Putting a stop to Aspartame

I am sure the GMO high fructose corn syrup being in everything including stuff that has aspartame in it has something to do with obesity. When I was a child I remember moms giving corn syrup to kids who were skinny or sick because it made them gain weight.
 
I am sure the GMO high fructose corn syrup being in everything including stuff that has aspartame in it has something to do with obesity. When I was a child I remember moms giving corn syrup to kids who were skinny or sick because it made them gain weight.

In Ron Paul's manifesto, he explains why soda makers use corn syrup and not sugar. its a direct result of sugar tarriffs. it keeps our sugar prices artificially high, so it is too expensive to use frutose in drinks.
 
Maybe a simple push to get aspartame listed like how peanuts are for nut allergies. The UK requires this warning according to wikipedia. - In 1997, The UK government introduced a new regulation obliging food makers who use sweeteners to state clearly next to the name of their product the phrase "with sweeteners". Since this is common sense I doubt the US will get to requiring the same anytime soon.

I believe the same ends could be accomplished by consumer demand. Write to the company and ask for labeling, for example. Remember that RP is against the State's onerous regulations of such things, as it sets a precedent for further, even more onerous regulation.
 
In Ron Paul's manifesto, he explains why soda makers use corn syrup and not sugar. its a direct result of sugar tarriffs. it keeps our sugar prices artificially high, so it is too expensive to use frutose in drinks.

Combine the tariffs with the subsidy on corn (high fructose corn syrup, in extension) and that is why hfcs is in everything. In other countries, where the free market is allowed to work a bit more, sugar is in everything and hfcs is not because of its high price tag.
 
Pretty soon it will be unsafe for people like me to go into a grocery store. If I even touch it it makes me start having chest pain. If I eat it I could have to go to the hospital. I wonder how many people drop dead from eating it and they call it a heart attack...

I understand some people have gotten deathly ill from allergic reactions. I think one very scary allergic reaction causes one to be unable to *breathe.*
 
I understand some people have gotten deathly ill from allergic reactions. I think one very scary allergic reaction causes one to be unable to *breathe.*

Just because some people are allergic is no reason to ban it.

If that were the case you wouldn't be able to sell ANYTHING.
 
Just because some people are allergic is no reason to ban it.

If that were the case you wouldn't be able to sell ANYTHING.

What I find curious is that consumers aren't being offered a choice, of sugar, for example, especially considering that so many customers are probably being driven away from the products that contain Aspartame, thus reducing sales for the maker.
 
What I find curious is that consumers aren't being offered a choice, of sugar, for example, especially considering that so many customers are probably being driven away from the products that contain Aspartame, thus reducing sales for the maker.

They are offered the choice. It's just that those sodas containing sugar are inevitably more expensive. Jones sodas are great, for example, containing pure cane sugar. Hell, you can even get real sugar cokes in the Mexican sections of most grocery stores (in glass bottles, no less).

I can't drink them because five seconds after I'm done with them, my mouth tastes like puke (which is the case with any non-zero calorie soda), because there is some strain of bacteria in my mouth that puts out a toxin in a high sugar, high acid environment. As such, I only drink sodas sweetened with aspartame. I don't think it is fair for people to condemn me to a life of vomit mouth whenever I drink soda.

So maybe you people should vote with your wallets, and stop trying to "put a stop" to things you don't like because they are "evil".
 
They are offered the choice. It's just that those sodas containing sugar are inevitably more expensive. Jones sodas are great, for example, containing pure cane sugar. Hell, you can even get real sugar cokes in the Mexican sections of most grocery stores (in glass bottles, no less).

Wow, I didn't know that (the Mexicans have it better than I do) Now I know where to shop at least.

I can't drink them because five seconds after I'm done with them, my mouth tastes like puke (which is the case with any non-zero calorie soda), because there is some strain of bacteria in my mouth that puts out a toxin in a high sugar, high acid environment. As such, I only drink sodas sweetened with aspartame. I don't think it is fair for people to condemn me to a life of vomit mouth whenever I drink soda.

So maybe you people should vote with your wallets, and stop trying to "put a stop" to things you don't like because they are "evil".
Wouldn't think of it. ;) And I'm sorry you've got that condition. As far as trying to ban it, I just think there should be a label on the Aspartame products, explaining what the possible deleterious effects are. Then if the consumer still wants it, fine.
 
So maybe you people should vote with your wallets, and stop trying to "put a stop" to things you don't like because they are "evil".


I refuse to buy anything I know has aspartame or HFCS in it and I don't drink sodas at all and I write a letter to the company of products I used to buy but no longer can because of the ingredients.

I talk to parents in grocery stores about the "problems" with these things. Also people who use artificial sweetener God I can't tell you how many people I have seen on respirators and using nutra-sweet or splenda.

Several deaths of children having heart attacks at their athletic events have been linked to drinking diet sodas or chewing sugar free gum...
 
Wow, I didn't know that (the Mexicans have it better than I do) Now I know where to shop at least.

Wouldn't think of it. ;) And I'm sorry you've got that condition. As far as trying to ban it, I just think there should be a label on the Aspartame products, explaining what the possible deleterious effects are. Then if the consumer still wants it, fine.

Free markets don't force anyone to do anything they don't want to, including labeling their products. I mean, do you really want 99% of consumer packaging to be taken up by government warnings? Even ones that you think are lies or are invalid? How would you tell truth from lies?

Of course, in a free market, consumers who want such information would ask for it, and vote with their wallets. There would likely be a number of ratings agencies which would spring up to fill the void.
 
Free markets don't force anyone to do anything they don't want to, including labeling their products. I mean, do you really want 99% of consumer packaging to be taken up by government warnings? Even ones that you think are lies or are invalid? How would you tell truth from lies?

Isn't that one of the functions of the FDA? Aspartame is, at minimum, "iffy" and I believe that would warrant a warning label to that effect. If I get the chance, I'll post some of the research which indicates why it is iffy.

Of course, in a free market, consumers who want such information would ask for it, and vote with their wallets. There would likely be a number of ratings agencies which would spring up to fill the void.
I think consumers *expect* warning labels on iffy products without having to ask for them. Otherwise there'd be no time to go shopping as you'd be bringing every product to the Manager asking for information. Rather impractical, no? :p

I like the ratings idea though.
 
Free markets don't force anyone to do anything they don't want to, including labeling their products. I mean, do you really want 99% of consumer packaging to be taken up by government warnings? Even ones that you think are lies or are invalid? How would you tell truth from lies?

Of course, in a free market, consumers who want such information would ask for it, and vote with their wallets. There would likely be a number of ratings agencies which would spring up to fill the void.

I agree with you that aspartame shouldn't be banned. The problem is that most people implicitly trust that something with FDA approval is perfectly safe. Aspartame didn't get FDA approval for a long time, until Donald Rumsfeld got it pushed through. In a true free market, stevia would kick aspartame's ass.

IMHO, Monsanto wouldn't exist in a true free market, because they would have been sued out of existence decades ago with the agent orange fiasco. My father-in-law survived 2 tours in Vietnam as a Marine with a flamethrower, which is pretty miraculous considering the mortality rates of flamethrowers. When you're shooting out 200 foot flames, you make a good target. 30-some years later, and he's fighting cancer because of Monsanto's experiments.
 
Combine the tariffs with the subsidy on corn (high fructose corn syrup, in extension) and that is why hfcs is in everything. In other countries, where the free market is allowed to work a bit more, sugar is in everything and hfcs is not because of its high price tag.

Exactly. Corn is heavily subsidized, so it's now used in almost everything. I recently saw Food Inc, and I highly recommend it. It's very shocking, and it explains the politics of food production very well. Torrents are available. If enough people see it, I think we'd have a pretty quick change to how we produce food in this country.
 
Click to see how safe Aspartame is [not]...

http://www.mercola.com/article/aspartame/dangers.htm

[h1]Aspartame is, by far, the most dangerous substance on the market that is added to foods.[/h1]
Aspartame is the technical name for the brand names NutraSweet, Equal, Spoonful, and Equal-Measure. It was discovered by accident in 1965 when James Schlatter, a chemist of G.D. Searle Company, was testing an anti-ulcer drug.
Aspartame was approved for dry goods in 1981 and for carbonated beverages in 1983. It was originally approved for dry goods on July 26, 1974, but objections filed by neuroscience researcher Dr John W. Olney and Consumer attorney James Turner in August 1974 as well as investigations of G.D. Searle's research practices caused the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to put approval of aspartame on hold (December 5, 1974). In 1985, Monsanto purchased G.D. Searle and made Searle Pharmaceuticals and The NutraSweet Company separate subsidiaries.
Aspartame accounts for over 75 percent of the adverse reactions to food additives reported to the FDA. Many of these reactions are very serious including seizures and death.(1) A few of the 90 different documented symptoms listed in the report as being caused by aspartame include: Headaches/migraines, dizziness, seizures, nausea, numbness, muscle spasms, weight gain, rashes, depression, fatigue, irritability, tachycardia, insomnia, vision problems, hearing loss, heart palpitations, breathing difficulties, anxiety attacks, slurred speech, loss of taste, tinnitus, vertigo, memory loss, and joint pain.


According to researchers and physicians studying the adverse effects of aspartame, the following chronic illnesses can be triggered or worsened by ingesting of aspartame:(2) Brain tumors, multiple sclerosis, epilepsy, chronic fatigue syndrome, parkinson's disease, alzheimer's, mental retardation, lymphoma, birth defects, fibromyalgia, and diabetes.
Aspartame is made up of three chemicals: aspartic acid, phenylalanine, and methanol. The book "Prescription for Nutritional Healing," by James and Phyllis Balch, lists aspartame under the category of "chemical poison." As you shall see, that is exactly what it is.

[h1]What Is Aspartame Made Of?[/h1]
[h2]Aspartic Acid (40 percent of Aspartame)[/h2]
Dr. Russell L. Blaylock, a professor of neurosurgery at the Medical University of Mississippi, recently published a book thoroughly detailing the damage that is caused by the ingestion of excessive aspartic acid from aspartame. Blaylock makes use of almost 500 scientific references to show how excess free excitatory amino acids such as aspartic acid and glutamic acid (about 99 percent of monosodium glutamate (MSG) is glutamic acid) in our food supply are causing serious chronic neurological disorders and a myriad of other acute symptoms.(3)
[h2]How Aspartate (and Glutamate) Cause Damage[/h2]
Aspartate and glutamate act as neurotransmitters in the brain by facilitating the transmission of information from neuron to neuron. Too much aspartate or glutamate in the brain kills certain neurons by allowing the influx of too much calcium into the cells. This influx triggers excessive amounts of free radicals, which kill the cells. The neural cell damage that can be caused by excessive aspartate and glutamate is why they are referred to as "excitotoxins." They "excite" or stimulate the neural cells to death.

Aspartic acid is an amino acid. Taken in its free form (unbound to proteins) it significantly raises the blood plasma level of aspartate and glutamate. The excess aspartate and glutamate in the blood plasma shortly after ingesting aspartame or products with free glutamic acid (glutamate precursor) leads to a high level of those neurotransmitters in certain areas of the brain.
The blood brain barrier (BBB), which normally protects the brain from excess glutamate and aspartate as well as toxins, 1) is not fully developed during childhood, 2) does not fully protect all areas of the brain, 3) is damaged by numerous chronic and acute conditions, and 4) allows seepage of excess glutamate and aspartate into the brain even when intact.
The excess glutamate and aspartate slowly begin to destroy neurons. The large majority (75 percent or more) of neural cells in a particular area of the brain are killed before any clinical symptoms of a chronic illness are noticed. A few of the many chronic illnesses that have been shown to be contributed to by long-term exposure to excitatory amino acid damage include:

  • Multiple sclerosis (MS)
  • ALS
  • Memory loss
  • Hormonal problems
  • Hearing loss
  • Epilepsy
  • Alzheimer's disease

  • Parkinson's disease
  • Hypoglycemia
  • AIDS
  • Dementia
  • Brain lesions
  • Neuroendocrine disorders
The risk to infants, children, pregnant women, the elderly and persons with certain chronic health problems from excitotoxins are great. Even the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology (FASEB), which usually understates problems and mimics the FDA party-line, recently stated in a review that:
"It is prudent to avoid the use of dietary supplements of L-glutamic acid by pregnant women, infants, and children. The existence of evidence of potential endocrine responses, i.e., elevated cortisol and prolactin, and differential responses between males and females, would also suggeshttp://www.sweetpoison.com/aspartame-side-effects.htmlhttp://www.sweetpoison.com/aspartame-side-effects.htmlt a neuroendocrine link and that suhttp://www.mercola.com/article/aspartame/dangers.htmpplemental L-glutamic acid should be avoided by women of childbearing age and individuals with affective disorders."(4)

Cont'd here:
http://www.mercola.com/article/aspartame/dangers.htmhttp://www.mercola.com/article/aspartame/dangers.htm

http://www.sweetpoison.com/aspartame-side-effects.htmlhttp://www.sweetpoison.com/aspartame-side-effects.html
 
Last edited:
I refuse to buy anything I know has aspartame or HFCS in it and I don't drink sodas at all and I write a letter to the company of products I used to buy but no longer can because of the ingredients.

I talk to parents in grocery stores about the "problems" with these things. Also people who use artificial sweetener God I can't tell you how many people I have seen on respirators and using nutra-sweet or splenda.

Several deaths of children having heart attacks at their athletic events have been linked to drinking diet sodas or chewing sugar free gum...

I could link 100 times the number of deaths to a full moon. Indeed, one could say that all deaths are simply caused by demons. Of course, there is no actual evidence of this. Scientific studies of aspartame have shown minimal or no ill effects at normal dosages. Now, if you eat 3500 packets per day for a few years, you might run into trouble, as the rats in the initial safety study did (that was the equivalent dose they were given), but that's a little out there. Aspartame is one of the most well studied food additives out there. You'd have more success arguing that guar gum or sodium benzoate was dangerous. Hell, how many things on THIS list are dangerous? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_food_additives
 
Click to see how safe Aspartame is [not]...

[h1]Aspartame is, by far, the most dangerous substance on the market that is added to foods.[/h1]
Aspartame is the technical name for the brand names NutraSweet, Equal, Spoonful, and Equal-Measure. It was discovered by accident in 1965 when James Schlatter, a chemist of G.D. Searle Company, was testing an anti-ulcer drug.
Aspartame was approved for dry goods in 1981 and for carbonated beverages in 1983. It was originally approved for dry goods on July 26, 1974, but objections filed by neuroscience researcher Dr John W. Olney and Consumer attorney James Turner in August 1974 as well as investigations of G.D. Searle's research practices caused the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to put approval of aspartame on hold (December 5, 1974). In 1985, Monsanto purchased G.D. Searle and made Searle Pharmaceuticals and The NutraSweet Company separate subsidiaries.
Aspartame accounts for over 75 percent of the adverse reactions to food additives reported to the FDA. Many of these reactions are very serious including seizures and death.(1) A few of the 90 different documented symptoms listed in the report as being caused by aspartame include: Headaches/migraines, dizziness, seizures, nausea, numbness, muscle spasms, weight gain, rashes, depression, fatigue, irritability, tachycardia, insomnia, vision problems, hearing loss, heart palpitations, breathing difficulties, anxiety attacks, slurred speech, loss of taste, tinnitus, vertigo, memory loss, and joint pain.


According to researchers and physicians studying the adverse effects of aspartame, the following chronic illnesses can be triggered or worsened by ingesting of aspartame:(2) Brain tumors, multiple sclerosis, epilepsy, chronic fatigue syndrome, parkinson's disease, alzheimer's, mental retardation, lymphoma, birth defects, fibromyalgia, and diabetes.
Aspartame is made up of three chemicals: aspartic acid, phenylalanine, and methanol. The book "Prescription for Nutritional Healing," by James and Phyllis Balch, lists aspartame under the category of "chemical poison." As you shall see, that is exactly what it is.

[h1]What Is Aspartame Made Of?[/h1]
[h2]Aspartic Acid (40 percent of Aspartame)[/h2]
Dr. Russell L. Blaylock, a professor of neurosurgery at the Medical University of Mississippi, recently published a book thoroughly detailing the damage that is caused by the ingestion of excessive aspartic acid from aspartame. Blaylock makes use of almost 500 scientific references to show how excess free excitatory amino acids such as aspartic acid and glutamic acid (about 99 percent of monosodium glutamate (MSG) is glutamic acid) in our food supply are causing serious chronic neurological disorders and a myriad of other acute symptoms.(3)
[h2]How Aspartate (and Glutamate) Cause Damage[/h2]
Aspartate and glutamate act as neurotransmitters in the brain by facilitating the transmission of information from neuron to neuron. Too much aspartate or glutamate in the brain kills certain neurons by allowing the influx of too much calcium into the cells. This influx triggers excessive amounts of free radicals, which kill the cells. The neural cell damage that can be caused by excessive aspartate and glutamate is why they are referred to as "excitotoxins." They "excite" or stimulate the neural cells to death.

Aspartic acid is an amino acid. Taken in its free form (unbound to proteins) it significantly raises the blood plasma level of aspartate and glutamate. The excess aspartate and glutamate in the blood plasma shortly after ingesting aspartame or products with free glutamic acid (glutamate precursor) leads to a high level of those neurotransmitters in certain areas of the brain.
The blood brain barrier (BBB), which normally protects the brain from excess glutamate and aspartate as well as toxins, 1) is not fully developed during childhood, 2) does not fully protect all areas of the brain, 3) is damaged by numerous chronic and acute conditions, and 4) allows seepage of excess glutamate and aspartate into the brain even when intact.
The excess glutamate and aspartate slowly begin to destroy neurons. The large majority (75 percent or more) of neural cells in a particular area of the brain are killed before any clinical symptoms of a chronic illness are noticed. A few of the many chronic illnesses that have been shown to be contributed to by long-term exposure to excitatory amino acid damage include:

  • Multiple sclerosis (MS)
  • ALS
  • Memory loss
  • Hormonal problems
  • Hearing loss
  • Epilepsy
  • Alzheimer's disease

  • Parkinson's disease
  • Hypoglycemia
  • AIDS
  • Dementia
  • Brain lesions
  • Neuroendocrine disorders
The risk to infants, children, pregnant women, the elderly and persons with certain chronic health problems from excitotoxins are great. Even the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology (FASEB), which usually understates problems and mimics the FDA party-line, recently stated in a review that:
"It is prudent to avoid the use of dietary supplements of L-glutamic acid by pregnant women, infants, and children. The existence of evidence of potential endocrine responses, i.e., elevated cortisol and prolactin, and differential responses between males and females, would also suggeshttp://www.sweetpoison.com/aspartame-side-effects.html[url]http://www.sweetpoison.com/aspartame-side-effects.html[/URL]t a neuroendocrine link and that suhttp://www.mercola.com/article/aspartame/dangers.htmpplemental L-glutamic acid should be avoided by women of childbearing age and individuals with affective disorders."(4)

Cont'd here:
http://www.mercola.com/article/aspartame/dangers.htm[url]http://www.mercola.com/article/aspartame/dangers.htm[/URL]

http://www.sweetpoison.com/aspartame-side-effects.html[url]http://www.sweetpoison.com/aspartame-side-effects.html[/URL]

There is so much misinformation in that article, I don't even know where to start. We discussed all the misinformation on glutamate in the MSG thread, and the same applies to aspartate. In short, aspartate does not cross the blood brain barrier, save via molecular pumps, which regulate the amount that goes into the brain. The amount of aspartate naturally in your blood is enough to kill every cell in your brain five times over. If your glutamate pumps are malfunctioning, you're dead anyways.

On Phenylalanine, those people with the genetic disorder already know they have it. Complaining that it is dangerous to one group is like rallying against the dangers of peanuts. The fact is that it isn't dangerous for the vast majority of the population.

On methanol: I have to call BS. If this was a problem, I would be blind or dead by now. Throughout my college years I drank a HUGE amount of diet soft drinks, and never had any problem. I have also had my share of diet drinks that have gotten too hot and had the aspartame break down. That is not pleasant to drink, because the sweetness is gone. Sugar free jello would not be sweet if the aspartame broke down. It is apparent that it didn't. Those drinks have to sit in 100+ degree weather for weeks before it breaks down. This is my experience from leaving a package of diet drinks in the garage for a month.

On DKP, this isn't a problem either. The tests he cited had the animals ingesting the equivalent of 3500 packets of sweetener per day. This is hardly a comparative test. Also, no-one would accept a GLP standard that included getting animals mixed up. It is obvious that the standards that were provided didn't include such statements. To say otherwise would be wholly asinine. I've had to deal with GLP, and I can tell you that that standard gives the term "anal" a whole new meaning. The tests have been reproduced dozens if not hundreds of times since then WITHOUT mix ups. Complaining about problems with the initial tests is a tactic of the AIDS deniers, and is beyond annoying. They act as if nothing has been done on the subject since 1983. The same thing is happening here.
 
there ya go science only cares about the % that doesn't have negative reactions to the rest be dammed.
 
Back
Top