Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Do you think diet coke should have a warning on the pack?

13»

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,644 ✭✭✭Asmodean


    I'd be just as worried about the Phenylalanine in coke aswell.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,492 ✭✭✭Thomas828


    Just about every diet drink I've come across tastes like dishwater.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 158 ✭✭Kormeera X


    yeah the worst drink ever!!


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,512 ✭✭✭BigDuffman


    NothingMan wrote: »
    :eek: News just in, Phasers is a gay woman!!!!

    ...;)
    /(.)(.)\ <
    Phasers
    ...) (
    ...(0)
    .../..\

    Gay women dont tend to be the Diet Coke drinking types (where as slim girls tend to). They drink virgin blood and guinness :D


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,148 ✭✭✭plein de force


    just drink diet pepsi :rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 310 ✭✭adamshred


    I personally think that these sugar free drinks, gums etc are an exceptional case for needing a warning label. I know there are countless dangers in every day life but this is one of the most misconceived dangers. This stuff causes all sorts of bad side effects and has been linked to bowel cancer. I'd bet a decent amount of money that not a lot of people who use these sugar free products are completely aware of their contents. All smokers are aware of the dangers of smoking with the help of ( but obviously not limited to) warnings on the pack and advertising campaigns. Its a classic case of (big company - dangerous ingredients used - big cover up to prevent profit losses). Anyone who contends for a second against the dangers of aspartame is just mis informed.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 16,584 CMod ✭✭✭✭faceman


    adamshred wrote: »
    I personally think that these sugar free drinks, gums etc are an exceptional case for needing a warning label. I know there are countless dangers in every day life but this is one of the most misconceived dangers. This stuff causes all sorts of bad side effects and has been linked to bowel cancer. I'd bet a decent amount of money that not a lot of people who use these sugar free products are completely aware of their contents. All smokers are aware of the dangers of smoking with the help of ( but obviously not limited to) warnings on the pack and advertising campaigns. Its a classic case of (big company - dangerous ingredients used - big cover up to prevent profit losses). Anyone who contends for a second against the dangers of aspartame is just mis informed.

    Have you any idea how much Diet Coke someone would have to be drinking for there to be a considerable risk to their health?

    Also, its thankfully not up to companies to come up with warnings etc, its up the EU and the irish government.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,100 ✭✭✭eightyfish


    JG009 wrote: »
    I ended up in hospital over aspartame, it effects my balance, my vision, and I get the shakes. Stuff is lethal. Check out Sweet Deception on mercola.com.

    I believed you until I had a look at that website. Alternative medicine pseudoscience rubbish. It promotes homeopathy, FFS!


  • Registered Users Posts: 185 ✭✭def


    faceman wrote: »
    Have you any idea how much Diet Coke someone would have to be drinking for there to be a considerable risk to their health?

    Also, its thankfully not up to companies to come up with warnings etc, its up the EU and the irish government.


    how many cigarettes do you have to smoke before you get cancer ,several thousand euros worth? over several years?
    its up the EU and the irish government.

    who are being payed to deal with issues like this....(making sure ,consumers are informed if a product can produce ,,,a horrible death) maybe to many top dogs are fat and like drinking diet coke...


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,893 ✭✭✭Davidius


    Sure there's no point getting a diet anything. You'd probably be better off going all out or learning some self control.

    I base this on nothing of course.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,564 ✭✭✭Naikon


    Davidius wrote: »
    Sure there's no point getting a diet anything. You'd probably be better off going all out or learning some self control.

    I base this on nothing of course.

    Self control is an attribute 90% of the population lack:p

    Hence the mass marketing campaigns designed to coerce joe sixpack out of his cash in exchange for a little box of nothing. Hard work and persistance is always better than some crappy danone sh4t from a plastic bottle.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 50 ✭✭ContyHooks


    Asmodean wrote: »
    I'd be just as worried about the Phenylalanine in coke aswell.

    There is no source of it in regular coke.

    Aspartame is the source of it in diet coke.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,414 ✭✭✭kraggy


    phasers wrote: »
    I live life on the edge

    I live life to the Max.


  • Posts: 1,427 Axl Tiny Palm


    There's been tons and tons of research on aspartame and the vast vast majority of it has shown it to be perfectly safe. However media sources/ the general public like to latch on to the handful of studies that question its safety and ignore the hundreds of papers that found it to be perfectley safe.

    One of the best examples ever of this problem was the furore caused by Andrew Wakefield's paper in the Lancet claiming a link between the MMR vaccine and autism.


  • Users Awaiting Email Confirmation Posts: 5,620 ✭✭✭El_Dangeroso


    There's been tons and tons of research on aspartame and the vast vast majority of it has shown it to be perfectly safe.

    That's actually not true, it's just the only studies you hear about are the large review studies carried out by large government organisations.

    Here is a list of all the studies carried out by the sweetener industry:

    http://www.dorway.com/industry.html

    100% of the research asserts the safety of aspartame (no real surprise there)

    Here is all the independently funded research on aspartame:

    http://www.dorway.com/nonindus.html

    92% identified a concern over aspartame's safety.

    Including a study that showed an increased cancer risk at half the maximum daily consumption limit recommended by the UK government.

    It's very hard to get long term human data on aspartame use as these trials are expensive and the big money comes from the sweetener companies. But there are trials in humans showing that non-caloric sweeteners do SFA to promote a healthy weight and may in fact contribute to weight gain.

    The bottom line at the moment is that we truly don't know the exact health effect of this substance beyond people who get facial numbness and impaired mental function from it. That's reason enough for me to avoid it when it has absolutely no potential benefits beyond tasting like crap.


  • Registered Users Posts: 185 ✭✭def


    That's actually not true, it's just the only studies you hear about are the large review studies carried out by large government organisations.

    Here is a list of all the studies carried out by the sweetener industry:

    http://www.dorway.com/industry.html

    100% of the research asserts the safety of aspartame (no real surprise there)

    Here is all the independently funded research on aspartame:

    http://www.dorway.com/nonindus.html

    92% identified a concern over aspartame's safety.

    Including a study that showed an increased cancer risk at half the maximum daily consumption limit recommended by the UK government.

    It's very hard to get long term human data on aspartame use as these trials are expensive and the big money comes from the sweetener companies. But there are trials in humans showing that non-caloric sweeteners do SFA to promote a healthy weight and may in fact contribute to weight gain.

    The bottom line at the moment is that we truly don't know the exact health effect of this substance beyond people who get facial numbness and impaired mental function from it. That's reason enough for me to avoid it when it has absolutely no potential benefits beyond tasting like crap.


    tabacco....


  • Posts: 1,427 Axl Tiny Palm


    That's actually not true, it's just the only studies you hear about are the large review studies carried out by large government organisations.

    Here is a list of all the studies carried out by the sweetener industry:

    http://www.dorway.com/industry.html

    100% of the research asserts the safety of aspartame (no real surprise there)

    Here is all the independently funded research on aspartame:

    http://www.dorway.com/nonindus.html

    92% identified a concern over aspartame's safety.

    Including a study that showed an increased cancer risk at half the maximum daily consumption limit recommended by the UK government.

    It's very hard to get long term human data on aspartame use as these trials are expensive and the big money comes from the sweetener companies. But there are trials in humans showing that non-caloric sweeteners do SFA to promote a healthy weight and may in fact contribute to weight gain.

    The bottom line at the moment is that we truly don't know the exact health effect of this substance beyond people who get facial numbness and impaired mental function from it. That's reason enough for me to avoid it when it has absolutely no potential benefits beyond tasting like crap.

    I stand corrected. Jeez now I've got the 'noids I drink tons of the stuff.

    Edit: Just looked at the website those tables came from, it's an anti aspartame website so perhaps not a completley unbiased meta-analysis?


  • Posts: 1,427 Axl Tiny Palm


    The more I read that website, the more suspicious I become. it seems to have been set up by a man on a mission. These are invariably the least impartial sources of data. I've never heard of this "aspartame poisoning" he keeps referring to in my time studying medicine.

    I very much agree that industry funded research is utter bolloks though.

    Edit: Just occurred to me that some of the reported negative effects (the very bad ones) might be occuring due to phenylketonuria, a genetic condition which causes Very Bad Things to happen if the affected individual consumes aspartame.


  • Users Awaiting Email Confirmation Posts: 5,620 ✭✭✭El_Dangeroso


    I stand corrected. Jeez now I've got the 'noids I drink tons of the stuff.

    Edit: Just looked at the website those tables came from, it's an anti aspartame website so perhaps not a completley unbiased meta-analysis?

    It's not a meta-analysis, it's just a straight up listing of the research to that date and the general conclusion of the study. I can't vouch for anything else on the website but at least that bit is accurate as far as I can see.

    It does all come back to not having good enough evidence to support it's safety. Industry sponsored research can be valuable but when it's the only thing supporting an assertion then I become suspicious. Maybe direct some of the skeptism aimed at that website to the scientists who are paid good money to say it is safe.


  • Posts: 1,427 Axl Tiny Palm


    It's not a meta-analysis, it's just a straight up listing of the research to that date and the general conclusion of the study. I can't vouch for anything else on the website but at least that bit is accurate as far as I can see.

    It does all come back to not having good enough evidence to support it's safety. Industry sponsored research can be valuable but when it's the only thing supporting an assertion then I become suspicious. Maybe direct some of the skeptism aimed at that website to the scientists who are paid good money to say it is safe.

    You've certainly changed my feelings on this subject. I used to be dead certain that aspartame was completly fine but now i'm not so sure. However I'm also not convinced that its NOT safe. I have become an aspartame agnostic.

    As I said before, I'm in 100% agreement with you about industry funded research being a load o bollocks.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 310 ✭✭adamshred


    faceman wrote: »
    Have you any idea how much Diet Coke someone would have to be drinking for there to be a considerable risk to their health?

    Also, its thankfully not up to companies to come up with warnings etc, its up the EU and the irish government.

    same goes for a lot of things. smoking? why are you even trying to debate what we know is true!?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 17,689 ✭✭✭✭OutlawPete


    It says on the website it can be linked to tremors and Parkinson's like symptoms.

    That's bollix so as the two people off the top of my head who drink Diet Coke by the gallon are Ozzy Osbourne and John McCririck and they seem fine to me.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,526 ✭✭✭m@cc@


    def wrote: »
    aspartame sounds like nasty stuff... also hyperactivity can be bad...

    but is this worth a warning?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diet_coke#Debate_over_health_issues


    Red Bull is much more of a concern.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,995 ✭✭✭Sofiztikated


    kraggy wrote: »
    I live life to the Max.

    I Max life to the EDGE!

    Not really. But YEAH! Hells YEAH! WOO! MAX! NO NEED FOR SELF AWARENESS AND COMMON SENSE!

    WOO!

    Also, no. If you're stupid enough to drinking vast quantities of this obviously inferior cola beverage, then it's your own fault if the aspemonkey thing gets you and kicks your spleen out.

    Full fat coke for me please. None of that unhealthy stuff for me, just lashings and lashings of sugar, caffeine, and colouring please.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,225 ✭✭✭Ciaran500


    What about sugar? That needs a warning too!



    Been linked to diabetes, cardio vascular disease, increased LDL, decreased HDL, increased blood pressure, insulin resistance and central obesity.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,100 ✭✭✭eightyfish


    It's not a meta-analysis

    Here's an actual meta-analysis from the European Food Safety Authority confirming aspartame's safety. It's dated 2009, unlike the dorway link where the most recent research listed is 12 years old and the earliest 1970!

    EDIT: Here's a easier-to-read summary of said meta-analysis.


Advertisement