Could Aspartame Be The Cause Of Bodybuilding Deaths?

[Big Chiro Flex]

Hope this helps, moron.

http://www.fda.gov/radiation-emittingproducts/resourcesforyouradiationemittingproducts/ucm252762.htm

Microwave Oven Safety Standard
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has the responsibility for carrying out an electronic product radiation control program mandated by the Electronic Product Radiation Control provisions of the Food Drug and Cosmetic Act. Through its Center for Devices and Radiological Health, FDA sets and enforces standards of performance for electronic products to assure that radiation emissions do not pose a hazard to public health.

A Federal standard limits the amount of microwaves that can leak from an oven throughout its lifetime to 5 milliwatts (mW) of microwave radiation per square centimeter at approximately 2 inches from the oven surface. This limit is far below the level known to harm people. Microwave energy also decreases dramatically as you move away from the source of radiation. A measurement made 20 inches from an oven would be approximately one one-hundredth of the value measured at 2 inches.

The standard also requires all ovens to have two independent interlock systems that stop the production of microwaves the moment the latch is released or the door opened. In addition, a monitoring system stops oven operation in case one or both of the interlock systems fail. The noise that many ovens continue to make after the door is open is usually the fan. The noise does not mean that microwaves are being produced. There is no residual radiation remaining after microwave production has stopped. In this regard a microwave oven is much like an electric light that stops glowing when it is turned off.

All ovens must have a label stating that they meet the safety standard. In addition, FDA requires that all ovens have a label explaining precautions for use. This requirement may be dropped if the manufacturer has proven that the oven will not exceed the allowable leakage limit even if used under the conditions cautioned against on the label.

To make sure the standard is met, FDA tests microwave ovens in its own laboratory. FDA also evaluates manufacturers' radiation testing and quality control programs at their factories.

Although FDA believes the standard assures that microwave ovens do not present any radiation hazard, the Agency continues to reassess its adequacy as new information becomes available.

Settle down, it was just a joke. You clearly get riled up too easy bro  way too easy to troll.

Calm down, relax. Don't get angry.

[The True Adonis]

Settle down, it was just a joke. You clearly get riled up too easy bro  way too easy to troll.

Calm down, relax. Don't get angry.

 

You were obviously dead serious and we both know it.  Killing you with Facts and Evidence is a breeze.

[Big Chiro Flex]

You were obviously dead serious and we both know it.  Killing you with Facts and Evidence is a breeze.

Not on the microwave stuff, I have zero knowledge about microwave radiation thresholds   

I just like getting you worked up bro, I know you're pounding the keyboard right now 

[BikiniSlut]

Typical female move, making this about you.

This is about Adonis and his false opinions.

PS: I'm not home yet, be patient

Ummmm.......what?

Can ANYONE and I do mean ANYONE explain how I made this about me?

[Big Chiro Flex]

Ummmm.......what?

Can ANYONE and I do mean ANYONE explain how I made this about me?

You're interfering with the trolling of Adonis. Step aside, I'll post the studies later

[The Abdominal Snoman]

Cancer centers will put people with cancer on Alkaline diets. When people have end stage liver disease, they will tell them not to touch any sugar substitutes...

[The Ugly]

Cancer centers will put people with cancer on Alkaline diets.

They eat batteries?

[The Abdominal Snoman]

They eat batteries?

lolz

[ProudVirgin69]

False.

Chiropractors are legally recognized as doctors, as well as primary care physicians.

Functional neurology is my scope of practice.

They're a doctor much like a dentist or podiatrist....so, "kinda".

[Big Chiro Flex]

They're a doctor much like a dentist or podiatrist....so, "kinda".

Mmm, there is no "kinda."  Completely separate scopes of practices. This is sometimes hard for a lay person to grasp, the concept of scope of practice.

GPs are different than DCs, different than DPTs different than DDS different than DOs, etc.

[ProudVirgin69]

Mmm, there is no "kinda."  Completely separate scopes of practices. This is sometimes hard for a lay person to grasp, the concept of scope of practice.

GPs are different than DCs, different than DPTs different than DDS different than DOs, etc.

You don't say?? This has been enlightening

(Btw you're not the only one here who is in healthcare... so no need to be patronizing)

[Big Chiro Flex]

You don't say?? This has been enlightening

(Btw you're not the only one here who is in healthcare... so no need to be patronizing)

Did not mean to offend you brother, just assumed you were a lay person by your lack of understanding the concept of SOP's. Otherwise why make your post?

Anyways, what is your take on aspartame?

[ProudVirgin69]

Did not mean to offend you brother, just assumed you were a lay person by your lack of understanding the concept of SOP's. Otherwise why make your post?

Anyways, what is your take on aspartame?

The reason I posted that is because a "doctor" to me--and most people--is someone who can prescribe medications and/or perform surgeries.  Scope of practice be damned.

A good chiropractor is worth his weight in gold.  But I think it's disingenuous to be a chiropractor or podiatrist or physical therapist and refer to oneself as "Dr".

Fuck, even an attorney could call himself Dr technically.

This is the last I'll post on this topic because I know you see it differently. Just thought I'd explain--because you deserve it  

As far as aspartame, it's tough to say.  A lot of contradicting research out there, it's hard to know what to trust.

If it really is so unhealthy and dangerous, where are the bodies?  Hundreds of millions of people consume artificial sweetener everyday--seemingly without ill effect.

Its probably not "healthy" but I think the risk of moderate consumption is nil.

[Big Chiro Flex]

The reason I posted that is because a "doctor" to me--and most people--is someone who can prescribe medications and/or perform surgeries.  Scope of practice be damned.

A good chiropractor is worth his weight in gold.  But I think it's disingenuous to be a chiropractor or podiatrist or physical therapist and refer to oneself as "Dr".

Fuck, even an attorney could call himself Dr technically.

This is the last I'll post on this topic because I know you see it differently. Just thought I'd explain--because you deserve it  

As far as aspartame, it's tough to say.  A lot of contradicting research out there, it's hard to know what to trust.

If it really is so unhealthy and dangerous, where are the bodies?  Hundreds of millions of people consume artificial sweetener everyday--seemingly without ill effect.

Its probably not "healthy" but I think the risk of moderate consumption is nil.

Hmm interesting. I never had the faintest desire to prescribe medication or perform surgeries, hence the reason I chose this path. I could personally care less bout ego-boasting titles. I chose my path because I felt I could help the most amount of people in this way. Either way, US law still requires me to grind out my 8 years of schooling on top of a 4 part board examination process to put that "Dr." in front of my name, so Ill accept the title that the US government has appointed unto me.

Another funny thought I always have is when did a GP become the gold standard for health care? A chiropractor harms far less patients in their office compared to your family doctor, as evidenced by the fraction of malpractice insurance I'll pay compared to a "family doc.". Not bashing on allopathics, just a funny cultural observation I've noted. There is an assumed trust that always seemed odd to me when you analyze the data showing the risk of becoming a victim of malpractice by just stepping foot into your GPs office.

Also interesting the similiarities shared by professjons. One of the most common function of your GP is something that is shared with chiropractors in the US: triaging! In Both professions, this is something we spend a great deal of time on. Referring out to specialists, sending out for lab work, MRs, etc. I bet the similarities would intrigue you if you hung around a high volume practice. (500+ patient visits a week).

As per aspartame, I tend to sit on the fence still. I've seen legitimate research on both sides, so I just try to minimize my exposure to toxins as best as possible without it severely impacting my life. This usually ends up being about 1-2 diet sodas a week, but definitely not an everyday thing.

What do you specialize in PV?

[Nicademus]

And so through all of this retardedness and the worlds longest commute home nobody has still yet provided a study linking sugar substitutes with cancer in humans.

Next.

[tommywishbone]

I declare aspartame safe.

Next nut job theory please. . .

[Nicademus]

May I propose the Mountain Dew Yellow 5 theory.

[tommywishbone]

May I propose the Mountain Dew Yellow 5 theory.

Those devils over at Mountain Dew are out to get me! I knew it all the time.

[Primemuscle]

I will keep this information in mind the next time I reheat my coffee in the microwave. At 69 years of age, I can't be too careful. Don't want to risk an early death.

[Fallsview]

The commentary on why Harvard Hospital apologized for promoting the aspartame cancer study is below by Hiyaguha Cohen. My commentary: http://www.mpwhi.com/harvard_sorry_they_told_you_aspartame_is_bad.htm

Consumption Of Artificial Sweetener– And Sugar-Containing Soda And Risk Of Lymphoma And Leukemia In Men And Women:
http://www.mpwhi.com/schernhammer_harvard_aspartame.pdf [PDF format] (It will open in a new window)

Note how strong this study is with a quote from the authors: "The data from approximately 77,000 women (nurses) and 48,000 men (doctors, dentists, pharmacists, etc) led the authors to conclude "In the most comprehensive long-term epidemiologic study, to our knowledge, to evaluate the association between aspartame intake and cancer risk in humans, we observed a positive association between diet soda and total aspartame intake and risks of NHL (non-Hodgkin lymphoma and multiple myeloma in men and women."

Harvard stopped speaking out about aspartame as did Dr. Richard Wurtman years ago. Dr. Wurtman who testified before Congress against aspartame reported that the VP of G.D. Searle threatened him if he did studies on aspartame and seizures his research funds would be rejected and they were. So what happened with this study? Oops Harvard must have forgotten not to release it. The modus operandi of the FDA is simply to ignore damning studies on aspartame as they have with Dr. Morando Soffritti's research which in 3 studies proved aspartame is a multipotential carcinogen, also lymphoma and leukemia. Did industry get to Harvard? Obviously upset that this study was called by the authors themselves the most comprehensive long-term epidemiologic study, to evaluate the association between aspartame intake and cancer risk in humans, how could they get over the strength of this study? They announce its "weak" science and apologize, and hope the public believes their lie.

There is no place to hide. Aspartame has been shown from the beginning to cause cancer and FDA reported the manufacturer had filtered out the things they didn't want them to see such as cancer. Even in the Bressler Report it mentions adenocarcinoma. http://www.mpwhi.com/complete_bressler_report.pdf Their own toxicologist, Dr. Adrian Gross, testified before Congress on 8/1/85 that aspartame violates the Delaney Amendment because it caused brain cancer,. Almost 100% of independent scientific peer reviewed research on aspartame has shown the problems, but FDA continues to ignore it. They have even ignored the Citizens Petition to ban and imminent health hazard amendment.

How many times does aspartame have to be proven to cause cancer? Only industry studies would say its safe and that's because they are trying to defend their chemical poison. Because of conflict of interest there is no way for the public to accept industry studies. The FDA themselves tried to have the manufacturer indicted for fraud.

In the December 2012 article, "Is Drug Research Trustworthy?" it states "Scientists around the country are pursuing government-funded research at the same time they are taking money from pharmaceutical companies, which often poses a potential conflict of interest." ...."We were able to identify $1.8 million in payments from a handful of drug companies to NIH grant recipients in New York State along - payments for speakers bureau appearances, consulting job and other services."

So damning studies are ignored and industry defense studies are unacceptable, For over 3 decades aspartame has caused global epidemics. Cancer spreads like gasoline poured on a fire. If you show how deadly aspartame is from the FDA records themselves they ignore it. Left with the only challenge being efforts to ban, FDA ignores the petitions serving above the law. The deck is stacked. Even some media cry because of advertising they are not allowed to report the news. The public goes on dying. Physicians can't help because their hands are tied with lack of knowledge operating under propaganda from industry, FDA and front groups. If a patient is suffering aspartame cancer the physician doesn't know to warn the patient. How can you treat cancer with the patient continuing to consume a deadly carcinogen daily? Without knowledge of drug interaction (Aspartame Disease: An Ignored Epidemic, http://www.sunsentpress.com by H. J. Roberts, M.D. ) how would the physician know how to treat the patient?

Now we are confronted with Title 18 of the domestic genocide law!

[Big Chiro Flex]

^^^ I've read this before, very good read. Definitely makes you look at things differently.

[ProudVirgin69]

Hmm interesting. I never had the faintest desire to prescribe medication or perform surgeries, hence the reason I chose this path. I could personally care less bout ego-boasting titles. I chose my path because I felt I could help the most amount of people in this way. Either way, US law still requires me to grind out my 8 years of schooling on top of a 4 part board examination process to put that "Dr." in front of my name, so Ill accept the title that the US government has appointed unto me.

Another funny thought I always have is when did a GP become the gold standard for health care? A chiropractor harms far less patients in their office compared to your family doctor, as evidenced by the fraction of malpractice insurance I'll pay compared to a "family doc.". Not bashing on allopathics, just a funny cultural observation I've noted. There is an assumed trust that always seemed odd to me when you analyze the data showing the risk of becoming a victim of malpractice by just stepping foot into your GPs office.

Also interesting the similiarities shared by professjons. One of the most common function of your GP is something that is shared with chiropractors in the US: triaging! In Both professions, this is something we spend a great deal of time on. Referring out to specialists, sending out for lab work, MRs, etc. I bet the similarities would intrigue you if you hung around a high volume practice. (500+ patient visits a week).

As per aspartame, I tend to sit on the fence still. I've seen legitimate research on both sides, so I just try to minimize my exposure to toxins as best as possible without it severely impacting my life. This usually ends up being about 1-2 diet sodas a week, but definitely not an everyday thing.

What do you specialize in PV?

8 years?  Are you including undergraduate?  Chiropractic school is 3 years in the US, and that's with clinical internships.

I was a CNA for 2 years, and I'm gonna take the MCAT in March... if I do well enough, I'll consider med school.  Maybe orthopedic surgery.  Maybe rheumatology.   I'm leaning towards hospital administration though

No need to go on the defensive, hombre.  I recognize the value of chiropractors.

[Big Chiro Flex]

8 years?  Are you including undergraduate?  Chiropractic school is 3 years in the US, and that's with clinical internships.

I was a CNA for 2 years, and I'm gonna take the MCAT in March... if I do well enough, I'll consider med school.  Maybe orthopedic surgery.  Maybe rheumatology.   I'm leaning towards hospital administration though

No need to go on the defensive, hombre.  I recognize the value of chiropractors.

Yep, 4 undergrad + 3.5 for DC.

Good luck man, I have some buds taking MCATs in march as well 

[Gonuclear]

Been doing a lot of thinking as of late...taking  inventory and going through articles regarding aspartame. Bodybuilders that "overload" with diet coke/pepsi vs. bodybuilders who refresh their bodies with natural spring/filtered water. We all know that bodybuilders fill up and slake there thirst and hunger with diet soda.  

Is there a link? Seriously, this needs to be investigated.


STAY POSITIVE!!!!

If what you posted is the result, I'd cut back on all that thinking.

[Ropo]

I never argued your point as I enjoy a delicious, crisp diet soda. I've been drinking Diet Pepsi since it was called Pepsi Free. My only problem is that these bodybuilders are "filling" up on this stuff. I was close to a bodybuilder who recently passed and watched him drink almost a case at a picnic. I understand drugs but this aspartame stuff does need closer examination. I'm not looking to argue...just food for thought. Everyone jumps on the drug train but these guys are also ingesting some serious quantities of food and beverage that may OR may not be healthy. Too many Kidney problems in bodybuilding...I think we found "ONE" of the causes!!!!!

This is written in response to the article entitled, "Diet Soda, Aspartame Shown To Destroy Kidney Function", which may be found at: http://naturalsociety.com/aspartame-alert-diet-soda-destroys-kidney-function


Aspartame ravages every organ in the body. A 1000 page medical text, "Aspartame Disease: An Ignored Epidemic" by world expert, H. J. Roberts., M.D. gives the mechanism by which it triggers or precipitates disease, http://www.sunsentpress.com Also, "Excitotoxins: The Taste That Kills" goes into aspartame and MSG, by neurosurgeon Russell Blaylock, M.D., http://www.russellblaylockmd.com

The Ramazzini Studies have proven kidney cancer. http://rense.com/general68/tiz.htm and http://rense.com/general77/lowdoses.htm No way to get around it, aspartame is a multipotential carcinogen and should be removed from the market because it violates the Delaney Amendment which forbids adding anything in food that causes cancer. In original studies aspartame produced brain tumors and brain cancer, and more. FDA senior scientist, Dr. Adrian Gross, told the Senate in 1985 the FDA should not have been able to set an allowable daily dose because of the cancer. He said "If the FDA violates its own laws who is left to protect the public?"

Even a recent Harvard Study confirms the work of Dr. Morando Soffritti with aspartame causing leukemia and lymphoma and more: http://www.naturalnews.com/037772_aspartame_leukemia_lymphoma.html

As to safe sweeteners you have "Just Like Sugar" which is on http://www.justlikesugarinc.com

Read those study's, don't just link them. Random pick from one of them = "CONCLUSION: Although our findings preserve the possibility of a detrimental effect of a constituent of diet soda, such as aspartame, on select cancers, the inconsistent sex effects and occurrence of an apparent cancer risk in individuals who consume regular soda do not permit the ruling out of chance as an explanation." What it means? They can't prove link between aspartame and cancer. As I say, there is plenty of foil hat morons mixing this soup, but the scientific evidence is still missing. I have told this plenty of times, you guys should look at  the big picture. It isn't just aspartame or saccharin which you should to concentrate, it is everything up to it.

What it mean? After you have born and before it, you face plenty of hazardous materials and chemicals, which all has effect on you. Did your mother drink or smoke while pregnant, did your family smoke while you were child, were there asbestos in the house you were living, did you live in town or countryside. List is endless, but the point is that in your age, you have face tens of thousands of chemicals which could give you cancer by itself, fifteen years from the intake, so how the hell you will know? I stop smoking 1988, and it take 20 something years to reach the point, where you are in the same line than non smokers. In that point of view, how you can rule something in or out? You consume poisons with half time of fifty years with no problem, and fear artificial sweeteners? How smart is that? There was a study about the pot, what you smoke with it. I know many of you guys smoke it because it is more healthy than alcohol. They tested marijuana which was growth to "medical purposes only" and find all kind of shit, starting with good old shit itself. There was numerous carcinogenic substances, poisons etc. in this "medicine". You eat gene manipulated meat and shit like that with no worries, but then there is diet soda, oh help me god, my life is ruin..