So I was sent a link by someone I know to this blog post. I want you
guys to read it, all the way through, all the while being skeptical of
everything it says. Go on:
http://rhondagessner.wordpress.com/2013/09/02/a-killer-in-your-fridge-sweet-poison-a-must-read/
Ok, finished? No one's brain has exploded? Good.
This
was sent to me after I had stated I was switching to diet soda in an
effort to cut down my HFCS consumption (High Fructose Corn Syrup for the
laymen, which IS bad for you, here's a source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-fructose_corn_syrup_and_health )
It
would take more time than I would want to spend on my weekend off to
count for you all the instances of fallacious logic, bad arguments, and
outright lies in this article. Shit, the whole thing can be discounted
completely due to the last statement at the very end: She just
copy-pasted this from someone else's blog. Anecdotal evidence can never
be used as a reliable source by virtue of it using such a small sample
size or of personal account. This is why any good lawyer will tell you
that eyewitness accounts of something are garbage as evidence in court
(I have a good lawyer who will attest to this, as those are his words,
Mr. Andrew B. Delaney, a lawyer for Charles S. Martin & Associates).
The
entire first half of this blog article of hers is nothing but pure
anecdotal evidence. There are zero cited sources for the article or
lawyer her friend said she took to her "doctor", and there's no way to
prove that this woman had Multiple Sclerosis-like symptoms, no way to
prove they were caused by aspartame, and no way to prove that this magic
"aspartame poisoning" cure pill stopped these so-called symptoms.
(Note: There is no such pill. This is a complete fabrication. We also
like to call that a bald-faced lie)
It's also an example of Post hoc ergo propter hoc, Latin for "after this, therefore because of this", which states "Since event Y followed event X, event Y must have been caused
by event X." You may have seen this also quoted by people saying that
correlation does not equal causation, which is another way of putting
it. Just because your friend had MS-like symptoms, doesn't mean they
were caused by the diet soda she was drinking. That's the fallacy.
She then goes on to use the Texas Sharpshooter
fallacy, which is committed when differences in data are ignored, but
similarities are stressed. She makes the claim about how when aspartame
was first being used that it was challenged and brought to Congressional
hearings, citing a random doctor who claims it causes birth defects and
diabetes, and a whole slew of other bad things, and then just stops
there, claiming "nothing has been done, because the "chemical lobby" (I
wasn't aware there was one, awesome) has deep pockets. She COMPLETELY
ignores all of the other data that came about because of these fears
back in the early 80's, and how both the FDA and the CDC ran independent
studies to test the validity of these claims. I'll give you one guess
as to how those studies came back.
Oh, here's the evidence for that too. See, I back up my claims, unlike Ms. Gessner here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspartame_controversy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspartame#Safety_and_health_effects
So
she basically just cherry-picks the bits that support her false claims,
and ignores the rest, hoping 'Muricans will be gullible enough to not
do their own research (and sadly, most are).
Lastly
(for now), she goes on to claim that MONSANTO created Aspartame as part
of some master plot to poison us all and take our money, because
Monsanto is the devil, right?
While I won't argue that
Monsanto is not an evil corporation, because let's face it, they fucking
ARE, I will contest her assertion that Monsanto created aspartame. They
didn't. At all. This is an outright lie, completely and unabashedly a
lie. All of her "knowledge" as a nutritionist for 35 years is complete
and utter bullshit, how diabetes is exacerbated by aspartame, and how
ADHD kids miraculously get better after stopping aspartame consumption,
and also how aspartame "gets in your brain" and turns you into a psycho
rage-monster. Which, if that were real, would be awesome if you wanted
to actually be the Incredible Hulk.
Yes, all of these
claims are nothing but pure lies. Her claim that she is a
"nutritionist", which, for those who are unaware, is a pseudo-science
title that is not professionally regulated like doctors and dietitians
are, and that basically anyone can call themselves a nutritionist and
claim anything they want is true despite having zero credibility and no
formal training, this claim of being a nutritionist invalidates
everything she talks about in terms of treating diseases and causes of
symptoms. It's like taking your car to a guy who calls himself a "car
wizard" and claims that he can fix your car by drawing out the bad juju
instead of, you know, turning a fucking wrench.
Again,
too many 'Muricans believe this shit because no one does any fucking
research for themselves anymore, they just lap it up like the gullible
sheep they are. BE SKEPTICAL OF EVERYTHING. If anyone tells you that
something is true without citing any sources, tell them they're full of
shit until they can provide evidence. That's how this thing we call
reality works. If you don't play by the rules, then you don't get to
play, period.
Oh, and if all of this weren't enough for
you to see this random blog post for the pure shite it really is,
there's this from Snopes:
http://www.snopes.com/medical/toxins/aspartame.asp
In
closing: Aspartame will not kill you, unless you drink 100 cans of diet
soda a day, every day, for the next decade, and even then there is no
evidence of THAT either. Anyone that claims it causes anything other
than a somewhat sour experience when drinking diet soda and expecting it
to taste like regular sugary soda, is full of shit and deserves to be mocked
publicly.
Stay skeptical and intelligent, Metallians, it's the only way you can understand the Universe.
Death is only the beginning...
