Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[cem_devecioglu]

As a rule of thumb, if an internet search produces no hits then the thing being searched either doesn't exist, fact or fiction, or it has been erased by persons unknown for reasons unknown.

Something fictional such as a hoax will probably produce more links than any genuine article could ever manage


This is the current top result when you search 'aspartame side effects'. It might sound familiar...

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/11/06/aspartame-most-dangerous-substance-added-to-food.aspx

This is the fourth listing. And contains, shock horror, rational and balanced information  ...

http://www.food.gov.uk/policy-advice/additivesbranch/aspartame/

You will note that the 1 in 10,000 people have an issue with phenylketonuria.

And finally, good old Wikipedia, the fifth listing. You will note the use of 'conspiracy theories' and 'email hoax' within the first paragraph...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspartame_controversy

 

Good job al

from the first link

"Due to the lack of a couple of key enzymes, humans are many times more sensitive to the toxic effects of methanol than animals. "

We know that humans even cant produce C vitamin   and comparing humans to rats




"It has been pointed out that some fruit juices and alcoholic beverages contain small amounts of methanol. It is important to remember, however, that methanol never appears alone. In every case, ethanol is present, usually in much higher amounts. Ethanol is an antidote for methanol toxicity in humans. The troops of Desert Storm were "treated" to large amounts of aspartame-sweetened beverages, which had been heated to over 86 degrees F in the Saudi Arabian sun. Many of them returned home with numerous disorders similar to what has been seen in persons who have been chemically poisoned by formaldehyde. The free methanol in the beverages may have been a contributing factor in these illnesses. Other breakdown products of aspartame such as DKP (discussed below) may also have been a factor."

[Sir Tigger KC]

I've always been partial to a bit of brown sugar.   

[cleggy]

If you live your life listening to these clowns, then you will eat nothing, drink nothing enjoyable and be a right miserable barsteward reading the lastest dog do on what is supposedly good for you.
Consume what you like in moderation and be HAPPY.  

We ain't going to live forever so enjoy the journey. . Especially  Brown Sugar every other lay day.

[cem_devecioglu]

seems like fda itself is responsible for ignoring many things


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kn5slnNB8h0


and there are other things behind the scene..

9:16


"results of industry sponsored research turned out very differently from the non-industry sponsored studies!!"


I looked at the medical literature adressing the safety of aspartame,  184 studies , 76 were founded by nutra sweet industry every single one of them attested to the safety of aspartame , of 90 independant studies 83 identified a problem
"
  ..  wot we said!!

[cem_devecioglu]

seems like fda itself is responsible for ignoring many things


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kn5slnNB8h0


and there are other things behind the scene..

9:16


"results of industry sponsored research turned out very differently from the non-industry sponsored studies!!"


I looked at the medical literature adressing the safety of aspartame,  184 studies , 76 were founded by nutra sweet industry every single one of them attested to the safety of aspartame , of 90 independant studies 83 identified a problem
"
  ..  wot we said!!

and more evidence..    the fda comissioner dont answer the questions

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvFRLIjOLOU

[05omegav6]

And you have just as systematically ignored the two links which counter the claims of the first one

[chrisgixer]

And you have just as systematically ignored the two links which counter the claims of the first one

We've all tried Al. A little bit of info can be a very dangerous thing. Even if the info is accurate to start with.
But sympathetically, something has gone very wrong for our cem, for which he has my deepest sympathies.

[Kevin Wood]

I'm out.

[cem_devecioglu]

And you have just as systematically ignored the two links which counter the claims of the first one

this is called selective recognition to seperate fact and bollix

by the way did you watch the videos

[cem_devecioglu]

I'm out.

dont

[cam2502]

I'm out.

Brilliant 

[chrisgixer]

I'm out.

Race you down

[D]

here is your famous article
http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/aspartame912.pdf


this is done.. this done.. etc etc..


no detailed charts, explanations, notes.. believe me I can prepare a report like that just by copy pasting for free

Again you fall prey to the google search and fail to read things properly. The first word on the article below the authors names states "Evaluation summary". Hence why there are no charts, explanations or notes. It is a summary, not the full text. Does that make sense?

So, if you want the actual full article on the internet, you have to pay for it. Or else access it via a library. The full article is available via this link:

http://informahealthcare.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/10408440701516184

or

http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/apl/btxc/2007/00000037/00000008/art00002?token=00521a3682c5db372c275c277b42572b67474828345f44236e59592f653b2a2d3a7c4e7247700b8626

They are not cheap, cost about $50 to purchase. And that will provide you with detailed analysis notes, charts and explanations as you wish to see. I cannot share the full article with you because the service I use to access such literature prohibits me from freely distributing such information.

I am not denying the fact that there may be new evidence in the future. Not at all. All I am saying is that the Aspartame hoax has been going around for more than 20 years and there is a good body of evidence (if you can access it) to suggest that so far it is safe. In fact it has been studied more extensively than something like Stevia plant extract. Yet, people are happy to use Stevia without any evidence, yet condemn Aspartame when there is good evidence that it is safe.

If I have to access the latest research available for my field of expertise, it costs me around  £300 - £500 in annual subscriptions. But this information is validated and peer reviewed. So as accurate as possible. Not perfect, not set in stone, but as uptodate and accurate as possible. Free information(medical) on the internet is often opinions, personal experiences and myth. Sometimes health scares/hoaxes. So do not believe all you read, unless you can peruse the evidence yourself. Worse still, dont scare others. A good example being the MMR scare or hoax. Unfortunately driven by a single medical person. Not so different to the way Dr Kim and Dr Whatshisname write on their websites.  The UK is suffering for the healthcare hoax that was the so called link between MMR and Autism. For years doctors tried to convince people about the fact that it was a hoax, but people chose not to listen and now we have a resurgence of adult measles.

of 90 independant studies 83 identified a problem

Could I have a link to one of these so call studies that identified a problem. I am willing to look into it in detail. And if the study is genuine, then I can access full articles via the service I currently use.

I ask because I use a aspartame/sucralose in lieu of sugar to reduce my risk of diabetes. And I spent a lot of time researching it before switching over.

[D]

I'm out.

Race you down

Dont leave! I am feeling cold and lonely 

[cem_devecioglu]

here is your famous article
http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/aspartame912.pdf


this is done.. this done.. etc etc..


no detailed charts, explanations, notes.. believe me I can prepare a report like that just by copy pasting for free

Again you fall prey to the google search and fail to read things properly. The first word on the article below the authors names states "Evaluation summary". Hence why there are no charts, explanations or notes. It is a summary, not the full text. Does that make sense?

So, if you want the actual full article on the internet, you have to pay for it. Or else access it via a library. The full article is available via this link:

http://informahealthcare.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/10408440701516184

or

http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/apl/btxc/2007/00000037/00000008/art00002?token=00521a3682c5db372c275c277b42572b67474828345f44236e59592f653b2a2d3a7c4e7247700b8626

They are not cheap, cost about $50 to purchase. And that will provide you with detailed analysis notes, charts and explanations as you wish to see. I cannot share the full article with you because the service I use to access such literature prohibits me from freely distributing such information.

I am not denying the fact that there may be new evidence in the future. Not at all. All I am saying is that the Aspartame hoax has been going around for more than 20 years and there is a good body of evidence (if you can access it) to suggest that so far it is safe. In fact it has been studied more extensively than something like Stevia plant extract. Yet, people are happy to use Stevia without any evidence, yet condemn Aspartame when there is good evidence that it is safe.

If I have to access the latest research available for my field of expertise, it costs me around  £300 - £500 in annual subscriptions. But this information is validated and peer reviewed. So as accurate as possible. Not perfect, not set in stone, but as uptodate and accurate as possible. Free information(medical) on the internet is often opinions, personal experiences and myth. Sometimes health scares/hoaxes. So do not believe all you read, unless you can peruse the evidence yourself. Worse still, dont scare others. A good example being the MMR scare or hoax. Unfortunately driven by a single medical person. Not so different to the way Dr Kim and Dr Whatshisname write on their websites.  The UK is suffering for the healthcare hoax that was the so called link between MMR and Autism. For years doctors tried to convince people about the fact that it was a hoax, but people chose not to listen and now we have a resurgence of adult measles.

of 90 independant studies 83 identified a problem

Could I have a link to one of these so call studies that identified a problem. I am willing to look into it in detail. And if the study is genuine, then I can access full articles via the service I currently use.

I ask because I use a aspartame/sucralose in lieu of sugar to reduce my risk of diabetes. And I spent a lot of time researching it before switching over.

D, I see you are insistent for the aspartame to be safe,  but at that point I must remind that these videos ,internet pages, including consumers and many independant researchs dont ask for money and tell you that there is a problem..  if you prefer to believe and continue to pay, its your choice..