The “TLDR” pullout from today’s article is that people who drink diet soda have a risk of dementia and Alzheimer’s disease seven times higher than those who do not.
In April 2017, the same month WebMD asked “ ‘ Do ’ Diet Sodas Pose Health Risks’ ? ’ ”, the National Institute of Health wrote of “Sugar- and Artificially Sweetened Beverages and the ‘ Risks ’ of Incident Stroke and Dementia”.
Where they used the general “risks” in the headline, to avoid telling you that, after adjustments for age, sex, education (for analysis of dementia), caloric intake, diet quality, physical activity, and smoking, higher recent and higher cumulative intake of artificially sweetened soft drinks were associated with an ‘ increased ’ risk of ischemic stroke, all-cause dementia, and Alzheimer’s disease dementia.”
Where they’ve used the general “increased” to avoid telling you that the risk of stroke close to tripled, and the risk of Alzheimer’s increased sevenfold.
SODA CONSUMPTION IS DECREASING BECAUSE THE POPULACE HAS RECOGNIZED THAT SOFT DRINKS HAVE BEEN WEAPONIZED AGAINST THEM
An article from March 2013 reads “Recommended: Who owns Gatorade: Coke or Pepsi? Take our ‘parent company’ quiz! For more than two decades, soda was the No. 1 drink in the U.S. with per capita consumption peaking in 1998 ‘ at 54 gallons a year .”
While another article from March 2017 reads “Americans drink less soda. In fact, per-capita consumption for carbonated soft drinks peaked in the United States in 1998 at ‘ nearly 53 gallons ’, dropping to 41 gallons in 2015
While a third article from June 2017 reads “In 2016, each person in the United States drank 39.3 gallons of bottled water, compared with 38.5 gallons of carbonated soft drinks, according to data from Beverage Marketing Corp., Reuters reported. That’s a dramatic drop for soda consumption from its heights in the late 1990s and early 2000s of ‘ over 50 gallons ’ per person.”
Where the Ministry of Truth took the peak 1998 soda consumption number from “54 gallons a year” in 2013 to “nearly 53 gallons” in March of this year and “over 50 gallons” in June.
You can see them carefully “walk it back” from the earliest, specific example (“54 gallons”) through “nearly 53 gallons” to “Over 50 gallons”, the latter which are both general, which, as you may recall, is a hallmark of propaganda. And they’ve made the number smaller each time, to try via subterfuge to minimize the magnitude of the horrible problem that consumers have realized the manufacturers deliberately created, and also that of the epochal positive change underway.
And while they all gave you the numbers – sort of – they also all deliberately hedged by omitting the percentage of the decrease, as providing it would be much more impactful. Going from 54 gallons in 1998 to 39.3 in 2016, is a 35% percent decrease in per capita soda consumption in just under two decades (and that’s 18 years, to be exact).
The “nearly 53 gallons” article is headlined, hilariously, “Americans drink ‘ less ’ soda.”
Where “ less ” is general, a hallmark of propaganda; it’s used here to avoid writing the more impactful, specific headline “American soda consumption drops 35% in two decades.”
The words “mystery”, “baffled” and “puzzled” are memes, used, among numerous similar variants, whenever anyone in the wholly-controlled-and-coopted Political, Academic, Scientific and Media establishments wants to lie about, well, basically anything. One of those variants is “unknown”.
That’s why an article from the New York Times from 2017 says “people who drank one to six artificially sweetened drinks a week had twice the risk of stroke. There were similar, although weaker, associations for dementia risk. The reasons for the link remain ‘ unknown ’.”
In 2017, the National Institute of Health said “Sugar-sweetened beverages were not associated with stroke or dementia”, which squarely proves that it’s the Aspartame, stupid. But I shouldn’t be so coarse, as most of the rubes have already gotten wise to the con, vis a vis a 2017 article from marketplace.org, which says “Diet soda sales fizzle as health-conscious consumers turn to other drinks.”
Diet Soda builds desire and decreases satisfaction. Splenda flies ate 30 percent more calories than the control, and when they took away the artificially sweetened food, the effect vanished.
Drinking one artificially sweetened beverage a day increases your risk of stroke and dementia by three-fold compared to drinking less than one a week
Consumption of diet soda at least daily is associated with a 67 percent increased risk of type 2 diabetes compared with not consuming any.
Consumption of diet soda at least daily is associated with a 36 percent increased risk of metabolic syndrome compared with not consuming any.
Those who drink four or more cans of diet soda per day are 30 percent more likely to develop depression than non-soda drinkers.
Among people who consumed diet soda, the ends of their chromosomes, known as telomeres, were shorter among people who drank more sugar-sweetened beverages. The shorter the telomere, the less a cell can regenerate thus aging the body, and raising the risk of disease and early death.
The words “mystery”, “baffled” and “puzzled” are memes, used, among numerous similar variants, whenever anyone in the wholly-controlled-and-coopted Political, Academic, Scientific and Media establishments wants to lie about, well, basically anything. One of those variants is “alarmed”.
“This finding is ‘ alarming ’ because it ‘ suggests ’ that soda ‘ may ’ be aging us, in ways we are not even aware of,” said Dr. Epel.
Three of the leading artificial sweeteners produce an increase in blood-sugar levels in both mice and humans, by disrupting the balance of helpful gut bacteria. High blood-sugar levels, in turn, are the telltale sign of glucose intolerance, a condition which can evolve into diabetes and metabolic disease.
There’s no reason to think that so-called “natural” sugar substitutes, such as stevia and monk fruit, would have a different effect. plant-based products might impair glucose tolerance just as much as the chemicals they tested.
If you go out seven years, 10 years, 15 years, 20 years, the cohorts of individuals who are consuming diet sodas have much worse health outcomes,” Diet soda drinkers are 31% more likely to have a clot-based stroke, have a tripled risk of deadly stroke, are 29% more likely to have heart disease, and are 16% to 26% more likely to die from any cause. Women Drinking Two Diet Sodas Per Day Are 50 Percent More Likely to Die from Heart-Related Disease.
Soda consumption in the U.S. has dropped for 13 straight years.
Americans trying to avoid soda increased from 41% in 2002 to 63% in 2014.
Coca Cola shares dropped 3%, and soda sales dropped 4% in the second quarter of 2013. cbsnews.com said “profit ‘ dipped ’ in the latest quarter, and attributed it “ bad weather and challenging economic conditions ”. Where “bad” and “challenging” are both general.
Overall soda volumes fell an estimated 3% in 2013, the ninth straight yearly contraction and more than double the 1.2% decline in 2012.
Diet soda sales dropped 6% in 2013.
Coca-Cola’s annual revenue decreased 38% from 2014 to 2018.
Diet soda sales in the U.S. decreased 7.3% from mid-February to mid-march 2014.
Soda consumption in the U.S. decreased 6% from 2015 to 2016.
Soda consumption fell to an all time low in the U.S. in 2016.
In November 2016, medicalxpress.com said “Sugary drink sales drop nearly 20 percent after multi-faceted campaign ”.
Where the Mouthpiece of the State has put forward a false plausible-deniability excuse and postured as if the wider, ongoing trend I’m documenting here didn’t exist.
In February 2017, Marketing Week said “Coca-Cola preps Diet Coke ‘ push ’ with advertising ‘ shift ’.”
In April 2017, the same month WebMD asked “ ‘ Do ’ Diet Sodas Pose Health Risks’ ? ’ ”, the National Institute of Health wrote of “Sugar- and Artificially Sweetened Beverages and the ‘ Risks ’ of Incident Stroke and Dementia”.
Where they used the general “risks” in the headline, to avoid telling you that, after adjustments for age, sex, education (for analysis of dementia), caloric intake, diet quality, physical activity, and smoking, higher recent and higher cumulative intake of artificially sweetened soft drinks were associated with an ‘ increased ’ risk of ischemic stroke, all-cause dementia, and Alzheimer’s disease dementia.”
Where they’ve used the general “increased” to avoid telling you that the risk of stroke close to tripled, and the risk of Alzheimer’s increased sevenfold.
I listed them in inverted order like that because that’s how the National Institute of Health brazenly had them ranked. There’s a strict rule in journalism in which you list the largest percentages first, and then the others in descending order. The NIH flipped them to spin it as best they could.
Sugar-sweetened beverages were not associated with stroke or dementia which shows how Aspartame’s the deadly key. Not even high-fructose corn syrup can mess you up like Aspartame does.
You can see how WebMD, which poses as an “independent” website, is in fact a wholly-controlled-and-coopted Organ of the State, questioning if Aspartame were bad for you to blunt and defray against the epochal NIH article released at the same time.
In April 2017, Moneyish said “Here’s a scary new reason to stop drinking diet soda”
“New health studies link ‘ sugary drinks ’ to brain damage - and diet sodas in particular to almost tripling stroke ‘ and dementia risk ’.”
Since we’re studying the subject as scholars, we can see how the propaganda Organ “Moneyish” says “almost tripling stroke and dementia risk”, where they wiped out the seven-fold increase in dementia we learned of moments ago.
And they’ve lied bald-fadedly a second time leading with “studies link ‘ sugary drinks ’ to brain damage, when we learned moments ago that the National Institute of Health said the very same month “Sugar-sweetened beverages were not associated with stroke or dementia”.
The culprit is Aspartame, which was hidden behind “sugary drinks” for the credulous-rube masses by ‘Moneyish’, an “Intelligence” organization masquerading as a bunch of innocent businesspeople.
An article from the New York Times from April 2017, said “The study, from the journal Stroke, found that compared with those who did not drink diet soda, people who drank one to six artificially sweetened drinks a week had twice the risk of stroke. There were similar, ‘ although weake r’, associations for dementia risk.”
In April 2017, the NIH said 2.9, or very close to three times he risk, which the journal “Stroke” promptly downgraded to twice the risk. The NIH said “seven times the risk of dementia, and the esteemed journal “Stroke” said “weaker then twice the risk”.
Wild, bald-faced, pathological lying, by the esteemed medical journal. They thought they’d lived past the days of fact-checking, and then I showed up to kick their ass and throw them out of the saloon.
In June 2017, organic consumers.org said “Mounting Evidence Grows Against Diet Soda”.
In June 2017, the trenchantly-named “fool.com” said “The biggest losers, Diet Coke and Diet Pepsi, ‘ may seem like healthy alternatives to their full-sugar sister brands ’, but ‘ changing attitudes ’ has led them to being America’s fastest-declining soda brands at a time when the overall market for sodas in general has ‘declined steeply’.
They’ve flipped it so you are to imagine that Aspartame is healthful, but that the fickle public doesn’t know what’s good for them. Since it’s put forward with the firmness of purpose that goes with complete honesty, some unimaginable subset of wholly-credulous rubes chug it right down. The propagandists know that the subconscious of many or most readers will grasp virtually any straw, no matter how think to remain off the hook of personal responsibility.
In July 2017, foxnews.com said disdainfully “Diet drinks ‘ may ’ cause weight gain, new research ‘ suggests ’ “.
They’ve ended the headline with “suggests” because it’s easy enough to shrug off a suggestion that you find unpalatable, as if someone said “get the pasta”, and you replied “I’d prefer the steak”.
The fact that millions have been addicted to a horrible neurotoxin on the promise that it would make them thin, and that it in fact makes them fat, is one of the more terrible things I’ve ever learned.
In August 2017, Livestrong.com fought the rearguard action and asked “ ‘ Does ’ Soda Increase the Risk of Pancreatic Cancer’ ? ’”
The article is from disgraced generational Satanist blood-doper Lance Armstrong’s “Livestrong” website.
To maintain current programming levels, stop reading immediately, breath through your mouth and affirm “ His heart is a third larger than the average male’s .” That’s from “ ‘ What ’ is Lance Armstrong’s secret’ ? ’, from Science | The Guardian, 2005.
In October 2017, FoodNavigator-USA saluted and said “Coca-Cola blasts ’ meritless’ diet soda lawsuit”.
“As described in the US Right to Know citizen’s petition, these studies suggest linkage or association between use of ‘diet’ sodas and weight gain .”
In December 2017, Grub Street said “ President Trump Reportedly Drinks 12 Diet Cokes Per Day “. Trump is an alcoholic, who no longer drinks alcohol. Aspartame breaks down into Methyl Alcohol in your blood stream, which is in turn broken down into Formaldehyde. So there’s a “dry drunk” effect.
Jeff Miller, Brooklyn, New York, August 3, 2020
If you’d like to be added to this free mailing list, please send me a note at [email protected]
