Obviously, alcoholic drinks present other dangers (driving drunk, alcoholism), but my question is specifically related to the cancer-causing nature of aspartame-sweetend soft drinks and alcoholic beverages, comparatively.
In: 1668
I learned something from my pharmacology professor when I was getting my psychology degree, and I’ve kept it in mind throughout my time since then:
“The dose makes the poison.”
Every substance imaginable can be harmful in excess. The LD:50 (the dose which kills 50% of the population and is generally considered a “lethal overdose”) of alcohol is much lower than that of water. You can tank a lot more H2O than ethanol. But too much of either can kill you. You can inhale a lot more oxygen than you can methamphetamine, but again, both can kill you at a high enough dose.
When you think of carcinogens, we’re talking about a substance which could potentially cause long-term changes to the DNA such that cells become cancerous.
Uranium exposure has a very low dose needed to damage, or even destroy, DNA. Liquor, cigarettes, and sunbathing have been clearly shown to damage DNA, but you need to consume more over a longer period of time to cause those changes to occur. One blast of nuclear energy can melt your skin off, while a typical person can go years never wearing sunscreen on the beach before they find a suspicious mole. In either event, they can damage your DNA directly; it’s just about dose and duration. A few sunburns over decades, having a couple beers with your friends every now and then, you’re not likely to have negative effects beyond just some dehydration and pain the following day.
And then there are lots of substances which are thought to be “potentially carcinogenic,” which is how aspartame is being labeled. This means they’ve got a hunch there might be a connection, but they haven’t got sufficient evidence to say for sure.
Something people don’t often think about is that we have cells which glitch and go rogue all the time. If you lived the healthiest lifestyle your body needs, you would still have problematic cells come about now and then. They’re the exceptions to an otherwise perfect program.
If you introduce environmental factors which affect how smoothly your program runs, like not wearing sunscreen, not getting enough exercise, drug use, chronic stress, or an unhealthy diet, you’re running the risk of more glitches. Your immune system being taxed by a bad cold increases this risk temporarily, because it’s your immune system which goes through and cleans up the mess. Most of the time, you’re just fine, because it takes a lot of these glitchy cells to make it past the cleanup crew.
Everything is “potentially carcinogenic.” It’s all about the dose.
The older you get, the more likely it is for your cells to break down, and the weaker your immune system is when it’s time to clean up the junk. So… Living a long life can cause cancer.
This is why I find it weird when people give up things they love in the name of living longer. Moderation is great, and “moderation” for many people and many substances can mean “none,” like how many people are never compelled to try cigarettes or cocaine even once. But why lose sleep over enjoying diet Pepsi, getting drunk on New Year’s with your friends, or forgetting sunscreen now and then?
Having more time to enjoy life is awesome, but not if it means you aren’t enjoying life.
Latest Answers