Posted on 04/11/2013 5:18:56 PM PDT by Olog-hai
The FDA is considering a plan that would allow the dairy industry to add the sweetener aspartame to milk without having to label it.
The plan is coming under fire from some farmers and some consumer groups. …
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnewsinsider.com ...
For not ‘agreeing what “Organic” even means’, they sure do have a lot of information and even regulate it
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_milk
They even have certification orgs and a federal regulatory framework.
But I know, it’s wikipedia which is all lies LOL
(I’m supporting your opinion, not looking to argue with someone who views the benefits of organics and pesticide free products as a scam)
They’re talking about not having to identify sweeteners in FLAVORED milk, like chocolate milk or strawberry milk.
Ain’t gonna happen.
:)
I agree with you on the shelf life of the organic/local milk when compared to regular milk; that’s been my experience, too.
$3 a 1/2 gallon is pricey - for WISCONSIN, where we have a d@mn COW on every CORNER! But it’s still worth it. :)
Do pro-organic consumers really believe that organic products are pesticide free? They aren't.
Does the pro-organic crowd also believe that any pesticides used by organic farmers will not be carcinogenic, simply because they are not synthetic?
Either way, I support their right to waste their money in any way they choose.
Saccharin was never a carcinogen. The original finding was predicated on laboratory "research" that fed rats 800 times the normal daily dose of saccharin in order to achieve the carcinogen label.
Many years after saccharin was suposed to come off the market, the makers of saccharin were able to prove what the research lab had done and get the finding reversed. Today, saccharin is still available as an artificial sweetner.
thanks. generally you have to read what each one’s done to the milk. basically the organic i look for is non-antibiotic cattle, non-growth hormone cattle. and they generally are non antibiotic because they are feeding their cattle what they are designed to eat, grass hays, not corn. they don’t need antibiotics all the timeto control gut bacteria and weaker imjune systems from eating too much sugars. they are gut fermenters and are designed to get great energy and nutrients out of low energy grasses.
it is worth it. those cows are healthier and better taken care of as well. plus you don’t get stuff you don’t want in your milk like antibiotics and growth hormones.
It’s true. Organic makes a big difference. My man boobies are a lot smaller now since I switched to organic.
Well then..just look for the milk labeled “CONTAINS NO ASPARTAME!”
Leaving “contains aspartame” off the label just means responsible dairies will have a boom in milk sales :-)
> Let me put it this way, there is no effin’ way the FDA is going to allow something containing phenylalanine into a food product without making it clear on the label.
Just like there’s “no effin’ way” the ATF — whose purpose, ostensibly, is to enforce gun laws... especially regarding firearm trafficking — would be involved in illegally trafficking firearms?
Aspartame is poison. Don’t drink it. Causes severe headaches in many people. Almost all of the diet drinks contain it.
If you must drink a diet soda, then choose Diet Rite...no aspartame, no caffeine, no sodium, and no calories. Tastes much better than diet Coke, Pepsi, etc.
Aspartame must not be allowed in children’s flavored milk, period.
No it isn't.
Ain't. Gonna. Happen.
Find something else to hate government for. There are plenty of legitimate options. This one, however, just makes you look like a lunatic.
You and I seem to be miscommunicating here.
I'm not saying they will do this; I'm saying the government has lost my trust, all of it. That they get no "benefit of the doubt" that they will "generally do the right thing" or that they "have people's best interests in mind."
No it isn't.
I beg to differ: http://www.safefood.org.nz/aspartaddict.html
There's a lot more information out there that says it is carcenogenic than not. It is also a neurotoxin.
Gives me heart palpitations within minutes of ingestion. Nasty stuff.
If that's true, every time you eat a small piece of grilled chicken with a small glass of wine or beer (or apple juice or tomato juice) means that you are subjecting your body to many times more carcinogens and neurotoxins than you get from the aspartame found in a bottle of diet soda.
Seems ridiculous, right? It is. Aspartame is no more a carcinogen, or a neurotoxin, than a small piece of grilled chicken with beer or wine. You shouldn't believe everything you read on the internet.
I’ve had several doctors tell me the same - that aspartame is a carcenogen and a neurotoxin. What medical school did you graduate from?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.