-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
$350M Suit: Nutrasweet a Deadly Neurotoxin
- Thread starter Miramonti
- Start date
SwissArmyBilly
Member
That does sound really shady. Wonder if this all is true.
shiner
Lifer
Hmm...well let's see. A quick Google search shows that Hayes became director of the FDA in April of 1981. When was that pesky innaguration again? Oh yeah.....Tuesday, Jan 20th, 1981
When was apartame approved for use in dry foods? Unsure, but the article I found says is was a "few months" after Hayes became driector of the FDA.
Again..... Jan to April is more than one day....so a "Few months" is surely more than one day. Right?
Soooo....if the fact of the approval date is wrong.....well gee....I wonder what else in the linked article might be?
Hmmmmmmm
When was apartame approved for use in dry foods? Unsure, but the article I found says is was a "few months" after Hayes became driector of the FDA.
Again..... Jan to April is more than one day....so a "Few months" is surely more than one day. Right?
Soooo....if the fact of the approval date is wrong.....well gee....I wonder what else in the linked article might be?
Hmmmmmmm
Hugenstein
Senior member
ReiAyanami
Diamond Member
d00d, they found high levels of platinum in women with silicon breast implants in a study recently.
anytime you introduce something unnatural into your body the possibilities of complications arises. Agent Orange is safe, as long as you stay the heck away from it.
anytime you introduce something unnatural into your body the possibilities of complications arises. Agent Orange is safe, as long as you stay the heck away from it.
Amused
Elite Member
There is? There is not a single peer reviewed and independantly repeated study showing ANY harm from aspartame (in people without the rare genetic disorder called phenylketonuria).
But never let the facts get in the way of your urban myths.
http://www.snopes.com/toxins/aspartame.asp
CycloWizard
Lifer
Yes, and logic debunked the argument that was used here.
BaliBabyDoc
Lifer
For a change, the "all regulations are evil and corporate America will save the world" crowd is right . . . sort of. Aspartame is not a deadly neurotoxin. It was never proven by Searle that it was safe but that's another issue altogether.
Regardless of how aspartame gained FDA approval, it has now been administered in millions (if not billions) of people at every reasonable (and somewhat unreasonable) dose. I have seen absolutely nothing that implies it does any harm . . . except for PKU (phenylketonuria) as noted by someone earlier.
There is a little wiggle room though. The tool that started this hoax claimed that "aspartic acid" in aspartame can destroy brain tissue. Well that's sort of true but it's essentially impossible to get enough aspartic acid into the brain to do so. Aspartic acid is an amino acid. So someone was claiming that some amino acids are dangerous. Curiously, that part is true. There's no known toxicity for amino acids like tryptophan; eat too much and you will enter a wonderfully sated mode known as a Turkey coma. Tryptophan is the precursor to the neurotransmitter serotonin which is vital for a variety of CNS functions such as mood, satiety, sleep regulation.
Glutamate on the otherhand is an amino acid that acts directly as an excitatory neurotransmitter. Under normal conditions glutamate is goody goody but excess glutamate is linked to several neurological disorders. But it's NEVER been proven that excess dietary glutamate causes such conditions.
In summary, Donald Rumsfeld is an arse. Reagan was an arse. And much of drug and food additive pushing corporate America are arses. But they pretty much didn't hurt anyone in the process . . . other than sugar producers.
Regardless of how aspartame gained FDA approval, it has now been administered in millions (if not billions) of people at every reasonable (and somewhat unreasonable) dose. I have seen absolutely nothing that implies it does any harm . . . except for PKU (phenylketonuria) as noted by someone earlier.
There is a little wiggle room though. The tool that started this hoax claimed that "aspartic acid" in aspartame can destroy brain tissue. Well that's sort of true but it's essentially impossible to get enough aspartic acid into the brain to do so. Aspartic acid is an amino acid. So someone was claiming that some amino acids are dangerous. Curiously, that part is true. There's no known toxicity for amino acids like tryptophan; eat too much and you will enter a wonderfully sated mode known as a Turkey coma. Tryptophan is the precursor to the neurotransmitter serotonin which is vital for a variety of CNS functions such as mood, satiety, sleep regulation.
Glutamate on the otherhand is an amino acid that acts directly as an excitatory neurotransmitter. Under normal conditions glutamate is goody goody but excess glutamate is linked to several neurological disorders. But it's NEVER been proven that excess dietary glutamate causes such conditions.
In summary, Donald Rumsfeld is an arse. Reagan was an arse. And much of drug and food additive pushing corporate America are arses. But they pretty much didn't hurt anyone in the process . . . other than sugar producers.
kage69
Lifer
My mom has a friend who was afflicted with a neurological disorder, causing chronic spasms and a lot of pain all along the right side of his body. He was also quite the Diet Coke fan, drinking that and other 'diet' drinks many times a day (a six pack easily I hear, sometimes more). She convinced him to quit for awhile as she was convinced these artificial sweeteners were to blame. 3 weeks after his last can of diet soda, the spasms and pain disappeared completely. He called my mom to apologize for chiding her recommendation.
I must admit, Splenda ain't bad though.
I must admit, Splenda ain't bad though.
Cerb
Elite Member
God, please rid us of these people w/o taste buds. Please. Splenda isn't as bas Sweet & Low, I'll give it that, but it has that same sickly sweetness to it of diet coke and equal. What is the alure of this stuff? It's not like eating or drinking crappy food with artificial sweetener is any better than eating it without. Coca-cola isn't healthy, neither is Diet Coke. So why drink diet? Why not just drink the real thing?
Cerb
Elite Member
Dunno, which one will you? However, going with a different sweetener won't change that--might as well drink the good one. MSG and its ilk (enhances flavor, addictive, makes you eat a bit more) make more of an impact on weight and overall health than a few calories from sugar in a bottle of coke. Also, you'll have about as many fillings either way--if you drink a lot of any soft drinks, it's the acid that will mess up your teeth.
<- fat, unhealthy, probably should see a dentist; but none of it can be attributed to drinking a few cokes every week.
Cerb
Elite Member
A sweetener created from sugar. Unlike Aspertame, which is simply not sugar, but gets absorbed pretty well, Splenda is a fair bit like sugar, and tastes closer to sugar than the others. None is supposed to be absorbed in theory, but studies have shown ~10% here, and about triple that in Japanese studies (I don't know if the dosages were different). Adverse affects of this have not been determined, and much like Aspertame, will probably be pretty rare.
I'll be staying away from it largely for the same reason as others: it doesn't taste as good, and serves no purpose if you aren't diabetic or on an Atkins-like diet. The biggest push for Splenda is that it can be used for some baking.
I'll be staying away from it largely for the same reason as others: it doesn't taste as good, and serves no purpose if you aren't diabetic or on an Atkins-like diet. The biggest push for Splenda is that it can be used for some baking.
imported_Aelius
Golden Member
The chemical makeup of Aspertame turns toxic only above a certain temperature. i.e. in a human body. You can test it all you want while it's sitting at room temperature in a glass tube.
If you research the chemical makeup of Aspertame you might be surprised as to what it actually contains and what it changes to at body temperature.
Three words. Fire Ant Toxin
Google is your friend.
If you research the chemical makeup of Aspertame you might be surprised as to what it actually contains and what it changes to at body temperature.
Three words. Fire Ant Toxin
Google is your friend.
Amused
Elite Member
Yes, google is your friend only when you use it intelligently and don't believe the tons of FUD and outright, baseless fearmongering on the web.
Read this to understand why the fear mongering over methanol and other chemicals are just that... baseless fear mongering with absolutely NO basis in science:
A reprint from an article in the Lancet
http://www.aspartame.net/media/opinion/op_aspint.html
Again, I challenge anyone to produce a single peer reviewed and repeated study showing harm from the use of Aspartame.
I've been making this challenge for years and to date, no one can meet it.
imported_Aelius
Golden Member
I'll just take the word of scientific studies that are funded by companies like the company that owns the site you linked to. They are not biased. Not at all. *sarcasm*
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
