I would stay away from Diet Pops, they usually contain aspartame. However, stuff like juice, crystal light, and other stuff is healthier and tastes pretty darn good.
Avoid soft drinks with a sweetener called aspartame. You're better off drinking sugar then.
No; no, you're not. The HFCS in most sodas is basically liquid death. The aspartame in most sodas doesn't do shit to you, unless you're phenylketonuric. If you're not phenylketonuric, your body just turns it into phenylalanine, which is an essential amino acid, i.e. you need it to live. This is one of the stupidest fucking things I've ever seen posted on this board, right up there with "you should try mixing ammonia and bleach to clean shit."
There isn't any evidence that diet soda is bad for you... but having said that, 20 years ago there wasn't any evidence that TransFat, HighFurtose Corn Syrup or Asbestos was bad for you either. What I'm saying, is that there have been very few Long term studies and just because it's "not bad for you" now, doesn't mean it couldn't be.
There have been ridiculous numbers of studies done on aspartame, both long-term and short-term effects. None of the valid ones have come up with shit for it being bad for you, unless you're phenylketonuric.
Aspartame controversy Main article: Aspartame controversy
Aspartame has been the subject of controversy regarding its safety and the circumstances of its approval by the American FDA and European FSA. Some studies have also recommended further investigation into possible connections between aspartame and negative effects such as headaches, brain tumors, brain lesions, and lymphoma.[8][9][10]These findings, combined with possible conflicts of interest in the approval process, have engendered vocal activism regarding the possible risks of aspartame.[11][12] The 2004 documentary Sweet Misery: A Poisoned World voices these same concerns. On 14 December2005, a member of the British House of Commons called on the British government to "ban the use and sale of aspartame" due to health concerns relating to this product.[13]
[SIZE=-1]It was discovered in 1965, approved by FDA in 1974 and entered the market in the 80’s[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]
So it has only been in mass use since 1980s... at most that's 27-33 years of public consummation. That's a very short time to study the long term effects.
[/SIZE][SIZE=-1] Also here, in 1980 the FDA says:
[/SIZE]
"September 30, 1980: A public Board of Inquiry advises against aspartame"
A Public Board of Inquiry (PBOI) advised against the approval of aspartame on September 30, 1980 pending further testing relative to induced brain tumors. It asserted: "The Board has not been presented with proof of a reasonable certainty that aspartame (nutrasweet) is safe for use as a food additive under its intended conditions of use."
The FDA has not retracted this statement Nor have they said anything to contradict this statement. They approved it in 1981 with the above statement still effective.
'Aspartame "side effects"' returns 242K google results.
I stand by my orignal point, that right now; there isn't any conclusion evidence that it's harmful, but doesn't mean something won't be found with it.
There is enough evidence that Suggests that more studies should be done by INDEPENDENT researchers to Verify the results of previous studies.
[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]
Look at cigarettes. There was many "scientific" studies that where overseen and paid by the tobacco industry a few decades back "debunking" the "myth" that tobacco caused cancer and we all know how that turned out.
[/SIZE]
EDIT:
To add to that:
TransFat, HighFuctose Corn Syrup, MSG.... all in previous decades have been declared "Safe" and without any side effects what so ever.... but now we are learning other wise. It would be injust to say Aspartame has and Always will be safe with all the evidence that suggests otherwise.
Since this is the one study you've cited, let me point out to you:
"Our study has shown that aspartame is a multipotential carcinogenic compound whose carcinogenic effects are also evident at a daily dose of 20 milligrams per kilogram of body weight (mg/kg), notably less than the current acceptable daily intake for humans," the authors write. Currently, the acceptable daily intake for humans is set at 50 mg/kg in the United States and 40 mg/kg in Europe.
One can of diet coke has 131mg of Aspartame. That means that at 120 pounds, you'd have to be drinking more than 8 cans of diet coke per day to be getting that amount.
I don't care what you're drinking, unless it's water, that much of it is probably going to give you cancer. Hell, that much water will probably do shit to you, too.
'Aspartame "side effects"' returns 242K google results.
"9/11 conspiracy" returns 2.3 million Google results. What's your point?
If you're not suffering from any of the possible reactions to aspartame, it's not hurting you. I mean, really, peanuts kill some people, so should no one be eating peanuts, ever? Stupid fucking argument.
To add to that:
TransFat, HighFuctose Corn Syrup, MSG.... all in previous decades have been declared "Safe" and without any side effects what so ever.... but now we are learning other wise. It would be injust to say Aspartame has and Always will be safe with all the evidence that suggests otherwise.
It would be unjust to say the same thing about water, so why are you suggesting people drink that? I mean, really, the vast, vast majority of people who've died over the past many millenia drank primarily water.
Chai. I like hot tea, and hate iced tea (both sweet and unsweet), but chai is good stuff either hot or cold. You can get some teabags or loose tea that have the spices all together already, but since I tend to have it cold, I get a premixed concentrate box, which you just mix with milk and drink.
If you're trying to cut down on calories, chai really isn't the best. Milk is pretty dense stuff, calorie-wise.
Thus the advantage of buying the team bags or loose tea, you can control how much, and what kind of milk you use.
If you think it's 100% safe and always will be, then that is your opinion... I don't think I can change that, or actucally don't' care anymore... if you want to drink down diet drinks all day; the it doesn't affect me much, if at all. It's your life, your choice, do as you will.
And seriously, what do I lose if I'm wrong in this argument? At worst, a tasty diet drink... but if I right, I have some extra money (from not buying soda) and possible avoiding serious health problems.
I'll take that bet any day
Regardless I think this we've probably bored the orignal poster :P so I'm going to end it here.
If you think it's 100% safe and always will be, then that is your opinion... I don't think I can change that, or actucally don't' care anymore... if you want to drink down diet drinks all day; the it doesn't affect me much, if at all. It's your life, your choice, do as you will.
And seriously, what do I lose if I'm wrong in this argument? At worst, a tasty diet drink... but if I right, I have some extra money (from not buying soda) and possible avoiding serious health problems.
I'll take that bet any day
Regardless I think this we've probably bored the orignal poster :P so I'm going to end it here.
Or maybe the diet soda cures whatever it is that eventually kills you, and it's all the water that's the death of you, as it turns out.
Seriously, that's just a total bullshit answer. The basis for life is predicated on one simple fact: everything you do is killing you. To say diet soda is doing it any faster than anything else, given the scientific evidence, is about on par with saying holistic medicine will save your life.
Thanatos on
0
Options
ShadowfireVermont, in the middle of nowhereRegistered Userregular
If you think it's 100% safe and always will be, then that is your opinion... I don't think I can change that, or actucally don't' care anymore... if you want to drink down diet drinks all day; the it doesn't affect me much, if at all. It's your life, your choice, do as you will.
And seriously, what do I lose if I'm wrong in this argument? At worst, a tasty diet drink... but if I right, I have some extra money (from not buying soda) and possible avoiding serious health problems.
I'll take that bet any day
Regardless I think this we've probably bored the orignal poster :P so I'm going to end it here.
Or maybe the diet soda cures whatever it is that eventually kills you, and it's all the water that's the death of you, as it turns out.
Seriously, that's just a total bullshit answer. The basis for life is predicated on one simple fact: everything you do is killing you. To say diet soda is doing it any faster than anything else, given the scientific evidence, is about on par with saying holistic medicine will save your life.
At any rate, wasn't the crazy "Aspartame is poison!" thing started in an e-mail rumor..?
This cannot be emphasized enough. If you're concerned about weight/health issues, just stay away from sodas of any kind and even most juices because they have a lot of calories and usually sugar in them.
I've been lucky and have never really had a problem with the taste of water, tap or otherwise, but I do like to add a lot of ice to make it taste better. Crystal Light helped me drop the soda habit last year and I feel a lot better, especially after I work out. (I would rarely ever feel any effects of caffeine until after a workout, at which point I had a headache that would last the rest of the day regardless of how much water and aspirin I would take.)
Its actually quite funny, when I weighed myself a good few months after I started working at a coffee shop, I had mysteriously gained about 15 pounds, despite maintaining weight loss or being even for a good year. I figured out recently why this is; milk.
If you're trying to lose weight, for the love of all that is holy, don't frequent coffee shops. A 16oz mocha? ~500 calories. 16oz latte? ~360 calories. Even your non-fat latte, 12oz? ~135 cal. Name as regular soda's, for the option with the least calories. These are small examples, though. I created a shake there that tastes like choco puffs. Exactly like them, its really, really good. I did the math today at work. A 32oz of it has 1700-1800 calories. For one drink. Instead, get tea's, or actual coffee(as opposed to 'espresso drinks'). General rule of thumb here is, the sweeter/better tasting it is, the worse it is for you.
Anyways, to get back on course, I have two suggestions. 'Fruit fiz' around here, someone mentioned it as 'clear' earlier, basically carbonated, flavorful, calorie/fat free water. It tastes really good, and is not bad for you. I also want to suggest the diet sprite drink, sprite zero or whatever they call it. It might just be me, but its the one and only diet soda I prefer over the regular soda.
At any rate, wasn't the crazy "Aspartame is poison!" thing started in an e-mail rumor..?
It's been around a long time. I remember when I was a kid in the mid-80s, friends telling me that a friend of a friend had gone blind from drinking diet soda, that kind of thing. Most of the information I've read has been that it started because of a combination of Puritan-style thinking ("You can't have something sweet without paying the price, whether it's calories or CANCER."), anti-science hippie thinking ("anything made with CHEMICALS is unsafe! I only consume things that are chemical-free, like hard vacuum!") and people associating the research on saccharin with all artificial sweeteners. Of course, since then saccharin itself has pretty much been redeemed for the same reason - you have to feed piles of it to rats before they start to have any reaction.
The first time I heard of it online was around 1996. Someone showed me a printout of an email about it, and it was clearly designed as a marketing tactic for the author's book which was advertised at the end.
The results of a large seven-year study into the long-term effects of eating aspartame in rats by the European Ramazzini Foundation for cancer research in Bologna, Italy were released in July 2005. The study of 1,800 rats demonstrates that aspartame administered at varying levels in feed causes a statistically significant increase of lymphomas-leukemias and malignant tumors of the kidneys in female rats and malignant tumors of peripheral nerves in male rats.
the national cancer institute did a different study of people which showed no significant relationship, but:
Critics of this study point out that while the study looked at humans, it did not look at life-long aspartame consumption as did the Ramazzini study on rats. The Ramazzini study simulated life-long consumption from childhood through old age (simulating 60 to 90 years of use). However the new National Cancer Institute study simply looked at subjects who consumed diet drinks during a twelve-month period from 1995 to 1996, without determining aspartame intake prior to the start of the study. Neurosurgeon Dr Russell Blaylock, commenting on the NCI study, remarked that "The greatest risk of leukemia and lymphoma would be in a younger population (young children and adolescents) and they would need to be exposed regularly from early in life."[72] Given that aspartame has only been publicly available for about a quarter of a century (in France from 1979, the USA since 1982, and the UK since 1983),[73] not one of the people examined in the NCI study could have ingested any aspartame product during their formative growth years, until they were at least into their mid-twenties.
Personally, a member of my family has worked with higher ups at Pepsi who have said unofficially that diet soda is definitely bad for you (more along the lines of "whoa, don't actually drink that stuff!" then a short explanation when he was grabbing a diet pepsi).
However anyone who claims to "know" the answer to this whole question is straight up full of shit.
The fact is that we don't know. It hasn't been proven one way or another, and it's up to the individual to decide whether they think it's a risk or not.
The results of a large seven-year study into the long-term effects of eating aspartame in rats by the European Ramazzini Foundation for cancer research in Bologna, Italy were released in July 2005. The study of 1,800 rats demonstrates that aspartame administered at varying levels in feed causes a statistically significant increase of lymphomas-leukemias and malignant tumors of the kidneys in female rats and malignant tumors of peripheral nerves in male rats.
the national cancer institute did a different study of people which showed no significant relationship, but:
Critics of this study point out that while the study looked at humans, it did not look at life-long aspartame consumption as did the Ramazzini study on rats. The Ramazzini study simulated life-long consumption from childhood through old age (simulating 60 to 90 years of use). However the new National Cancer Institute study simply looked at subjects who consumed diet drinks during a twelve-month period from 1995 to 1996, without determining aspartame intake prior to the start of the study. Neurosurgeon Dr Russell Blaylock, commenting on the NCI study, remarked that "The greatest risk of leukemia and lymphoma would be in a younger population (young children and adolescents) and they would need to be exposed regularly from early in life."[72] Given that aspartame has only been publicly available for about a quarter of a century (in France from 1979, the USA since 1982, and the UK since 1983),[73] not one of the people examined in the NCI study could have ingested any aspartame product during their formative growth years, until they were at least into their mid-twenties.
Personally, a member of my family has worked with higher ups at Pepsi who have said unofficially that diet soda is definitely bad for you (more along the lines of "whoa, don't actually drink that stuff!" then a short explanation when he was grabbing a diet pepsi).
However anyone who claims to "know" the answer to this whole question is straight up full of shit.
The fact is that we don't know. It hasn't been proven one way or another, and it's up to the individual to decide whether they think it's a risk or not.
I notice you don't actually cite the levels which cause a problem.
There was one study cited earlier which put the problem level at 20 milligrams per kilogram of weight per day. For a 120-pound person, that's over 8 cans of diet soda per day. This has been explained several times. A few diet sodas are not going to hurt you; drinking them exclusively, over the course of your lifetime, might.
If you can't provide an actual, honest-to-god clinical study, along with methodology, just shut the fuck up about "it's going to kill you," "it might kill you," or "we don't know whether or not it will kill you." We can't prove it won't kill you; it is impossible. Then again, you can't prove water isn't going to kill you. There are times people have died from water poisoning, but you're not advocating not drinking water.
When I freaked out about aspartame a few years ago, I did a lot of reading on it, and from what I recall the big areas of concern for me personally were the methanol, formic acid, and formaldehyde production that occurs during digestion. Methanol because it's toxic if ingested in the absence of ethanol I think it was, and formaldehyde because...well it's freaking formaldehyde .
I couldn't find many studies discussing that aspect though during a cursory glance at pubmed though...well heres one:
I imagine it's safe in the doses usually consumed, but really if you're concerned about your health, I would maybe use diet soda as an aid in weaning yourself off habitual soda consumption completely. That's what I ended up doing, and it was one of the best health related things I've ever done .
The results of a large seven-year study into the long-term effects of eating aspartame in rats by the European Ramazzini Foundation for cancer research in Bologna, Italy were released in July 2005. The study of 1,800 rats demonstrates that aspartame administered at varying levels in feed causes a statistically significant increase of lymphomas-leukemias and malignant tumors of the kidneys in female rats and malignant tumors of peripheral nerves in male rats.
the national cancer institute did a different study of people which showed no significant relationship, but:
Critics of this study point out that while the study looked at humans, it did not look at life-long aspartame consumption as did the Ramazzini study on rats. The Ramazzini study simulated life-long consumption from childhood through old age (simulating 60 to 90 years of use). However the new National Cancer Institute study simply looked at subjects who consumed diet drinks during a twelve-month period from 1995 to 1996, without determining aspartame intake prior to the start of the study. Neurosurgeon Dr Russell Blaylock, commenting on the NCI study, remarked that "The greatest risk of leukemia and lymphoma would be in a younger population (young children and adolescents) and they would need to be exposed regularly from early in life."[72] Given that aspartame has only been publicly available for about a quarter of a century (in France from 1979, the USA since 1982, and the UK since 1983),[73] not one of the people examined in the NCI study could have ingested any aspartame product during their formative growth years, until they were at least into their mid-twenties.
Personally, a member of my family has worked with higher ups at Pepsi who have said unofficially that diet soda is definitely bad for you (more along the lines of "whoa, don't actually drink that stuff!" then a short explanation when he was grabbing a diet pepsi).
However anyone who claims to "know" the answer to this whole question is straight up full of shit.
The fact is that we don't know. It hasn't been proven one way or another, and it's up to the individual to decide whether they think it's a risk or not.
I notice you don't actually cite the levels which cause a problem.
There was one study cited earlier which put the problem level at 20 milligrams per kilogram of weight per day. For a 120-pound person, that's over 8 cans of diet soda per day. This has been explained several times. A few diet sodas are not going to hurt you; drinking them exclusively, over the course of your lifetime, might.
If you can't provide an actual, honest-to-god clinical study, along with methodology, just shut the fuck up about "it's going to kill you," "it might kill you," or "we don't know whether or not it will kill you." We can't prove it won't kill you; it is impossible. Then again, you can't prove water isn't going to kill you. There are times people have died from water poisoning, but you're not advocating not drinking water.
Whether I cited the actual amounts of anything is moot, the point was that evidence has been found saying that it's harmful and that it's not harmful.
You can't just say, as you did before, that all the studies that are good show that you're right, and the ones that say otherwise are bad, with no explanation of why.
MY post wasn't in favor of or against diet drinks, just to say that there's really not enough information out there on the long term effects of aspartame to draw any kind of conclusion that you could argue to someone else.
Your water argument is stupid. Comparing an artificial compound to water in terms of possible long-term health effects is just plain dumb.
Just relax man, this isn't something you have to be right about, and even if it was, you're doing a terrible job of it.
I know it's already been limed once, but really - Crystal Light is awesome. It's awesome not only because you can buy it to mix up ala Kool Aid to throw in the fridge but also because they have the travel packets that you just throw into a bottle of water and shake for instant goodness. They have a citrus iced tea that's really good.
Whether I cited the actual amounts of anything is moot, the point was that evidence has been found saying that it's harmful and that it's not harmful.
You can't just say, as you did before, that all the studies that are good show that you're right, and the ones that say otherwise are bad, with no explanation of why.
MY post wasn't in favor of or against diet drinks, just to say that there's really not enough information out there on the long term effects of aspartame to draw any kind of conclusion that you could argue to someone else.
Your water argument is stupid. Comparing an artificial compound to water in terms of possible long-term health effects is just plain dumb.
Just relax man, this isn't something you have to be right about, and even if it was, you're doing a terrible job of it.
ON TOPIC: Diet rockstar is great and doesn't have sodium benzoate or aspartame
If I were making an affirmative claim, I'd be throwing out studies left and right. If you'd actually read the thread, the last guy who posted a study posted one that proved my point (even though he was arguing against it).
Wikipedia is not a source, and on this particular subject, seems to be totally full of shit, probably last-edited by some holistic hippie or conspiracy theorist who thinks the Russians want our precious fluids.
If I were making an affirmative claim, I'd be throwing out studies left and right. If you'd actually read the thread, the last guy who posted a study posted one that proved my point (even though he was arguing against it).
Wikipedia is not a source, and on this particular subject, seems to be totally full of shit, probably last-edited by some holistic hippie or conspiracy theorist who thinks the Russians want our precious fluids.
Just posted this in the other thread
My sister presented symptoms of lupus/fibromyalgia, she was drinking about 3 diet mountain dews a day. Thats a lot but not unheard of. Soon as she stopped her symptoms all disappeared.
JD Smith, CM Terpening, SO Schmidt, and JG Gums. "Relief of fibromyalgia symptoms following discontinuation of dietary excitotoxins" The Annals of Pharmacotherapy: Vol. 35, No. 6, pp. 702-706
Four out of four patients had complete resolution of their problem after eliminating MSG and aspartame from their diet.
Alan C. Logan. "Dietary Modifications and Fibromyalgia" Complementary Health Practice Review, Vol. 8, No. 3, 234-245
Another study where cutting out aspartame eliminated symptoms of fibromyalgia.
If I were making an affirmative claim, I'd be throwing out studies left and right. If you'd actually read the thread, the last guy who posted a study posted one that proved my point (even though he was arguing against it).
Wikipedia is not a source, and on this particular subject, seems to be totally full of shit, probably last-edited by some holistic hippie or conspiracy theorist who thinks the Russians want our precious fluids.
Just posted this in the other thread
My sister presented symptoms of lupus/fibromyalgia, she was drinking about 3 diet mountain dews a day. Thats a lot but not unheard of. Soon as she stopped her symptoms all disappeared.
JD Smith, CM Terpening, SO Schmidt, and JG Gums. "Relief of fibromyalgia symptoms following discontinuation of dietary excitotoxins" The Annals of Pharmacotherapy: Vol. 35, No. 6, pp. 702-706
Four out of four patients had complete resolution of their problem after eliminating MSG and aspartame from their diet.
Alan C. Logan. "Dietary Modifications and Fibromyalgia" Complementary Health Practice Review, Vol. 8, No. 3, 234-245
Another study where cutting out aspartame eliminated symptoms of fibromyalgia.
There are more if you like.
*bangs head against wall*
So if you get Fibromyalgia from it, stop drinking it. People die from peanuts; are you saying no one should eat peanuts, because some people have a bad reaction to them? How many times do I have to explain this?
Wouldn't it be wise to err on the side of caution given that, unlike peanut allergies, the mechanism by which aspartame would cause lupus/fibromyalgia is unknown?
I'm just making the case that the safety concerns from this stuff aren't all due to hippies and naturopaths.
Some people being allergic to peanuts is nowhere near the same thing as a chemical being metabolized into excess amounts of aspartic acid and leading to nerve death. By the way, here is another one where three individuals eliminated their carpal tunnel symptoms by removing aspartame from their diet. You'll need to login from a university for it.
Robbins, P and Lawrence R. "Aspartame and Symptoms of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome" Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine: Vol. 41, No. 6, p. 418
Wouldn't it be wise to err on the side of caution given that, unlike peanut allergies, the mechanism by which aspartame would cause lupus/fibromyalgia is unknown?
It is known in the sense that there is an excellent model derived from the breakdown of aspartame into aspartic acid, large amounts of which is known to kill nerve cells.
Wouldn't it be wise to err on the side of caution given that, unlike peanut allergies, the mechanism by which aspartame would cause lupus/fibromyalgia is unknown?
... it sounds pretty fucking known. She used aspartame drinks, she got symptoms which were similar to lupus, she stopped drinking the drinks, and the symptoms went away. She did not get lupus. She had an allergic reaction to the chemical.
You are treating an anecdote as if it were part of a scientific study.
There is a lady in the UK who gets headaches if she doesn't wear a tinfoil hat or something when she thinks she's around cellphones or wifi gear. Does that mean they are really the cause? No, it means she is crazy and has psychosomatic symptoms when she thinks she's around EVIL RADIATION.
Unless someone does a double-blind study of supposed fibromyalgia patients WRT aspartame/MSG exposure, it is meaningless.
Furthermore, fibromyalgia wasn't even recognized as a real disease the last time I checked.
You're right, its not a real diseases, its a diagnosis of exclusion that means "We don't know why you are having joint pain." How does that disprove aspartame as an unhealthy substance? Right there I have given you studies published in very respected journals that show something is clearly going on, along with a model of what exactly is going on.
I'm not advocating for it to be banned, I drink it myself on occasion when I have to have something sweet to drink (fructose corn syrup is way worse IMO). But it is stupid to go around telling people its completely safe and all the negative stuff about it was made up by propoganda.
You're right, its not a real diseases, its a diagnosis of exclusion that means "We don't know why you are having joint pain." How does that disprove aspartame as an unhealthy substance? Right there I have given you studies published in very respected journals that show something is clearly going on, along with a model of what exactly is going on.
I'm not advocating for it to be banned, I drink it myself on occasion when I have to have something sweet to drink (fructose corn syrup is way worse IMO). But it is stupid to go around telling people its completely safe and all the negative stuff about it was made up by propoganda.
For the vast, vast majority of people, it is perfectly safe. Just like peanuts. Or water. Or most substances consumed by humans on the face of the earth.
If you are looking to stay up and want a good diet energy drink, I recommend Enviga. It does have aspartame, but it tastes decent and it has a real kick, without giving you that hollow feeling that caffeine + sleep deprivation usually does.
Posts
From here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspartame#Aspartame_controversy
Also more here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspartame_controversy
Also: [SIZE=-1]
So it has only been in mass use since 1980s... at most that's 27-33 years of public consummation. That's a very short time to study the long term effects.
[/SIZE][SIZE=-1] Also here, in 1980 the FDA says:
[/SIZE]
The FDA has not retracted this statement Nor have they said anything to contradict this statement. They approved it in 1981 with the above statement still effective.
[SIZE=-1] Also here: http://www.healthdiaries.com/eatthis/aspartame-side-effects-include-cancer.html
'Aspartame "side effects"' returns 242K google results.
I stand by my orignal point, that right now; there isn't any conclusion evidence that it's harmful, but doesn't mean something won't be found with it.
There is enough evidence that Suggests that more studies should be done by INDEPENDENT researchers to Verify the results of previous studies.
[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]
Look at cigarettes. There was many "scientific" studies that where overseen and paid by the tobacco industry a few decades back "debunking" the "myth" that tobacco caused cancer and we all know how that turned out.
[/SIZE]
EDIT:
To add to that:
TransFat, HighFuctose Corn Syrup, MSG.... all in previous decades have been declared "Safe" and without any side effects what so ever.... but now we are learning other wise. It would be injust to say Aspartame has and Always will be safe with all the evidence that suggests otherwise.
One can of diet coke has 131mg of Aspartame. That means that at 120 pounds, you'd have to be drinking more than 8 cans of diet coke per day to be getting that amount.
I don't care what you're drinking, unless it's water, that much of it is probably going to give you cancer. Hell, that much water will probably do shit to you, too.
"9/11 conspiracy" returns 2.3 million Google results. What's your point?
If you're not suffering from any of the possible reactions to aspartame, it's not hurting you. I mean, really, peanuts kill some people, so should no one be eating peanuts, ever? Stupid fucking argument.
It would be unjust to say the same thing about water, so why are you suggesting people drink that? I mean, really, the vast, vast majority of people who've died over the past many millenia drank primarily water.
Thus the advantage of buying the team bags or loose tea, you can control how much, and what kind of milk you use.
And seriously, what do I lose if I'm wrong in this argument? At worst, a tasty diet drink... but if I right, I have some extra money (from not buying soda) and possible avoiding serious health problems.
I'll take that bet any day
Regardless I think this we've probably bored the orignal poster :P so I'm going to end it here.
Seriously, that's just a total bullshit answer. The basis for life is predicated on one simple fact: everything you do is killing you. To say diet soda is doing it any faster than anything else, given the scientific evidence, is about on par with saying holistic medicine will save your life.
At any rate, wasn't the crazy "Aspartame is poison!" thing started in an e-mail rumor..?
This cannot be emphasized enough. If you're concerned about weight/health issues, just stay away from sodas of any kind and even most juices because they have a lot of calories and usually sugar in them.
I've been lucky and have never really had a problem with the taste of water, tap or otherwise, but I do like to add a lot of ice to make it taste better. Crystal Light helped me drop the soda habit last year and I feel a lot better, especially after I work out. (I would rarely ever feel any effects of caffeine until after a workout, at which point I had a headache that would last the rest of the day regardless of how much water and aspirin I would take.)
If you're trying to lose weight, for the love of all that is holy, don't frequent coffee shops. A 16oz mocha? ~500 calories. 16oz latte? ~360 calories. Even your non-fat latte, 12oz? ~135 cal. Name as regular soda's, for the option with the least calories. These are small examples, though. I created a shake there that tastes like choco puffs. Exactly like them, its really, really good. I did the math today at work. A 32oz of it has 1700-1800 calories. For one drink. Instead, get tea's, or actual coffee(as opposed to 'espresso drinks'). General rule of thumb here is, the sweeter/better tasting it is, the worse it is for you.
Anyways, to get back on course, I have two suggestions. 'Fruit fiz' around here, someone mentioned it as 'clear' earlier, basically carbonated, flavorful, calorie/fat free water. It tastes really good, and is not bad for you. I also want to suggest the diet sprite drink, sprite zero or whatever they call it. It might just be me, but its the one and only diet soda I prefer over the regular soda.
3ds friend code: 2981-6032-4118
It's been around a long time. I remember when I was a kid in the mid-80s, friends telling me that a friend of a friend had gone blind from drinking diet soda, that kind of thing. Most of the information I've read has been that it started because of a combination of Puritan-style thinking ("You can't have something sweet without paying the price, whether it's calories or CANCER."), anti-science hippie thinking ("anything made with CHEMICALS is unsafe! I only consume things that are chemical-free, like hard vacuum!") and people associating the research on saccharin with all artificial sweeteners. Of course, since then saccharin itself has pretty much been redeemed for the same reason - you have to feed piles of it to rats before they start to have any reaction.
The first time I heard of it online was around 1996. Someone showed me a printout of an email about it, and it was clearly designed as a marketing tactic for the author's book which was advertised at the end.
http://www.thelostworlds.net/
the national cancer institute did a different study of people which showed no significant relationship, but:
Personally, a member of my family has worked with higher ups at Pepsi who have said unofficially that diet soda is definitely bad for you (more along the lines of "whoa, don't actually drink that stuff!" then a short explanation when he was grabbing a diet pepsi).
However anyone who claims to "know" the answer to this whole question is straight up full of shit.
The fact is that we don't know. It hasn't been proven one way or another, and it's up to the individual to decide whether they think it's a risk or not.
Read the FDA approval process, it's rather creepy.
There was one study cited earlier which put the problem level at 20 milligrams per kilogram of weight per day. For a 120-pound person, that's over 8 cans of diet soda per day. This has been explained several times. A few diet sodas are not going to hurt you; drinking them exclusively, over the course of your lifetime, might.
If you can't provide an actual, honest-to-god clinical study, along with methodology, just shut the fuck up about "it's going to kill you," "it might kill you," or "we don't know whether or not it will kill you." We can't prove it won't kill you; it is impossible. Then again, you can't prove water isn't going to kill you. There are times people have died from water poisoning, but you're not advocating not drinking water.
I couldn't find many studies discussing that aspect though during a cursory glance at pubmed though...well heres one:
It is concluded that aspartame consumption may constitute a hazard because of its contribution to the formation of formaldehyde adducts.
I imagine it's safe in the doses usually consumed, but really if you're concerned about your health, I would maybe use diet soda as an aid in weaning yourself off habitual soda consumption completely. That's what I ended up doing, and it was one of the best health related things I've ever done
Whether I cited the actual amounts of anything is moot, the point was that evidence has been found saying that it's harmful and that it's not harmful.
You can't just say, as you did before, that all the studies that are good show that you're right, and the ones that say otherwise are bad, with no explanation of why.
MY post wasn't in favor of or against diet drinks, just to say that there's really not enough information out there on the long term effects of aspartame to draw any kind of conclusion that you could argue to someone else.
Your water argument is stupid. Comparing an artificial compound to water in terms of possible long-term health effects is just plain dumb.
Just relax man, this isn't something you have to be right about, and even if it was, you're doing a terrible job of it.
check this out if you really want the references
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspartame_controversy
ON TOPIC: Diet rockstar is great and doesn't have sodium benzoate or aspartame
I know it's already been limed once, but really - Crystal Light is awesome. It's awesome not only because you can buy it to mix up ala Kool Aid to throw in the fridge but also because they have the travel packets that you just throw into a bottle of water and shake for instant goodness. They have a citrus iced tea that's really good.
Wikipedia is not a source, and on this particular subject, seems to be totally full of shit, probably last-edited by some holistic hippie or conspiracy theorist who thinks the Russians want our precious fluids.
Just posted this in the other thread
My sister presented symptoms of lupus/fibromyalgia, she was drinking about 3 diet mountain dews a day. Thats a lot but not unheard of. Soon as she stopped her symptoms all disappeared.
JD Smith, CM Terpening, SO Schmidt, and JG Gums. "Relief of fibromyalgia symptoms following discontinuation of dietary excitotoxins" The Annals of Pharmacotherapy: Vol. 35, No. 6, pp. 702-706
Four out of four patients had complete resolution of their problem after eliminating MSG and aspartame from their diet.
Alan C. Logan. "Dietary Modifications and Fibromyalgia" Complementary Health Practice Review, Vol. 8, No. 3, 234-245
Another study where cutting out aspartame eliminated symptoms of fibromyalgia.
There are more if you like.
So if you get Fibromyalgia from it, stop drinking it. People die from peanuts; are you saying no one should eat peanuts, because some people have a bad reaction to them? How many times do I have to explain this?
Some people being allergic to peanuts is nowhere near the same thing as a chemical being metabolized into excess amounts of aspartic acid and leading to nerve death. By the way, here is another one where three individuals eliminated their carpal tunnel symptoms by removing aspartame from their diet. You'll need to login from a university for it.
Robbins, P and Lawrence R. "Aspartame and Symptoms of Carpal Tunnel Syndrome" Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine: Vol. 41, No. 6, p. 418
It is known in the sense that there is an excellent model derived from the breakdown of aspartame into aspartic acid, large amounts of which is known to kill nerve cells.
... it sounds pretty fucking known. She used aspartame drinks, she got symptoms which were similar to lupus, she stopped drinking the drinks, and the symptoms went away. She did not get lupus. She had an allergic reaction to the chemical.
There is a lady in the UK who gets headaches if she doesn't wear a tinfoil hat or something when she thinks she's around cellphones or wifi gear. Does that mean they are really the cause? No, it means she is crazy and has psychosomatic symptoms when she thinks she's around EVIL RADIATION.
Unless someone does a double-blind study of supposed fibromyalgia patients WRT aspartame/MSG exposure, it is meaningless.
Furthermore, fibromyalgia wasn't even recognized as a real disease the last time I checked.
http://www.thelostworlds.net/
I'm not advocating for it to be banned, I drink it myself on occasion when I have to have something sweet to drink (fructose corn syrup is way worse IMO). But it is stupid to go around telling people its completely safe and all the negative stuff about it was made up by propoganda.