Donald Rumsfeld one day may be considered to have committed the world’s greatest genocide. Having killed over two million Iraqis with bombs and unknown millions of people worldwide with aspartame and planned killing of millions more with tamiflu, the “miracle” flu vaccine
In 1985 Monsanto purchased G.D. Searle, the chemical company that held the patent to aspartame, the active ingredient in NutraSweet.
Monsanto was apparently untroubled by aspartame's clouded past, including a 1980 FDA Board of Inquiry, comprised of three independent scientists, which confirmed that it "might induce brain tumors."
The FDA had actually banned aspartame based on this finding, only to have Searle Chairman Donald Rumsfeld (currently the Secretary of Defense) vow to "call in his markers," to get it approved.
On January 21, 1981, the day after Ronald Reagan's inauguration, Searle re-applied to the FDA for approval to use aspartame in food sweetener, and Reagan's new FDA commissioner, Arthur Hayes Hull, Jr., appointed a 5-person Scientific Commission to review the board of inquiry's decision.
It soon became clear that the panel would uphold the ban by a 3-2 decision, but Hull then installed a sixth member on the commission, and the vote became deadlocked.
He then personally broke the tie in aspartame's favor.
Hull later left the FDA under allegations of impropriety, served briefly as Provost at New York Medical College, and then took a position with Burston-Marsteller, the chief public relations firm for both Monsanto and GD Searle.
Since that time he has never spoken publicly about aspartame.
~
5 comments:
Your comments about aspartame safety are outdated and thoroughly rejected by science.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 the old science presented). 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.)
It's so very interesting how John E. Garst, Ph.D. (Medicinal Chemistry, Pharmacology, Toxicology, and Nutrition)'s entire statement above is posted as a comment on all blogs touting aspartame as a poison.
Some major interest, probably highly paid, is keeping busy by answering any aspartame attacks by posting the same above comment.
Either, they are working directly for Searle or Rummy himself.
The best answer lies in whether the FDA really goes ahead and finally removes this poison from our daily diets.
Stevia is the best substitute and it actually tastes like sugar and not like a chemical like aspartame.
If Europoe and the US believes aspartame is a poison and many toher countries (like Japan) do not allow it, just remove iot and replace it with stevia and everyone except Rummy and Dr. Garst will be happy.
Coke has been using stevia in their diet coke in Japan for years and people love it.
ALSO PLEASE NOTE THAT jegarst (above commenter) is not even a blogger and joined just to cut and paste above comment. Almost certain that it's someone working for the aspartame czars who are well paid and trying to keep their "bloddy" jobs.
John E. Garst's comment reminds me how hard the tabacco peoplke fought the FDA after years of suffering and missery. John's first line is "Aspartame is perfectly safe used as directed in healthy people".
I believe most of these "peoplke" used it to make something taste sweet. I don't think they snorted it or shoved it up their butts.
Aspartame must be used by "healthy people"? Shit, most of the people who use it are diabetics or grossly overweight people or peopkle trying to lose weight. A sugar free sweetener is mostly used and expected to be used by UNHEALTHY people. Otherwise, there would not be a market for the product.
It;'s like saying "aspirin" should only be used by healthy people. Healthy people don't need aspirin or aspartame!!!!
Yes I go to misspeaking websites one after another and I often post the same information, because I speak the truth about aspartame otherwise obscured by conspiracy theorists and websites like yours. People must know that your comments are simply disproven by the facts. Do you really believe nothing more is known about aspartame since the 1980’s? Readers take note that this website posts nothing substantial done after the 1990's. That is a hallmark of this conspiracy theory, because they just don’t have anything reputable since then. I have documented evidence specifically rejecting the few scientific papers that antiaspartame theorists espouse, including not just the Soffritti et al, but everything—all on the basis of poor folate controls or in one case highly questionable conclusions based on insufficient and clearly questionable data.
FYI, I really don't care whether you or anyone uses aspartame, other sweeteners, or nothing at all. I write correcting these mistruths so that all may know and understand that your information perpetuates a clearly disproven internet conspiracy. You must realize that no western world scientific regulatory organization agrees with you or the perpetrators of this conspiracy theory. Don't believe me? Check out the latest 2009 data casting real doubt on any harm from sweeteners: Artificial sweeteners and the risk of gastric, pancreatic, and endometrial cancers in Italy, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19661082?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum
. Not only does this paper not support questions about aspartame safety, it came from the same country and a more prestigious group than the Soffritti et al work questioning it.
Also go and read about the discovered positive effects of aspartame, http://rmforall.blogspot.com/2009/08/tony-e-hugli-phd-ceo-healthaide-inc.html. Note that this post was written in opposition to the internet conspiracy theory purveyed at most of that site.
John E. Garst, Ph.D. (Medicinal Chemistry, Pharmacology, Toxicology, and Nutrition)
Post a Comment