Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 678
Results 71 to 80 of 80
  1. #71
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Long branch
    Posts
    2,069
    Quote Originally Posted by brewengineer View Post
    Ok, using mpwhi.com as a reference is laughable. I am done here. No reason to argue with someone that gets their "facts" from conspiracy sites.
    http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dai...emc-000199.txt

    http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dai...emc-000202.txt

    http://leda.law.harvard.edu/leda/dat...Aspartame.html

  2. #72
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Science mother****er
    Posts
    3,548
    Was that so hard?

    The FDA stuff is interesting. The Harvard Law thing is not really a scientific document (I don't trust lawyers or law students).

  3. #73
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Long branch
    Posts
    2,069
    Quote Originally Posted by brewengineer View Post
    LOL. Official documents, yet they are only on the Mercola site.

    *These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease. If you are pregnant, nursing, taking medication, or have a medical condition, consult your physician before using this product.

    My favorite disclaimer on that site. It's not like they stand to make money by bashing the chemical industries or anything.
    You make a fool of yourself because by denying every independent research presented to you on the dangers of aspertame as conspiracy theory, means you support the idea that it is safe for consumption. I guess you approve of fluoridated drinking water too?

  4. #74
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Science mother****er
    Posts
    3,548
    Quote Originally Posted by archy View Post
    You make a fool of yourself because by denying every independent research presented to you on the dangers of aspertame as conspiracy theory, means you support the idea that it is safe for consumption. I guess you approve of fluoridated drinking water too?
    What is wrong with you? I didn't deny independent research. I said the Harvard Law thing is not a scientific document. I said the FDA thing was interesting. However, those are letters, and the real data is in references.

  5. #75
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Carolina Beach
    Posts
    1,776
    We are all getting brain cancer from looking at this thread. I think Archy works for the Cancer Company.

  6. #76
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Science mother****er
    Posts
    3,548
    Quote Originally Posted by CBSCREWBY View Post
    We are all getting brain cancer from looking at this thread. I think Archy works for the Cancer Company.
    He probably owns a natural foods company.

  7. #77
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Long branch
    Posts
    2,069
    Quote Originally Posted by CBSCREWBY View Post
    We are all getting brain cancer from looking at this thread. I think Archy works for the Cancer Company.
    Haha that's a good one. Props

  8. #78
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Long branch
    Posts
    2,069
    Quote Originally Posted by brewengineer View Post
    Was that so hard?

    The FDA stuff is interesting. The Harvard Law thing is not really a scientific document (I don't trust lawyers or law students).
    It is for the average American family. You argued the Gerson therapy with a link to the Cancer Society. I pointed out their misrepresentation on of the safety of aspertame, which would mislead the general public in making choices concerning their personal health, if they were to take that literature as a valid basis on such decisions. Much like you did. No one has any monetary benefit from exposing the dangers of aspertame. You may claim they own a natural food company as their motive, but pointing out the dangers of aspertame does not increase the sale of vitamins.it doesn't take a genius to know that natural organic foods are far superior to ones health than processed genetically altered pesticide herbacide fungiced hormonal laden foods. It does however monetarily benefit the chemical drug medical companies to bash natural approaches.

  9. #79
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Long branch
    Posts
    2,069
    Quote Originally Posted by brewengineer View Post
    He probably owns a natural foods company.
    You probably work for Monsanto.

  10. #80
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Science mother****er
    Posts
    3,548
    Quote Originally Posted by archy View Post
    You probably work for Monsanto.
    I am not sure they need a diesel engine development engineer.