Posts by dustycanyon6

shadowgardener12 said:Look, sugars—glucose or fructose—they aren't all bad if you're getting them through honey (which is actually medicinal!), fruit, or veggies... or even just direct absorption into the bloodstream.

It’d be pretty mindless to say we shouldn't eat honey just because it has sugar in it. Everything our bodies need comes in different amounts and different forms... it's all about balance.

I think you're missing the forest for the trees here... maybe I'm just talking to a brick wall, but: people living a healthy lifestyle don't actually need added sugar! It’s more than that. Eating sugar carries real risks, and honestly, it brings us nothing positive. We get plenty of energy from other carbs. If you're going to have any sugar at all, better to grab it from fruit or vegetables rather than processed junk. Like I've said before... small amounts probably won't wreck your health.

Sure, if someone feels they "need" a sugar fix, honey is the way to go. It's packed with beneficial stuff—like you mentioned, it's medicinal and can help with certain ailments... like tossing a spoonful in tea when you've got a nasty cold or the flu. But let's be real, honey is still sugar. It actually has more calories than plain white sugar and it'll definitely give you cavities faster.

Unlike medicinal honey, "standard" sugars are nothing but trouble for our health. So why bother? You can't really justify it unless you just like the taste... there's no other reason. Now, you could argue for dark baking chocolate (not the milk stuff)—that's actually a great antioxidant, and it usually has less sugar than candy bars! So, in that specific case, a little bit might actually be good for you... despite the slight sugar risk. That's just a tiny handful of sugary things that might actually serve a purpose... there are probably others, I just can't think of any right now. Most sugary stuff—candy, cookies, etc.—does zero good for you. Plus, most chocolate brands pack in hydrogenated fats, which are a nightmare... they even started pulling those out of Mars and other candy bars because they were linked to heart issues.

Lisa Ortiz17 said:Does that apply to refined sugar too, or just the other kind? What's actually the best thing to use instead?

It applies to all sugars, really. Mostly white sugar, raw sugar, honey... even fructose if you're using it as an additive. If you're just eating fruit in moderation, you aren't really getting massive amounts of fructose from that...

Honestly, the best move is to skip the sugar entirely. Just try going without it for two or three months... you’ve got nothing to lose (except maybe some weight 😉), but there’s plenty to gain. I mean, having a little bit once in a while isn't going to kill anyone. It seems like stevia might be one of those rare, relatively safe substitutes. It probably still bumps up your insulin, though maybe not nearly as much as actual sugar—I can't be totally sure about that part... plus, like any sweetener, it can be addictive. Since stevia has zero calories, it could work as a daily swap, like putting it in your coffee. It feels like it’s a bit hard to track down here in the States, and honestly, globally too (well, except in Japan). It seems like companies just cook up all these silly excuses to avoid approving it as a sweetener... they probably don't want to approve it because they'd rather stick with things like aspartame, which brings in way more money for the big manufacturers...

shadowgardener12 said:Look, that's pretty much the limit on what sugar can do. But hey, we already agreed—no need to go running around causing a panic. We should just focus on offering some better alternatives instead... At the end of the day, sugar is just like anything else; if you overdo it, it’s going to mess with your system...

So... I'm just dropping a link here with the sole intention of keeping everyone in the loop about what sugar can actually do to you. And then—bam—instant panic. It’s like some people just reflexively freak out the second they see something that doesn't align with their own worldview. If someone flags something as potentially risky, and you don't personally view it that way, you immediately start sounding the alarm... it's wild... I've been wondering... out of everyone following this thread, how many of you actually knew even a fraction of what sugar can do to you? Like, maybe just one-fifth or even one-tenth of the damage... There’s this one great saying out there... Ignorance is bliss, right? Honestly... what you don't know probably won't kill you... So... if you aren't aware of all those hidden dangers lurking in sugar, then I guess sugar isn't dangerous. Simple logic, right? Or maybe just... not quite... Sometimes I think knowing too much just gets in the way... Honestly, there's a certain kind of peace in just not knowing everything. Ignorance really can be a blessing... Only if you’re looking to absolutely wreck your life and your health...

Let's just stick to what's normal here... sugar is obviously going to be part of life, but if you're staying active and actually eating a decent variety of foods, it’s really not that big of a deal...

It really makes you wonder... where did we lose the plot? I mean, look, eating sugar isn't going to kill you instantly if you’re active and actually eat decent meals most of the time. It just lowers the odds of all those nasty metabolic issues. It doesn't erase them... The thing is, sugar spikes your insulin. And let's be real, it's not even the only culprit there. Grains, potatoes, rice... they all bump those levels up too, just not quite as aggressively as the sweet stuff. But high insulin? That’s basically the engine behind almost every chronic illness we see in the developed world today. Think about it... you look at those remote tribes in Africa or anywhere else that hasn't been touched by processed sugar, and what do you see? You don't see heart attacks, diabetes, or skyrocketing blood pressure. You don't see massive tooth decay or widespread depression either. Even acne—which is linked to dairy consumption—just isn't an issue there. If you have a little sugar every once in a while, you'll probably be fine. But if you're eating it constantly, even if you think the amount is small... that's how you end up with those damn chronic problems. You never truly know if the habits you're building today are the ones that are going to wreck your health ten years down the road...

So, what’s the actual issue here? Is it really about whether we can cut out sugar? No way... that's not even the point. The real problem is just that most people... Not happening... Cut out the sugar. Honestly, why bother giving it up if you don't really have to? It’s addictive, plain and simple. Just like everything else we crave—booze, cigarettes, drugs, caffeine, even just mindless TV watching... We always find some way to justify our little vices. The first step is usually just lying to ourselves about the problem, which is exactly what shadowgardener12 is doing right now. There’s no other way to spin it, unless you just really love how sugar tastes... It offers zero nutritional value, too. I actually read somewhere that it's basically... So, I was reading about this whole "antinutrient" thing... you know, those substances people claim are lurking in our food just waiting to mess everything up. It’s kind of wild how much debate there is around it lately. Some folks swear by avoiding them like the plague, while others think it's all just overblown hype... I don't know. It makes you wonder if we're overthinking what's actually on our plates... maybe we should just enjoy the meal and stop worrying so much... That describes him perfectly...

There's this weird situation going on here in the States regarding water fluoridation. You see people fighting against it, which makes sense because most of Western Europe has actually banned the practice. The whole argument they use is basically, "We’re putting fluoride in the water so you don't end up with cavities from all that sugar you eat." But if you look closer... there are massive corporations behind the push for fluoridation—companies that make a killing off sugar consumption, like Coca-Cola. It really makes you stop and think... who actually benefits from everyone consuming more sugar? It certainly isn't you. Because sugar... It’s just not happening... It doesn't really bring anything good to the table... except maybe a little bit of short-lived euphoria... 😉)!

I’ve always been the type of person with an incredibly strong will... turns out that can be both a blessing and a curse depending on the day...😁So, after looking into all this sugar stuff, I figured I’d give it a shot—just to see what happens. I haven't really touched sugar for about two months now. Well, maybe a little ice cream here or there, fewer cookies, some in my Gatorade... I guess that's pretty much it. Maybe a few tiny things here and there. Over those two months—maybe even a bit less—I dropped about 10 or 12 pounds. I wasn't overweight to begin with, but now I'm at a really solid weight for my height. My energy levels are up, I don't feel nearly as wiped out, and there are probably other small perks too... I'll admit, I cut back on grains and bread as well. Do I miss the sugar? Honestly... not really. And once you go that long without it, your taste buds reset. Everything tastes sweeter. It feels like drinking a Coca-Cola is two or three times sweeter than it was before I quit...

Some of these points are mostly because that guy wants to recommend them to his kid, but honestly, none of that matters if you're just living a normal, healthy life.

That guy over there is basically "treating" people with chronic illnesses by prescribing his specific diet—but that's not actually a weight-loss diet, it's just eating right. His whole philosophy is simple: just give a person exactly what they need to survive (what we need was decided by evolution hundreds of thousands of years ago) and in the specific amount that works for them, since everyone is different. Sugar doesn't have a place in a human diet, period. All his claims are backed by scientific research and he keeps everything updated. For instance, I read a lot on his site about Omega-3 fatty acids. About two weeks ago, an alert popped up—almost like a warning—for anyone using them, saying you should also consume certain antioxidants found in specific vegetables to get the full benefit. And I was just reading something about fluoride on his page recently... it didn't cover everything I wanted to know, so I followed some links and stumbled upon a real surprise. Next to one link, there was a comment pointing out that the company behind the link sells water filters designed to remove fluoride, so take their info with a grain of salt. If a guy like that doesn't inspire trust, who can you actually believe? Just look at the Coca-Cola websites and read the nonsense they put out about sugar—they try to frame it like alcohol, implying that life is no fun without it! The only study they ever mention regarding sugar is from 1994, and it's strictly about how people behave differently depending on whether they eat sugar or not. You'd have to be incredibly gullible—or maybe just totally naive—to believe everything you find on Coca-Cola's pages (or any other site promoting sugar as part of a healthy lifestyle). Sure, someone who eats sugar can be healthy, but sugar plays zero positive role in that health...

Even though I'm not a big drinker, I think having a drink in moderation is better than consuming sugar in moderation. In some cases—well, probably many cases, as long as you aren't abusing it—alcohol can actually have positive qualities. We all know the deal with a glass of red wine being good for your heart and other health aspects...

124 ways sugar might be wrecking your health (it’s all laid out super clearly, too... plus there's actual scientific research backing everything up).

shadowgardener12 said:If you're gonna look for it, search for sucrose instead of glucose, because sucrose is the actual sugar I'm talking about.

Oh man, shadowgardener12... You really shouldn't have said that! Now Casey Palmer5 is gonna come after you!😁 Sucrose is just glucose plus fructose! Just a little more info on sugars...

Richard Moore3 said:Anyone with even a basic grasp of biochemistry or immunology would be stunned by such vague conclusions...

A single amino acid, based on its structure alone, simply cannot be an allergen!
So there's no possibility of sensitization or developing antibodies against a single amino acid... I don't feel like explaining why
but looking at this, it’s clear you don't really know what you're talking about. You're misusing terms and clearly don't understand what they actually mean...

Phenylketonuria isn't about any kind of hypersensitivity; it's a metabolic disorder (not an allergic hypersensitivity!!!)
caused by a missing enzyme responsible for breaking down the amino acid phenylalanine, which results in it building up!

etc, etc.....

Thanks for the corrections and the extra, more precise info. I actually learned something here. 😉 I should point out that my comments regarding how the broken-down parts of aspartame work were pretty layman... Especially the part about phenylketonuria, which was based on assumptions and guesswork—it looks like I messed up by presenting the aspartame issue (only) as a phenylalanine problem... But I did that because of this:

Phenylalanine is an amino acid normally found in the brain. Persons with the genetic disorder, phenylketonuria (PKU) cannot metabolize phenylalanine. This leads to dangerously high levels of phenylalanine in the brain (sometimes lethal). It has been shown that ingesting aspartame, especially along with carbohydrates can lead to excess levels of phenylalanine in the brain even in persons who do not have PKU. This is not just a theory, as many people who have eaten large amounts of aspartame over a long period of time and do not have PKU have been shown to have excessive levels of phenylalanine in the blood. Excessive levels of phenylalanine in the brain can cause serotonin levels to decrease, leading to emotional disorders such as depression. It was shown in human testing that phenylalanine levels of the blood were increased significantly in human subjects who chronically used aspartame.

So, according to that text, it turns out people don't need to have PKU to be "sensitive" to the phenylalanine in aspartame. I interpreted that as hypersensitivity, and hypersensitivity as some kind of allergy. You know, back when I was writing all that, I wasn't exactly being the sharpest tool in the shed... 😁 But regardless, aren't you denying that people's phenylalanine levels "spike" after chronic consumption of aspartame?

Any extra info is welcome—where have you been hiding all this time? 🙂

shadowgardener12 said:I can't say I see eye to eye with dustycanyon6 on this one, to put it mildly. Look, life has its risks, sure, but there's always a better way to go about things. Milk and grains aren't the enemy here. Every kid knows that—they're essential fuel for the body, just like meat or fish...

Look, nobody’s forcing you to see things my way... but let's be real about milk. It’s risky for a ton of people because so many folks are actually allergic to it without even knowing it. Or, they just don't have enough lactase to process it properly. If you want to argue it isn't "dangerous," fine... maybe it's not life-threatening for everyone, but it sure as hell isn't healthy either. Not that the mainstream media or doctors who haven't done their homework would tell you that... mostly because pasteurization wipes out most of the good stuff anyway. I dropped some links above if you actually want to dig into the science... And honestly? Babies—I mean actual infants here, not just being metaphorical—are in a much better spot than we are. They have plenty of lactase to handle it, and they haven't even had the chance to develop those dairy allergies yet. You really can't group us adults in with them... it just doesn't work like that... 😉 Processed grains—you know, things like bread or heaven forbid, sugary cereals—they just spike your insulin levels for no reason and lead straight to weight gain... If that doesn't sound like a problem to you, then whatever, it's your life. But honestly, look around. People are getting heavier by the day, and we're seeing more and more cases of diabetes and other chronic issues. The thing is, diabetes can often be prevented, or even reversed in some cases, just by ditching the grains and cutting out the sugar entirely. So many of the health struggles we face today are legitimately "Western lifestyle diseases," because that's exactly what this kind of diet produces. Just because the shelves are full of food doesn't mean we have to eat total garbage...

Look, you don't need all those emulsifiers and random chemical additives... they just aren't necessary. And honestly, the long-term damage hasn't even been properly studied yet. That’s really the heart of the issue here...
dustycanyon6, look, we’re talking about chemical additives and synthetics that we’re actually putting into our bodies here. Please, just stick to the topic. I know you love to go off on every single tangent imaginable, but seriously... it's getting old. Tone it down a bit and stop spamming the thread. I’m really not interested in debating whether "natural" foods are harmful when it’s obvious they’re necessary for survival. And honestly, if you aren't overdoing it, salt and sugar aren't the villains everyone makes them out to be. Especially when it comes to dairy—whether it's yogurt or just good old milk... we should be focusing on what’s actually nutritious. Think things like butter or using honey instead of processed sugar. It’s all about finding what works for your own body...

My bad—I definitely went off on a tangent there... Anyway, I know there are people here who are probably more interested in other dietary red flags besides just additives. Like, you see it all the time... people obsess over finding products without any additives, but then they end up making really poor nutritional choices overall. It's kind of ironic, isn't it...?

It feels like you’re one of those people who only sees what they want to see... thinking every single additive is super toxic while "natural" foods are somehow perfectly safe. You actually remind me of my old man. One time he caught me eating a burger and he goes, "How can you eat that? Haven't you seen The Sun? They say those things cause addiction and weight gain." And honestly, I rarely even eat burgers anymore... not lately at all. Just keep in mind, my dad is carrying some extra weight around his middle and he's a heavy smoker... meanwhile, I've got a flat stomach and don't have any of those bad habits...

The truth is usually somewhere in the middle... like most things in life. Those additives aren't necessarily going to kill you unless you're super sensitive to one of them, but then again, a lot of what we call "staple foods" are actually pretty essential for staying healthy. That said, a huge chunk of those "everyday" groceries we grab at the supermarket aren't even necessary. I'm talking about stuff like sugar and all those other ingredients that just spike your insulin levels... And don't even get me started on grains. Honestly, they don't offer much value. You can get all the carbs you need from actual vegetables, and when you eat real veggies, you're getting way more important vitamins and minerals anyway...

Basically, if you don't watch what you eat, you aren't staying healthy!

On the flip side—if you ignore your diet, you're asking for trouble. 😉 And the worst part is how many of these issues are chronic. Like, if you start slamming sugar now, you might feel fine for ten years, and then suddenly... boom. You're diabetic. Then you'll sit there acting surprised, like you just caught it out of nowhere when it's been brewing for a decade, right?

Pesticides in grains are definitely an issue, just like antibiotics in meat. But you can mostly dodge that by sticking to organic food, which is somewhat regulated.

Pesticides are tough to avoid. But regarding grains, I wasn't actually talking about pesticides; I meant the general impact grains have on our bodies. Atkins was on the right track, but he tripped up by cutting out all carbs entirely. He didn't realize that vegetables and grain crops are worlds apart. He also missed the fact that everyone needs a different balance of fats, proteins, and carbs. Some people—maybe about 15% of us—won't have much trouble with grains. That’s why Mercola's grain-free "diet" (which is really just eating right) works better than Atkins; it fixes his mistakes. Who knows, maybe Mercola will change his mind down the road as new science comes out... though the thing is, he'll probably adapt, while others just cling to wrong ideas like a drunk clinging to a lamppost...

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Anyway, back to the topic before shadowgardener12 starts cursing me out... 😁 I was telling you guys about MSG (monosodium glutamate), right? E621, one of those flavor enhancers. About two weeks ago, I was reading some article about it and noticed how they list these additives on packaging. They split the category name into two lines. In some languages, the grammar makes it look weird, but in English, it actually works! I happened to pick up a packet of Campbell's soup and checked the ingredients under the English label, and I saw something like this:

Ingredients: meat, ..., flavor
enhancers (monosodium glutamate,...), salt...

Man, talk about a surprise! Even big brands like Campbell's do it! Such sneaky little tricksters. And the kicker is how they align it to the right margin, so you don't immediately realize that "flavor" and "enhancers" are actually one single phrase: "flavor enhancers."

You see the same nonsense with brands like Coca-Cola—for example, their soda contains both real sugar and artificial sweeteners (which would be a huge problem in the US!). They list water and sugar first, followed by a bunch of other stuff, and then put the "Sweeteners" at the very end... as if sugar isn't a sweetener.

Andrew Stewart2 said:This is such an interesting topic... there’s really so much to pick up here. Of course, the people actually willing to learn are the ones who value it most. But honestly, after reading all this, I’m starting to wonder if there’s anything left for me to eat. Looking at these lists of food toxins, it feels like everything is on there. Meat seems terrible—even though some folks try to convince me white meat is okay—grains are out, milk is bad, sugar is a no-go. Nothing. And man, I love milk... especially ice-cold when the Sun is beating down like this. It beats any Coca-Cola or juice any day. So, could someone please just give me a list of foods that actually have little to no of these toxins you mentioned? What are we actually supposed to be eating?

Anyone trying to tell you meat is absolutely awful is probably just a vegetarian... though, I have to admit, the whole vegetarian thing has its charms (I stick to chicken breasts and the occasional deli meat myself). At the end of the day, you just have to decide what works for you. You can't totally escape toxins from the world, but you can definitely dial them back as far as possible. If I were you, I'd cut way back on sugar, (pasteurized) milk, and grains—you know, things like rice, bread, pasta... just skip those. Eat plenty of veggies, then maybe some fruit. Personally, I think veggies win out since they don't have all that fructose...

Glad this thread is finally picking up some steam. William Morris2 wandered off on a bit of a tangent, but no big deal. People love spreading rumors, and because of that, actual facts get dismissed. If you haven't seen it on the nightly news or caught it on CNN, people just shrug and call it nonsense... they assume it’s fake just because they’ve never heard of it.

I've been wanting to weigh in on this for a while now... I've felt a bit "put under a microscope" before because of how I write, getting accused of being paranoid or afraid of everything. I sat with that for a bit and realized something: I'm not the one who's afraid... it's the people telling me I am. Here's the thing: most people need a little self-delusion just to function. They have to believe in something. I'm not talking about religion here, but more like a belief in an "ideal" lifestyle regarding health. Most of us act like the world is perfectly safe when it comes to medicine and wellness—we try to believe it even though we know better deep down. What does the average person think is dangerous? Smog, the Sun because of skin cancer risks, drugs (well, besides marijuana, which is supposedly less harmful than cigarettes and isn't addictive, right? As if the mental effects don't matter at all 😉; and candy isn't that bad either), cigarettes (are we even sure they're that bad? Half the people in the US live as if they aren't, otherwise their ads wouldn't be banned!), cholesterol (though nowadays people actually understand the difference between "good" and "bad"), greasy food, or even things like Coca-Cola... people know it's bad, yet they keep drinking it... yeah, there's plenty more where that came from.

And then you get the "crazy" ones—and hey, I'm probably the craziest of them all—who start sounding the alarm. Some folks on this forum see it as panic, but I see it as stating facts. We take so many things for granted that aren't actually good for us. Take aspartame, for example. Diabetics love to tell themselves it's a great sugar substitute, but it's actually a neurotoxin... just say no! There's Stevia. Then there's amalgam, which releases mercury and causes galvanization in your teeth. Or fluoride—in some places, kids drink fluoridated water just to get better teeth! But fluoride is a poison; chronic exposure symptoms look a lot like mercury poisoning, and statistically, kids drinking fluoridated water often end up with more cavities than those who don't. You even find excessive amounts of it in certain teas and other products... who would've thought? Then there's milk. People say, "Oh, drink as much pasteurized milk as you want!"—that was sarcasm, by the way, I don't want anyone getting confused. Most people claim they aren't lactose intolerant, but studies show about 50% of Caucasians, 75% of Black Americans, and virtually all Asians struggle to digest it. Plus, pasteurization kills off most of the good stuff like vitamins and enzymes, and it tanks calcium absorption. And sugar? We all "know" too much sugar is bad, but some people go as far as saying it's more dangerous than cigarettes! It triggers so many issues and can even worsen cancer. Then there's aluminum, which we know is linked to Alzheimer's, or Teflon—even if its toxicity for humans is debatable, it's been shown to kill pet birds kept in kitchens. Don't forget MSG (monosodium glutamate, or E621)... it hits the brain similarly to aspartame; high doses kill brain cells. It's used as a flavor enhancer in everything from soups and sauces to burgers and chips... you name it! People love to blame McDonald's for unhealthy food, but honestly, just take a look at what's sitting in your own pantry. Then there's formaldehyde—I've written about this before—it's in everything from construction materials and furniture to electronics and soaps. About 10% of aspartame breaks down into methanol in the body, which then turns into formaldehyde! Of course, the idiots defending aspartame will tell you it just turns straight into CO2 and water! And don't get me started on fruit, vegetables, or coffee... they're usually sprayed with pesticides and other toxins. Even oils are heavy on Omega-6 fatty acids; we need them, sure, but we have to balance them with Omega-3s, and most people are way too low on the Omega-3 side, which leads to all sorts of problems. Even grains like corn, wheat, and rice act similarly to sugar... it goes on forever.Life is genuinely dangerous! Every single substance carries its own specific risk for various illnesses or health issues. When you start mixing them together, those risks don't just add up—they multiply. It’s especially true for toxins that work through synergy... you know, that whole concept where 1+1 actually equals 3.

Once you realize how much is out there, I think you'll naturally start looking out for yourself a bit more. Some people just won't be able to accept that, though. They'll take the path of least resistance and tell me I'm just fear-mongering... which is really just a way of denying the truth, if you ask me. Of course, a huge part of this stuff is nearly impossible to avoid. In the US, we're seeing this whole new epidemic of a different kind—people becoming totally obsessed with the "healthy lifestyle." They get terrified of every little toxin and go into a frenzy trying to achieve the impossible: living a perfectly healthy life. That's one extreme. On the other side, you've got the folks who ignore everything I just said and live in this illusion that only a tiny handful of things are risky. You really have to find that middle ground between those two extremes.

One more thing... I was reading a memoir by someone who suffered from mercury poisoning, and they made a pretty interesting point. There are basically two types of people: those who have absolutely no clue about "healthy living," and those who know far too much. The people caught somewhere in the middle? There are very few of them. The reason is simple: the truly healthy people aren't worried about "living healthy." But those of us who get hit hard... well, we try to learn everything possible to reclaim our health, or at least make it better...

Amanda Mitchell17 said:Has anyone ever heard that white sugar is bleached using a mixture containing crushed animal bones just to get that perfect crystalline whiteness?...

I haven't heard that one before...

which is supposedly one of the main causes of diabetes... I don't have any scientific proof for this bit, but... well...

Well... there's a reason there isn't any scientific evidence for that. 😉 (Read: it probably isn't true—not that they don't do it, but rather that it's just one factor in the risk of diabetes). I guess it's because sugar is dangerous enough on its own, being a major driver for diabetes along with, um, grains (I think we're missing a good word for it here: mostly agricultural crops like grains, corn, rice, etc.)—all those things spike your blood sugar, and then your insulin follows suit.

William Morris2 said:Well, my bad on the wrong info then. I was just trying to be helpful...
Anyway, do you have a "real" link for that?

That’s exactly what I’m talking about—you really have to learn how to separate actual facts from all the rumors and guesswork out there. A couple of months back, I actually went down a bit of a rabbit hole looking into citric acid because a buddy told me it causes cancer. So, I did some digging online, and honestly, it turned out to be total nonsense. There aren't even any studies or evidence to back it up. It looks like people just got confused because citric acid is part of the Krebs cycle—and since Krebs is the name of the scientist who won a Nobel Prize for discovering it, it just got mixed up with the word for cancer in some other languages. Some uneducated folks saw that and jumped to the conclusion that citric acid causes cancer. Here's the link: http://ukfoodguide.net/e330.htm

darkbison81 said:Since you only have an issue with Diet Coke (and artificial sweeteners), you can't really blame the Phenylalanine. It's just an amino acid found in all proteins. By that logic, meat, soy, and milk would be bad for you too...

Besides, Phenylalanine is only harmful to people with phenylketonuria, but they screen for that at birth because babies need a special diet from day one. Like Andrew Anderson6 said, if they aren't managed, they face Intellectual Disability.

Anyway, do you go to the bathroom after eating something containing phenylalanine? No. So your metabolism for that amino acid seems fine.

Maybe your problem with Diet Coke comes from somewhere else entirely—maybe you don't handle acidity well, maybe it’s just the flavor, or even the caramel coloring...

Mercola reports on a doctor's testimony before the U.S. Congress: Even a single use of aspartame raised the blood phenylalanine levels. In his testimony before the U.S. Congress, Dr. Louis J. Elsas showed that high blood phenylalanine can be concentrated in parts of the brain and is especially dangerous for infants and fetuses. He also showed that phenylalanine is metabolised much more effeciently by rodents than by humans.(7)
Maybe Phenylalanine isn't the main culprit here—when we drink sodas with aspartame, we aren't consuming pure phenylalanine, we're consuming aspartame molecules. It's a bit like how salt (NaCl) isn't inherently dangerous, but chlorine itself is. I don't know... just a thought.

It might be a good idea for Thomas Edwards82 to try some Orbit Drops. If he gets the same symptoms, then he'll know for sure it's the aspartame. I don't think there's anything in those drops that's also in Diet Coke (except citric acid, obviously—but that's everywhere... in most sodas, candies, gums... even bouillon cubes have citric acid since it's used as a flavor enhancer. Honestly, citric acid seems way safer than MSG, and a quarter of a bouillon cube is basically pure MSG!).

Andrew Anderson6 said:dustycanyon6; how much time have you actually spent spiraling, trying to figure out what's making you sick? You know, theorizing about everything from aspartame allergies and aluminum issues to amalgam concerns, or even worrying if it's the start of Alzheimer's or Parkinson's... just writing endlessly about it all. You could've taken all that energy and actually put it toward improving your quality of life. Maybe then you’d actually feel better...

So, what you're saying is the only solution is to live under a glass dome???...

Look, no hard feelings at all... but honestly? Spending your entire life living in fear and constantly overthinking whether you’re going to wake up with some kind of allergic reaction tomorrow is just... well, it's not exactly the way to live... 👎

You're painting me in a bad light (just like our lovely moderator Casey Palmer5 does) — though, I can't say I'm not partly to blame myself... but seriously, just go take a look at my last post in this thread... Life is just... unpredictable. It’s dangerous out there. One minute you're cruising along, and the next, everything changes... turns upside down. You really have to watch your step. Everything feels so fragile sometimes... Just so we're clear... what I'm posting here isn't exactly a mirror of my actual life. It's just how things come out when I'm typing... nothing more than that... 😉 In my second to last post, I was talking about Dr. Mercola’s site... basically saying we need to take everything we read online with a grain of salt. People tend to swing between extremes, you know? One side goes too far one way, the other side goes too far the other... it's all a bit much sometimes. Honestly, if you just read my posts, you might think I’m living under a microscope or something... like I'm constantly terrified of everything. But that's not really the case. If you actually knew me—and didn't just judge me based on all those things I've written over on the health forums—you wouldn't see me any differently than anyone else. Though, I guess there is one thing... I probably wouldn't join you for a coffee date. I don't drink it... 🙂 I guess I’m a bit of a "philosopher" at heart, so I tend to wander off into deep thoughts and theories quite often... In my last post on this topic, I think you might have missed the smiley face—that little thing was just my way of showing I was being friendly... (I just wanted to get my point across...)...even if his content comes off pretty harsh.

I’m not exactly living in fear of what my next allergic reaction might be. Honestly, once I start breaking out, I just try to play detective... figure out what triggered it, and then stay far away from that thing. Isn't that how it's supposed to work? Usually, the first thing everyone tells you when you find out you're allergic to something is to just avoid the allergen. It's common sense, right? Anyway, I was diagnosed with a pretty intense allergy to dust mites about three years ago... and I only finally cleared the antihistamines out of my bedroom three months ago. That’s a long way from living under a glass dome...

My posts turn out the way they do because I feel totally let down by "modern" medicine and the mainstream media. You turn on the TV or pick up a newspaper and it’s just a bunch of nonsense... while the stuff that actually matters gets buried, glossed over, or straight-up lied about. Thank God we have the Internet, though... at least we can find some truth there. It really frustrates me how both government and non-profit health organizations handle things. Our local agencies seem completely passive, just blindly copying what happens elsewhere, and even the ones here in the US make some pretty questionable calls. Take the latest example: on one hand, they want to speed up the approval process for new drugs—which basically means medications aren't being tested nearly enough—but then on the other hand, they want to put more oversight on supplements. It’s getting to the point where if you just wanted to buy some essential, healthy Omega-3 fatty acids, you might actually need a doctor's prescription first... I'm exaggerating a bit, but that's essentially where we're heading. I've always been a very rational, logical person. When someone brings me a tech problem, I do everything in my power—and then some—to fix it. That's why it's so hard for me to accept that "solutions" for many health issues just aren't being found. Everyone is so obsessed with treating symptoms or side effects rather than the actual root causes... mostly because digging for the cause doesn't turn a profit for the big pharma companies. It's even harder to stomach the fact that sometimes, a solution isn't even being sought, or if it is, it's immediately dismissed... junk science...But hey, that’s just my take on things. That's exactly why we have this forum... a place where everyone can say what's on their mind. If I happen to get something wrong and someone calls me out with some solid arguments—well, that's totally fine by me. It actually helps... gives me a chance to learn something new...

Hey, just wanted to give you guys an update—I’m feeling a whole lot better. I’m still a long way from being totally cured of everything, but things are definitely looking up. Honestly, I think the biggest game-changer was cutting dairy out of my diet... turns out I was allergic to it all along. Another huge relief came from getting those old dental fillings pulled. My back and shoulder muscles aren't constantly clenched anymore (probably because of that weird electrical current issue). We'll see how it goes from here. And what would I have done if I hadn't started paying attention to my health? Oh, one more thing: I’m finally dreaming again! In the last two weeks alone, I've dreamed more than I have in the last five years! I can't say for sure what triggered it since I haven't had dreams in ages, but my best guess is that the old amalgam fillings were the culprit... basically, that constant galvanic current in my mouth...

Andrew Anderson6 said:From what I gather, that warning is really just there for people who have PKU (phenylketonuria—is that how you spell it???)

But hey, please tell me... do you actually know if you're a phenylketonuric or not? (You aren't, obviously, but still—I had to start with a sharp question, 😉 so don't take offense). I actually asked my doctor if I was tested for it when I was a baby... he said no (honestly, he doesn't know much about it—he just knows for sure I wasn't screened). In many places here in the US, that testing is mandatory! But around here, they barely even know what phenylalanine or phenylketonuria is (or maybe I'm wrong?).

Look, if we were "real" phenylketonurics, we wouldn't be sitting here right now—we’d be suffering from Intellectual Disability (or might even face DEATH !!) after eating food containing phenylalanine (I think it's in meat and other animal products). But at the same time, none of us were tested to see if phenylalanine bothers us—meaning, are we allergic or hypersensitive to it? It wouldn't be weird if it didn't bother us as babies, but then developed into a sensitivity over time... practically nobody is allergic to anything as an infant, right? Allergies show up later. As far as I can tell, the only way to check if it affects us is to drink stuff with aspartame. Of course, there's always the chance of autosuggestion... but if someone played a trick on you and poured regular Coca-Cola instead of Diet Coke, you might not even notice. When I was drinking Coca-Cola more often, I felt a massive difference between the regular stuff and Diet Coke, or Pepsi and Pepsi Max... I could even tell the difference between our Coca-Cola and the stuff from Canada. Now that I haven't been drinking it for a while, I'm not quite sure I'd notice the difference between Diet Coke and regular Coca-Cola just by tasting it. About a month ago, when I was drinking Coca-Cola, I totally messed up! 😁 Two months ago, there was no way that would have happened.

Casey Palmer5 said:Look, there's only one PubMed... it's not like there are a bunch of them. Just type "PubMed" into Google and you'll find those pages in no time. I don't get why you're acting confused. One minute you're claiming you found studies proving how much vitamin C actually helps, and then a second ago you were typing about how all that info is being suppressed... it doesn't add up. Like I just told you, I went looking too, and I found plenty of research showing the benefits of vitamin C. Nobody is hiding the truth about it or covering anything up. I honestly don't know what part of this isn't clicking for you...

I honestly don't know! My bad! I guess I'm still a little... well... "confused"... I thought you were trying to prove there’s actually more research out there regarding the negative effects of vitamin C... Total mistake on my part...

I wonder how many doctors actually use the internet to dig into actual studies... In the US, I bet a good chunk of them do, but definitely not here. And looking back at those old medical texts, I doubt they put much emphasis on the benefits of vitamin C—if they even mentioned it at all, since they probably didn't even know much about it back then... Hmm... It’d be interesting to ask current med students if they’re even learning about vitamin C in their classes... Or if anyone ever brings up its positive impact on cancer treatment...

So, lactase is basically that enzyme our bodies rely on... then you've got lactose, which is just the sugar found in milk. I'm honestly not entirely sure if the pasteurization process actually destroys it or not... turns out it's a bit more complicated than that...

I didn't catch it right away that you wrote lactose instead of lactase... lactose is... It doesn't destroy it... Pasteurization... man, that really is the core of the issue. If we could just get rid of it, pretty much everyone would finally be able to enjoy a glass of milk without any trouble...

With this (I was just scrolling through some info from the NIH website about digestive diseases... it’s pretty heavy stuff if you really dig into it. It makes you realize how much goes on under the hood just to keep us running. Everything from how we process food to how our gut bacteria play nice with our immune system... it's all connected. Honestly, sometimes I think we take our digestion for granted until something goes sideways. Anyway, worth a look if you're curious about how the whole system works... or if you've just been feeling a bit off lately.I've been digging through some stuff online lately... just browsing... trying to make sense of things... So, every once in a while, you get kids who are born totally unable to produce lactase. It’s pretty rare... but for most of us, it's just something that happens as we grow up. Basically, after about the age of 2 years, the body begins to produce less lactase. You might feel fine for a long time, though... some people don't even notice a thing until they're much older. Just one of those things, I guess...

I'm honestly not sure what to make of this whole thing regarding the claim that pasteurization wipes out lactase... maybe he just went a bit overboard with the rhetoric, or maybe he actually knows something the rest of us haven't figured out yet... Mercola says: They go ahead and pasteurize their milk, which basically wipes out all those good enzymes... you know, like lactase for processing lactose, galactase for galactose, or even phosphatase for helping your body take in calcium... It's a shame, really...I haven't really seen this info popping up anywhere else... most places barely even mention lactase. And when they do, it’s always just some basic textbook definition like, "lactase is the enzyme you need to digest lactose." But wait, isn't lactase actually present in milk itself? It feels a little weird to think that pasteurization would wipe out all those other enzymes but somehow just skip over the lactase... turns out the body begins to produce less lactase after about the age of 2 years... anyway...
Look, the truth is just that pasteurized milk is pretty terrible for you... at least once you're past being a little kid and your body stops making enough lactase to handle it. I've even seen those lactose-free options online where they basically just use enzymes to kill off the lactose after the fact. Honestly, if you're one of those people who loves to panic about everything, you should probably check out this page... I was reading through some stuff online earlier... just one of those rabbit holes you fall down at 2 AM. It’s about milk and how our bodies handle it as we get older. Turns out, there's this thing where after about the age of 2 years, the body begins to produce less lactase... which basically means things start getting a little complicated for a lot of us. It makes you wonder about all the different things we consume every day without thinking twice. You know, the stuff we just assume is fine because it's sitting right there in the fridge. It really makes you stop and think about the connection between what we eat and how we feel long-term... anyway, just a random thought that popped into my head while I was scrolling. They’ve cranked the alarm levels way up on the whole milk thing compared to everyone else... It all looks super convincing when you read it, too. The only catch is the way they wrote it—it makes you walk away thinking milk is ten times more dangerous than it actually is. Though, who knows, maybe it really is...

So now we're talking formaldehyde? You'll be living under a glass dome soon enough... You try to dodge everything in sight, yet you're still dealing with symptoms. Isn't that a little weird?

And you're doing it again, taking my words and pushing them into extremes. Formaldehyde isn't even the main issue right now—I'm still waiting on my mercury results. 😉 I mean, what's wrong with looking out for myself as much as possible? I still eat sweets once in a while (not often), occasionally grab some ice cream (I know there's milk in it, but hey... I'm technically allergic to dairy), I still have bread every day, the occasional cookie, I still live in a house where the formaldehyde concentration is >0, I still brush my teeth with fluoride toothpaste, I still shower in chlorinated water (well, at least I don't drink it) and so on.

We all know what formaldehyde is and the trouble it can cause. For me, it's tricky because I have allergic rhinitis, so it’s hard to tell if my issues at any given moment are from formaldehyde or just pollen. About a year and a half ago, I picked up a new monitor—a 17" LCD in a black plastic casing. Ever since I got it, for two or three months (maybe longer), my eyes were swollen and red, and I could barely look near it. Back then, I had to spend long hours on the computer, so I moved that LCD to the hallway and worked on a good old-fashioned CRT monitor instead. One time, a buddy of mine who also struggles with allergies came over and his eyes started watering almost immediately. For a long time after I bought that monitor, whenever he visited, he’d complain that "something was wrong with the air" because his nose would start running right away. Now, was it the formaldehyde or maybe an apricot tree blooming outside my window? I'm not 100% sure... probably both. Eventually, the monitor seemed to "off-gas," but I still get eye strain or a slight headache when I work at my desk for too long (especially since I have an open PC case, and I just installed a new graphics card last week). I should mention, though, that most of my symptoms aren't related to that and couldn't have been caused by formaldehyde anyway (most of them started way before that).

Like I said before: information is what matters. What each of us decides to do with that info is up to us. For instance, I am never again going to wash my hair with a shampoo that contains formaldehyde (Head&Shoulders is one of those), nor will I use sprays containing aluminum or similar junk. To make matters worse, the idiots (I don't know what else to call them—honestly, calling them pigs is an insult to pigs) don't even list formaldehyde on the label. Instead, they write Polyquaternium-10. If formaldehyde is such a harmless thing, why not just put it on the label instead of using these cryptic names?! Even with soda, they'll tell you which toxin is inside (like aspartame or cyclamates), but they won't explicitly state "this soda contains artificial sweeteners." If we have alternatives, why bother using toxins? Just so manufacturers can rake in more profit? At the end of the day, you're the only one responsible for your own health.

Finally found a little more breathing room to get back to you and respond to that post...

Casey Palmer5 said:That’s just not true... honestly, if you go over to PubMed and just plug in "ascorbic acid" plus "cancer" or whatever, you'll find a mountain of research abstracts sitting right there detailing how vitamin C impacts cancer... it's all there...

I honestly can't remember which specific PubMed database I was digging through—there are so many of them—but I didn't find anything like that. In fact, everything I came across said the exact opposite... that vitamin C might actually help prevent or even assist in treating cancer, not to mention all the other benefits. Could you send over some links? And seriously, which PubMed search were you using? I'm genuinely curious. All I've found are studies showing the positive side of vitamin C... that one negative study was run by a "scientist" who pocketed millions from big pharma companies... so, you know how that goes... It's just not happening... Just gotta believe...

There’s a ton of research out there talking up how great vitamin C can be... But honestly, if people could just heal themselves using nothing but vitamin C, they wouldn't be stuck dealing with the entire pharmaceutical industry and all their little "cover-ups" regarding its actual benefits... It's just how things work...

I never actually said that—you’re really taking my words to the extreme here. Look, studies have shown that vitamin C can actually help with cancer treatment... I just find myself wondering why it isn't being used more widely (presumably alongside those "mandatory" prescriptions, if such things even exist)? If we aren't utilizing vitamin C, then treatments might just drag on longer, which means spending more money on even more medication... higher doses, more volume, right? Of course, I'm not saying someone is magically cured just because they start taking vitamin C...

Honestly, this place isn't any more scientific than some random blog you'd find on Google... anyone can start a website and just write whatever nonsense they feel like... turns out having an opinion online doesn't make you an expert...

There’s a massive difference between this and sites like WebMD or those mainstream medical blogs. First off, the site doesn't make its money peddling pharmaceutical ads. Sure, they sell some supplements through the platform, but you don't even see them unless you go looking for the "products" section—and even then, it's just stuff they’ve actually tested themselves. Also, they aren't just pumping out their own fluff pieces. Honestly, most of what you read there is pulled straight from official scientific publications or newspapers they actually trust. Usually, there’s a bit of their own commentary attached to the reprinted articles. When they do publish the "heavy" stuff—not just news clips—they actually name names. They tell you exactly who wrote what. It’s not like reading *The Washington Post* where they just say "experts say" or "scientists discovered"... like, which scientists? Give me a name. Plus, they provide actual references, which is huge. They also share pieces meant to teach people how to spot the truth amidst all the lies and public misinformation out there. Now, you could argue the whole point of those articles is just to keep you hooked on the site... but no. Those posts aren't even really about the site itself. They're written very rationally. Most of us already know this stuff, really... these articles just help it finally click...

I remember seeing this email floating around a while back... some story about a doctor working at a big pharma company like Johnson & Johnson. She was supposedly writing to a friend about how breast cancer is linked to the aluminum in your deodorant. But then, it turns out that whole famous doctor? Total fabrication. She doesn't even exist, let alone work at that firm... just one of those internet tall tales...

People are just naive—what else can I say? It’s exactly what that article I mentioned was getting at. It’s just a shame most people are naive in all the wrong ways... like those who believe some random email is gospel truth. They think, "Oh, it can't be that bad," and then they end up doing themselves a massive disservice regarding their health. We know aluminum is dangerous (by the way, it's even in Rexona!) and that it's linked to Alzheimer's, but breast cancer is a totally different story. Honestly, it’s better if they believe it causes breast cancer rather than believing it's perfectly safe. It's like how people act about mercury in dental amalgams... it's just pure faith. Dentists, doctors, and most regular folks just take it as fact without any actual evidence or logical reasoning. Of course, at first, it seems right because they get one "rational" explanation... the problem is they only hear one side and cling to it. Then, when they finally hear fifty much more convincing and rational arguments, they reject them just because of their preconceived beliefs...

Sites like Mercola give you the other side of the story. True, to an uninformed reader, it might seem like they're exaggerating because it makes it feel like nothing is actually safe. But that’s where the smart surfer comes in... you have to judge for yourself how significant a risk is. These days, practically nothing is 100% healthy. Like, vegetables are "healthy"—they are, sure—but people forget they’re often sprayed with pesticides... so then they aren't exactly "healthy" anymore. It’s really up to each person to decide if they want to risk various illnesses by skipping veggies or if they'd rather risk the pesticides...

I wouldn't know, I don't go into pharmacies and I avoid medication as much as possible.

Good for you. Up until a few months ago, I was hitting the pharmacy every single month for my Claritin and Flonase. I don't use them anymore because I realized they weren't actually helping me. Now, I only stop by the drugstore for my vitamin C tablets, garlic pearls, calcium, and Omega-3 fatty acids.

Weight gain is simply the result of consuming excess calories, which can come from both carbs and fats. Besides, fats aren't as harmless as people think; from what I know, it isn't carbs that build up on artery walls, but excess fat.
The Atkins diet is a fantastic way to wreck your own kidneys. Didn't Dr. Atkins himself have heart problems?

I never said fats were harmless—I don't eat anything particularly fatty. Based on what you said, it sounds like I'm claiming you should ditch carbs and eat tons of fat—but I'm not saying that. I'm saying: ditch both. I cut out sugar, but not necessarily carbs. I'm not saying carbs will kill you—I touched on that a few paragraphs ago—it's just up to everyone to decide what they eat. The important thing is having the right information. Most people just don't have it. As for Dr. Atkins... I don't know anything about him, and neither do you. What about all the other people who didn't follow the Atkins diet but still ended up with heart problems?

I see we agree there. I don't drink milk and I don't touch processed foods like cornflakes because both are gross to me. Okay, I put a little milk in my coffee, but that's it.
Digestibility has to do with a lack of lactase, not with pasteurization or sterilization. Some people just don't have enough of it, so they have a hard time digesting milk.

And pasteurization destroys lactase along with several other things (http://www.mercola.com/article/Diet/milk/no_milk.htm).

You know, thinking back on it... I barely even touch grains anymore. Not a single gram today.

I'm not giving up sugar entirely, though. You have to enjoy something in life, right? And honestly, I haven't really noticed it doing me any harm...

The thing is, we can't just look at a substance—especially something that only hurts you over the long haul—and decide it's fine because we feel okay right now. Just because it isn't hitting you hard today (which, for me, isn't really an issue since I don't do caffeine, so there’s nothing to offset the sugar crash anyway) doesn't mean you won't face health issues twenty or thirty years down the line that wouldn't have been there if you hadn't been consuming it... Or at least, if you'd kept it to a minimum. Look at mercury amalgams in dental work: for most people, by the time the mercury actually leaches out of those fillings, they're already getting older... and then they just blame everything on "old age." Another example... my grandmother ate pretty heavy, fatty foods her whole life (like most grandmas used to) and didn't think twice about it... until she had a heart attack in her fifties.

From everything I've picked up online and through my own experience, I'm becoming more convinced that most of us would be in much better shape if we just avoided certain foods and stuck to what's actually good for us. If we cut out toxins—mercury, aluminum, aspartame, other synthetic sweeteners, formaldehyde (man, that stuff is everywhere! From shampoo to furniture to electronics...), fluoride (some idiots put it in the water supply just to prevent cavities in kids!)... if we exercised, did things that actually nourish our bodies, and kept stress to an absolute minimum... It all seems to tie back to the epidemic of allergies, and diseases like Alzheimer's and multiple sclerosis, obesity, heart disease...

Casey Palmer5 said:You can't really overdose on vitamin C, but taking massive doses over a long period... that’s linked to kidney stones. And look, if it were actually that effective at treating cancer, you'd think they'd be using it for that purpose by now. Or do you honestly believe it's just some grand conspiracy by Big Pharma to keep pushing those expensive chemo treatments?

Vitamin C is dirt cheap—and honestly, I think that’s exactly the point. It feels like they're hiding how much it could actually help with cancer treatment just so Big Pharma can keep those massive profit margins coming in... But it doesn't even stop there. They go as far as paying doctors to publish studies claiming Vitamin C might actually cause cancer instead of fighting it. You really ought to look into it for yourself... Hey... just checking in... Great read. Next time you find yourself wandering through a drugstore, just take a second to look around... honestly, there are so many colorful little boxes for every little thing, it's like stepping into a candy shop...

It’s actually kind of wild when you think about it... the recommended daily amounts of vitamin C are just way too low to really make a dent in our health... barely enough to do anything at all...
Health... things to think about...

The whole idea that we can't properly digest carbs—and yeah, starch counts as one—is just total nonsense... honestly, it's such a joke...

I think I might have overshot my mark a bit with what I said earlier... or maybe my conclusion was just a little too blunt. But look, we all know—or at least we should know—that we aren't actually gaining weight because of fat. Not if you aren't absolutely gorging yourself on it, anyway. It’s the carbs that get us. The thing is, humans only really started eating grains and heavy carbs about 10,000 years ago. In the grand scheme of evolution, that's nothing. It’s way too short a window for our metabolism to actually catch up and adapt... That’s why the Atkins diet works so well; it basically just cuts the carbs out of the equation. Carbs spike your insulin and drive up that "bad cholesterol," which can lead to all sorts of health issues. I'm talking about those chronic conditions that people don't immediately link back to what they eat. It’s pretty wild how much diabetes cases have shot up lately, isn't it? And that includes all the heart and cardiovascular stuff too... Here’s a look at what’s going on with this topic... So, I was reading some stuff the other day about diabetes... you know, those stories where people who were basically tethered to insulin—feeling like they were just waiting for the disease to take them—actually turned things around. They saw huge improvements in their health, or in some cases, the diabetes just... vanished. It was all down to changing up what they eat. I can't remember the exact specifics... just that low-carb was the big thing...

I mean... honestly, everything nowadays seems to be driven by nothing but pure marketing hype. People are just too naive, or maybe just uninformed, and they swallow whatever nonsense pops up in an advertisement. Then you read some fluff in The New York Post or The Washington Post, or see some celebrity doctor on TV, and it just reinforces all those ridiculous ideas... Milk isn't even nearly as healthy as everyone makes it out to be. The stuff you grab at the grocery store is pasteurized and heavily processed, which strips away so many useful nutrients and makes it way harder to digest. And don't even get me started on all those breakfast cereals... they act like it's this amazing source of energy and vitamins, right? It's mostly just junk. Honestly, it’s probably one of the main reasons why Americans struggle so much with being overweight and unhealthy. The more processed a grain is, the less nutritional value it actually holds... So, we're getting into the territory of dangerous substances now. Everything I've said so far is fine, but we're missing the stuff people think isn't "that" bad. Right after you start avoiding preservatives and additives, you really need to look at sugar and, whenever possible, grains... though I'm not sure if I could ever fully commit to a grain-free diet myself. Once you cut those out, you start wondering what's actually left to eat... but sugar? Yeah, you can definitely skip the sugar...

shadowgardener12 said:The trick isn't freaking out like dustycanyon6 does. Instead, you should try to stick to "clean" foods—stuff without all those preservatives, emulsifiers, artificial flavors, or dyes...

If you were dealing with my issues, you’d probably be panicking too. 😉 I mean, I wouldn't say I'm panicking, per se, but when I first realized what my symptoms actually meant, it definitely hit me hard. I'm seeing early signs of multiple sclerosis and Alzheimer's, and let's face it, there isn't exactly a magic cure for that stuff.

Beyond avoiding everything you just mentioned, you really have to feed your body the right things to fight back. You need plenty of Omega-3 fatty acids... modern diets totally throw the ratio of Omega-3 to Omega-6 out of whack because we consume way, way too much Omega-6 from oils and processed foods, which can lead to all sorts of health problems. Then there's vitamin C—since it's water-soluble, you don't really have to worry about overdosing, and some studies even show high-dose IV vitamin C can be helpful in fighting cancer. Plus, other vitamins, garlic (which is great for detoxing toxins)... and honestly, cutting back on carbs and starches might help too, since the human body isn't always great at processing them.

Ryan Sanchez55 said:Is that stuff in Crystal Light too?

Nope, just the Crystal Light—you won't find aspartame in the other ones.

There’s also some talk about those synthetic vitamins...

I don't know enough about that one to say...

In certain parts of the USA, they make vaccinating infants against hepatitis B mandatory—but honestly, hepatitis B is such an incredibly rare disease for little kids to even catch that the whole vaccination thing just feels totally absurd! Not even mentioning that if you look at the link above, you'll find two stories about babies passing away just a day after getting their shots... And apparently, there's plenty of talk about how vaccinated kids end up with autism too! The REAL reason they're pushing this hepatitis B shot on babies is nothing but cold, hard cash for whoever manufactured the vaccine! Just greedy, profit-driven pigs... They're killing babies just to pad their pockets! 😢