Not sure where you’re being sarcastic here. You mention “unnatural and inorganic” but then say “the same great taste with no sacrifice.”

Again, not sure where your sarcasm is exactly, but I, of course, have to go on record saying toxic artificial sweetners have a most definite toll on the human body.

There is an American mindset that believes that even though a substance may not be “healthy”, it’s not really dangerous unless it causes cancer or one of a dozen other feared maladies.

That same mindset completely misses the point that mental state of well-being, focus, the ability to feel good about one’s self and one’s life, joint pain, bone brittleness, chronic re-injury, and many other physical, emotional, and mental ailments stem from toxicity in the body. What bothers me most about this American mindset is the actual preference of outward physical appearance to inward sense of well-being and long life.

It’s the same mindset that causes some to smoke cigarettes to stay thin. I gained 35 pounds after I quit smoking a pack a day. Did I suddenly become less healthy because I gained weight? Hardly.

Want to know whether a food product is healthy? Ask yourself this simple question: did it grow biologically, uninterrupted by artificial (man-made) chemicals? If not, the product has chemicals that will harm you on some level.

Obviously I’m ranting here, but the point needs to be drilled home until some of us get the picture.

I can’t help it…I just love those commercials, and that one was great, Michael. I think you should submit it to Budweiser and see what they say

Diet soda…a blessing and a curse. Yes, we save ourselves the calorie count, but at what costs?

To Daniel’s question, yes and no, of course a lot of it is sarcastic, I do not have the fear of chemicals that you have. I see some of the modern science as good for overall food production. Like all things, moderation is key.

For me, I hate the diet soda because I am guilty of doing all the bad stuff, drinking a diet soda and thinking I am doing a good thing. No I am not. To me it is more making fun of the person (myself) who says that they are trying when in reality they are not. The only difference is I am self aware enough to know I am a fraud, many just whine.

To Ashleigh’s point, I tried to submitt it Budweiser, they do not accept unsolicated suggestions.

I don’t fear chemicals. I do have a decent understanding of optimal performance. The human body and mind will perform at its best when one eliminates substances that interrupt ideal function.

It’s a purely logical equation, like a mathematical certainty. The body is entirely biological. It was created naturally. It functions naturally. It derives sustenance naturally. It is programmed to function optimally.

You could pour a little sugar in your gas tank and your car might still run. You could argue that fuel from RaceTrack won’t do permanent damage to your car, even though the chemical composition causes the fuel and engine to burn much hotter. In truth, whether the driver wants to accept it or not, he WILL need to replace parts sooner if he uses Racetrack gasoline on a consistent basis.

The argument for moderation is only logical if one agrees to accept a modicum of risk for introducing unnatural substances into their body. If one assumes that moderate use of unnatural substances has no harmful consequence, he or she is deceived. For every action there is an opposite and equal reaction. For every choice, there is a consequence. An unobservant person might not notice the consequences, and therefore interpret the consequences as nonexistent. But that is merely an issue of perspective and awareness, not of reality or truth.

I like debate, as you can tell, and am willing to debate most things without feeling the need to get personal, so you can fire away if you’d like. It’s good exercise for the mind!

Here are my thoughts on the issue, they are not based on facts or anything like that and chances are I am wrong. I guess there are one of two choices, either you are right and I am naive or I am right and you are paranoid. =)

Just because something is natural does not mean it is going taste better or be healthy, it just means it is natural. Anthrax and uranium are all natural but I do not think that you want serve that to your family.

When I see packaging that says “All Natural” or its evil twins, “Whole” and “Organic” next to something I know one thing, they are charging me more money for it. Give me the unnatural, the not whole, the inorganic, the processed and the jacked up on all kinds chemicals that science can create. If adding horse DNA to cattle is going to make my steak taste better then I want DNA altered cattle. If pesticides lower the harmful bugs that destroy my food I want my vegetables swimming in them. Like they say in race car driving, if you are not cheating, you are not trying.

What is the big deal about chemicals and hormones anyway? Just in case anyone is wondering, the Black Death that raged all through out Europe during the Middle Ages all happened on genetically unaltered and no chemicals watch. Maybe a little DDT would have stopped the flies that carried the bubonic plague and could have saved lives. It is possible, during the period of global cooling that happened during that time that genetically altered wheat would have survived better then all natural wimpy wheat did and could have stopped mass starvation.

Sure it scares me that when I leave out my artificial sweetener all day and all night that there are no ants that get into it. It is possible that someday I could have some strange growth on some part of my body that I did not expect. Am I going to give up my artificial sweetener? No! Why? Because it taste like sugar and has no calories and I can not get that with all natural.

Maybe some day a rogue scientist is going to create some Frankenstein monster by altering the DNA of corn or chickens but that is the risk we are just going to have to take. I am sure to cave men the natural way to gather food was to roam around and find it where ever it grew. It would have seemed strange and unnatural to use an ox to break up the ground and plant all the seed in one place, wheat does not grow in straight rows. That is not natural, that is not whole, that is not organic, should not food be unaltered by human activity?

I will respond to the rest a little later, but I’m in no way a fruitarian, i.e. one of those people who thinks we should only eat what has fallen from the vine or tree. Letting plants grow wild is not a defining characteristic of organic or “wholistic.” It is simply wild.

Using an ox to plow the ground doesn’t alter the genetic or chemical composition of the food you eat. It does not go from being corn to like-corn.

The argument you’ve laid forth is not one that can be much argued against. In essence, you have stated that you don’t care about what toxins and pesticides and artificially created chemicals do to your body. I can’t argue with that.

I was arguing from the standpoint of organic products being superior because they are unaltered chemically/genetically and are the healthiest option going. You’re not debating that. You’re saying, “Give me cheaper, better tasting, fewer calories.”

Done. It’s all yours. But what you save at the store over the years you may well make up for at the hospital in the years to come. Just a friendly warning.

You may contest that statement, so let me tell you that I obviously can’t give you any medical studies to support that statement at this moment. But I will point to the organic / wholistic people I know in their 60s and 70s. They are thin. They are much more mobile than most people their age. They have more energy, fewer injuries, no instances of diabetes. They are people who “do.”

Oh you are right, don’t get me wrong. The reason I can not debate such an issue is I am on the wrong side. If asked which position is better I am going to say yours. I think the rise of child obesity and food allergies and allergies over all can be tied to what we are doing to ourself.

Even the devil needs an advocate now and then.

dear mr mike calloway,I can vouche for daniel in saying that aspartame is absoultue garbage for the human body,I became very ill with strange symptoms that a healthy 26 yr old shouldnt have. I had joint pain,fast heart rate,palpatations,insomnia,rashes,depression,parinoia,and chronic fatigue syndrome. my doctors were puzzeld, did all kind of test and counldnt pin point the problem or better yet didnt want to. I discovered for myself that it was the diet drinks that were making me ill even though the doctors suggested otherwise, there is no “safe level of consuption for phlymaldihyde{spelling?} as is is total toxic to the body.when i refrained from this crap I immediately began to feel better and vowed to let my voice be heard on how angry I was that the fda approved this crap. long story short I realized that the people who created this product and those that approved it were well aware of how dangerous it is and came to find out that that was the point there may be a bigger conspiracy as to why aspatame is being consumed and I will not look any further into this, One theory is that the powers that be are trying to kill off the population due to resource shortage. but who knows

Thanks for information, I'll always keep updated here!

That bud light commercial idea is perfect. I LOL'd.

so do u mean this does not cause any health hazard and it does not store in the body? Will like to hear from u soon. But i think it been a diet coke does not mean we should drink in excess…for more info check Side effects of sugar on http://healthifact.com

Thanks