Aspartame "sensitives" study published
Replies
-
beemerphile1 wrote: »Burden of proof is on you, since you make the claim.
(Hint, those studies either don't exist or they have been debunked)
What exactly do you think I have to prove, maybe you should reread my post?
I said, "My personal experience from about five years ago"
Do you think I need to prove my personal experience?
Anecdotes are just that. And there are too many confounding variables to use anyone's n=1 experience as evidence
I don't have time to dig through all this. I suspect you just dumped a search on me without reading these. I will click a few and see what they have to say.
I cant get to this through the paywall, but you said this one is unsubstantiated, so I can dismiss it without reading it. Why did you even link it?
I said, "have seen many studies that document the hazards of aspartame"
In fact the study first linked qualifies although results were that the hazards are unsubstantiated.
Some reading for your enjoyment;
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v227/n5258/pdf/227609b0.pdf
This one SPECIFICALLY says the very thing you are arguing against:However, they should not in any way be interpreted as demonstrating that aspartame significantly affects the human brain.
This is about excitotoxins, which is not what you are trying to argue against.
This is a correlation/causation study and shows nothing
OK - so massive doses damage mice. What does that have to do with non-massive doses for humans?http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6TCR-408BJC1-4&_user=10&_coverDate=05/19/2000&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_origin=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view
=c&_searchStrId=1456058577&
_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=395a2fc9d4ef0ffceeea475146341607
&searchtype=a
This one says it is bad for those with phenylketonuria. I think that is well established.
This one contradicts you again:It is concluded that low concentrations of ASP metabolites had no effect on the membrane enzyme activity, whereas high or toxic concentrations partially or remarkably decreased the membrane AChE activity, respectively. Additionally, neurological symptoms, including learning and memory processes, may be related to the high or toxic concentrations of the sweetener metabolites.
I have had enough digging through these. In fact I have done more than enough considering your burden of proof. If there is some damning evidence in the later studies, you will have to show me. The first bunch I clicked through didn't sway me.
[/quote]
Contradicts what exactly? I made no claims in the first place other than there are a lot of studies that document the hazards of aspartame. Everything else I said was my experience and personal opinion.
Sway you? I'm not trying to sway anyone, if you and others weren't so defensive you would know that.0 -
chivalryder wrote: »Well, I suppose one could - if they were so inclined - streeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeetch and conclude that, if you were a rodent and were directly injected with a butt-ton of aspartame, that it would be considered harmful.
And for people with certain medical conditions, it can be harmful.
So I guess he's not completely wrong.
I believe we should have a medical experiment where we inject an IV full of aspartame and hook it up to a patient and observe the results.
If the patient shows any negative symptoms, we shall conclude that all aspartame in any dosage should be banned because it is harmful.
Sounds like MFPScience, to me!0 -
beemerphile1 wrote: »beemerphile1 wrote: »Burden of proof is on you, since you make the claim.
(Hint, those studies either don't exist or they have been debunked)
What exactly do you think I have to prove, maybe you should reread my post?
I said, "My personal experience from about five years ago"
Do you think I need to prove my personal experience?
Anecdotes are just that. And there are too many confounding variables to use anyone's n=1 experience as evidence
I don't have time to dig through all this. I suspect you just dumped a search on me without reading these. I will click a few and see what they have to say.
I cant get to this through the paywall, but you said this one is unsubstantiated, so I can dismiss it without reading it. Why did you even link it?
I said, "have seen many studies that document the hazards of aspartame"
In fact the study first linked qualifies although results were that the hazards are unsubstantiated.
Some reading for your enjoyment;
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v227/n5258/pdf/227609b0.pdf
This one SPECIFICALLY says the very thing you are arguing against:However, they should not in any way be interpreted as demonstrating that aspartame significantly affects the human brain.
This is about excitotoxins, which is not what you are trying to argue against.
This is a correlation/causation study and shows nothing
OK - so massive doses damage mice. What does that have to do with non-massive doses for humans?http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6TCR-408BJC1-4&_user=10&_coverDate=05/19/2000&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_origin=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view
=c&_searchStrId=1456058577&
_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=395a2fc9d4ef0ffceeea475146341607
&searchtype=a
This one says it is bad for those with phenylketonuria. I think that is well established.
This one contradicts you again:It is concluded that low concentrations of ASP metabolites had no effect on the membrane enzyme activity, whereas high or toxic concentrations partially or remarkably decreased the membrane AChE activity, respectively. Additionally, neurological symptoms, including learning and memory processes, may be related to the high or toxic concentrations of the sweetener metabolites.
I have had enough digging through these. In fact I have done more than enough considering your burden of proof. If there is some damning evidence in the later studies, you will have to show me. The first bunch I clicked through didn't sway me.
Contradicts what exactly? I made no claims in the first place other than there are a lot of studies that document the hazards of aspartame. Everything else I said was my experience and personal opinion.
Sway you? I'm not trying to sway anyone, if you and others weren't so defensive you would know that.
0 -
beemerphile1 wrote: »
Contradicts what exactly? I made no claims in the first place other than there are a lot of studies that document the hazards of aspartame. Everything else I said was my experience and personal opinion.
Sway you? I'm not trying to sway anyone, if you and others weren't so defensive you would know that.
But these studies aren't documenting hazards. You made a very bold claim which I will quote:I am absolutely convinced that aspartame is toxic to the human body and at best is a diversion from proven weight loss techniques.
Toxic? Well sure, EVERYTHING is toxic at some dosage. LD50 of aspartame appears to be 5g per kg. So for someone such as me who is 67kg, I would need to eat 335 grams of pure aspartame to get a 50% lethal dose. Just under a pound of the stuff. Typical diet soda contains 125mg of it, so I would need to drink 2680 12-oz cans to get that dose. I would probably die of water poisoning first.
In any case none of what you linked in that massive google-bomb showed me that your claim of "toxicity" has any teeth. Or that it is in any was "diversionary" to "proven" weight-loss technique.0 -
I don't laugh at a line in a published researched paper often...but my imaginative mind just LOLed...One man was excluded because of a self-limiting gastro-intestinal upset during one session (revealed when unblinded to be after control).
Yeah that made me laugh too I almost choked0 -
beemerphile1 wrote: »
Contradicts what exactly? I made no claims in the first place other than there are a lot of studies that document the hazards of aspartame. Everything else I said was my experience and personal opinion.
Sway you? I'm not trying to sway anyone, if you and others weren't so defensive you would know that.
But these studies aren't documenting hazards. You made a very bold claim which I will quote:I am absolutely convinced that aspartame is toxic to the human body and at best is a diversion from proven weight loss techniques.
Toxic? Well sure, EVERYTHING is toxic at some dosage. LD50 of aspartame appears to be 5g per kg. So for someone such as me who is 67kg, I would need to eat 335 grams of pure aspartame to get a 50% lethal dose. Just under a pound of the stuff. Typical diet soda contains 125mg of it, so I would need to drink 2680 12-oz cans to get that dose. I would probably die of water poisoning first.
In any case none of what you linked in that massive google-bomb showed me that your claim of "toxicity" has any teeth. Or that it is in any was "diversionary" to "proven" weight-loss technique.
You are right, sort of, I said that "I am absolutely convinced". I did not say that I have irrefutable proof. What exactly about a person's opinion is so confusing? I am not asking anyone to prove their opinion. You have yours and I have mine, neither of us are required to prove our opinion.
Did I miss that somewhere when I signed up for the forum that we must be able to without a shadow of a doubt prove our opinions?
0 -
beemerphile1 wrote: »beemerphile1 wrote: »
Contradicts what exactly? I made no claims in the first place other than there are a lot of studies that document the hazards of aspartame. Everything else I said was my experience and personal opinion.
Sway you? I'm not trying to sway anyone, if you and others weren't so defensive you would know that.
But these studies aren't documenting hazards. You made a very bold claim which I will quote:I am absolutely convinced that aspartame is toxic to the human body and at best is a diversion from proven weight loss techniques.
Toxic? Well sure, EVERYTHING is toxic at some dosage. LD50 of aspartame appears to be 5g per kg. So for someone such as me who is 67kg, I would need to eat 335 grams of pure aspartame to get a 50% lethal dose. Just under a pound of the stuff. Typical diet soda contains 125mg of it, so I would need to drink 2680 12-oz cans to get that dose. I would probably die of water poisoning first.
In any case none of what you linked in that massive google-bomb showed me that your claim of "toxicity" has any teeth. Or that it is in any was "diversionary" to "proven" weight-loss technique.
You are right, sort of, I said that "I am absolutely convinced". I did not say that I have irrefutable proof. What exactly about a person's opinion is so confusing? I am not asking anyone to prove their opinion. You have yours and I have mine, neither of us are required to prove our opinion.
Did I miss that somewhere when I signed up for the forum that we must be able to without a shadow of a doubt prove our opinions?
Uh huh.
And what exactly is the value of stating your opinion if you're just stating it for no other reason than to state it?
Realistically, just from a rhetorical standpoint, you're making generalized statements and then hiding behind a "This just my opinion" caveat. The common understanding is that you're attempting to persuade, at least to some degree. Now you're just saying that the evidence you provided doesn't actually support your opinion, it's evidence that you have the opinion that you have? Alrighty.
Also, if you think irrefutable proof is a part of science, then you know nothing Jon Snow.0 -
Opinions are ideas not based on fact. They are useful in situations where "facts" do not come in to play. For example I can say "It is my opinion we should spend more money on space exploration". You are welcome to contradict that because my statement has no factual basis, you can provide a different thing to spend taxpayer money on, and perhaps even provide reasons.
However if I say "it is my opinion that the sky is green" most people will tell me that my "opinion" is simply incorrect and that factually the sky is blue.
0 -
One glaring error on the publication (or the abridged synopsis) would be that HDL-C could not be as high as the Triglycerides. That would take a miracle if the whole patient population had HDL levels as high as they stated. The mmol/L converted to mg/dL (more commonly seen in US) would mean both study groups had "good" cholesterol in the triple digits...[scratching my head], I think not.
However, this is just the abstract and a synopsis, the actual data could be correct. I'm somewhat skeptical though.
If you convert the units it translates like this:
Aspartame sensitive and non-sensitive participants differed psychologically at baseline in handling feelings and perceived stress. Sensitive participants had higher triglycerides (181.5 ± 127.5 vs. 111.6 ± 74.4 mg/dl; p value 0.008) and lower HDL-C (44.8 ± 13.1 vs. 52.2 ± 20.8 mg/dl; p value 0.04)0 -
beemerphile1 wrote: »beemerphile1 wrote: »
Contradicts what exactly? I made no claims in the first place other than there are a lot of studies that document the hazards of aspartame. Everything else I said was my experience and personal opinion.
Sway you? I'm not trying to sway anyone, if you and others weren't so defensive you would know that.
But these studies aren't documenting hazards. You made a very bold claim which I will quote:I am absolutely convinced that aspartame is toxic to the human body and at best is a diversion from proven weight loss techniques.
Toxic? Well sure, EVERYTHING is toxic at some dosage. LD50 of aspartame appears to be 5g per kg. So for someone such as me who is 67kg, I would need to eat 335 grams of pure aspartame to get a 50% lethal dose. Just under a pound of the stuff. Typical diet soda contains 125mg of it, so I would need to drink 2680 12-oz cans to get that dose. I would probably die of water poisoning first.
In any case none of what you linked in that massive google-bomb showed me that your claim of "toxicity" has any teeth. Or that it is in any was "diversionary" to "proven" weight-loss technique.
You are right, sort of, I said that "I am absolutely convinced". I did not say that I have irrefutable proof. What exactly about a person's opinion is so confusing? I am not asking anyone to prove their opinion. You have yours and I have mine, neither of us are required to prove our opinion.
Did I miss that somewhere when I signed up for the forum that we must be able to without a shadow of a doubt prove our opinions?
Uh huh.
And what exactly is the value of stating your opinion if you're just stating it for no other reason than to state it?
Realistically, just from a rhetorical standpoint, you're making generalized statements and then hiding behind a "This just my opinion" caveat. The common understanding is that you're attempting to persuade, at least to some degree. Now you're just saying that the evidence you provided doesn't actually support your opinion, it's evidence that you have the opinion that you have? Alrighty.
Also, if you think irrefutable proof is a part of science, then you know nothing Jon Snow.
It's called the internet.
Just sayin'.0 -
chivalryder wrote: »beemerphile1 wrote: »beemerphile1 wrote: »
Contradicts what exactly? I made no claims in the first place other than there are a lot of studies that document the hazards of aspartame. Everything else I said was my experience and personal opinion.
Sway you? I'm not trying to sway anyone, if you and others weren't so defensive you would know that.
But these studies aren't documenting hazards. You made a very bold claim which I will quote:I am absolutely convinced that aspartame is toxic to the human body and at best is a diversion from proven weight loss techniques.
Toxic? Well sure, EVERYTHING is toxic at some dosage. LD50 of aspartame appears to be 5g per kg. So for someone such as me who is 67kg, I would need to eat 335 grams of pure aspartame to get a 50% lethal dose. Just under a pound of the stuff. Typical diet soda contains 125mg of it, so I would need to drink 2680 12-oz cans to get that dose. I would probably die of water poisoning first.
In any case none of what you linked in that massive google-bomb showed me that your claim of "toxicity" has any teeth. Or that it is in any was "diversionary" to "proven" weight-loss technique.
You are right, sort of, I said that "I am absolutely convinced". I did not say that I have irrefutable proof. What exactly about a person's opinion is so confusing? I am not asking anyone to prove their opinion. You have yours and I have mine, neither of us are required to prove our opinion.
Did I miss that somewhere when I signed up for the forum that we must be able to without a shadow of a doubt prove our opinions?
Uh huh.
And what exactly is the value of stating your opinion if you're just stating it for no other reason than to state it?
Realistically, just from a rhetorical standpoint, you're making generalized statements and then hiding behind a "This just my opinion" caveat. The common understanding is that you're attempting to persuade, at least to some degree. Now you're just saying that the evidence you provided doesn't actually support your opinion, it's evidence that you have the opinion that you have? Alrighty.
Also, if you think irrefutable proof is a part of science, then you know nothing Jon Snow.
It's called the internet.
Just sayin'.
As long as we're all clear that the inherent value of his opinion in this context is zero, then great
0 -
chivalryder wrote: »beemerphile1 wrote: »beemerphile1 wrote: »
Contradicts what exactly? I made no claims in the first place other than there are a lot of studies that document the hazards of aspartame. Everything else I said was my experience and personal opinion.
Sway you? I'm not trying to sway anyone, if you and others weren't so defensive you would know that.
But these studies aren't documenting hazards. You made a very bold claim which I will quote:I am absolutely convinced that aspartame is toxic to the human body and at best is a diversion from proven weight loss techniques.
Toxic? Well sure, EVERYTHING is toxic at some dosage. LD50 of aspartame appears to be 5g per kg. So for someone such as me who is 67kg, I would need to eat 335 grams of pure aspartame to get a 50% lethal dose. Just under a pound of the stuff. Typical diet soda contains 125mg of it, so I would need to drink 2680 12-oz cans to get that dose. I would probably die of water poisoning first.
In any case none of what you linked in that massive google-bomb showed me that your claim of "toxicity" has any teeth. Or that it is in any was "diversionary" to "proven" weight-loss technique.
You are right, sort of, I said that "I am absolutely convinced". I did not say that I have irrefutable proof. What exactly about a person's opinion is so confusing? I am not asking anyone to prove their opinion. You have yours and I have mine, neither of us are required to prove our opinion.
Did I miss that somewhere when I signed up for the forum that we must be able to without a shadow of a doubt prove our opinions?
Uh huh.
And what exactly is the value of stating your opinion if you're just stating it for no other reason than to state it?
Realistically, just from a rhetorical standpoint, you're making generalized statements and then hiding behind a "This just my opinion" caveat. The common understanding is that you're attempting to persuade, at least to some degree. Now you're just saying that the evidence you provided doesn't actually support your opinion, it's evidence that you have the opinion that you have? Alrighty.
Also, if you think irrefutable proof is a part of science, then you know nothing Jon Snow.
It's called the internet.
Just sayin'.
0 -
Funny, I use diet coke to prevent migraines.0
-
chivalryder wrote: »beemerphile1 wrote: »beemerphile1 wrote: »
Contradicts what exactly? I made no claims in the first place other than there are a lot of studies that document the hazards of aspartame. Everything else I said was my experience and personal opinion.
Sway you? I'm not trying to sway anyone, if you and others weren't so defensive you would know that.
But these studies aren't documenting hazards. You made a very bold claim which I will quote:I am absolutely convinced that aspartame is toxic to the human body and at best is a diversion from proven weight loss techniques.
Toxic? Well sure, EVERYTHING is toxic at some dosage. LD50 of aspartame appears to be 5g per kg. So for someone such as me who is 67kg, I would need to eat 335 grams of pure aspartame to get a 50% lethal dose. Just under a pound of the stuff. Typical diet soda contains 125mg of it, so I would need to drink 2680 12-oz cans to get that dose. I would probably die of water poisoning first.
In any case none of what you linked in that massive google-bomb showed me that your claim of "toxicity" has any teeth. Or that it is in any was "diversionary" to "proven" weight-loss technique.
You are right, sort of, I said that "I am absolutely convinced". I did not say that I have irrefutable proof. What exactly about a person's opinion is so confusing? I am not asking anyone to prove their opinion. You have yours and I have mine, neither of us are required to prove our opinion.
Did I miss that somewhere when I signed up for the forum that we must be able to without a shadow of a doubt prove our opinions?
Uh huh.
And what exactly is the value of stating your opinion if you're just stating it for no other reason than to state it?
Realistically, just from a rhetorical standpoint, you're making generalized statements and then hiding behind a "This just my opinion" caveat. The common understanding is that you're attempting to persuade, at least to some degree. Now you're just saying that the evidence you provided doesn't actually support your opinion, it's evidence that you have the opinion that you have? Alrighty.
Also, if you think irrefutable proof is a part of science, then you know nothing Jon Snow.
It's called the internet.
Just sayin'.
As long as we're all clear that the inherent value of his opinion in this context is zero, then great
The inherent value of any opinion in any context is equal the the value of the gas the escapes the persons behind.
It's just that some are louder than others, and most of them stink.0 -
beemerphile1 wrote: »beemerphile1 wrote: »
Contradicts what exactly? I made no claims in the first place other than there are a lot of studies that document the hazards of aspartame. Everything else I said was my experience and personal opinion.
Sway you? I'm not trying to sway anyone, if you and others weren't so defensive you would know that.
But these studies aren't documenting hazards. You made a very bold claim which I will quote:I am absolutely convinced that aspartame is toxic to the human body and at best is a diversion from proven weight loss techniques.
Toxic? Well sure, EVERYTHING is toxic at some dosage. LD50 of aspartame appears to be 5g per kg. So for someone such as me who is 67kg, I would need to eat 335 grams of pure aspartame to get a 50% lethal dose. Just under a pound of the stuff. Typical diet soda contains 125mg of it, so I would need to drink 2680 12-oz cans to get that dose. I would probably die of water poisoning first.
In any case none of what you linked in that massive google-bomb showed me that your claim of "toxicity" has any teeth. Or that it is in any was "diversionary" to "proven" weight-loss technique.
You are right, sort of, I said that "I am absolutely convinced". I did not say that I have irrefutable proof. What exactly about a person's opinion is so confusing? I am not asking anyone to prove their opinion. You have yours and I have mine, neither of us are required to prove our opinion.
Did I miss that somewhere when I signed up for the forum that we must be able to without a shadow of a doubt prove our opinions?
Uh huh.
And what exactly is the value of stating your opinion if you're just stating it for no other reason than to state it?
Realistically, just from a rhetorical standpoint, you're making generalized statements and then hiding behind a "This just my opinion" caveat. The common understanding is that you're attempting to persuade, at least to some degree. Now you're just saying that the evidence you provided doesn't actually support your opinion, it's evidence that you have the opinion that you have? Alrighty.
Also, if you think irrefutable proof is a part of science, then you know nothing Jon Snow.
This post of yours is 100% your opinion, does that make it wrong?0 -
Opinions are ideas not based on fact. They are useful in situations where "facts" do not come in to play. For example I can say "It is my opinion we should spend more money on space exploration". You are welcome to contradict that because my statement has no factual basis, you can provide a different thing to spend taxpayer money on, and perhaps even provide reasons.
However if I say "it is my opinion that the sky is green" most people will tell me that my "opinion" is simply incorrect and that factually the sky is blue.
This post of yours is 100% your opinion, does that make it wrong?0 -
Thank you to everyone who responded to my question with informative links etc. Very helpful and very useful. The reason I asked was not to scaremonger etc. I personally don't drink any soft drinks etc. But my dad loves his diet cokes (probably 15 cans a day and really helped with his weight loss) but has gave them up due to things he's read about (any)manufactured sugar substitute being linked to cancer. He still uses Stevia though. It's a shame because he considered Diet Coke a real treat for him.0
-
You will need to explain to me where in that post I presented an opinion on any situation
(other than the examples)0 -
Aspertame has been shown to increase cancer in cancer prone rats. Moral of the story, animal testing is crap, and if you want to mainline aspertame you deserve whatever consequences be fall you.0
-
slideaway1 wrote: »Thank you to everyone who responded to my question with informative links etc. Very helpful and very useful. The reason I asked was not to scaremonger etc. I personally don't drink any soft drinks etc. But my dad loves his diet cokes (probably 15 cans a day and really helped with his weight loss) but has gave them up due to things he's read about (any)manufactured sugar substitute being linked to cancer. He still uses Stevia though. It's a shame because he considered Diet Coke a real treat for him.
15 cans a day is excessive. There was a man that recently died from over-consumption of Iced Tea which caused his liver to fail.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.7K Getting Started
- 260.1K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.8K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 415 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.9K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.6K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.5K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions