Hmm, at work that website is blocked and the reason the nanny software gives for blocking it is “Paranormal.” 'Nuff said.
Maria Collazo-Clavell, M.D. of the Mayo Clinic says no.
My dentist says that many people are not getting enough fluoride because they drink filtered water and diet sodas.
Personally, I feel the downside of diet sodas is the taste. I can’t stand most of them. IBC sugarfree root beer is acceptable, but even then, I’d rather have a real soda once in a blue moon rather than several diet sodas each day.
Heh. I love the front page of that site. Chemtrails, ghosts, historic UFO’s. Yep, a true bastion of journalism. 
I am not even going to cite, just do a google search of any sweetener and you’ll find all sorts of information that just because it is not believed to be true by mainstream medicine does not mean it’s not true. Artificial sweeteners are chemicals you put into your body, maybe they do no harm but maybe they do. If a doctor can give you a little tiny prescription pill that will benefit or harm your health why do most doctors insist that there is no harm in sweetener chemicals?
My personal experience is that in some people aspartame causes sugar cravings. 20 minutes after having a diet soda I am in the kitchen looking for a sugary snack. It took me a long time to recognize this pattern. If I don’t have nutrasweet, I have almost no food cravings. Some of my friends notice this and some don’t.
Nutrasweet also gives me migraine headaches It’s not immediate, I seem to have to build it up over time in my body. It’s not caffeine related either, it happens if I have aspartame in anything, even yogurt.
So, I switched to Splenda which makes me incontinant. Search incontinance and you’ll see, even on respected medical sites, that one of the causes is artificial sweeteners. That freaked me out, but since I had been heavily drinking Diet Rite sodas I made the connection and looked it up before I rushed to the doctor.
So try drinking diet sodas, just be aware of changes in how you feel.
I think that not a significant percentage of this board reads Russian.
I’m saying that it casts their statements and their summations of the evidence into doubt. I’m not a doctor; I don’t have the knowledge or the time to fairly evaluate the medical literature. However, I have a brain, and one of its uses is in helping me evaluate the source of information, as that’s one of the best ways there is to determine its accuracy. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the same folks claiming aspartame is deadly are the ones getting abducted by aliens.
Everything you put in your body is a “chemical”; very few of them are completely free from the possibility of causing harm. Doctors evaluate the safety of these chemicals through substantial clinical research, which is a better tool to evaluate a chemical’s safety than gathering questionable anecdotes from people whose essential belief is that anything artificial must be bad.
However, the now removed spammer apparently thought it needed the site clicks for some reason.
Yeah, that’s what I figured…unfortunately not until AFTER I’d clicked on it and then seen the same link in the other OP. :smack:
If you’d like to remove the link in my quote of him, that may be for the better as well.
Not every person who believes artificial sweeteners are not entirely safe believe that all chemicals are bad. Just the fact that people who report affects even drank a diet soda says something about what they believe about natural foods. Different substances can cause undesireable affects in some people that they do not in others, even natural substances. There is enough anecdotal evidence from regular people of many of the affects of artificial sweeteners that they can’t be totally disregarded as made up or psychologically created. Once a product is on the market it becomes a larger test, the anecdotes of regular people are like the reports of people in a study. So while the aspartame= death crowd is extreme it shouldn’t make us disregard everything else.
There have been enough things supposedly tested to be safe by “substantial clinical testing” that later do turn out to be harmful that we can’t always trust official testing to be unbiased or substantial enough to deterimine safety. Also, “safe” does not mean “no noticable affects” from injesting.
Just a brief hijack, where do you work that blocks a website for being Paranormal?!?
How about caffeine free non-diet drinks?
I wish!
But “substantial clinical testing” is better than just about any other method of determining if something is safe or not than we’ve figured out so far. It manages to weed out placebo effects- you might read a website saying “artificial sweeteners are bad” and think you feel worse after drinking sodas with them, just because you think you should feel bad.
I’m going to keep drinking my diet soda until there is substantial evidence believed by mainstream medicine that artificial sweeteners are significantly worse for you than 3-500 extra calories a day. And I don’t think that evidence is there, certainly not yet.
Maybe not all of the “artificial sweeteners are bad” people also say “chemicals are bad” or “anything natural is good”, but many of them do, and any time I look at something that says “artificial sweeteners are bad”, I’m going to be keeping a lookout for either of those two attitudes. Just like when I see someone questioning the theory of evolution, I’m going to be looking for evidence that they’re religious fundamentalists. And since I think “chemicals are bad”, “natural is good” and religious fundamentalism are loony attitudes, I’m going to require a lot more evidence before I’ll believe one of them than I would for someone who doesn’t have one of those agendas.
Rense.com is a notorious crackpot website. Here’s what wiki has to say about him.
It’s not just a “little wacky”. The guy’s a full-on loon.
slightly off-topic (non-diet soda), but from a website with NO UFOs. (Since the whole topic seems to make people so uncomfortable.)