[jddj]

When someone puts sugar in my tea or coffee it genuinely ruins it for me, but I eat sweet things faily rarely and so haven't developed the tolerance and/or addiction to that flavour.

Could it be that not eating sugar isn't so much of a strenuous ascetic chore, but rather it's the reduction in sugar intake which is particularly (albeit temporarily) awkward?

[RandomInteger4]

My comment wasn't against not eating / drinking sweet thing things. My comment was anti-anti-sweet things (which is not the same as pro-sweet things in certain systems of logic)

One doesn't need to have an addiction to sweet things to want to enjoy sweet things every once in a while, though I admit that "addictions" to sweet things exist (namely my father, whom I have a hard time breaking him away from that addiction).

The point was mainly that there is a certain brand of health and fitness that says one must suffer / become a stoic ascetic in order to make progress, and it's this brand of health and fitness that is counter productive. Yes, maybe it works for many people, but it doesn't work for everyone.

I'm perfectly happy living a rather Spartan life; my 70 year old father is not and it's very difficult to change his stubborn mind.

Another way of putting it is that if you say that the only way to health and fitness is to climb over this 50 ft. wall, then you're going to get far fewer people actually putting in the effort to do so. Artificial Sweeteners are the large hand holds on the climbing wall, before they're ready to switch over.

And yes, if your goal is body recomposition, then macronutrition and caloric intake is far more important than this "artificial sweeteners make you fatter" voodoo magic nonsense.