By Kimberpoo - 14/03/2013 06:21 - United States - San Diego
Same thing different taste
By sofakingweetodit - 18/10/2010 12:44 - United States
Gassy day
By Anonymous - 02/10/2024 23:00 - United States
The diet plan from hell
By Mustanggt - 01/11/2020 14:01 - United States - Rochester
By Anonymous - 15/03/2010 23:29 - United States
By Anonymous - 18/11/2015 14:50 - Canada
Gummied up
By Anonymous - 01/05/2024 15:00 - United States
By NotSoSick - 12/02/2010 05:11 - United States
By fat and alone - 05/06/2014 04:11 - United States - Birmingham
By dannij08 - 14/01/2009 01:05 - United States
Addiction
By Anonymous - 18/01/2022 01:58
Top comments
Comments
How on earth did such a food get approved by regulatory bodies?! And why would you consume these if you well knew what might happen?
A side effects warning on food? I've never noticed anything like that.
Sorbitol is an artificial sweetener and Iain almost all sugar free candies and most gum too. It is also a main ingredient in laxatives. Some people can handle it better than others. Others (like myself) can't handle it at all and one candy causes problems. Hence the "may cause" on the label.
Glucose is what everything you eat gets broken down to, and sucrose is regular table sugar. What you ate was probably maltitol or sorbitol, which are sweet sugar alcohols that have no caloric value. They can, however, cause the GI symptoms you and OP were unlucky enough to experience.
Was going to say the same thing Doc. For once, I actually used organic chemistry in real life!
Diet soda does not give you the *****. Aspartame, sucralose, etc, are not sugar alcohols and do not have the same effect. I'm diabetic and would rather not take insulin for such things, so Splenda and diet soda, FTW. But those sugar free candies are nasty. Also, you have to eat several servings before it becomes a laxative. Sugar free, low fat, nonfat, whatever doesn't mean that you should hoover the whole bag.
If you just eat a few there's no problem. But eat too many...
Sounds like a tasty way to go
I feel like food shouldn't have side effect warnings. Throw that crap out.
Every food item has implied side effects warnings... because they all consist of chemical compounds and side effects are still an item's effects. Strawberry - Cellulose, Glucose, Vitamin C... each compound affects individuals in different ways, idiosyncrasies. Implied warning: May kill you. May restore your energy via ETC..and the list goes on.
Ok but really food should be good enough not to have any warnings
Your FML may as well have read, "today I pooped my pants." Bwahahaha.
It would be hard to market a product with a "may cause sharting" label on it. There was a fake fat that had "make cause oily anal leakage" on its label, and that's why you never hear of it anymore.
You might want to buy a different brand of jellybeans OP, whoever approved of actually selling those jellybeans must've been on crack
Or just wanting to make money
This is why you don't eat sugar-free jellybeans. They just aren't legit. Taste the rainbow, poop the rainbow. (yeah yeah skittles but still...)
It seems obvious that sugar-free candy is indicative of a chemical shitstorm. Good news: the sharts will go away. Bad news: your IQ will stay relatively the same.
Hint: sugar-free isn't going to help if there's corn syrup in it. FYL but YDI for buying something labeled with an effect like that.
corn syrup is litterly liquid sugar...
Keywords
Did you spill your beans?
How on earth did such a food get approved by regulatory bodies?! And why would you consume these if you well knew what might happen?