• testfactor@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    19 hours ago

    Your original comment is, “Artificial sweeteners are arguibly often worse than sugar.” Literal copy and paste.

    I suppose you could be pedantic and say “arguably” is doing a ton of heavy lifting (the same way that it would be in “vaccines arguably cause autism”), but I hope you’ll forgive me for reiterating that it’s a braindead take.

    • REDACTED@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      18 hours ago

      And a word often. Your comment re-frames as if I said all are worse, without an argument. That is VERY different from my original point, which was essentially “I understand why governments wants us to intake less random artificial sweeteners along with sugar, so this does not feel very onion-y”

      • Aatube@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        15 hours ago

        If this is true, wasn’t testfactor’s initial reply agreeing with you? Why did you spend so much time attacking aspartame, the most studied food additive ever?

        • REDACTED@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          15 hours ago

          Because I disagreed with the claim “we have never found anything negative”. Literally anything can have negative consequences, even drinking too much water. I never denied it’s likely the safest one, along with stevia, but saying there is zero risk, zero negative findings, ectera is just factually, scientifically wrong.

          Sorry, I tend to be pedantic.