human_probably

joined 1 year ago
[–] human_probably@kbin.social 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Are you exaggerating or do you have actual sources? I did some searching around and can’t verify your claims.

The choice to reject new information just because something has been studied a lot is a very anti-science take.

People should understand aspartame, and understand sugar, as much as they can and make their own choices for their health.

[–] human_probably@kbin.social 9 points 1 year ago

Neither Coke nor Diet Coke are nutritious. Whether one or the other is a risk is specific to a person, and aspartame as well as other sweeteners aren’t fully understood in terms of risk.

I think these kind of simplistic statements serve to stoke fears around food than actually help people understand them. Added / excess sugar is associated to health risks but ultimately people need to understand their own health as individuals.

Here’s a Healthline article (by no means an authority but still fairly informative) to help expand.

https://www.healthline.com/health/food-nutrition/sugar-facts-scientific#8.-Going-on-a-low--or-no-sugar-diet-will-help-you-lose-weight.-

[–] human_probably@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

That’s fair! I was giving examples but you’re right this and what another user mentioned about Nova make them imperfect choices. I like the idea of paying homage to Apollo somehow.

[–] human_probably@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Maybe a name like Aurora or Nova could work. Like it is still space / celestial themed but both symbolize “new” (aurora - new morning after nighttime, nova, explosion of light / pent up energy), and can work as a spiritual successor paying homage to Apollo. Great idea btw I just signed up.