Where's the evidence re: aspartame, msg, carbs, gmo etc?
Options
Replies
-
Well, that's just the problem. It costs a LOT of money and time to conduct human trials, and especially with nutrition-related hypotheses, it's really damned hard to eliminate confounding factors. It's virtually impossible to do a randomized, double-blind prospective clinical trial related to humans and their diet, at least one that is factored high enough to be meaningful and last long enough to collect relevant data. So... we don't get those conclusive human studies. Which means all that we have are human studies that must use language like "may cause", "might be related to", "further studies are needed", "inconclusive".
So we make the best decisions we can, based on what little data we have. If a compound causes illness in a rat, guinea pig, rabbit, or monkey, that doesn't mean it will cause an illness in humans. However, it may raise a cause for concern and further research to understand the mechanism of action and any dose-dependency. The aspartame example is a good one. It seems safe because the levels needed to cause toxicity are much higher than the normal "dose" ingested by the average person. So no worries, unless you're one of the people who gets migraines from it. Or who craves sugar because of it.
Does that mean aspartame is good for you? Not really. Just that there's no conclusive data that it's unsafe at "average" consumption levels. So you won't die from your diet coke. Would you be better off drinking water? Probably so.
The point is that if you are like me and love soda. You shouldn't eliminate from your diet just because someone somewhere said that 2% of 68,000 women got a brain cancer AND there is a POSSIBILITY that diet soda caused it.
That's like saying I should avoid driving because 300 people died on my state's highway system this year.
Totally agree. You love soda. You look at the data. You make your choice. Another person might look at that data and think that even an infinitesimal risk is not worth it when there are alternatives. For you, that would feel like a HUGE deprivation because it's something you love. For someone else, they might not feel deprived by cutting it out, but rather just feel good about drinking something else instead.
My name is Caribougal, and I'm a Diet Coke addict. I am great at saying no to LOTS of other things that I think are not adding to my health, and I feel good about my choices. But I crave diet coke. I try to fortify myself against it by drinking Kombucha. But if I'm out of Kombucha, which is often, I give in to the pleasures of diet coke. I know that having a few ounces of diet coke a day is not going to hurt me. But I also know that I could be making a better choice.0 -
I would love to see actual evidence myself.0
-
I was just offering up sexy pics, yo.
Well in that case, can you post a pic of you eating a pickle? LOL oh..wait.
You should see what happens when I eat avocado
:blushing:0 -
Well, that's just the problem. It costs a LOT of money and time to conduct human trials, and especially with nutrition-related hypotheses, it's really damned hard to eliminate confounding factors. It's virtually impossible to do a randomized, double-blind prospective clinical trial related to humans and their diet, at least one that is factored high enough to be meaningful and last long enough to collect relevant data. So... we don't get those conclusive human studies. Which means all that we have are human studies that must use language like "may cause", "might be related to", "further studies are needed", "inconclusive".
So we make the best decisions we can, based on what little data we have. If a compound causes illness in a rat, guinea pig, rabbit, or monkey, that doesn't mean it will cause an illness in humans. However, it may raise a cause for concern and further research to understand the mechanism of action and any dose-dependency. The aspartame example is a good one. It seems safe because the levels needed to cause toxicity are much higher than the normal "dose" ingested by the average person. So no worries, unless you're one of the people who gets migraines from it. Or who craves sugar because of it.
Does that mean aspartame is good for you? Not really. Just that there's no conclusive data that it's unsafe at "average" consumption levels. So you won't die from your diet coke. Would you be better off drinking water? Probably so.
The point is that if you are like me and love soda. You shouldn't eliminate from your diet just because someone somewhere said that 2% of 68,000 women got a brain cancer AND there is a POSSIBILITY that diet soda caused it.
That's like saying I should avoid driving because 300 people died on my state's highway system this year.
Totally agree. You love soda. You look at the data. You make your choice. Another person might look at that data and think that even an infinitesimal risk is not worth it when there are alternatives. For you, that would feel like a HUGE deprivation because it's something you love. For someone else, they might not feel deprived by cutting it out, but rather just feel good about drinking something else instead.
My name is Caribougal, and I'm a Diet Coke addict. I am great at saying no to LOTS of other things that I think are not adding to my health, and I feel good about my choices. But I crave diet coke. I try to fortify myself against it by drinking Kombucha. But if I'm out of Kombucha, which is often, I give in to the pleasures of diet coke. I know that having a few ounces of diet coke a day is not going to hurt me. But I also know that I could be making a better choice.
What is Kombucha? I'm not familiar with this.0 -
meanwhile I won't blindly put my faith in corporations, pharmaceutical companies, lobbyists and the government to tell me what's healthy and what isn't.
Oh the irony! So what makes a scientist suddenly decide to research the occurrence of brain cancer in diet soda drinkers (I'm just picking on this study because it was mentioned earlier). I mean... they don't just sit around and say hmmm... I bet there is something evil about aspartame... let me just go and figure out what it is.
No... they are paid by lobbyists of the sugar cane industry to find something wrong with aspartame... not that I have anything against sugar either, but my point is that studies, particularly those concerning food products, are generally biased in some way.
Oh... and I like to add that 30 years ago some scientists decided that aspartame is safe for human consumption. Since then, scientists have been trying to prove that it isn't safe... it's been 30 years... and they haven't proven it yet.
lol this is my point exactly. i don't trust lobby-funded research period. sugar's bad for you. aspartame's probably bad for you. let's move on. but if you wanna drink it go for it. doesn't affect me whatsoever.0 -
Well, that's just the problem. It costs a LOT of money and time to conduct human trials, and especially with nutrition-related hypotheses, it's really damned hard to eliminate confounding factors. It's virtually impossible to do a randomized, double-blind prospective clinical trial related to humans and their diet, at least one that is factored high enough to be meaningful and last long enough to collect relevant data. So... we don't get those conclusive human studies. Which means all that we have are human studies that must use language like "may cause", "might be related to", "further studies are needed", "inconclusive".
So we make the best decisions we can, based on what little data we have. If a compound causes illness in a rat, guinea pig, rabbit, or monkey, that doesn't mean it will cause an illness in humans. However, it may raise a cause for concern and further research to understand the mechanism of action and any dose-dependency. The aspartame example is a good one. It seems safe because the levels needed to cause toxicity are much higher than the normal "dose" ingested by the average person. So no worries, unless you're one of the people who gets migraines from it. Or who craves sugar because of it.
Does that mean aspartame is good for you? Not really. Just that there's no conclusive data that it's unsafe at "average" consumption levels. So you won't die from your diet coke. Would you be better off drinking water? Probably so.
The point is that if you are like me and love soda. You shouldn't eliminate from your diet just because someone somewhere said that 2% of 68,000 women got a brain cancer AND there is a POSSIBILITY that diet soda caused it.
That's like saying I should avoid driving because 300 people died on my state's highway system this year.
Totally agree. You love soda. You look at the data. You make your choice. Another person might look at that data and think that even an infinitesimal risk is not worth it when there are alternatives. For you, that would feel like a HUGE deprivation because it's something you love. For someone else, they might not feel deprived by cutting it out, but rather just feel good about drinking something else instead.
My name is Caribougal, and I'm a Diet Coke addict. I am great at saying no to LOTS of other things that I think are not adding to my health, and I feel good about my choices. But I crave diet coke. I try to fortify myself against it by drinking Kombucha. But if I'm out of Kombucha, which is often, I give in to the pleasures of diet coke. I know that having a few ounces of diet coke a day is not going to hurt me. But I also know that I could be making a better choice.
What is Kombucha? I'm not familiar with this.
It's like carbonated vinegar made from a fungus. It tastes great as long as you completely mask the taste with other things.0 -
meanwhile I won't blindly put my faith in corporations, pharmaceutical companies, lobbyists and the government to tell me what's healthy and what isn't.
Oh the irony! So what makes a scientist suddenly decide to research the occurrence of brain cancer in diet soda drinkers (I'm just picking on this study because it was mentioned earlier). I mean... they don't just sit around and say hmmm... I bet there is something evil about aspartame... let me just go and figure out what it is.
No... they are paid by lobbyists of the sugar cane industry to find something wrong with aspartame... not that I have anything against sugar either, but my point is that studies, particularly those concerning food products, are generally biased in some way.
Oh... and I like to add that 30 years ago some scientists decided that aspartame is safe for human consumption. Since then, scientists have been trying to prove that it isn't safe... it's been 30 years... and they haven't proven it yet.
It's a big conspiracy. In all countries, and all governments.
(notsrs)
how do you feel about the FDA? do you trust them?0 -
It's like carbonated vinegar made from a fungus. It tastes great as long as you completely mask the taste with other things.
Thanks... I'll take my chances with the aspartame. LOL!0 -
It's like carbonated vinegar made from a fungus. It tastes great as long as you completely mask the taste with other things.
Thanks... I'll take my chances with the aspartame. LOL!
you'll take the man-made chemical with no nutritional benefit (or other benefit for that matter) over the naturally occurring fermented drink that will do wonders for your digestive tract and thus your overall health? makes sense.0 -
meanwhile I won't blindly put my faith in corporations, pharmaceutical companies, lobbyists and the government to tell me what's healthy and what isn't.
Oh the irony! So what makes a scientist suddenly decide to research the occurrence of brain cancer in diet soda drinkers (I'm just picking on this study because it was mentioned earlier). I mean... they don't just sit around and say hmmm... I bet there is something evil about aspartame... let me just go and figure out what it is.
No... they are paid by lobbyists of the sugar cane industry to find something wrong with aspartame... not that I have anything against sugar either, but my point is that studies, particularly those concerning food products, are generally biased in some way.
Oh... and I like to add that 30 years ago some scientists decided that aspartame is safe for human consumption. Since then, scientists have been trying to prove that it isn't safe... it's been 30 years... and they haven't proven it yet.
lol this is my point exactly. i don't trust lobby-funded research period. sugar's bad for you. aspartame's probably bad for you. let's move on. but if you wanna drink it go for it. doesn't affect me whatsoever.
Sugar is vital for you, see blood glucose.0 -
It's like carbonated vinegar made from a fungus. It tastes great as long as you completely mask the taste with other things.
Thanks... I'll take my chances with the aspartame. LOL!
you'll take the man-made chemical with no nutritional benefit (or other benefit for that matter) over the naturally occurring fermented drink that will do wonders for your digestive tract and thus your overall health? makes sense.
I would do both just to be safe. Plus, the Kombucha won't taste like carbonated vinegar with all that chemically sweetness.0 -
Dr. Oz has finished his own study which has come to the conclusion that all study's are bullsh!t.0
-
"I eat paste." ~ Ralphie0
-
meanwhile I won't blindly put my faith in corporations, pharmaceutical companies, lobbyists and the government to tell me what's healthy and what isn't.
Oh the irony! So what makes a scientist suddenly decide to research the occurrence of brain cancer in diet soda drinkers (I'm just picking on this study because it was mentioned earlier). I mean... they don't just sit around and say hmmm... I bet there is something evil about aspartame... let me just go and figure out what it is.
No... they are paid by lobbyists of the sugar cane industry to find something wrong with aspartame... not that I have anything against sugar either, but my point is that studies, particularly those concerning food products, are generally biased in some way.
Oh... and I like to add that 30 years ago some scientists decided that aspartame is safe for human consumption. Since then, scientists have been trying to prove that it isn't safe... it's been 30 years... and they haven't proven it yet.
lol this is my point exactly. i don't trust lobby-funded research period. sugar's bad for you. aspartame's probably bad for you. let's move on. but if you wanna drink it go for it. doesn't affect me whatsoever.
Sugar is vital for you, see blood glucose.
this is true.0 -
Just tagging cause this is hilarious. And I might learn something. But mostly it's just hilarious.0
-
I have a friend that is irreparably, neurologically jammed up from consuming aspartame products for years. So when I see someone I care about following that path, I feel compelled to talk about it. When it comes up on forums like this, I feel compelled to talk about it.
What condition did they acquire and how was this proven to be caused by aspartame?
She had neurological symptoms that kept getting worse and worse to the point where she couldn't coordinate her brain with her hands, limbs, mouth, etc. At her worst she couldn't feed herself, dress herself or walk without assistance. She also had trouble speaking. Her husband brought her to a stream of doctors and no one could figure out what was happening. Her husband was freaking out because her neurological function kept deteriorating at a pretty rapid pace.
She had been drinking diet soda and other diet drinks for years. She bought everything "sugar free". A well meaning coworker brought it to the husband's attention that it could be the aspartame. He went right home and emptied out the pantry. As soon as she stopped taking aspartame, her symptoms stopped getting worse. And after a few months she did show improvements but she is still jammed up.0 -
Pulls up chair, pops open a diet coke......
LOL!0 -
It's like carbonated vinegar made from a fungus. It tastes great as long as you completely mask the taste with other things.
Thanks... I'll take my chances with the aspartame. LOL!
you'll take the man-made chemical with no nutritional benefit (or other benefit for that matter) over the naturally occurring fermented drink that will do wonders for your digestive tract and thus your overall health? makes sense.
I'm sorry... have ever drank vinegar? Cause I used to... way back when I believed every horrible piece of crap I read.
I could just imagine the extra level of awful with carbonation added to it.
*shudders*0 -
It's like carbonated vinegar made from a fungus. It tastes great as long as you completely mask the taste with other things.
Thanks... I'll take my chances with the aspartame. LOL!
you'll take the man-made chemical with no nutritional benefit (or other benefit for that matter) over the naturally occurring fermented drink that will do wonders for your digestive tract and thus your overall health? makes sense.
I'm sorry... have ever drank vinegar? Cause I used to... way back when I believed every horrible piece of crap I read.
I could just imagine the extra level of awful with carbonation added to it.
*shudders*
I have. ACV, honey and cayenne in water to help with my voice (i'm a singer)
it's really not bad.0 -
meanwhile I won't blindly put my faith in corporations, pharmaceutical companies, lobbyists and the government to tell me what's healthy and what isn't.
Oh the irony! So what makes a scientist suddenly decide to research the occurrence of brain cancer in diet soda drinkers (I'm just picking on this study because it was mentioned earlier). I mean... they don't just sit around and say hmmm... I bet there is something evil about aspartame... let me just go and figure out what it is.
No... they are paid by lobbyists of the sugar cane industry to find something wrong with aspartame... not that I have anything against sugar either, but my point is that studies, particularly those concerning food products, are generally biased in some way.
Oh... and I like to add that 30 years ago some scientists decided that aspartame is safe for human consumption. Since then, scientists have been trying to prove that it isn't safe... it's been 30 years... and they haven't proven it yet.
lol this is my point exactly. i don't trust lobby-funded research period. sugar's bad for you. aspartame's probably bad for you. let's move on. but if you wanna drink it go for it. doesn't affect me whatsoever.
Sugar is vital for you, see blood glucose.
this is true.
yet you just called it bad, so make up your mind0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.7K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 395 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 960 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions