[newshep]

Yep, everybody dies.

[palantownia]

Brown star

[movlabz]

Particularly the fearmongering on the diet sodas. The rest of the **** is just common sense.

This is the best part:
An article put out by the University of Texas found that aspartame has been linked to obesity. Shock of shocks: People who are obese may drink diet sodas which contain aspartame.

[JonDopl]

Aspirin has been linked to headaches

[CicyHannyCeli]

Asher is wrong in a sense. WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG. Aspartame DOES CAUSE CANCER IN LAB RATS. Why don't you LOOK IT UP. I have been drinking diet Coke since I was born and while I have never been proven to have brain cancer I do get headaches a lot and I think there must be at least five tumors in there somewhere. The facts are logical: Just because you LIKE something does NOT mean it CAN'T cause CANCER. This is something you would know if you looked at the science.

[Bounce]

Each and every cell needs water to perform its essential functions.

That's my favorite quote from the article. I especially love how he says "Each and every."

Immortality is only possible by murdering babies, Lori. We discussed this.

[Barbshowers]

Asher is wrong in a sense. WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG. Aspartame DOES CAUSE CANCER IN LAB RATS. Why don't you LOOK IT UP. I have been drinking diet Coke since I was born and while I have never been proven to have brain cancer I do get headaches a lot and I think there must be at least five tumors in there somewhere. The facts are logical: Just because you LIKE something does NOT mean it CAN'T cause CANCER. This is something you would know if you looked at the science.

http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/f...risk/aspartame

[Donadoni1809]

Well obviously the lobbying arm of the DIET SODA COMPANIES wants to influence these studies. Cigarette companies ARE STILL DOING THE SAME GOD DAMItfgeruitjh ITHIGN Consider what Ramazzini Foundation thinks before you pretend you are always right.


Ramazzini Foundation

In two controversial[6][89] 2006 publications, the European Ramazzini Foundation of Oncology and Environmental Sciences (ERF) reported[57] a dose-independent, statistically significant increase in several malignancies of rats, concluding that aspartame is "a multipotential carcinogenic agent, even at a daily dose of 20 mg/kg body weight, much less than the current acceptable daily intake". According to the authors, their study was superior to earlier studies because they followed so many subjects (1800) to the end of their life span.[57]

After reviewing the foundation's claims, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA)[60] the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)[90] discounted the study results and found no reason to revise their previously established acceptable daily intake levels for aspartame. A comprehensive review of aspartame safety stated that the Ramazzini studies were flawed in several ways: comparing cancer rates of older aspartame-consuming rats to younger control rats; unspecified composition of the "Corticella" diet and method of adding aspartame, leading to possible nutritional deficiencies; unspecified aspartame storage conditions; lack of animal randomization; overcrowding and a high incidence of possibly carcinogenic infections; and the U.S. National Toxicology Program's finding that the ERF had misdiagnosed hyperplasias as malignancies.[6] The U.S. FDA requested the study's data and offered to review tissue slides, but the Ramazzini Foundation did not send all of the data and withheld its pathology slides. From the materials received, the FDA found that the data did not support the researcher's published conclusions.[90]

The New Zealand Food Safety Authority (NZFSA) questioned the validity and significance of the Ramazzini studies, stating, "These studies were conducted in a way that could not possibly have provided any information about the toxicity of aspartame – or in fact anything else in the rats’ diet. ... In fact, the only conclusion that can be drawn from the results is that aspartame appears to be safe because the studies showed that those rats fed it (even at very high doses) lived as long (if not longer) as untreated rats, despite consuming up to more than 100 times the ADI every day of their lives. If aspartame was as horrendously toxic as is being claimed, it would be logical to expect the rats dosed with it to have shortened life-spans. The conclusions drawn by the researchers were clearly not backed up by their own data"[91]

In 2007 the ERF published another study with similar conclusions.[92] Magnuson and Williams stated that the Ramazzini researchers ought to have improved upon the methodologic and conceptual weaknesses that had been present in their earlier paper.[93] Soffritti disputed these criticisms and suggested that critics had misled readers.[94] Several other scientists supported the study,[95] and two called for a study of aspartame workers.[96]

[Dvjkefdw]

You are off the wall. Don't you think that, it would be nice for these studies to prove WHY IT ISN'T CAUSING CANCER? It is telling that they just say "no link given our methodology." Why DON'T THEY SAY HERE'S WHY IT CAN'T HAPPEN?

[Nurse_sero]

I drink lots of Diet Dr Peeper and I am rich, satisfied, and happy, so **** all you who do not drink Diet Dr Pepper. You are what is wrong with the world.

[minowz]

Uh, no.

Not that diet soda was good for us, but that they were not as bad as drinking regular soda.

[DzjwMKo5]

I bet you think cell phones are safe too.