Science vs the Fructose/HFCS Conspiracy
Moderators: Ironman, Jungledoc, parth, stuward, jethrof
-
- Novice
- Posts: 96
- Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 7:31 pm
- Location: Santa Monica, CA
Just because you are too stupid to even understand what they are talking about does not make them unrelated.
Seeing Monsanto put Aspartame on the market I think they are very relevant but if you want to live you your own little dream world go ahead. I bet you didn't even watch them all. No wonder Americans are getting more stupid by the day with attitudes like yours. Go eat you aspartame, drink your fluoride - please, as you will be doing a world a favor.
I have been i meetings with researchers when they openly discussed how they could "adjust" the results of their studies. I bet you have never even open a biochemistry text book in your life.
Wake up to the real world!
Seeing Monsanto put Aspartame on the market I think they are very relevant but if you want to live you your own little dream world go ahead. I bet you didn't even watch them all. No wonder Americans are getting more stupid by the day with attitudes like yours. Go eat you aspartame, drink your fluoride - please, as you will be doing a world a favor.
I have been i meetings with researchers when they openly discussed how they could "adjust" the results of their studies. I bet you have never even open a biochemistry text book in your life.
Wake up to the real world!
I realize you were being a bit of a smartass in this reply, but I am honestly curious if Stevia has the same backlash that many artifical sweeteners do. I cut them out simply because when I was drinking them I was drinking entirely too much caffeine in addition to the coffee in the morns.Ironman wrote:Well it's not natural, and it's not sugar. Most importantly it tries let you make something sweet with little or no calories and little to no effect on blood sugar. It sweetens things, so it HAS to be bad for you somehow, if it isn't in the same way as sugar then of course it must be MUCH worse.Rucifer wrote:Everyone seems to be on the stevia bandwagon as of late. I cut out artifical sweeteners myself, how does stevia compare to them?
Since it isn't natural it of course causes cancer, aids, necrotising fasceitis, MS, Parkinsons. Lupus, heart disease, gingivitis, PTSD,terminal flatulence, bubonic plague, small pox, polio, halitosis and bad posture.
Stevia has some of the same drawbacks as all sweeteners. If it's sweet it will have an effect on the body that may be detrimental. There is evidence that artificial sweeteners could actually cause weight gain.
Searching stevia side effects will give you lots of stuff, some positive, some negative, all inconclusive.
Most of the controversy has nothing to do with any side effects but in the political nonsense behind it.
http://herbs.org/greenpapers/controv.html#stevia
Searching stevia side effects will give you lots of stuff, some positive, some negative, all inconclusive.
Most of the controversy has nothing to do with any side effects but in the political nonsense behind it.
http://herbs.org/greenpapers/controv.html#stevia
-
- Novice
- Posts: 96
- Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 7:31 pm
- Location: Santa Monica, CA
-
- Junior Member
- Posts: 226
- Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 12:44 pm
actually I called them useless, not unrelated.Peter Rouse wrote:Just because you are too stupid to even understand what they are talking about does not make them unrelated.
Its youtube ffs, I could put together a youtube video in no time that talks about how blueberries make your balls shrink.
How it is that you think you can have a serious evidence based conversation by posting youtube links, and calling anyone who disagrees with you names is beyond me.
Just for the record, I don't use artificial sweeteners. Not because I think it will give me cancer, but because I dont like the taste. But if I ever felt the need to use them, your temper and rampant use of unreliable internet sources certainly wouldn't deter me.

-
- Deific Wizard of Sagacity
- Posts: 4424
- Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 7:20 pm
actually I called them useless, not unrelated.frigginwizard wrote:Peter Rouse wrote:Just because you are too stupid to even understand what they are talking about does not make them unrelated.
Its youtube ffs, I could put together a youtube video in no time that talks about how blueberries make your balls shrink.
How it is that you think you can have a serious evidence based conversation by posting youtube links, and calling anyone who disagrees with you names is beyond me.
Just for the record, I don't use artificial sweeteners. Not because I think it will give me cancer, but because I dont like the taste. But if I ever felt the need to use them, your temper and rampant use of unreliable internet sources certainly wouldn't deter me.
quote]
bravo! It's a shame this thread's turned into this
-
- Novice
- Posts: 96
- Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 7:31 pm
- Location: Santa Monica, CA
-
- Novice
- Posts: 96
- Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 7:31 pm
- Location: Santa Monica, CA
Here is one more piece of evidence I will post,
"There is no evidence to suggest that the consumption of foods containing this sweetener, according to the provisions of the Food and Drug Regulations and as part of a well-balanced diet, would pose a health hazard to consumers. In addition, other scientific advisory bodies such as the Scientific Committee for Food of the European Community, and the Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) of the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization and World Health Organization have reviewed all the available safety studies and have found aspartame to be safe. More than ninety countries world-wide, including the United States, countries of the European Union, and Australia and New Zealand, have also reviewed aspartame and found it to be safe for human consumption and allow its use in various foods."
-Canadian Food Inspection Agency
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fn-an/securit/ad ... me-eng.php
"There is no evidence to suggest that the consumption of foods containing this sweetener, according to the provisions of the Food and Drug Regulations and as part of a well-balanced diet, would pose a health hazard to consumers. In addition, other scientific advisory bodies such as the Scientific Committee for Food of the European Community, and the Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) of the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization and World Health Organization have reviewed all the available safety studies and have found aspartame to be safe. More than ninety countries world-wide, including the United States, countries of the European Union, and Australia and New Zealand, have also reviewed aspartame and found it to be safe for human consumption and allow its use in various foods."
-Canadian Food Inspection Agency
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fn-an/securit/ad ... me-eng.php
-
- Novice
- Posts: 96
- Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 7:31 pm
- Location: Santa Monica, CA
So you trust the government to do the right thing by you?Jebus wrote:Here is one more piece of evidence I will post,
"There is no evidence to suggest that the consumption of foods containing this sweetener, according to the provisions of the Food and Drug Regulations and as part of a well-balanced diet, would pose a health hazard to consumers. In addition, other scientific advisory bodies such as the Scientific Committee for Food of the European Community, and the Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) of the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization and World Health Organization have reviewed all the available safety studies and have found aspartame to be safe. More than ninety countries world-wide, including the United States, countries of the European Union, and Australia and New Zealand, have also reviewed aspartame and found it to be safe for human consumption and allow its use in various foods."
-Canadian Food Inspection Agency
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fn-an/securit/ad ... me-eng.php
You people have very short memories.