Same here I used to get headaches from diet soda as a child. I still refuse to drink anything with aspartame in it. Wish someone would sell pop with less sweeteners. I find them all too sweet to drink.

Sugar is good in small amounts. The amount in pop is very unhealthy. Even drinking too much water can cause seizures.

No. Aspartame is not bad for you. Sugar, however is absolutely bad for you. The purpose of this video is to show people how much aspartame is in Coke Zero vs the amount of sugar in Coke. Sugar, the number one cause of obesity, heart disease and other health issues, is far less sweet so you need a much larger amount to get the same level of sweetness as aspartame. The tiny amount of black stuff left over at the end of the Coke Zero pan is the aspartame. You need milligrams of aspartame compared to 30 grams of sugar.

All of the studies that have "shown" damaging effects of aspartame have given RATS not milligrams of aspartame, but GRAMS. This would be equivalent to a human being shoveling a pile of aspartame powder into their mouth, something that no one could even do because it would be too sweet to ingest.

Aspartame is a very simple chemical that when it enters the human body breaks down into three things, phenylalanine, methanol and aspartic acid. Once again, the amounts that these things break down into is smaller than you would get from eating comparable "natural products." You would get more methanol eating a few grapes or an apple. Aspartic acid is an amino acid that is good for you and you would once again find more of it in an oyster than in Coke Zero. And finally phenylalanine is the only thing that is of any danger to anyone. And even then, it is only dangerous to those who have phenylketonuria, a sensitivity to phenyl-groups that you would know if you have. Otherwise it is a hormone that only affects infants and is present in breast milk, one of the healthiest substances on earth for a human.

Sure, aspartame is one of the most complained about items by consumers at the FDA. But does that mean the science is wrong? No. It simply means that someone gets a headache and they blame it on the diet soda they just drank instead of the fact that they are dehydrated. Or someone has a dizzy spell because they got up too fast and they blame it on the diet soda they just drank. Aspartame has been investigated by every Federal Consumer Product group around the world and none of them have found a sufficient link to any health danger in order to take it off of the shelves. If you believe that this is a conspiracy, you are wrong. The bigger conspiracy is the rampant disregard for the danger of sugar in processed foods.

If you are curious about the dangers of sugar that are backed by solid nutritional and molecular biology, you should watch "Sugar: The Bitter Truth" on Youtube, or the movie Fed Up.

>> ^littledragon_79:

Would you want to use diet soda so no sticky sugars, or does that not have citric acid?


If you are going for citric acid why not just use citric acid instead of the concoction ? I would think the grease comes off, then wash it off with water. Sugar and water are friends.

*** Oh wait, your talking about the video.. I have not watched the video. Off to do so now.

Would you want to use diet soda so no sticky sugars, or does that not have citric acid?

6:15am: Get out of bed and smoke cigarette before baby wakes up. Make coffee immediately so that eating breakfast and lunch can be avoided.
7:00am: Begin third cup of coffee.
8:00am: Sit on couch and encourage child to run around. Avoid running after him for any reason.
10:00am: Drive two blocks to school. Park at median height of campus to avoid walking uphill either direction.
11:00am-4:00pm: Have to walk off campus now to smoke. Every time I get back to class I want another one already. Can't complain, out of breath anyway.
5:00pm: Go to store, buy ranch dressing for tater-tots and vinaigrette for wife's salad.
7:00pm: Spend an hour cooking ultra-healthy, carb-free meal for wife and son. Snack on cheese-crackers and diet soda (not because it's diet, I just like it better).
9:00pm: Put son to bed, go outside to smoke and play with bokken: today's only exercise.
9:30pm-12:00am: Fold laundry, clean, homework, etc.
1:00am: First meal of day: leftover pastry dough I made for pie wrapped around salami and some lettuce (gotta eat your veggies).
2:00am: Wake up on couch to Galactica credits. Go to bed. (I average the actual, completely awake viewing of one episode every four days at this rate.)

There, now I don't even need a Fitocracy profile.

>> ^peggedbea:

hey, this is something my dude and i were wondering about while we were in the netherlands last year...
in the US most sodas are made with hfcs, but in europe they mostly use real sugar... so we were reading all the soda cans there and none of them listed the sodium content but here they always list the sodium content and it's pretty well known that sodas are high in sodium...
so do they not put the sodium in sodas in europe? or do they just not have to list the sodium content on the nutrition labels?
does the sodium content have something to do with the hfcs content? or are they just adding it to our sodas over here to make us thirstier so we'll drink more soda?


I'm doing a report on salt right now (seriously) and I think we can be pretty sure that an overabundance of sodium in your diet is a bad thing. But don't forget that sodium chloride is what makes shit taste good. Sweet things are always better with a little bit of salt to set them off. I'm pretty sure that sodium is added to pretty much any soda you can buy, including the ones in Europe. The content is higher in diet soda but it's there in regular soda as well. One thing you can be sure of: an excess of sugar in any form is WAY worse for you than an excess of sodium.

nope, we didn't even think to look at diet drinks, but in regular US coca cola, pepsi and dr. pepper there's about 35mg (or micrograms, maybe. been a while and i don't keep soda in the house)... dr. pepper may be a little higher, i think grape soda was a little lower.

they don't list the values on the cans in the netherlands, i was just wondering if thats because they just dont have to or because they don't put sodium in their drinks. >> ^dag:

I thought that sodium was only high in diet soda.
BTW, cane sugar is also used in soft drinks here in Australia - mainly because we have lots of cane farmers and few corn farmers - so it's cheap. It would probably be cheaper in the US today if there weren't massive government subsidies to corn farmers.
>> ^peggedbea:
hey, this is something my dude and i were wondering about while we were in the netherlands last year...
in the US most sodas are made with hfcs, but in europe they mostly use real sugar... so we were reading all the soda cans there and none of them listed the sodium content but here they always list the sodium content and it's pretty well known that sodas are high in sodium...
so do they not put the sodium in sodas in europe? or do they just not have to list the sodium content on the nutrition labels?
does the sodium content have something to do with the hfcs content? or are they just adding it to our sodas over here to make us thirstier so we'll drink more soda?

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

I thought that sodium was only high in diet soda.

BTW, cane sugar is also used in soft drinks here in Australia - mainly because we have lots of cane farmers and few corn farmers - so it's cheap. It would probably be cheaper in the US today if there weren't massive government subsidies to corn farmers.

>> ^peggedbea:

hey, this is something my dude and i were wondering about while we were in the netherlands last year...
in the US most sodas are made with hfcs, but in europe they mostly use real sugar... so we were reading all the soda cans there and none of them listed the sodium content but here they always list the sodium content and it's pretty well known that sodas are high in sodium...
so do they not put the sodium in sodas in europe? or do they just not have to list the sodium content on the nutrition labels?
does the sodium content have something to do with the hfcs content? or are they just adding it to our sodas over here to make us thirstier so we'll drink more soda?

I think a certain Neko Case interview quote is appropriate there;

Case: 'When I think about Jackie Wilson or the Platters and then I think about modern, Top 40 music that’s really horrible, it makes me mad. … It’s not to do with the people who are doing it as much as the people who are producing it. There’s technology like auto tune and pitch shifting so you don’t have to know how to sing. That shit sounds like shit! It’s like that taste in diet soda, I can taste it– and it makes me sick.

When I hear auto tune on somebody’s voice, I don’t take them seriously. Or you hear somebody like Alicia Keys, who I know is pretty good, and you’ll hear a little bit of auto tune and you’re like, “You’re too fucking good for that. Why would you let them do that to you? Don’t you know what that means?” It’s not an effect like people try to say, it’s for people like Shania Twain who can’t sing. Yet there they are, all over the radio, jizzing saccharine all over you. It’s a horrible sound and it’s like, “Shania, spend an extra hour in the studio and you’ll hit the note and it’ll sound fine. Just work on it, it’s not like making a burger!”'

PITCHFORK: She’s pretty busy making videos and shit though.

CASE: It’s rough, I know. She’s so rich she could get somebody else to do the other stuff while she spends that extra hour in the studio. Or Madonna! Just hit the note! Don’t pretend it’s William Orbit being crafty — we know you’re not hitting the note because you have other shit to do. You can do it, I have faith in you. But don’t leave the studio before you hit that fucking note. And you know what? When you do hit it you’re going to feel so much more valid that it’ll come through in all the other shit you’re supposed to be doing later in the day. Seriously!

And if Celine Dion is supposedly the great singer that she says she is why is there auto tune on every fucking word in her songs? Can’t you just hit it, Celine? Do you have another baby book to shoot? You gotta paint your baby to look like a pot of peas? What are you doing that you can’t be singing in the studio? It’s your fucking job!
http://stereogum.com/2489/neko_case_hates_auto_tune_not_babies/

I agree. But I still like cake.

>> ^dag:

why should tax dollars be used to prevent obesity?
Because it's smart. $1 spent on prevention now stops $100 in tax money spent for hoist crane to deliver fatty to ER.
>> ^NordlichReiter:
>> ^dag:
We have very similar laws here in Australia- paid paternity leave as well. I support it with my tax dollars and gladly.
You frame your comment like it's outragous for tax dollars to go towards jungle gyms and paternity leave. That makes me sad. <-see?
In my experience with the US, - more jungle gyms would not go astray - for the purposes of preventative health care. (What country has the highest rate of childhood obesity - any takers?)
>> ^NordlichReiter:
Dag, perhaps if it were your taxes paying for the Jungle Gyms you might see it differently. At my workplace there is a room, on every floor that allows for breast feeding. It is also federal law to allow for maternity, and paternity leave. That's right. paternity, too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_and_Medical_Leave_Act_of_1993
But that said, I would rather pay taxes for this bullshit, then for those foreign entanglements.
You know the hardest thing about taxes for me? The goddamn paperwork, and all the exemptions; how the fuck am I gonna keep up with all of that shit. For me it's like getting stuck in traffic. FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU


Obesity is a choice, that will probably take a Tax to solve. I would wager that everyone is obese if they use BMI. Body Mass Index does not take into account your fitness level, nor does it take into account a persons fat to muscle ratio. BMI as I understand it is a measurement ordained by the government, because it's science! It is like going to the doctor and having them weigh you while wearing shows, pants, and a belt. The only way to get a valid measurement is by taking all of your clothes off, or subtracting the weight of the clothes, you still end up naked. That is why fighters weigh in naked. Bah, enough on what I think about that.
Of course the US has problems with Obesity, but why should Federal Income tax money be used for that? When they could tax fatty foods, non diet soda drinks, and sodium enriched foods? Like the Suntan tax.
At the end of the year, my pocket book is destroyed by the bullshit.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

why should tax dollars be used to prevent obesity?

Because it's smart. $1 spent on prevention now stops $100 in tax money spent for hoist crane to deliver fatty to ER.

>> ^NordlichReiter:

>> ^dag:
We have very similar laws here in Australia- paid paternity leave as well. I support it with my tax dollars and gladly.
You frame your comment like it's outragous for tax dollars to go towards jungle gyms and paternity leave. That makes me sad. <-see?
In my experience with the US, - more jungle gyms would not go astray - for the purposes of preventative health care. (What country has the highest rate of childhood obesity - any takers?)
>> ^NordlichReiter:
Dag, perhaps if it were your taxes paying for the Jungle Gyms you might see it differently. At my workplace there is a room, on every floor that allows for breast feeding. It is also federal law to allow for maternity, and paternity leave. That's right. paternity, too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_and_Medical_Leave_Act_of_1993
But that said, I would rather pay taxes for this bullshit, then for those foreign entanglements.
You know the hardest thing about taxes for me? The goddamn paperwork, and all the exemptions; how the fuck am I gonna keep up with all of that shit. For me it's like getting stuck in traffic. FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU


Obesity is a choice, that will probably take a Tax to solve. I would wager that everyone is obese if they use BMI. Body Mass Index does not take into account your fitness level, nor does it take into account a persons fat to muscle ratio. BMI as I understand it is a measurement ordained by the government, because it's science! It is like going to the doctor and having them weigh you while wearing shows, pants, and a belt. The only way to get a valid measurement is by taking all of your clothes off, or subtracting the weight of the clothes, you still end up naked. That is why fighters weigh in naked. Bah, enough on what I think about that.
Of course the US has problems with Obesity, but why should Federal Income tax money be used for that? When they could tax fatty foods, non diet soda drinks, and sodium enriched foods? Like the Suntan tax.
At the end of the year, my pocket book is destroyed by the bullshit.

>> ^dag:

We have very similar laws here in Australia- paid paternity leave as well. I support it with my tax dollars and gladly.
You frame your comment like it's outragous for tax dollars to go towards jungle gyms and paternity leave. That makes me sad. <-see?
In my experience with the US, - more jungle gyms would not go astray - for the purposes of preventative health care. (What country has the highest rate of childhood obesity - any takers?)
>> ^NordlichReiter:
Dag, perhaps if it were your taxes paying for the Jungle Gyms you might see it differently. At my workplace there is a room, on every floor that allows for breast feeding. It is also federal law to allow for maternity, and paternity leave. That's right. paternity, too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_and_Medical_Leave_Act_of_1993
But that said, I would rather pay taxes for this bullshit, then for those foreign entanglements.
You know the hardest thing about taxes for me? The goddamn paperwork, and all the exemptions; how the fuck am I gonna keep up with all of that shit. For me it's like getting stuck in traffic. FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU



Obesity is a choice, that will probably take a Tax to solve. I would wager that everyone is obese if they use BMI. Body Mass Index does not take into account your fitness level, nor does it take into account a persons fat to muscle ratio. BMI as I understand it is a measurement ordained by the government, because it's science! It is like going to the doctor and having them weigh you while wearing shoes, pants, and a belt. The only way to get a valid measurement is by taking all of your clothes off, or subtracting the weight of the clothes, you still end up naked. That is why fighters weigh in naked. Bah, enough on what I think about that.

Of course the US has problems with Obesity, but why should Federal Income tax money be used for that? When they could tax fatty foods, non diet soda drinks, and sodium enriched foods? Like the Suntan tax.

At the end of the year, my pocket book is destroyed by the bullshit.

Finally, i just hope (as spawnflagger points out) that they take into consideration all factors, diet soda should be taxed as well in my opinion as artificial sweeteners are potentially worse than sugar.

It makes sense because people don't need to pay the tax, they just need to stop drinking soda, and that's not killing anyone, in fact it's helping them - healthwise anyway.

So would diet soda not be taxed?
Or does that cause cancer instead of obesity, so would also present a "burden on the city" ?

I would be for the tax if all the revenue from it went into "healthy" lifestyle/living campaigns and programs, but guess what - it would just back to the city to spend on whatever.

That should be printed on every soda can like warnings on cigarettes.

And apparently diet soda does the same thing by making your body crave the sugar it was denied by the fake sweeteners.