[ryanferg]

When I was in undergrad, a Cog Psych professor told me a story about an undergrad who made a poster for a regional research conference of no real consequence about the correlation between diet soda drinking and some recall task. The study and the conference were more about teaching students about research more than actually finding anything. When he and his student showed up to the conference, a representative from a low-cal sweetener producer was there, and proceeded to spend the entire conference standing next to the poster refuting the obviously amateurish research. He said for years afterwards, he'd still get mail and faxes about new research that disproved any link between fake sugar and memory problems.

All of that being said, I don't know if there is a substance that we consume that has had more research done on it than artificial sweeteners. For every study like this, there are other studies disproving them, etc. If there is an effect, the effect size is small, and I'm not convinced there is anything there. Also, I'm drinking a Diet Coke right now and in another life I was an Alz researcher so maybe I really want it to not be there.

[SQueeeeeL]

Wait, a mysterious man showed up to an impactless meeting to basically embarrass the hell out of an aspiring undergrad research and your immediate reaction wasn't "Oh shit, these people are probably trying to cover something up."

Cause that's my immediate reaction, sounds similar to the cigarette industry in the 60s

[Taywee]

I think that's a strong reaction. Corporate damage control and prevention of profit loss will look pretty much the same whether they're covering something up or just correcting the record. If there's a threat to profits, an industry and corporation will usually attempt to prevent or attack it regardless of any connection to the truth.

[RcouF1uZ4gsC]

> "Oh shit, these people are probably trying to cover something up."

Was that also your reaction when Youtube shut down anti-vax videos and videos promoting dangerous Covid "cures"?

Sometimes, even if you know something is false, it is helpful to nip misinformation in the bud.

[jrootabega]

I guess it's good that the sugar industry has enough money to fund studies of artificial sweetener and vice versa.

[xattt]

How about developing enough self-control to avoid both products altogether?

[spookthesunset]

> All of that being said, I don't know if there is a substance that we consume that has had more research done on it than artificial sweeteners

MSG? ... MSG is probably a close second...

[lotsofpulp]

> If there is an effect, the effect size is small, and I'm not convinced there is anything there.

Even if there is, apparently sugar is doing much more damage.

[TillE]

Yeah, that's my main takeaway from the general body of research. Sugar is awful for you in a million well-known ways. Most artificial sweeteners are, at worst, far better for your health. I'm a big fan of erythritol for most purposes.

[bee_rider]

Has there been a suspected artificial sweetener/memory issue link for a while? I could see them wanting to refute it if there were fluoride-like not very well founded concerns. Otherwise that is insanely suspicious, to the point of parody.