Several users kept pointing out aspartame metabolizes into formaldehyde and that aspartame wasn't approved for 16 years by the FDA until Donald Rumsfeld, former president of the company that manufactures it (Searle) gave the FDA commissioner the boot and appointed a new one.
The wikidorks (aspartame shills?) who police the aspartame article and prevent people from editing it could only respond by ignoring the entire conflict of interest and insisting over and over that the users pointing this out were "paranoid" and "conspiracy theorists" and falling back on industry-funded studies (literally the private corporation that made it studying it) saying it's safe, and the FDA being ultimately trustworthy. They accused the users of "writing a blog" and "diffusing history" (????) and said that this isn't what the talk page is for.
They said that the talk page is only for "suggesting ways to improve the article (that they police)" (????????) When that didn't work they finally accused their interlocutors of being traditional sugar shills, at which point someone responded that both sugar and aspartame are bad for you, and that the USA allows high fructose corn syrup while other countries don't, because it has lax regulations. This is when the entire conversation was shut the fuck down.
TL;DR wiki nerds get to invoke "it's not a forum" rule to shut down people "diffusing history" while accusing their interlocutors of being "paranoid conspiracy theorists" and claiming that pointing out conflicts of interest in the FDA approval is wrong because... the FDA is the most reliable source.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Aspartame
deleted by creator
Sugar demonstrably causes an insulin response. You can test this with a simple blood-glucose meter. I was type 2. My A1C was 10.1%. I got it down to 5.9% by staying away from sugar and carbs. If it was fats and oils that caused insulin resistance, then I would still be diabetic.
Fruit is fine because it has less sugar in it than sugary treats. It also tends to have more fiber. If you go from drinking sodas and eating candy/cookies/cakes to eating nothing but fruit, you would see a drop in A1C and blood-glucose because fruit has less sugar in it. That doesn't mean it's the sugar reversing diabetes though.
You can go buy a $20 meter and some test strips and test this out for yourself. Fast for 8 hours, test your sugar. Eat some honey, wait 30 mins, then test it again. The next day fast for 8 hours, eat some sugar-free peanut butter. Wait 30 mins and test. See which ones causes the greater insulin response.
It's a constant high-insulin response that triggers type 2. Your cells become insulin resistant because they're constantly bombarded with high blood sugar levels.
Yes, this is correct. It's even more correct to say that flooding cells with sugar that is never used by the cell causes type two diabetes. Exercise and triggering cellular metabolic activity literally both prevents and reverses insulin resistance.
Type one diabetes is completely different, almost the opposite. It's truly disturbing how many patients, doctors and nurses confuse the two.
deleted by creator
Not to be rude but this is very wrong.