COMPANIES LEAVE OUT THE!!!! & INNOVATE

Page 4 of 5 First ... 2345 Last

  1. Double post


  2. Quote Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier

    For the purpose of discussion, I am going to square away the non-trivial matters of you using data prior to 1981 (when the studies you listed were found to have serious methodological deficiencies, including, though not limited to, conclusions which human morphology rendered moot), you deliberately obfuscating the timeline of approval, and you responding to a post I made about sucralose with a post on aspartame, and address your comments at face value.

    Even doing so, you will once again find that the credible scientific evidence lands on the opposite side of the fence.

    To wit:

    "Questions about artificial sweeteners and cancer arose when early studies showed that cyclamate in combination with saccharin caused bladder cancer in laboratory animals. However, results from subsequent carcinogenicity studies (studies that examine whether a substance can cause cancer) of these sweeteners have not provided clear evidence of an association with cancer in humans. Similarly, studies of other FDA-approved sweeteners have not demonstrated clear evidence of an association with cancer in humans."

    And:

    "Subsequently, NCI examined human data from the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study of over half a million retirees. Increasing consumption of aspartame-containing beverages was not iassociated with the development of lymphoma, leukemia, or brain cancer (2)."

    http://m.cancer.gov/topics/factsheet...ial-sweeteners

    "FDA Statement on European Aspartame Study
    CFSAN/Office of Food Additive Safety
    April 20, 2007
    FDA has completed its review concerning the long-term carcinogenicity study of aspartame entitled, "Long-Term Carcinogenicity Bioassays to Evaluate the Potential Biological Effects, in Particular Carcinogenic, of Aspartame Administered in Feed to Sprague-Dawley Rats," conducted by the European Ramazzini Foundation (ERF), located in Bologna, Italy. FDA reviewed the study data made available to them by ERF and finds that it does not support ERF's conclusion that aspartame is a carcinogen. Additionally, these data do not provide evidence to alter FDA's conclusion that the use of aspartame is safe."

    http://www.fda.gov/Food/Foodingredie.../ucm208580.htm

    Unless you assume that the National Cancer Institute is deliberately presenting falsified information, I hesitate to see how your position gains purchase: all the information demonstrative of adverse effects are either dubious or outright invalidated; while the methodology of studies showing no association have had their methodologies similarly vetted, and not found to be lacking.

    Your intractable position lacks any credible evidence to justify it.
    Yu a lawyer? Lol
    •   
       


  3. Quote Originally Posted by PreciseNstuff

    These are the kinds of post that dumb down the forum impeding constructive debate
    How does that dumb-down the forum? Because it's counter to your point? Are you suggesting that people do not report adverse reactions to vitamin C? You're basing your entire argument around anecdotal reports and a small segment of the population who is known to be unable to safely consume aspartame, against guys citing clinical research showing that things like aspartame and sucralose are safe to consume for most human beings in reasonable human dosages.

    So far you've twice lauded the intelligence of posters for no other reason than they agreed with you, and dismissed another as "dumb" because it disagreed with you. Is that what you consider to be constructive debate?

  4. Quote Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier View Post
    April 20, 2007
    "Long-Term Carcinogenicity Bioassays to Evaluate the Potential Biological Effects, in Particular Carcinogenic, of Aspartame Administered in Feed to Sprague-Dawley Rats," conducted by the European Ramazzini Foundation (ERF), located in Bologna, Italy. FDA reviewed the study...
    The Ramazzini study was reported in the November 2005 issue of "Environmental Health Perspectives," the peer-reviewed journal of th United States' National institute of Environmental Health Sciences.

    "Our study has shown that aspartame is a mulipotential 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."

    Aspartame has been banned in the Philippines due to its awful effects and banned in chidren's foods in others.

    Government members from countries have called for it's ban. One being Member of Parliament Roger Williams cited, "compelling and reliable evidence for this carcinogenic substance to to be banned from the UK food and drinks market altogether."

    As for the FDA Hull was 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, then took a position with Burston-Marsteller, the chief public relations firm for Searle and for Monsanto, which purchased Searle in 1985.

    Based on all this it is little wonder that many avoid artificial sweeteners. For those that like aspartame it is available. Companies make products in a variety of flavors so why not have an option for products sweetened with natural things so the consumer has an option.

  5. Quote Originally Posted by thills

    The Ramazzini study was reported in the November 2005 issue of "Environmental Health Perspectives," the peer-reviewed journal of th United States' National institute of Environmental Health Sciences.

    "Our study has shown that aspartame is a mulipotential 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."

    Aspartame has been banned in the Philippines due to its awful effects and banned in chidren's foods in others.

    Government members from countries have called for it's ban. One being Member of Parliament Roger Williams cited, "compelling and reliable evidence for this carcinogenic substance to to be banned from the UK food and drinks market altogether."

    As for the FDA Hull was 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, then took a position with Burston-Marsteller, the chief public relations firm for Searle and for Monsanto, which purchased Searle in 1985.

    Based on all this it is little wonder that many avoid artificial sweeteners. For those that like aspartame it is available. Companies make products in a variety of flavors so why not have an option for products sweetened with natural things so the consumer has an option.
    Again: the study you are quoting was fully-reviewed, and found not to demonstrate, with sufficient veracity, that aspartame possesses carcinogenicity.
    •   
       


  6. Quote Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier View Post
    with sufficient veracity
    Well heck I will just hang my hat on that there

  7. Quote Originally Posted by thills View Post
    Well heck I will just hang my hat on that there
    In the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary of your position, I would suggest it.

    If your entire approach to a topic hinges on an agency not finding a study to be complete nonsense, then a reorientation might be in order.

  8. Quote Originally Posted by thills View Post
    The Ramazzini study was reported in the November 2005 issue of "Environmental Health Perspectives," the peer-reviewed journal of th United States' National institute of Environmental Health Sciences.

    "Our study has shown that aspartame is a mulipotential 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."

    Aspartame has been banned in the Philippines due to its awful effects and banned in chidren's foods in others.

    Government members from countries have called for it's ban. One being Member of Parliament Roger Williams cited, "compelling and reliable evidence for this carcinogenic substance to to be banned from the UK food and drinks market altogether."

    As for the FDA Hull was 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, then took a position with Burston-Marsteller, the chief public relations firm for Searle and for Monsanto, which purchased Searle in 1985.
    I happen to care a little more about my hats Sir.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier View Post
    In the face of overwhelming evidence
    You have to be kidding me

  9. Quote Originally Posted by PreciseNstuff View Post
    I happen to care a little more about my hats Sir.



    You have to be kidding me
    Hey hey hey... let's keep this ad hominem... none of this science stuff you are providing.
    The Historic PES Legend

  10. Quote Originally Posted by PreciseNstuff

    I happen to care a little more about my hats Sir.

    You have to be kidding me
    No. If you take issue with the data I have presented, I would be interesting to know how and why it is deficient.

  11. Quote Originally Posted by Mulletsoldier View Post
    No. If you take issue with the data I have presented, I would be interesting to know how and why it is deficient.

    Don't hate the playa, hate the game!

  12. I find this thread highly entertaining. Didn't Sweet n low have a disclaimer on its packaging once? (maybe it still does, Idk).
    But hey, I've used sweet n low. I've used splenda, and sugar, stevia, agave, sweet serum. I have no doubt every single one of 'em is bad for some be it allergies, insulin response, reactions, interactions or whatever the hell. Does that mean we should ban it altogether? If consumers wish to educate themselves, then they can. I remember first hearing of the "dangers" of sweeteners a while back and researched all of them. Saw no reason to call any of them the devil. If ya just don't like one, pick another. This is 'Merica! F yeah! Ya got a choice.

    Sorry, my 2 cents. Please continue the entertainment.

    Also have to agree with bioman, aspartame tastes like ish.

  13. Quote Originally Posted by mattikus View Post
    I find this thread highly entertaining. Didn't Sweet n low have a disclaimer on its packaging once? (maybe it still does, Idk).
    But hey, I've used sweet n low. I've used splenda, and sugar, stevia, agave, sweet serum. I have no doubt every single one of 'em is bad for some be it allergies, insulin response, reactions, interactions or whatever the hell. Does that mean we should ban it altogether? If consumers wish to educate themselves, then they can. I remember first hearing of the "dangers" of sweeteners a while back and researched all of them. Saw no reason to call any of them the devil. If ya just don't like one, pick another. This is 'Merica! F yeah! Ya got a choice.

    Sorry, my 2 cents. Please continue the entertainment.

    Also have to agree with bioman, aspartame tastes like ish.
    Thanks for your post. My point in creating the thread was to point out that 90% of the companies selling "sports nutrition" supplements are not making options for those who wish to go with natural sweeteners, they will be the way of the future.
    For those that keep on about the FDA this and the fda that, well yeah it was a deadlock that was broken by just one vote, and some of those on this site claim this makes it correct. Obamacare was decided by just one vote so this makes it correct, and all Americans should agree?
    What has happened to Merica.

  14. Quote Originally Posted by thills

    Thanks for your post. My point in creating the thread was to point out that 90% of the companies selling "sports nutrition" supplements are not making options for those who wish to go with natural sweeteners, they will be the way of the future.
    For those that keep on about the FDA this and the fda that, well yeah it was a deadlock that was broken by just one vote, and some of those on this site claim this makes it correct. Obamacare was decided by just one vote so this makes it correct, and all Americans should agree?
    What has happened to Merica.
    Horrible analogy that demonstrates a clear misunderstanding of your reference and maybe your worst attempt yet at backing up your argument against artificial sweeteners.

  15. Quote Originally Posted by thills

    For those that keep on about the FDA this and the fda that, well yeah it was a deadlock that was broken by just one vote, and some of those on this site claim this makes it correct. Obamacare was decided by just one vote so this makes it correct, and all Americans should agree?
    What has happened to Merica.
    So, just to be clear: what are you objecting to-democracy, majoritarianism, or just any decision that does not agree with your personal tastes?
    If "90%" of supplement companies are making products with sweeteners you find (unscientifically) scary, maybe that is because you are in the minority & most consumers prefer lower calorie sweetened foods.

  16. Quote Originally Posted by thills View Post
    Thanks for your post. My point in creating the thread was to point out that 90% of the companies selling "sports nutrition" supplements are not making options for those who wish to go with natural sweeteners, they will be the way of the future.
    For those that keep on about the FDA this and the fda that, well yeah it was a deadlock that was broken by just one vote, and some of those on this site claim this makes it correct. Obamacare was decided by just one vote so this makes it correct, and all Americans should agree?
    What has happened to Merica.
    i give up..i thought i was thickheaded

  17. Quote Originally Posted by scherbs View Post
    So, just to be clear: what are you objecting to-democracy, majoritarianism, or just any decision that does not agree with your personal tastes?
    If "90%" of supplement companies are making products with sweeteners...
    I did not say "supplement companies"...go in any real health food store "not G..N..C or the like" and 99% of the powdered formulas, from sports nutrition to antioxidant formulations are made with natural sweeteners. I said 90% of "sports nutrition" companies, as in those that sell on a site such as NutraPlanet, which by the way I happen to like and do buy from albeit produts with no additives.
    As for low calorie sweeteners there are many natural to choose from so, "that dog don't hunt". If it would be cheaper for the companies to ad no sweetener at all that would be fine, but then again I am one of those that can drink straight Cissus powder and not bat an eye.

  18. Quote Originally Posted by thills

    I did not say "supplement companies"...go in any real health food store "not G..N..C or the like" and 99% of the powdered formulas, from sports nutrition to antioxidant formulations are made with natural sweeteners. I said 90% of "sports nutrition" companies, as in those that sell on a site such as NutraPlanet, which by the way I happen to like and do buy from albeit produts with no additives.
    As for low calorie sweeteners there are many natural to choose from so, "that dog don't hunt". If it would be cheaper for the companies to ad no sweetener at all that would be fine, but then again I am one of those that can drink straight Cissus powder and not bat an eye.
    Oh "sports nutrition", not supplement companies-your argument is no longer dripping with illogic!
    You do realize that "real health food stores" are able to sell highly specialized products at a marked up price b/c they have a very narrowly defined market- unlike the broader one served by NP

    ---oh: and cissus can cause headaches & diarrhea. Wasn't that your major complaint vs artificial sweeteners?

  19. Quote Originally Posted by scherbs View Post

    ---oh: and cissus can cause headaches & diarrhea. Wasn't that your major complaint vs artificial sweeteners?
    No.

  20. I poop blue aliens from the blue raspberry dark rage

    Like the color leeks from my poop. I thought I was dying. Then I realized it was just my pre workout

    I agree with the notion to rid of food dyes and artificial ****

  21. Quote Originally Posted by EBF Inc View Post
    I poop blue aliens from the blue raspberry dark rage

    Like the color leeks from my poop. I thought I was dying. Then I realized it was just my pre workout

    I agree with the notion to rid of food dyes and artificial ****
    Second this... artificial sweetener is fine, but stop with the heavy coloring. I don't care if my drink without artificial coloring will be the light brown color of dirty river water or the faint green-grey of stagnant pond water; I'm a big boy, I'm aware of the ingredient profile and fully aware that I'm not drinking contaminated sewage. Do you think the adults drinking your various preworkouts and nootropic blends are children who need to be further coaxed by the comforting sight of atomic blue, neon green or bright crimson?

    Please cut the coloring, I don't like pooping red or blue or green and seeing this stuff seep out of my excrement, I don't really care if it's healthy or how many studies you can link proving the safety of artificial colors, I don't like the user experience. Kudos to the many vendors that have already taken steps to meet my needs and the needs of individuals that feel similarly.

  22. Quote Originally Posted by Lutztenways View Post
    Second this... artificial sweetener is fine, but stop with the heavy coloring. I don't care if my drink without artificial coloring will be the light brown color of dirty river water or the faint green-grey of stagnant pond water; I'm a big boy, I'm aware of the ingredient profile and fully aware that I'm not drinking contaminated sewage. Do you think the adults drinking your various preworkouts and nootropic blends are children who need to be further coaxed by the comforting sight of atomic blue, neon green or bright crimson?

    Please cut the coloring, I don't like pooping red or blue or green and seeing this stuff seep out of my excrement, I don't really care if it's healthy or how many studies you can link proving the safety of artificial colors, I don't like the user experience. Kudos to the many vendors that have already taken steps to meet my needs and the needs of individuals that feel similarly.
    You eat/drink with your eyes as well. If the food/drink is not visually appealing, many people will not eat it/drink it. In all actuality, eating/drinking is usualy done with all the senses so the ability to cater for all senses will make the product overall more enjoyable.

  23. Quote Originally Posted by Jiigzz View Post
    You eat/drink with your eyes as well. If the food/drink is not visually appealing, many people will not eat it/drink it. In all actuality, eating/drinking is usualy done with all the senses so the ability to cater for all senses will make the product overall more enjoyable.
    Companies aren't giving consumers enough credit in this regard. For example, I opened my new tub of Raspberry Lemonade Alphamine today and it just adds a hazy off-white touch to the 16 oz of water I have it in here on my desk. I eat with my eyes, and my informed brain that is receiving signals from my eyes is really liking this....I think my ears are even getting in on the action, they love the stark silence of Alphamine suspended in the watery mixture. The touch of the drink when it hits my lips, the feel of the tub, the tiny little scooper. Ahhhhh, feels good man.

    Anyway, the last Alphamine I had was fruit punch and it was a light pink color where most companies would have opted for a deep nasty red that leaves you looking like a little kid that just polished off a couple popsicles. I've got meetings to go to and presentations to give, so thanks PES for keeping it real. I think my Watermelon Hemavol is a similar acceptable color. I love both of these products, and there are whole heaps of people echoing that affection right here on this very discussion forum.

    These are products for adults, dipping into the Fruit by the Foot color stock isn't a value added experience for the target audience. With a little tweak, Raspberry Lemonade Alphamine could resemble a sauvignon blanc, push a little further and you've got what could appear to be a quality scotch. Honey, which you'll find in a whole spectrum of colors, seems to illicit a natural hunger response. Apple juice, pineapple juice, pink grapefruit juice, white zinfandel, you get the idea. For the toys-r-us kids that don't want to grow up, how about something inspired by White Mystery Airheads? You might be right that stagnant pond water coloring may not have a natural appeal, but we could learn to enjoy it just like we most certainly did with "toxic waste" bright green.

  24. If I can shoot a mix of Cissus and Berberine, I obviously do not care what my product looks or tastes like. I just like that it works.

  25. I've read studies for and against quite a few compounds.
    However unlike many guys on this board I am not educated nor do I work in the chemical field so I am not witness to any firsthand knowledge as to how most of them work in certain ways in tests.

    Short of actually doing the experiments myself all I can do is research as much as possible, see what has the most positive reports and reviews, and hope I have no allergies or adverse effects. (The former docs can test for).

    Comes down to what works for the person.
    Some people have smoked for years and have little or no lung issues.
    And people who have lived with them have lung cancer from the second hand smoke.
    Different body chemistry and genetic markers.
    Which also may play a part in the effects of reasonably safe compounds on individuals.
    "I don't want anything. I don't want anybody. That's the worst part. When the want goes, that's bad."
    (Doug Stanhope as Eddie on Louie)
  •   

      
     

Similar Forum Threads

  1. a thank you to IA.. check out the pics
    By LakeMountD in forum Training Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-30-2003, 02:06 PM
  2. Check out the Optimim Price at the boys' site
    By scotty2 in forum Supplements
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 07-25-2003, 05:33 PM
  3. Come Check Out The Newest Board to Hit the Net
    By The Answer in forum General Chat
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-03-2003, 02:42 AM
Log in
Log in