13 year old son in trouble for selling Pepsi at school

Bambywamby

Potentially libellous. LMAO - I am potentially worried.

ashleypride

Bambywamby wrote: »

I have seen first hand what artifical additives that are added to food can do to children with ADHD and hyperactivity (having worked with these children).

E301 is commonly found artificial additive. But you won't find any reports or studies showing it's bad for you or causes cancer.

This whole natural = good and artificial = bad is total tosh.

Bambywamby

Wheat is natural and it makes some people very ill as does cows milk. Nobody is saying natural is perfect - however it's alot better than the artifical toxins pumped into alot of foods.

Derivative

Bambywamby wrote: »

Wheat is natural and it makes some people very ill as does cows milk. Nobody is saying natural is perfect - however it's alot better than the artifical toxins pumped into alot of foods.

I agree that natural foods are better than artificial in most cases, simply due to higher nutrient levels and taste.

The problem is when you go on to say things like aspartame are 'toxins'.
Do you have any reason to believe this besides your son and a study on rats?

The reason I feel so strongly on this is because it's the kind of attitude that leads to things like the whole MMR debacle, where it was pretty much conclusively shown that the benefits of the vaccine outweighed any potential autism risk (if there indeed was any). Yet the media dragged it on forever.

shellsuit

Bamby, some people eat natural (like yourself) and some don't and don't really care.

Is there any need to sneer and look down your nose at those people? That's the way you're coming across even if you don't mean to.

So you eat a really good diet, bully for you. You haven't always had a good diet or you wouldn't have needed to lose 3 stone in the past or whatever it was.

I need to lose weight and when and if I actually get to target, I'm not going to preach to all and sundry.

Everyone has the choice to eat what they want and live theirs lives how they want without having people patronise them.

Bambywamby

It may be a problem for you EdgEy old bean...but not for me.
If it doesn't make sense to you that the artifical chemicals added to food are probably health damaging, especially when combined with all the other toxins we inhale, digest and absorb, I don't have the energy or inclination to try and convince you otherwise.

asbokid

There are plenty of studies which indicate that aspartame may not be safe for various reasons. Its possible carcinogenicity is only one concern. The very famous Ramazzini study has heightened others' concerns about aspartame.

The sweetener is also suspected of causing or triggering neuropsychiatric problems, including seizures. That is why pilots in the USA are advised not to consume aspartame shortly before or during a flight. Studies appear to show that the sweetener can cause metabolic disorders. Paradoxically, drinking an artificially-sweetened foodstuff might make you crave more food!

Under certain environmental conditions, including in excess heat, aspartame breaks down into compounds that are known to be very dangerous to human health. One of those compounds is formaldehyde, a well-recognised carcinogen and teratogen. Aspartame should never be used in cooking for this reason. The sweetener also degrades over time, so it is unwise to consume aspartame-containing products that have been stored incorrectly, or are past their sell by date.

There are also concerns over the safety of the new sweetener, sucralose, which the makers boast is "made from sugar". The dubious insinuation is that it must also be as safe as sugar. That may not be true.

Sucralose was found in scientific studies to cause testicular cancer in rats. Members of the European Parliament have asked for new independent safety studies to be conducted.

The manufacturer of sucralose, Tate & Lyle, has strenuously denied all these claims. Worryingly, company-appointed scientists do not deny that sucralose causes cancer in rats. Instead they argue that the sweetener has yet to be shown to be carcinogenic to humans at 'normal' levels of consumption. I'm not reassured.

Artificial sweeteners cost much less than sugar to produce. That is the sole commercial motivation for their use in soft drinks. Their supposed dietetic advantage is little more than marketing.

.

Bambywamby

Shell, I wasn't looking down my nose at you - that is why I winked at the end of my comment - you have just taken it that way.

No I wasn't always food aware. That is how I discovered my son and many others of his migraine group were made ill by artificial sweetners - he used to drink diet drinks.
I too used to eat and drink junk. Now, being three stone lighter, having a clear skin and more energy at 39 than I had at 19 makes me realise how ill informed I once was.

NickyBat

digitalphase wrote: »

Blimey he must have been peeing like a racehorse :rotfl:

pmsl :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Bambywamby

asbokid wrote: »

There are plenty of studies which indicate that aspartame may not be safe for various reasons. Its possible carcinogenicity is only one concern. The very famous Ramazzini study has heightened others' concerns about aspartame.

The sweetener is also suspected of causing or triggering neuropsychiatric problems, including seizures. That is why pilots in the USA are advised not to consume aspartame shortly before or during a flight. Studies appear to show that the sweetener can cause metabolic disorders. Paradoxically, drinking an artificially-sweetened foodstuff might make you crave more food!

Under certain environmental conditions, including in excess heat, aspartame breaks down into compounds that are known to be very dangerous to human health. One of those compounds is formaldehyde, a well-recognised carcinogen and teratogen. Aspartame should never be used in cooking for this reason. The sweetener also degrades over time, so it is unwise to consume aspartame-containing products that have been stored incorrectly, or are past their sell by date.

There are also concerns over the safety of the new sweetener, sucralose, which the makers boast is "made from sugar". The dubious insinuation is that it must also be as safe as sugar. That may not be true.

Sucralose was found in scientific studies to cause testicular cancer in rats. Members of the European Parliament have asked for new independent safety studies to be conducted.

The manufacturer of sucralose, Tate & Lyle, has strenuously denied all these claims. Company-appointed scientists have argued that the sweetener has not yet been shown to be carcinogenic to humans at 'normal' levels of consumption.

Artificial sweeteners cost much less than sugar to produce. That is the sole commercial motivation for their use in soft drinks. Their supposed dietetic advantage is little more than marketing.

There you go EdgEy - Asbokid had the time and inclination to give you some facts. :T Beautifully put Asbokid.