I actually work in clinical research or the industry that conducts testing for the safety and efficacy of drugs/food additives etc. and present the findings for government approval. On one hand I know the FDA regulations and regulators get it right but boy do they get it wrong. The treatment of animals and documentation was absolutely trash in the 70s. A similar story to this one is Industrial Bio-Test Laboratories and the facilities there were so bad it was called “the Swamp”. Staff also removed tumors on the animals, replaced animals all without documenting it. And it skewed the results of studies and made products seem safer than they may have been. Altogether a great video and I’m thankful someone’s able to bring this info to the public.
My husband and I both worked in clinical studies in big Pharma. I made the randomization lists for the patients, and designed labels for studies in cancer, diabetes..you name it.. Its. A. Joke. The FDA and DEA look at you SOP's and make sure everything is calibrated correctly, thats about it. You can make numbers up all day and they would never notice, as long as the study looks like it was run with validity. My husband got fired for pointing out the flaws in their clinical trials. The people that run these places for the most part are raging narcissists, and an critique against their process to make the studies more safe and effective for the patients is a sure way to get you fired.
I work in biomedical research as a PhD student and I can say compared to the record keeping detailed here, I am under way more scrutiny than one of these companies. I can’t bribe reviewers or fake results. They would axe me so quick.
@@krk6216 I am not sure where in biomedical r&d you are in, in a hospital, in a lab, in a Dr's office but it restores my faith in humanity that is your experience. In my experience when a clinical drug goes to trial its goes to the Drs. offices or a hospital( hospitals are wayyy more strict) Say we were running a diabetes or arthritis drug, double blind, let's say 100,000 people all around the world. Patients "miss a dose" or tell the dr side effects. The Dr then only reports half of the side effects to statistician since big pharma is paying them good money to get the drugs through (they have a whole team of salespeople for these Drs.) Depending on the drug, the medical assistants or nurses do the intake for these patients, and give the medication and are responsible for calling the IRT specialist of any changes, drugs go missing, patients given the wrong dose constantly. And it's the specialists job to go on the back end and update their system. The Drs office then marks it as dispensed correctly, that is what is given to the statistician, NOT the info on the backend, and that information never makes it to the FDA or DEA. A whole study of incorrect information is then given to the r &d team to then comb through, that they think is correct.
So ex pharmacy worker here, and I have to say yeah FDA is a joke and it is scary how things like medical devices and some new meds are approved, it is soooo sketchy.
Or if the Government put a heel on them, corps must obey the Government, or it will be the other way round Tragically when someone proposed this : "IT wILl be CoMMUnisM!"
Kiana.... how do you make literal documentaries that are the most well researched and supremely entertaining on the entire platform? And how do you do this consistently with every new upload?
Yes! I'm planning on teaching using your video on fast food. I teach EFL and it's really important for me to find videos that aren't too long (that one is 14 min) and that are very very very clear. When I hear complaints about "big pharma" my brain says "don't listen" so I'm excited to dive into the subject with someone who has done her research consistently.
I’m a little disturbed that her sponsorship is a supplement though. They’re generally not tested scientifically. (I’m a biomedical researcher) and the cognitive dissonance of that on an FDA video is dizzying 😵💫
Long before I decided I needed to at least partially homeschool my kids (over 30 years ago) I believed both the FDA and the USDA were focused on supporting corporations and NOT our personal or public health. My son was actually sent to detention for arguing that cow’s milk was NOT a necessary part of human health during a public school class lesson on basic nutrition. Class materials were all donated by the Dairy Industry. Go figure.
Imagine telling a bunch of school kids, some of whom are statistically likely to have a milk or lactose allergy or intolerance, that cows milk is a necessary part of nutrition. When I was at school we did only get an extremely basic 'food groups' education, but milk and dairy weren't the only foods in their grouping at least. I have an instinctive cringe reaction to people online saying they decided to home ed their kids because we get such a bad rap from the parents who take them our out of school because they refuse to teach their kids science, or other dodgy reasons they love to post about, but when you see the stuff many schools are actually teaching it suddenly becomes very easy to see why so many of us come to the conclusion that teaching our kids ourselves might be better.
@@katharineeavan9705 agree. I suppose for the kid’s dad and I, it was more an issue of public school being woefully lacking especially in areas of science and broader world experience. For fun, we’re definitely a Trekkie family and embrace all aspects of science, engineering, philosophy, technology, etc. Our goal was to EXPAND our kid’s education, not instill myopic boundaries on their ability to think and learn. And yes, it’s sad to hear about the ways that public education is being boxed in further recently due to fear and prejudice. Fear of learning is a nationwide problem these days and American students are sadly falling further and further behind on the world stage by almost every measure. 😟
As a practitioner, if my patients have even the smallest, even very good treatable cancer, what do we tell them? Stop all dairy immediately. There’s growth hormones in it, even naturally. A woman that had breast cancer surgery in 1880 , was more likely to still be cancer free . Even after ten years ( yes, surgery itself, was more risky , of course) , than a woman today. In Victorian times, Doctors knew absolutely what cancer is . Gibetting wasn’t stopped for humanitarian reasons. But because they wanted the bodies to study. Every third person of low class was completely cut open and used for study. They reported cancer, specially after stage 2. But medical books said, don’t waste time on cancer, you probably won’t ever see a case. What changed? Our nutrition. Dairy used to be a treat, not daily food . And just drinking milk , that was only used in humans, if the mother couldn’t nurse and no wet nurse was available. Your son was absolutely right. People can’t believe, that every body of control and government, in the west or sometimes world, says the same thing. But that’s standard. Peer reviewed studies are easily manipulated. We don’t get money, to review. If I say it needs major revision, I will have to put my time in to review it possibly multiple times. If scientists say, it’s good to go, the job ends there. If ten review a paper or study and six say no and four say yes, the publisher can overrule the majority or claim the four are more knowledgeable in the topic. A lot happens. The science was never a thing. The science with dairy is actually quite easily proven to be wrong. But people get money and many others don’t care. Im sure you raised a fine man. Most people don’t dare to speak against authorities. It’s what we’re taught early and it stops us often, even as adults, to go with our gut. 7 out of ten people will answer a question wrong, if the group in majority answered wrong or the leaders answered wrong. The emperor is naked. Many experiments and studies on that topic.
I’m a plant milk person and have no trouble getting enough nutrition. Leafy greens and eggs from the local farmers free range chickens will do it if you’re dairy free (I’m not vegan though)
Not to mention the arguments against alternatives like monk fruit and stevia. They are both technically not approved because they aren't deemed safe, but countries have been using them for hundreds if years with less problems then sugar brings.
@@christinesarkis4029 and to think, the most popular flavor for vapors are all fruits, all that high fructose corn syrups are bypassing the GI tracts and reaching directly into the bloodstream.
It seems that dosage may be the key factor. At times, scientists with an agenda will give dosages of a substance far below what a subject will consume in a normal product to demonstrate safety, or far in excess to suggest danger. I can give you uranium to eat and claim its safe if its on the scale of one part per billion. Likewise, an iron supplement can be helpful, but eating a nail is bad for health.
@@Bekyed2 I suppose I did get a bit mixed up. What can I say, solid B student here. Would you happen to be in Upstate New York? I would love to talk more over coffee.
I'm always surprised by studies conducted on mice/monkeys that give them HUGE quantities, or don't take the environment that they're living in into consideration at all. Like maybe living isolated in a cage with no natural sunlight can cause symptoms of illness or even cancer? There's many examples of studies with addictive drugs where mice in that awful environment will overdose, whereas ones who are living outside with enough mice to socialize with will display the same % of addicts as the general human population.
The studies showing carcinogenicity in rats can't prove that aspartame causes cancers in humans, and epidemiological studies haven't found a link. Rats metabolize aspartame differently from us. I think it would have been important and responsible to point out that animal studies alone can rarely prove wheter or not a substance is safe in humans. There have been cases where the opposite occurred and a drug showed limited side effects in animal studies but caused severe/widespread problems in humans. As for reported side effects, 100% of those with memory loss or vision problems have drunk water at some point. "Correlation doesn't equal causation" feels like a tired cliché at this point, but it's true. I'm not dismissing people's experiences but it would take a study with robust data and a control group to prove that aspartame caused symptoms, and you haven't linked to anything like that. For the record I don't usually consume artificial sweeteners and I think it's a good idea to avoid or limit their use, based on nutrition classes I had in college. But this video feels sensationalistic and a step down from your usual quality
Agreed strongly, thank you for writing such a thoughtful comment. There was no mention of "the dose makes the poison" which was surprising because that's usually commonly talked about with sugar substitutes. I agree that the video felt sensationalistic and I think it focused too much on aspartame in particular. I think the real core issue that does make sense to me is that the FDA is not doing their own research and is trusting companies at their word, but that wasn't the takeaway from the video.
I agree that I would like to know the dose dependency, but I think the point was purely to show that a government agency like the FDA can't even be trusted to discern what we should and shouldn't put in our bodies.
Your comment should be on top. Anyone who has a scientific background or who is just interested in science knows that animal studies do not prove anything at all. They are the less reliable studies one can found. Same with studies performed on mice trying to prove that cooked meat is not good for your health. mice are not supposed to eat and digest meat. Besides, just like aspartame, they exposed the mice to crazy doses to get a response. A human should drink more than 100 sodas or more for aspartame to be considered dangerous and still. This video is very fallacious. She did not do a good job on this one sadly
I worked at fda for 1.5y. Fda does get a lot of “user fees” from the companies to drive hiring of new university grads to write review memos on a timely basis. There are many ways reviewers and consultants can be pressured to justify one scientific decision or another. Could be direct pressure from a manager or soft pressure from peers; I’ve seen both. The reasons for the pressure are usually political in nature. There could be a patient advocacy group publicly shaming your division or the fda employees wanting to play favorites with some companies vs others. One thing average people don’t understand very well, is that fda does not directly test the products. The fda can ask the company to run tests, and fda reviews the disclosed results.
If you’re going to make claims about aspartame being cancer causing and dangerous you should go into the research itself and pull it apart, stories like this while emotionally moving and very convincing are unfortunately not scientific. If the aspartame studies are bad people shouldn’t write them off by saying “look who they’re funded by, how can they be trusted if it was funded by a company?” Instead if the study is bad you should be able to critique it through the methodology itself bad control group, small sample size, bad dosages etc. To my knowledge there have been to date no studies shown that any artificial sweeteners have bad effects on humans, and the animal studies so far are either safety studies that are dosed at levels far higher than what I humans normally eat on a Mg per Kg or they’re just full of outright sloppy controls. A good example of studies being used to justify wrong ideas is the so called studies showing the deleterious effect that Artificial sweeteners have on gut health when in reality it was one study in the 90s that exposed E-Coli bacteria culture in vitro to pure sucralose and the E-Coli died so therefore sucralose must be bad for gut microbiome, sorry but it is patently ridiculous to extrapolate up to humans from a bacteria culture in a Petri dish being exposed to a pure concentrate. Furthermore animal studies cannot be extrapolated out to humans, same goes with in vitro. I love your channel and your work, however I would like you to back up your critique of artificial sweeteners with an actual scientific critique of the studies themselves. All the best
This exactly, thank you for commenting. All these animal tests give a general idea on what MIGHT occur, but when we have studies done on humans that disprove those effects, animal studies mean little.
My psych professors crammed this into our minds! As much as it wore me out I'm grateful for it now, it really helps to be able to critically analyze and understand scientific literature. I would go as far as to say it's important for the general public to know how to do this for themselves. It's too easy to get swept up in emotional bandwagon of writing things off or harping on something new just because someone else said so. It's important to understand the sources of this information!
Kiana, honestly, your research and topics are astonishing. I enjoy every single one of those and my jaw drops throughout the whole video. You do a better job than many investigative reporters, your content is amazing!
No offense here but does Athletic Greens seem dodgy to anyone else? Im glad you use it and find it beneficial, Kiana, but anything with the word superfood in it makes me look a little more skeptically. It honestly sounds just like a pre workout supplement and those aren't really regulated from what I can tell. I've watched too many Chubbyemu videos to trust that kind of stuff.
99 dollars for some powder is offensive and not needed for healthy living. It sucks that Kiana thinks this is okay to try and sell to her audience but anything for a buck, I guess. Btw there's a lot of comments calling her out on this.
Good on you, superfoods don't exist. Pre-workout usually isn't anything dangerous, pretty much just a combination of some vitamins, sugar, and caffeine for energy before a workout (but that is dependent on the pre-workout), you can always look at the ingredients and research about that stuff if you're worried. But yeah something that has "a lot of stuff packed into it" isn't necessarily a good thing, even if they're all vitamins. Most supplements are not regulated but that doesn't mean they're dangerous or useless... just more of a waste of money. Getting nutrition from real foods is always the best way, you'll only really need supplements when you have a deficiency or recommended by a dietitian or doctor.
@@UltimateTacoz ok, but this platform is really rough. Do you really think Kiana can research, record, edit, and upload videos without needing funding? She's trying to take relevant sponsors. It's rough making a YT channel work.
@@stephaniekanoun4409 but to promote a supplement drink with unfounded claims and not do research about it while condemning FDA for being money hungry, not researching on Aspartame and being quick to approve it. It’s just ironic. She can choose who to take sponsorships from.
I generally agree that the FDA has performed poorly when it comes to drug and medical device regulation. However, I would like to point out that pretty much every food regulator in the world has approved aspartame so it’s hard to chalk up the approval to just FDA corruption. I’m also extremely skeptical of the potential problems of aspartame.
Agreed. The FDA is meant to keep people safe. That doesn’t work in a capitalist society and having a revolving door of drug cartel ceos as well as food industry ceos being at the head of the FDA it will always be questionable. People need to remember that this was all these animals were fed, ridiculously high amounts of aspartame, to equal that amount in humans people would have to be slamming down alarming amounts of diet food and drinks for decades. So my motto is be skeptical but discerning and try not to fall for fear mongering.
By and large the FDA has done ok. It’s not a perfect government regulatory agency, can you name one? Yes there is corruption, but as a whole, I prefer an FDA with flaws versus no FDA at all.
My problem with the concept of thinking it’s ok because other countries also approved it is that there seems to be a reliance on the FDA’s stance as a part of the review and approval process for many products in other countries. I do still understand your skepticism and don’t disagree with it. In part my skepticism for both its safety and its harmfulness are because of the lack of reliance on quality, non-biased scientific studies accompanied by the money and politics endemic in the FDA.
@@fiveandfour Governments have funded evaluations and studies on Aspartame which have all shown no meaningful effects on people's health. "Independent" scientists are often extremely biased and agenda-driven themselves (take a look at GMO research). FDA approval is not sufficient for a food additive being approved in Canada, the UK, and EU. All have approved it looking at the research and funding re-evaluations the evidence relatively recently.
It's all about the dose, though. The monkeys were fed between 1-6 g/kg of aspartame which is huuuge dose. A 12 oz diet coke contains about 192 mg of aspartame, meaning that in order for a 192-lb man to be in the lowest dose group they would have to drink 1000 cans a day... Only one monkey died in the high dose group. And most monkeys across the board had seizures, most likely because they overdosed on phenylalanine. The study also did not have a control group. BTW, I suspect the reason why aspartame was so easily approved initially is because chemically it is composed of aspartate and phenylalanine, which are just amino acids that you can find in virtually all foods, thus they were likely assumed non toxic.
Talking about pharmaceutical fraud, while advertising a vitamin mix that contains pseudoscientific “adaptogens” is quite something. You cannot have it both ways.
Plus for all the complaining about the limited abilities of the FDA when it comes to food and drugs, they're even more limited when it comes to supplements. Stuff like athletic greens is classed as a supplement which means it's subject to pretty much no regulation whatsoever.
I'm not a fan of "supplements" in general because they're usually a complete scam. At best, unless you have a known deficiency in something, they probably won't hurt you. At worst, Jilly juice.
Hey, learning is a process... Nobody comes screaming out of mum´s woumb as perfect. Got to be able to allow for mistakes to be able to learn from them. :D But having somebody pointing out potential paradoxes can be of good help too
Not a bad point but pales in comparison to the hypocrisy of more mainstream content. Pretty much every politician who speaks out against misinformation is revealed to host large parties and not wear a mask.
Gonna send this to my mom. She's a diet soda junkie, and this is the most eloquent, easily digestible, and comprehensive shorter form video I've found on aspartame. Thank you, Kiana, for your service to your audience. You're incredible, as always.
Aspartame is completely safe though so i dont see why you need to worry your mother. It's just amino-acids and have been approved by the rest of the world. Literally the most well tested additive in the whole world at this point.
How can you start your video by criticising the statement that "aspartame is the most well-tested food additive in history" and then go into a sponsorship segment claiming that Athletic Green "supports gut health and immunity", without citing any sources? The Athletic Greens website doesn't link to any research about the effects of their product. How can you make these claims on behalf of your sponsor? Isn't this a conflict of interest?
sadly sponsorships are a microcosm of the point of this video I feel like as viewers we have to tune out the sponsorship parts and consider them a necessary evil to support the channel
@@Twistedtwat This is a very interesting perspective. But it's really hard to justify any creator endorsing a product / service that fundamentally conflicts with their own message. It has made me unsubscribe from many channels over the years. If you can't stick to your principles, I can't trust you. Start a Patreon account instead and be accountable to your audience
most products (especially) dont conduct research on the efficacy of their product specifically because the product is made up of supplements that have already been researched. it was easy for me to find the ingredients and benefits that they claim, and from there you can research the individual supplements themselves. the difference is that we arent watching a government authority meant to dictate what is good for you or what isnt, just a youtube video..
She's not a scientist and has no science education, she should be more humble and listen to the research...which shows it's safe over 50 years among so many independent studies.
I have always really enjoyed your content, but I have to be honest that I was surprised to see the ad for Athletic Greens, especially after being so critical of the FDA (the FDA has little bearing in my neck of the woods, as I'm not American - but I was interested in your assessment of Aspertame - that stuff is nasty). Surely there were other sponsorships you could have gone with instead. When I went to check out the product (because when I hear buzz words like "superfood" I immediately give the product the side eye and go look things up about it). What did I find? Other buzz words describing the product, such as "detox" (especially when it concerns the liver - the liver is a highly specialised organ that filters and detoxes the body naturally - it does not need to be detoxed itself), "superfood" (there is no such thing) and several other buzz words used around dodgy supplements that have little to no research backing them up. The business model is also suspicious because automatically renewed subscriptions usually come with issues in cancelling and/or returning the product if it does not meet the buyer's expectations. I did see numerous complaints about that. I also couldn't find any studies on this specific product and saw a few reviews of it stating that there is no way of knowing if the ingredients are in "clinically relevant doses". So, the product to me is suspect, not to mention extremely expensive. At the same time, the thing I do appreciate about the ad, is that you use the product yourself and enjoy it and find it beneficial. Of course anecdotal evidence doesn't mean much (and unfortunately all I could find regarding the product is anecdotal evidence), but at least you stand by a product you actually use.
Yeah, the sponsor on this video made me side eye too and I didn’t even bother to look at it closer. I just know most “greens” supplements are overpriced hype and are generally being marketed with lots of buzz words and are not needed to get good nutrition in overall if you’re eating a well rounded diet.
Felt the same way when I saw Andrew Huberman, a Stanford neuroscientist, was sponsored by them, it's not that bad but I do sideye it every time I listen to the podcast lol
You know what I wondered: what does adaptogen even mean? That's a medical term, neither did I every hear it or come across it in all my years of studying different degrees in the medical field.
You're right that the buzzwords aren't great. I had personally already been an Athletic Greens customer for months after researching it myself AND seeing it on all my favourite science podcasts. So maybe not infallible logic for purchasing something lol but, I truly enjoy the product 🤷♀️ so that's really all I can say!
I'll admit I used to be that person that was like "o this is FDA approved so it is totally safe to eat or drink" you have literally made me go 180 on that statement. Thank you really well done video
As u grow older you realize how literally almost nothing that's man-changed in the food industry is remotely healthy. From vagan meat to vegetables oil to fluoride usage, to preservatives , emulsifiers, and food on shelves that stay edible for years! All unnatural and unhealthy
Complains about inadequate study of aspartame and corporate funded science, then sells a pseudoscience supplement where the only studies on effectiveness are funded by the company. Pretty much all of the few studies on green powders are also industry funded. Multiple peer reviewed studies have found vit. D supplementation worthless for most people. The regulation of supplements is also way worse than that of food or drugs so there is really no accountability for products like that.
Are you sure about the Vitamin D - many studies have found people over the age of 50 deficient in it? I myself had a level of 3 when it is meant to be 50.
I usually really enjoy your videos, but this one left a bad taste in my mouth. The first major problem is that it is sponsored by "Athletic Greens" which, even if it is not actually harmful as claimed by other commenters, is very expensive and has no benefits if you eat a varied and otherwise healthy diet. I understand you need to earn a living, but at least pick another topic for the video than criticizing FDA if you really want to get sponsored by a company selling a (sketchy) product subject to far less stringent regulations than Aspartame. The second major problem with the video is all the stuff you leave out. Like how Aspartame has been approved internationally by over 100 regulatory agencies OTHER than FDA including in the EU. Or how the initial studies you keep referencing used far higher doses of Aspartame than what will reasonably be consumed by a human. Just to name two examples. The things you leave out makes the video highly misleading, even if the information itself is not incorrect. I know you claim this video is only about the FDA and not about Aspartame's safety, but if you read the comments on this video you will see that most of the viewers did not make that distinction. Which again leads back to the video being misleading. I really hope you do better next time as I have learned a lot from and enjoyed watching many of your previous videos.
This ultimately depends on what you view the video as. If it is a historical drama then sure this is true as far as it goes. Early research in aspartame was crap when it was approved. But if you view the end as proving aspartame is bad for you because the food industry sponsors studies I have a used car to sell you. Numerous non US or FDA related agencies have found aspartame has no link to cancer. Further, the EU, which thinks a minute amount of red meat causes cancer, views it as safe. Cancer rates have not skyrocketed since its introduction. What has is obesity. Not saying they are related but some would argue they are.
Aspartame is one of the most studied food additives in existence. That includes independent studies. There is no strong evidence either short term or long term of any harm in anything but ridiculously high amounts.
Thank you for making this video, recently I’ve been stuck in a medical mystery over the past 4 months now, and after researching more for aspartame’s effects, we think this may be what’s been causing my condition to grow worse in such a fast rate. Again thank you so much.
Two problems with this video. 1. It isn't as if we don't know this happens. It's called regulatory capture. This is something that was theorized and studied in economics since the '50s! Yet every time there's an example of it, people are shocked, SHOCKED, that it happens. 2. Near the end is the senator asking "are there any studies showing negative effects?" I hate questions like those because, well, it isn't asked in good faith and presumes an answer. "Have you stopped beating your wife?" The question implies the person beat their wife and any answer confirms that hypothesis. Either they say no, confirming they are still beating their wife. Or they say yes, confirming the had beat their wife in the past. The same here, the implication is that there are negative effects to be found. Yes means there are negative effects. No means there are but they are hidden. The problem here is, what if there are no negative effects to be found? That is conspiracy level thinking on display. He's a senator. Setup and commission one. Don't engage in theatrics, prove it.
I really liked the video but could you maybe next time provide references to your research? Sure, I can just open next tab and look it up myself (which I did) but it would be much more convenient to just search for it in the description. :) Again, Loved the vid
... Then why do ALL OTHER countries with less corruption come to similar conclusions that aspartame is fine? The European regulators found it safe... Even my country's regulator found it safe and they're often more stringent than the FDA... Is the next thing you say going to be "MSG is bad?"
@@brookelee9745 ALL of them? Yeah, right, now that's a huge conspiracy theory. Aspartame is safe, Kiana cherrypicked whatever studies suited her theory but there are at least 200 more articles that disprove that there's any danger.
So, I'm a little scared to watch because I drink *so much* aspartame. Realistically, though, that hesitation is probably the reason I have to watch. Thanks 🙂
Don't consume it daily. Those things are a treat only. You literally have to consume it all day everyday day for a long time to have a harmful effect. Same with any sugar artificial or not.
@Olympic-grade lurker I worked for a certain large coffee chain and one guy asked for 24 WHOLE PACKS of this stuff in his tea! I could taste it on my tongue just from the air through a face mask. Hopefully nothing bad happens to him!
@@alessia9328 Addictive to some. I'm not defending big pharma or food but most people don't drink dozens of diet sodas a day (the human equivalent of the poison dosage). There also is little evidence diet soda actually leads to cancer let alone weight gain.
Interesting video, but I feel like you did not touch on what negativities that the independent studies pointed out. Often studies give 100x if not 1000x the normal doses... anything in excess I would expect side effect. If we force feed a mouse 1000X it's daily protein intake it's likely going to have kidney failure... but that would not mean do not eat proteins. It has also been 40 years since we've been adding it to everything and I would expect we would see some sort of macrolevel of analysis. I do look forward to your aspartame video and hope you'll provide a little more on the other side.
Looking forward to this; I love your channel! I discovered it recently and it is just what this grad student needs to reform some eating habits. I have actually stuck to a caloric limit for over 50 days now!! It’s only a very slight deficit so I think that has made it realistic and doable
As an Australian, just how much America is run by enormous, greedy corporations is a huge shock to me. Sure, we have problems with corporate payouts (COUGH COUGH LABOR) but I simply CANNOT imagine the industry that monitors the stuff people put in their bodies being lobbied by companies that make unhealthy foods. Here we're at the point where we have a health star rating on nearly every food product, like how video games have a rating on how mature they are, HSR goes from 0.5 for stuff that's awful for you like most soft drinks, ultra processed slop "food-like products" and 5 for stuff like pure fruit and veg, cheese, whole wheat products, milk, eggs, organic juices, etc. (Though I believe some products like fruit don't need to display their star rating because they trust that consumers can figure out "this applw from the farmers market will be good for me") And we have a legal requirement that all cigarette and vape products cannot be advertised anywhere, must have no logos and graphic health warnings covering most of the pack, with the rest being the most basic product information like brand and variant, as well the various "SMOKING CAUSES EMPHYSEMA" etc warnings with the majority of the back of the box being in depth information about the illnesses and information on how to call the quitline and advice for quitting. Second highest tax in the world also. We were actually the first country in the world to come up with this "plain packaging" idea and fortunately many other countries like Canada, all of the EU and the UK have also taken the initiative. To my knowledge the US still has that almost nothing "Smoking is bad for you guys don't do it!" text on the packs but the tobacco companies are free to use the packs to make their products looks premium and appealing instead of being glorified disease sticks. I'm also 100% sure vape ads are allowed ans there's almost no packaging regulation despite them having most of the dangers of smoking and some new ones...
Honestly, very brave of you to post this at this moment and time and I give you all the praise for doing so. And I fully agree. I have not trusted the FDA since I did a school research project on it in 2016
Aspartame fear is my litmus test for pseudoscience. It is made of two amino acids and phenylalanine with an added methyl group. Amino acids and phenylalanine are naturally occurring in several foods we eat on a regular basis including fruits and vegetables. It's also much sweeter than sugar so the actual amount used in products as a sweetener alternative is lower that the sugar than would have been in it.
Great to see a new video. Great topic, but I’m a bit put off by the clear sensationalizing (graphics, ominous music etc.) slightly over the top, would love a more neutral tone. I’m not saying I disagree with your opinion, but as a documentary, your bias is clearly there and the video title suggests that the FDA of 40 years ago is the same as the one we have now. It’s not. And it’s all we got to protect us from big corporate greed on a level we have never known. I lived through the nutrasweet era, it was all over the news. Even as a young consumer in the 80s I knew the reported risks of nutrasweet, it was controversial at the time. Yet I chose to consume products with it as opposed to sugary food products because I believed the health benefits outweighed the risks. I switched to sucralose based products when that became available because it was shown to be safer still 😁
Except athletic greens and plenty of other green powdered drinks are literally just dried fruits and veggies. I’ve taken it before and the ingredients don’t contain anything artificial or “concocted”. Not everything has to be bad and scary, as long as you read the ingredients and do your research. You realize for a content provider she has to be paid for her time right? At least she’s being supported by reputable companies
@@Lycurgus47 how did you come to the conclusion that a company claiming that their magical green powder is a "liver detox, and superfood" is reputable and therefore you can trust this lady on it??
Very well put together and researched. Fantastic first step in a more serious, documentary-esque format. Looking forward to seeing where this type of content takes the channel, and glad to see your passion for health and diet related topics taking you in a more serious direction.
Fun fact, I was looking at the label of a no sugar lemonade, and it had sweetener 952 which is also known as sodium cyclamate. It is banned in the US, South Korea and Bangladesh due to its potentially carcinogenic nature. So fun that the same chemical can be used to sweeten drinks in Australia.
Please do a video on the horrors of sucralose. I can't personally eat it without major issues. But, the food companies can leave it out of the ingredients because it is considered a "natural flavor". At least aspartame has to be listed in the ingredients.... Even if it is horrible for us. Sucralose is horrible for us, and no one is required to tell you it is in your food. Aspartame is "The Devil you know", while Sucralose is "The Devil you don't".
@@luchirimoya, it causes me to have a painful morning bathroom session.... If I manage to keep it down until morning. Sucralose wears down your GI lining, and can even cause lesions and scarring. Even worse though, is that you're unknowingly consuming it in flavored club sodas and various other drinks. Sucralose can be called a "natural flavor", legally.
I love you for adding a sponsor chapter to the video so I didn't have to guess where the content starts. As much as I respect you want/need sponsors, as much I feel you respect me to be able to skip it!
It looks like the review you showed at 14:12 was written by people who didn't read their citations. Firstly, the review is from 2007 so it doesn't matter if you looked at the review in 2022. Secondly, harmful effects were ANECDOTAL as written in the abstract by author R J Wurtman in their 1987 paper. This paper was used as a citation in said review. Citations that documented harmful effects were mouse studies. I don't know why scientists never give mice reasonable doses but these studies, the mice are proportionally overdosed sometimes thousands of percent above their tolerated amount. If course they will experience seizures. If you drink too much water, you'll also experience high blood pressure and seizures because too much is anything is toxic. There are dozens of mouse studies and they're always overdosed. It's something that drives me mad. I'm guessing they just want "interesting results" in the study they conduct? Why? Because if they gave mice a reasonable dose, nothing happens... just like in humans. I like your channel Kiana but honestly that review you skimmed is low quality because its author either barely reads their citations, or they like to misinterpret certain phrases in purpose for whatever reason. Their own agenda? Anecdotal evidence is the weakest form of evidence. It's undocumented, it's literally a person telling someone else "hmm well I drank diet coke and it caused problems". If you go up to a policeman and say "hey look at that guy walking over there, he murdered my brother" do you think the policeman will take that as fact? Any normal human will have many questions before taking action. Anecdotes aren't science, they're just rumors. I'm not saying there's no corruption, there probably is but I'm going to echo this video featuring humans (who could be anybody by the way, they might not be MDs?) Aspartame is so well researched, I'm not worried about it. Logically aspartame is not some financial investment, it's easy to mass produce and can be made on demand very quickly. If aspartame WAS toxic and it was suddenly somehow discovered (that's not how that works though), the manufacturers can very easily start producing an alternative like sucralose or ANY sugar-alcohol derived sweetener that they want. All of which are also incredibly well researched. Of any product to pick as "INDUSTRY BAD BIG PHARMA BAD", aspartame is the worst example. I'm sorry for the rant but conspiracies like these aren't backed by anything reputable or high quality.
Please do more of these food corruption videos. This was SO entertaining, informative, and there is a lot of corruption happening in the food industry.
I would love a video on Rockefeller’s influence on medical school teachings and his attempt to push petrochemical pharmaceuticals from his oil vs “uncivilized herbal modalities” and preventative care
Industry funding is not an actual gotcha. You actually have to find the flaws in the methodology that are correlated with industry funding. In the obviously bunk studies funded by big money, their methods have been thoroughly ripped apart time and time again. Saying this on its own proves nothing. If you seriously believe this, then that’s how you convince people. Show which studies were funded by aspartame manufacturers and how they are flawed.
Agreed, if something was tampered with it would be apparent in the data. Just like how aspartame was demonized to be cancer-inducing because of the large doses given to rats, while current studies on humans showed no signs of similar dangers.
Yeah, this video is unfortunate all around. Between the ad and the video topic, it comes across very much as the "natural" pseudoscience that's so popular.
Kiana’s videos are like Supersize Me. I eat healthy for a few days after watching, then go back to living on frozen food, fast food, and Pringles a couple days later.
GREAT video! I love how well researched and well versed you always are. I would love to see you dive deeper into this (other ingredients that are possibly addictive, FDA approved and in a lot of processed foods. Other ingredients or products that the FDA is getting a kick back for/etc.)
Last night I chewed like 30 peices of gum with aspartame in them. I had like half of those symptoms you showed, I almost fell over I was so dizy and would get a migrane in my eyes when I stood up.... spooky. This video convinced me to give up my lowkey aspartame gum addiction.
Kiana, I love your videos, the way you explain and research the topics really helps me understand the content. I’ve recently had a struggle with refined sugar; I used to be overweight and then became healthier, over Christmas I fell off the wagon and ate lots of refined sugars and this reintroduction caused me so many health issues! (Now clearing up by reducing sugars). I would really love if you did a video on the health affects (and addiction) of refined sugar. Please think about it ❤️
At 10:22. Donald Rumsfeld? He knew about pharmaceuticals? Odd. He had never studied science in undergrad at Princeton, or from the law school he dropped out of, Georgetown. But he had been Chief of Staff to President Gerald Ford, and then Secretary of Defense in that same administration. So Searle made Rumsfeld its CEO because he was a powerful lobbyist with great connections within the corridors of power in Washington.
Eh... might be the first miss I've seen on this channel. Had this just been a cautionary tale about the corruption of public institutions entrusted with guarding our health and safety, it would have landed in a good place. But it went too far into an anti-aspartame rant. The problem is, the U.S. FDA and Searle aren't the only organizations that have studied the substance. Many organizations outside the U.S. have conducted their own independent research and have failed to find substantive links between dietary aspartame consumption and malignancy. In short: Searle was a crappy and corrupt researcher who fudged data to get this work approved, but - by what is apparently cosmic coincidence - the substance actually is safe. Lucky for the rest of us, I guess.
wonderfully researched video. I did not know any of this, I only ever heard that aspartame was bad for your bones! I feel like you're prob the only one who has covered this topic, so thank you!
Just found your channel today. I've been non stop watching your videos all day. Not only are your videos well edited and catchy but just so well researched. I really resonated with your personal weight loss journey as well, thank you
Unless you're doing the work to actually analyze all of the studies you find that show that aspartame is unsafe, I'm not convinced that aspartame should be worried about. Aspartame is used worldwide and has been tested in multiple countries and none of them have any problem with it. Even WHO, despite labeling it "possibly carcinogenic," says that the evidence for aspartame being unhealthy is not enough to be substantial. You raised an interesting point in that a lot of studies about aspartame are funded by soda/sweetener companies, but the discussion has been made beyond the US and I'm generally inclined to believe the wider opinion about things like these. This is not something like tobacco lol. The Bressler Report was also interesting, I did not know about that. But studies with animals should be taken with a grain of salt anyway because animals react differently to food than humans do.
Same exact thing here in Brazil, I think the difference is that corruption is almost in our DNA and people expected ANVISA (our FDA) do be the prime example of Regulatory Capture (all our agencies are prime examples of that). But now out of a sudden it's become the epitome of moral and ethics and everything they decide is gospel.
Your videos about food and weight and fat people legit have helped me lose 100 pounds and pack about 30 more back in muscle through regular exercise. Whatever you’re doing is helping at least some people. Thank you.
I've always felt weird and off after consuming (especially drinking) something containing aspartame + other sweeteners. I can feel if there's aspartame in it, without reading the label first, and sometimes get disappointed and have to pour something I was excited about out. But rather pour it out than having those sensations.
It just tastes awful to me. I’ve never been able to get past even a few sips of Diet Coke. We all need to eat less sweets overall, but if I’m going to eat sweets I’ll stick to regular sugar.
Growing up my family drank a lot of coke zero/other diet sodas, I'm pretty sure that's all I drank during my teen years. It wasn't until I moved out that I realized I had entirely lost my sense of thirst. It took 3 years of completely cutting aspertame out of my diet before I could feel the feeling of thirst again 😬
By the way, as far as aspartame goes.. my mom used to be addicted to diet pepsi and she started having kidney problems and the doctor told her "you either drink like a fish or take an awful lot of tylenol (she did neither, never drank alcohol or took tylenol except maybe now and again) OR you drink too much diet soda" anyway she has to be on medicine for kidney failure the rest of her life now. I can't believe I used to drink it too because she did!
"I need to tell you guys about the terrifying history of aspartame"
Me, literally picking up a diet coke to take a swig:...uh-oh....
Diet coke is NASTY
DRINK WATER
Lol was chewing a piece of gum laced with aspartame during the entire video and felt the same way.
Lol I was taking a drink of mine before I couldn't. 😂😂😂
I actually work in clinical research or the industry that conducts testing for the safety and efficacy of drugs/food additives etc. and present the findings for government approval. On one hand I know the FDA regulations and regulators get it right but boy do they get it wrong.
The treatment of animals and documentation was absolutely trash in the 70s. A similar story to this one is Industrial Bio-Test Laboratories and the facilities there were so bad it was called “the Swamp”. Staff also removed tumors on the animals, replaced animals all without documenting it. And it skewed the results of studies and made products seem safer than they may have been.
Altogether a great video and I’m thankful someone’s able to bring this info to the public.
My husband and I both worked in clinical studies in big Pharma. I made the randomization lists for the patients, and designed labels for studies in cancer, diabetes..you name it.. Its. A. Joke. The FDA and DEA look at you SOP's and make sure everything is calibrated correctly, thats about it. You can make numbers up all day and they would never notice, as long as the study looks like it was run with validity. My husband got fired for pointing out the flaws in their clinical trials. The people that run these places for the most part are raging narcissists, and an critique against their process to make the studies more safe and effective for the patients is a sure way to get you fired.
@@brianamariamcginley-downey5958 wow thats so interesting!!!!
I work in biomedical research as a PhD student and I can say compared to the record keeping detailed here, I am under way more scrutiny than one of these companies. I can’t bribe reviewers or fake results. They would axe me so quick.
@@krk6216 I am not sure where in biomedical r&d you are in, in a hospital, in a lab, in a Dr's office but it restores my faith in humanity that is your experience. In my experience when a clinical drug goes to trial its goes to the Drs. offices or a hospital( hospitals are wayyy more strict) Say we were running a diabetes or arthritis drug, double blind, let's say 100,000 people all around the world. Patients "miss a dose" or tell the dr side effects. The Dr then only reports half of the side effects to statistician since big pharma is paying them good money to get the drugs through (they have a whole team of salespeople for these Drs.) Depending on the drug, the medical assistants or nurses do the intake for these patients, and give the medication and are responsible for calling the IRT specialist of any changes, drugs go missing, patients given the wrong dose constantly. And it's the specialists job to go on the back end and update their system. The Drs office then marks it as dispensed correctly, that is what is given to the statistician, NOT the info on the backend, and that information never makes it to the FDA or DEA. A whole study of incorrect information is then given to the r &d team to then comb through, that they think is correct.
So ex pharmacy worker here, and I have to say yeah FDA is a joke and it is scary how things like medical devices and some new meds are approved, it is soooo sketchy.
Imagine the government and corporations not being one and the same. One can dream I guess.
So one of them wouldn't exist...
Capitalism
Or if the Government put a heel on them, corps must obey the Government, or it will be the other way round
Tragically when someone proposed this : "IT wILl be CoMMUnisM!"
Power is power
@@Christina-qk2jx no that is not capitalism. overlap between industry and the govt is more like communism
Kiana.... how do you make literal documentaries that are the most well researched and supremely entertaining on the entire platform? And how do you do this consistently with every new upload?
dawww thank you very much!! what a compliment lol 🤗💕 i try!! hahah
I 100% agree. First one I saw I thought it had been produced by a big production company. I'm not kidding. Completely professional!
Yes! I'm planning on teaching using your video on fast food. I teach EFL and it's really important for me to find videos that aren't too long (that one is 14 min) and that are very very very clear.
When I hear complaints about "big pharma" my brain says "don't listen" so I'm excited to dive into the subject with someone who has done her research consistently.
I’m a little disturbed that her sponsorship is a supplement though. They’re generally not tested scientifically. (I’m a biomedical researcher) and the cognitive dissonance of that on an FDA video is dizzying 😵💫
If your interested in more channels like this watch What I've Learned
Long before I decided I needed to at least partially homeschool my kids (over 30 years ago) I believed both the FDA and the USDA were focused on supporting corporations and NOT our personal or public health. My son was actually sent to detention for arguing that cow’s milk was NOT a necessary part of human health during a public school class lesson on basic nutrition. Class materials were all donated by the Dairy Industry. Go figure.
Imagine telling a bunch of school kids, some of whom are statistically likely to have a milk or lactose allergy or intolerance, that cows milk is a necessary part of nutrition. When I was at school we did only get an extremely basic 'food groups' education, but milk and dairy weren't the only foods in their grouping at least.
I have an instinctive cringe reaction to people online saying they decided to home ed their kids because we get such a bad rap from the parents who take them our out of school because they refuse to teach their kids science, or other dodgy reasons they love to post about, but when you see the stuff many schools are actually teaching it suddenly becomes very easy to see why so many of us come to the conclusion that teaching our kids ourselves might be better.
@@katharineeavan9705 agree. I suppose for the kid’s dad and I, it was more an issue of public school being woefully lacking especially in areas of science and broader world experience. For fun, we’re definitely a Trekkie family and embrace all aspects of science, engineering, philosophy, technology, etc. Our goal was to EXPAND our kid’s education, not instill myopic boundaries on their ability to think and learn. And yes, it’s sad to hear about the ways that public education is being boxed in further recently due to fear and prejudice. Fear of learning is a nationwide problem these days and American students are sadly falling further and further behind on the world stage by almost every measure. 😟
As a practitioner, if my patients have even the smallest, even very good treatable cancer, what do we tell them? Stop all dairy immediately. There’s growth hormones in it, even naturally. A woman that had breast cancer surgery in 1880 , was more likely to still be cancer free . Even after ten years ( yes, surgery itself, was more risky , of course) , than a woman today. In Victorian times, Doctors knew absolutely what cancer is . Gibetting wasn’t stopped for humanitarian reasons. But because they wanted the bodies to study. Every third person of low class was completely cut open and used for study. They reported cancer, specially after stage 2.
But medical books said, don’t waste time on cancer, you probably won’t ever see a case. What changed? Our nutrition. Dairy used to be a treat, not daily food . And just drinking milk , that was only used in humans, if the mother couldn’t nurse and no wet nurse was available.
Your son was absolutely right. People can’t believe, that every body of control and government, in the west or sometimes world, says the same thing. But that’s standard. Peer reviewed studies are easily manipulated. We don’t get money, to review. If I say it needs major revision, I will have to put my time in to review it possibly multiple times. If scientists say, it’s good to go, the job ends there. If ten review a paper or study and six say no and four say yes, the publisher can overrule the majority or claim the four are more knowledgeable in the topic. A lot happens. The science was never a thing. The science with dairy is actually quite easily proven to be wrong. But people get money and many others don’t care.
Im sure you raised a fine man. Most people don’t dare to speak against authorities. It’s what we’re taught early and it stops us often, even as adults, to go with our gut. 7 out of ten people will answer a question wrong, if the group in majority answered wrong or the leaders answered wrong. The emperor is naked. Many experiments and studies on that topic.
Cow's milk is only a necessary part of your diet if you are a baby cow.
I’m a plant milk person and have no trouble getting enough nutrition. Leafy greens and eggs from the local farmers free range chickens will do it if you’re dairy free (I’m not vegan though)
Thank you for speaking differently and not being afraid of “controversial” topics.
I baffles me that anyone can see Reagan as a hero. Every time I learn something about his presidency it gets worse.
Kiana, love this episode. This scratches the surface. Look into sugar. Specifically refined sugar. It's horrifying. Greed has no boundaries.
Not to mention the arguments against alternatives like monk fruit and stevia. They are both technically not approved because they aren't deemed safe, but countries have been using them for hundreds if years with less problems then sugar brings.
Like tobacco, sugar is going to be really difficult for us as a society to "quit" because we've been addicted to it for hundreds of years.
I'd love to see Kiana do one on refined sugar!
Oo great suggestion, id love to hear about this topic!
@@christinesarkis4029 and to think, the most popular flavor for vapors are all fruits, all that high fructose corn syrups are bypassing the GI tracts and reaching directly into the bloodstream.
It seems that dosage may be the key factor. At times, scientists with an agenda will give dosages of a substance far below what a subject will consume in a normal product to demonstrate safety, or far in excess to suggest danger.
I can give you uranium to eat and claim its safe if its on the scale of one part per billion. Likewise, an iron supplement can be helpful, but eating a nail is bad for health.
Exactly.
Ya but it's actually the other way around in this case. They give the mice way more than the normal human will consume to give them cancer.
@@Bekyed2 I suppose I did get a bit mixed up. What can I say, solid B student here.
Would you happen to be in Upstate New York? I would love to talk more over coffee.
I'm always surprised by studies conducted on mice/monkeys that give them HUGE quantities, or don't take the environment that they're living in into consideration at all. Like maybe living isolated in a cage with no natural sunlight can cause symptoms of illness or even cancer? There's many examples of studies with addictive drugs where mice in that awful environment will overdose, whereas ones who are living outside with enough mice to socialize with will display the same % of addicts as the general human population.
Just like the divorce of the Church and the State, we need the divorce of the Corporate and the State.
The studies showing carcinogenicity in rats can't prove that aspartame causes cancers in humans, and epidemiological studies haven't found a link.
Rats metabolize aspartame differently from us.
I think it would have been important and responsible to point out that animal studies alone can rarely prove wheter or not a substance is safe in humans. There have been cases where the opposite occurred and a drug showed limited side effects in animal studies but caused severe/widespread problems in humans.
As for reported side effects, 100% of those with memory loss or vision problems have drunk water at some point.
"Correlation doesn't equal causation" feels like a tired cliché at this point, but it's true.
I'm not dismissing people's experiences but it would take a study with robust data and a control group to prove that aspartame caused symptoms, and you haven't linked to anything like that.
For the record I don't usually consume artificial sweeteners and I think it's a good idea to avoid or limit their use, based on nutrition classes I had in college.
But this video feels sensationalistic and a step down from your usual quality
Agreed strongly, thank you for writing such a thoughtful comment. There was no mention of "the dose makes the poison" which was surprising because that's usually commonly talked about with sugar substitutes. I agree that the video felt sensationalistic and I think it focused too much on aspartame in particular. I think the real core issue that does make sense to me is that the FDA is not doing their own research and is trusting companies at their word, but that wasn't the takeaway from the video.
I agree that I would like to know the dose dependency, but I think the point was purely to show that a government agency like the FDA can't even be trusted to discern what we should and shouldn't put in our bodies.
Your comment should be on top. Anyone who has a scientific background or who is just interested in science knows that animal studies do not prove anything at all. They are the less reliable studies one can found.
Same with studies performed on mice trying to prove that cooked meat is not good for your health. mice are not supposed to eat and digest meat. Besides, just like aspartame, they exposed the mice to crazy doses to get a response.
A human should drink more than 100 sodas or more for aspartame to be considered dangerous and still. This video is very fallacious. She did not do a good job on this one sadly
I worked at fda for 1.5y. Fda does get a lot of “user fees” from the companies to drive hiring of new university grads to write review memos on a timely basis. There are many ways reviewers and consultants can be pressured to justify one scientific decision or another. Could be direct pressure from a manager or soft pressure from peers; I’ve seen both. The reasons for the pressure are usually political in nature. There could be a patient advocacy group publicly shaming your division or the fda employees wanting to play favorites with some companies vs others. One thing average people don’t understand very well, is that fda does not directly test the products. The fda can ask the company to run tests, and fda reviews the disclosed results.
If you’re going to make claims about aspartame being cancer causing and dangerous you should go into the research itself and pull it apart, stories like this while emotionally moving and very convincing are unfortunately not scientific.
If the aspartame studies are bad people shouldn’t write them off by saying “look who they’re funded by, how can they be trusted if it was funded by a company?”
Instead if the study is bad you should be able to critique it through the methodology itself bad control group, small sample size, bad dosages etc.
To my knowledge there have been to date no studies shown that any artificial sweeteners have bad effects on humans, and the animal studies so far are either safety studies that are dosed at levels far higher than what I humans normally eat on a Mg per Kg or they’re just full of outright sloppy controls.
A good example of studies being used to justify wrong ideas is the so called studies showing the deleterious effect that Artificial sweeteners have on gut health when in reality it was one study in the 90s that exposed E-Coli bacteria culture in vitro to pure sucralose and the E-Coli died so therefore sucralose must be bad for gut microbiome, sorry but it is patently ridiculous to extrapolate up to humans from a bacteria culture in a Petri dish being exposed to a pure concentrate.
Furthermore animal studies cannot be extrapolated out to humans, same goes with in vitro.
I love your channel and your work, however I would like you to back up your critique of artificial sweeteners with an actual scientific critique of the studies themselves.
All the best
This exactly, thank you for commenting. All these animal tests give a general idea on what MIGHT occur, but when we have studies done on humans that disprove those effects, animal studies mean little.
My psych professors crammed this into our minds! As much as it wore me out I'm grateful for it now, it really helps to be able to critically analyze and understand scientific literature. I would go as far as to say it's important for the general public to know how to do this for themselves. It's too easy to get swept up in emotional bandwagon of writing things off or harping on something new just because someone else said so. It's important to understand the sources of this information!
Kiana, honestly, your research and topics are astonishing. I enjoy every single one of those and my jaw drops throughout the whole video.
You do a better job than many investigative reporters, your content is amazing!
🥺🥺🥺 thank you!!! This comment means a lot! :’)💕💕
No offense here but does Athletic Greens seem dodgy to anyone else? Im glad you use it and find it beneficial, Kiana, but anything with the word superfood in it makes me look a little more skeptically. It honestly sounds just like a pre workout supplement and those aren't really regulated from what I can tell. I've watched too many Chubbyemu videos to trust that kind of stuff.
99 dollars for some powder is offensive and not needed for healthy living. It sucks that Kiana thinks this is okay to try and sell to her audience but anything for a buck, I guess. Btw there's a lot of comments calling her out on this.
Good on you, superfoods don't exist. Pre-workout usually isn't anything dangerous, pretty much just a combination of some vitamins, sugar, and caffeine for energy before a workout (but that is dependent on the pre-workout), you can always look at the ingredients and research about that stuff if you're worried. But yeah something that has "a lot of stuff packed into it" isn't necessarily a good thing, even if they're all vitamins. Most supplements are not regulated but that doesn't mean they're dangerous or useless... just more of a waste of money. Getting nutrition from real foods is always the best way, you'll only really need supplements when you have a deficiency or recommended by a dietitian or doctor.
@@UltimateTacoz ok, but this platform is really rough. Do you really think Kiana can research, record, edit, and upload videos without needing funding? She's trying to take relevant sponsors. It's rough making a YT channel work.
it’s an expensive multivitamin drink
@@stephaniekanoun4409 but to promote a supplement drink with unfounded claims and not do research about it while condemning FDA for being money hungry, not researching on Aspartame and being quick to approve it. It’s just ironic. She can choose who to take sponsorships from.
I generally agree that the FDA has performed poorly when it comes to drug and medical device regulation. However, I would like to point out that pretty much every food regulator in the world has approved aspartame so it’s hard to chalk up the approval to just FDA corruption. I’m also extremely skeptical of the potential problems of aspartame.
Agreed. The FDA is meant to keep people safe. That doesn’t work in a capitalist society and having a revolving door of drug cartel ceos as well as food industry ceos being at the head of the FDA it will always be questionable. People need to remember that this was all these animals were fed, ridiculously high amounts of aspartame, to equal that amount in humans people would have to be slamming down alarming amounts of diet food and drinks for decades. So my motto is be skeptical but discerning and try not to fall for fear mongering.
Yeah it's the least of the shady shit the FDA's done.
By and large the FDA has done ok. It’s not a perfect government regulatory agency, can you name one? Yes there is corruption, but as a whole, I prefer an FDA with flaws versus no FDA at all.
My problem with the concept of thinking it’s ok because other countries also approved it is that there seems to be a reliance on the FDA’s stance as a part of the review and approval process for many products in other countries. I do still understand your skepticism and don’t disagree with it. In part my skepticism for both its safety and its harmfulness are because of the lack of reliance on quality, non-biased scientific studies accompanied by the money and politics endemic in the FDA.
@@fiveandfour Governments have funded evaluations and studies on Aspartame which have all shown no meaningful effects on people's health. "Independent" scientists are often extremely biased and agenda-driven themselves (take a look at GMO research). FDA approval is not sufficient for a food additive being approved in Canada, the UK, and EU. All have approved it looking at the research and funding re-evaluations the evidence relatively recently.
It's all about the dose, though. The monkeys were fed between 1-6 g/kg of aspartame which is huuuge dose. A 12 oz diet coke contains about 192 mg of aspartame, meaning that in order for a 192-lb man to be in the lowest dose group they would have to drink 1000 cans a day... Only one monkey died in the high dose group. And most monkeys across the board had seizures, most likely because they overdosed on phenylalanine. The study also did not have a control group.
BTW, I suspect the reason why aspartame was so easily approved initially is because chemically it is composed of aspartate and phenylalanine, which are just amino acids that you can find in virtually all foods, thus they were likely assumed non toxic.
I agree. Even drinking too much water in a short period of time can be harmful.
Talking about pharmaceutical fraud, while advertising a vitamin mix that contains pseudoscientific “adaptogens” is quite something. You cannot have it both ways.
Plus for all the complaining about the limited abilities of the FDA when it comes to food and drugs, they're even more limited when it comes to supplements. Stuff like athletic greens is classed as a supplement which means it's subject to pretty much no regulation whatsoever.
I'm not a fan of "supplements" in general because they're usually a complete scam. At best, unless you have a known deficiency in something, they probably won't hurt you. At worst, Jilly juice.
Hey, learning is a process... Nobody comes screaming out of mum´s woumb as perfect. Got to be able to allow for mistakes to be able to learn from them. :D
But having somebody pointing out potential paradoxes can be of good help too
Not a bad point but pales in comparison to the hypocrisy of more mainstream content. Pretty much every politician who speaks out against misinformation is revealed to host large parties and not wear a mask.
What sponsor was there?
Gonna send this to my mom. She's a diet soda junkie, and this is the most eloquent, easily digestible, and comprehensive shorter form video I've found on aspartame. Thank you, Kiana, for your service to your audience. You're incredible, as always.
Aspartame is completely safe though so i dont see why you need to worry your mother. It's just amino-acids and have been approved by the rest of the world. Literally the most well tested additive in the whole world at this point.
@@pontiuspilatus964did you even watch the video
Ice water..is better
Or drink regular soda
Preferably CANE SUGAR
full of ICE
Xylitol is better, for fake sugar, but doesn't work in soda
Letter enjoy we are all poisoned for profit food water it's all bad
How can you start your video by criticising the statement that "aspartame is the most well-tested food additive in history" and then go into a sponsorship segment claiming that Athletic Green "supports gut health and immunity", without citing any sources? The Athletic Greens website doesn't link to any research about the effects of their product. How can you make these claims on behalf of your sponsor? Isn't this a conflict of interest?
sadly sponsorships are a microcosm of the point of this video I feel like as viewers we have to tune out the sponsorship parts and consider them a necessary evil to support the channel
@@Twistedtwat This is a very interesting perspective. But it's really hard to justify any creator endorsing a product / service that fundamentally conflicts with their own message. It has made me unsubscribe from many channels over the years. If you can't stick to your principles, I can't trust you. Start a Patreon account instead and be accountable to your audience
most products (especially) dont conduct research on the efficacy of their product specifically because the product is made up of supplements that have already been researched. it was easy for me to find the ingredients and benefits that they claim, and from there you can research the individual supplements themselves. the difference is that we arent watching a government authority meant to dictate what is good for you or what isnt, just a youtube video..
She's not a scientist and has no science education, she should be more humble and listen to the research...which shows it's safe over 50 years among so many independent studies.
I have always really enjoyed your content, but I have to be honest that I was surprised to see the ad for Athletic Greens, especially after being so critical of the FDA (the FDA has little bearing in my neck of the woods, as I'm not American - but I was interested in your assessment of Aspertame - that stuff is nasty). Surely there were other sponsorships you could have gone with instead. When I went to check out the product (because when I hear buzz words like "superfood" I immediately give the product the side eye and go look things up about it). What did I find? Other buzz words describing the product, such as "detox" (especially when it concerns the liver - the liver is a highly specialised organ that filters and detoxes the body naturally - it does not need to be detoxed itself), "superfood" (there is no such thing) and several other buzz words used around dodgy supplements that have little to no research backing them up. The business model is also suspicious because automatically renewed subscriptions usually come with issues in cancelling and/or returning the product if it does not meet the buyer's expectations. I did see numerous complaints about that. I also couldn't find any studies on this specific product and saw a few reviews of it stating that there is no way of knowing if the ingredients are in "clinically relevant doses". So, the product to me is suspect, not to mention extremely expensive. At the same time, the thing I do appreciate about the ad, is that you use the product yourself and enjoy it and find it beneficial. Of course anecdotal evidence doesn't mean much (and unfortunately all I could find regarding the product is anecdotal evidence), but at least you stand by a product you actually use.
Yeah, the sponsor on this video made me side eye too and I didn’t even bother to look at it closer. I just know most “greens” supplements are overpriced hype and are generally being marketed with lots of buzz words and are not needed to get good nutrition in overall if you’re eating a well rounded diet.
Felt the same way when I saw Andrew Huberman, a Stanford neuroscientist, was sponsored by them, it's not that bad but I do sideye it every time I listen to the podcast lol
You know what I wondered: what does adaptogen even mean? That's a medical term, neither did I every hear it or come across it in all my years of studying different degrees in the medical field.
Thank you for pointing this out. I thought the same thing.
You're right that the buzzwords aren't great. I had personally already been an Athletic Greens customer for months after researching it myself AND seeing it on all my favourite science podcasts. So maybe not infallible logic for purchasing something lol but, I truly enjoy the product 🤷♀️ so that's really all I can say!
I'll admit I used to be that person that was like "o this is FDA approved so it is totally safe to eat or drink" you have literally made me go 180 on that statement. Thank you really well done video
As u grow older you realize how literally almost nothing that's man-changed in the food industry is remotely healthy. From vagan meat to vegetables oil to fluoride usage, to preservatives , emulsifiers, and food on shelves that stay edible for years! All unnatural and unhealthy
@@uptheante7565This person isn't dead yet, so yes they have probably been vaccinated.
Before aspartame, it was cyclimates
Complains about inadequate study of aspartame and corporate funded science, then sells a pseudoscience supplement where the only studies on effectiveness are funded by the company. Pretty much all of the few studies on green powders are also industry funded. Multiple peer reviewed studies have found vit. D supplementation worthless for most people. The regulation of supplements is also way worse than that of food or drugs so there is really no accountability for products like that.
For all the good that overpriced Karen crap does you, you might as well just smoke weed and/or put it in your food and drinks.
Take my energy award!
@@Attmay What does marijuana has to do with this?
Are you sure about the Vitamin D - many studies have found people over the age of 50 deficient in it? I myself had a level of 3 when it is meant to be 50.
I find it troubling that a documentary about the FDA is sponsored by a nutritional company.
What are you talking about?
@@truzle6133 well I'm sure that the nutritional company had to pass FDA approval, the same FDA this channel is accusing of corruption.
I mean, that happens all the time UA-cam isnt that carefull.
Do you understand that we are already within this corrupted system? Like, well within it, like drowning in it
Maybe that's why her videos are so high quality.
If you did a series of this type of thing, I would so watch. It's sad how the FDA, Teddy Roosevelt's own creation, got corrupted the way it did.
There’s a documentary called what the health
That is why demanding The State save us is stupidity of the highest order.
I usually really enjoy your videos, but this one left a bad taste in my mouth. The first major problem is that it is sponsored by "Athletic Greens" which, even if it is not actually harmful as claimed by other commenters, is very expensive and has no benefits if you eat a varied and otherwise healthy diet. I understand you need to earn a living, but at least pick another topic for the video than criticizing FDA if you really want to get sponsored by a company selling a (sketchy) product subject to far less stringent regulations than Aspartame.
The second major problem with the video is all the stuff you leave out. Like how Aspartame has been approved internationally by over 100 regulatory agencies OTHER than FDA including in the EU. Or how the initial studies you keep referencing used far higher doses of Aspartame than what will reasonably be consumed by a human. Just to name two examples. The things you leave out makes the video highly misleading, even if the information itself is not incorrect. I know you claim this video is only about the FDA and not about Aspartame's safety, but if you read the comments on this video you will see that most of the viewers did not make that distinction. Which again leads back to the video being misleading.
I really hope you do better next time as I have learned a lot from and enjoyed watching many of your previous videos.
She did listen thankfully.
The FDA was the first agency to approve aspartame and the international agencies followed suit.
@@BBQ_Jackfruit Are you implying those international agencies just followed the FDA and didn't do their own research?
@@randomwerewolf1099 No, I’m sure they do. Just pointing it out.
@@BBQ_Jackfruit pretty sure each agency does their own research before approving.
I love seeing an update from you. You have the most informative, well-researched, and entertaining short docs on this site. Keep up the great work!
This ultimately depends on what you view the video as. If it is a historical drama then sure this is true as far as it goes. Early research in aspartame was crap when it was approved. But if you view the end as proving aspartame is bad for you because the food industry sponsors studies I have a used car to sell you. Numerous non US or FDA related agencies have found aspartame has no link to cancer. Further, the EU, which thinks a minute amount of red meat causes cancer, views it as safe. Cancer rates have not skyrocketed since its introduction. What has is obesity. Not saying they are related but some would argue they are.
Obesity increases the risk of cancer.
@@Attmay Yes and?
Aspartame is one of the most studied food additives in existence. That includes independent studies. There is no strong evidence either short term or long term of any harm in anything but ridiculously high amounts.
Exactly! Regulators around the world approved it independently of the FDA.
This is like the anti-MSG movement or the anti-vaccine movement.
How many adaptagens does it have?
Amen.
@@caimaccoinnich9594 MSG is amazing and it's a great tool for any cook.
Ridiculously high amounts, like the people who drink 6 cans a day?
Thank you for making this video, recently I’ve been stuck in a medical mystery over the past 4 months now, and after researching more for aspartame’s effects, we think this may be what’s been causing my condition to grow worse in such a fast rate. Again thank you so much.
Two problems with this video.
1. It isn't as if we don't know this happens. It's called regulatory capture. This is something that was theorized and studied in economics since the '50s! Yet every time there's an example of it, people are shocked, SHOCKED, that it happens.
2. Near the end is the senator asking "are there any studies showing negative effects?" I hate questions like those because, well, it isn't asked in good faith and presumes an answer. "Have you stopped beating your wife?" The question implies the person beat their wife and any answer confirms that hypothesis. Either they say no, confirming they are still beating their wife. Or they say yes, confirming the had beat their wife in the past. The same here, the implication is that there are negative effects to be found. Yes means there are negative effects. No means there are but they are hidden. The problem here is, what if there are no negative effects to be found?
That is conspiracy level thinking on display. He's a senator. Setup and commission one. Don't engage in theatrics, prove it.
Brave, well-researched, well-presented as usual. And your hair looks gorgeous.
hahah aww thank you!!!
Very importan 💁♀️! ☺️
I agree. Her hair looks fantastic.
I really liked the video but could you maybe next time provide references to your research? Sure, I can just open next tab and look it up myself (which I did) but it would be much more convenient to just search for it in the description. :) Again, Loved the vid
... Then why do ALL OTHER countries with less corruption come to similar conclusions that aspartame is fine? The European regulators found it safe... Even my country's regulator found it safe and they're often more stringent than the FDA...
Is the next thing you say going to be "MSG is bad?"
I think you’re missing the point is that they lied about the research and bribed to have their products pushed through.
@@brookelee9745 ALL of them? Yeah, right, now that's a huge conspiracy theory. Aspartame is safe, Kiana cherrypicked whatever studies suited her theory but there are at least 200 more articles that disprove that there's any danger.
So, I'm a little scared to watch because I drink *so much* aspartame. Realistically, though, that hesitation is probably the reason I have to watch. Thanks 🙂
You should look into everything you consume from your water to your veg/meat
Don't consume it daily. Those things are a treat only. You literally have to consume it all day everyday day for a long time to have a harmful effect. Same with any sugar artificial or not.
@Olympic-grade lurker I worked for a certain large coffee chain and one guy asked for 24 WHOLE PACKS of this stuff in his tea! I could taste it on my tongue just from the air through a face mask. Hopefully nothing bad happens to him!
Pretty sure you'll live unless your a rat and drinking your body weight in it daily.
@@alessia9328 Addictive to some. I'm not defending big pharma or food but most people don't drink dozens of diet sodas a day (the human equivalent of the poison dosage). There also is little evidence diet soda actually leads to cancer let alone weight gain.
Interesting video, but I feel like you did not touch on what negativities that the independent studies pointed out. Often studies give 100x if not 1000x the normal doses... anything in excess I would expect side effect. If we force feed a mouse 1000X it's daily protein intake it's likely going to have kidney failure... but that would not mean do not eat proteins. It has also been 40 years since we've been adding it to everything and I would expect we would see some sort of macrolevel of analysis. I do look forward to your aspartame video and hope you'll provide a little more on the other side.
Looking forward to this; I love your channel! I discovered it recently and it is just what this grad student needs to reform some eating habits. I have actually stuck to a caloric limit for over 50 days now!! It’s only a very slight deficit so I think that has made it realistic and doable
Congratulations on your progress!
That's awesome! ☺️ 👍
@@sarahwatts7152 thank you!!
@@AngelaMerici12 Thank you so much!!
Good job, keep going!
I have a feeling the algorithm isn't going to like this one... Thank you for your excellent content and spreading the truth!!
This is painful to watch, some people's lack of humanity is so disappointing.
As an Australian, just how much America is run by enormous, greedy corporations is a huge shock to me. Sure, we have problems with corporate payouts (COUGH COUGH LABOR) but I simply CANNOT imagine the industry that monitors the stuff people put in their bodies being lobbied by companies that make unhealthy foods. Here we're at the point where we have a health star rating on nearly every food product, like how video games have a rating on how mature they are, HSR goes from 0.5 for stuff that's awful for you like most soft drinks, ultra processed slop "food-like products" and 5 for stuff like pure fruit and veg, cheese, whole wheat products, milk, eggs, organic juices, etc. (Though I believe some products like fruit don't need to display their star rating because they trust that consumers can figure out "this applw from the farmers market will be good for me") And we have a legal requirement that all cigarette and vape products cannot be advertised anywhere, must have no logos and graphic health warnings covering most of the pack, with the rest being the most basic product information like brand and variant, as well the various "SMOKING CAUSES EMPHYSEMA" etc warnings with the majority of the back of the box being in depth information about the illnesses and information on how to call the quitline and advice for quitting. Second highest tax in the world also. We were actually the first country in the world to come up with this "plain packaging" idea and fortunately many other countries like Canada, all of the EU and the UK have also taken the initiative. To my knowledge the US still has that almost nothing "Smoking is bad for you guys don't do it!" text on the packs but the tobacco companies are free to use the packs to make their products looks premium and appealing instead of being glorified disease sticks. I'm also 100% sure vape ads are allowed ans there's almost no packaging regulation despite them having most of the dangers of smoking and some new ones...
Honestly, very brave of you to post this at this moment and time and I give you all the praise for doing so. And I fully agree. I have not trusted the FDA since I did a school research project on it in 2016
Aspartame fear is my litmus test for pseudoscience. It is made of two amino acids and phenylalanine with an added methyl group. Amino acids and phenylalanine are naturally occurring in several foods we eat on a regular basis including fruits and vegetables. It's also much sweeter than sugar so the actual amount used in products as a sweetener alternative is lower that the sugar than would have been in it.
Agreed. I'm not the least bit worried about aspartame. Government corruption, sure. Aspartame? Give me my Diet Coke please.
Great to see a new video. Great topic, but I’m a bit put off by the clear sensationalizing (graphics, ominous music etc.) slightly over the top, would love a more neutral tone. I’m not saying I disagree with your opinion, but as a documentary, your bias is clearly there and the video title suggests that the FDA of 40 years ago is the same as the one we have now. It’s not. And it’s all we got to protect us from big corporate greed on a level we have never known. I lived through the nutrasweet era, it was all over the news. Even as a young consumer in the 80s I knew the reported risks of nutrasweet, it was controversial at the time. Yet I chose to consume products with it as opposed to sugary food products because I believed the health benefits outweighed the risks. I switched to sucralose based products when that became available because it was shown to be safer still 😁
OMG. I have consumed a lot of this over the years! Thank you for the well-researched and gripping presentation, Kiana. You are very good at this
Oh, how I missed you! You’re so knowledgeable, and I thank you for all the work and sweat you put on your videos! Have a wonderful day, Kiana!
Kiana always delivering the quality educational content! Love watching these videos in my nursing school study breaks! 🥰
thank you!! i'm always so flattered when people truly working in the health field enjoy my content haha
@@KianaDocherty we appreciate it so much! Your sugar, fascia, and hydration for healthy brain activity videos changed my life 🥰
The FDA is lying to us and here is why, but first, let me introduce you to this magical concoction from our sponsor
I can't get past this. What a whiplash.
Except athletic greens and plenty of other green powdered drinks are literally just dried fruits and veggies. I’ve taken it before and the ingredients don’t contain anything artificial or “concocted”. Not everything has to be bad and scary, as long as you read the ingredients and do your research. You realize for a content provider she has to be paid for her time right? At least she’s being supported by reputable companies
kiana isn’t dumb she’s not just gonna sponsor anything. i’m sure she looked at the ingredients. like come on now let’s use our brains
@@diamond2979 totally agree.
@@Lycurgus47 how did you come to the conclusion that a company claiming that their magical green powder is a "liver detox, and superfood" is reputable and therefore you can trust this lady on it??
I love how people don’t realise that these government agencies can be brought by big phama
At this point it's a pipeline of high-power employment. The something in the financial sector with FTC
I always love your videos, they are so well done and informative and this one is no different. Your editing style is fire.
Lol gotta love it! First ad when clicking on this video is about how aspartame is good for you.
Very well put together and researched. Fantastic first step in a more serious, documentary-esque format. Looking forward to seeing where this type of content takes the channel, and glad to see your passion for health and diet related topics taking you in a more serious direction.
Fun fact, I was looking at the label of a no sugar lemonade, and it had sweetener 952 which is also known as sodium cyclamate. It is banned in the US, South Korea and Bangladesh due to its potentially carcinogenic nature. So fun that the same chemical can be used to sweeten drinks in Australia.
Literally thought about you yesterday! Happy to see a new upload! 😍💖🔥
girl… you’re hitting a new level with this one. keep it up 👏🏻
Please do a video on the horrors of sucralose. I can't personally eat it without major issues. But, the food companies can leave it out of the ingredients because it is considered a "natural flavor".
At least aspartame has to be listed in the ingredients.... Even if it is horrible for us. Sucralose is horrible for us, and no one is required to tell you it is in your food.
Aspartame is "The Devil you know", while Sucralose is "The Devil you don't".
Why can't you eat sucralose without having issues? I'd like to learn more about this topic.
@@luchirimoya, it causes me to have a painful morning bathroom session.... If I manage to keep it down until morning.
Sucralose wears down your GI lining, and can even cause lesions and scarring. Even worse though, is that you're unknowingly consuming it in flavored club sodas and various other drinks. Sucralose can be called a "natural flavor", legally.
@@luchirimoya sucralose also raises your blood sugar and is thus dangerous to diabetics or people with insulin resistance
I love you for adding a sponsor chapter to the video so I didn't have to guess where the content starts. As much as I respect you want/need sponsors, as much I feel you respect me to be able to skip it!
It looks like the review you showed at 14:12 was written by people who didn't read their citations. Firstly, the review is from 2007 so it doesn't matter if you looked at the review in 2022. Secondly, harmful effects were ANECDOTAL as written in the abstract by author R J Wurtman in their 1987 paper. This paper was used as a citation in said review.
Citations that documented harmful effects were mouse studies. I don't know why scientists never give mice reasonable doses but these studies, the mice are proportionally overdosed sometimes thousands of percent above their tolerated amount. If course they will experience seizures. If you drink too much water, you'll also experience high blood pressure and seizures because too much is anything is toxic. There are dozens of mouse studies and they're always overdosed. It's something that drives me mad. I'm guessing they just want "interesting results" in the study they conduct? Why? Because if they gave mice a reasonable dose, nothing happens... just like in humans.
I like your channel Kiana but honestly that review you skimmed is low quality because its author either barely reads their citations, or they like to misinterpret certain phrases in purpose for whatever reason. Their own agenda? Anecdotal evidence is the weakest form of evidence. It's undocumented, it's literally a person telling someone else "hmm well I drank diet coke and it caused problems". If you go up to a policeman and say "hey look at that guy walking over there, he murdered my brother" do you think the policeman will take that as fact? Any normal human will have many questions before taking action. Anecdotes aren't science, they're just rumors.
I'm not saying there's no corruption, there probably is but I'm going to echo this video featuring humans (who could be anybody by the way, they might not be MDs?) Aspartame is so well researched, I'm not worried about it. Logically aspartame is not some financial investment, it's easy to mass produce and can be made on demand very quickly. If aspartame WAS toxic and it was suddenly somehow discovered (that's not how that works though), the manufacturers can very easily start producing an alternative like sucralose or ANY sugar-alcohol derived sweetener that they want. All of which are also incredibly well researched.
Of any product to pick as "INDUSTRY BAD BIG PHARMA BAD", aspartame is the worst example.
I'm sorry for the rant but conspiracies like these aren't backed by anything reputable or high quality.
Another great video! We appreciate all the time and effort you put into your videos
Quality of your videos has really improved a lot, great job!
thank you!! working on it lol
Please do more of these food corruption videos. This was SO entertaining, informative, and there is a lot of corruption happening in the food industry.
Another masterpiece! Never stop doing what you do!
I love all your videos so much you've been such a great motivation I've lost 60 pounds so far thank you so much keep up the good work
yesss get it!! congratulations and thank you!
I would love a video on Rockefeller’s influence on medical school teachings and his attempt to push petrochemical pharmaceuticals from his oil vs “uncivilized herbal modalities” and preventative care
Is Athletic Greens FDA approved ?
THE QUEEN IS BACKK
Industry funding is not an actual gotcha. You actually have to find the flaws in the methodology that are correlated with industry funding. In the obviously bunk studies funded by big money, their methods have been thoroughly ripped apart time and time again.
Saying this on its own proves nothing. If you seriously believe this, then that’s how you convince people. Show which studies were funded by aspartame manufacturers and how they are flawed.
Agreed, if something was tampered with it would be apparent in the data. Just like how aspartame was demonized to be cancer-inducing because of the large doses given to rats, while current studies on humans showed no signs of similar dangers.
Yeah, this video is unfortunate all around. Between the ad and the video topic, it comes across very much as the "natural" pseudoscience that's so popular.
AMEN to that. Smelled something fishy on the title of the video alone. She didn't put links to the actual studies for further reading
She claimed in the description that she isn't trying to prove whether aspartame is unhealthy, but to critic the FDA's sketchy approval process
She also said she'll do another video on aspartame
Great content, love the editing style. I go down these kinds of rabbitholes a lot but never heard about aspartame until now. You are doing good work
Kiana’s videos are like Supersize Me. I eat healthy for a few days after watching, then go back to living on frozen food, fast food, and Pringles a couple days later.
The meticulous nature of your research, visuals and your lovely personality truly makes your videos a masterpiece. Subscribed!
GREAT video! I love how well researched and well versed you always are. I would love to see you dive deeper into this (other ingredients that are possibly addictive, FDA approved and in a lot of processed foods. Other ingredients or products that the FDA is getting a kick back for/etc.)
ugh i get so excited whenever you post
Amazing Video!!!!
This is the absolute best UA-cam video I've ever watched. I am literally gobsmacked and speechless.
You did a great job girl! I love your videos. They’re informative and well researched 👌
Last night I chewed like 30 peices of gum with aspartame in them. I had like half of those symptoms you showed, I almost fell over I was so dizy and would get a migrane in my eyes when I stood up.... spooky. This video convinced me to give up my lowkey aspartame gum addiction.
Kiana, I love your videos, the way you explain and research the topics really helps me understand the content. I’ve recently had a struggle with refined sugar; I used to be overweight and then became healthier, over Christmas I fell off the wagon and ate lots of refined sugars and this reintroduction caused me so many health issues! (Now clearing up by reducing sugars).
I would really love if you did a video on the health affects (and addiction) of refined sugar. Please think about it ❤️
At 10:22. Donald Rumsfeld? He knew about pharmaceuticals? Odd. He had never studied science in undergrad at Princeton, or from the law school he dropped out of, Georgetown. But he had been Chief of Staff to President Gerald Ford, and then Secretary of Defense in that same administration. So Searle made Rumsfeld its CEO because he was a powerful lobbyist with great connections within the corridors of power in Washington.
Eh... might be the first miss I've seen on this channel.
Had this just been a cautionary tale about the corruption of public institutions entrusted with guarding our health and safety, it would have landed in a good place. But it went too far into an anti-aspartame rant.
The problem is, the U.S. FDA and Searle aren't the only organizations that have studied the substance. Many organizations outside the U.S. have conducted their own independent research and have failed to find substantive links between dietary aspartame consumption and malignancy.
In short: Searle was a crappy and corrupt researcher who fudged data to get this work approved, but - by what is apparently cosmic coincidence - the substance actually is safe.
Lucky for the rest of us, I guess.
wonderfully researched video. I did not know any of this, I only ever heard that aspartame was bad for your bones! I feel like you're prob the only one who has covered this topic, so thank you!
I honestly can‘t wait for you to get the recognition you deserve.
Just found your channel today. I've been non stop watching your videos all day. Not only are your videos well edited and catchy but just so well researched. I really resonated with your personal weight loss journey as well, thank you
Thank you for making this video! I've heard so much about aspartame but never understood the true answer.
Thank you so much kiana for all the videos you made they really help my health
Unless you're doing the work to actually analyze all of the studies you find that show that aspartame is unsafe, I'm not convinced that aspartame should be worried about. Aspartame is used worldwide and has been tested in multiple countries and none of them have any problem with it. Even WHO, despite labeling it "possibly carcinogenic," says that the evidence for aspartame being unhealthy is not enough to be substantial. You raised an interesting point in that a lot of studies about aspartame are funded by soda/sweetener companies, but the discussion has been made beyond the US and I'm generally inclined to believe the wider opinion about things like these. This is not something like tobacco lol.
The Bressler Report was also interesting, I did not know about that. But studies with animals should be taken with a grain of salt anyway because animals react differently to food than humans do.
Kiana this video was well done! Thank you for creating this! Lots of WTF moments in there!
Watching this before it gets censored. Lawd, what can of worms are you opening, Kiana!?💋
This is amazing journalism, thank you for standing up!
Could you cite your sources? I'm trying to look into this but would like to know the sources you used. Thank you
You're amazing Kiana! Thanks for even more wonderful content!!
With natural sweeteners like stevia leaf and monk fruit, it's a wonder why corporations would use artificial sweeteners that are so dangerous.
They changed before, they can change again. Lots of foods made with sugar switched to high fructose corn syrup because it is cheaper.
You're looking so professional in this 😭 you always look so gorgeous I can't even believe it
Same exact thing here in Brazil, I think the difference is that corruption is almost in our DNA and people expected ANVISA (our FDA) do be the prime example of Regulatory Capture (all our agencies are prime examples of that). But now out of a sudden it's become the epitome of moral and ethics and everything they decide is gospel.
This is by far my favorite channel right now, you make amazing content and I’m so glad I discovered this top notch content
Thank you very much!! 💕💕
The FDA already makes me angry so I can't wait to watch this 😭😭
Your videos about food and weight and fat people legit have helped me lose 100 pounds and pack about 30 more back in muscle through regular exercise. Whatever you’re doing is helping at least some people. Thank you.
LOVE IT when I see people using true analytical skills when assessing research. Keep fighting the good fight Kiana 👏
I love how youve segmented the video. It makes it easy to navigate
I've always felt weird and off after consuming (especially drinking) something containing aspartame + other sweeteners. I can feel if there's aspartame in it, without reading the label first, and sometimes get disappointed and have to pour something I was excited about out. But rather pour it out than having those sensations.
Same!
It just tastes awful to me. I’ve never been able to get past even a few sips of Diet Coke. We all need to eat less sweets overall, but if I’m going to eat sweets I’ll stick to regular sugar.
Growing up my family drank a lot of coke zero/other diet sodas, I'm pretty sure that's all I drank during my teen years. It wasn't until I moved out that I realized I had entirely lost my sense of thirst. It took 3 years of completely cutting aspertame out of my diet before I could feel the feeling of thirst again 😬
By the way, as far as aspartame goes.. my mom used to be addicted to diet pepsi and she started having kidney problems and the doctor told her "you either drink like a fish or take an awful lot of tylenol (she did neither, never drank alcohol or took tylenol except maybe now and again) OR you drink too much diet soda" anyway she has to be on medicine for kidney failure the rest of her life now. I can't believe I used to drink it too because she did!