Diet Cokes ?
Replies
-
cerise_noir wrote: »
Frank Gallagher would be SO proud....nutmegoreo wrote: »
That seems like internet begging. At least this way I'm doing a goods for services and can feel productive. :laugh:
That's not Frank, this is Frank:
Flipping Americans, coming over here, stealing our amazingly awesome dramas... (well, when I say 'here', I don't mean 'here', because I'm now in Australia, but 'here', the UK)
1 -
Do you or someone you know have a young baby....Would you give them DIET COKE??.... WHY NOT?!
Do you see animals in nature drinking Diet Coke?..... WHY NOT?!
If you have a dog and/or cat, would you give them Diet Coke?.... WHY NOT?!
This is the silliest logic fail I have ever seen.
I would not give a very young baby anything except milk (and maybe boiled water in hot weather) - and specific milk (human breast milk or specific infant formula) at that.
Does that mean adults should consume nothing but human milk or infant formulas??
I dont see animals in nature eating tinned dog food or packet dog food either - does this make it bad to feed such to domesticated pets??
No I wouldnt give my dog diet coke - but I wouldnt give her any drink except water and especially not milk (dogs being lactose intolerant)
Having said that, my husband does give her a small amount of his left over tea - shock horror
sweetened with equal. 4 -
^My dog used to love tea. My parents couldn't leave their cups at her height or she'd stick her snout in the cup and start drinking. Come to think of it, she loved my father's best, and his was always sweetened with at least three teaspoons of sugar.1
-
My husband can drink diet soda no problem...He only drinks them in moderation (like when we are out at a restaurant). At home we typically only drink water.
I, however, can't have anything with aspartame in it. A few years ago, I was drinking diet green tea. I hated plain water, and it had zero calories. After months of drinking it, I started experiencing vision problems, numbness in my legs (started walking with a limp), and debilitating migraines. My doctor thought I had M.S. Thousands of dollars in medical tests later, we figured out it was aspartame poisoning. Some people just don't do well with it...I'm one of them.
I was excited when pepsi took aspartame out, just to experience soda again. However, I can't handle the carbonation, and end up feeling bloated after drinking it. LOL, I'll just stay away from it, but I don't begrudge anyone that can handle it
I am quite interested in how you figured out it was something that doesn't exist and thus doesn't have a test for finding it.1 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »For example, if someone says the FDA reports 98 known side effects of aspartame, it should be trivially easy to point to the FDA listing them and identifying them in an official source, no?
Since I know exactly where this claim comes from and it proves how ron didn't actually even research his own sources and is just repeating something he heard somewhere, let me enlighten you.
Here: http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/jan03/012203/02p-0317_emc-000199.txt
This is what the FDA calls a docket. What is a docket you may ask?
"The system allows consumers to access FDA's administrative proceedings and rule-making documents more readily, including Federal Registers, Petitions, supporting documents and comments."
and "By law, anyone can participate in the rule-making process by commenting in writing on rules FDA proposes. FDA routinely allows plenty of time for public input and carefully considers these comments when it draws up a final rule."
The link above is a docket comment sent TO the FDA by a certain Mark Gold of the Aspartame Toxicity Information Center, which appears to consist of Mark Gold, Mark Gold, Mark Gold and Mark Gold. A google search of the Center shows you exactly what kind of people use that as their source.15 -
stevencloser wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »For example, if someone says the FDA reports 98 known side effects of aspartame, it should be trivially easy to point to the FDA listing them and identifying them in an official source, no?
Since I know exactly where this claim comes from and it proves how ron didn't actually even research his own sources and is just repeating something he heard somewhere, let me enlighten you.
Here: http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/jan03/012203/02p-0317_emc-000199.txt
This is what the FDA calls a docket. What is a docket you may ask?
"The system allows consumers to access FDA's administrative proceedings and rule-making documents more readily, including Federal Registers, Petitions, supporting documents and comments."
and "By law, anyone can participate in the rule-making process by commenting in writing on rules FDA proposes. FDA routinely allows plenty of time for public input and carefully considers these comments when it draws up a final rule."
The link above is a docket comment sent TO the FDA by a certain Mark Gold of the Aspartame Toxicity Information Center, which appears to consist of Mark Gold, Mark Gold, Mark Gold and Mark Gold. A google search of the Center shows you exactly what kind of people use that as their source.
Because.......I have a life to live and very rapidly did a search and when I saw fda.gov grabbed the link. I didn't have time to read it. I saw your comment later and started a post that apologized for the mis-grabbed link but got distracted by kids and didn't end up posting until I saw this this morning. So no, not intentionally grabbed. Just not enough time to stop and read that it was a docket. I didn't catch that until later. My apologies. I will take more time to read before posting in the future and I just won't post when I'm in a hurry. Some people must live on these boards. I don't have time. It is partly why I hesitate to get into protracted arguments - sometimes I just don't have time to go back and comment on things that have been said and end up having to let it go in favor of getting work done. It grates me leaving things unfinished. That said, I have no issue with what the docket says (although not a source that should be said the fda endorsed as I posted previously). I know plenty of people that have exhibited side effects of aspartame so I have no issue with his list.
And right now, I can either choose to get my workout in or sit here and argue with people and lose my workout time. I'd rather workout. It burns more calories.
Y'all have a nice day.
1 -
Not busy here! LOL3
-
ronjsteele1 wrote: »
I am firmly in the camp that aspartame is not safe. I don't care if others want to fill their bodies with it. So be it. But I do not believe it is safe and I do not believe AT ALL that this issue is settled in the health community. Having read plenty on how aspartame got approved by the FDA was just the beginning (besides my own experience). The FDA lists 92 side effects of aspartame. No thank you. To each his own. People can drink away all they want. My issue is the attacks on people that are putting out another view point. I do not bow at the feet of "studies" because a huge majority of them are backgrounded by the industry themselves. I believe nothing coming out of the FDA. They are completely corrupt as far as I'm concerned.
Just wanting to point out the irony of you stating that one of the reasons you avoid aspartame is because the FDA lists 92 side effects. Then in the next breath you say you believe nothing that the FDA says because they are completely corrupt.
You can't suck and blow at the same time.
17 -
stevencloser wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »For example, if someone says the FDA reports 98 known side effects of aspartame, it should be trivially easy to point to the FDA listing them and identifying them in an official source, no?
Since I know exactly where this claim comes from and it proves how ron didn't actually even research his own sources and is just repeating something he heard somewhere, let me enlighten you.
Here: http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/jan03/012203/02p-0317_emc-000199.txt
This is what the FDA calls a docket. What is a docket you may ask?
"The system allows consumers to access FDA's administrative proceedings and rule-making documents more readily, including Federal Registers, Petitions, supporting documents and comments."
and "By law, anyone can participate in the rule-making process by commenting in writing on rules FDA proposes. FDA routinely allows plenty of time for public input and carefully considers these comments when it draws up a final rule."
The link above is a docket comment sent TO the FDA by a certain Mark Gold of the Aspartame Toxicity Information Center, which appears to consist of Mark Gold, Mark Gold, Mark Gold and Mark Gold. A google search of the Center shows you exactly what kind of people use that as their source.
After the claim of 92 side effects of aspartame was posted yesterday, I Googled it and found that ridiculousness. I also found this gem, which claims that if a pregnant woman eats a cookie made with aspartame, it will kill her baby:
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dockets/02p0317/02P-0317_emc-000399.txt
There's some crazy *babysloth* out there.
A general request: please vet your sources before posting them. If you "don't have time" to thoroughly read and understand what it is you're referencing, don't reference it or assume it's factual. It's that simple.7 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »ronjsteele1 wrote: »
I am firmly in the camp that aspartame is not safe. I don't care if others want to fill their bodies with it. So be it. But I do not believe it is safe and I do not believe AT ALL that this issue is settled in the health community. Having read plenty on how aspartame got approved by the FDA was just the beginning (besides my own experience). The FDA lists 92 side effects of aspartame. No thank you. To each his own. People can drink away all they want. My issue is the attacks on people that are putting out another view point. I do not bow at the feet of "studies" because a huge majority of them are backgrounded by the industry themselves. I believe nothing coming out of the FDA. They are completely corrupt as far as I'm concerned.
Just wanting to point out the irony of you stating that one of the reasons you avoid aspartame is because the FDA lists 92 side effects. Then in the next breath you say you believe nothing that the FDA says because they are completely corrupt.
You can't suck and blow at the same time.
Wait!!! I can suck and blow at the same time 5 -
ronjsteele1 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »For example, if someone says the FDA reports 98 known side effects of aspartame, it should be trivially easy to point to the FDA listing them and identifying them in an official source, no?
Since I know exactly where this claim comes from and it proves how ron didn't actually even research his own sources and is just repeating something he heard somewhere, let me enlighten you.
Here: http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/jan03/012203/02p-0317_emc-000199.txt
This is what the FDA calls a docket. What is a docket you may ask?
"The system allows consumers to access FDA's administrative proceedings and rule-making documents more readily, including Federal Registers, Petitions, supporting documents and comments."
and "By law, anyone can participate in the rule-making process by commenting in writing on rules FDA proposes. FDA routinely allows plenty of time for public input and carefully considers these comments when it draws up a final rule."
The link above is a docket comment sent TO the FDA by a certain Mark Gold of the Aspartame Toxicity Information Center, which appears to consist of Mark Gold, Mark Gold, Mark Gold and Mark Gold. A google search of the Center shows you exactly what kind of people use that as their source.
And right now, I can either choose to get my workout in or sit here and argue with people and lose my workout time. I'd rather workout. It burns more calories.
Oddly, most of my posts on here some from rest periods while I'm working out. Not a shocker though at your thought process. On MFP all the time must equal "puts MFP ahead of working out". Just another correlation does not equal causation. Who usually likes to use correlation as a defense? Quacks.10 -
...0
-
snickerscharlie wrote: »ronjsteele1 wrote: »
I am firmly in the camp that aspartame is not safe. I don't care if others want to fill their bodies with it. So be it. But I do not believe it is safe and I do not believe AT ALL that this issue is settled in the health community. Having read plenty on how aspartame got approved by the FDA was just the beginning (besides my own experience). The FDA lists 92 side effects of aspartame. No thank you. To each his own. People can drink away all they want. My issue is the attacks on people that are putting out another view point. I do not bow at the feet of "studies" because a huge majority of them are backgrounded by the industry themselves. I believe nothing coming out of the FDA. They are completely corrupt as far as I'm concerned.
Just wanting to point out the irony of you stating that one of the reasons you avoid aspartame is because the FDA lists 92 side effects. Then in the next breath you say you believe nothing that the FDA says because they are completely corrupt.
You can't suck and blow at the same time.
I am so annoyed at myself right now. That's the type of logic fail that I usually pick up on right away. Maybe I was just getting numb from all the derp in this thread.6 -
ronjsteele1 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »For example, if someone says the FDA reports 98 known side effects of aspartame, it should be trivially easy to point to the FDA listing them and identifying them in an official source, no?
Since I know exactly where this claim comes from and it proves how ron didn't actually even research his own sources and is just repeating something he heard somewhere, let me enlighten you.
Here: http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/jan03/012203/02p-0317_emc-000199.txt
This is what the FDA calls a docket. What is a docket you may ask?
"The system allows consumers to access FDA's administrative proceedings and rule-making documents more readily, including Federal Registers, Petitions, supporting documents and comments."
and "By law, anyone can participate in the rule-making process by commenting in writing on rules FDA proposes. FDA routinely allows plenty of time for public input and carefully considers these comments when it draws up a final rule."
The link above is a docket comment sent TO the FDA by a certain Mark Gold of the Aspartame Toxicity Information Center, which appears to consist of Mark Gold, Mark Gold, Mark Gold and Mark Gold. A google search of the Center shows you exactly what kind of people use that as their source.
Because.......I have a life to live and very rapidly did a search and when I saw fda.gov grabbed the link. I didn't have time to read it. I saw your comment later and started a post that apologized for the mis-grabbed link but got distracted by kids and didn't end up posting until I saw this this morning. So no, not intentionally grabbed. Just not enough time to stop and read that it was a docket. I didn't catch that until later. My apologies. I will take more time to read before posting in the future and I just won't post when I'm in a hurry. Some people must live on these boards. I don't have time. It is partly why I hesitate to get into protracted arguments - sometimes I just don't have time to go back and comment on things that have been said and end up having to let it go in favor of getting work done. It grates me leaving things unfinished. That said, I have no issue with what the docket says (although not a source that should be said the fda endorsed as I posted previously). I know plenty of people that have exhibited side effects of aspartame so I have no issue with his list.
And right now, I can either choose to get my workout in or sit here and argue with people and lose my workout time. I'd rather workout. It burns more calories.
Y'all have a nice day.
Then don't bring it as an argument if you didn't even read it, easy as that.8 -
queenliz99 wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »ronjsteele1 wrote: »
I am firmly in the camp that aspartame is not safe. I don't care if others want to fill their bodies with it. So be it. But I do not believe it is safe and I do not believe AT ALL that this issue is settled in the health community. Having read plenty on how aspartame got approved by the FDA was just the beginning (besides my own experience). The FDA lists 92 side effects of aspartame. No thank you. To each his own. People can drink away all they want. My issue is the attacks on people that are putting out another view point. I do not bow at the feet of "studies" because a huge majority of them are backgrounded by the industry themselves. I believe nothing coming out of the FDA. They are completely corrupt as far as I'm concerned.
Just wanting to point out the irony of you stating that one of the reasons you avoid aspartame is because the FDA lists 92 side effects. Then in the next breath you say you believe nothing that the FDA says because they are completely corrupt.
You can't suck and blow at the same time.
Wait!!! I can suck and blow at the same time
You are truly talented, my friend. 0 -
queenliz99 wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »ronjsteele1 wrote: »
I am firmly in the camp that aspartame is not safe. I don't care if others want to fill their bodies with it. So be it. But I do not believe it is safe and I do not believe AT ALL that this issue is settled in the health community. Having read plenty on how aspartame got approved by the FDA was just the beginning (besides my own experience). The FDA lists 92 side effects of aspartame. No thank you. To each his own. People can drink away all they want. My issue is the attacks on people that are putting out another view point. I do not bow at the feet of "studies" because a huge majority of them are backgrounded by the industry themselves. I believe nothing coming out of the FDA. They are completely corrupt as far as I'm concerned.
Just wanting to point out the irony of you stating that one of the reasons you avoid aspartame is because the FDA lists 92 side effects. Then in the next breath you say you believe nothing that the FDA says because they are completely corrupt.
You can't suck and blow at the same time.
Wait!!! I can suck and blow at the same time
How you doin'?12 -
ronjsteele1 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »For example, if someone says the FDA reports 98 known side effects of aspartame, it should be trivially easy to point to the FDA listing them and identifying them in an official source, no?
Since I know exactly where this claim comes from and it proves how ron didn't actually even research his own sources and is just repeating something he heard somewhere, let me enlighten you.
Here: http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/jan03/012203/02p-0317_emc-000199.txt
This is what the FDA calls a docket. What is a docket you may ask?
"The system allows consumers to access FDA's administrative proceedings and rule-making documents more readily, including Federal Registers, Petitions, supporting documents and comments."
and "By law, anyone can participate in the rule-making process by commenting in writing on rules FDA proposes. FDA routinely allows plenty of time for public input and carefully considers these comments when it draws up a final rule."
The link above is a docket comment sent TO the FDA by a certain Mark Gold of the Aspartame Toxicity Information Center, which appears to consist of Mark Gold, Mark Gold, Mark Gold and Mark Gold. A google search of the Center shows you exactly what kind of people use that as their source.
And right now, I can either choose to get my workout in or sit here and argue with people and lose my workout time. I'd rather workout. It burns more calories.
Oddly, most of my posts on here some from rest periods while I'm working out. Not a shocker though at your thought process. On MFP all the time must equal "puts MFP ahead of working out". Just another correlation does not equal causation. Who usually likes to use correlation as a defense? Quacks.
I did not say being on mfp meant one is putting it ahead of working out so don't put words in mouth. I specifically said *I* had a choice to make.
As for the fda link and not trusting the fda, I was simply trying to grab a link off of a page that most of you worship as truth. Had I posted a link from an alternative site (which, quite frankly, I inadvertently did anyway) someone would have said it wasn't a valid site. So no matter what I had posted with that information you would have blown it off anyway. There is no point with you people.
And Aaron, for the record, that was not an underhanded compliment. It was absolutely sincere. I have not read everything you've ever posted on mfp. Sorry you can't take it for what it was.
FWIW my homeopath was a chemist for 10yrs before she went back to school to become a homeopath. She's amazingly intelligent and her chemistry background has proven useful in her practice.
Have a nice day folks. Time for me to get to work.1 -
My husband can drink diet soda no problem...He only drinks them in moderation (like when we are out at a restaurant). At home we typically only drink water.
I, however, can't have anything with aspartame in it. A few years ago, I was drinking diet green tea. I hated plain water, and it had zero calories. After months of drinking it, I started experiencing vision problems, numbness in my legs (started walking with a limp), and debilitating migraines. My doctor thought I had M.S. Thousands of dollars in medical tests later, we figured out it was aspartame poisoning. Some people just don't do well with it...I'm one of them.
I was excited when pepsi took aspartame out, just to experience soda again. However, I can't handle the carbonation, and end up feeling bloated after drinking it. LOL, I'll just stay away from it, but I don't begrudge anyone that can handle it
You're not the one who started the chain email about "aspartame poisoning" back in the early to mid 2000's are you?
Snopes debunked the scary stories and emails about aspartame causing M.S. symptoms.
http://www.snopes.com/medical/toxins/aspartame.asp7 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »ronjsteele1 wrote: »
I am firmly in the camp that aspartame is not safe. I don't care if others want to fill their bodies with it. So be it. But I do not believe it is safe and I do not believe AT ALL that this issue is settled in the health community. Having read plenty on how aspartame got approved by the FDA was just the beginning (besides my own experience). The FDA lists 92 side effects of aspartame. No thank you. To each his own. People can drink away all they want. My issue is the attacks on people that are putting out another view point. I do not bow at the feet of "studies" because a huge majority of them are backgrounded by the industry themselves. I believe nothing coming out of the FDA. They are completely corrupt as far as I'm concerned.
Just wanting to point out the irony of you stating that one of the reasons you avoid aspartame is because the FDA lists 92 side effects. Then in the next breath you say you believe nothing that the FDA says because they are completely corrupt.
You can't suck and blow at the same time.
Glad I'm not the only one who caught that.4 -
ronjsteele1 wrote: »ronjsteele1 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »For example, if someone says the FDA reports 98 known side effects of aspartame, it should be trivially easy to point to the FDA listing them and identifying them in an official source, no?
Since I know exactly where this claim comes from and it proves how ron didn't actually even research his own sources and is just repeating something he heard somewhere, let me enlighten you.
Here: http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/jan03/012203/02p-0317_emc-000199.txt
This is what the FDA calls a docket. What is a docket you may ask?
"The system allows consumers to access FDA's administrative proceedings and rule-making documents more readily, including Federal Registers, Petitions, supporting documents and comments."
and "By law, anyone can participate in the rule-making process by commenting in writing on rules FDA proposes. FDA routinely allows plenty of time for public input and carefully considers these comments when it draws up a final rule."
The link above is a docket comment sent TO the FDA by a certain Mark Gold of the Aspartame Toxicity Information Center, which appears to consist of Mark Gold, Mark Gold, Mark Gold and Mark Gold. A google search of the Center shows you exactly what kind of people use that as their source.
And right now, I can either choose to get my workout in or sit here and argue with people and lose my workout time. I'd rather workout. It burns more calories.
Oddly, most of my posts on here some from rest periods while I'm working out. Not a shocker though at your thought process. On MFP all the time must equal "puts MFP ahead of working out". Just another correlation does not equal causation. Who usually likes to use correlation as a defense? Quacks.
I did not say being on mfp meant one is putting it ahead of working out so don't put words in mouth. I specifically said *I* had a choice to make.
As for the fda link and not trusting the fda, I was simply trying to grab a link off of a page that most of you worship as truth. Had I posted a link from an alternative site (which, quite frankly, I inadvertently did anyway) someone would have said it wasn't a valid site. So no matter what I had posted with that information you would have blown it off anyway. There is no point with you people.
And Aaron, for the record, that was not an underhanded compliment. It was absolutely sincere. I have not read everything you've ever posted on mfp. Sorry you can't take it for what it was.
FWIW my homeopath was a chemist for 10yrs before she went back to school to become a homeopath. She's amazingly intelligent and her chemistry background has proven useful in her practice.
Have a nice day folks. Time for me to get to work.
You know a chemist who believes that water has a memory and the more you dilute a substance the more potent its effect? Can...can you get this person on here to talk that is fascinating. If you can't then you probably shouldn't claim legitimacy based on interactions with a person we will never have the chance to interact with ourselves.
As for compliments when I choose to compliment someone I tend to just say something like "You look beautiful" not "You are looking beautiful today, unlike many the other days I have seen you". I may be "absolutely sincere" that the person looks beutiful on that day, that isn't what makes it an underhanded compliment. If you honestly cannot see how the second phrasing detracts a bit from the "compliment" I don't know what to say.10 -
You should seriously go in yourself, think very hard, and try to figure out why it's only alternative sites that make claims like that.7
-
I just tried to give my cat Diet Mt Dew because of this thread; she wasn't interested.8
-
sunfastrose wrote: »I just tried to give my cat Diet Mt Dew because of this thread; she wasn't interested.
She wanted the non-diet version. 7 -
Chilli7777 wrote: »Any type of soda, sugar free or otherwise, expands the tummy and will make you feel hungry. Diet coke is so full of chemicals. It wont hinder your weight loss if you dont eat extra food, but it is bad for youe overall health in so many othet ways. Personally I dont touch it.
Why oh why do actual adults use the word "tummy" in reference to themselves? I said it to my kids up until they were about 4 and then had to stop because I felt so ridiculous saying it...
On topic - I feel like Diet Coke helps me with staying within my calories, as I consider it a free treat each afternoon. (Calorie free, not $ free). I've never added up how much money I spend annually on DC, but it's less than on coffee for sure.3 -
stevencloser wrote: »ronjsteele1 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »For example, if someone says the FDA reports 98 known side effects of aspartame, it should be trivially easy to point to the FDA listing them and identifying them in an official source, no?
Since I know exactly where this claim comes from and it proves how ron didn't actually even research his own sources and is just repeating something he heard somewhere, let me enlighten you.
Here: http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/jan03/012203/02p-0317_emc-000199.txt
This is what the FDA calls a docket. What is a docket you may ask?
"The system allows consumers to access FDA's administrative proceedings and rule-making documents more readily, including Federal Registers, Petitions, supporting documents and comments."
and "By law, anyone can participate in the rule-making process by commenting in writing on rules FDA proposes. FDA routinely allows plenty of time for public input and carefully considers these comments when it draws up a final rule."
The link above is a docket comment sent TO the FDA by a certain Mark Gold of the Aspartame Toxicity Information Center, which appears to consist of Mark Gold, Mark Gold, Mark Gold and Mark Gold. A google search of the Center shows you exactly what kind of people use that as their source.
Because.......I have a life to live and very rapidly did a search and when I saw fda.gov grabbed the link. I didn't have time to read it. I saw your comment later and started a post that apologized for the mis-grabbed link but got distracted by kids and didn't end up posting until I saw this this morning. So no, not intentionally grabbed. Just not enough time to stop and read that it was a docket. I didn't catch that until later. My apologies. I will take more time to read before posting in the future and I just won't post when I'm in a hurry. Some people must live on these boards. I don't have time. It is partly why I hesitate to get into protracted arguments - sometimes I just don't have time to go back and comment on things that have been said and end up having to let it go in favor of getting work done. It grates me leaving things unfinished. That said, I have no issue with what the docket says (although not a source that should be said the fda endorsed as I posted previously). I know plenty of people that have exhibited side effects of aspartame so I have no issue with his list.
And right now, I can either choose to get my workout in or sit here and argue with people and lose my workout time. I'd rather workout. It burns more calories.
Y'all have a nice day.
Then don't bring it as an argument if you didn't even read it, easy as that.
And think of all the precious time you'll save to boot! Win/win.6 -
ronjsteele1 wrote: »ronjsteele1 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »For example, if someone says the FDA reports 98 known side effects of aspartame, it should be trivially easy to point to the FDA listing them and identifying them in an official source, no?
Since I know exactly where this claim comes from and it proves how ron didn't actually even research his own sources and is just repeating something he heard somewhere, let me enlighten you.
Here: http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/jan03/012203/02p-0317_emc-000199.txt
This is what the FDA calls a docket. What is a docket you may ask?
"The system allows consumers to access FDA's administrative proceedings and rule-making documents more readily, including Federal Registers, Petitions, supporting documents and comments."
and "By law, anyone can participate in the rule-making process by commenting in writing on rules FDA proposes. FDA routinely allows plenty of time for public input and carefully considers these comments when it draws up a final rule."
The link above is a docket comment sent TO the FDA by a certain Mark Gold of the Aspartame Toxicity Information Center, which appears to consist of Mark Gold, Mark Gold, Mark Gold and Mark Gold. A google search of the Center shows you exactly what kind of people use that as their source.
And right now, I can either choose to get my workout in or sit here and argue with people and lose my workout time. I'd rather workout. It burns more calories.
Oddly, most of my posts on here some from rest periods while I'm working out. Not a shocker though at your thought process. On MFP all the time must equal "puts MFP ahead of working out". Just another correlation does not equal causation. Who usually likes to use correlation as a defense? Quacks.
I did not say being on mfp meant one is putting it ahead of working out so don't put words in mouth. I specifically said *I* had a choice to make.
As for the fda link and not trusting the fda, I was simply trying to grab a link off of a page that most of you worship as truth. Had I posted a link from an alternative site (which, quite frankly, I inadvertently did anyway) someone would have said it wasn't a valid site. So no matter what I had posted with that information you would have blown it off anyway. There is no point with you people.
And Aaron, for the record, that was not an underhanded compliment. It was absolutely sincere. I have not read everything you've ever posted on mfp. Sorry you can't take it for what it was.
FWIW my homeopath was a chemist for 10yrs before she went back to school to become a homeopath. She's amazingly intelligent and her chemistry background has proven useful in her practice.
Have a nice day folks. Time for me to get to work.
Ha ha...I am sure that a chemistry background has been VERY useful in her practice, specifically the marketing and money-making side of the practice. Unless she is shaking and selling her jars of water for free.
Since you are homeschooling three teenagers, it seems like this would be a great topic for them (and you) to research for their science course and do a paper on, or at least compile a list of studies and annotate the bibliography with a critique. It would also be a good exercise to teach them about credible sources. And look at the awesome, tough built-in review panel you have here on MFP! They would have a good start with a bunch of the research that has already been shared on the assorted Diet Coke threads. I have often found myself saying, this would have been an excellent debate to share with my students, when I read some of the debates on here.
We had a bunch of scientists (mostly chemists but also an ag biologist, a vet, and a pharmacist) in an herbal study group for a couple of years, and we learned all about salves and balms and teas and tinctures, but we also debated and researched the crap out of the things we were studying. Thus, we had a thorough understanding of where things were backed by reliable vs. unreliable research vs. no research. Research is not the enemy...it just allows you to say, X action might be woo, and it is definitely unproven, but it is not going to hurt anything if I avoid it (other than hammering my pocketbook unless I am producing my own herbs and their associated products) so personally, I am going to follow X.5 -
Aaron_K123 wrote: »You know a chemist who believes that water has a memory and the more you dilute a substance the more potent its effect? Can...can you get this person on here to talk that is fascinating. If you can't then you probably shouldn't claim legitimacy based on interactions with a person we will never have the chance to interact with ourselves.
In some countries, at least, they use the terms "homeopath" and "naturopath" interchangeably. I know this because my cousin calls herself a homeopath when what she actually practices is naturopathy.
As for the "would you feed a baby Diet Coke" nonsense - no, I wouldn't feed either of my kids Diet Coke because they are still growing and they need to gain weight. So, I would not feed them any diet product. That doesn't mean that I, as an adult who needs to lose weight, shouldn't drink the diet product.4 -
Chilli7777 wrote: »Any type of soda, sugar free or otherwise, expands the tummy and will make you feel hungry. Diet coke is so full of chemicals. It wont hinder your weight loss if you dont eat extra food, but it is bad for youe overall health in so many othet ways. Personally I dont touch it.
And here I was pretty sure that the stomach stretching is one of the physical signals of fullness and why so many are successful at killing hunger with large volumes of food.
7 -
SusanMFindlay wrote: »Aaron_K123 wrote: »You know a chemist who believes that water has a memory and the more you dilute a substance the more potent its effect? Can...can you get this person on here to talk that is fascinating. If you can't then you probably shouldn't claim legitimacy based on interactions with a person we will never have the chance to interact with ourselves.
In some countries, at least, they use the terms "homeopath" and "naturopath" interchangeably. I know this because my cousin calls herself a homeopath when what she actually practices is naturopathy.
As for the "would you feed a baby Diet Coke" nonsense - no, I wouldn't feed either of my kids Diet Coke because they are still growing and they need to gain weight. So, I would not feed them any diet product. That doesn't mean that I, as an adult who needs to lose weight, shouldn't drink the diet product.
+1
Lately it seems that all of my social circle are using homeopath, naturopath, holistic interchangeably. I don't think they realize there're differences.2 -
SusanMFindlay wrote: »Aaron_K123 wrote: »You know a chemist who believes that water has a memory and the more you dilute a substance the more potent its effect? Can...can you get this person on here to talk that is fascinating. If you can't then you probably shouldn't claim legitimacy based on interactions with a person we will never have the chance to interact with ourselves.
In some countries, at least, they use the terms "homeopath" and "naturopath" interchangeably. I know this because my cousin calls herself a homeopath when what she actually practices is naturopathy.
As for the "would you feed a baby Diet Coke" nonsense - no, I wouldn't feed either of my kids Diet Coke because they are still growing and they need to gain weight. So, I would not feed them any diet product. That doesn't mean that I, as an adult who needs to lose weight, shouldn't drink the diet product.
+1
Lately it seems that all of my social circle are using homeopath, naturopath, holistic interchangeably. I don't think they realize there're differences.
Add in organic and you have the holy quartet. 4
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions