![]() People give salt a lot of shit because the majority of the time it’s too high. Etc.)Īnd I know there’s a hell of a lot more to it all than that, but it’s so fucking drowned out by all these people who don’t talk mechanics but talk JUDGEMENTS, saying that more or less of this or that is ‘bad’ or ‘good’. And if it has to work too hard, the liver can get sloppy and let things slide. ![]() And the liver refuses to work any harder than it has to, so giving it a huge workload means there’s a backlog of poisons just… sitting there being poisonous. Things which are harmful to keep in the system for too long owing to how they react with everything while they’re unprocessed. (In general, things that have to go in your liver are usually, well… toxins. Bzzzt.Īnd that’s without going into the difference between what can be broken down by simple saliva or digestive enzymes and which ones need to take a tour through your liver to crack open and get at, like fructose. Like pouring kerosene onto a campfire and expecting that to be all the fuel it needs for the rest of the night. You aren’t ALWAYS using the sugars for fuel, and if you put more into your system than you’re burning, they get stored as fat, which is only the beginning of PART of the problem. High-GI (simple/refined sugars which are damn near sugar molecules in solid form) are ‘bad’ because they get accessed so quickly. And the ‘good’ sugars and foods with low-GI are often the ones that are slower to break down and release those juicy fuel goods. Broadly speaking, a compound might be considered a ‘sugar’, but it’s laden down with all these other atoms that form easier or more difficult to process molecules. It’s why the glycemic index (GI) – the measure of how quickly you break a compound down into the eventually-used glucose molecule – is important. It’s the ONLY thing you ‘burn’, once the internal refinement process is done. A big part of how ‘healthy’ something is is down to your body’s need for it, or use for it. Sugars ain’t sugars, to misquote an oil ad. Like, for example, here’s the gross oversimplification I was taught: Year 10 chemistry probably has a lot to answer for. Have a question you want to put to Ask Lifehacker? Send it using our. ![]() What’s your caffeine beverage of choice? Or do you ingest it a different way? Share your recommendations (and warnings) in the comments section below. We’re keen to hear what other readers think. You may also want to consider black tea: a strong brew can contain up to 20mg of caffeine per 100ml, alongside antioxidants and other health benefits that Coke Zero lacks. This is something to keep in mind if you want a slightly bigger hit of caffeine per can. Interestingly, Diet Coke actually has more caffeine than Coke Zero at 12.8mg/100ml. (Our picks: V Energy Sugar Free or 28 Black Sugarfree.) If you don’t like the taste of coffee, you might want to give a diet energy drink a try instead: you can find a rundown of products and how they taste here. So to answer your question, coffee gives you a lot more bang-for-buck than Coke Zero. By contrast, the caffeine in Coke is artificially added to a precise dosage. However, there is a lot more variation in coffee depending on the type of coffee bean, the amount of milk used and how it is prepared. This is substantially less than coffee which packs in up to 40mg per 100ml. In terms of caffeine content, Coke Zero contains 9.6mg per 100ml. It is, however, something to keep in mind. The former was recently linked to metabolic disease and digestive problems, although no clear consensus has been reached. ![]() It derives its sugary taste from the artificial sweeteners aspartame and acesulfame K. First up, great job on the H2O intake! Favouring water over soft drink (even if it’s the diet variety) is definitely recommended.Ĭoke Zero contains zero kilojoules or sugar.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |