Science vs the Fructose/HFCS Conspiracy

Ask and answer questions, discuss research and applications

Moderators: Ironman, Jungledoc, parth, stuward

Locked
Peter Rouse
Novice
Novice
Posts: 96
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 7:31 pm
Location: Santa Monica, CA

Post by Peter Rouse » Mon Apr 12, 2010 3:49 pm

Just because you are too stupid to even understand what they are talking about does not make them unrelated.

Seeing Monsanto put Aspartame on the market I think they are very relevant but if you want to live you your own little dream world go ahead. I bet you didn't even watch them all. No wonder Americans are getting more stupid by the day with attitudes like yours. Go eat you aspartame, drink your fluoride - please, as you will be doing a world a favor.

I have been i meetings with researchers when they openly discussed how they could "adjust" the results of their studies. I bet you have never even open a biochemistry text book in your life.

Wake up to the real world!


Rucifer
Member
Member
Posts: 928
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 11:21 pm
Location: Ohio, USA

Post by Rucifer » Mon Apr 12, 2010 3:55 pm

Ironman wrote:
Rucifer wrote:Everyone seems to be on the stevia bandwagon as of late. I cut out artifical sweeteners myself, how does stevia compare to them?
Well it's not natural, and it's not sugar. Most importantly it tries let you make something sweet with little or no calories and little to no effect on blood sugar. It sweetens things, so it HAS to be bad for you somehow, if it isn't in the same way as sugar then of course it must be MUCH worse.

Since it isn't natural it of course causes cancer, aids, necrotising fasceitis, MS, Parkinsons. Lupus, heart disease, gingivitis, PTSD,terminal flatulence, bubonic plague, small pox, polio, halitosis and bad posture.
I realize you were being a bit of a smartass in this reply, but I am honestly curious if Stevia has the same backlash that many artifical sweeteners do. I cut them out simply because when I was drinking them I was drinking entirely too much caffeine in addition to the coffee in the morns.

Rucifer
Member
Member
Posts: 928
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 11:21 pm
Location: Ohio, USA

Post by Rucifer » Mon Apr 12, 2010 3:57 pm

Peter Rouse wrote:Why do we need sweeteners in the first place?
Cause we live in modern society and I do like the taste of something sweet in moderation. And because its natural human instinct.

User avatar
stuward
moderator
moderator
Posts: 6648
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 5:44 pm
Location: Halifax, NS

Post by stuward » Mon Apr 12, 2010 4:08 pm

Stevia has some of the same drawbacks as all sweeteners. If it's sweet it will have an effect on the body that may be detrimental. There is evidence that artificial sweeteners could actually cause weight gain.

Searching stevia side effects will give you lots of stuff, some positive, some negative, all inconclusive.

Most of the controversy has nothing to do with any side effects but in the political nonsense behind it.

http://herbs.org/greenpapers/controv.html#stevia

Peter Rouse
Novice
Novice
Posts: 96
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 7:31 pm
Location: Santa Monica, CA

Post by Peter Rouse » Mon Apr 12, 2010 4:23 pm

Rucifer wrote:
Peter Rouse wrote:Why do we need sweeteners in the first place?
Cause we live in modern society and I do like the taste of something sweet in moderation. And because its natural human instinct.
Actually no it's not natural instinct


User avatar
stuward
moderator
moderator
Posts: 6648
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 5:44 pm
Location: Halifax, NS

Post by stuward » Mon Apr 12, 2010 4:26 pm

Liking sweet things is natural, eating them in modern quantities is not.

frigginwizard
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 226
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 12:44 pm

Post by frigginwizard » Mon Apr 12, 2010 4:26 pm

Peter Rouse wrote:Just because you are too stupid to even understand what they are talking about does not make them unrelated.
actually I called them useless, not unrelated.

Its youtube ffs, I could put together a youtube video in no time that talks about how blueberries make your balls shrink.

How it is that you think you can have a serious evidence based conversation by posting youtube links, and calling anyone who disagrees with you names is beyond me.

Just for the record, I don't use artificial sweeteners. Not because I think it will give me cancer, but because I dont like the taste. But if I ever felt the need to use them, your temper and rampant use of unreliable internet sources certainly wouldn't deter me.

Image

robertscott
Deific Wizard of Sagacity
Deific Wizard of Sagacity
Posts: 4424
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 7:20 pm

Post by robertscott » Mon Apr 12, 2010 4:30 pm

frigginwizard wrote:
Peter Rouse wrote:Just because you are too stupid to even understand what they are talking about does not make them unrelated.
actually I called them useless, not unrelated.

Its youtube ffs, I could put together a youtube video in no time that talks about how blueberries make your balls shrink.

How it is that you think you can have a serious evidence based conversation by posting youtube links, and calling anyone who disagrees with you names is beyond me.

Just for the record, I don't use artificial sweeteners. Not because I think it will give me cancer, but because I dont like the taste. But if I ever felt the need to use them, your temper and rampant use of unreliable internet sources certainly wouldn't deter me.

quote]

bravo! It's a shame this thread's turned into this

Peter Rouse
Novice
Novice
Posts: 96
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 7:31 pm
Location: Santa Monica, CA

Post by Peter Rouse » Mon Apr 12, 2010 5:02 pm

It's obvious you did not even watch them by your comments

Peter Rouse
Novice
Novice
Posts: 96
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 7:31 pm
Location: Santa Monica, CA

Post by Peter Rouse » Mon Apr 12, 2010 5:03 pm

stuward wrote:Liking sweet things is natural, eating them in modern quantities is not.
Actually no it's not natural. Anyone with a biochemistry background will know this.

Marnix
Rookie
Rookie
Posts: 36
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 5:47 am

Post by Marnix » Mon Apr 12, 2010 5:12 pm

Peter Rouse wrote:
stuward wrote:Liking sweet things is natural, eating them in modern quantities is not.
Actually no it's not natural. Anyone with a biochemistry background will know this.
Explain?

User avatar
stuward
moderator
moderator
Posts: 6648
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 5:44 pm
Location: Halifax, NS

Post by stuward » Mon Apr 12, 2010 5:26 pm

I'd like it explained too. I always thought that sweetness was associated with ripeness and nutrition in our evolutionary past. It's only in unnatural abundance that sweetness becomes unnaturally unhealthy. You might have to use small words so us uneducated folk can understand.

Jebus
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
Posts: 1106
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2009 11:04 pm

Post by Jebus » Mon Apr 12, 2010 6:02 pm

Here is one more piece of evidence I will post,

"There is no evidence to suggest that the consumption of foods containing this sweetener, according to the provisions of the Food and Drug Regulations and as part of a well-balanced diet, would pose a health hazard to consumers. In addition, other scientific advisory bodies such as the Scientific Committee for Food of the European Community, and the Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) of the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization and World Health Organization have reviewed all the available safety studies and have found aspartame to be safe. More than ninety countries world-wide, including the United States, countries of the European Union, and Australia and New Zealand, have also reviewed aspartame and found it to be safe for human consumption and allow its use in various foods."

-Canadian Food Inspection Agency

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fn-an/securit/ad ... me-eng.php

frogbyte
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
Posts: 1455
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 3:46 pm

Post by frogbyte » Mon Apr 12, 2010 6:05 pm

I'm not convinced it's natural either. I think it's an acquired taste at a young age that people carry over unnaturally to adulthood. Ie, human milk is very sweet so babies should like sweetness, but then we keep shoving candy down their throats and perpetuate it incorrectly.

Peter Rouse
Novice
Novice
Posts: 96
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 7:31 pm
Location: Santa Monica, CA

Post by Peter Rouse » Mon Apr 12, 2010 6:17 pm

Jebus wrote:Here is one more piece of evidence I will post,

"There is no evidence to suggest that the consumption of foods containing this sweetener, according to the provisions of the Food and Drug Regulations and as part of a well-balanced diet, would pose a health hazard to consumers. In addition, other scientific advisory bodies such as the Scientific Committee for Food of the European Community, and the Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) of the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization and World Health Organization have reviewed all the available safety studies and have found aspartame to be safe. More than ninety countries world-wide, including the United States, countries of the European Union, and Australia and New Zealand, have also reviewed aspartame and found it to be safe for human consumption and allow its use in various foods."

-Canadian Food Inspection Agency

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fn-an/securit/ad ... me-eng.php
So you trust the government to do the right thing by you?

You people have very short memories.


Locked