Real sugar vs sugar free (sugar substitutes)...what' ok and what's not?

I could use some guidance on this subject...I am pretty bad about not wanting (or giving) the kids to have stuff with added sugar...fruit, yogurt, cereal, and now I'm looking at Jello, pudding, etc. For example, with yogurt I buy the kind with Splenda (although it has less fat) because I feel like that's an ok substitute and would rather them have that than sugar, jmo. Today I purchased some sugar free jello and noticed that it has aspartame in it as the substitute. Is this ok for kids to have?? Or is it better just to give the "real" thing?
Thanks again for the insight.

faith

 

Hmmm... I choose to not give my children any sugar substitutes. I think it's a lot healthier to eat a small bit of the real thing vs. something that's been chemically altered (or however they make the substitutes). I choose to buy whole fruit jam spreads and mix it into plain yogurt. I puree yogurt and frozen fruit and freeze that as "ice cream". You can make jello with gelatin and juice which allows you to use 100% juice. You can make pudding pretty easily but it's not something I give them. I guess I would rather make what they eat, as much as possible, and know what's in it, even if it is a little sugar vs. being very uncertain about the long term effects (affects?) of sugar substitutes. Good luck sorting this out!

 

I stay away from sugar subsitutes for the kids. They dont get alot of "extra" sugar, but when they do its the real deal. I agree with the p/p its better to have a little bit of the real deal than something chemically altered.

 

Anything artifical gives me really bad headaches, enough that it effects my vision. I've done a lot of reading, and for me I did not see enough evidence of long term monitoring and effects on people being good or indifferent.
There is a lot of contridictory imformation, but it was the long term effect question that makes me avoid it like the plague in anything for my kids.

 

I agree, real, all natural sugar (in moderation) is definitely better than the substitutes. Splenda is made from a sugar molecule and 2 chlorine molecules! YUCK!! Why put more nasty chemicals into your kids intentionally!!!!! And I don't know of any lab rats that died from pure cane sugar, can't say the same for aspartame.

 

I agree with everyone else! I try VERY hard to make sure the dudes don't get ANY artificial sugars! For the longest time I wouldn't give them anything with sugar unless it was in it naturally! But as they started becoming fussier eaters, I started giving them some sugar...but it is ALWAYS real sugar and never anything artificial.

 

An industrial chemist once told me that aspartame metabolizes into a neurotoxin.... So I avoid that and did when I was pregnant too!

As for Splenda... the molecular chemistry of bonding a sugar molecule to chlorine is complex. For example table salt is Sodium bonded to Chlorine... each individually is toxic...Sodium is highly reactive in water (re: ignites) and Chlorine gas is a nasty little chemical called Mustard Gas... Sooooo I wouldn't trouble about the molecular structure but rather what happens after you injest it! JMHO!! I would limit sugar and try to investigate the effects of sucralose (Splenda) I bet you can find some good diabetic studies.

 

Unless there is a medical reason to use a substitute such as diabetes, I would use the real thing for now. There is really no reason to replace sugar at this young an age. Teaching moderation from the very beginning is ideal.

 

I vote for real sugar also.

 

quote:
An industrial chemist once told me that aspartame metabolizes into a neurotoxin.... So I avoid that and did when I was pregnant too!


Aspartame can break down into formaldehyde (normally under extreme conditions, although this is still being debated), which does have neurotoxic qualities. A search on wikipedia might offer some decent information, if you're curious about the chemistry and how it is metabolised in the body. I'm sure you could also do a search on sucralose (Splenda).

In any case, we use real sugar over a substitute and just give them the minimum amount. I've read and heard that substitutes are safe, but if you feel unsure or uncomfortable, better to stick to sugar in small amounts

 

While I use sugar substitutes for myself I don't give them to the girls. I didn't use them for myself when I was pregnant either.

 

We don't use sugar substitutes so the boys don't eat them. I do use fruit as a sweetener in place of sugar when I can but they get refined sugar in moderation.

I'm not sure what purpose it serves giving a kid artificial sugar? Is this about their teeth? Calories? Getting a taste for sweet foods? The last one doesn't make sense at all, of course, since they are still getting the sweet sensation from an artificial sweetener but I've heard this argument so I threw it in there.

 

I'm another one who does no sustitutes at all. We don't eat a lot of sweets but if we do it's got to be all natural. None of those sugar sustitues have had enough testing done on them, I don't believe any are safe or worth it. If a parent wants to limit childs sweets, they shouldn't use artifically sweet things because you are just reinforcing bad habits (the habit of reaching for something that tastes sweet as a snack).
I'm lucky that I have easy access to a lot of unrefined natural sweeteners. I use local honey in my baking, or raw, unrefined sugar, so we get less simple carbs that way.

Also on a personal note, artifical sweeteners don't taste "sweet" to me, they taste chemical. I'm probably a super taster, but never been tested. I can't manage to take more than a sip or two of diet sodas because they taste like solevents to me. I'd never give that stuff my children!