So here I was posting a rant about the rankness of “no added sugar” soft drinks and what comment do I receive?

One about the merits of a new drink with …..

No added sugar.

Complete with a link to where to buy the stuff, of course. (A link I shall not be including here.)

So thanks but no thanks, Margaret. I’ll not be trying it.

Even if it does come in six delicious flavours.

Time was when bottles labelled as above were rare in shops. Not so now. Just try to find any diluting juice that has sugar added to it at all (at least in my local supermarkets.)

It may not actually be the case – they may be perfectly all right – but I remember reading somewhere years ago that the tests on the stuff that’s used instead of sugar in these drinks (aspartame or E951 and acesulfame K or E950 – but not so much saccharin, which came earlier) didn’t properly pass the safety tests. Either that or the results were massaged to put them in a more positive light. Something iffy anyway. This, I find, is supported by the Wikipedia article on aspartame, which does, though, contain a warning as to its disputed content. The main article states that the latest information is that the safety of aspartame is clear cut.
Acesulfame K has also been questioned but declared safe by the FDA and its European equvalent.

Aspartame is the methyl ester of a phenylalanine-aspartic acid dipeptide. Ah, a bit of Chemistry!

Both phenylalanine and aspartic acid are essential amino acids; which is to say our bodies need a certain supply of them – along with other amino acids – to make protein for muscles and cell repair and so on. We get these amino acids normally from our food. The plain dipeptide would present no health problems as the body would hydrolyse it to the individual amino acids before utilising those. I presume the dipeptide itself is not sweet since they use the methyl ester as aspartame. This ester can potentially hydrolyse to produce methanol – which is a poison, as found in wood alcohol (wood spirit.) I can see that the quantities of methanol involved will be small unless you imbibe bucket-loads of the drinks and the body will be able to get rid of it reasonably easily – though its metabolite, methanoic acid (or formic acid,) apparently lingers and is the main problem in causing the blindness and acidosis associated with drinking methanol.

Acesulfame K has a more complicated chemical structure (see link above,) containing what is known as a heterocyclic ring and bristling with oxygen atoms. As it is relatively stable under heating it is probably reasonably safe though I suspect it will hydrolyse to form an amino sulphonic acid.

Whatever, these “no added sugar” drinks have a slimy quality to them that is extremely unpleasant. I much prefer the sugared varieties (when I drink any at all) but they’re so hard to find.

I would also take, for myself, any health risks associated with the increased sugar intake. I’m sure these risks will also be acceptable for children if their sugar consumption from elsewhere isn’t excessive.