Fox News on Aspartame (Nutrasweet)

If you use Aspartame on a regular basis, you need to watch this.  If you want alternatives, we need to talk.

More information on Aspartame (Nutrasweet) can be found on the Aspartame Consumer Safety Network.

At some point I plan to do a more complete review of this poison that is commonly found in diet products.  I do not for one minute believe that either the American FDA, or Health Canada always tell the truth or always have our best interests in mind.

Updates

August 18, 2009:

A list of products that contain Aspartame that may not be so obvious can be found here.

3 thoughts on “Fox News on Aspartame (Nutrasweet)”

  1. John E. Garst, Ph.D. (Medicinal Chemistry, Pharmacology, Toxicology, and Nutrition) says:

    Your video about aspartame safety is outdated and thoroughly rejected by science. There are two poorly understood realities.

    The first reality is that all aspartame research prior to 2009 is fatally flawed (and hence so is all criticism of aspartame based on such science including this video). It was all done in a scientifically unacceptable manner as was established in preliminary work presented at the Society of Toxicology (Seattle, USA) and the American Chemical Society (New Orleans, USA) national meetings in 2008. Full comments are currently being preparing for regular publication, but in essence it was demonstrated that inappropriate controls were used in all aspartame rodent research starting with the original Searle work and extending through the oft-cited Soffritti et al work published over the past several years (and even other work thereafter). The standard control-versus-treated animal experiments are invalid for aspartame, because aspartame’s methanol (actually through its oxidation products formaldehyde and formate) depletes a vitamin, namely folic acid. No properly done experiment can deplete a vitamin, but all experiments to date claiming problems have done just that! And those experiments showing the greatest effect (Soffritti et al) took 2-3 years and caused dose- and time-dependent depletion of this critical vitamin. And the cancers reported are well-known consequences of folate deficiency. Studies not finding a problem with aspartame were either of such short duration as to avoid this issue or used diets that provided extra folate such that this issue was not encountered.

    The second reality is that this same underlying folate issue explains human problems attributed by critics to aspartame. The folate enzyme system metabolizes the common dietary ingredient methanol’s oxidation products formaldehyde and formate. These are innate metabolites of many substances and are required for normal biological function. In humans, however, the issue is not any aspartame depletion of folate, but widespread preexisting folate deficiency (see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folate_deficiency) , especially before 1998 when supplementation was begun (and this criticism of aspartame began) or folate genetic issues, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methylenetetrahydrofolate_reductase), and/or related biochemistry linked to vitamin B12 (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitamin_B12). Folate deficiency or genetic issues facilitate formation of homocysteine. Much has been written about the “excitotoxic” amino acids that form the aspartame framework (phenylalanine and aspartic acid) by aspartame critics. However, those excitotoxic amino acids occur at far greater concentrations in everyday food, so neither of these amino acids are issues for most people. However, what seems to be consistently missed by the antiaspartame critics is that homocysteine is a far stronger excitotoxin than any constituent of aspartame.

    Explaining problems with aspartame only suggests it is even safer. Given these new, stronger indications of safety, science no longer has any reason to doubt the safety of aspartame. And the European equivalent of the US FDA on April 20 again just validated the safety of aspartame, efsa.europa.eu/EFSA/efsa_locale-1178620753812_1211902454309.htm.

    John E. Garst, Ph.D. (Medicinal Chemistry, Pharmacology, Toxicology, and Nutrition)

    (FYI, the author has absolutely no financial or biasing connection with the aspartame, the soft drink or their related industries. The author has a Ph.D. in Medicinal Chemistry (Pharmacy) from the University of Iowa, postdoctoral experience at Yale University (Molecular Biophysics & Biochemistry) and at Vanderbilt University and taught nutritional toxicology at the University of Illinois (Champaign-Urbana) besides having conducted federally funded research at Vanderbilt, UIUC, and at several other universities before recently entering into retirement.)

  2. I have a difficult time believing that ALL research before 2009 is flawed.

    If all research before 2009 is flawed, then all research that allowed Aspartame to be approved is no longer valid. Perhaps Aspartame should be pulled until we can prove it is safe.

    One of my biggest concerns is I am not convinced that Aspartame was approved in an honorable manner and the FDA is not addressing this.

    The original makers of Aspartame are Monsanto. A Google search will quickly turn up ethical issues surrounding this company.

  3. So of this crap is so good for you why is it that my wife every time she has aspartame or msg she gets a massive headache it’s just tells me there is something wrong with this crap or she wouldn’t have this kind of reaction no matter what the scientist say period don’t trust the FDA or the Canadian food inspection agency it’s all about money and the companies pay lots to the FDA douche bags that are willing to look the other way when it come down to the money

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

WordPress spam blocked by CleanTalk.