does anyone read food nutritional labels - Page 2

-mex- · 08-22-2006, 08:12 PM

If a product contains aspartamane, a disclaimer is legally required.

I see none on mine.

I know a bit about nutrition. Partially hydrogenated oil is oil that has hydrogen (I believe, I may be off) pumped into it to make it more solid. It's bad for you, really, REALLY bad. Avoid at all costs.

High fructose corn syrup puts wieght on you that is more difficult to lose, it deposits in your body.

deepbluevibes · 08-22-2006, 09:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nomi

Cancer, hm. My dad is a doctor, and the Cleveland Clinic even sponsors Splenda-use for their diabetic patients. I don't really buy into the whole artificial sweetener to human cancer thing; lots of other shit will kill you quicker. Being alive causes cancer, hah. And what affects rats and lab animals won't always harm humans anyway.

When I had my heart attack at 7 days old, the doctors thought that it was a spider bite for four days until they figured out otherwise.

Doctors aren't always right.

Quote:

According to wikipedia, Splenda isn't aspartamane, and your numbers are VERY off. It does mention rat cancer, but meh, I have other worries.

Dunno, just saying what i've heard from various discover magazines, doctors, etc.

*Eggman* · 08-22-2006, 10:18 PM

Uh, those are totally different circumstances.

I am much MUCH more inclined to believe someone whose father is a doctor and has an entire clinic sponsoring something to back it up, rather than you.

If it's been basically proven to cause cancer, by all means, basically prove it. With lots and lots of sources that are 100% sure on this with exact amounts specified and uses in which the product is safe/is not safe/blah blah blah and are experts in their field and are reputable.

RVN-G · 08-23-2006, 12:06 AM

Personally, reading nutritional facts labels is one of my hobbies.

deepbluevibes · 08-23-2006, 02:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eggman

Uh, those are totally different circumstances.

I am much MUCH more inclined to believe someone whose father is a doctor and has an entire clinic sponsoring something to back it up, rather than you.

If it's been basically proven to cause cancer, by all means, basically prove it. With lots and lots of sources that are 100% sure on this with exact amounts specified and uses in which the product is safe/is not safe/blah blah blah and are experts in their field and are reputable.

Go ahead, I just personally don't trust doctors as a whole because of my numerous experiences with them being incorrect on many things, some causing me huge amounts of physical suffering/near death experiences.

-mex- · 08-23-2006, 08:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deepbluevibes

When I had my heart attack at 7 days old, the doctors thought that it was a spider bite for four days until they figured out otherwise.

Doctors aren't always right.

Dunno, just saying what i've heard from various discover magazines, doctors, etc.

Kinda contradicted yourself there, captain.

Untouchable · 08-23-2006, 10:11 AM

I almost always read the nutritional facts, especially when Im dieting.

Nomi · 08-23-2006, 10:44 AM

I'm not trying to start a fight about it or anything. I don't know much about cancer-agents in artificial sweeteners. I did have a two-day lecture on Splenda from my diabetic chemistry teacher, and coming from a very diabetic family, Splenda is all over the damn place. The Cleveland Clinic offers Diabetes Dieting Courses at their campus locations, so every time I go in for shots or whatnot I see the poster advertising the program and it has a big bright sticker about the CC recommending Splenda for diabetic patients. I've had Splenda sugar cookies and they're delicious, and my family uses it. The wikipedia page implies that it's safer than pink-packet artificial sweeteners. The end.

And really, I don't trust doctors very much, not as a personal thing, medicine is just such a complicated science. I give mad props to those who can tough it out and do their best, but let's be realistic, there is so much shit we don't know and so much that can go wrong, you can't expect them to be perfect. Science as a whole is so fucking unpredictable, that's why we approve chemicals for use and then find out they kill us. Shit happens. I just don't think left-handed sugar is one of the things I should worry about in life if I only ingest it on holidays at my grandma's.

-mex- · 08-24-2006, 12:07 PM

Nomi- I wasn't attacking him, just pointing out an error : )

My dad is a diabetic, he uses splenda. No harm so far; he's been using it since it came out.

deepbluevibes · 08-24-2006, 12:57 PM

about "no harm so far", i had cancer growing in me from almost near birth, but i didn't know about it until i was 14.

there was no explainable reason for it, but the thing is, that stuff can be building up/damaging you, without you knowing it.

-mex- · 08-24-2006, 02:23 PM

dbv- can we please move on? I really don't want to argue in this thread anymore, if you do want to talk about it PM me.

MC Malicious Gravy · 08-24-2006, 04:44 PM

Eh, I only check the nutrition facts for serving size, just to see by how much I over-portion in comparison to the wee people.

seiya256 · 08-24-2006, 05:13 PM

Splenda is a brand name form of sucralose. It is a sucrose (sugar) derivative that cannot be digested by the human body. It is considered safer because it is not completely man made like saccharine (Sweet n Low) or aspartame (Equal/Nutrisweet). The pink stuff causes cancer in large doses and has a pretty bad aftertaste. The blue stuff is now being found to cause certain (bad) reactions with other elements and builds up over time. Some people are saying that sucralose needs to be tested some more over a long period of time because there are reports of some people (a fairly small number) who react badly to it. It may be something akin to a food allergy, but that has yet to be determined. Also, some of the sucralose warnings have been coming from what sounds to be conspiracy nut jobs.

It's a shame that tagatose (Gaio) has not become widely known in the US. It is actually a naturally occuring sugar where the D-tagatose molecules cannot be broken down by the human body. This means that it is safe for diabetics and does not promote tooth decay. The D variation occurs much less frequently in nature, so the benefits were not discovered until fairly recently. Although it is in use in some countries, the US FDA is still reviewing the usage of it.

The real problem is the amount of preprocessing that goes into some of food staples. Gluten is basically predigested flour. High fructose corn syrup does not get processed properly. These and other ingredients are what some people believe is creating the increase of obesity and diabetes in the US and other major countries. The body doesn't have to work as hard to break down these types of food causing some of these health problems.

Anyways, knowing all of that, I still eat whatever I want. Cancer, diabetes, blah, blah, blah. I'm going to die anyways. I might as well enjoy that food I like while I'm still able.

-mex- · 08-24-2006, 05:20 PM

Also, the FDA sucks, really bad. Same with the USDA.

deepbluevibes · 08-24-2006, 06:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mexicans

dbv- can we please move on? I really don't want to argue in this thread anymore, if you do want to talk about it PM me.

? I'm not arguing with you at all, just debating and putting stuff out there. But ok, if you don't want to talk about it anymore