Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Kingofaces43 (talk) 00:59, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
In the health section where it states "there is no evidence that retail HFCS products contain harmful compounds or cause diseases.[4]" is at the very least controversial and i think the wording "no evidence" is too definitive. Obviously there is a lot of controversy surrounding HFCS and the metabolic effects fructokinase can have on the body such as the increase in uric acid product by degrading ATP to AMP, the effects on the liver, how it may be associated with obesity, non alcoholic fatty liver disease and so on. Taking a look at the "Fructose" wikipedia page, under cardiometabolic diseases it states "fructose has been associated with increased risk of obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular disorders that are part of metabolic syndrome.[10]" Now obviously HFCS is partly made out of fructose, so i'm wondering why my edit was reverted when i removed "there is no evidence that retail HFCS products contain harmful compounds or cause diseases" when this is such a controversial topic. I still do not believe this statement should be in the article, does anyone object and if so why?
"no evidence" is too definitive for a controversial topic
editIn the health section where it states "there is no evidence that retail HFCS products contain harmful compounds or cause diseases.[4]" is at the very least controversial and i think the wording "no evidence" is too definitive. Obviously there is a lot of controversy surrounding HFCS and the metabolic effects fructokinase can have on the body such as the increase in uric acid product by degrading ATP to AMP, the effects on the liver, how it may be associated with obesity, non alcoholic fatty liver disease and so on. Taking a look at the "Fructose" wikipedia page, under cardiometabolic diseases it states "fructose has been associated with increased risk of obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular disorders that are part of metabolic syndrome.[10]" Now obviously HFCS is partly made out of fructose, so i'm wondering why my edit was reverted when i removed "there is no evidence that retail HFCS products contain harmful compounds or cause diseases" when this is such a controversial topic. I still do not believe this statement should be in the article, does anyone object and if so why?