| Pages:
1
2 |
Sauron
International Hazard
Posts: 5351
Registered: 22-12-2006
Location: Barad-Dur, Mordor
Member Is Offline
Mood: metastable
|
|
Sorry you get headaches.
BUT
You have no way of knowing if it is the methyl functional group in aspartame that is responsibl.e That is surmise on your part.
You can't even state in any scientifically valid way that your headaches are not psychosomatic, because obviously you know when you eat aspartame. You
have not been through a double blind trial of this have you?
So, at best your comments are anecdotal.
Basing ANYTHING on a Wiki article is ratyher dodgy, many such article are far from unbiased and others are simply erroneous.
You do not know furthermore, that ethyl aspartame would not likewise give you heaches, real or psychosomatic, do you? More surmise because it is not
avavailable for you to try.
I have no ax to grind, no dog in this fight, I do not use any artificial sweeteners (to best of my knowledge). But as this is a science forum let's
remain sacientific about all this, shall we?
Sic gorgeamus a los subjectatus nunc.
|
|
|
myth
Harmless
Posts: 2
Registered: 10-12-2008
Member Is Offline
Mood: No Mood
|
|
I actually don't disagree with you, but I would like to clarify my position...
The original post was asking, essentially: Why do *they* not alter the structure to mitigate any *possible* effects. A logical solution/alternative
was proposed as an example.
The discussions eventually seemed to veer off into more of an artificial sweetner discussion coupled with theories why the structure isn't changed
("costs" and "no reason at all", were the two main theories I see). I amassed there is no known/obvious scientific answer, so I threw my 2 cents in:
It's that way initially because of political/legal/$ reasons and is currently profitable to leave it as-is, regardless of possible health benefit
(assuming there is a detriment) to the public. I tried to substantiate my (admittedly very unscientific) claims with some historical data.
To be fair I also tried to be upfront about my personal reasons/feeling about aspartame (as others had done). I did this to indicate that I have
researched it starting from this angle (personal interest) and didn't just read a wikipedia article and decide the stuff was evil.
Having said that, let me answer the rest:
| Quote: |
You have no way of knowing if it is the methyl functional group in aspartame that is responsibl.e
|
Correct.
| Quote: |
You can't even state in any scientifically valid way that your headaches are not psychosomatic...
|
Correct. I would love to have this checked though. I was thinking of designing a *simple* experiment where I would premix sweetners, label them
(A,B,C) and then have my wife give them to me (once a day) without me knowing what she was giving me and without her knowing what the A,B, and C's
were...etc. Maybe even mix it into lemonade or something. The problem I run into is that, from what I've read, I might actually be able to taste the
differences in the sweetners (they all have their own signatures) and figure out what I've been given...so I have to look up how to mix them to all
taste the same...and it starts to get a little too complicated from there on out to make it fun/easy/reliable enough for anyone to take seriously but
myself. If there were an *actual* medical study nearby and I hear about it I'd participate though because I do believe I react to it *somehow*.
| Quote: |
So, at best your comments are anecdotal.
|
Yep. That was what I was aiming for and all I have to go on. It appears that no one else yet has a concrete the answer to the original post.
| Quote: |
Basing ANYTHING on a Wiki article is ratyher dodgy....
|
I totally agree. That was why I said "This is all based internet research and a few books I have read that have referenced the
debates/issue/politics". From my personal research this wikipedia article is not a bad one...But, then again, what do I know (do I really trust my
other sources that much)? That's why I added the last line on my last post.
| Quote: |
You do not know furthermore, that ethyl aspartame would not likewise give you heaches...
|
Correct. If it didn't though I would not try to avoid it like I do aspartame. I actually read labels just to see if it's in there and generally will
not buy something with it in it if the product is really sweet by nature (candy/pop) as I assume there is probably more in it than my curently
"undetectable" threshold of several sticks of gum (even if the threshold/effets are all in my head). If it's not a really sweet product and it's in
there I don't mind eating it.
[Edited on 13-12-2008 by myth]
[Edited on 13-12-2008 by myth]
|
|
|
Sauron
International Hazard
Posts: 5351
Registered: 22-12-2006
Location: Barad-Dur, Mordor
Member Is Offline
Mood: metastable
|
|
Just a little on the whole methanol -> HCHO HCOOH toxicity thing:
Formaldehyde in some parts of the world is used to preserve beer. Oddly this is known as the French method, while more commonly beer is preserved by
pasteurization and Pasteur was, of course, French. But I digress.
The use of formaldehyde to preserve beer is used where I live, to preserve Singha beer, and probably others. Amond expats there is a lively debate as
to whether Singha gives a worse hangover than other beers, because of the formaldehyde. The maount of formaldehyde we are talking about is very
minute. There are lots of opinions, but little substantiated fact.
I am quite sure that this preservation method is permitted in EU and equally confident that it is also permitted in USA although less common there
(perhaps unknown except for some imports.) French 33 beer is certainly one, Vietnamese copy of that also, and Singha from Thailand another.
Sic gorgeamus a los subjectatus nunc.
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
2 |
|
![[*]](images/xpblue/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
