URGENT: NutraSweet(tm) Destroys Usenet!!!!

Speaker-to-Minerals lydick at SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
Thu Aug 3 15:09:09 EST 1995

In article <neil-0308950332550001 at pma01.rt66.com>, neil at rt66.com (Neil Jensen) writes:
=I previously suspected that you were incapable of accepting ANYTHING that
=is counter to the FDA approved, Corporate oriented, party line. You have
=at last CONVINCED me, and i suspect many others, of it. You couldn't
=refute the FDA dogma if God herself came down and told you that it was a
=wrong. At one time having fixed ideas was considered a sign of insanity.
=Your idee fixe is double-blind studies. Of course they are necessary in
=many (perhaps even most) situations but i fail to see the necessity of
=performing double-blind studies, at great expense to the taxpayers, when
=in case after case after case Aspartame is proven to be the culprit by
=simply removing it from a sick person's diet - everything else remaining
=the same. Of course such methodology doesn't put the moola into the
=coffers of some taxpayer's $$$ addicted research facility.

Never heard of the placebo effect, eh?  Why do you think it is that
double-blind studies are preferred to unblinded studies?
I  try  very  hard  to say exactly what I mean.  I'd appreciate it if you'd
bear that in mind and not try to "interpret"  my  posts  to  fit  your  own
preconceived notions if I'm posting in a serious thread.  Remember:  If you
throw a strawman into a heated debate, flames are likely to be the result.

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list