One word

u8myufo

u8myufo

Suspended / Banned
Messages
19,354
Name
Rich
Edit My Images
Yes
But many results "Aspartame" just Google it. And they say alcohol is bad for you :lol:
 
good grief Rich :( I've just started back dieting again and aspartame is in everything
 
Life's too short.....especially for someone with T1 diabetes :D
 
What really gets me is everybody is up in arms about a bit of Horse meat,just to take our minds off of the real carp we take in imho.
 
u8myufo said:
What really gets me is everybody is up in arms about a bit of Horse meat,just to take our minds off of the real carp we take in imho.
Click to expand...

One has to wonder how much of what we are told is "good for us" actually is.
I know what I like (and I have limited intake capabilities), and I know so far what does and does not make me feel good or bad.
I will continue to eat / drink what is on my "OK" list until I pop-off.
Got no sprogs to worry about though, so maybe that makes a difference, because frankly I look at things like climate change as well and thing .....sod it, I don't give a rat's.

Apologies for any typos...keyboard is acting up on lappy.
 
viv1969 said:
Got no sprogs to worry about though, so maybe that makes a difference, because frankly I look at things like climate change as well and think.....sod it, I don't give a rat's.
Click to expand...

And you'd be right to not worry about a natural event that no amount of appeasing the carbon dioxide god will change.
 
Oh for goodness sake...
I recently had a debate about aspartame with my uncle.

DO NOT believe everything you read online, it's a bunch of lies. Aspartame isn't a nutritious product, but it isn't going to kill you.

Try looking at peer reviewed journal articles, not crap random people have made up on blogs or chain emails...
 
HopefulM said:
good grief Rich :( I've just started back dieting again and aspartame is in everything
Click to expand...

there are loads of so called health issues from artifcial sweetners. pretty much all of it is [PLEASE DON'T TRY TO BYPASS THE SWEAR FILTER]. really the only problems with some of them is bloating, flatulence, and diarrhea if you take too much.
 
joesmith said:
Oh for goodness sake...
I recently had a debate about aspartame with my uncle.

DO NOT believe everything you read online, it's a bunch of lies. Aspartame isn't a nutritious product, but it isn't going to kill you.

Try looking at peer reviewed journal articles, not crap random people have made up on blogs or chain emails...
Click to expand...

I don't believe you :)
 
I don't believe you or him!
 
POAH said:
really the only problems with some of them is bloating, flatulence....
Click to expand...

Ah....well that clears that up then.
Thought there was something wrong with me, turns out it's just the Assfartome all along.
browwipe.gif
 
tonester said:
http://www.getbig.com/articles/aspartame1.htm

So because people have read something on brave Internet then it must be true?!?! A simple but of proper research will yield some proper data!!
Click to expand...

You have obviously read something on the brave internet that says it aint, that report was from 2000 btw ;) Here is another from 2012.

I am not saying it is personaly going to kill you, but you have to seriously think that if you were suffering with any of the symptoms that they suggest it can cause, then it would be worth looking into it. Interesting to read the bit about Searle Pharmaceuticals, perhaps it is all made up by people who have nothing better to do :thinking:
 
Last edited:
POAH said:
there are loads of so called health issues from artifcial sweetners. pretty much all of it is [PLEASE DON'T TRY TO BYPASS THE SWEAR FILTER]. really the only problems with some of them is bloating, flatulence, and diarrhea if you take too much.
Click to expand...

I've got a bottle of saccharine from the US somewhere, with a Health warning saying that it can cause cancer.
 
I continued to use Stevia even for the time it was banned in the UK. :lol:
Tastes better than aspartame.
 
u8myufo said:
You have obviously read something on the brave internet that says it aint, that report was from 2000 btw ;) Here is another from 2012.
Click to expand...

[Sarcasm] You really know how to differentiate good, factual articles from bad ones. [/Sarcasm]

I mean, seriously, are you even aware of what website you just linked to?? :cuckoo:

If you honestly believe that alcohol is better for you than aspartame, well... :bang: :bonk: :cuckoo: :suspect: :bang::bang::bang::bang:
 
u8myufo said:
You have obviously read something on the brave internet that says it aint, that report was from 2000 btw ;) Here is another from 2012.

I am not saying it is personaly going to kill you, but you have to seriously think that if you were suffering with any of the symptoms that they suggest it can cause, then it would be worth looking into it. Interesting to read the bit about Searle Pharmaceuticals, perhaps it is all made up by people who have nothing better to do :thinking:
Click to expand...

http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/n/Aspartame-NutraSweet.htm#.UR0e24cgHCQ

The brave Internet was auto corrected on my phone!! And there more factual clinical studies on the subject that would be better placed than the scaremongering that is related to this issue!! My point was that it was taken at face value as being true and not looked into for the facts that are readily available from a wide range of respected institutions!!
 
joesmith said:
[Sarcasm] You really know how to differentiate good, factual articles from bad ones. [/Sarcasm]

I mean, seriously, are you even aware of what website you just linked to?? :cuckoo:

If you honestly believe that alcohol is better for you than aspartame, well... :bang: :bonk: :cuckoo: :suspect: :bang::bang::bang::bang:
Click to expand...

I am all ears Joe, point me to a factual article on Aspartame where there is no mention of it having possible side effects. As for the alcohol comment pehaps a smilie would have helped you differentiate between being serious or not :lol: You probably will not want to read any more propoganda, but perhaps you can let me know if the Uk Food Guide is talking out it`s arse also :shrug: I am all for listening to peoples opinions Joe, but try putting your views across to me in a bit more of a mature way, I am sure you could try if you put your mind to it ;)
 
Last edited:
u8myufo said:
I am all ears Joe, point me to a factual article on Aspartame where there is no mention of it having possible side effects. As for the alcohol comment pehaps a smilie would have helped you differentiate between being serious or not :lol: You probably will not want to read any more propoganda, but perhaps you can let me know if the Good Food Guide is talking out it`s arse also :shrug: I am all for listening to peoples opinions Joe, but try putting your views across to me in a bit more of a mature way, I am sure you could try if you put your mind to it ;)
Click to expand...

The article you link to is the UK food guide and in no way is it affiliated to GOOD FOOD GUIDE. That article is as much hearsay as the original email that started this in the first place!! As I said in my previous post there are more factual articles that provide more accurate information than a woman that has some sort of axe to grind!!!
 
Johnd2000 said:
I've got a bottle of saccharine from the US somewhere, with a Health warning saying that it can cause cancer.
Click to expand...

The cancer warning rescinded in the early to mid 90s.

It can cause cancer (pancreatic IIRC) in mice because their biology is different to ours. Perfectly safe (carcinogen wise) for humans but the reputation damage has been done by Florida (or California, one of the two) declaring it illegal
 
tonester said:
The article you link to is the UK food guide and in no way is it affiliated to GOOD FOOD GUIDE. That article is as much hearsay as the original email that started this in the first place!! As I said in my previous post there are more factual articles that provide more accurate information than a woman that has some sort of axe to grind!!!
Click to expand...

My mistake Tony apologies for that, must be the Aspartame kicking in again ;) As I said to Joe though Tony, point me to two or three links that show no mention of it being related to some of the possible side effects. Call me want you want though, as I dont believe much of what I read in a paper or what the two faced BBC throw at us. If you are of the mind that a lot of the stuff we eat or drink nowadays is doing us good then that is your choice. The long term affect of all this :thinking:It keeps people in jobs M8 ;)
 
joesmith said:
Try looking at peer reviewed journal articles, not crap random people have made up on blogs or chain emails...
Click to expand...

I don't think most of the internet knows about the concept of peer review in scientific research.
 
Gr8Shot said:
contradict someone finding and believing an article on the internet by producing another article on the internet to support your point
SMART:clap:
Click to expand...

You obviously don't see the stupidity of the whole thing!! Smart or not!!! As I said in previous posts if you actually bothered to read them!!! There is other information that contradicts the original post!! If someone bothered 2 secs to look for it! It made my point that nothing should be taken as fact including my link!! But seeing as you not reading the whole story, just where did I say that I believed either argument!! Like I said my point was about the availability of other data and this does not just apply to the op first post!!
 
onomatopoeia said:
I don't think most of the internet knows about the concept of peer review in scientific research.
Click to expand...

Haha, obviously not.

Anyway, at Rich's request:
Book discussing the matter: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...hoax&hl=en#v=onepage&q=aspartame hoax&f=false

A cancer charity discussing the issue: http://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancercauses/othercarcinogens/athome/aspartame

European Food Safety Authority: http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/945.htm

Journal article on the effect of aspartame on children: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199402033300501

Headaches and aspartame: http://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/3657889

If you would like more, go to your local library and stick to the non-fiction zone :thumbs:

Obviously it isn't nutritious, obviously it isn't the most healthy thing in the world for you, obviously you shouldn't consume too much of it, but the scare mongering around it really does annoy me, along with all the other scare mongering crap that's on the internet. It isn't going to kill you, so stop worrying about it, it is a good sugar substitute.


My 'immature' comments were down to the fact that you linked to a website run by Alex Jones, it just amazed me that someone would actually link to that site as if the 'information' on there was actually remotely true.
 
joesmith said:
Haha, obviously not.

Anyway, at Rich's request:
Book discussing the matter: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...hoax&hl=en#v=onepage&q=aspartame hoax&f=false

A cancer charity discussing the issue: http://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancercauses/othercarcinogens/athome/aspartame

European Food Safety Authority: http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/945.htm

Journal article on the effect of aspartame on children: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199402033300501

Headaches and aspartame: http://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/3657889

If you would like more, go to your local library and stick to the non-fiction zone :thumbs:

Obviously it isn't nutritious, obviously it isn't the most healthy thing in the world for you, obviously you shouldn't consume too much of it, but the scare mongering around it really does annoy me, along with all the other scare mongering crap that's on the internet. It isn't going to kill you, so stop worrying about it, it is a good sugar substitute.


My 'immature' comments were down to the fact that you linked to a website run by Alex Jones, it just amazed me that someone would actually link to that site as if the 'information' on there was actually remotely true.
Click to expand...

Thanks for those Joe I will take a look.But why should I believe anything they say? It is not a natural product just like a lot of other stuff in our foods, perhaps you want to do a few visits to a dermatology department and see how busy they are nowadays ;) I bet you have a plugin air freshner in each room as well, wtf are those things supposed to be doing then? :lol: Still we will just have to agree to disagree. Btw there is some good books down the library on how to talk to people in a civil way :thumbs:
 
u8myufo said:
Thanks for those Joe I will take a look.But why should I believe anything they say?
Click to expand...

In the case of the New England Journal of Medicine, the paper they published has been subject to peer review, which means the methodology of the experiments and many other factors have been checked by independent, unpaid experts in that field of science, who will in turn feedback their thoughts to the editors (many of whom also have scientific backgrounds) on whether the article is suitable for publication.

One of my friends is a research scientist, has been published in various journals (not so much now he is in industry) and is entitled to use Dr in front of his name (not a medical doctor that can prescribe drugs but a person with a PhD). He will tell you, the process of peer review of academic papers is not something that you can bluff, bull.... or buy your way through.

So, you can believe the data outlined in the article has been collected using valid scientific method and you can believe that the way conclusions have been drawn from that data is a rational one. You don't have to accept the conclusions of course - you can argue that the reasoning of the researchers is flawed in some way, or that their experimental method was flawed, but you'd better be able to make credible arguments about what is wrong with it if you want anyone to take you seriously ("take a trip to a dermatology department" or talking about air fresheners do not constitute credible arguments).
 
u8myufo said:
But why should I believe anything they say?
Click to expand...
Mark has explained this nicely above.
You don't have to take anything they say as fact, please do be critical. However, what is posted in the articles I posted above are a lot more reliable and credible than blog posts or websites by guys like Alex Jones.
You need to look through different papers, look at the credibility of the different papers, who they are written by, where they are published, whether they are peer reviewed etc., and come to a conclusion from there.

u8myufo said:
It is not a natural product just like a lot of other stuff in our foods, perhaps you want to do a few visits to a dermatology department and see how busy they are nowadays ;) I bet you have a plugin air freshner in each room as well, wtf are those things supposed to be doing then?
Click to expand...
I'm really not sure what your point is here, can you expand on what you mean?
Obviously it's not a natural product, and if someone refuses to consume unnatural products then fair enough.
 
I'd disagree, there are plenty of **** poor papers published

onomatopoeia said:
One of my friends is a research scientist, has been published in various journals (not so much now he is in industry) and is entitled to use Dr in front of his name (not a medical doctor that can prescribe drugs but a person with a PhD). He will tell you, the process of peer review of academic papers is not something that you can bluff, bull.... or buy your way through.
Click to expand...
 
onomatopoeia said:
In the case of the New England Journal of Medicine, the paper they published has been subject to peer review, which means the methodology of the experiments and many other factors have been checked by independent, unpaid experts in that field of science, who will in turn feedback their thoughts to the editors (many of whom also have scientific backgrounds) on whether the article is suitable for publication.

One of my friends is a research scientist, has been published in various journals (not so much now he is in industry) and is entitled to use Dr in front of his name (not a medical doctor that can prescribe drugs but a person with a PhD). He will tell you, the process of peer review of academic papers is not something that you can bluff, bull.... or buy your way through.

So, you can believe the data outlined in the article has been collected using valid scientific method and you can believe that the way conclusions have been drawn from that data is a rational one. You don't have to accept the conclusions of course - you can argue that the reasoning of the researchers is flawed in some way, or that their experimental method was flawed, but you'd better be able to make credible arguments about what is wrong with it if you want anyone to take you seriously ("take a trip to a dermatology department" or talking about air fresheners do not constitute credible arguments).
Click to expand...

joesmith said:
Mark has explained this nicely above.
You don't have to take anything they say as fact, please do be critical. However, what is posted in the articles I posted above are a lot more reliable and credible than blog posts or websites by guys like Alex Jones.
You need to look through different papers, look at the credibility of the different papers, who they are written by, where they are published, whether they are peer reviewed etc., and come to a conclusion from there.


I'm really not sure what your point is here, can you expand on what you mean?
Obviously it's not a natural product, and if someone refuses to consume unnatural products then fair enough.
Click to expand...

Thanks, but it still leaves me wondering I know it`s a blog ;)

Peer reviews are a bit like our goverment, it`s carp but it is all we got untill something better comes along. Also some (not all) peer reviews are being proved wrong all the time, 5,10,15,20 years after they are published. Joe, as for it not being a natural product, all I am saying is that if it isnt natural why have it? We just did not have all this stuff in food years ago, it is hard to avoid it unfortunately but the more I can avoid it then I will. A lot of the reports saying that it is safe seem to state " The small amounts consumed pose no threat in a persons lifetime " or words to that effect, that may well be true. My way of thinking though is that a lot of all these added things have got to be passed down when we have children, they then consume the stuff in their lifetime and so on. If you believe that long term it is all perfectly good for us then so be it, personally I don`t think it is, that is not science but just common sense imho.
 
not all natural products are good for you either.

Do you wash your clothes in the local river, do you make your own bread, do you not use drugs to cure pain/disease. avoiding non-natural products is just plain dumb TBH.

out of interest do you only eat organic food?
 
u8myufo said:
Also some (not all) peer reviews are being proved wrong all the time, 5,10,15,20 years after they are published.
Click to expand...

Absolutely true. Things accepted as fact can be proved wrong.
The fact is though, currently, no scientifically conducted experiments have been able to suggest that aspartame does any damage to you. All articles posted on the internet and chain emails that tell you that it's going to kill you have no scientific evidence to support it. Also remember what it was designed to replace - sugar. Sugar is a natural product, yet it's accepted that large amounts of sugar will do us harm. Current research suggests that aspartame is a good replacement for sugar. You tend to find it in diet versions of products, diet coke, diet pepsi (although I prefer the taste of sugar, so I consume the normal versions of such products, although I don't consume that much of it).

If you are worried about aspartame on the off chance it might actually harm you, you'd probably starve to death as you wouldn't consume anything, you'd be too scared to. There are currently other things you probably consume that you should really be more concerned about than aspartame.

Innocent until proven guilty and all that.
 
Just seen your other thread, scrap that last sentence, it obviously means nothing to you.
When someone names something, or someone, as bad, seems you'll just accept that as fact and ignore the evidence. In which case, completely pointless me debating with you about this.

Hey, fruit and veg is bad for you, statistically, 100% of people who eat it will die. You best be avoiding dat veg.

Yep, you just hit another nerve with me with that other thread of yours.
 
joesmith said:
Hey, fruit and veg is bad for you, statistically, 100% of people who eat it will die. You best be avoiding dat veg.

QUOTE]

I will have to agree with you on that one, I hump about 20Ton of the stuff about every week and it is giving my back no end of problems ;)
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top