Supplements

Top Contributors
Re: Supplements

Aspartame has been known to be neuro-toxic for some time - about 15 years ago it was brought to the World Health Organisation as it was apparently causing symptoms of Multiple Sclerosis in children that would not respond to medication .... the cure - stop them drinking 10-15 cans of diet coke per day ....
 
Re: Supplements

The problem is, aspartame can be found in so many different products that it does not take much to be "high consumption". For instance, trying to find squash without it for the u15s on Sunday was close to impossible. Almost all the shelves were full of 'no added sugar' varieties which contain large amounts of this ingredient. Of course, you would expect aspartame in the 'no added sugar' options but the original versions also contain aspartame. I did find one without... Tesco Hi Juice Squash.

E-951 can be found in...
Beverages: Carbonated and non-carbonated soft drinks, fruit drinks, squashes, iced teas and coffees and hot chocolate drinks.
Dairy products: Yoghurts, dairy desserts and fromage frais.
Confectionery: Chewing gum, sweets, chocolate, breath mints.
Table-top sweeteners: Tablets and spoon-for-spoon powders.
Frozen desserts: Ice cream and frozen snacks.
Powdered products: Powdered soft drinks, milkshake mixes, and multivitamin drinks.
Cereals: Cereal mixes, mueslis.
Preserves: Fruit preserves, canned fruits.
Pharmaceuticals: Effervescent tablets, chewable tablets and sachets.

I guess if you consume little of the above, you'll be fine but its the little people we should be worrying about and I think its great that somebody is reviewing the research.
 
Re: Supplements

Absolutely - it is in the majority of products aimed at children who are obviously the most vulnerable group :eek:- Rocks Organic juice is aspartame free as well :)
 
Re: Supplements

I agree that cutting out processed food is always a good idea.

I would still like to see exactly what 'high consumption' actually means.

Food should be consumed for pleasure and health, not fear.
 
Re: Supplements

The FSA, the AFFSA, the EFSA, the SCF have published a lot of info in this country regarding Aspartame AKA Nutrasweet, Spoonful, Canderel and Equal. At the moment the considered safe consumption, here, is (40 mg/kg bw/day); not a lot for a toddler or child.

Some time ago the EPA announced that there is an epidemic of Multiple Sclerosis and Systemic Lupus and they did not know what toxin was causing this to be rampant across the US. Scientists have since found the answer to be Aspartame. Adult patients with methanol toxicity caused by drinking 3-4 Diet Coke or Diet Pepsi per day, have been caused to have MS or Systemic Lupus symptoms. In Systemic Lupus and MS cases triggered by Aspartame, the victims were unaware that Aspartame was the culprit [continued use, in the case of Lupus, can be life threatening]. When use ceases these patients usually lose all or most of their symptoms. Unfortunately the disease cannot be reversed.

The problem is, this figure does not consider the individual, who has individual genetic make up. Side effects are linked to genetic individuality and physical weaknesses and there are more than 92 different health side effects associated with aspartame consumption. Aspartame dissolves into solution and can therefore travel throughout the body and deposit within any tissue. The body digests aspartame, which does not break down within humans.

Forget that Aspartame may trigger, mimic, or cause the following illnesses:
Chronic Fatigue Syndrome
Epstein-Barr
Post-Polio Syndrome
Lyme Disease
Grave’s Disease
Meniere’s Disease
Alzheimer’s Disease
ALS
Epilepsy
Multiple Sclerosis (MS)
EMS
Hypothyroidism
Mercury sensitivity from Amalgam fillings
Fibromyalgia
Lupus
non-Hodgkins
Lymphoma
Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD)

Forget that symptoms include:
irreversible brain damage
birth defects, including mental retardation
peptic ulcers
aspartame addiction and increased craving for sweets
hyperactivity in children
severe depression
aggressive behavior
suicidal tendencies

The eye, ear, neurological, psychological/psychiatric, chest, gastrointestinal, skin, allergies, endocrine and metabolic reactions and side effects make consuming Aspartame a game of Russian Roulette. A game I decline to play! Apart from above, a component converts to Formaldehyde and forward to Formic Acid in temperatures above 30 degrees Celsius. Not something I would like to be consuming at all and certainly not something I would consider feeding to the people in my care!
 
Re: Supplements

Interesting stuff.

I have a number of questions on this (not that I am trying to defend the safety of the product, I just like to have all the facts).

What do the meta-studies say (if there are any)?
Have you got a link to that US study?
What studies link the above health issues to Aspartame?
How much Aspartame is in a diet coke?
I was under the impression the body can break down Aspartame except in small babies. Is this wrong?
How many cases of the above issues can be directly linked to Aspartame?

All I'm saying is, while we want to approach any 'non-natural non-whole food' option with care, we don't want to be scaring people when there is, as far as I know, no solid evidence.

I'm open to debate of course :)
 
Re: Supplements

Unlike saccharin, the body cannot break down aspartame

I don't have any links at hand but if you are intersted have a look at the following [for starters :D]:

NutraSweet Corporation. A subsidiary of Monsanto.
Monsanto funds the American Diabetics Association, the American Dietetic Association, Congress and the Conference of the American College of Physicians.

World Environmental Confernence and the Multiple Sclerosis Foundation
F.D.A. Issuing for collusion with Monsanto

Chemistry and Industry, 21 October 1996, p. 776

Olney J. W. et al, 'Increasing brain tumor rates: is there a link to aspartame?', Journal of Neuropathology and Experimental Neurology, Vol. 55, No 11, November 1996

Two year toxicity study in the Rat: Final Report and Appendix, Hazelton Laboratories study number P-T 838H71, Submitted to the FDA 25 January 1973, Master File numbers E-33 and E-34

Shephard S. E. et al, 'Mutagenic activity of peptides and the artificial sweetener aspartame after nitrosation', Food and Chemical Toxicology, 1993, Vol. 31, pp. 323-329

FDA Establishment Investigation Report on Searle Laboratories, to Richard Ronk, Bureau of Foods, by J. Bressler et al, 7 Aug 1977, p. 2

A second Ramazzini bioassay on aspartame “Lifespan Exposure to Low Doses of Aspartame Beginning During Prenatal Life Increases Cancer Effects in Rats” was published in the September 2007 issue of Environmental Health Perspectives [EHP 115:1293–1297; Soffritti et al]. The issue also includes a Science Selections feature story on the Ramazzini project [EHP 115:A460] .

IT: Il secondo studio sull'aspartame della Fondazione Europea Ramazzini (FER) conferma la cancerogenicità dell'aspartame. I risultati saranno presentati il 23 aprile a New York, al Mount Sinai Medical School.
L'aspartame è un dolcificante artificiale consumato nel mondo da oltre 200 milioni di persone. E' utilizzato in oltre 6.000 prodotti, fra i quali bevande light, gomme da masticare, dolciumi, caramelle, yogurt, farmaci, in particolare sciroppi e antibiotici per bambini. Nel 2005, la Fondazione Europea Ramazzini ha pubblicato importanti dati sperimentali che dimostravano la cancerogenicità dell'aspartame. Venne dimostrato sperimentalmente per la prima volta che l'aspartame è un agente cancerogeno in grado di indurre vari tipi di tumori maligni, anche a dosi tutt'oggi ammesse per l'alimentazione umana.

Fin dal momento della percezione della cancerogencità dell'aspartame, la FER avviò un secondo studio, somministrando aspartame a basse dosi nel cibo ai ratti a partire della vita fetale.

In anteprima mondiale un servizio del TG2 ha anticipato che la Fondazione Europea Ramazzini presenterà i risultati del secondo studio nei prossimi giorni a New York, al Mount Sinai Medical School of Medicine, dove il Direttore Scientifico Dottor Soffritti riceverà il Premio Selikoff per i suoi studi sull'aspartame.
 
Re: Supplements

Sorry, thought we all could, what with sans frontiere :laugh:

"A second study conducted by the European Ramazzini Foundation (ERF) confirms the carcinogenicity of aspartame. The results of this study will be presented April 23, 2007 at the Mount Sinai Medical School of New York, where ERF Scientific Director Morando Soffritti will receive the third Irving J. Selikoff Award. [vedi testo completo per l'italiano]

Aspartame is an artificial sweetener consumed by hundreds of millions of people worldwide. It is used in over 6,000 diet products including soft drinks, chewing gum, candy, desserts, yogurt as well as in pharmaceuticals, in particular, syrups and antibiotics for children. In 2005, the European Ramazzini Foundation published important experimental data demonstrating the carcinogenicity of aspartame. These data demonstrated for the first time that aspartame is a carcinogenic agent, inducing various types of malignant tumors in rats, even at dose levels currently considered acceptable for humans.

As soon as carcinogenic effects were perceived during this first study, the ERF began a second long term experiment, administering aspartame at low doses in feed to rats beginning during fetal life.

In a world exclusive, Italian news station TG2 announced on April 13th that the European Ramazzini Foundation will present the results of this second study at the Mount Sinai School of Medicine at the end of April when Scientific Director Dr. Morando Soffritti will receive the third Irving J. Selikoff Award."
 
Re: Supplements

Good points well made. Just to act as devils advocate I give you 3 studies which show no ill effects:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9734727?dopt=Abstract
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3657889?dopt=Abstract
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9230890?dopt=Abstract

Sadly the last one has no abstract, but you get the idea: The evidence is inconclusive.

I can't find anything at the moment, but I'm 90% sure that it breaks down in the body you know. I think it becomes Phenylalanine in the body which is why diet coke says "contains a source of Phenylalanine" on the bottle.
 
Re: Supplements

Oh by the way, just to reiterate, I don't recommend any level of aspartame in the diet, but I also don't think the odd diet coke (or similar) will kill you. Just keep it occasional (2-3 cans a week perhaps).
 
Re: Supplements

Interesting that all these articles derive from the National Institutes of Health. Remember my second reference?

"In 1991, the National Institutes of Health listed 167 symptoms and reasons to avoid the use of aspartame but today it is a multi-million dollar business that contributes to the degeneration of the human population, as well as the deliberate suppression of overall intelligence, short-term memory and the added contribution as a carcinogenic environmental co-factor. The FDA and the Centers for Disease Control continue to receive a stream of complaints from the population about aspartame. It is the only chemical warfare weapon available in mass quantities (should keep the cone-heads happy) on the grocery shelf and promoted in the media. It has also been indicated that women with an intolerance for phenylalinine, one of the compoents of aspartame, may give birth to infants with as much as a 15% drop in intelligence level if they habitually consume products containing this dangerous substance.

FAA Collusion in Suppression of Facts on Aspartame

The March 1995 issue of The Pacific Flyer published a pro-aspartame article in which it stated, "the Federal Aviation Administration conducted its own cognitive research and, according to experts, found no contraindications that would prevent pilots, or anyone, from ingesting aspartame." This flies in the face of consistent reports from pilots who maintain they have suffered severe and dangerous repercussions in the air after drinking soft drinks containing aspartame. Virtually every time, symptoms disappeared when aspartame-laced drinks were discontinued. Over 600 pilots have reported this problem.

FDA "Findings" on Aspartame Remain Based on Faked Tests

So, the faked Searle tests remain. The FDA bases its findings on the faked Searle tests, and the Journal of the American Medical Association, examining the FDA findings, based on the faked Searle tests, announced "the consumption of aspartame poses no health risk for most people." Searle officials argue that the use of aspartame as an artificial sweetener "has been officially approved not only by the FDA, but by foreign regulatory agencies and the World Health Organization" - based on Searle-sponsored aspartame research, not independently conducted tests."

Independent research is the key:

The Ecologist September October 1998 (This edition was trashed by the printing office after threats from Monsanto)
Revolving Doors: Monsanto and the Regulators
by Jennifer Ferrara
Traditionally, key figures at the FDA in particular have either held important positions at Monsanto, or are destined to do so in the future. Is it surprising therefore that Monsanto gets clearance for its often dangerous products? ...

The first government body to establish guidelines for biotechnology research was the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in 1976. Since the NIH is an advisory and not a regulatory body, it could formulate guidelines, but it had no power to enforce them. From the beginning, the NIH guidelines relied on the scientific community's and industry's self-regulation, starting a trend that continues today...

Unfortunately, money talks!
 
Re: Supplements

Those studies are from MIT, Duke University and Saint Louis University School of Public Health. Are they something to do with the NIH?

Either way, I like what they say in this study http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8939194 (you cited it earlier):

"Evidence potentially implicating aspartame includes

an early animal study revealing an exceedingly high incidence of brain tumors in aspartame-fed rats compared to no brain tumors in concurrent controls
the recent finding that the aspartame molecule has mutagenic potential
Aspartame was introduced into US food and beverage markets several years prior to the sharp increase in brain tumor incidence and malignancy.

We conclude that there is need for reassessing the carcinogenic potential of aspartame."

They key point for me is there is a need to reassess. Not to use emotive terms like poison.

As rational scientists we must be careful how we frame our terms and let our political views effect our recommendations.
 
Re: Supplements

Which all means I agree we all need to exercise caution when it comes to any processed food.
 
Re: Supplements

so whilst 're-assessment' takes place surely one would recommend to avoid it?? If there is a potential carcinogenic link surely it would be good practice not to ingest it - it has no nutritional value and is not necessary in our diet so why bother - it clearly adds to the toxic load unnecessarily - I don't think a political view would make me recommend avoiding it but a common sense view would .....
 
Re: Supplements

I agree. I think we are looking at the same opinion from slightly different angles here.

If we are talking common sense, most people are not going to give up ingesting it. I applaud anyone who does though.
 
Re: Supplements

Much cleverer people than I use the term 'poison', including the US Environmental Protection Agency who are concerned that heavy users of aspartame-containing products consume as much as 32 times the EPA limit!

As a scientist, I have no political views, I deal in facts; hidden or otherwise ;)

The reason most people are not going to give up ingesting aspartame is because they do not have the facts.
 
Re: Supplements

Have to agree with Liz there - I think if most people knew the facts / controversy surrounding it they would use common sense and choose not to have it - maybe not to an extreme extent - but at least be more aware of it as an ingredient - similar to the old blue Smarties :laugh:
 
Re: Supplements

Absolutely! Its like smoking; people know it can kill them but they still smoke. The difference is... they know!

Having said that, I know many people from my parents' generation, who started smoking in the 30s, 40s and 50s, who would not have done so had they known.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top