I thought I had finally found a healthy drink I liked with no artificial sweetness and they had to go and fuck it up
Man fuck that. I wanted to try these specifically because they said they only used agave syrup as a sweetener. Stevia, suclarose and aspartame always have this weird aftertaste and mouth feel.
Stevia is not artificial you silly duck. And it’s more sustainable to grow than the fucking sugar you hypocritically enjoy every day. Get over it.
Stevia is incredibly misleading as a product
I love how you say this, offer zero explanation as to why and just drop the mic.
I’m not here to defend Stevia, and I could give two shits about it; I’m here because I don’t believe you, unless you please provide us all something to read, because we are done taking things people say at face value.
It is marketed as somehow healthy when the reality is drinking anything with strong sweeteners is problematic. It offers a false sense of security. Instead of actually cutting back on Soda and junk food people switch to the low and zero sugar products.
It is like switching from smoking to vaping. Sure it might be better but the problem still persists.
You can drink a zero sugar saccharine drink every day for the rest of your life and experience no problems from it whatsoever. It’s the most tested artificial sweetener in history and has been used commercially since the 1890s.
People switching to the low and zero sugar products is a good thing. It is much healthier than people drinking sugary beverages - which is the alternative that that they replace. They do not replace water.
Switching from smoking to vaping is an improvement, but not a fair comparison as vaping has been shown to have significant negative health impacts.
You’re wrong.
What is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
To clarify I don’t necessarily have an issue with stevia itself it’s the fact that it is usually mixed with erythritol which is bad for you.
Do you have any actual data showing that reasonable amounts of erythritol is worse for you than any alternatives?
You’re cooked
erythritol
Shouldn’t that be on the label if it was in there too? How can you assume it is when it’s not labelled?
IDK what shitty country this is from, but it’s for sure an illegal label here (EU), on at least 2 counts.
usually mixed with erythritol
Your photo shows no evidence of this.
is bad for you
I’m fucking done reading shit on the internet where people say things and expect us to believe them at face value. You made this statement, and it isn’t my burden to provide evidence to prove you correct, you will.
Please provide everyone here a link for us to read and change our minds.
Not the guy, but https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9028423/ was an interesting read.
A quick glance on google about Stevia might lead you to this link, but the preview shows “Results showed that stevia might lead to microbial imbalance, disrupting the communication between Gram-negative bacteria in the gut via either the LasR or RhlR …” which seems bad, until you read the rest of the good things that Stevia is supposedly doing.
Plus, the text behind that ellipses is “However, even if stevia inhibits these pathways, it cannot kill off the bacteria.”
So this might just be some good old misinformation on google’s part.
Edit: I mean to say that google is intentionally misleading people about Stevia.
Stevia is not artificial you silly duck.
Not to mention that while it’s OP’s money, at least in the US, natural and artificial sweeteners (or flavors) can be chemically-identical. I remember a bit…might have been from NPR Planet Money…on a substance that literally could be obtained either way, but some people thought that artificial flavors were bad, so there was a market for companies to go out and (more-expensively) extract the thing so that they could make the food they made say “natural flavor” rather than “artificial flavor”. The designation is just a function of whether you synthesize or extract the thing, the manufacturing process. It doesn’t say anything about the actual content.
EDIT: Not the article I was thinking of, but same idea:
https://health.wusf.usf.edu/npr-health/2017-11-03/is-natural-flavor-healthier-than-artificial-flavor
All three experts say that ultimately, natural and artificial flavors are not that different. While chemists make natural flavors by extracting chemicals from natural ingredients, artificial flavors are made by creating the same chemicals synthetically.
Platkin says the reason companies bother to use natural flavors rather than artificial flavors is simple: marketing.
“Many of these products have health halos, and that’s what concerns me typically,” says Platkin. Consumers may believe products with natural flavors are healthier, though they’re nutritionally no different from those with artificial flavors.
These are great reads. Thank you for the links!
Also, thank you for paraphrasing one of them, because they helped pique my interest further.
Appreciate you!
The unsweetened tea fight is a losing battle. The only way to get it is to make it yourself.
What about tejava (spelling?)
This isn’t unsweetened tea either. It’s probably very sweet considering how high in the order agave syrup is
Why would anyone want to buy unsweetened tea? Its literally less work making your own than carrying the cans from the store. And costs like 1/100
When I’m out and about and looking for a drink on a hot day I’d love if regular unsweet tea was widely available. I hate buying bottled water but I also hate sweet drinks.
Just bring tea concentrate. There are several different versions of them from paste to powder to just a tea bag and then you just need water.
Cold brew is even a thing. Tea is like the easiest thing you can make especially if you want it unsweetened.
My problem is I always want lemonade and life has apparently run out of free lemons raining from the sky for me to use and I’m not bringing simple syrup anymore.
“Death to plastic”
“Here drink from this plastic-lined can” (https://www.plasticstoday.com/business/liquid-death-may-murder-your-thirst-but-it-won-t-kill-plastic-no-matter-what-the-ads-say)
Not only that, but unless you can guarantee that a significant portion users will recycle those aluminum cans, they are significantly more energy intensive to manufacture compared to single use plastic bottles.
Do most people not recycle cans?
The overwhelming majority of people recycle nothing.
As well, the overwhelming majority of recycling collection companies recycle nothing.
Here in Cleveland, we used to just put all trash, no recycling, on the lawn. Then in 2008 or so, they put out a recycling innitive. Each resident had to pay $10 per family (so duplexs would buy 2 per house), and they’d get a blue bin. You put the recycling in the blue bin, and a seperate truck picks that up.
Sounds great right?
Welll…in 2020 or so they found out the 1st truck would take your black bin regular trash, and the 2nd truck would take your blue bin recyclables, and then BOTH trucks would drop off in the same pile, in the same landfill with zero recycling done.
Since that was discovered I see a massive 90%+ dropoff in blue bins. Not only have people lost faith in buying blue bins at all, but most people now use their blue bins as 2nd regular non-recycling trash can.
and then BOTH trucks would drop off in the same pile, in the same landfill with zero recycling done.
That’s not true, especially for cans. It’s more effective to sort trash at a central location than to have consumers do it beforehand. Aluminum recycling alone turns a significant profit. Glass is also profitable by itself.
Waste management companies should be paying you for your cans; if they are charging you for recycling, you should consider taking your cans to a scrap yard rather than leaving them in your trash.
I think you’re misunderstanding.
I’m not stating how recycling SHOULD work. I’m stating how the city of Cleveland DID (or rather did NOT) operate it’s own recycling innitive.
They sold you a blue bin for $10. And then for 12 years, unknown to the public, they picked up the recycleables, and didn’t recycle them.
It was a cash grab to get millions of dollars from residents, to perform a service that was never properly performed.
Bro. Citation needed.
My city started doing a similar thing. Their contracted recycling plants started rejecting the truck loads because they were seeing less than 40% recyclable content in the trucks. Lots of people overestimate how much of their trash is recyclable, and over-utilize the recycling bin.
Apparently the recycling plants will accept as low as 50% recyclable content in the load, anything under that for a prolonged period, they start rejecting the loads.
So for a year our city was just taking the recycling bin loads to the landfill. Years ago most cities could just sell it directly to China, ship it over on enormous garbage boats, but even China has stopped accepting our nonsense.
Our city had to do a big re-education campaign, and send out new stickers for the bin lids, to get residents to put only recyclable things in the recycle bins.
It’s true, I have no idea what actually happens to my recycling after it’s picked up, but I guess I can hope…
It’s easier if you don’t hope. Less inevitable disappointment that way.
Where I live, every time you buy a plastic bottle, aluminum can or glass bottle, you pay extra 10 cents that you get back when you take them to the recycling (that every store is mandated to have, IIRC).
And do you do that?
I’m lazy enough and a frequent enough soft drink & beer consumer that by the time I take it in, it’s at least 10€, but can be 20€ or more. I have also gotten over 100€ but that was cheating, it was from previous year’s summer solstice celebrations. And like the commenter above you, it’s the same price for me, 10 cents a bottle or can. Mostly because we apparently live in the same country.
Don’t know about other places with a deposit system, but in Finland 98% of aluminium cans are recycled. Seems to work pretty well
Yes? Because every time we bring back a bag of bottles, we get about 10€. Would you rather throw out the 10€?
I also return mine but most people around me don’t seem to. You can often find them littering the streets or walkways or even out in the woods unfortunately.
Here in California we have high deposits and I never see cans left unattended for long. $0.05 is nothing in this economy.
According to the actual Aluminum Association, only 43% of aluminum cans shipped within the United States are recycled.
My fiance loves liquid death because it didn’t have anything for sweetness aside from the agave. Now all he’s gonna taste is the stevia. :(
Are they? These seem to be completely different products to me. One has caffeine and artificial sugar whereas the other has neither. I’d have a hard time believing these are the same products and not just similar ones with confusing names
This label part about plastics is what’s called green-washing here, and is illegal unless what they are doing is a very signifikant part of the price of the product.
The labeling of what’s NOT in the drink is also under similar regulation, but I don’t recall what it’s called. But the fact that a “sugar” drink doesn’t contain fat is irrelevant and misleading.Whatever country this is from has bullshit regulation.
The thing that is ABSOLUTELY NOT a problem is the Stevia which is clearly labeled!So the “mildly infuriating” part is completely misguided compared to the real problems of that product.
Edit:
Just noticed, Carbs 3%, sugar 6% incl. added sugar 12%.
That’s impossible! You can’t have less carbs than sugar, since sugar is a carb. So these labels are probably illegal in EU on no less than 3 counts!!It’s not percent of total it’s percent of daily recommendation. I’m not defending that choice but it just isn’t the same.
It’s a US label and the percents are % of recommended daily intake. So that’s 3% of your daily recommended carbohydrate intake, 6% of your daily recommended intake of sugar, and 12% of your daily recommended intake of “added” sugar. The recommendation is something like, no more than half of your carbs should come from sugar, and no more than half of those should be added during manufacturing (i.e. most of your sugar intake should be from fresh fruit, etc.). So the numbers do line up.
In reality there is no recommended sugar intake. We can do perfectly well with zero grams of sugar every single day for a whole life, without it causing a single health issue.
So the label remains nonsense.There is a recommended intake of vegetables and fruit, but not for sugar. Not by any factual based health measure.
You would have a point if the recommendation was a minimum daily intake. It’s not. It is a maximum. A recommended limit that you should not exceed.
The USDA recommendation is that sugar should make up no more than 10% of total caloric intake. The percentages you see are based on a 2000 (kilo)calorie daily diet.
That recommendation is perfectly consistent with your assertion that “we can do perfectly well with zero grams of sugar every single day”.
It is a maximum. A recommended limit that you should not exceed.
Ah OK that makes better sense.
But that’s not the same as a “daily recommendation” which was what GBU_28 wrote, and I responded to.
it’s percent of daily recommendation.
This is exactly why, for many years, there was no percentage on the label. They were concerned that people would try to get it to 100%.
Fast forward a few decades, and it’s extremely rare to find Americans consuming that little sugar, so the concern was no longer valid.
The labeling of what’s NOT in the drink is also under similar regulation,
For consistency, the regulations on labeling requires listing quantities of all of those specific nutrients, whether they are present or not.
Not a significant source of saturated fat, trans fat, cholesterol…
Those are the ones that are illegal, not protein 0g.
The fat parts are illegal because those are not normal content for that kind of product, trans fats are also regulated, and advertising that something is within regulation is illegal. Because it implies other products are not.
It’s funny how some people can’t even spot the problematic parts when pointed out, because they are so used to them.
The listed items are all mandatory parts of all labels. Everything inside that box is required, in that format. “Nutrition Facts” boxes are highly regulated. Remove those statements, and this label is no longer legally compliant.
You’ll note that “good” content (dietary fiber, vitamin d, calcium, iron, and potassium) are also listed, even though this product does not contain them.
Because all of these items are mandated to be present inside this box on all products, there is no implication that another product may or may not contain these items.
The content of that box is not considered “advertisement”. It’s just a simple, consistent, statement of facts.
It’s mandatory to label sweetened water as not containing Cholesterol or trans fat?
That’s outright moronic. Might as well demand labeling the amount of U35.
It’s moronic to require labeling what’s NOT in it, it ads noise and hides what’s actually in it.
I know American standards are sometimes stupid, but really?Kind of insane that things that would make a label illegal as misleading in EU is required in USA!?
That it’s a requirement in USA, doesn’t change the fact that it’s illegal in EU, because it doesn’t add meaningful information, and is therefore detrimental for quickly seeing the actual content.It is mandatory for the manufacturer to make an affirmative claim as to the cholesterol and trans fat content (along with several other items) of every food product sold in the US. The manufacturer is only liable for what they actually claim; this labeling standard forces them to make certain claims.
With the labeling you describe of the EU, I could look at every item in my pantry and refrigerator, and not realize that my diet is entirely missing any source of vitamin D, for example. If nothing in any of my labels even mentions vitamin D, I might not even realize it is something I should be looking for in my diet.
When every single item in my diet affirmatively claims “Not a significant source of vitamin D”, it’s a big clue that I’m not eating right.
There is a distinct difference in liability between “accidentally” forgetting to include the sodium content of a product, and affirmatively claiming it has no significant amount of sodium.
When I’m on a low sodium diet and a soy sauce manufacturer fails to list its sodium content on the label, I bear a large part of the responsibility. It is common knowledge that soy sauce is usually extremely high in salt, so I can’t reasonably claim their mislabeling was the cause of any harm I experience. But, if they were to affirmatively claim “not a significant source of sodium”, I’ll own their asses.
Mandating claims of these specific, important nutrients certainly does add meaningful information.
You can’t get sufficient vitamin D from eating a normal healthy varied diet.
So if you want to be sure, and don’t live a place where the sun gets above 45° year round, you need to take it as a supplement.
It’s ridiculous to read labels to see if you get enough of all vitamins, minerals, fatty acids and amino acids. That’s insane.Insanity is expecting the system to work in a way other than the way it actually works.
By the way, I did discover that EU labeling does include a “% RI” for sugar, which is functionality identical to the “recommendation” you were complaining about as being illegal.
Whatever country this is from has bullshit regulation.
I’ll give you one guess…
The only country I know of, that could have this shitty and misleading label and still be legal is USA, but I don’t know that for a fact.
I think if I saw these labels here in Denmark, I would call the police or health authorities immediately on the spot, which are responsible for enforcing declaration rules on items meant for consumption.Those labels are not merely mildly infuriating, they are attempts at scamming consumers.
So, having a pre-chilled and conveniently-available product can be nice when you’re away from home, but if this is for at home, have you ever considered just, you know, making a pitcher of your own drink with whatever you want? Maybe take a Thermos of the stuff chilled or iced if you’re on the go? I mean, if you want agave as your sweetener, then you can make a drink with just agave and then tweak it to however you want. Food-grade citric acid is a preservative – I have a bottle in the pantry. You can purchase all sorts of flavors.
Like, if you buy a premade good, then you can benefit from the R&D done by the company, but if you have extremely exacting demands that you feel no company is making, you can rage about it or just make what you want. In general, drinks have an enormous markup – I mean, you’re mostly buying water with a little flavoring and coloring – so you can have exactly what you want and it’ll probably be cheaper, too.
I take my own unsweet tea to work in a thermos. If that runs out, I drink the bottled water they provide.
These are the same people that bitch about the plastic waste in Keurig pods.
i have no issue with stevia other than it tastes fucking awful. just a terrible aftertaste that makes me never want to consume it ever, in any configuration.
Stevia is FOUL.
And it isn’t exactly good for you
Why?
Makes your body think it got sugar but it didn’t
Further studies are required to conclude a direct correlation of artificial sweeteners with decreased insulin sensitivity.
It is still sugar and it has a impact. It us also common in soda and over heavily flavored drinks that are hard on your kidneys and heart.
On the plus side, stevia isn’t artificial.
Unless it’s mixed with erythritol
The ingredients only say stevia leaf extract, nothing about erythritol.
Stevia is DISGUSTING and by far the worst non-sugar sweetener. Aspartame is good in my opinion.
It’s interesting to read people’s reactions to stevia. I don’t seem to have the same reactions/aftertaste others point out.
I much prefer stevia over other sweeteners. I wonder if there is some sort of cilantro type thing going on.
Edit: Turns out stevia can taste different to other people!
Because it’s subjective
And none of us can ever really know what anything actually tastes like to anyone else.
And I think we have enough information to say definitively that not everyone experiences every taste exactly the same way.
you have to be careful of which stevia brand you buy, most of them will contain real sugar, either maltodextrose or dextrose as the ingredient, or the sugar alcohol. i use sweetleaf brand, which is pure stevia. with the other brands with the dextrose you notice its sweeter too.
I’ve had a fresh stevia leaf before, totally amazingly delicious. However i can’t stand it as a sweetener in drinks.
Imo stevia is one of the best of the no calorie sweeteners, but since that entire category is absolutely abhorrent that’s sort of like being called the fastest snail.
I think we have to allow that when you’re raised on sugar like we all were, substitutes are never going to live up.
However lots of people throughout history didn’t have refined sugar. The ancient Egyptians for example. What would they have thought of stevia?
I once went on a strict no-carb diet for a few months and a stevia tea at the end of the day was a very enjoyable treat that I looked forward to. Now, having gone back to a normal diet, it doesn’t taste as good.
So I think habituation is a big part of it.
I mean of course, yes, but since I can’t change my environment or context all I can do is speak on my own perspective informed my own context and experiences.
Like I’m not sure what your point is here, just that this obviously subjective topic is subjective? Yes, of course it is. And yes of course my response was likewise subjective, but given the inherent nature of the topic the idea of addending “in my opinion” to the end feels extremely unnecessary.
So again, I don’t disagree with you, but this feels entirely non-sequitur to me.
I’m saying it’s even more than just subjective from one person to the next. I described how I changed my environment and context and how that had an effect. Your opinion can change.
I think you’re upsetting yourself trying to figure out if I’m agreeing or disagreeing with you but It’s a discussion. People chip in different bits.
Not upset, just confused. No ire anywhere, I assure you. Cheers.
the sweetleaf brand doesnt have the wierd dextrose ingredients that the others have, i used 2 different ones and they all had sugar in it.
Why wouldn’t you just use sugar
If you are going to mistreat your body then go big or go home.
Added sugar is considerably worse for you than any zero calorie sweetener. Don’t give me that IT’S CHEMICALS bullshit either. Aspartame is one of the most tested food additive world wide and it’s not found to be unsafe.
It is all really terrible for you in the long run. There are phycological impacts of sweetness.
Also drinking anything heavily flavored is problematic for your kidneys and heart. A little coffee or tea isn’t a problem but if you start drinking Soda as a water replacement it will come back to bite you.
I do agree that terms “artificial”, “chemicals”, “non GMO” and “organic” are BS. Ultimately it is more phycological than anything.
“its all bad in the long run” doesnt mean that one isnt significantly worse. If youre smoking, why not just do meth instead? Both will kill you.
I dont use sweeteners because of the aftertaste but I wont deny that sugar is much worse for my health. I dont consume enough to make it an actual problem though.
Aspartame gives me headaches. Like “I can’t interact with people” headaches. I’ve tried it a few times and it’s always directly afterwards.
That said Stevia gives me a reaction like I had 5x the same amount of sugar, so I just have to remember if I’m adding it to something don’t use much or I’ll be hyper and then crash terribly. But at least I don’t get headaches.
Sugar gives me no problems if I have it in moderation. I generally drink water, but if I have a soda, I have one and I’m done. It’s a treat, not a way of life. Drink water people, it’s actually good for you.
Diabetes?
Stevia does have a bit of an aftertaste, but it’s fine for me in, say, coffee.
IIRC, the major limiting issue with aspartame is that it’s not heat-stable to the degree that sugar is, so there are a bunch of products that are made with sugar that you can’t make with aspartame, problem for baking.
kagis
Yeah:
https://www.fda.gov/food/food-additives-petitions/aspartame-and-other-sweeteners-food
Aspartame is not heat stable and loses its sweetness when heated, so it typically isn’t used in baked goods.
There is no one alternative sweetener that has all of sugar’s properties, just without the calories, which is what people really want.
Stevia has the aftertaste. Aspartame isn’t heat stable. A lot of the sugar alcohols – like xylitol, which is really common in sugar-free candy – are laxatives, so if you eat that whole bag of candy, you are going to have horrendous diarrhea. You gotta use a patchwork of alternative sweeteners to replace sugar, based on the properties of a particular sugar use.
removed by mod
deleted by creator
its sweet, but aspartame is generally not good for you long term.
Cite a source on that
I prefer stevia to just regular sugar. I go out of my way when buying soda to get ones with stevia because they just taste better.
You do realize manufactures have to wear gas masks when pouring in that junk right?
OH MY GOD!!! MASKS!?! It must be rat poison!
People working with powders should be wearing masks.
What is “artificial?”
It is all marketing BS
Generally, artificial sweeteners are chemically synthesized while natural sweeteners are grown and refined.
I used to grow the stevia plant in my garden.
Can you differentiate synthesis and refinement for me?
I would say synthesis in this example is the creation of a molecular compound from differing source materials while refinement is the isolation and concentration of an existing compound.
Does that matter at all?
In reality it is all arbitrary. By that definition table salt is artificial and poison nightshade is natural.
Hey, you asked… I just answered.
Salt is also a poison
but “table salt” contains iodine, and that requires a refining brine which is an industrial process. Its natural but also not. When it comes down to it, lots of this is splitting hairs
its like some vegans cant decide if a FIG is natural or not, since wild figs, or normal ones are fertilized by fig wasps and thier parasitoids. the fig wasps die in the fig after laying its eggs and fertilizing.
If I drink a lot pineapple juice, would it be considered artificial sweetness?
only for your cum
That’s precisely why I use it in my coffee and have for many years. However there’s a big difference from one brand to another I’ve found. Sweet Leaf stevia drops are the only kind I’ll use now.
i use it too, because almost all the other brands have dextrose, which is basically actual sugar, or ehtyrithiol, which is a sweetener, but it can cause GI issues. I bought 2 boxes from amazon to try it out, its worht it. its pricey but not sugar is better.
Yeah the first stevia I ever got had dextrose in it and literally 8 grains was enough, it was silly. I didn’t know until I was almost done that it was just basically sugar.
Might not be artificial, but it doesn’t look natural in sweetener form:
The process of extracting stevia -
Dried stevia leaves are subjected to purified water first. Then followed by a precipitation process with ferric chloride and calcium hydroxide to remove non-soluble plant materials & other impurities and follow filtration.
Then the leaf extract goes through an adsorption resin, which is used to trap the steviol glycosides of the leaf extract.
Afterward, wash the resin with ethanol to release steviol glycosides and decolorize the resulting solution with activated carbon to remove the colors in leaves, and then concentrated by evaporation.
Again, go through the process of decolorization, filtration and spray-drying. The spray-dried product is then combined with similarly processed additional extracts, dissolved in ethanol and/or methanol, crystallized and filtered. Finally, after further processes of crystallization, filtered and spray-dried to obtain pure stevioside.
Taken from here: https://foodadditives.net/natural-sweeteners/stevioside/#easy-footnote-bottom-1-1949
Dried stevia leaves are subjected to purified water first. Then followed by a precipitation process with ferric chloride and calcium hydroxide to remove non-soluble plant materials & other impurities and follow filtration.
So they’re washed with soap and water? Must we use the scariest language possible here?
You don’t know how sugar is made, do you?
Or agave syrup apparently
More info here:
They don’t get simple chemistry is required to refine and purify stuff either apparently lol
Yeah , it’s from an actual plant.
some people dont like the taste of stevia, i used at least the ones that have actual stevia, and not just filled with dextrose, which is basically sugar, or ethyrithiol. its pricier and less sweet. ALot of stevia products will have sugar in it. i buy the sweet leaf, i heard you can get pure stevia leaves, but its expensive.
Before this picture I thought Liquid Death was literally water in a can.
Had no idea they added stuff.
Yeah the slogan goes “Don’t be scared. It’s just water.” So same here, I thought it was just water lol.
They have a few different products including plain water
Stevia isn’t artificial lol
But it tastes artificial and fucks with lots of tummies.
Yeah Stevia tastes like poison to me, super bitter.
Basically all artificial sweeteners taste like either bitter or nothing at all to me. So I’m really angry when I buy a product I’ve been buying for years and it suddenly tastes like a Nintendo Switch cartridge.
>:(
deleted by creator
suddenly tastes like a Nintendo Switch cartridge.
Fuck. I know this smell. You just triggered NES and Super Nintendo memories in me. Never played Switch but I’m assuming they’re about the same.
The switch cartridges have a bitterant added to them since they’re small enough to be a choking hazard. It’s not the smell of the construction material they’re talking about.
Ah, so not the scent-memories that were triggered in me then. Different Nintendo scents, makes sense.
I love the smell of electronics! What I’m referencing is indeed the bitter compound they put on Switch cartridges, it tastes really bad and you taste it for a really long time, a stern warning to would-be choking children.
Like the sweet plasticky taste of dasani.
You’re thinking of xylitol which gets mixed with commercial stevia crystals to cut the sweetness
I think anything you’re not used to has the potential to fuck with your tummy
I have yet to find a low calorie sweetener that doesn’t bother my digestive system. My wife, who lives on diet Pepsi, doesn’t believe me.
have you tried honey? Even just a drop or two will really add a lot of sweetness
Liquorice (there’s also an actual root, not just the confectionery) is very sweet and tummy-friendly, actually recognised as a herbal remedy over here for (mild) gastritis because antiinflammatory and antispasmodic (alongside helping with coughs and having some antibacterial properties) but too much will fuck with your blood pressure, avoid it if you have any issues there. A bit will probably be fine but a habit generally isn’t “a bit”.
There’s some medicinal teas over here which pretty much only contain it to taste better (otherwise makes no sense in combination with e.g. valerian). The stuff is actually sweet and pleasant, not a neutral but woody sweetness, not to be confused with North European liquorice confectionery where the predominant flavour is Salammoniac. Which are also very good… hey I grew up with the stuff, don’t look at me like that. Anyhow if you want a naturally sweet herbal tea adding a couple of shavings of the stuff should do the trick.
I have the exact same issue! Haven’t met anyone else with the same problem yet. Really sucks that more and more non-diet drinks are containing some amount of artificial sweetener.
Have we applied the same scrutiny to HFCS or refined Sugar itself? Or does sugar get a pass because it was the first plant processed for its sweetness?
Drink water
How?
No.
Your loss
Ultimately it is your call what you put in your body. Just don’t start complaining about health issues.
I drink almost a gallon a day of water. I just don’t like being told what to do.
Anything in a can is not going to be good for us
Why do you think that?
You can get plain old water in a can.
https://www.amazon.com/Richards-Rainwater-Water-Still-Cans/dp/B09K4V87FM
So I can or can’t drink from the toilet?
it has infected everything and it’s fucking awful.
I’d be interested in finding out if there’s a genetic component to this, like people who taste soap in coriander, because I can’t believe any reasonable person would put this nonsense in anything they want to make a profit on.
There must be something. I see so many comments and how horrible it tastes and honestly I can’t tell the difference. I sprinkle this stuff on my bran cereal and it tastes fine to me.
