top | item 37319661

(no title)

jebus989 | 2 years ago

This is an example of the "appeal to nature" logical fallacy. You may be able to make a case that Stevia is healthier than Aspartame, but it should be based on evidence to that effect rather than because you like the idea that it has ingredients derived from organic material.

discuss

order

ghostzilla|2 years ago

And this is an example of "where is the evidence" logical fallacy. In complex systems, such as the human body, the only evidence of safety is time -- a very long time. The Stevia plant (though not the same as extract) has been used for centuries. Aspartame was (accidentally) created in the lab in 1965.

If you are going to mess with complex systems, such as feed yourself aspartame, vape, give pregnant women a synthetic sedative and medication for morning sickness etc., you do it for a high potential gain that offsets potentially huge downsides. Benefits of aspartame are close to nil; if anything it probably makes things worse because people think they can consume more ultra processed foods sweetened with it because such foods have "fewer calories".

jebus989|2 years ago

> In complex systems, such as the human body, the only evidence of safety is time -- a very long time. The Stevia plant (though not the same as extract) has been used for centuries. Aspartame was (accidentally) created in the lab in 1965.

Time is not evidence of safety, that is an odd claim (see smoking tobacco), thankfully we have the scientific method to investigate hypotheses like "x is bad for you".

krembo|2 years ago

So does cocaine. 100% natural ingredients.

sebstefan|2 years ago

That's why if I ever need a false tooth with a suicide pill in it, I'll fill it with cyanide and not novitchok. It's much better for you

INTPenis|2 years ago

You may call it "appeal to nature", I may call it; if it ain't broke, why fix it?

sebstefan|2 years ago

Well a dictionary would call your comment an "appeal to nature" as well. Ricin is natural, hugging a bear is natural, I mean come on...

PartiallyTyped|2 years ago

The problem is that you assume consistency, but in reality, we keep modifying plants / fruits / etc by selecting them and planting them. IIRC fruits are now too sweet for zoo animals.

Bancakes|2 years ago

Seriously? I should trust some scientists getting paid to push a product to multi billion dollar companies, over something simple you can grow yourself?