Awesome! As someone who used to drink a lot of Diet Dr. Pepper (DDP) I could easily tell how close a given can (or bottle) was to its "use by" date. This makes for a great party trick [1] but otherwise has limited utility.
It also made for some socially awkward situations where, when visiting friends, they would want to have drinks on hand that their guests like and would go out of their way to get some DDP for me, not checking the date, and then serve out of date soda which tasted horrible.
Not surprising the rate of hydrolysis is temperature dependent so if you keep things refrigerated they last longer, but if you leave them out on the back porch in the summer where they get warm they go 'non-sweet' relatively quickly.
I switched to water (or tea if I want caffeine) with diet sweetener in packets (which doesn't go bad because no pesky water to 'unzip' it). I wrote to the Dr. Pepper company once and suggested they design their beverage so that the sweetener was dry and only released when you opened it (I got the idea from the way the Guinness folks started selling Guinness in cans with a gizmo to put a head on it when opened. Alas, nobody at the company was interested in "fixing" a non-problem, they responded (nicely) that I should just be sure to check the date and included a coupon for a free six pack. Of course at that time (and is still true around Reno) the bottler doesn't use an easily readable date code so it isn't much of a solution.
[1] And by "great" I mean the nerds all are fascinated by it and the non-nerds were nominally repulsed that someone could have such familiarity with the hydrolysis profile as to call it out by taste.
Your note about the sweetener packets makes me curious if diet soda syrup lasts longer. This has been a reason for me to hold off on putting together my own carbonation setup as, in spite of how much soda I drink, I still don’t think I could move through the requisite 2.5 gallons of syrup before the expiration date hit. I wonder if the aspartame suffers the same hydrolysis in syrup.
It does! (less water, so less hydrolysis) "name brand" syrup however isn't particularly economical at retail however[1]. Not too surprisingly there has been a rash of restaurant bankruptcies during the pandemic and so buying "used" soda fountain gear is actually pretty easy (at least in the western US) these days. I actually have an Elkay "water machine" which does carbonation (as well as chilled and not chilled still water) although its carbonation chamber is too small to give a good fizz like the commercial units do. (more Perrier like, less fountain soda like). That said there are also relatively few powder mixes that take into account carbonated water. There was an AWESOME Grape Crush one (that was sugar free) but since it tasted poorly when mixed with still water it was discontinued (having a soda water tap is not the normal situation).
One of the more interesting ideas (and also impractical) are the "mini-syrups" that are used in the multi-beverage dispensers with the touch screen at places like Movie Theaters. Good luck getting hold of those. I briefly had a line on getting them from a local AMC because I knew the manager who wasn't averse to re-selling them to me at cost but she changed jobs when the pandemic made theaters non-viable. The existing Coke branded dispensers are so loaded up with various DRM/telemetry that even if you can get one at auction (which you normally can't since they are leased, not sold) it would be quite the reverse engineering process to get it to work "disconnected" from the Coke network.
[1] Funny story about how I spent four months trying to buy Diet Dr. Pepper syrup at the "restaurant" rate (which was about 1/4th the "retail" rate) elided.
One issue with those machines is the sweetener is mixed with the flavor ingredients at the fountain. That's how they fit all those flavors in a refrigerator size package. Each flavor pack is about the size of a box of mike and ikes, but there's also a "bib"(2.5 gallon bag in box)[1] of non-nutritive sweetener that's shared by all the diet flavors. Corn syrup gets routed in from a big tank in the back along with water and c02.
In practice if you wanted some kind of home setup, you'd be much better off just buying the normal box of syrup like they use in fast-food restaurants, gas stations, etc.
Wow, why am I not surprised :-). If the normal boxes had been reasonably priced when I was pursuing this I would have gone that route. At the time the best I could do was a bit under 0.02/oz based on the 24 oz bottles or 2 liter bottles depending on sales. The places that would sell me syrup had the result coming in at 4.2 - 6 cents/oz which would have increased my costs considerably.
Hello old Google coworker
I had the same setup in Fort Mason in 2004 and was able to get the SF wholesaler to sell to us pretty regularly. Iirc it became a lot easier lately to just find generics on eBay and worry less about getting the hookup. Diet red bull was the holy grail but we found an okay proxy on eBay too.
Note also that most soda fountain syrups also use saccharine instead of aspartame. This is probably so the syrup doesn't go bad as quickly. The transition to aspartame was driven by a study that showed that saccharine caused cancer in rats. That study had issues, but it had enough of an impact that consumers looked for alternatives. For soda machines, there usually isn't an ingredient list visible to the consumer, so that pressure to switch to aspartame didn't exist. There was a class-action lawsuit a few years ago claiming harm from the fountain formulation of diet sodas being different from the same brand sold at retail, but I believe it was thrown out.
Try https://sodastream.com . The soda can be sweetened with syrups they sell, or sweeten with anything you like, like Mangrove Honey which is salty and rich in itself. Add Scotch for a new drink called a "Southern Bee Sting". Squirt of lemon optional.
Honestly, I made my own using this[0] setup and I've never been happier. I had Sodastream before and the cost of refills and inconvenience of restocking them meant that I didn't actually use it that much. I bought some fruit extracts on Amazon, put a few mL in a 2L of water, and have delicious seltzer water without vendor lock-in. Now we need to refill our 10lb tank every few months, unless there's some leak/gasket problem (which has happened once or twice when the cats play near it).
You can make it more automated if you'd like with some sort of automatic agitation to dissolve the CO2, but it hasn't been too big of a bother for me to manually shake it yet.
We got a Sodastream for Christmas along with a SodaMod kit which comes with three food-grade tanks with paintball fill valves. That way you can fill them at a sporting goods store for $5 instead of exchanging them for $15. Related to the article, there's something very strange about the Sodastream Diet Cola that I haven't quite put my finger on. I prefer to add some lime juice to mask the flavor.
How do you get the carbonation levels to an equivalent level of commercial equivalents? I have this same setup (used mostly for beer)- but when I tried to carbonate water, it was always a bit on the flat side.
Honestly, I have the opposite experience. I pressurize around 50-55PSI and do at least 2 carbonation cycles, venting in-between. Using cold water is also key, so I keep a 2L full of flat water for later carbonation - we swap between 2-3 bottles. I've recarbonated flat Dr. Pepper and it truly tasted like a fresh cracked can, carbonation and all.
We've also tried carbonating blueberries, which was really interesting. It didn't work great, but we noticed the fizziness and it'll probably be something I try again soon - perhaps using a chamber with a bigger opening than a 2L's.
Depends on the powder. The "Wyler's Lemondade mix" powders do fine with the carbonated water from my Elkay machine (not that they taste as good in carbonated water but they do work). I know there were powders that added fizz to still water to make them more soda like and those would be a problem on water that was already carbonated.
You can get unsweetened carbonated soda water that's "Dr." flavored. I've never tried adding a nutrasweet packet to one, but I wonder how close it would come to a "Dr." soda of the same brand.
When the old DDP expires, you buy more. If it lasted longer, you would not buy more. Though it sure causes destress on their best customers. Quite the dilemma.
I once explained to a coworker that I brought in some soda that day because the diet soda at work was expired. They were skeptical and we proceeded to go down to the cafe to setup a blind taste test. I passed with flying colors and we had an interesting conversation about it. It was a fun 20 minutes of not working.
You weren't goofing off, you were applying the scientific method while at the same time engaging in team building.
I'm not even kidding. That incidental silliness is valuable. A year later, you run across a problem where a customer explains a problem you don't understand, and then you have a flashback to that time when you did a blind taste test. You look at your colleague and whisper "Hey, remember that blind taste test we did that time?" and their eyes light up.
Off topic, but the headline made me realize that something “tasting off” is sort of an unpaired expression. We don’t say that normal drinks “taste on.”
An unpaired word is one that, according to the usual rules of the language, would appear to have a related word but does not.
Not sure if it's only the UK but we also use "up" and "down" as synonyms in some sitations. e.g. "I'm up for going to the pub" and "I'm down for going to the pub" mean the same thing
This is also true in the US, although I would add that being down for something connotes a tiny bit more enthusiasm than being up for it, since "down" is also used in the context of making a commitment, e.g. "put me down for two boxes" or "I'll mark you down as present."
No we don't say that. We would only say that it tastes off. We really only use the opposite with regards to events, this event is on, Daniell's birthday surprise is on, etc.
> aspartame has a half-life of about 300 days in solution at about pH 4, about the pH of soft drinks, but half life means that half if it as gone by that time. And if the cans are exposed to a hot storeroom or stored in a warm summer garage, they may deteriorate faster.
And they deteriorate a lot slower at cold temperatures. Hydrolysis practically stops if you freeze it.
Sounds like the time I woke to what sounded like a gun shot in my apartment. I had accidentally left a can of frozen orange juice concentrate on top of my fridge about a week prior. It had started to ferment, and eventually, bang. Like you, it took me ages to clean up that mess.
I've had something similar happen. I was keeping home-made ginger beer in our refrigerator for some weeks after I'd made several bottles of it. Ginger beer is yeast, water, sugar, ginger juice, and a few other things. I didn't realize that - even at 3-4 degrees Celsius the yeast would continue doing their thing, albeit slowly.
I was sitting at the kitchen table, right next to the fridge, when a 750 ml glass bottle of ginger beer exploded. It took out another bottle along with the tempered glass shelf it had been sitting on.
Not only did it take more than an hour to clean up, the replacement shelf my wife ordered was the wrong one, so she had to order yet another replacement. It took ages to arrive.
I have not yet been allowed to make more home-made ginger beer, which is a shame because it's very tasty and is excellent for making cocktails in the summer.
That... was painful to read, I can only imagine what it was like cleaning it. I had a glass carbonated water bottle break in a similar fashion last year...
Was it already frozen when you transferred it to the fridge? That kind of sounds like it was supercooled and it happened to crash out while in the fridge. Once it freezes that's as high as the pressure will ever get, thawing it will only allow more CO2 to redissolve and lower the pressure.
This hasn’t been my experience with Diet Coke I’ve accidentally left in the freezer overnight. As long as I let it sit on the counter and thaw over the course of a few hours, it retains its carbonation, or at least some of it.
So long as you don't open the bottle before it has had time to redissolve the CO2 while being nice and cool you should be fine. Same thing applies to shaken or heated soda, so long as the CO2 doesn't leave the bottle it's reversible no problem.
I wonder what the genetic factor is for stevia, because oh boy does that taste awful. Aspartame is unpleasant, but stevia is something else entirely.
About the only diet sweeteners that taste sweet to me are xylitol and saccharin, and they're hard to find outside their niches (gum/mints and coffee sweetener). Kinda sucks tbh.
I'm one of those and have difficulties with most bitter drinks as well so the problem compounds as I have to have more sugar than most to drink coffee or nonherbal teas. I found that the sugar free off brand winco red bull doesn't trigger the same sour/bitter for me which is great. I still stick with water, milk, barley tea, and hot cocoa (I make my own mix) for the most part.
I know lots of people claim that Coke Zero tastes "basically" the same as normal Coke, but to me it was literally the most disgusting soda I have ever tastes. Far worse than even Coke light for some reason.
For me it's an on-/off relationship over the years.
I usually am fine with the Diet Coke at McDonald's in Germany (it's cold), but not a fan of the stuff I buy in plastic bottles. I do like Diet Pepsi but not Max (I find it tastes very artificial). Coke Zero is so-so.
And the weirdest thing is that we have Fanta Tangerine, which they switched from sugar to only-as-diet a while ago and now I can't drink it because it tastes so horrible.
TLDR: Either my sense of taste is just broken or they're actually switching the recipes every few years. Or it is actually this phenomenon here.
Some time ago I could tell something was really off about the taste of my diet soda even though it was way before it's expiry date. I was able to find out some storage irregularities with the shop I was buying from and call CC on them. Turns out they were also doing a lot of stupid things like taking meat freezers out of socket overnight to reduce energy consumption.
But we don't say 'soda' (for the same usage). (And 'call CC on them' seems an unlikely phrasing to me, though you're correct that (a department of) the county council would probably be the port of call.)
I noticed a similar thing with regular Coca Cola years ago. Some PET 2 l bottles went stale and tasted terribly, like mold. Other people thought that it wasn't so bad, but did detect the bad taste after being told about it.
I suspected it was an effect of sunlight on sugar, but had no way to know for sure. Nobody would admit that the bottles were transported or stored in inadequate conditions either.
Then I quit regular coke and later diet coke too, so no idea if it's still a problem.
Here in Norway I think "Pepsi Max" was the gold standard for years while diet Coca Cola mostly sold because of the brand name.
Then something happened: Coca Cola launched Zero and after a few iterations it tasted good! Meanwhile Pepsi Max always yaste stale now since the start of the pandemic or something.
I don't really know what happened and it could just be my taste changing but I don't think so.
Carlsberg Sverige and Ringnes AS (also Carlsberg), I'm guessing it's made locally.
Haven't notice anything with the Swedish Pepsi max and I'm drinking _a lot_ of it. Didn't get the flu yet so my taste buds should be good! Coke zero got a lot better after the new recipe if you ask me but still a Pepsi guy :)
I drank a lot of Pepsi Max since 2006 to sometime just before the pandemic when I started feeling the difference.
Recently I have only tried the ones from Norway since the border has been closed for so long && local shops have reduced prices to Swedish levels for now, but the Pepsi Max I get here all tastes stale now across all shops and all bottle sizes I have tested.
I used to drink coke years ago. But it only tasted ok to a pizza. Then I didn't eat pizza for a while (no local pizza place) and after that I couldn't even enjoy a coke to pizza any more. Not sure if they changed something in the recipe or my taste just changed. I haven't had more than a couple of cokes the last 20+ years because they just don't taste good any more. Neither diet or normal.
I don't know, maybe I got used to it real quick. When the new (and better :P) coke zero came out people didn't shut up about it, so would be strange if they changed pepsi and almost nobody noticed. But I did have that happen with beer though, a beer I liked started tasting real bad, then I had it for the first time in 10 years or more last summer and it was good again. Think tastebuds works in mysterious ways and changes a lot more than we think.
- sometimes a brewery changes the taster/mixer master
- other times I suspect they start cheaping on ingredients
- in one particular case I almost expect the brewery did it on purpose: A particular brewery here in Norway produced a very tasty low-alcoholic beer that was sold durt cheap in one particular chain 8f grocery stores. Then at some point around 2008-2009 that particular beer changed to taste like the smell of a fox farm (I grew up next to one so I know that smell). I checked back a number of times but the quality didn't recover until years later. One possible explanation would be that they had an extremely bad deal and was actively sabotaging this product to sell less of it at loss.
I don't think its related to OP, but maybe to your experience.
I have a friend that pointed out to me that Regular Coca Cola in both cans and bottles taste different between the product labeled as "Made in GB" to those that are not labeled as such, even with full UK labeling and identical ingredients. Once you pick up on it, you can tell straight away. I suspect UK cans without "Made in GB" are produced elsewhere in Europe, and has a slightly different recipe.
I've seen the same in France. Coca Cola sold in heavily discounted stores used to taste quite a bit worse than regular « Made in France » Coca Cola. I suspected it was made on the cheap somewhere and imported, like a lot of products there. I don't think I could find it anymore, as those stores have mostly disappeared (and those that still exist like Lidl and Aldi had to go up-market and significantly improve their quality and image). As it happens it's a retail model that's much less popular here than in Germany.
That is interesting; I didn't know European countries would prefer sugar over corn syrup. Do people there also have the opinion that real sugar is more subjectively superior in it's taste and aftertaste?
I don't know that anyone has an opinion on it, regular sugar is just the norm. Corn syrup is just not common enough that people would be exposed to the point of single it out. We don't really have a « big corn » lobby, and GMOs which are meant for that type of production are verboten anyway.
The quotas on isoglucose have been lifted a few years ago in the EU, so that might become more common. But I think it's really meant for export, especially considering sugar is meant lower in manufactured products anyway.
Random story - I met the chemist who worked at Searle and whose job it was to come up with a way to purify aspartame on an industrial scale.
Normally purifying things like pharmaceuticals can be challenging, but as long as impurities are under 0.5%, generally they are acceptable (some have lower limits).
But with aspartame it had to be much cleaner since small impurities would ruin the taste. So it had nothing to do with safety but more quality of the final product.
He banged his head against the wall until they came up with a process that consistently have high quality product as measured by taste.
I had left an almost full case of Diet Pepsi at work went we were sent home for COVID. Over a year later when allowed back I opened up the work fridge and grabbed a can. Due to masking and still being quite nervous about the virus I basically slammed it so I could re-mask faster. Big mistake, it was awful.
Had the same experience briefly returning to an office last year, some very unappetizing Coke Zero. I don't know how much Ace-K differs in this regard or if there's not really enough to matter but... not good.
Was not really something I previously thought of as really expiring in any meaningful sense.
Acesulfame K is not sensitive to degradation at coke pH. In addition to acesulfame K coke zero reportedly contains aspartame as well so that was probably the cause of the off-taste.
Could it be that you just didn't drink cola for a long time? I haven't really drank any soft drink in few years and whenever I try it just tastes like very sugary water to me. And I used to drink a lot of cola in the past.
No. Aspartame is one of the most studied and tested substances on the planet and they still haven't linked a single problem to it. At least not one that doesn't relate to sweeteners in general. Nothing else has gone under so much scrutiny (Maybe MSG). Seems like a too good to be true situation where people can't accept its actually this good.
Can you provide a source or explain how you came to the conclusion that it is one of the most studied substances on the planet?
Personally I'm not worried about aspartame. I consume it in small amounts and am not overly concerned, but this statement goes beyond the facts I'm aware of.
Speaking of people being afraid of MSG, As far as I'm concerned that's racist. The only reason people are afraid of seaweed extract (MSG) is because some racists person made up "Chinese Food Syndrome". People repeating the lie are affectively passing on something based on racist propaganda. It's also the reason much of the asian food in the bay area doesn't taste nearly as delicious as the real deal in asia. Because the racist person who made up Chinese Food Syndrome lie is still spreading their hatred.
> The only reason people are afraid of seaweed extract (MSG) is because some racists person made up "Chinese Food Syndrome".
Not exactly. I agree the term is racist, and that racist sentiment may way spur disinformation on MSG. But the fear actually began in 1968, during the beginnings of the modern 'health food' movement, with a letter written in the New England Journal of Medicine by a man named Robert Ho Man Kwok describing his supposed symptoms from eating MSG. The body of follow up research showing no such effects is much less interesting to people than the scary story that started it all.
According to this article [0], "Robert Ho Man Kwok" was a fake name. The letter was supposedly a hoax but the journal wanted to publish it even though the author contacted them later and told them it was a hoax.
Well, most Chinese restaurants usually dump MSG into their cooking. Back before Panda Express stopped claiming they used it, they would dump more than one teaspoons of it for a single entree on the fly.
MSG should be used as sparingly as possible (a pinch or less) and there are many kinds for specific ingredients, such as the original one made by Ajinomoto and more specialized ones for meats or vegetables only.
This isn't really about the safe dosage of MSG for human consumption but the prolonged effects from folks whom are sensitive (or have developed a tolerance) to such exposure without even realizing it. I have had non-Asian friends whom have developed an allergy from it when it doesn't overly affect me at all but raises an interesting correlation not causation argument when applied in a broader food and cooking consumption context.
Please link directly to the study (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11606-011-1968-2) instead of just posting the PR announcement. I'll also note that this is part of the Northern Manhattan Study (http://columbianomas.org/). I'll also note that it's not directly about aspartame but diet sodas in general (so if diet sodas has a consistently higher caffeine, then that could be the reason). I've also noticed this phrase, although the study claims that increased cardiovascular risk on frequent diet soda consumption is still significant despite adjusting to these factors:
Frequent diet soft drink consumption was uniquely associated with white race, former smoking, hypertension, elevated blood sugar, lower HDL, elevated triglycerides, increased waist circumference, BMI, peripheral vascular disease, previous cardiac disease, and the metabolic syndrome. Frequent regular soft drink consumption was uniquely associated with male sex, black race, current smoking, carbohydrate consumption, greater diastolic BP, and lower prevalences of diabetes and hypercholesterolemia.
On the other hand, it was published in 2012 and the study was conducted in America, so almost all non-diet sodas were sweetened with either 100% HFCS or cane sugar/HFCS mix. It's harder to replicate today considering that most non-diet sodas has also added aspartame (or other high-intensity sweeteners) to the sweetener mix.
Intuitively, it would make sense that the introduction of such an artificial and alien chemical into the diet would have some kind of negative effect, for whatever that's worth. I say that as a fairly heavy user of sweeteners.
I don't understand why people are scared of "Alien Chemicals" in food but will take plenty of OTC medication. If we didn't trust anything made in labs people would still be dying at 30 years old.
Also, artificial sweeteners help people who have obesity problems, being obese will reduce your life expectancy by up to 15 years, drinking diet soda hasn't killed anyone.
I think so, this meta study https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28938797/ from 2017 seems to suggest that there are some possible negative effects and points out that most studies use animal models. Animal models are not conclusive, so without quality human studies I would say the "jury is still out"
Diet Coke mythology
You can’t discuss diet sodas for very long before someone brings up the old saw the diet sodas cause weight gain. The theory was that the sweetness induces hunger and you eat more actual food to satisfy it.
In 2008 Fowler and Williams[5] published a paper noting a correlation between obesity and diet soda consumption. A correlation, not causation. But in 2009, Chen and Appel [6] monitored 810 adults for 18 months, recording their beverage intake. They found weight gain from sugar sweetened beverages and but no weight gain from artificially sweetened beverages.
Finally, in 2012, Maersk and Belza [7] compared satiety scores for milk, sugar sweetened beverages and artificially sweetened beverages, and found no evidence that artificially sweetened beverages increased appetite or energy intake, concluding that “diet colas had effects similar to water.”
Regarding unfounded rumors that artificially sweetened beverages had some neurological effect, a panel of 10 experts examined all the current literature [8] and concluded:
The data from the extensive investigations into the possibility of neurotoxic effects of aspartame, in general, do not support the hypothesis that aspartame in the human diet will affect nervous system function, learning or behavior. Epidemiological studies on aspartame include several case-control studies and one well-conducted prospective epidemiological study with a large cohort, in which the consumption of aspartame was measured. The studies provide no evidence to support an association between aspartame and cancer in any tissue. The weight of existing evidence is that aspartame is safe at current levels of consumption as a nonnutritive sweetener.
So aspartame is safe before and after it degrades into the component amino acids, but for the best taste, you should check each package’s expiration date.
Problem is that it's not alone on the market. These new proteinbars that are flooding stores here in Sweden have a careful balance of THREE different sweeteners just to get away with the low sugar content.
They do taste amazing but I'm skeptical to anything unnatural.
This article is at pains to say ‘it’s safe’. Meh. It is absolutely not definitely established to be safe.
Safety aside, I read some research once which indicated artificial sweeteners impact the body’s own insulin response and suppress the feeling of being full. This resonated with me because when I have diet sodas I always feel like eating. Nowadays I stick to water or if I want to treat myself, soda with real sugar.
> If you unzip aspartame into the two amino acids and remove that methyl to become methanol, you have a tasteless mixture of pretty harmless compounds.
I'm somewhat surprised nobody has commented on this yet, so let me point it out: methanol is not harmless! It causes blindness or death.
(I don't say diet soda is harmful, only that methanol is.)
Your statement about the toxicology of methanol is correct, but as the article alludes too, and the referenced paper goes into detail on, the dosage is below the point where it harms people. (I don't recall off hand if they considered an infant being fed an entire can of soda in the paper so I'm not going to say that as a blanket statement)
As for the toxicology limit. If the maximum amount of methanol has been created by all of the aspartame "unzipping" even if you consumed the whole can your does will be lower than the amount needed to create harmful effects. Additionally, sodas in this state taste like crap, so unless you have no taste sensors at all you won't drink more than a gulp which lowers the dosage still further.
But that there can be methanol in an out of date soda has been the go to reason a friend of mine never drinks sugar free soda. And frankly I can respect that choice.
Methanol is toxic because it is eventually metabolized into formic acid (the same venom used by ants) which interferes with cell metabolism.[1] If the amount of formic acid is high enough, cells can't maintain homeostatis and die. Certain cells with higher metabolic demands (such as nerve cells) die first. If the dosage is below that threshold, you're fine.
The FDA considers 0.5mg/kg/day of methanol to be unlikely to cause deleterious effects for a person's lifetime. For a 70kg person that would be 35mg per day. For comparison: a can of diet soda has less than 200mg of aspartame. Assuming 100% of the aspartame breaks down into phenylethylamine, aspartic acid, and methanol, then less than 10% of that mass would be methanol, or less than 20mg. So even if you drank an entire can of disgusting old diet soda every day, you'd still be below the FDA's threshold for cumulative damage and you'd be nowhere near the threshold for acute methanol poisoning.
Well then you got the wrong message. A glass of wine can contain over 50mg of methanol. If something's at or below the FDA reference dose, it's not worth worrying about. The FDA is rather risk-averse and tends to set limits far below what would actually cause harm.
To give you another bit of data: The metabolite of methanol that actually causes damage (formic acid) is a common food additive and is naturally present in many fruits, honey, and of course ant venom. If tiny amounts caused issues, we'd know by now.
I'm somewhat amused that pointing out that methanol is actually deadly even if this isn't a problem in diet soda has cost me two downvotes : )
(No, I'm not complaining. I can't cash out HN karma points in Norwegian banks so to me it is just a bit puzzling because I wonder what triggered those, somewhat amusing and mildly scary.)
There's probably a surprising amount of methanol and ethanol in a gallon jug of apple cider by the time you get to the bottom of it. The better types, at least.
I'm well aware (I've been part of the milk industry where farmers initentionally give it to cows to extend their lifespan and increase the yield, anyone who is new to this, see http://dhmo.org/milk.html )
I also have a sore knee after an incident relating to solid DHMO at my childrens hockey training in the weekend (my bad, I should have learned to use proper protection my now.)
That said, there is a large difference between DHMO where in its liquid form it will have a median LD50 of around 90,000 mg/kg and methanol who has a median LD50 of 810 mg/kg.
slightly unrelated, but i read mixed opinions on the safety of aspartame. Is there anyone knowledgeable in the field who has research proving one way or the other? I rarely consume sodas, I just don't know whether it's safer to consume artificially sweetened ones or standard ones. The literature on the topic seems conflicting and incomplete
It is propaganda, read through this wiki[1] and see how far people have gone to create propaganda against it. It's one of the most researched ingredients by the FDA.
It seems there are a lot of studies where the author starts with the conviction that Aspartame is "bad", and designs a study to "prove" it. For example, "what if we give these lab rats a massively excessive dose of Aspartame every day for a year, and then check if that harmed them"
You are right that my comment as written did not do a good job of explaining what it is about these studies that seems fishy to me. So I thank you for responding to it and making me examine my opinion in more detail.
Someone else already responded to you and provided a much better explanation.
There is always something that rubs me the wrong way about these studies that set out to prove that artificial sweeteners are bad. It's intuitively appealing: it seems too easy that we can just replace sugar with these harmless chemicals and then it tastes mostly the same but without the calories or bad metabolic effects of sugar. But artificial sweeteners have been studied for decades, especially Aspartame, and as far as I know they appear to be harmless, outside of the Gwyneth Paltrow universe. So it seems to me that some people still have an axe to grind with these artificial sweeteners, and try to bend science to their will.
Sorry if this is slightly off-topic, but whenever I drink Coca-Cola Zero, I get a bit dizzy. It doesn't happen with other soda like Pepsi Zero. I've read somewhere that aspartame is much stronger than sugar.
For the life of me, I can't find any references I stumbled upon when I searched about it, but has any of you had the same symptoms?
No idea, but theorizing “out loud”. Your body could be producing a bunch of insulin in response to the sweet, which lowers your blood sugar level to below normal levels since there’s no actual sugar for it to move around. Low blood sugar (< 70 mg/dl iirc) can lead to lightheadedness I believe, but folks who need to take insulin would be able to speak to that a lot more than I can.
I’ve seen some people say that they have an insulin response to artificial sweeteners but I don’t know if there’s any medical literature to confirm/quantify it.
But much more insulin than appropriate will lower blood sugar. This would be more of a question of whether or not aspartame causes an insulin response from the taste.
Probably, but I'd rather drink only water and tea. Considering how bad I feel after just a bottle of Coca-Cola Zero, I'd rather not try it again and stick with natural drinks.
I think we've allowed our society to become addict to sugar, and I don't think Aspartame is our savior.
Yes exactly this, it makes me feel dizzy, kind of "floaty" and generally just bad, anything with artificial sweetner can ruin my entire day. It's amazing how many things have these artificial sweetners in them, I have to read the labels on everything new I try. I can't seem to find others with the same issue so I'm really glad you said this.
Similar topic, but after having COVID and losing my taste and smell for a few weeks, all carbonated sodas "taste off" for me. I've talked to a few people who have had similar experiences and after a year later, all of my regular Cokes still taste off :/
I was thinking about this yesterday when reading that some people with
long covid experience the smell of meat as that of decaying dead flesh, which
none of us wants to hear but is not technically wrong. Could it be
that whereas we're socialized toward certain perceptions, a disorderly
shutdown of the senses causes something like a reboot to factory
settings?
I think there has to be a certain part of the population that is sensitive to the taste of non-sugar sweeteners. A lot of people I asked said they can’t tell the difference but to me they all taste bitter or metallic, even stevia and agave. monkfruit is the only sweeter than sugar sweetener that doesn’t taste bitter to me.
From my understanding it is different compounds that cause the bad taste for each sweetener, but I suppose people might be sensitive to some more than others. I wonder why it is that only sugar does not produce the bad flavor.
Well, if you wanted to match the glycemic load of a diet soda you would have to drink 100% less, i.e. not at all, not 'slightly less'. Drinking less sugary soda is not a comparable alternative to drinking diet soda, even if you prefer it. So saying diet sodas are pointless on that basis seems a bit non-sequitur. Also consider that 10% of the US population has type 2 diabetes, and almost 40% are prediabetic.
This is my life motto: eat well but portion wisely. I like butter. I like sugar. I like McDonalds, and cream, and cheese. So I eat these things, but only in moderation. I don't worry about trying to trick my tastebuds into thinking food tastes good. To me, artificial sweeteners taste bitter and wholly unpleasant. I would rather just drink water than drink diet soda. Indeed, I drink soda very rarely now, but once every few weeks a real coca cola is quite delicious.
Good point. I still struggle with myself not to eat the whole packet. I guess I've grown to enjoy the battle of wills and the sense of satisfaction of winning each time.
I switched from drinking exclusively sugar soda to exclusively sugar-free soda, and very quickly ended up preferring the taste of the latter. But I also discovered that non-sugar sweeteners feel a lot… lighter? They're easier to drink, simply put; my body knows it's not sugar somehow. I also have discovered I don't like the sugar rush, feeling on the teeth or aftertaste of a sugary soda.
But this is the whole difficulty about it. It's very hard to stick to a diet when there is so much temptation in the world. If you can have your aspartame cake and eat it, why wouldn't you?
Surely 40g of sugar if you do not need all that energy is worse than 0g of sugar.
Almost every advancement in dietary knowledge I have see over my life has indicated more and more that excess sugar (and carbs in general) is by far the biggest problem all over the world. And it is trivial to consume excess carbs with a modern lifestyle in a developed country.
Diet soda and artificial sweeteners is a gateway crutch. Took years to stop drinking soda and decade of diet but finally kicked it. Worth the effort and recommended.
Everyone is quick to hand wave "doesn't cause cancer" blah blah but what they hop and skip over is it definitely changes gut microbe for the worse.
"To our knowledge, there are no data on the potential influences of aspartame on the human gut microbiome. It is hard to understand how aspartame influences the gut microbiota because this NNS is rapidly hydrolyzed in the small intestine. In fact, even with the ingestion of very high doses of aspartame (>200 mg/kg), no aspartame is found in the blood because of its rapid breakdown. Upon ingestion, aspartame breaks down into residual components, including aspartic acid, phenylalanine, and methanol and their components, which are readily absorbed so that they do not reach the large bowel."
For me, soda scratches my throat in a good way (like having an itch scratched). In way that my life would be worse without. I like tea and water and milk too but there are times I need the scratchiness of the carbonation that non-carbonated drinks don't provide.
As an example, if I have a mild sore throat, carbonated drinks sooth it much more than non.
Thanks for sharing this anecdote. I've had this same "throat feeling" observation for years (thought I was just weird). I used to drink Coke semi-regularly, and would prefer it over water when I had a sore throat both because of the "scratchiness" but also because it would coat my throat whereas water would "strip" my throat of mucus/saliva.
Actually, I totally stopped drinking any soda just by replacing it by sparkling water (self made with sodastream). It just worked (for me) and I can’t drink a coke anymore without having nausea due to the high sugar dosage.
I have also noticed significant reduction in carbonation of Coke and Pepsi. 2-3 years ago it would hit the spot so to speak. Now they taste flat as if they have been sitting out all day. Wild thought was they are doing this to reduce “co2” emissions :)
That's really interesting. That suggests that taste may be a calibrated sense, where signals come from multiple sensors and are 'gathered' into the final perception. Probably some of your taste buds and olfactory sensors are less sensitive after covid, or may even respond differently, producing a different mix of signals. To return to normal, I suspect the lagging sensors will need to fully revive.
I wonder if there's a way to retrain sensory organs, to shape your perception of flavor, perhaps the way that oenophiles teach someone to taste wine more sensitively and meaningfully. Can one learn to deconvolute the the signals of taste?
I believe my kids have a similar situation. They have been really picky with food since COVID. We actually talked to a paediatrician (is that what they are called?) about it. He said it seemed to be very common right now.
Also suggested that we should try to give the kids lots of different tastes, textures, temperatures etc. I guess to “train” the sense again? I don’t know. Seems a bit unscientific. But who knows.
You may be onto something. After I had COVID and recovered my sense of smell, I found things didn't smell or taste exactly the same as before. Drinks, especially coffee, doesn't smell exactly the same as before, for example. And I had COVID almost a year ago, so it's not like I recovered yesterday.
Not to worry you, but like I said in the sibling comment, it's been almost a year and while I recovered my sense of smell and taste, it's not exactly the same as before COVID.
You might be used to really sugary drinks, i was an obese child and once my nutritionist took away regular coke and juices from me i couldn't drink a sugary drink without feeling disgusted at how sweet it was and artificial sweeteners tasted a lot better.
For me, it's also a timely discussion in that a short while ago (from my records on August 19 2019) I was looking at the Wikipedia article on aspartame when I realized that there was a significant error on the page. The skeletal formula was correct but the ball-and-stick model was incorrect in that it had an extra hydrogen tacked onto the aspartic acid group—the NH2 was misrepresented as NH3.
Being somewhat surprised at the error—as one would have thought that both representations would have been generated in the same software, Avogadro etc., thus the error should have occurred in both or not at all—so I dug a little deeper. I recalled that I had previously visited Wiki's Aspartame page some years back so I went looking to see if I had kept a copy of the page and sure enough I had saved it (it's not unusual for me to save Wiki pages).
Anyway, upon reexamination of the earlier page, I found that the ball-and-stick formula was also incorrect therein. Clearly, I'd not noticed the error back then.
The date of that earlier viewing was April 5, 2012, so the Wikipedia page has had that blatant error present for over 9 years—it could be much longer as I never checked when the page was originally posted! Given both its notoriety and controversy, how could such a large mistake exist in this Aspartame page for so long without anyone noticing it?
I then tried to correct the error. I attempted to edit the page only to be informed that my domain was unacceptable and so I could not do so. I then resorted to contacting Wiki by other means and informing them of the error and they corrected fault within hours.
If anyone has a reasonable explanation for why this error could exist so long on Wiki without being corrected then I'd love to know. Moreover, why would only the balls-and-stick be in error when it is normal for both representations to be generated on a common piece of software?
Second Matter:
"Searle patented this product, naming it Nutrisweet and Equal. Officially, aspartame has a half-life of about 300 days in solution at about pH 4, about the pH of soft drinks, but half life means that half if it as gone by that time. And if the cans are exposed to a hot storeroom or stored in a warm summer garage, they may deteriorate faster."
I'd rarely have the opportunity to drink 'old' artificially sweetened drinks of this sort. First I don't drink many of them, and second, I only buy them in the supermarket where there's a very fast turnover of stock.
That said, I find Diet Coca Cola unbearably sweet and almost undrinkable when its chilled and completely undrinkable when warm, the others, Zero etc., I find so sweet that they're undrinkable under any conditions.
Could it be that drink manufactures are actually increasing sweetness past the so-called 'bliss point' to allow for the deterioration/aging of aspartame? Perhaps they're aiming for some 'ideal' or average date past manufacture where the maximum number of punters would likely be consuming the stuff.
Does anyone know or have factual information about such matters?
>I was looking at the Wikipedia article on aspartame when I realized that there was a significant error on the page. The skeletal formula was correct but the ball-and-stick model was incorrect in that it had an extra hydrogen tacked onto the aspartic acid group—the NH2 was misrepresented as NH3.
I am sure you meant well, but as far as I can see, the original ball-and-stick model was indeed correct--and the current edited version is wrong.
Amino acids, as well as most things made from amino acids, exist as zwitter ions in solid form as well as in aqueous solution. The carboxyl groups are comparatively strong acids, the amino groups are comparatively strong bases, so there is a proton transferred to NH2, making it NH3+. That proton is missing from the carboxyl group resulting in a carboxylate group (COO-). The positive and negative charges cancel each other and the result is a zwitter ion with two charged atoms/groups, but no charge overall.
The newer version still has a carboxylate group (COO-), but no NH3+ group, making it negatively charged. That probably exists, at high pH values.
I've yet to check Wiki as of today, so I don't know if the site has changed since last August or not. I will check momentarily.
I acknowledge what you say and I'm not necessarily disputing your points. If this is the result of another of the many nomenclature problems that plague and beset chemistry then I'm damn-well sick of it (and I'm certainly not alone).
It's about time that someone—some authoritative body, most specifically IUPAC et al, sorted this mess out.
PS: you haven't really answered why both the skeletal and ball-and-stick would be different. Moreover, the skeletal outline in the story is also the usual default (i.e.: the same as in both versions of Wiki and in ChemSpider).
IUPAC has nothing to do with it--aspartame is a trivial name. It's no mess, either--chemists know that 1M sulfuric acid does not contain any H2SO4, even though H2SO4 is sulfuric acid.
The skeletal and ball-and-stick structures differ precisely because they weren't created from the same source--the author of the ball-and-stick structure cites a crystallography paper as their source, and solid crystals consist of zwitter ions.
That type of problem is found throughout chemistry but usually an accepted nomenclature applies (when it doesn't is when we get into troubles).
So why did Wiki make the change when I pointed the matter out if it is incorrect?
I'd now suggest you get it corrected.
Edit: also tell Wiki that it shouldn't post inconsistent information as it only confuses (similarly ChemSpider).
Edit 2: 'aspartame is a trivial name'. Very true, but aspartame is not known to the world by its IUPAC name, even at best it still means that a nomenclature problem exists.
1. You still haven't answered why other more authorative sites such as ChemSpider also display ball-and-stick as per the later Wiki version. (If more than one authorative site does so then there must be some reason for it - for this common consistency.)
2. You have failed to realize the significance of being consistent in presentation especially when stuff is presented in encyclopedic form. To do so in any other way is misleading.
That means that the skeletal and ball-and-stick depictions should be consistent with each other (otherwise it's confusingly - except for geniuses such as yourself of course).
Can't you understand that many people compare both models and that they expect them to match? (It's common practice to count the hydrogens on both to cross reference the chemical formula, etc., etc. - that's a common teaching practice where I come from.)
3. I never said that I disagreed with your assessment of the chemistry and I still don't. In fact, I do understand what you are talking about but (a) it's irrelevant if I do or don't in this instance and (b) expressing the more 'complex' state of molecules isn't normal practice in encyclopedic references. Yes, I'd agree that in textbooks such detail is normal but not here.
If you want to be precise to the nth degree and grind things superfine AND also be consistent across chemistry (i.e.: have common and consistant [standard] nomenclature to describe things) then you could not describe water as just 'H2O'.
OK: now where do we start for a proper formulaic description of water?
We would have to add in hydronium - or should that be hydroxonium (I learned the latter but I'm happy with both). Or should we refer to that as 'oxonium' only? Or should we start the description with something as confusing as:
Water = H20+H3O+ +... . ('water'
+ oxonium-type ion and then some extras)
How do we describe the protonation in its fullest form (as a formula)?
As you ought to know, this gets even more complicated, should we add in all known cations (Zundel, etc.) for a basic description of water just to ensure the formula is complete in all circumstances (cover all states/conditions)? (And then add a footnote that we may still not have them all as others may still be there - yet to be discovered).
Of course not. It's ridiculous.
Any chemist who works at that level already knows this stuff so it's unnecessary to describe the 'basic' molecule - dare I say it - in anything other than in its simplest (basic) form.
>1. You still haven't answered why other more authorative sites such as ChemSpider also display ball-and-stick as per the later Wiki version. (If more than one authorative site does so then there must be some reason for it - for this common consistency.)
I do not owe you any answer, let alone why someone who is not me decides to represent anything in any form. Both versions (the original ball-and-stick model and the current skeletal structure) are valid, though one of them accounts for protolysis, and one doesn't.
>2. You have failed to realize the significance of being consistent in presentation especially when stuff is presented in encyclopedic form.
My point was not that the current version is or isn't consistent, my point was that it is WRONG.
>Later, when he licked his fingers to turn a page, he discovered a very sweet taste. Since he realized that the compound he made was unlikely to be toxic, he tasted it and found it extremely sweet indeed. In fact, aspartame is about 200 times as sweet by weight as sugar.
Stop drinking coke!
It's not well for you. Especially when you get older.
The problem lies within the phosphoric acid added in plenty amounts.
It's not exactly only coca cola's problem, but it adds up.
Phosphorus is been added everywhere - from Sausages (e.g. the one in hot dogs. Or, The one's intended to be grilled like the GERMAN SAUSAGE) to muffins.
I think, it's called sometimes backing soda - the powder you add to make cakes or croissants fluffy.
Not to compare with the Natrium bicarbonate which is ok ..
So the phosphorus is needed for every living cell. Essential for the live developed.
The problem:
We need phosphorus to build our bones. Phosphorus reacts with Calcium and they build up salt difficult to dissolve back to calcium and phosphorus. Usually, that will be incorporated into our bones and makes the bone's structure and fillings.
The problem starts when you grew older and your kidneys worsen. It still can be enough to clean your blood, but give a possibility for phosphorus to accumulate slowly in your blood.
With too much phosphorus in your blood, your body tries to regulate that - as your kidneys can't do the work properly anymore, there's is just one way:
going through the Calcium-phosphate-double-circle-regulation.
That means, if one is having to much phosphorus in the blood, your body start to produce a hormone that stimulates releasing more calcium into your blood to bind that phosphorus. The calcium comes out of the Bones. They get easy broken like glass. and.. the bound phosphorus and calcium are in your blood vessels. Difficult to dissolve back. Cluttering the vessels.
That's one of the reasons for arteriosclerosis and insults. But also for the elder getting blind (Makula degenerative illness) and deaf (I think). A lot of people have that.
So. I stopped consuming anything with added phosphate contents.
> backing soda - the powder you add to make cakes or croissants fluffy
Baking. And there is none of this in croissants, it's mostly regular butter and flour. Baking soda is usually just sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO3). No phosphorous at all. Unless you are talking about something else, but please source your claims before making them here.
Being vague and not able to source just show you are not a subject-matter expert, and likely repeating rumors. There might be some truth to it, but you make bold claims, and I can at least pick a few wrong ones, which does not bode well for the rest. You make also some weird connections.
May be I misspelled baking soda for baking powder. Just a wiki away:
"A typical formulation (by weight) could call for 30% sodium bicarbonate, 5–12% monocalcium phosphate, and 21–26% sodium aluminium sulfate. Alternately, a commercial baking powder might use sodium acid pyrophosphate as one of the two acidic components instead of sodium aluminium sulfate. Another typical acid in such formulations is cream of tartar (KC4H5O6), a derivative of tartaric acid."
You're right if you have acidic ingredients, you can take bicarbonate only. If you don't, then you need an acidic agent which is a -Phosphate.
Croissant made by your french neighborhood may be are made of plane butter and flour.. but in an industrial and home production adding a little bit of backing powder make them more fluffy. There is no conspiracy to that... just a quick googling:
https://www.todaysparent.com/recipe/picnic-recipes/quickie-c...
> I think, it's called sometimes backing soda - the powder you add to make cakes or croissants fluffy. Not to compare with the Natrium bicarbonate which is ...
That's a really strong claim, that someone would mix up the label of baking soda (it literally has "soda" in the name, aka sodium aka natrium if you're not English) with phosphoric acid.
As for the rest of this, it's the sort of thing that might have some truth to it, but it should really have data backing it, because human biochemisty is really complex and often acts counter-intuitively.
It goes with the same.. for baking soda you need some acid to start production of CO2.
If you having a sour-acidic ingredient like "vinegar" or Orange juice, the reaction starts at once even before you can put it in the oven.
If you want to start the reaction after some time and at an higher temperature, there is no way to do it without an agent. It breaks apart to acid at certain temperature. The agents used are 99% of times phosphates -> phosphorus.
The baking powder free of phosphorus is quite of a seldom taste imo
You can have it measured by the concentrations of phosphates in your blood. Also, the hormone, Parathormone can be measured. But both are part of the big blood test.
Indirectly, you also can measure the function of your kidneys.. but.. it may still be high enough for the doctors not to react..
Otherwise... If you're on dialysis, you have 200% sure high levels of phosphorus
Supplement of calcium could Help as to much of Calcium in blood will also induce the counter reaction by pulling to much of the phosphorus into the bones. They will get to dense. Also an effect you don't want
Lol at all these big coke and sugar shills in this thread. Read Sugar Blues and You All Have Sanpaku. Sugar is bad for your body. Sodastream carbonation is bad for teeth and supports Israel's occupation in the west bank. Best play is to ween off it completely. First start with sugar beverages (and alcohol if you drink). Once that is kicked, look at the artificially added sugar in foods.
I quite like Coke Zero, although I admit that regular Coke does taste somewhat better.
However, my reason for drinking diet Coke is that sometimes I feel like drinking soda, but if I can limit the damage done (by sugar, since I'm trying to lose weight), might as well do it.
Sure, no soda at all is best, but I think this is one of those cases which aren't all black or all white.
It's not punishment. You get used to it and then you start finding regular soda way too sugary. Your taste buds adjust to the new flavor and end up preferring it.
The unhealthy part is mostly the caffeine, not the aspartame, itself. That being said - I don't get the 'soda' at all. It's worse than plain water, juice (no extra sugars), espresso, and beer.
I hate beer and also have some sort of allergic reaction to it (I don't mind, since I don't like it anyway).
Water has no taste, so unless I'm drinking merely to quench my thirst, it's not what I want.
Juice is too much work and many juices "out of the fruit" without added sugar are also bad for you, e.g. orange juice. Most dentists and nutritionists now do not recommend drinking orange juice except very occasionally (then again, of course they don't recommend soda drinks either).
I love espresso and drink it way too often, but it's not a refreshing drink like Diet Coke is, and also it's not good for you either (in excess). I probably drink way too much espresso and Diet Coke.
Different strokes. The only soft drink I like is Pepsi Max; Fat Coke and Fat Pepsi taste horrible to me and make my teeth feel all furry, and Diet Coke tastes off in some way
It also made for some socially awkward situations where, when visiting friends, they would want to have drinks on hand that their guests like and would go out of their way to get some DDP for me, not checking the date, and then serve out of date soda which tasted horrible.
Not surprising the rate of hydrolysis is temperature dependent so if you keep things refrigerated they last longer, but if you leave them out on the back porch in the summer where they get warm they go 'non-sweet' relatively quickly.
I switched to water (or tea if I want caffeine) with diet sweetener in packets (which doesn't go bad because no pesky water to 'unzip' it). I wrote to the Dr. Pepper company once and suggested they design their beverage so that the sweetener was dry and only released when you opened it (I got the idea from the way the Guinness folks started selling Guinness in cans with a gizmo to put a head on it when opened. Alas, nobody at the company was interested in "fixing" a non-problem, they responded (nicely) that I should just be sure to check the date and included a coupon for a free six pack. Of course at that time (and is still true around Reno) the bottler doesn't use an easily readable date code so it isn't much of a solution.
[1] And by "great" I mean the nerds all are fascinated by it and the non-nerds were nominally repulsed that someone could have such familiarity with the hydrolysis profile as to call it out by taste.