[throwing838383]

It's important to remember a simple fact about artificial sugars: they're about 10 times less dense than sugar (at least the one i use, which is a combo of maltodextrin and sucralose). This means that 10g of sugar is sugar sweet equivalent of about 1g of artificial sweetener. Which means if you're switching your sweetener from sugar to artificial you're getting 10 times less sweetener! Which means, even if sugar and artificial sweeteners were equally bad for you gram for gram, you're still getting 10 times less of thus 10 times less bad for you.

[thelazydogsback]

To me it comes down to this: sugar is bad for you in a multitude of very measurable ways, both short-term and long-term. Artificial sweeteners, at the very least, seem to be more subtle in any adverse effects. (And some which I wish got used more, like Xylitol, even have some benefits, in addition to tasting better than Sucrolose or stevia, etc.) Personally, I would rather have my son drink an occasional diet soda than one containing 40g of sugar -- his mom thinks the opposite.

[paulddraper]

> gram for gram

I have no earthly idea if these are comparable gram for gram.

[RugnirViking]

Exactly - there are plenty of things I will happily eat 500 grams of, and there are a great many things in this world I should never eat even a single milligram of.

This comparison is not even close to a given.

[resoluteteeth]

Comparing the maltodextrin content of granulated splenda to sugar is completely irrelevant to the question of whether nonnutritive sweeteners are themselves harmful.