Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
T
the_clockwork
Guest
I drink it, not a lot..
Will I die?
Will I die?
T
the_clockwork
Guest
I hear it is toxic at high levels.. what exactly is a high level? how much is in a diet soda?
worrying is bad for you too.
Dont worry about it.
actually, I dont know. I cut it out for 3 years and never noticed anything. I never felt healthier and now I drink diet soda again, and I try not to worry about it. I think that as long as you are getting enough water each day that you should be able to drink a couple a day and not worry about it.
most everything is toxic at high levels ya know
maybe someone will google it or something and post it, i dunno
Dont worry about it.
actually, I dont know. I cut it out for 3 years and never noticed anything. I never felt healthier and now I drink diet soda again, and I try not to worry about it. I think that as long as you are getting enough water each day that you should be able to drink a couple a day and not worry about it.
most everything is toxic at high levels ya know
maybe someone will google it or something and post it, i dunno
T
the_clockwork
Guest
jnevin said:
holy shit, that sounds painful. what did you do with it? ebay? or put it back in?
T
the_clockwork
Guest
it was only 10% b/c I like you. It adds some character to your name!!
ya I usually eat the lungs of 8 year old Korean girls after I lure them over with bubble gum and text messaging.
ya I usually eat the lungs of 8 year old Korean girls after I lure them over with bubble gum and text messaging.
the_clockwork said:
I'll keep my fingers crossed
patsfan1379
New member
I 
grilled esophogus.
grilled esophogus.
T
the_clockwork
Guest
you must have the 10 mile Dell widescreen? I only got the 7.5 mile one.
Ya I've found Thailand whores (around the age of 3-4) have terrific tasting bladders when cooked on a bed of rice and served with duck sauce
Ya I've found Thailand whores (around the age of 3-4) have terrific tasting bladders when cooked on a bed of rice and served with duck sauce
T
the_clockwork
Guest
so I'm not going to die?
calveless wonder
New member
i think certain people are alergic to it.........
there's alot of debates on it.
i got scared and stopped using crystal light because of it...i used to drink like a gallon of diluted crystal light ice tea a day since water was so bland...now i just drink water and maybe ocne a week do the crystal light thing.
there's alot of debates on it.
i got scared and stopped using crystal light because of it...i used to drink like a gallon of diluted crystal light ice tea a day since water was so bland...now i just drink water and maybe ocne a week do the crystal light thing.
S
ShowKidd
Guest
according to the research i have done on it, it is a sweetener that is 200 times sweeter than sugar and when you consume it, it gathers behind the retina in the eye and transforms into a formaldehyde and them fromic acid in they eys wich then cause blindness over a period of time by the swelling of the optic nerve and degeneration of ganglion cells in the retina, and will affect some people worse than other depending on genetics. i also believe that the US may be the last country to still use it along with Hydrogenated oil
javaguru
Banned
People worried about formaldehyde should stop drinking orange juice, you get more from a glass of orange juice than a diet soda, and they do not want to know what happens when they consume an alcoholic beverage. 
@ juicers and drinkers being worried about health effects of aspartame.....
@ juicers and drinkers being worried about health effects of aspartame.....
Aspartame is made up of just two amino acids, phenylalanine and aspartic now please tell me how that can be toxic or cause cancer? I am sure if you are mega dosing I might be possible for some negative side effects to occur like anything but the average consumer I highly doubt would ever have any problems with it.
T
the_clockwork
Guest
superqt4u2nv said:
I eat it by the spoonful
I also inject it into my veins.
I also snort it.
blueta2
New member
Aspartame is made by Monsanto, a nice "family run" CHEMICAL company.
If you do some research, you can see the #'s of cancer and auto immune illness rose at the onset of artificial sweeteners.
Aspartame is BANNED in Japan. All their diet drinks are made with Stevia (a non chemical).While stevia was being grown and enjoyed in such countries as China, Japan, Brazil, Israel, Malaysia, and even Germany, it disappeared completely from the US marketplace until 1994. Despite the FDA’s opposition, passage of the Dietary Supplement Health & Education Act allowed stevia to reenter the US market as a food supplement. Companies which market stevia products are prohibited from making the slightest implication that stevia has sweetening qualities. To do so is to risk stevia being relabeled as an unsafe food additive and to once again be banned entirely from the U.S. market.
To further protect the interests of Monsanto, and to continue the poisoning of the American public, the FDA would ultimately resort to strategies frighteningly reminiscent of tactics practiced in Nazi Germany. Recently, the FDA placed an embargo on shipments of stevia to the small Stevita Company of Arlington, Texas. In a letter to Stevita dated May 19, 1998 the FDA further demanded that Stevita destroy a warehouse full of ‘cookbooks, literature, and other publications’ and promised to be on hand to ‘witness the destruction’ of the offending materials. In a later development, the FDA asked the Stevita Company to recall the more than 6,500 books already in distribution to stores, and private individuals for the purpose of destroying these, as well
What is Aspartame?
Researchers at G.D. Searle pharmaceutical company were looking for an ulcer drug when they accidentally stumbled upon a white, crystalline powder that was 180 times sweeter than sugar. This man made synthetic compound consisted of two isolated amino acids, phenylalanine and aspartic acid chemically bonded by methanol (wood alcohol.) Searle dubbed the new compound aspartame and was relentless in gaining approval for its use as a food additive, despite the dangers.
Phenylalanine breaks down into diketopiperazine, a brain tumor agent.Ê Rats in original laboratory studies developed astrocytoma brain tumors.Ê Elevated levels of phenylalanine also cause changes in brain chemistry which may account for brain/mood symptoms such as seizures, mania, and severe depression.(2) Other specific types of reactions which were published in the Journal of Applied Nutrition in 1988 included: extreme irritability, severe anxiety attacks, marked personality changes, recent severe insomnia, and severe aggravation of phobias.(3)
Aspartic acid is a neurotransmitter, one of a class of chemicals manufactured and used by the brain. It is believed by some experts that the aspartic acid in aspartame causes brain lesions by literally exciting brain cells to death.(4) Aspartic acid has caused brain lesions in experimental animals.Ê
In nature, methyl alcohol (or methanol) occurs in combination with ethyl alcohol, its antidote. Only in aspartame, does methyl alcohol appear alone. Once ingested, methanol converts to formaldehyde, which not surprisingly, affects the brain. It is then further converted to formic acid (ant sting poison) which causes metabolic acidosis. Absorption of methanol is hastened when aspartame has broken down, as it does when it is heated, (added to hot beverages or baked goods) or decomposes during prolonged storage. Methyl alcohol is specifically toxic to the optic nerve and has been known to cause blindness.(5)
There are 32 breakdown products from aspartame that we know of. These include: methanol, formaldehyde, formic acid, epinephrine, phenylethylamine, phenypyruvate, phenylactic acid,Êdiketopiperazine, aspartylphenylalanine, beta aspartame, tyrosine, L-Dopa, dopamine, and norepinephrine
If you do some research, you can see the #'s of cancer and auto immune illness rose at the onset of artificial sweeteners.
Aspartame is BANNED in Japan. All their diet drinks are made with Stevia (a non chemical).While stevia was being grown and enjoyed in such countries as China, Japan, Brazil, Israel, Malaysia, and even Germany, it disappeared completely from the US marketplace until 1994. Despite the FDA’s opposition, passage of the Dietary Supplement Health & Education Act allowed stevia to reenter the US market as a food supplement. Companies which market stevia products are prohibited from making the slightest implication that stevia has sweetening qualities. To do so is to risk stevia being relabeled as an unsafe food additive and to once again be banned entirely from the U.S. market.
To further protect the interests of Monsanto, and to continue the poisoning of the American public, the FDA would ultimately resort to strategies frighteningly reminiscent of tactics practiced in Nazi Germany. Recently, the FDA placed an embargo on shipments of stevia to the small Stevita Company of Arlington, Texas. In a letter to Stevita dated May 19, 1998 the FDA further demanded that Stevita destroy a warehouse full of ‘cookbooks, literature, and other publications’ and promised to be on hand to ‘witness the destruction’ of the offending materials. In a later development, the FDA asked the Stevita Company to recall the more than 6,500 books already in distribution to stores, and private individuals for the purpose of destroying these, as well
What is Aspartame?
Researchers at G.D. Searle pharmaceutical company were looking for an ulcer drug when they accidentally stumbled upon a white, crystalline powder that was 180 times sweeter than sugar. This man made synthetic compound consisted of two isolated amino acids, phenylalanine and aspartic acid chemically bonded by methanol (wood alcohol.) Searle dubbed the new compound aspartame and was relentless in gaining approval for its use as a food additive, despite the dangers.
Phenylalanine breaks down into diketopiperazine, a brain tumor agent.Ê Rats in original laboratory studies developed astrocytoma brain tumors.Ê Elevated levels of phenylalanine also cause changes in brain chemistry which may account for brain/mood symptoms such as seizures, mania, and severe depression.(2) Other specific types of reactions which were published in the Journal of Applied Nutrition in 1988 included: extreme irritability, severe anxiety attacks, marked personality changes, recent severe insomnia, and severe aggravation of phobias.(3)
Aspartic acid is a neurotransmitter, one of a class of chemicals manufactured and used by the brain. It is believed by some experts that the aspartic acid in aspartame causes brain lesions by literally exciting brain cells to death.(4) Aspartic acid has caused brain lesions in experimental animals.Ê
In nature, methyl alcohol (or methanol) occurs in combination with ethyl alcohol, its antidote. Only in aspartame, does methyl alcohol appear alone. Once ingested, methanol converts to formaldehyde, which not surprisingly, affects the brain. It is then further converted to formic acid (ant sting poison) which causes metabolic acidosis. Absorption of methanol is hastened when aspartame has broken down, as it does when it is heated, (added to hot beverages or baked goods) or decomposes during prolonged storage. Methyl alcohol is specifically toxic to the optic nerve and has been known to cause blindness.(5)
There are 32 breakdown products from aspartame that we know of. These include: methanol, formaldehyde, formic acid, epinephrine, phenylethylamine, phenypyruvate, phenylactic acid,Êdiketopiperazine, aspartylphenylalanine, beta aspartame, tyrosine, L-Dopa, dopamine, and norepinephrine
T
the_clockwork
Guest
blueta2 said:
man are you are chemist? you didn't have to type all that out for me, I could have just googled it myself
Who did this study?blueta2 said:
T
the_clockwork
Guest
superqt4u2nv said:
I am curious as well. I would like to see a study directly relating aspartame consumption to the rise in cancer. Cancer is on the rise throughout the world and has been every year. Just because a new compound was released doesn't mean Aspartame was the reason behind this. Has there been a decline in Japan now that it is banned?
javaguru
Banned
Years ago, the head of the FDA went on record saying that table sugar would not have been approved by the FDA based on what is known about its effect on human health. Sucrose, an "all natural" product. I know several people who gave up diet beverages for sugary ones over unfounded fears and very bad science which is sponsored by teh sugar industry.
http://www.aspartame.net/
The following article appeared on the website of TIME magazine (TIME.com) on 8 March 1999
A Web of Deceit: Online advice from TIME health columnist Christine Gorman.
Heard the one about the common shampoo ingredient that causes cancer? Or how about the epidemic of blindness among toddlers who accidentally get waterproof sunscreen in their eyes? These absurd fictions used to be the stock-in-trade of ninth-graders bent on frightening the younger kids. But now such tall tales are appearing on the Internet, and many adults are taking them seriously.
Consider the latest electronic health scare: about the artificial sweetener aspartame, which is found in everything from Equal to diet Coke. A widely disseminated e-mail by a "Nancy Markle" links aspartame to Alzheimer's, Gulf War syndrome, lupus, multiple sclerosis and seizures. Right away, the list warrants skepticism. Just as no single chemical cures everything, none causes everything.
In this and similar cases, all the Nancy Markles of the world have to do to fabricate a health rumor is post it in some Usenet news groups and let ordinary folks, who may already distrust artificial products, forward it to all their friends and e-mail pals. I received several copies last week, as have many doctors and health organizations.
When I searched Altavista for aspartame AND brain AND seizure AND sclerosis, I learned that Markle's message is almost identical to an antiaspartame screed first penned under a different name in 1995. None of the specific allegations pans out, however. Among the more outrageous claims:
Aspartame leads to "methanol toxicity". Not even close. Trace amounts of methanol exist naturally in many fruits and vegetables and a tiny amount is released whenever the body digests aspartame. But there's four times more methanol in a glass of tomato juice than in a can of aspartame-sweetened soda, and our bodies have no trouble handling such a small amount.
Aspartame triggers headaches. Wrong again, says Susan Shiffman, a medical psychologist at Duke University who conducted a double-blind placebo-controlled trial of 40 "aspartame sensitive" people. A little probing often revealed the real trouble. One woman, who often ate peanuts with her diet soda, was allergic to peanuts. Another subject drank too much caffeine.
Aspartame is responsible for the recent uptick in brain-cancer rates. So how do you explain that the trend dates back to 1973, eight years before aspartame was approved in the U.S.?
Curiously, Markle didn't warn against aspartame's single known health risk. Folks with an uncommon genetic disorder called phenylketonuria shouldn't consume the sweetener because they cannot metabolize one of its ingredients.
Before you decide to believe or, worse, forward an e-mail with serious health claims, do a little checking. Start on the Web with urbanlegends.about.com which catalogues the more persistent rumors. Then go to reliable health sites, like www.mayohealth.org (for general health), www.medhelp.org (especially good for cardiology), www.oncolink.org or www.cancernet.nci.nih.gov (for cancer) or www.navigator.tufts.edu (for nutrition). Otherwise, you might get caught in a web of confusion.
To go to the online archive of TIME magazine click on the link: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/archives
http://www.aspartame.net/
The following article appeared on the website of TIME magazine (TIME.com) on 8 March 1999
A Web of Deceit: Online advice from TIME health columnist Christine Gorman.
Heard the one about the common shampoo ingredient that causes cancer? Or how about the epidemic of blindness among toddlers who accidentally get waterproof sunscreen in their eyes? These absurd fictions used to be the stock-in-trade of ninth-graders bent on frightening the younger kids. But now such tall tales are appearing on the Internet, and many adults are taking them seriously.
Consider the latest electronic health scare: about the artificial sweetener aspartame, which is found in everything from Equal to diet Coke. A widely disseminated e-mail by a "Nancy Markle" links aspartame to Alzheimer's, Gulf War syndrome, lupus, multiple sclerosis and seizures. Right away, the list warrants skepticism. Just as no single chemical cures everything, none causes everything.
In this and similar cases, all the Nancy Markles of the world have to do to fabricate a health rumor is post it in some Usenet news groups and let ordinary folks, who may already distrust artificial products, forward it to all their friends and e-mail pals. I received several copies last week, as have many doctors and health organizations.
When I searched Altavista for aspartame AND brain AND seizure AND sclerosis, I learned that Markle's message is almost identical to an antiaspartame screed first penned under a different name in 1995. None of the specific allegations pans out, however. Among the more outrageous claims:
Aspartame leads to "methanol toxicity". Not even close. Trace amounts of methanol exist naturally in many fruits and vegetables and a tiny amount is released whenever the body digests aspartame. But there's four times more methanol in a glass of tomato juice than in a can of aspartame-sweetened soda, and our bodies have no trouble handling such a small amount.
Aspartame triggers headaches. Wrong again, says Susan Shiffman, a medical psychologist at Duke University who conducted a double-blind placebo-controlled trial of 40 "aspartame sensitive" people. A little probing often revealed the real trouble. One woman, who often ate peanuts with her diet soda, was allergic to peanuts. Another subject drank too much caffeine.
Aspartame is responsible for the recent uptick in brain-cancer rates. So how do you explain that the trend dates back to 1973, eight years before aspartame was approved in the U.S.?
Curiously, Markle didn't warn against aspartame's single known health risk. Folks with an uncommon genetic disorder called phenylketonuria shouldn't consume the sweetener because they cannot metabolize one of its ingredients.
Before you decide to believe or, worse, forward an e-mail with serious health claims, do a little checking. Start on the Web with urbanlegends.about.com which catalogues the more persistent rumors. Then go to reliable health sites, like www.mayohealth.org (for general health), www.medhelp.org (especially good for cardiology), www.oncolink.org or www.cancernet.nci.nih.gov (for cancer) or www.navigator.tufts.edu (for nutrition). Otherwise, you might get caught in a web of confusion.
To go to the online archive of TIME magazine click on the link: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/archives
blueta2
New member
the_clockwork said:
I never said it was the reason and there are no known studies to conclude that, but to many researchers it's suspicious.
The common factor here is there are some people that are at risk when consuming it.
There have been tons of test done on Aspartame, most funded by Monsanto.
Listen, it's a personal choice. I personally would not want to cosume a potential harmful substance.
I have lupus and watch everything that I consume.
Seriously seems like everything can cause cancer IMO like most anything there has to be a predisposition in your gene pool to cancer. Then add in factors zwy and you raise your chances.the_clockwork said:
javaguru
Banned
the_clockwork said:
Aspartame is the methyl ester of the dipeptide of the natural amino acids L-aspartic acid and L-phenylalanine. Under strongly acidic or alkaline conditions, aspartame first generates methanol by hydrolysis. Under more severe conditions, the peptide bonds are also hydrolyzed, resulting in the free amino acids. It is a nonpolar molecule.
David J. Ager, David P. Pantaleone, Scott A. Henderson, Alan R. Katritzky, Indra Prakash, D. Eric Walters (1998). "Commercial, Synthetic Nonnutritive Sweeteners". Angewandte Chemie International Edition 37 (13-24): 1802-1817. DOI:10.1002/(SICI)1521-3773(19980803)37:13/14%3C1802::AID-ANIE1802%3E3.0.CO;2-9.
"Aspartame is responsible for the recent uptick in brain-cancer rates. So how do you explain that the trend dates back to 1973, eight years before aspartame was approved in the U.S.?"
I remember this study when it came out. It was nothing more than epidemiology study that found increased cancer rates in the US. Ironically, it also showed a dramatic decline in the 1990's when aspartame was in more products than ever before. Wouldn't it be more logical to conclude aspartame prevents brain cancer? Causally one might as well conclude that hair bands cause brain cancer.
blueta2
New member
Rumsfeld to the Rescue
But Searle had a dynamic CEO named Don Rumsfeld who promised that he would get it on the market. Four months after the revocation of Searle’s petition, he became Reagan’s Secretary of Defense. The day after the inauguration, a new FDA Commissioner, Arthur Hayes, was appointed; and he did the dirty deed that no previous Commissioner would stoop to doing when he approved aspartame over the objections of his own Public Board of Inquiry.
Several scientists, who had been overruled when aspartame was approved, resigned in protest. They even alleged that Searle had fabricated results in the testing submitted.
Later, the FDA Commissioner scurried out of his position while under a conflict-of-interest investigation to become a consultant to Searle’s public-relations agency. He has not said a peep since. Who ever heard of a public-relations guy who wouldn’t talk? Hey, there, Mr. Government Man, we’ll make you rich if you bless our plan!
By now the FDA was truly turned, becoming in effect Monsanto’s Branch Office in Washington, D.C. Today, the Agency gets more than half of its money from the industries it regulates, serving them instead of us. Said the late FDA toxicologist, Dr. Adrian Gross, in his congressional testimony, "the cancer causing potential of aspartame is a matter established way beyond any reasonable doubt.” Yet the FDA ignored its own scientist. If the FDA itself elects to violate the law, then who is left to protect the health of the public?
But Searle had a dynamic CEO named Don Rumsfeld who promised that he would get it on the market. Four months after the revocation of Searle’s petition, he became Reagan’s Secretary of Defense. The day after the inauguration, a new FDA Commissioner, Arthur Hayes, was appointed; and he did the dirty deed that no previous Commissioner would stoop to doing when he approved aspartame over the objections of his own Public Board of Inquiry.
Several scientists, who had been overruled when aspartame was approved, resigned in protest. They even alleged that Searle had fabricated results in the testing submitted.
Later, the FDA Commissioner scurried out of his position while under a conflict-of-interest investigation to become a consultant to Searle’s public-relations agency. He has not said a peep since. Who ever heard of a public-relations guy who wouldn’t talk? Hey, there, Mr. Government Man, we’ll make you rich if you bless our plan!
By now the FDA was truly turned, becoming in effect Monsanto’s Branch Office in Washington, D.C. Today, the Agency gets more than half of its money from the industries it regulates, serving them instead of us. Said the late FDA toxicologist, Dr. Adrian Gross, in his congressional testimony, "the cancer causing potential of aspartame is a matter established way beyond any reasonable doubt.” Yet the FDA ignored its own scientist. If the FDA itself elects to violate the law, then who is left to protect the health of the public?
blueta2 said:
Please explain why it is legal in Canada then? We are not ruled by the FDA and a great number of supplements etc that are legal in the US are not here.
javaguru
Banned
Aspartame and its effects on health
The sweetener has been demonised unfairly in sections of the press and several websites
The European population of 375 million consumes about 2000 tonnes annually of aspartame (NutraSweet, Canderel) an artificial sweetener, which contains two amino acids-aspartic acid and phenylalanine.(1) It is 180-200 times sweeter than sucrose, and almost half a million extra tonnes of sugar would therefore be needed to generate the same sweetness. Was the world screaming for all this sweetness, and what has it done to us? Anyone searching the web on aspartame, launched in 1981 by Monsanto, the manufacturer of NutraSweet, will find a vast catalogue of frightening personal accounts attributing multiple health disasters to exposure to aspartame.(1) Although no orchestrated public outcry about aspartame has taken place, much sensationalist journalism has been published mostly on websites . In contrast, aspartame marketing implies that it embodies a healthy way of life and avoids obesity. Are these claims of hazards and benefits supported by evidence?
Evidence does not support links between aspartame and cancer, hair loss, depression, dementia, behavioural disturbances, or any of the other conditions appearing in websites. Agencies such as the Food Standards Agency, European Food Standards Authority, and the Food and Drug Administration have a duty to monitor relations between foodstuffs and health and to commission research when reasonable doubt emerges. Aspartame's safety was convincing to the European Scientific Committee on Food in 1988,(2) but proving negatives is difficult, and it is even harder to persuade vocal sectors of the public whose opinions are fuelled more by anecdote than by evidence. The Food Standards Agency takes public concerns very seriously and thus pressed the European Scientific Committee on Food to conduct a further review, encompassing over 500 reports, in 2002. It concluded from biochemical, clinical, and behavioural research that the acceptable daily intake of 40 mg/kg/day of aspartame remained entirely safe-except for people with phenylketonuria.(3)
Does aspartame embody a healthy way of life and avoid obesity? In most Western countries sugar provides around 10% of total calories (about 200 kcal (837 kJ), or 50 g daily). If this were entirely replaced by a non-nutritive, non-caloric sweetener such as aspartame then obesity could indeed be vanquished-assuming these calories are not replaced due to stimulation of appetite. We eat about 5 g aspartame annually, equivalent to another kg of sucrose, whose 4000 kcal (16 740 kJ) could generate 0.5 kg gain in weight. But evidence that aspartame prevents weight gain or obesity is generally inconclusive,(4, 5) although in children, the consumption of sugar sweetened soft drinks relates notably to increasing obesity, whereas increasing "diet" drinks or fruit juice is inversely related to weight gain.(6)
Dietary recommendations for the management of diabetes conclude that up to 10% of total energy can safely come from sugars but that artificial sweeteners may help avoid weight gain.(7, 8). When sugar is consumed as a sweetener it is chemically identical with the sugar found in fruits, which we are promoting keenly, and its metabolic effects are no different if consumed in reasonable amounts even by people with diabetes.(8) Most evidence points to fat as the main dietary culprit in obesity, and one counterargument to the use of artificial sweetener instead of sugar includes evidence that high sugar diets tend to be lower in fat.(9) Displacing saturated fat would offer particular advantages by reducing risk of heart disease.(10) Carried to extremes, large amounts of sucrose will increase triglycerides, a key component of the metabolic syndrome, and turn the tables back towards promoting heart disease. Its fructose component is responsible for this hazard.(11)
Artificial sweeteners are promoted to prevent dental caries, as sugars form the main substrate for mouth bacteria. However, avoiding sugar does not reduce dental caries dramatically in regions with high levels of caries.(3) The dominant factors are fluoride deficiency and prolonged exposure to sugar between meals. If children consume sweetened drinks between meals or suck on sweet foods, resulting in prolonged periods of exposure to sugar, then replacing the sugar with artificial sweeteners in such products has some rationale. Children exposed to heavily sweetened foods develop a "sweet palate," but those who take the plunge and take unsweetened drinks may prefer them, which seems a better solution.(12)
Why has aspartame been demonised by the world's press and countless websites? Monsanto was in the public eye, accused of enthusiastic dissemination of genetically modified plants and foods. People resent interference with foods, and synthetic food components are regarded with suspicion. However, aspartame comprises just two amino acids (aspartic acid and phenylalanine). Could this present a risk? Phenylalanine is a natural amino acid, and is toxic only in patients who have phenylketonuria.
Food labelling of sweetener is contentious. Six artificial sweeteners are permitted in Europe, each with an acceptable daily intake. Consumers cannot be expected to calculate cumulative daily intakes of each. Instead, manufacturers are encouraged to use cocktails of sweeteners so it becomes difficult for anyone to reach the acceptable daily intake of any sweetener individually-adults need at least 10 cans of a drink fully sweetened with aspartame alone to reach the acceptable daily intake of 40 mg/kg/day. When using combinations of sweeteners, even high level consumers rarely exceed 10 mg/day. Intakes over 1g/day were needed to alter brain neurotransmitters and provoke seizures in monkeys, and randomised controlled trials of high doses in humans have not shown any behavioural or other effects.(13, 14) The cynical conclusion is that there is probably too much sweetness and never enough light, and the public probably needs protection against misleading websites.
Michael E J Lean, Professor
Division of Developmental Medicine, University of Glasgow, Royal Infirmary, Queen Elizabeth Building, Glasgow G31 2ER
Catherine R Hankey, Lecturer, University Department of Human Nutrition
Division of Developmental Medicine, University of Glasgow, Royal Infirmary, Queen Elizabeth Building, Glasgow G31 2ER
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Competing interests: None declared.
References
1. AspartameInformation Center. www.aspartame.org
2. European Commission. Health and Consumer Protection Directorate-General, Scientific Committee on Food. Opinion of the scientific committee on food: update on the safety of aspartame. SCF, 10 December 2002.
3. Navia JM. Carbohydrates and dental health. Amer J Clin Nutr 1994;59: 719-27.
4. Tordoff MG, Alleva AM. Effect of drinking soda sweetened with aspartame or high fructose corn syrup on food intake and body weight. Amer J Clin Nutr 1990;51: 963-9.
5. Drewnowski A. Review: intense sweeteners and energy density of foods: implications for weight control. Eur J Clin Nutr 1999;53: 757-63.
6. Ludwig DS, Peterson, Gortmaker SL. Relation between consumption of sugar sweetened drinks and childhood obesity: a prospective, observational analysis. Lancet 2001;357: 505-8.
7. Nutrition Sub-Committee, British Diabetic Association. Dietary recommendations for people with diabetes. An update for the 1990's. J Hum Nutr Diet 1991;4: 393-412.
8. Diabetesand Nutrition Study Group (DNSG) of the European Association for the study of diabetes. Recommendations for the nutritional management of patients with diabetes mellitus. Eur J Clin Nutr 2000;54: 353-5.
9. BoltonSmith C, Woodward M. Dietary composition and fat to sugar ratios in relation to obesity. Int J Obes 1994;18: 820-8.
10. Puska P, Vartiainen E, Tuomilehto J, Salomaa V, Nissinen A. Changes in premature deaths in Finland: successful long-term prevention of cardiovascular diseases. Bull WHO 1998;76: 419-2.
11. Hollenbeck CB. Dietary fructose effects on lipoprotein metabolism and risk for coronary artery disease. Am J Clin Nutr 1993;58: 800s-809s.
12. Birch LL. Development of food preferences. Annu Rev Nutr 1999;19: 41-62.
13. Wolraich ML, Lindgren SD, Stumbo PJ, Stegink LD, Appelbaum MI, Kiritsy MC. Effects of diets high in sucrose or aspartame on the behaviour and cognitive performance of children. N Eng J Med 1994;330: 301-7.
14. Butchko HH, Stargel WW. Aspartame: scientific evaluation in the postmarketing period. Reg Toxic Pharma 2001;34: 221-233
The sweetener has been demonised unfairly in sections of the press and several websites
The European population of 375 million consumes about 2000 tonnes annually of aspartame (NutraSweet, Canderel) an artificial sweetener, which contains two amino acids-aspartic acid and phenylalanine.(1) It is 180-200 times sweeter than sucrose, and almost half a million extra tonnes of sugar would therefore be needed to generate the same sweetness. Was the world screaming for all this sweetness, and what has it done to us? Anyone searching the web on aspartame, launched in 1981 by Monsanto, the manufacturer of NutraSweet, will find a vast catalogue of frightening personal accounts attributing multiple health disasters to exposure to aspartame.(1) Although no orchestrated public outcry about aspartame has taken place, much sensationalist journalism has been published mostly on websites . In contrast, aspartame marketing implies that it embodies a healthy way of life and avoids obesity. Are these claims of hazards and benefits supported by evidence?
Evidence does not support links between aspartame and cancer, hair loss, depression, dementia, behavioural disturbances, or any of the other conditions appearing in websites. Agencies such as the Food Standards Agency, European Food Standards Authority, and the Food and Drug Administration have a duty to monitor relations between foodstuffs and health and to commission research when reasonable doubt emerges. Aspartame's safety was convincing to the European Scientific Committee on Food in 1988,(2) but proving negatives is difficult, and it is even harder to persuade vocal sectors of the public whose opinions are fuelled more by anecdote than by evidence. The Food Standards Agency takes public concerns very seriously and thus pressed the European Scientific Committee on Food to conduct a further review, encompassing over 500 reports, in 2002. It concluded from biochemical, clinical, and behavioural research that the acceptable daily intake of 40 mg/kg/day of aspartame remained entirely safe-except for people with phenylketonuria.(3)
Does aspartame embody a healthy way of life and avoid obesity? In most Western countries sugar provides around 10% of total calories (about 200 kcal (837 kJ), or 50 g daily). If this were entirely replaced by a non-nutritive, non-caloric sweetener such as aspartame then obesity could indeed be vanquished-assuming these calories are not replaced due to stimulation of appetite. We eat about 5 g aspartame annually, equivalent to another kg of sucrose, whose 4000 kcal (16 740 kJ) could generate 0.5 kg gain in weight. But evidence that aspartame prevents weight gain or obesity is generally inconclusive,(4, 5) although in children, the consumption of sugar sweetened soft drinks relates notably to increasing obesity, whereas increasing "diet" drinks or fruit juice is inversely related to weight gain.(6)
Dietary recommendations for the management of diabetes conclude that up to 10% of total energy can safely come from sugars but that artificial sweeteners may help avoid weight gain.(7, 8). When sugar is consumed as a sweetener it is chemically identical with the sugar found in fruits, which we are promoting keenly, and its metabolic effects are no different if consumed in reasonable amounts even by people with diabetes.(8) Most evidence points to fat as the main dietary culprit in obesity, and one counterargument to the use of artificial sweetener instead of sugar includes evidence that high sugar diets tend to be lower in fat.(9) Displacing saturated fat would offer particular advantages by reducing risk of heart disease.(10) Carried to extremes, large amounts of sucrose will increase triglycerides, a key component of the metabolic syndrome, and turn the tables back towards promoting heart disease. Its fructose component is responsible for this hazard.(11)
Artificial sweeteners are promoted to prevent dental caries, as sugars form the main substrate for mouth bacteria. However, avoiding sugar does not reduce dental caries dramatically in regions with high levels of caries.(3) The dominant factors are fluoride deficiency and prolonged exposure to sugar between meals. If children consume sweetened drinks between meals or suck on sweet foods, resulting in prolonged periods of exposure to sugar, then replacing the sugar with artificial sweeteners in such products has some rationale. Children exposed to heavily sweetened foods develop a "sweet palate," but those who take the plunge and take unsweetened drinks may prefer them, which seems a better solution.(12)
Why has aspartame been demonised by the world's press and countless websites? Monsanto was in the public eye, accused of enthusiastic dissemination of genetically modified plants and foods. People resent interference with foods, and synthetic food components are regarded with suspicion. However, aspartame comprises just two amino acids (aspartic acid and phenylalanine). Could this present a risk? Phenylalanine is a natural amino acid, and is toxic only in patients who have phenylketonuria.
Food labelling of sweetener is contentious. Six artificial sweeteners are permitted in Europe, each with an acceptable daily intake. Consumers cannot be expected to calculate cumulative daily intakes of each. Instead, manufacturers are encouraged to use cocktails of sweeteners so it becomes difficult for anyone to reach the acceptable daily intake of any sweetener individually-adults need at least 10 cans of a drink fully sweetened with aspartame alone to reach the acceptable daily intake of 40 mg/kg/day. When using combinations of sweeteners, even high level consumers rarely exceed 10 mg/day. Intakes over 1g/day were needed to alter brain neurotransmitters and provoke seizures in monkeys, and randomised controlled trials of high doses in humans have not shown any behavioural or other effects.(13, 14) The cynical conclusion is that there is probably too much sweetness and never enough light, and the public probably needs protection against misleading websites.
Michael E J Lean, Professor
Division of Developmental Medicine, University of Glasgow, Royal Infirmary, Queen Elizabeth Building, Glasgow G31 2ER
Catherine R Hankey, Lecturer, University Department of Human Nutrition
Division of Developmental Medicine, University of Glasgow, Royal Infirmary, Queen Elizabeth Building, Glasgow G31 2ER
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Competing interests: None declared.
References
1. AspartameInformation Center. www.aspartame.org
2. European Commission. Health and Consumer Protection Directorate-General, Scientific Committee on Food. Opinion of the scientific committee on food: update on the safety of aspartame. SCF, 10 December 2002.
3. Navia JM. Carbohydrates and dental health. Amer J Clin Nutr 1994;59: 719-27.
4. Tordoff MG, Alleva AM. Effect of drinking soda sweetened with aspartame or high fructose corn syrup on food intake and body weight. Amer J Clin Nutr 1990;51: 963-9.
5. Drewnowski A. Review: intense sweeteners and energy density of foods: implications for weight control. Eur J Clin Nutr 1999;53: 757-63.
6. Ludwig DS, Peterson, Gortmaker SL. Relation between consumption of sugar sweetened drinks and childhood obesity: a prospective, observational analysis. Lancet 2001;357: 505-8.
7. Nutrition Sub-Committee, British Diabetic Association. Dietary recommendations for people with diabetes. An update for the 1990's. J Hum Nutr Diet 1991;4: 393-412.
8. Diabetesand Nutrition Study Group (DNSG) of the European Association for the study of diabetes. Recommendations for the nutritional management of patients with diabetes mellitus. Eur J Clin Nutr 2000;54: 353-5.
9. BoltonSmith C, Woodward M. Dietary composition and fat to sugar ratios in relation to obesity. Int J Obes 1994;18: 820-8.
10. Puska P, Vartiainen E, Tuomilehto J, Salomaa V, Nissinen A. Changes in premature deaths in Finland: successful long-term prevention of cardiovascular diseases. Bull WHO 1998;76: 419-2.
11. Hollenbeck CB. Dietary fructose effects on lipoprotein metabolism and risk for coronary artery disease. Am J Clin Nutr 1993;58: 800s-809s.
12. Birch LL. Development of food preferences. Annu Rev Nutr 1999;19: 41-62.
13. Wolraich ML, Lindgren SD, Stumbo PJ, Stegink LD, Appelbaum MI, Kiritsy MC. Effects of diets high in sucrose or aspartame on the behaviour and cognitive performance of children. N Eng J Med 1994;330: 301-7.
14. Butchko HH, Stargel WW. Aspartame: scientific evaluation in the postmarketing period. Reg Toxic Pharma 2001;34: 221-233
javaguru
Banned
Alarm over Aspartame
The Inappropriate and Unsubstantiated Alarm Over Aspartame
David Squillacote, MD
Senior Medical Advisor, Multiple Sclerosis Foundation
January 12, 1999
In the 1960's, before the advent of satellite communications, gold workers in the interior of South America knew the closing price of gold on the London market within an hour of the closing. The final leg of the communication was over jungle drums. Before the Internet, information moved through the Multiple Sclerosis (MS) community in a similarly informal, but high fidelity, fashion. Now, within minutes of a breaking story or rumor, the first question appears on the Multiple Sclerosis Foundation (MSF) Internet forum. Such is the case with the recent alarm over aspartame (NutraSweet and similar dietary sweetening agents).
In a recent article by Nancy Markle, allegedly based on talks at the "World Environmental Conference", wild and inaccurate information about aspartame is being spread. I have no problem with information dissemination, even when it is wrong, but Ms. Markle has crossed the line. The MSF has asked me to look into the allegations raised and report on them.
1. There is no connection between the MSF and Ms. Markle. The MSF has no knowledge of Ms. Markle's professional credentials (none are cited), and a MEDLINE search shows no contributions to the world medical literature by her.
2. The MSF has/had no connection with the "World Environmental Conference".
3. Neither the MSF nor myself have any connection with Monsanto (producer of NutraSweet). We do not support any of the inflammatory allegations about NutraSweet made at this conference, but neither do we in any way formally endorse or condemn the product.
I ran a number of MEDLINE searches on aspartame.
1. There are 377 citations in the world medical literature (all languages) from 1966-1998.
2. There is no information whatsoever about deleterious effects of aspartame on MS, systemic lupus erythematosis (SLE or lupus), or fibromyalgia.
3. There is no evidence that aspartame in any way causes, provokes, mimics or worsens MS.
4. There is no evidence of any "aspartame disease".
5. Repeated studies in peer reviewed journals show no adverse effects of aspartame on seizures (rats, children, adults), weight gain, body temperature, cognitive/behavioral/neuropsychiatric/neurophysiologic function, brain/intestinal/liver hormones or enzymes, brain tumors, cancer, birth defects (rats and humans), Parkinson's disease, allergic responses, blood pressure, carbohydrate and lipid metabolism, etc.
6. It has not been shown to be dangerous to diabetics in any way.
7. One small study (which has not been repeated) did find some worsening of depression when depressed patients took large doses of aspartame.
8. Several small reports have appeared showing that there may be a subset of migraine patients who worsen with aspartame. Other studies show no connection in patients who have claimed to have aspartame-related headaches.
Ms. Markle's claims regarding the metabolism of aspartame are wildly inaccurate. Her understanding of pharmacology and metabolism is largely incorrect.
1. Aspartame does cause the production of small amounts of methanol, but no more than normal consumption of fruits and vegetables.
2. There are about 200 mg of aspartame in 12 ounces of most diet drinks. Even with greater than 2000 mg of aspartame, there is no change in the levels of methanol in normal adults. Normal volunteers have taken 600 mg/hour of aspartame for 8 hours without significant increases in serum methanol. Normal men have taken 10,000 mg of aspartame without any side effects.
3. Infants who have received equivalently enormous doses of aspartame show no increase in serum methanol levels.
4. Methanol itself is not the problem in "methanol poisoning". It is the generation of formic acid when the methanol is very high that causes the dangerous acidosis and the blindness. Normal volunteers have taken 14,000 mg of aspartame. Even though their methanol levels rose, the formic acid did not. The methanol levels returned to normal within 8 hours.
5. When aspartame-containing beverages are left at high storage temperatures, the aspartame can degrade and form small amounts of methanol.
6. Diketopiperazine (DKP) is another breakdown product of aspartame. It has not been show to be carcinogenic (causes cancers).
7. There is no connection between "Desert Storm Syndrome" and aspartame.
Ms. Markle cites the work of Dr. H.J. Roberts. I do not know if she is citing Dr. Roberts with or without his knowledge. Dr. Roberts is apparently an Australian physician who has 77 citations in MEDLINE. He is a prodigious letter writer and most of his citations are letters to the editors. He has published a number of case reviews in second and third tier journals, and in addition has produced a few articles on clotting problems and diabetic complications. He has produced no original research that I can find on aspartame.
In summary, this series of allegations by MS. Markle are almost totally without foundation. They are rabidly inaccurate and scandalously misinformative. I have found no basis for alarm about aspartame, but would recommend (based on one study) those patients who are being treated for depression let their physicians know that they are using aspartame. Patients who have a documented, evaluated adverse reaction to aspartame should avoid its use. There is no connection between the Multiple Sclerosis Foundation and Ms. Markle or her writings.
The Inappropriate and Unsubstantiated Alarm Over Aspartame
David Squillacote, MD
Senior Medical Advisor, Multiple Sclerosis Foundation
January 12, 1999
In the 1960's, before the advent of satellite communications, gold workers in the interior of South America knew the closing price of gold on the London market within an hour of the closing. The final leg of the communication was over jungle drums. Before the Internet, information moved through the Multiple Sclerosis (MS) community in a similarly informal, but high fidelity, fashion. Now, within minutes of a breaking story or rumor, the first question appears on the Multiple Sclerosis Foundation (MSF) Internet forum. Such is the case with the recent alarm over aspartame (NutraSweet and similar dietary sweetening agents).
In a recent article by Nancy Markle, allegedly based on talks at the "World Environmental Conference", wild and inaccurate information about aspartame is being spread. I have no problem with information dissemination, even when it is wrong, but Ms. Markle has crossed the line. The MSF has asked me to look into the allegations raised and report on them.
1. There is no connection between the MSF and Ms. Markle. The MSF has no knowledge of Ms. Markle's professional credentials (none are cited), and a MEDLINE search shows no contributions to the world medical literature by her.
2. The MSF has/had no connection with the "World Environmental Conference".
3. Neither the MSF nor myself have any connection with Monsanto (producer of NutraSweet). We do not support any of the inflammatory allegations about NutraSweet made at this conference, but neither do we in any way formally endorse or condemn the product.
I ran a number of MEDLINE searches on aspartame.
1. There are 377 citations in the world medical literature (all languages) from 1966-1998.
2. There is no information whatsoever about deleterious effects of aspartame on MS, systemic lupus erythematosis (SLE or lupus), or fibromyalgia.
3. There is no evidence that aspartame in any way causes, provokes, mimics or worsens MS.
4. There is no evidence of any "aspartame disease".
5. Repeated studies in peer reviewed journals show no adverse effects of aspartame on seizures (rats, children, adults), weight gain, body temperature, cognitive/behavioral/neuropsychiatric/neurophysiologic function, brain/intestinal/liver hormones or enzymes, brain tumors, cancer, birth defects (rats and humans), Parkinson's disease, allergic responses, blood pressure, carbohydrate and lipid metabolism, etc.
6. It has not been shown to be dangerous to diabetics in any way.
7. One small study (which has not been repeated) did find some worsening of depression when depressed patients took large doses of aspartame.
8. Several small reports have appeared showing that there may be a subset of migraine patients who worsen with aspartame. Other studies show no connection in patients who have claimed to have aspartame-related headaches.
Ms. Markle's claims regarding the metabolism of aspartame are wildly inaccurate. Her understanding of pharmacology and metabolism is largely incorrect.
1. Aspartame does cause the production of small amounts of methanol, but no more than normal consumption of fruits and vegetables.
2. There are about 200 mg of aspartame in 12 ounces of most diet drinks. Even with greater than 2000 mg of aspartame, there is no change in the levels of methanol in normal adults. Normal volunteers have taken 600 mg/hour of aspartame for 8 hours without significant increases in serum methanol. Normal men have taken 10,000 mg of aspartame without any side effects.
3. Infants who have received equivalently enormous doses of aspartame show no increase in serum methanol levels.
4. Methanol itself is not the problem in "methanol poisoning". It is the generation of formic acid when the methanol is very high that causes the dangerous acidosis and the blindness. Normal volunteers have taken 14,000 mg of aspartame. Even though their methanol levels rose, the formic acid did not. The methanol levels returned to normal within 8 hours.
5. When aspartame-containing beverages are left at high storage temperatures, the aspartame can degrade and form small amounts of methanol.
6. Diketopiperazine (DKP) is another breakdown product of aspartame. It has not been show to be carcinogenic (causes cancers).
7. There is no connection between "Desert Storm Syndrome" and aspartame.
Ms. Markle cites the work of Dr. H.J. Roberts. I do not know if she is citing Dr. Roberts with or without his knowledge. Dr. Roberts is apparently an Australian physician who has 77 citations in MEDLINE. He is a prodigious letter writer and most of his citations are letters to the editors. He has published a number of case reviews in second and third tier journals, and in addition has produced a few articles on clotting problems and diabetic complications. He has produced no original research that I can find on aspartame.
In summary, this series of allegations by MS. Markle are almost totally without foundation. They are rabidly inaccurate and scandalously misinformative. I have found no basis for alarm about aspartame, but would recommend (based on one study) those patients who are being treated for depression let their physicians know that they are using aspartame. Patients who have a documented, evaluated adverse reaction to aspartame should avoid its use. There is no connection between the Multiple Sclerosis Foundation and Ms. Markle or her writings.
javaguru
Banned
I'm sure this is one giant conspiracy....
Is aspartame safe?
The FDA and almost all scientists who are familiar with the data collected on aspartame safety conclude that aspartame, and its use in a wide variety of products, is a safe and useful option for those individuals who prefer a low-calorie sweetener. In fact, the FDA Commissioner noted upon approval that "few compounds have withstood such detailed testing and repeated, close scrutiny, and the process through which aspartame has gone should provide the public with additional confidence of its safety."
In addition to the rigorous review by the FDA, the full body of research on aspartame has been evaluated by numerous governmental and medical authorities including: American Medical Association Council on Scientific Affairs, American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Nutrition, American Diabetes Association, American Dietetic Association, American Cancer Society, American Dental Association, American Council on Science and Health, The Epilepsy Institute, Joint Expert Committee of Food Additives of the World Health Organization and the Scientific Committee for Food of the European Union.
Some critics claim that aspartame’s breakdown components (aspartic acid, phenylalanine, methanol) could have harmful effects. However, those claims are unfounded. Aspartic acid and phenylalanine are building blocks of protein that are found in all protein-containing foods. Methanol is found naturally in the body and in many foods such as fruit and vegetable juices. The FDA reviewed animal, clinical and consumption studies submitted by the sweetener’s manufacturer, as well as the existing body of scientific data, and "concluded that the studies demonstrated the safety of these components."
Is aspartame safe?
The FDA and almost all scientists who are familiar with the data collected on aspartame safety conclude that aspartame, and its use in a wide variety of products, is a safe and useful option for those individuals who prefer a low-calorie sweetener. In fact, the FDA Commissioner noted upon approval that "few compounds have withstood such detailed testing and repeated, close scrutiny, and the process through which aspartame has gone should provide the public with additional confidence of its safety."
In addition to the rigorous review by the FDA, the full body of research on aspartame has been evaluated by numerous governmental and medical authorities including: American Medical Association Council on Scientific Affairs, American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Nutrition, American Diabetes Association, American Dietetic Association, American Cancer Society, American Dental Association, American Council on Science and Health, The Epilepsy Institute, Joint Expert Committee of Food Additives of the World Health Organization and the Scientific Committee for Food of the European Union.
Some critics claim that aspartame’s breakdown components (aspartic acid, phenylalanine, methanol) could have harmful effects. However, those claims are unfounded. Aspartic acid and phenylalanine are building blocks of protein that are found in all protein-containing foods. Methanol is found naturally in the body and in many foods such as fruit and vegetable juices. The FDA reviewed animal, clinical and consumption studies submitted by the sweetener’s manufacturer, as well as the existing body of scientific data, and "concluded that the studies demonstrated the safety of these components."
T
the_clockwork
Guest
lol @ #7
patsfan1379
New member
My farts smell really bad today.
i would be willing to bet that life expectancies would go UP if every "regular" soda drinker switched over to drinking diet soda with aspartame (i'm excluding those people with phenylketonuria who can not ingest aspartame). i can only imagine the obesity and diabetes which results partly from all of those empty calories.
T
the_clockwork
Guest
so you are saying drinks with 0 calories that contain aspartame cause obesity? I would think drinks with 130 calories in them are the ones causing obesity.
Similar threads
