4 ms·
Take it up with the author. My point was to dispute the GP poster's assertion that random public persons' concerns are unfounded. The existence of such studies
by fnordfnordfnord 12y ago
Take it up with the author. My point was to dispute the GP poster's assertion that random public persons' concerns are unfounded. The existence of such studies absent a firm conclusion from the studies makes it an open question.
- fluidcruft 12y agoI'm sorry, this is completely ridiculous. You are literally saying that since the article you chose to cite does not support your argument, that I should instead go argue with the author of the peer-reviewed journal article? Really?!? That's the best defense of your argument you can muster?
- fnordfnordfnord 12y agoI didn't even make an argument. I posted a few links to peer-reviewed research about the effects of artificial sweeteners. HN poster kmicklas, way up there made a post referring to "unfounded fears in the public" about artificial sweeteners. The links I posted are enough to dismiss the notion that artificial sweeteners can pose no health risk(s).
- Dylan16807 12y agoYou can't throw a file full of non-evidence on the table and say that it justifies people being wary of artificial sweeteners.