be so chemically naive, that ACSH s Dr. Josh Bloom, after a brief perusal of the authors and their affiliations, saw that the answer was obvious.
As momma used to say, Too much of anything is no good for you. This has been confirmed again, in a new study just published in JAMA Internal Medicine.
Julie Gunlock, the director of the Independent Women s Forum Culture of Alarmism Project, has written a new book, From Cupcakes to Chemicals: How the Culture of Alarmism Makes
In the no news is no news department, one of the most studied chemicals ever - Aspartame, NutraSweet - has gotten a clean bill of health from the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). It s about time. But will it matter?
Foods and beverages containing sugar substitutes are widely used in the United States and other countries; they offer attractive dietary options for people who are trying to limit calorie intake and/or reduce the risk of tooth decay. Extensive scientific research supports the safety of the five low-calorie sugar substitutes currently approved for use in foods and beverages in the U.S. acesulfame-K, aspartame, neotame, saccharin, and sucralose. This report by the American Council on Science and Health summarizes the scientific facts about the safety of sugar substitutes.