Aspartame has been approved for use by more than 100 nations worldwide.

All the stuff posted on Aspartame sparked my interest to investigate why it's so feared and I will admit that some of the articles posted are a little nerve racking but even if the FDA is corrupt, are all these other countries wrong?

I am not saying it's absolutly safe, I would be interested in keeping this debate going.


Health Canada acknowledges the safety of aspartame
http://www.aspartame.info/opinion/op_can.html

Canada's Food Directorate, Health Canada, has recently posted on its website details of the process to which aspartame was subjected before being approved as a food ingredient. Health Canada conducted an extensive review of the scientific research and examined the results of clinical studies. The Directorate stated that "there is no evidence to suggest that the consumption of foods containing this sweetener, according to the provisions of the Food and Drug Regulations and as part of a well-balanced diet, would pose a health hazard to consumers."

The full report can be viewed by clicking the attached link:

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/food-aliment/cs-ipc/chha-edpcs/e_aspartame01.html


Other Countries around the World:


Have other regulatory bodies reviewed aspartame's safety?

Yes. Aspartame has been approved for use by more than 100 nations worldwide. It is used widely in major industrialized countries such as the U.S., Canada, the United Kingdom, Germany and Japan. Aspartame has also been reviewed and found safe by expert scientific committees, including the Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) of the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization and World Health Organization as well as the Scientific Committee on Food of the European Union.

In detailed re-reviews of aspartame’s safety in 2002 and 2003, health authorities in the European Union, United Kingdom, France, and Canada reaffirmed aspartame’s safety.


Have independent health organizations reviewed the safety of aspartame?

Yes. Health organizations, such as the American Medical Association's Council on Scientific Affairs, the American Diabetes Association, and the American Dietetic Association, have reviewed research on aspartame and found the sweetener to be safe.

http://ific.org/publications/brochures/aspartamebroch.cfm

I also have another food intolerance that not everybody has. It could very well be that only some people have reactions to aspartame, but that doesn't mean that those reactions aren't real.

Till the day I came home from having a pituitary brain tumor removed on August 29, 2000. Everybody in the medical profession said it can't be the Equal, you just had it. When I found out about the history of Aspartame, I KNEW it was a contributing factor.

Why would I get a pituitary tumor, a rarity in men, at the age of 48?

I am sure it was the Equal, but I'll never be able to prove it.

But 1.5 million people react to peanut for some it's a life threatening allergen.
http://www.riverside-online.com/health_reference/Immune-System/DS00710.cfm
And potatoes develop solanine, a significant poison in the skin, when exposed to light:
http://www.snopes.com/food/ingredient/potato.asp

Plenty of stuff to avoid.

20 or 30 years. Its only been on the market for 20 years or so and it might take 30 or 50 years for effects to show up. Until then I will probably keep using it but I am a little less nervous about Splenda. It looks like the scientific data is pretty positive for both Aspartame and Splenda though.


As you pointed out, everyone is allergic to something and as we get older we become allergic to more and more things. There may be 1.5 million people allergic to Aspartame and it may give them headaches but for the general public its probably safe.

type of problem. (which is also well documented)

when stored and used perfectly sodium or potassium benzoate is fine.
but when people leave it in a hot warehouse, or in the sun, when its in bottles of soda for example it breaks down into benzene and stuff!

as far as i know this is the same thing that happens with aspartame. people dont want to drink the byproducts of breakdown whatever they are i dont actually remember =)
at least this is the anti-aspartame club i fall into.
its unstable.
i dont trust stupid people to handle properly. it also tastes like crap.like battery chemicals or something really bad.

First pregnancy was in 1989-90 and it was still on the NO list with each subsequent pregnancy. I didn't ingest it then and still don't.

To each his own and this isn't something that I'm going to get into an argument about.

When one of my kids asked about it and I relayed the NO factor during pregnancy he soon stopped ingesting anything that contains aspartame.

After reviewing scientific studies, FDA determined in 1981 that aspartame was safe for use in foods. In 1987, the General Accounting Office investigated the process surrounding FDA's approval of aspartame and confirmed the agency had acted properly. However, FDA has continued to review complaints alleging adverse reactions to products containing aspartame. To date, FDA has not determined any consistent pattern of symptoms that can be attributed to the use of aspartame, nor is the agency aware of any recent studies that clearly show safety problems.

Carefully controlled clinical studies show that aspartame is not an allergen. However, certain people with the genetic disease phenylketonuria (PKU), and pregnant women with hyperphenylalanine (high levels of phenylalanine in blood) have a problem with aspartame because they do not effectively metabolize the amino acid phenylalanine, one of aspartame's components. High levels of this amino acid in body fluids can cause brain damage. Therefore, FDA has ruled that all products containing aspartame must include a warning to phenylketonurics that the sweetener contains phenylalanine.

"Effects on a rapidly developing brain and neurological system are still unknown. Therefore, I want you to consider it a substance to be avoided."

It's all about Industrialized food. Lowest possible quality for highest possible profit. And killing off any healthy alternatives.

:spank:

Over 100 countries are on Rumsfeld's side on this issue. Even Rumsfeld is right one out of 1,000 times. :shrug:

It's bringing all the woo woos outta the woodworking.

Past 20 years or so, lot of the reports had been twisted or flat out lie about products... Look at Iraq war report? Should I believe government report that is pay for by pharma? I think not! After what happened to Iraq war reports and how governments had been lying to us, I just don't trust reports anymore.

Health organizations, such as the American Medical Association's Council on Scientific Affairs, the American Diabetes Association, and the American Dietetic Association, have reviewed research on aspartame and found the sweetener to be safe.


They all want us Dead!
:sarcasm:

Hmmm.....CEOs of top pharmaceutical companies.

You break trust...you never earn it back!

...the stuff gives me. Cool for them, I wish them well.

I'm still not gonna eat/drink it.

firmly,
Bright

It sounds like you are allergic to it just as I am allergic to Ibuprofen. If I take ibuprofen my lips swell up like balloons!

Fortunately science is based on more than just the reactions you and I have to these two products.

I think the number is more than they'll admit.

And don't forget, those safety studies didn't include overheating aspartame and then feeding it to people. In real world conditions the sweetener may well be more dangerous than in the controlled studies.

It stands to reason that drinking even a small amount of formaldehyde on a daily basis isn't good for you. Why take a chance?

This is kinda like the global warming debate. There are hundreds of scientific studies showing the safety of aspartame, yet many people dismiss them because of a website or some guy making money off the fear. If you want to show that aspartame is dangerous, you need to back it up with a scientific study, not some website with an agenda.

The safety test from the FDA are very thorough to protect the people from corperations and snake oil salemen. Its not a 100% perfect process, but the FDA is not going to deliberately poison people for profit, its job is actually the complete opposite.

The studies can be verified by scientists all over the world, so its just stupid for the FDA or any other organization to lie about the results in the interest of business. The truth will come to the surface fast.

Huh??? Remember VIOXX??? FDA kept the informations under the rug until... way too many people died and they had no choice but to take it off the market!

conditions, not real world conditions.

They didn't purposely overheat aspartame, producing formaldehyde, and then feed it to people. They studied aspartame as it was intended to be consumed.

First you sent me to the Health Canada website. I went to 'Aspartame':
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fn-an/securit/facts-faits/aspartame/index_e.html

That took me here:

Health Canada Comments on the Recent Study Relating to the Safety of Aspartame

Health Canada scientists have reviewed the published data from a recent research study of aspartame. The European Ramazzini Foundation of Oncology and Environmental Science published results of their study in the European Journal of Oncology in June, 2005 and in Environmental Health Perspectives on November 17, 2005.

Health Canada scientists concluded that the reported findings did not indicate a need to change the existing restrictions on use of aspartame already outlined in the Food and Drug Regulations. Health Canada also requested the complete set of raw data from the Foundation to permit a comprehensive analysis. These data were received on April 10, 2006, and are currently being analyzed.

In the meantime, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) was requested by the European Commission to review the study. On May 5, 2006, EFSA released the report of its Scientific Panel on Food Additives, Flavourings, Processing Aids and Materials in Contact with Food. The Panel concluded "on the basis of all the evidence currently available, that there is no need to further review the safety of aspartame nor to revise the previously established Acceptable Daily Intake."

This conclusion supports Health Canada's initial assessment of this study. Nonetheless, Health Canada will continue with its comprehensive analysis of the raw data recently received.
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fn-an/securit/facts-faits/aspartame/aspartame_statement_e.html

That was very new information and they didn't sound very certain, so I looked up the study and got a summary in the New York Times.

The Lowdown on Sweet?
Published: February 12, 2006

WHEN Dr. Morando Soffritti, a cancer researcher in Bologna, Italy, saw the results of his team's seven-year study on aspartame, he knew he was about to be injected into a bitter controversy over this sweetener, one of the most contentiously debated substances ever added to foods and beverages.

Aspartame is sold under the brand names Nutra-Sweet and Equal and is found in such popular products as Diet Coke, Diet Pepsi, Diet Snapple and Sugar Free Kool-Aid. Hundreds of millions of people consume it worldwide. And Dr. Soffritti's study concluded that aspartame may cause the dreaded "c" word: cancer.

The research found that the sweetener was associated with unusually high rates of lymphomas, leukemias and other cancers in rats that had been given doses of it starting at what would be equivalent to four to five 20-ounce bottles of diet soda a day for a 150-pound person. The study, which involved 1,900 laboratory rats and cost $1 million, was conducted at the European Ramazzini Foundation of Oncology and Environmental Sciences, a nonprofit organization that studies cancer-causing substances; Dr. Soffritti is its scientific director.

...

Dr. Soffritti said he was inspired to look at aspartame because of what he calls "inadequacies" in the cancer studies done by Searle in the 1970's. He said that those studies did not involve large-enough numbers of rats and did not allow them to live long enough to develop cancer.

The Ramazzini study was conducted with 1,900 rats, as opposed to the 280 to 688 rodents used in Searle's studies, and the rats lived for up to three years instead of being sacrificed after two, which is the human equivalent of age 53. "Cancer is a disease of the third part of life," Dr. Soffritti said. "You have 75 percent of cancer diagnoses for people who are 55 years old or older. So if you truncate the experiments at 110 weeks and the rats are supposed to survive until 150 to 160 weeks, it means you avoid the development of cancer at the time when cancer would be starting to arise."

...Others have also challenged Searle's studies. Documents from the F.D.A. and records from the Federal Register indicate that, in the years before the F.D.A. approved aspartame, the agency had serious concerns about the accuracy and credibility of Searle's aspartame studies. From 1977 to 1985 — during much of the approval process — Searle was headed by Donald H. Rumsfeld,

...A 1976 report from an F.D.A. task force, for example, found that Searle's studies on aspartame and several of the company's pharmaceutical drugs were "poorly conceived, carelessly executed, or inaccurately analyzed or reported." It cited what it called a lack of training by the scientists analyzing tissue samples, a "substantial" loss of information because of tissue decomposition and inadequate monitoring of feeding doses.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/12/business/yourmoney/12sweet.html?ex=1172379600&en=acbc242ea1ee9431&ei=5070

Complete study here:
http://www.ehponline.org/docs/2005/8711/abstract.html

It seems the jury's still out on aspartame. Quite interesting.

>>Katz said that rats had short life spans and were naturally more susceptible to cancer. He also pointed out that even healthy foods like broccoli, spinach and beans contained some potentially carcinogenic compounds.

A lady died from drinking too much water the other day. As with anything, even the most healthy foods, they ALL contain things that could kill you if you eat too much of it.


Artificial Sweeteners: Are They Safe?
ABCNews

Feb. 13 - The debate over the safety of artificial sweeteners intensified over the weekend, when an article in The New York Times said Aspartame, the most popular sugar replacement in America, might cause cancer in rats.

Aspartame, which was invented in 1965, is found in more than 6,000 products, and most people know it by its trade names, NutraSweet and Equal. It is estimated that 200 million people consume Aspartame so if it is unsafe, the effects could be far-reaching. Dr. David Katz, ABC News' medical contributor, said that people should not jump to conclusions based on the rat study.

"If it caused any significant harm, we would know about it," he said. "If there was any potential for harm, it's a very low level & because of how widespread the use is and because it's been around long enough."

Katz, a Yale professor and the author of the "Flavor Point Diet," said that the latest study, which comes from Italy, demonstrated a "statistically significant increase in lymphomas and leukemias over three years." The Italian researcher studied the effects of about five sodas a day worth of Aspartame on each of the 1,900 rats  that is the equivalent of 100 ounces of soda for a 150-pound person every day. The Italian doctor also increased the time the rats ingested the chemical.

http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=health&id=3913960

Remember how bad margarine turned out to be for us? (And it doesn't even taste as good as butter.)

Let's go back to eating things that actually taste like the real stuff -- because it IS the real stuff.

sugar and sugar substitutes mask the taste of FOOD

My solution is to use real sugar sparingly

(and pig out occasionally on chocolate):spank:

Clean up Armenia!

Papoon for President!

but then I already have conditions which it apparently can exacerbate.

I also get symptoms from bananas.

I also get symptoms from dairy or anything with added caseinates.

I also get symptoms from pover the counter cold medication.

I also get symptoms from anti-inflammatory drugs.

:shrug:

Splenda was created by adding chlorine atoms to sugars ... it's a chlorocarbon. It was discovered when two people were working on a new pesticide, and one of them tasted it and found it was sweet.

anecdotal evidence indicates some people also have a reaction to Splenda because of the chlorine part of it. People have reported such symptoms as respiratory problems, rashes, digestive problems, heart palpitations, etc.

I had been going through a horrible neck rash and slight breathing problems till I stopped eating Splenda. So, Splenda's my candidate as the cause, at this point (though I can't be sure).

there are plenty of web sites about what's being called "Splenda Sickness." could be claptrap. But I'm off Splenda till I figure out whether the rash comes back.

some years later we shall see how safe aspartame really is. They used to think asbestos was safe. When one reads the many articles in MEDLINE on the subject it all points to aspartame being safe. Who knows they may all be paid off to fudge their results?