Recent Updates Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • truedeity 4:10 AM on August 30, 2017 Permalink | Reply  

    Is Diet Soda Bad For You? 

    Is Diet Soda Bad For You?

    Most of the concerns having to do with Diet Soda having a harmful impact on health has to do with Aspartame.

    A quick online search about Aspartame will provide you numerous opinions about this Artificial Sweetener

    Some claim it causes things like cancer, seizures, multiple sclerosis, lupus, memory problems, brain tumors, etc.

    But just about every governmental orginization in the world regulating food products have deemed it safe for human consumption

    In 1974 Aspartame gained FDA’s approval as a food additive, the benifits were that while Sugar and Aspartame both contain about 4 calories per gram, Aspartame is about 180 times sweeter than Sugar, Thus you need much less to get the same perception of sweetness. This is the reason it works so well as a low calorie sweetener.

    Aspartame is made of two amino acids

    1. Phenylalanine
    2. Aspartic acid
    3. And the alcohol Methanol

    All of the health concerns regarding this supplement is regarding what these 3 things can do to the body.

    The question then becomes do the three parts of Aspartame cause health problems?

    The quick answer is Yes.  At high enough levels they do.  But the quick answer is not the whole answer.

    So if high doses of Aspartame are harmful why are they allowed in our food?

    It turns out low doses aren’t harmful and we even need those Amino acids to perform certain functions within the body.

    In fact, Phenylalanine and Asparatic acid are either produced by our bodies from many other foods, or are already found naturally in our diets.  Aspartic acid helps the liver by aiding in the removal ammonia, and is involved in the production of anti-bodies created by the immune system.  It can be found in many different types of foods like asparagus, avocados, sugar beets, sausages, and molasses.  Too much Aspartic acid can be seen in several different disease processes like Lou Gehrig’s disease, Epilepsy, and certain strokes. Unfortunately, for those fighting against Aspartame the levels seen in these conditions are several folds higher than can be achieved by eating Aspartame at recommended amounts.  There is also never been a direct effect between these diseases and increased aspartic acid intake.

    Methanol more commonly known as wood-alcohol is definitely not needed by our bodies, if your wondering why its allowed in Aspartame that’s because it’s already found in many drinks wine, whiskey, and beer.  As you might have guessed humans have been ingesting this for ages at low levels, so it seems Methanol has no long term consequences.  Methanol in general does result in some unwanted reactions within the body specifically it’s taken up by the cells of the body and the production of formaldehyde and formic acid are the result.  Formaldehyde at high levels will cause proteins to form abnormally the result is proteins that no longer function. Formic acid at high levels will cause abnormal metabolic processes within cells, causing them to cease functioning.  The result is death to that cell due to a lack of energy.  This is because it disrupts the organelle responsible for a cells metabolism, known as your mitochondria.  Some cells are extremely sensitive to formic acid, specifically those in the optic nerve.  This is why blindness is associated with methanol poisoning.  So does Aspartame produce enough Methanol to harm people? Probably not. There are many other foods we eat every day that have the same, or higher amounts of Methanol than Aspartame, beer and wine aside, foods like Tomato’s, Tomato Juice, and other citrus fruits and their associated juices are good examples here.

    This brings us to the last ingredient Phenylalanine.  There is a rare disorder called Phenylketonuria affecting 1 in 10,000 people this ailment makes your body unable to break down Phenylalanine, left untreated toxic levels of Phenylalanine build up the result can be things like developmental disorders, cardiac rhythm problems, seizures and severe learning disabilities.  Fortunately, most babies born in the developed world are tested for this disorder and treatment usually involves diet control.  The diet control is because there are many foods that contain higher levels of Phenylalanine than Aspartame specifically the many different types of protein we taken in.  Knowing this disorder exists the FDA requires the Aspartame products be labeled specifically for Phenylketonuria patients.

    That said, anything we take in our bodies in high enough doses can be harmful, arguably the most basic of human needs is water and even water in high doses can be lethal in what is being called water-intoxication

    The question of Aspartame’s safety is more appropriately: Are the levels found in Aspartame, and the dose you may be ingesting high enough to cause unwanted health effects?

     

    Like any food additive evaluated by the FDA there is an extensive process that takes place before manufacturers are allowed to put it in our foods.  When the FDA first approved Aspartame as an additive there were numerous controversies surrounding its approval.   Those controvercies revolved around the studies the FDA looked at Advocating Aspartame safety.

    That said there have been countless new studies performed looking at Aspartame’s safety

    Numerous other reviews of the research have been conducted by several agencies, including the FDA and the EFSA.  The most recent was conducted by the EFSA and issued on Dec. 10, 2013 that reviewed all studies performed on Aspartame in Animal and Human alike.  Knowing there is such a large controversy surrounding the supplement, the EFSA’s independent panel of experts issued an open public call for any data, comments, or concerns on Aspartame.  According to Alicia Mortensen, chair of the EFSA’s panel, said, “This opinion represents one of the most comprehensive risk assessments of Aspartame ever undertaken.”  The panel concluded that Aspartame does not cause cancer at the levels consumed by humans, and it doesn’t cause problems during pregnancy.  Overall, there were no concerns regarding the current ADI(acceptable daily intake) of 40 milligrams per kilogram of body weight.

    For your reference, according to the american cancer society there are an average of 180 milligrams of Aspartame in a typical 12 ounce can of diet soda.  So an Adult weighing 165 lbs would need to drink 16 cans of diet soda per day to exceed the recommended limit, which itself is set drastically below the dangerous thresholds.  According to the ACS the ADI is about 100 times less than the smallest amount that might cause health concerns, based on a study done on lab animals.

     
  • truedeity 2:55 AM on August 6, 2017 Permalink | Reply  

    Election rigging in California 2016 Presidential Election 

    I live in Fremont, CA., and on election day I went into my local polling location and when I arrived an old Chinese lady sitting at the table asked to present my Photo ID.  They looked my name up and then asked me, if I brought my mail in ballot?  I was quite stunned by that question, I wasn’t expecting that question, it really threw me off. I thought maybe I forgot to do something… But it struck me as odd because I have voted in the past in other states and that was never asked.  I certainly did not intend to send a mail in ballot when I arrived at the polling location.  I also did not recall anything about a mail in ballot when I registered to vote for the 2016 election.  So I politely answered the lady, “No, I don’t have a mail in ballot.”

    So she told me that I could fill out the ballot, but asked me not to send it through the electronic ballot counting machine and instead they will mail it…  So I hesitantly agreed and went to the line at the booth to fill out my ballot card.  While I was waiting in line another guy was complaining about it, asking the staff lots of questions. I talked to him as well, he claimed to be a resident of California for the last 15 years and that he voted a lot.  He said he never experienced this kind of thing.  He asked why is it that some people are not being asked to send a mail in ballot?  I noticed that too.  Some people would come in, present their photo ID and not a word was mentioned to them about mail in ballots.

    He was visibly upset, as was I.  I talked to that man about it, because at that time I had known about there being provisional ballots that were not counted at the DNC primaries.  Apparently some rigging was being rumored about provisional ballots.  I said that a lot of people believe that there was rigging going on at the DNC primaries but that I was not a democrat.  So he and I were very skeptical.

    Just as I was thinking about it I had suspected that foul play was taking place.  I had suspected that more republicans were slated as “mail in”.  If Bernie Sanders was being cheated during the DNC primaries then Donald Trump could very probably be getting cheated in the general election.

    Later that night as I was watching the votes come in and I noticed that not all of California votes were counted.  Day’s and weeks went by and they still hadn’t been counted.

    In fact it has been reported that over 3 million provisional ballots were not accounted for in California.  Are they all republican voters?

    I can’t say for sure but what I can say is that there are some really striking statistical anomalies that have come out regarding the election results in several states and all of the abnormalities seem to favor Hillary Clinton.  So if you ask me if I believe that Hillary won the popular vote, I will tell you, not even close!

     

     

     
  • truedeity 11:21 PM on July 31, 2017 Permalink | Reply  

    Coal is not moving the United States backwards. 

     

    During the 2017 Politicon debate between Ann Coulter and Ana Kasparian, Ana Kasparian argued that the coal industry is moving us backwards.  Also it is often argued by many Democrats that investing in the coal industry is a “leap backwards”.  The problem is that this is not actually true.  First of all what the president wants to do is create job growth in the united states by removing regulations that inhibit the ability of growth in certain sectors.  The energy industry is a huge sector for potential job growth in the United States.  The democrats are basically saying that we need to invest in more “clean” energy.  But there are several misconceptions, the first most obvious misconception is, there are other options.  Actually, there are no other options, we must ramp up coal mining.

    Clean energy can be divided into two categories

    1. Fantasia (Such as zero point energy, etc…  While these ideas maybe theoretically possible “in the future”, there is no guarantee and it is highly theoretical.)
    2. Existing clean/renewable energy such as Solar, and Wind.

    The obvious problem with #1 is we cannot count on this as an energy solution NOW.  Until we actually demonstrate that fusion is possible and can replace petroleum there are no sufficient reason to throw away investments on it.

    The less obvious problem with #2 is that our existing clean energy solutions are not sufficient solutions to replace petroleum and never will be.  The total amount of existing clean energy in the world rests somewhere between 2% and 4%.  That does not even come close to our existing dependency on petroleum.

     

     

     

    It might be worth noting that we are nearing the end of the petroleum age based on the peak-oil predictions of the 1970’s which did not account for a newly discovered method of drilling shale oil.  However, the reality of the end of the petroleum age has yet to sink in.  We are not finding the high quality oil mines that we used to get in the last 150 years.  The reserves are harder and harder to get.  The energy return investment is far lower than cheap oil fields.  We used up most of the easiest to get oil.  The energy return investment has been falling continuously over decades.  It has reached a very low level.  Which is creating epic problems.  We need to invest more and more money into capex exploration, and the demand for crude oil has grown an average of 1.76% per year each year since 1994.

    Once all of the oil has been used up the economy will enter into a thermodynamic collapse.  Our dependency on oil is directly responsible for the growth of petroleum man.  The last 150 years is the age of the petroleum man.  Without petroleum, petroleum man would never have reached the 7+ billion population.  We are still petroleum man, and until we can replace oil, coal, and natural gas we will remain petroleum man.  Wind and solar are not feasible replacements of petroleum.  Not even nuclear energy comes close.

    Just because a thermodynamic collapse of our economy is somewhere over the horizon does not mean we can be prepared for such an event.  In fact, we will not be prepared for it.

    In retrospect Trump is not wrong about creating job growth for the coal industry.  It creates jobs in the united states which is the platform Trump campaigned on.  That does not send us backwards.  It is not like we are “expending resources” to allow for the coal industry to grow.  We are just simply lifting regulations.  The coal industry flourishes by itself minus the regulations that Obama had imposed on it.  Trump has created 50,000 new jobs this year simply by lifting that regulation.  The only thing that can be said intelligibly about the coal industry that has any value, is that it helps to boost the economy.  We are still able to invest in many different sub-sectors of the energy sector, despite growth in the coal industry.

     
  • truedeity 12:28 AM on July 3, 2017 Permalink | Reply  

    Netflix: Nobody Speak: Trials of the Free Press (Review) 

    This whole documentary is liberal cry baby bullshit propaganda.

    It was primarily created in an attempt to save the face of Gawker.  It may also be a slight pay back against Hulk Hogan too.

    But what I think is less subtle is the liberal propaganda in the film.  At least there are obvious biases that I can detect.

    Let’s start with the obvious.  Most of the people commenting/narrating on this documentary have some stake in earning the public’s appreciation of Gawker.

    1st there is Nick Denton (a Gay man) and obvious liberal-

    This is the guy who sought to damage the reputation of Billionaire Peter Thiel which ended up working against him.

    They attempt to claim that Peter Thiel’s bankrolling hogans lawsuit was somehow an attack against the media’s free-speech.

    The film is attempting to build a perception that Gawker was not acting immorally as a news organization when publishing Hulk Hogans sex tape on the web for ALL to see.  Their justitification- because they published lots of borderline controversial news in the past, such as with Hillary Clinton email scandal, etc…

    It starts with them attempting to justify their blatantly obvious infringement of Terry Bollea ( aka. Hulk Hogan) personal rights and privacy.

    Also, in this documentary they are claiming that its news organizations being attacked, and that “freedom is on trail” for the media.

    Because they should be allowed to publish any kind of news… I do think that there is an infringement on freedom but the victims are the american people, not the news agencies.

    In fact, I think news agencies are guilty of using brainwashing techniques to elicit a behavioral response from Americans.

    Back in 2002 the DHC released an advisory system, and the news media displayed this information along with the news during the Bush administration.

     

    Many Critics accused the bush administration of using this Color-coded threat system as a way to generate public fear during politically sensitive times, such as in the 2004 election when Bush went for re-election.  Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge told a Washington forum that he sometimes disagreed with the rationale for raising the alert but was overruled by others on the Homeland Security Advisory Council.  In this instance the News is not directly responsible with the brainwashing technique but it was obvious that they were complicit.

    In recent times the Obama administration sought to help Hillary Win the election, and they used the same brainwashing techniques by claiming that the polls were reporting favoritism for Hillary.  The idea is that if you get enough people on board with your propaganda even if you are reporting fake polls you can actually influence the election.   But it seemed that Donald Trump had too much momentum to loose this election.  So in my view news agencies like CNN are responsible for running fake news stories every day (even though CNN claims their news is being undermined of-course). But to get into their rational you also have to buy into their propaganda such as with the polling.

     

     

     

     
    • John Newman 12:53 AM on July 3, 2017 Permalink | Reply

      I agree! Members of the media literally got on stage and said that everything is news worthy including sex tapes of children under the age of 4 years old which is totally distinguishing news. That’s not news that should be for law enforcement people to follow up on; they are sick individuals and they need to stop deliberately creating new worthy ideas in their own minds.This whole documentary was one huge cry baby attack to defend the media’s right to ruin destroy defame and lie against any person they see fit. Its no surprise to anyone that media deliberately leaks evidence against whichever party they aren’t politically backing. And to turn this into a war against the rich and powerful trying to bully american’s slowly taking away our rights is absolute bullshit. The government hasn’t ever resorted to putting private sexual encounters of people on the internet for all to see. It’s distinguishing to think the media has some right in that domain.

  • truedeity 2:14 AM on July 2, 2017 Permalink | Reply  

    Atheism In Hinduism 

    When you ask a Hindu does he believe in God, he will tell you he does.  But this is not the same God that Christians believe in.  The Hindu belief of God, is closer to a “new age philosophy” in that it takes the perspective that “All is one”, and they believe that “The I” is equivalent to God, and that each of us are God.  This is very reminiscent of a modern new-age philosophy.

    Hence the statement of “no lord”, “doctrine of godlessness”, or disbelief in god has been a viewpoint in many of the orthodox streams of Hindu philosophy.

    Christians on the other hand believe in a purpose to existence, justice, and meaning to everything in reality.  The christian concept of God has more purpose and meaning and sense of fulfillment.  God is his own identity, we are not God.

    One reason I am Christian is because there is no other religion where there is an accountability for Sin.  Other religions seem nonsensical to me because of this.

    Let’s take Islam as an example.  The normal person whether good or bad will either go to heaven or hell.  Basically their life is on a scale, if you do more good you will go to heaven and if you don’t you go to hell.  So when you look at the things that they do wrong, they are never held to accountability.

    Whereas in Christianity you’re judged based on your life but you also must atone for your Sins.  Jesus also paid the debt for our sins and we must believe in him.

    Believing that Jesus is God is essential, Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life, no one goes to the father except through him.

     

     
  • truedeity 3:40 AM on June 28, 2017 Permalink | Reply  

    Jesus was ethnically Druze 

    I just got done watching a new Jesus Documentary, “The Jesus Strand A Search for DNA”

    In this documentary a new Blood test was conducted on the Shroud Of Turin.

    The conclusion of the test revealed that Jesus was ethnically Druze.

    This is a shocker because the Druze people lived near Nazareth 2000 years ago around the time that Jesus lived.

    What is also shocking is that this is an Isolated ethnic group this is surprising because the gospels are firm that Jesus is Jewish.  Our entire understanding of Jesus’s role in Christianity is based on the belief that he was Jewish.

    In the original Greek writings in the new testament Jesus was referred to as Ioudaios a Greek word that can be translated to describe people who are Jewish, but also people hailing from Judea.  Is it possible that Jesus was Judean but not religiously Jewish.

    It’s unlikely.  The Gospels are very clear that Jesus was religiously jewish.  He went with his family for the Jewish holiday of Passover. His followers called him rabbi. Most importantly Jesus’s Jewish identity was part of him being recognized as the Messiah.  For him to fulfill that prophetic destiny Jesus had to be Jewish.

    The researchers in the documentary went to Isreal to meet with some of the native Druze population to conduct a simple DNA test.  While conversing with a Druze family we learned a little history about the Druze.

    • The Druze people migrated to Judea from Egypt.
    • The Druze people incorporate aspects of all 3 major religions, Christianity, Judaism, and Islam (Islam’s Isma’ilism)
    • You cannot convert to Druze.  The only way to be a Druze is if your mother/father are Druze.  (But it is important to note that the Druze did not formalize their faith and close off the group until the 11th century 1000 years after Jesus lived)

     

     
c
Compose new post
j
Next post/Next comment
k
Previous post/Previous comment
r
Reply
e
Edit
o
Show/Hide comments
t
Go to top
l
Go to login
h
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Cancel