Don't consume NutraSweet/Aspartame/Equal/Spoonful !!!

[Paradroid]

This has been in and out of the news for years (so long I can't even remember the first time I read it). Basically, NutraSweet/Aspartame/Equal/Spoonful are dangerous to your health! The recent news is a racketeering suit has been filed against some US companies:

...

For 16 years, the FDA denied approval of aspartame because of compelling evidence of its contributing to brain tumors and other serious disabilities. Donald Rumsfeld, present Secretary of Defense in the Bush Administration, left President Ford's administration as Chief of Staff to become the CEO of aspartame producer G D Searle Co. in 1981. Shortly after, Rumsfeld became the CEO, and the day after President Reagan took office, aspartame was quickly approved by FDA Commissioner Arthur Hayes over the objections of the FDA's Public Board of Inquiry. Hayes had been recently appointed by the Reagan Administration. Shortly after aspartame's approval by the FDA, Hayes joined NutraSweet's public relations firm under a ten year contract at $1,000 a day.

Aspartame/NutraSweet was the product of the G. D. Searle Co. In January 1977, the FDA wrote a 33 page letter to U.S. Justice Department Attorney
Sam Skinner: "We request that your office convene a Grand Jury investigation into apparent violations of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act." Skinner allowed the Statute of Limitations to run.

....

Personnaly, I never touch the stuff!

 

[Sar]

Give me real sugar any day.

:/

 

[Tom]

Real sugar in the form of Fructose, Lactose, Maltose, not the stuff you buy in bags.

Myself, I drink diet drinks all the time (mainly because I don't like the gummy feeling you get after drinking real coke etc), I'd drink more water but hardly any service stations sell the fizzy stuff, so I go for Latte instead.

As a side note, there are things we consume that are many times more dangerous to our health. Things like Hydrogenated Vegetable Oils and mercury levels in seafood.

 

[Wij]

Please check Snopes in future

 

[Tom]

Good point Wijlet. here is the link for those who are too lazy to search.

 

[Bodhi]

Only "consume" whichever one is in Pepsi Max. I'm pretty sure the other bad stuff I take will get me before Nutrasweet tho.

 

[Paradroid]

The above link does give you a interesting prespective, unfortunetly the links from that page (proving it's bunk?) are somewhat dubious!

The whole idea is that the law suit is for racketeering (ie involving officials in the FDA), hence, can you then believe the reems of websites referring to the FDAs decision on this issue back in 1981? Thats' the point!

Another link takes us to the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH) - who are also widely discredited on their impartiality.

Another link on that page (laughably) states:

...
This work was supported by a grant from the NutraSweet Co.
...

Here's another link.

Dr. Light confirmed not only the revolving door I had described in my paper, but in addition, the corruption within the "government" taking place just on the other side of that door. Here, from an eyewitness, came the truth that individuals representing corporations are not only holding key government positions, they have also been determining which studies are done, who receives grants, and they have been "adjusting" the reports in order to create a false sense of security about their favored products and services.

A lot of these independant research companies are just setup to aid industry, I thought this was common knowledge?





I've no doubt there may well be lots of scare mongering etc (I don't claim to have all the answers), but, remember, I'm Paradroid - the conspiracy nut (note the absence of "theory").

 

[Sar]

Real sugar in the form of Fructose, Lactose, Maltose, not the stuff you buy in bags.

Myself, I drink diet drinks all the time (mainly because I don't like the gummy feeling you get after drinking real coke etc), I'd drink more water but hardly any service stations sell the fizzy stuff, so I go for Latte instead.

As a side note, there are things we consume that are many times more dangerous to our health. Things like Hydrogenated Vegetable Oils and mercury levels in seafood.

I was talking about the bagged stuff - cane sugar...?

 

[Rubber Bullets]

Anyone heard of stevia rebaudiana?

Probably not I guess.

It is plant that is native to South America and produces a natural sweetener that has been used for hundreds of years.

It has been shown to be a very safe non-toxic and non-calorific sugar substitute, with possible implications for diabetics etc.

So why haven't you heard of it? Because the American sugar and sweetener industry doesn't want you too. They have 'bought' the rights to the plant, worldwide, despite the fact that it grown naturally.

Multinational giants like Coca-Cola and Beatrice Foods use stevia extracts to sweeten foods (as a replacement for NutraSweet and saccharin) for sale in Japan, Brazil, and other countries where it is approved as a food additive. Not so in the United States, however, where stevia is specifically prohibited from use as a sweetener or as a food additive. Why? Many people believe that the national noncaloric sweetener giants have been successful in preventing this all-natural, inexpensive, and nonpatentable sweetener from being used to replace their patented, synthetic, more expensive sweetener products.

Today, stevia products and steviosol extracts may only be sold in the United States as foods and food supplements, not as food additives. In fact, in 1991 the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) even banned all imports of stevia into the country. This political move was viewed by many to have monetary ties to the sweetener industry (such as NutraSweet and others), which stood to lose a lot

In fact of course this probably isn't legal, but in practise no one can afford to actually fight the sugar companies in court and so the ban stands. It is possible to buy the stuff in very small quantities, my sister bought a couple of the plants just a couple of weeks ago, but try to make any money out of it and you'll be stomped on.

The article the quote is taken from is here

Don't you just love american big business?

RB

 

[old.user4556]

Please check Snopes in future

Damn, beat me to it!

Re the first post, what a pile of internet-rumoured-witch-hunting pile of shite.

 

[Paradroid]

Re the first post, what a pile of internet-rumoured-witch-hunting pile of shite.

Erm, I'm straining to understand what you mean? Are you suggesting it's a rumour that a racheteering law suit has been filed? Are you selectively reading certain posts?

My last point was suggesting that you can't trust what they say because they're quite possibly crooks - Rubber Bullets post gave another interesting insight into the sugar industry with further evidence of dodgy dealings, but you have chosen to ignore it? It looks like you've only read posts 1 & 2 and then replied! tbh everyone does that now and again ... ?

 

[old.user4556]

Let me be utterly and anally specific just for you:

The whole "artificial sweetner causes your eyeballs to fall out their sockets and rot your brain in 10 seconds" is a pile of internet-rumoured-witch-hunting pile of shite.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Diabetic here -raises a hand-

Artificial, or antarctical, sweeteners are the way to go. Don't know about the US though, they got dangerous stuff even in their dangerous stuff. Soon they'll be announcing that acid is bad for you 'cause it contains acid.

Sidetracking, argh, mental note: don't type when hungover...

Anyway, the point is, america has crappy food products so any study on "hazards" from food is given a bird, toss and a byebye.


Oh by the way....i f'ing hate when people think(i'm psychic) i'm being some veggie crapper or diet monster when i order a light coke....

 

[leggy]

OMGS SNOPES SAYZ ITS LIES SO IT MUST BE!1!!!

It strikes me as moronic trying to counter one internet based argument with another. It's like using a down syndrome child to beat another at an arithmetic competition.

 

[Paradroid]

Let me be utterly and anally specific just for you:

The whole "artificial sweetner causes your eyeballs to fall out their sockets and rot your brain in 10 seconds" is a pile of internet-rumoured-witch-hunting pile of shite.

Big_G, I appreciate your opinion on the Aspartame debate, needlessly-unpleasant anal specificity accepted.

The FDA didn't accept Aspartame for 16 years, why? Because the producers couldn't prove it was 100% safe. After a political/commercial appointment, all of a sudden it was Ok'd (aka the racketeering law suit).

The chances are it is 99.9% safe (or whatever the percentage is). But what if you're the 0.1% of the population who are affected? The officials decided that 0.1% is "acceptable" - would you, if you were affected? They probably saw it as low-risk, not no-risk. But profit provails.

This goes on all the time in different arenas, Firestone tyres? Microwave transmitters? Electricity pylons & sub stations? It's never no-risk is it? It's a financial balance between profits and claims - if you can muddy the argument, then you get less claims 'cause you can't prove it was solely this product that caused your illness. But why should we? Shouldn't the owness be on the producer to prove it's 100% safe? The argument can then boil down to our safety against commercial progress (ie profits).

 

[Bodhi]

As you say, welcome to big business. Anyone remember the Ford Pinto scandal of the early 70's? Ford made a business decision, between an extensive re-engineering of the Pinto car and paying out compensation to those killed or injured by their product. It turned out compensation was cheaper (by quite a long margin), so they went with that. Morally dubious yes, but from a business perspective it was the way to go. Just goes to show, keep moral fabric out of business, as it typically gets in the way and costs lots and lots of money. You can moan on and on about disregard for the consumer, but Ford's attitude doesn't really seem to have harmed car sales too much (Ford being the biggest car maker in the world and all).

But as ever, common sense must prevail, even with your average rabid tree-hugging anti-capatalist muppet. Due to the varying nature of human beings, it is damn near impossible to make something which is 100% safe. If you think it is you are stuck in your own ideal world and will never be satisfied with the way the world is going and will spend the rest of your life having a moan. You can see why I ignore people such as this. In reality, if something is safe for 98-99% of the population, then it's safe to be sold imo. Just put a warning on the side for the awkward 1-2% and bob's related to your mother. If you're in the 1-2% I would honestly say tough shit, natural selection will make you it's bitch soon enough.

I see the issue of research funding has come up by the ultimately paranoid amongst you. My only response to this is Bollocks. Great big hairy Bollocks. We have had years of research into the dangers of smoking cigarettes and passive smoking, all the research is telling us its bad. However all the research is also being funded by anti-smoking groups. Does this mean we should just ignore it cos it can't be impartial? Didn't think so, although I would ignore the passive smoking research, as that's mostly bollocks, but that's a different argument. Let's just say I don't think Roy Castle knew any more about what triggered his cancer than I do.

 

[old.user4556]

Good post!

 

[Paradroid]

As you say, welcome to big business. Anyone remember the Ford Pinto scandal of the early 70's? Ford made a business decision, between an extensive re-engineering of the Pinto car and paying out compensation to those killed or injured by their product. It turned out compensation was cheaper (by quite a long margin), so they went with that. Morally dubious yes, but from a business perspective it was the way to go. Just goes to show, keep moral fabric out of business, as it typically gets in the way and costs lots and lots of money. You can moan on and on about disregard for the consumer, but Ford's attitude doesn't really seem to have harmed car sales too much (Ford being the biggest car maker in the world and all).

But as ever, common sense must prevail, even with your average rabid tree-hugging anti-capatalist muppet. Due to the varying nature of human beings, it is damn near impossible to make something which is 100% safe. If you think it is you are stuck in your own ideal world and will never be satisfied with the way the world is going and will spend the rest of your life having a moan. You can see why I ignore people such as this. In reality, if something is safe for 98-99% of the population, then it's safe to be sold imo. Just put a warning on the side for the awkward 1-2% and bob's related to your mother. If you're in the 1-2% I would honestly say tough shit, natural selection will make you it's bitch soon enough.

I see the issue of research funding has come up by the ultimately paranoid amongst you. My only response to this is Bollocks. Great big hairy Bollocks. We have had years of research into the dangers of smoking cigarettes and passive smoking, all the research is telling us its bad. However all the research is also being funded by anti-smoking groups. Does this mean we should just ignore it cos it can't be impartial? Didn't think so, although I would ignore the passive smoking research, as that's mostly bollocks, but that's a different argument. Let's just say I don't think Roy Castle knew any more about what triggered his cancer than I do.

In the Pinto example above, you say yourself that is was "morally dubious" - but you seem happy that the company made ok profits, so that's ok then? And, if 1-2% of the population are not safe that's "tough shit"? With 6 billion people on the planet that accounts for 60-120 million people? Even in the small UK market that's 600,000 - 1.2 million people? I'd say that displays a remarkable lack of empathy, bordering on sociopathy! Thank god you're not in charge!

 

[MYstIC G]

tbh I'd vote for Bodhi if it meant I didn't have to read this shit...

 

[Bodhi]

With the overpopulation problems in the UK and abroad these days, I'd say losing 1-2% of the population wouldn't be such a bad thing at all, as long as they were all chavs and excessively paranoid internet forum posters. I don't see how a bit of realism makes me a sociopath. Considering these people would be lost through an inability to adapt to their environment it would be natural selection. This has been going on longer than anyone can remember (the dinosaurs anyone?) and is a natural part of life. With all the dangers we're removing through medicines and the idiot-proofing of anything dangerous such as cars etc we are actually affecting this most natural of processes, leading to the overpopulation problems we have today. I mean it happens in the natural world all the time (myxamitosis in rabbits etc), to think that we're above the laws of nature just because we're capable of rational thought is downright arrogant imo.

And in the Pinto example, I was pointing out that these are taken as business decisions, not moral ones. Businesses are set up to make money, and all decisions must be taken with this in mind. It sucks yeah, but come up with a better way of doing things rather than just moaning about the way things are and I'll listen. If you ask me, Ford covered their asses by offering compensation to victim's families - if they hadn't they would have been in very muddy waters. As it is, they're evil yes, but technically they haven't done anything wrong. They found a problem with a product and found a way round it. Worse things happen at sea after all.

 

[Paradroid]

tbh I'd vote for Bodhi if it meant I didn't have to read this shit...

Then do, and don't! But you did, and you went further - you replied!

Thanks for the comments MYstIC G, but why don't you post in a thread that interests you? - instead of trolling? You intellectual giant you!

:touch:

 

[Jonaldo]

Peanuts are still legal right? But aren't millions of people allergic to them and they go in loads of foods. As long as they have the warning on them that it might kill you then fair play.

 

[Bodhi]

But peanuts are teh natural and hence nowhere near as lethal as those horrible nasty sweeteners American companies pump out! Plus! Morally superior people eat peanuts. It's what makes their posts such an interesting read.

 

[Paradroid]

With the overpopulation problems in the UK and abroad these days, I'd say losing 1-2% of the population wouldn't be such a bad thing at all, as long as they were all chavs and excessively paranoid internet forum posters. I don't see how a bit of realism makes me a sociopath. Considering these people would be lost through an inability to adapt to their environment it would be natural selection. This has been going on longer than anyone can remember (the dinosaurs anyone?) and is a natural part of life. With all the dangers we're removing through medicines and the idiot-proofing of anything dangerous such as cars etc we are actually affecting this most natural of processes, leading to the overpopulation problems we have today. I mean it happens in the natural world all the time (myxamitosis in rabbits etc), to think that we're above the laws of nature just because we're capable of rational thought is downright arrogant imo.

And in the Pinto example, I was pointing out that these are taken as business decisions, not moral ones. Businesses are set up to make money, and all decisions must be taken with this in mind. It sucks yeah, but come up with a better way of doing things rather than just moaning about the way things are and I'll listen. If you ask me, Ford covered their asses by offering compensation to victim's families - if they hadn't they would have been in very muddy waters. As it is, they're evil yes, but technically they haven't done anything wrong. They found a problem with a product and found a way round it. Worse things happen at sea after all.

I'd agree the world is over populated in places (and without future oil we're looking at a major shrinkage). I didn't say your "realistic views" make you a sociopath, I said your lack of empathy for the 1-2% is borderline sociopathy. If you were in the 1-2%, I'd be concerned about you, but apparently you wouldn't care about me (or anyone else)!

But this isn't natural selection we're talking about though, is it? It's man-made. It's not like we're talking about diseases wiping out populations - it's about the deliberate insertion of additives (in the larger context) into our food supplies. Or maybe it is, and the future population will be either people who genetically can handle every chemical thrown at them, or brainy chemists who know what foodstuffs to avoid for breakfast lunch & dinner!

 

[Tom]

This goes on all the time in different arenas, Firestone tyres? Microwave transmitters? Electricity pylons & sub stations?

What a load of cock tbh. There is absolutely nothing unhealthy in the slightest respect about Microwave transmitters or electricity pylons. To believe there is, is merely demonstrating a person's ignorance of the mechanics of such things.

 

[MYstIC G]

Don't say such things Tom, you'll have the size of your intelligence brought into question in public!!!

 

[Paradroid]

What a load of cock tbh. There is absolutely nothing unhealthy in the slightest respect about Microwave transmitters or electricity pylons. To believe there is, is merely demonstrating a person's ignorance of the mechanics of such things.

LoL

Tom, I've a BEng Electrical/Electronic Engineering (Paisley Uni - formerly Paisley College of Technology), which I believe I've posted about before (there's another Freddy doing my same degree atm). I specialised in Communications & Electromagnetic waves, my honours project was building & testing Radiating-Edge Gap-Coupled Microwave antennas (REGCOMA). I've done uni reports on the effects of electromagnetic radiation on the human body (inc. thermo-elastic expansion of the brain)...

 

[Jonaldo]

Peanuts still kill people..

 

[Wij]

LoL

Tom, I've a BEng Electrical/Electronic Engineering (Paisley Uni - formerly Paisley College of Technology), which I believe I've posted about before (there's another Freddy doing my same degree atm). I specialised in Communications & Electromagnetic waves, my honours project was building & testing Radiating-Edge Gap-Coupled Microwave antennas (REGCOMA). I've done uni reports on the effects of electromagnetic radiation on the human body (inc. thermo-elastic expansion of the brain)...

Still not read a good book though

Seriously, the epidemeology is against it.

 

[Tom]

LoL

Obviously that makes you such an expert on the subject you can disregard the thousands of hours of research done over the past 50 or so years by minds greater in intellect than yours, mine, or anybody elses whom you know.

By the way, do you know the back of a typical CRT has around 9600 volts buzzing away in there? Its killing me as I type. Oh, and don't forget to hold your mobile phone away from your head, after all, its the microwaves that heat your head up (or perhaps its just the heat from your own body that warms the phone up).