Aspartame and cancer – new evidence for causation

Post by nate_meurer » Sat, Aug 14, 2021, 6:18 PM UTC

zippy5 wrote: post #67

tptacek wrote: post #45

Aspartame isn't just widely consumed, it's practically universally consumed. If it was carcinogenic in humans, wouldn't there be obvious epidemiological evidence to back that up?

I used to work on DNA dyes. Typically when you see a 6 carbon ring with a chain of carbons attached, there is high probability of that molecule interfering with DNA replication. Basically the mechanism works because the hexagon ring slides between the base pairs and this leads to a lowest energy state due to a phenomenon call pi orbital stacking resulting in the molecule getting stuck there. The carbon chain is mostl…

Post by sillysaurusx » Sat, Aug 14, 2021, 6:18 PM UTC

nvarsj wrote: post #148

Johnny555 wrote: post #136

I treat artificial sweeteners like I do mask wearing -- I'm not sure how much difference wearing a mask makes for my safety and safety of others, but I wear it anyway because it's a very minor inconvenience and it probably helps. I avoid artificial sweeteners because I'm not sure if they have any detrimental effects, but I avoid them anyway because it's a minor inconvenience, and whether they are actually harmful or…

Except mask wearing actually has scientific evidence for its effectiveness, and is why governments around the world recommend it. [1] Your rationale is based on personal bias against "artificial" substances. The same kind of quack reasoning that drives anti vaxers and other nonsense movements. [1] https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2776536

Post by parineum » Sat, Aug 14, 2021, 6:25 PM UTC

nvarsj wrote: post #148

Johnny555 wrote: post #136

I treat artificial sweeteners like I do mask wearing -- I'm not sure how much difference wearing a mask makes for my safety and safety of others, but I wear it anyway because it's a very minor inconvenience and it probably helps. I avoid artificial sweeteners because I'm not sure if they have any detrimental effects, but I avoid them anyway because it's a minor inconvenience, and whether they are actually harmful or…

Except mask wearing actually has scientific evidence for its effectiveness, and is why governments around the world recommend it. [1] Your rationale is based on personal bias against "artificial" substances. The same kind of quack reasoning that drives anti vaxers and other nonsense movements. [1] https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2776536

Post by fouc » Sat, Aug 14, 2021, 6:28 PM UTC

vladvasiliu wrote: post #105

tofof wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, yes, replace 'sweets' with 'fruits' which are about 50-75% sugar by non-water mass. Eg strawberries - 100 g is 7.7g of carbohydrates (4.9g sugar), 0.7g protein, 0.3g fat. 56% sugar. Or oranges - 165 g without membrane or peel is 20.7g carbs (14g sugar), 1.5g protein, 0.2g fat. 63% sugar. As opposed to, say, a snickers bar. 9.1g carbohydrates (7.6g sugar), 1.1g protein, 3.6g fat. 55% sugar. Or a kitkat. 27.1g carb…

I think the issue isn't just the pure carb content. 100g of strawberries is a lot of strawberries. 100 g of Snickers bars is... two bars. I can easily eat two and then crave another one right away. After 100 g of strawberries, I'm pretty much done for a while. Same with say, apples. I think one thing that is usually overlooked in these discussions is the "feeling" part of it, for lack of a better term. Some things ma…

Post by ben_w » Sat, Aug 14, 2021, 6:30 PM UTC

RL_Quine wrote: post #124

ben_w wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> However these cases of polymer fume fever were mostly present in people who had cooked at 390 °C (734 °F) for ≥4 hours. My oven goes up to 250 °C, though I never use it above 220. What cooking processes go to each of these thresholds?

Frying.