3 Comments

Do you feel that the following is a reasonable conclusion? Just because something has not been shown to be "harmful" based on the research done so far (take artificial sweeteners for example) it doesn't necessarily mean it's perfectly safe and healthy either. Humans evolved largely to eat what they could find in nature so any of the "man made" food products/additives, things that hunter gatherers wouldn't have been able to eat, MIGHT cause negative health outcomes, but this is next to impossible to properly research for reasons such as for instance something you've said before - that in reality our physiology is very complex and looking at a single compound in isolation isn't generally effective at demonstrating outcomes. If this is true, then perhaps I'd prefer to avoid things like artificial sugar for example (AND keep real "added sugars" as low as possible).

Expand full comment

"Aspartame is a non-nutritive sweetener, which means that it provides no functional calories when we consume it."

It aspartame non-nutritive because of the chirality of the molecule i.e. it's a mirror image of molecule that would be nutritive?

Expand full comment

Love that you used the IARC chart that showed Aloe Vera, pickled veggies and Kava is in the same 2B class.

Expand full comment