Studio_caveman

If this is interesting to you, you may also be interested to check out the book The Light Eaters by Zoe Schlanger

I personally try to steer clear of diphenhydramine for anything other than one off purposes just due to the research coming out regarding anticholinergics and possible cognitive decline. It sounds like you’re taking it relatively infrequently, so I’d guess that’s ok. Just linking here for others for visibility as it seems like perhaps not the best long term solution.

https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/common-anticholinergic-drugs-like-benadryl-linked-increased-dementia-risk-201501287667

Is it called SuperCook?

It’s a quote that gets attributed to Socrates showing that the issue of one generation complaining about the following generation is a tradition as old as time itself

https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/63219-the-children-now-love-luxury-they-have-bad-manners-contempt

It’s not really sawdust. Cellulose, which is basically plant fiber, is an FDA approved food additive used in things like shredded cheeses as an anti-caking agent. It is commonly extracted from wood pulp, but it could also be extracted from any plant really. Here’s a brief explainer

https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2014/07/10/329767647/from-mcdonalds-to-organic-valley-youre-probably-eating-wood-pulp

The IARC classified this as a possible carcinogen in their category 2b based on limited evidence of a particular cancer in humans — hepatocellular carcinoma, which is a type of liver cancer. The strength-of-evidence classification in Group 2B is the third highest level out of 4 levels, and it is generally used either when there is limited, but not convincing, evidence for cancer in humans or convincing evidence for cancer in experimental animals, but not both. This classification is primarily intended to inform researchers to encourage further research of aspartame, and it does not make any assertion about the relative risk associated with typical exposure levels. It rather determines whether the substance could be carcinogenic at any dose — even if the required dose far exceeds typical exposure.

Notably, JEFCA, the group responsible for researching and making recommendations on food additives, reviewed the same evidence as the WHO and concluded that the data evaluated indicated no sufficient reason to change the previously established acceptable daily intake (ADI) of 0–40 mg/kg body weight for aspartame. The committee therefore reaffirmed that it is safe for a person to consume within this limit per day. For example, with a can of diet soft drink containing 200 or 300 mg of aspartame, an adult weighing 70kg would need to consume more than 9–14 cans per day to exceed the acceptable daily intake, assuming no other intake from other food sources.

https://www.who.int/news/item/14-07-2023-aspartame-hazard-and-risk-assessment-results-released