The Museum of Hoaxes
Aspartame Disease
Posted By:
Gee...
Jun 30, 2004
 This is an old one, isn't it? I need to convince my crazy parents and a couple of co-workers that it's a hoax.
Category: Food, Health; Replies: 52

Comments
Terry Austin
Posted: Wed Jun 30, 2004 | 04:22 PM
Snopes is your friend. They have many links.

http://www.snopes.com/toxins/aspartame.asp

Not that facts will help you any.
Gee...
Posted: Wed Jun 30, 2004 | 05:17 PM
People are stupid.
Bill
Posted: Thu Jul 01, 2004 | 10:35 AM
This was in a book used in an upper level college course and the teacher used it as a test question.

"According to a growing number of scientists, aspartame is the most dangerous substance added to foods. Aspartame currently accounts for more than 75 percent of the adverse reactions to food additives reported to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration."

~ Simon, D. Elite Deviance, 2002. Allyn and Bacon.

The discussion continues for several pages, and also quote publications from the F.D.A. and other sources.

Decades ago there were numerous articles in those same publications warning about possible dangers of Aspartame. There was kind of a scare about it. Your parents probably remember those articles. I wouldn't say your parents are crazy or call people stupid for this. This is simply a case of misinformation, which is still perpetuated obviously.

When things like this happen, who do you believe? Simon, author of the book, is a professor at a college. Do you believe the media, or a published college professor? The media is often the source of misinformation. This is not a case of "people are stupid."
Gee...
Posted: Thu Jul 01, 2004 | 10:48 AM
I said people are stupid because most of them, especially the ones who forwarded the e-mail shown in snopes, didn't bother to do any research. The just said "Oh, my goodness!" to themselves and forwarded away!

Any e-mail about "a friend" is suspect...then there's that much too long laundry list of ailments caused by aspartame...I mean come on...who'd believe that?

As to who do you believe? Certainly not an e-mail written by someone you've never heard of. I just wonder how many of these nuts actually asked a doctor about aspertame BEFORE sending it on.

Besides, you know that no one but you heard about this thing from a book...everyone else read the e-mail!
Bill
Posted: Thu Jul 01, 2004 | 04:17 PM
Yes, you are right. There are plenty of times I think that people are unwise for doing sending emails like this. I misunderstood and thought you were calling his parents stupid. There's no discussion of them receiving this email.

Actually, the "laundry list" of possible repercussion which you describe as being "too long" comes directly from an FDA report.

Report on All Adveerse Reactions in the Adverse Reaction Monitoring System. February 25 and 28, 1994. Department of Health and Human Services.
Gee...
Posted: Thu Jul 01, 2004 | 07:18 PM
Actually, this is what the FDA says about aspertame...now...

After reviewing scientific studies, FDA determined in 1981 that aspartame was safe for use in foods. In 1987, the General Accounting Office investigated the process surrounding FDA's approval of aspartame and confirmed the agency had acted properly. However, FDA has continued to review complaints alleging adverse reactions to products containing aspartame. To date, FDA has not determined any consistent pattern of symptoms that can be attributed to the use of aspartame, nor is the agency aware of any recent studies that clearly show safety problems.

Carefully controlled clinical studies show that aspartame is not an allergen. However, certain people with the genetic disease phenylketonuria (PKU), those with advanced liver disease, and pregnant women with hyperphenylalanine (high levels of phenylalanine in blood) have a problem with aspartame because they do not effectively metabolize the amino acid phenylalanine, one of aspartame's components. High levels of this amino acid in body fluids can cause brain damage. Therefore, FDA has ruled that all products containing aspartame must include a warning to phenylketonurics that the sweetener contains phenylalanine.

Bill
Posted: Fri Jul 02, 2004 | 10:41 AM
Yes, that's what they say now. But I've show other places where other opposite information was posted.

Which is why I completely understand people who still believe that Aspartame is bad. This is a more reasonable bit of misinformation to believe than, say, the Bill Gates Email Hoax or scores of countless other stupid things that people believe.
Diva
Posted: Fri Mar 04, 2005 | 08:28 AM
As with many of you, I am a skeptic. It is difficult to make me believe something like this. But...I will speak from my own experience. Not the tale told by a friend of a friend, but me personally.

Up until 2 days ago I've been drinking Diet Coke and Diet Dr. Pepper. Probably 3 or more cans a day. Progressively, i've felt worse and worse over the past several months. I also started drinking more and more diet drinks.

My niece warned me about Aspartame. I didn't listen and kept on drinking the Diet sodas. My symptoms included declining eyesight, fatigue, headaches, dizziness, aches in my neck, overpowering stress and a feeling of desparation. I did not want to get out of bed in the morning, I could have slept all day.

Two days ago I stopped drinking the sodas. It is the first time in over a year and a half that i've gone this long without a diet soda. The day after I stopped, I woke up feeling better. This morning, it is twofold. I feel better than I have in months. I've got a great energy level. I can breathe better, see more clearly, think clearly and I hopped out of bed.

I ask myself...is this merely coincidence? There is nothing else i've changed in my diet or routine. If I was hearing this from a friend then I may doubt some but this happened to me...just this week.

The energy I feel is natural, not that of any stimulant. My attitude is that I could conquer the world and I have my confidence back.

This experience is enough to make me never consume Aspartame again. When I see a diet coke, it looks like a skull and crossbones to me...and I don't miss it at all.

...just my own story...
Diva
X
in McKinney, TX
 Member
Posted: Fri Mar 04, 2005 | 10:15 AM
Well, remember Diva; Coke will soon be using Splenda!!!!
Sharruma
Posted: Fri Mar 04, 2005 | 11:03 AM
Oh yuk, Splenda is revolting

We tried a bottle of something sweetened with it, we ended up pouring it down the drain.

I mean Aspartame tastes bad enough, but this stuff was totally undrinkable
Diva
Posted: Fri Mar 04, 2005 | 11:16 AM
Really? I wonder why the change...

I read online that Splenda has chlorine in it. Has anyone heard about it being harmful, or is that another board? LOL

😊
Rod
in the land of smarties.
 Member
Posted: Fri Mar 04, 2005 | 11:40 AM
Hmm, lemme see... something everybody uses every day that has chlorine in it...

Nope, nothing instantly comes to mind.

Except table salt (sodium CHLORIDE) and chlorinated drinking water. Holy crap, we've all been dead for the last forty years and we didn't even realize it!
Mike
Posted: Fri Mar 04, 2005 | 12:01 PM
I think that it's safest to be skeptical of at least some of these "advances" in food science. Considering the volumes at which many people consume diet drinks, it's not hard to imagine them developing health problems. For instance, people who eat too much sugar can end up diabetic because of the overload... so who's to say that you can't develop something similar to PKU or "hyperphenylalanine" when you consume too much aspartame (see the packaging on many sugar-free breath fresheners: "contains phenylketonurics"). I'll bet there are people out there who drink nothing but diet soda and pop these mints all day. Would it be surprising to learn that they might be at risk?

Splenda also worries me. According to what I've read, it's essentially two sugars bound with chlorine. Now, we all know that, just because there's a molecule of chlorine, it isn't necessarily unsafe (table salt NaCl)... but this is a new, lab-engineered chemical that just happens to be sweet and resistant to metabolization in the body (scientists believe this is specifically because of the chlorine, if I remember correctly)... now everybody's in a hurry to start using it instead of sugar... in the interest of what, health???

Personally, I think it's best to stick to sugar for cooking, and then you can use it as sparingly as you see fit. Then, when you buy a drink or a snack, it probably won't hurt to buy something with an artificial sweetener if you're that concerned about calories. No matter what, I think it's safe to say that in the long run, it's probably better to sacrifice a few sweet snacks in our diets in exchange for better health.
X
in McKinney, TX
 Member
Posted: Fri Mar 04, 2005 | 12:10 PM
Well, I found it to be a great alternative to put in coffee. Still like the sugar better, but after blood work last week, I gotta stay away from it for a while.
winona
Posted: Fri Mar 04, 2005 | 07:02 PM
My husband (diabetic) has been using Stevia extract in his coffee. You might want to try it, tho he says it tastes like saccarin. (Which I like, but most people don't).

One caveat, he says, if you use too much it starts to get bitter.

(I think this is "barely-on-topic day" for me, sorry guys).
meaganUGA
Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2005 | 07:17 AM
Why is it that all of these emails about aspartame relay stories about a friend of a friend? The Internet is great, but I
Tru
in Other Words
 Member
Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2005 | 10:39 AM
Okay, so my take on this... I've been a diet coke addict for years and I've never had a problem with the aspartame. My mom on the other hand will be sick for three days if she has even a little bit. But then she also has the same problem with a lot of other chemicals. I think it just depends on each person.

As to the Splenda craze, I personally love the stuff. When they start making the diet coke with splenda in convenient cans instead of just 20oz and 2ltr bottles, I will definitely make the switch. But like I've told everyone who asks me about it, you really have to like the taste of splenda (I do). Just like regular diet coke has an aspartame aftertaste, the new stuff has a splenda aftertaste. I don't know if the new stuff is any healthier, but I like it!
Dany
in Waco, Texas
 Member
Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2005 | 11:42 AM
I think they do have some coke with Splenda in it. But I could be wrong.
smith
Posted: Sun Jun 26, 2005 | 02:42 PM
I agree with meaganUGA there is a lot of rubbish about aspartame on the net. OK maybe some people are allergic to it but then there are people that are allergic to bread, milk - just about anything. For a sensible view check out <a href=http://www.aspartame.info>http://www.aspartame.info</a>.
Saint Cad
Posted: Sun Jun 26, 2005 | 05:35 PM
I love Splenda and use it is the ratio 3:1 when making Kool-aid since it doesn't have the syrupy after effect when drinking it. C2 was great and the new Coke w/Splenda is pretty good. My opinion is that a combination of sugar and Splenda is the way to go.
Maegan
in Tampa, FL - USA
 Member
Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2005 | 09:28 AM
I'm sure drinking water is totally out of the question.
Evan
Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2005 | 11:44 AM
Keep in mind that Stevia is illegal in several European countries and has been linked to liver damage with long term use. Just because it has a natural source doesn't make it okay. Poison ivy is a plant too and all natural as well.
Accipiter
Member
Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2005 | 03:35 PM
You have to be a bit skeptical of some of these studies that declare various food additives to be carcinogens or to damage the liver or whatever. There was one experiment done on something (I can't remember what it was now, but it was something in sodas) that I read a while ago. First, they started on the assumption that a person drank 20 gallons a day, every day, and calculated the amount of whatever substance it was that would be in that. They then figured out what that amount would be proportional to a lab rat. They then multiplied that amount by 200. They injected the rats every day with that amount of whatever it was, and the rats were fine. So they multiplied it by 200 again and the rats were fine. Again they multiplied it by 200, and started injecting the rats with that amount daily. After a few months of that the rats died, and the researchers published an article about how the stuff in sodas causes liver damage (assuming that you drink 160,000,000 gallons a day for several months on end). Personally, I wonder if the rats simply exploded due to so much stuff being injected into them.
Peter
in Melbourne, Australia
 Member
Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2005 | 06:23 PM
There's an interesting story at:

http://www.abc.net.au/science/k2/moments/s1167056.htm

It's title is "Killer Diet Drinks" and it seems to describe the Aspartame disease thing as a myth
Maegan
in Tampa, FL - USA
 Member
Posted: Tue Jun 28, 2005 | 05:38 AM
Water doesn't have calories.
DFStuckey
Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 | 11:38 PM
I don't write off everyone who claims they had a reaction to Aspartame, for one good reason: It is an artificial protein made up of two amino acids, and as we all should know, the key trigger to the human immune system is protein. Mkaes sense, as all life is made of proteins, that the body should disrupt if something suspicious made of amino acids arrives in the system . . .

Still, nothing added to food shows as strong an allergic reaction in as many people as the Food The FDA Wont Let American Vegeterians Eat; The substance sold in Europe under the name Quorn. A random selection of any human population will show 10% of them will have severe reactions to Quorn, compared to 5% for eggs and 2% for peanuts.

But then, if the FDA told you what Quorn was, you seppos might not want to eat it, even out of spite:) :lol:
Doug Parks
Posted: Fri Jul 08, 2005 | 08:05 AM
Funny how the sites that claim aspartame is harmless somewhow have more credence than the ones that come out against it. I'll go with my personal experience. I had about 10 symptoms, stopped using NutraSweet, and voila! Doing much better.
DFStuckey
Posted: Sat Jul 09, 2005 | 02:25 AM
Doug, I am happy that you feel better. But I must remind you that there are dozen of other ingredients in those foods and beverages that may also have triggered your reaction. Do without those as well and also voila! No proof at all.

What is needed is a double-blind test; You should try consuming items that you don't know what is in them, administered by someone else you also can't tell you immmediately whether you are having the allergen or not. Tests like this ruule out the possibility of psycosomatic reactions. which are real; I once saw the skin blisters caused by distilled water on the skin of a person who was "allergic" to honey, after she was told that the water contained a dilute amount of honey.

In any case, many people are allergic to antibiotics; Would you have thsoe banned totally to prevent a few abreactions, or merely work around them?
Be_aware
Posted: Sun Jul 17, 2005 | 11:49 AM
Just so you are a bit more aware...

This is from another site who's now weirdly enough, only viewable by Google "cached link" option.

Clever, Meagan, but not clever enough. You present yourself as a random person interested in diet soda, but in fact you are working for the Calorie Central Council, "an international association of manufacturers of low-calorie and reduced-fat foods and beverages. [The Council] has approximately 60 members, including the manufacturers of alternative sweeteners, fat replacers and low-calorie bulking agents." The CCC runs aspartame.org, and is a client of the Kellen Company. Meagan's post was from a host in the "kcocommitmenttoexcellence.com" domain, owned by that same Kellen Company.

A Google search on the name "meaganUGA" shows that she has posted on a few other sites about this same issue, each time not disclosing her relationship to this council. That really doesn't make me want to believe her.

davidh

David Henderson (link) - June 24 '05, 16:00

here's her reply...

David,
Yes, I do work on behalf of the Calorie Control Council (CCC) but I'm also a girl who loves diet soda. Who knew you could actually mix work with pleasure! At the CCC, I work alongside registered dieticians who are very knowledgeable about aspartame's safety and benefits as well as low calorie sweeteners in general and weight control topics. I've read a lot of the information and research out there so I'm serving as an informed source with scientific evidence to back up my statements. I care about the facts surrounding the safety of aspartame
Be_aware
Posted: Sun Jul 17, 2005 | 11:56 AM
Sorry I forgot to include her original post.


There are tons of rumors and allegations on the Internet about aspartame, almost all of which are false. Go to and click on the "Myths" section and you'll see what I mean! Because I'm obsessed with diet soda and sugar free gum, I did some research on my own about aspartame's safety and found that it has been studied a lot! .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

meaganUGA (email) - June 24 '05, 09:18

Find it with search keyword: meaganUGA
and look for: Omphaloskepsis - It's not just a job... it's a way of life
Dan
Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2005 | 07:02 PM
I have personally seen people become semi-addicted to diet drinks to the point that they consume several liters a day and are unable to stop.

People need to keep in mind that the problem with aspartame is not that it is an allergen but that is a neurotoxin. Most of the chronic effects attributable to aspartame are due to its apparent neurotoxicity. The other significant effect of aspartame seems to be increased appetite after consuming it. The people that I've seen who were heavy diet drink consumers also generally became more and more obese. After they drink the aspartame-loaded drink, their appetite increases significantly. Don't believe it? Watch your friends drink diet pop when they don't know what you're watching for. After they drink the diet pop, the next thing they will want is a snack or food of some kind, usually within 10 or 15 minutes.
Captain Al
in Vancouver Island, Canada
 Member
Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2005 | 09:36 PM
"Most of the chronic effects attributable to aspartame are due to its apparent neurotoxicity."

There have never been any harmful effects attributed to aspartame. It's all been a myth spread on the Internet, that wonderful new medium so efficient at spreading rumors. Serious research websites, such as <a href="http://www.snopes.com/toxins/aspartame.asp">Snopes</a> have traced the history of this urban legend.

If aspartame caused even a small fraction of the problems claimed by the urban legend, there is no way it would be allowed in food products, unless of course your're into conspriracy theories.
Dan
Posted: Sat Feb 04, 2006 | 02:03 PM
I have heard the aspartame hoax myself, and some crackpots on shortwave radio warn about it when they're not giving dire warnings about the New World Order and other conspiracies. The only reasoable warning I've heard is from my neurologist. I take Tegretol for epilepsy, and it can damage the liver, so I would have a problem with it and my medication. Most other people should be fine.
Ed
Posted: Fri Feb 24, 2006 | 11:48 PM
Also, the BIG point many of the anti aspartame folks mention to further enhance the scare,,, > it converts to formaldehyde!! well folks! the biggest source of formaldehyde on planet Earth is........ drum roll......... tomatoes!!!
so any time you heat up spaghetti sauce or eat pizza, your getting MORE formaldehyde than you are from aspartame.

hmmmmmm,,,,, all these internet scare hoaxes, people who blindly forward junk email / scare hoaxes without doing their own research (same applies for all those fake virus alerts via junk email from your best friends, neighbors and relatives!!) none of them think anything of goning to McDonalds and shoving that stuff down their throat,,,,,,,,,, now there's some real poison!!
Barb101
Posted: Fri Apr 28, 2006 | 04:22 AM
I just got my blood test back from the dr seems i have a high AST and ALT level only thing i do thats bad is drink diet sodas next month im going to have another blood test run im giving up the sodas and going to see what these levels go to will report back here in june and let you people know My ast level is 46 my alt is 54
UKveggie
Posted: Wed May 17, 2006 | 09:32 AM
DFStucky,

I think that quorn thing is another hoax..

http://www.undueinfluence.com/milloy.htm

The so called CSPI which ran all the negative stories and spoke to all the media is funded by quorns main rival. The figures you quote are infact the same figures they quote, which is from a distorted clinical trial, which in reality puts allergic reactions at less than 1 in 100,000, which is far less than most foods - even mushrooms (which is only standing issue over quorn, is it was described as "mushroom based", where as really it's not technically a mushroom it's a fungal derivitive, the difference for the average consumer being trivial).

Interestingly one of the testimonails cited by the CSPI is from a man who suffered several hours of vomiting and diarphea (sp) EIGHT DAYS after consumming the quorn - quite how those two independant incidents could be linked is more than a little dubious.

Quorns been on sale here since the early 90s, and AFAIK hasn't had any health alerts or scares, and is consumed heavily by the vegetarian population (which I guess must be over 10million people, most of which consume it regularly (2x+ a week)) so I'm guessing that if it caused violent reactions in 10% of people we would have heard more about it by now..
DFStuckey
Posted: Sat May 20, 2006 | 04:14 PM
UKveggie, maybe you are right. My information came from a WHO treatise on the number of illnesses based on food sources, including food poisoning which also had a surprising result.


What does distort the reporting of some facts is the vested interest of those involved, I agree; And it occurs on both sides of the argument, as witness the macrobiotic diet gurus who attribute all adverse reactions to their regime as "the toxins exiting the body".

For myself, I just find certain sources of food disturbing and I avoid them. Everything in moderation.😊
T. Eaton
Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2006 | 07:23 PM
I'm a skeptic too, of any e-mail forwarded to me, but I researched this one. Then I told my mother (not a friend) about it. She has rhuematoid arthritis, and has been diagnosed with fibromyalgia. It has been difficult for her to get out of bed in the mornings, and painful to even walk to her car after work. Her feet, legs, arms and shoulders gave her constant pain. She drank 3-6 cans of diet soda a day. Two weeks ago, she quit the soda. When I talked to her yesterday she says she doesn't know if it's just in her head, but she has no muscle pain. She still has the arthritis, of course, but the overwhelming pain is gone. Say what you will, but I'm a believer.
Chris K
Posted: Wed Nov 22, 2006 | 11:08 AM
For those who say aspartame is safe...
How come the FDA not onliy denied it once, but denied it again when the commisioner Arthur Hayes thought he could have aspartame pushed through on an independent review board.
On January 21, 1981, the day after Ronald Reagan's inauguration, Searle re-applied to the FDA for approval to use aspartame in food sweetener, and Reagan's new FDA commissioner, Arthur Hayes Hull, Jr., appointed a 5-person Scientific Commission to review the board of inquiry's decision.

It soon became clear that the panel would uphold the ban by a 3-2 decision, but Hull then installed a sixth member on the commission, and the vote became deadlocked. He then personally broke the tie in aspartame's favor. Hull later left the FDA under allegations of impropriety, served briefly as Provost at New York Medical College, and then took a position with Burston-Marsteller, the chief public relations firm for both Monsanto and GD Searle. Since that time he has never spoken publicly about aspartame.


So it seems that when there is an intrest in lining your own pockets, that intrest outweighs public safety and intrest.

Can people at least admit that way aspartame was approved was in no way in the best public intrest of the people. If aspartame failed to be apporved more than once, why should it have to get all yes's only once. All that tells me is that you got the right group of assholes in the same room who all share the same intrests in the name of greed.

Would someone please agree with me to the fact that when the FDA allows more than half of its approval budget to come from the companies needing drugs approved(approx $500,000 per application), it doesnt take long to figure who's calling the shots.

And one last word for the day VIOXX
Kesley
Posted: Sun Jan 28, 2007 | 07:31 AM
Watch the documentary "Sweet Misery" and you be the judge:
http://www.veoh.com/videos/v212395E2Z3SJpj?searchId=78b3b651e37a19

And that "Aspartame.org" website is a joke. This happens all the time, whenever a certain organization wants to minimize this kind of controversy which is "bad for business" they make this "independent grassroots" website that says that's it's all a lie and it's fake. It's just a PR stunt:

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Calorie_Control_Council

The same thing happened when "An Inconvenient Truth" came out, this video surfaced on YouTube making fun of the documentary, making it look like it was made by some "bored college student," when it was really a PR employee hired by some gas company.

The same thing with "Handsoff.org" or some other ridiculous thing like that which was a "grassroots" company which wanted the government to let big telecom businesses do whatever they wanted with the internet and forget about net neutrality.

It happens all the time, it's the oldest trick in the book. Think twice when you see these websites and look at where the source comes from.


And I wouldn't give so much trust to the FDA. The FDA doesn't even do their own studies anymore. They just let the company do the study themselves and sends the FDA a report. The companies can leave whatever they want out of it or spin their test results if they want to. And if not, like has been done before, they can rely on some kind of corruption scandal.
artificialchemicalsKILL
Posted: Thu Feb 12, 2009 | 01:21 PM
you should all check out Natural news it tells you everything you need to know about aspartame and other artificially produced chemicals, Acesulphame K also comes under the list aswell as Sucralose..... here some other info on it from doctors and scientists

Based on his own clinical experience,James Braly, M.D., an allergy expert in Hollywood, Florida, states that 90% of all migraine headaches are directly linked to food allergies or to reactions caused by additives, particularly certain preservatives and colorings, caffeine, and chocolate. According to Dr. Chaitow, MSG and aspartame (NutraSweet
artificialchemicalsKILL
Posted: Thu Feb 12, 2009 | 01:28 PM
And also remember some peoples drinking water is fluoridated and surprisingly enough its RAT POISON.... how shocking

Should fluoride be added to our water supplies? Dr Howard was quite clear about what he felt.

"So, the evidence is out there for us to have to say that we got to be very careful. And my opinion is that there isn't a satisfactory one dose fits all solution through treating our population via tap water. There are going to be some members of that population which will be more disadvantaged than others, and they will obviously include the fetus and the infant, but at the other end of life, people who have got marginal kidney function will be more susceptible. And therefore, I don't think, on a precautionary basis, that we should be continuing the fluoridation of drinking water supplies," he said.

And he had some strong words regarding the authorities who continue adding fluoride to water supplies, too.

"If governments don't have ways of making sure that people in the areas that are fluoridated who are susceptible, like bottled fed babies, are actually stopped from being exposed in that way, then they have no right, really, to be using a mass medication like this," he added.

According to the video clip, Dr Howard is one of over 1,750 professionals from various communities - medical, scientific, and environmental - to sign a statement "calling for an end to water fluoridation worldwide"

surprisingly enough if the goverment say its ok you people believe... do more research people

your more at risk than you think
Ahem...
Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2009 | 01:06 PM
But you believe Snopes...have you researched them? Do you know who Snopes is? Do you know it's a couple in CA who do their own research just like you and me AND they don't research everything before coming to a conclusion!!! WHO'S STUPID NOW??? Don't believe EVERYTHING you read...do your own research!
D F Stuckey
Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2009 | 02:31 PM
Just a quick observation; The phrase "Do your own research" has come to mean "believe only what I say, not any conflicting evidence" to a lot of peopel . . . I hope ahem in Iowa isn't using it in that sense.

Anyway, sicne Ahem in Iowa has written this down, and tehrefore we are reading it, it is necessary that we do not believe everything Ahem in Iowa says either.
Glen
Posted: Sat Dec 19, 2009 | 08:45 PM
Whilst there are numerous false claims it does seem from the more mature of us that there are food additives today that obviously cause allergies etc which were not prevalent in our younger days. There is a cause for most of these problems BUT not enough research to discover the cause & act on them! Hence many old remedies becoming popular!
anarhrist
Posted: Sun Jan 10, 2010 | 02:19 PM
Chlorine in the drinking water if you do consume the tap water. Likely, people who are concerned about the effects of aspartame avoid fluoride as well. I myself do. Whether or not aspartame is causing cancers or not doesn't matter. What matters is people who choose to strip aspartame, fluoride, GMOs out of their diet are keeping their DNA unaltered and possibly doing a favor for their offspring. Why should I consume something that is unnatural? I think quite often these forums are dominated by office-chair jockeys who have fun shooting down people who question authority, question the "facts". I don't wish to preach to anyone, this is a choice for individuals to make.
Aaron Hart
Posted: Fri Feb 26, 2010 | 07:40 AM
I've looked at the evidence.

Read Dr Mercola's report. It has references to all you need to know.

Then watch the documentary "Sweet Deception" which shows you how deep the rabbit hole goes.

Then review the evidence which is all there at http://www.dorway.com

Linus Pauling said back in the 1980s that he was worried about the "possible toxicity of these non-orthomolecular compounds." Was he wrong too? He was a world-famous and highly respected NOBEL PRIZE WINNING CHEMIST who speciaized in orthomolecular medicine.

Believe scientists, doctors and ordinary people's experiences, or believe those who nail their colours to the mast when they send you to the official Aspartame website.

And how about this. If Aspartame is not bad for you, then like ALL THINGS YOU EAT that are not bad for you, it presumably does something good for you? What? The silence from the FDA in answer to this question is deafening.
Fastin
Posted: Sun Mar 07, 2010 | 06:09 AM
Consumption of sugar - it is as they say leads to diabetes. Also, there are cases when the doctors told you about that 2 different people, or rather one of them has a tendency to the disease, due to the fact that disturbed carbohydrate metabolism. Optional diabetes affects people who consume a lot of sugar, it may be hereditary.
Aaron Hart
Posted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 | 09:59 AM
QUORN:

I read some comment about this here. I ate it ten years ago for the first time and was violently sick within minutes. Quorn refunded me for the cost of the food (only) when I wrote to them, saying thst it was a rare response.

I ate it one more time a few years later, when my host did not realise (and neither did I) that the food contained it. I did not know I had eaten Quorn this second time either.

Again, I started to feel as if I was going to throw up, and we soon realised what was in the sausages. Because the throwing up had been so violent on the previous occasion, my host made me very strong ginger tea from fresh ginger to stop me being sick, which worked. I managed not to be sick. You eat quorn at your own risk. Nothing makes me retch all over the floor like Quorn.
D F Stuckey
Posted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 | 03:40 PM
What? Aaron, how can you POSSIBLY react badly to a natural, animal-friendly and Vegan-approved product like Quorn?

And it's everywhere, too - It's a fungi closely related to the Tinnea we degrade by the humanocentric name of Athlete's Foot Fungus. How could you not want to replace the murder-harvested meat with the lovely and delicious cousin of Jock Itch? 😊
Aaron Hart
Posted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 | 06:53 AM
I wish I had been sick the second time now. I ATE that stuff and kept it down!!!

Why do we make stuff when it greows for free?

Land is plentiful and covered in grass.
Horses breed new horses by eating grass.
Drinking water falls from the sky.
Food grows in the ground.
And wood to build houses grows on trees.

So why are we all so hard up?
D F Stuckey
Posted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 | 02:13 PM
"So why are we all hard up?"

Humans cannot digest grass.

Not everyone wants trees cut down to make houses.

It is unatural to eat horses.

And where did you find seeds to grow your computer? Or the electrical generator to power it?

Note: This thread is located in the Old Forum of the Museum of Hoaxes.