The big health news from this past week is the petitioning of the FDA by two very powerful dairy organizations, The International Dairy Foods Association (IDFA) and the National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF), to allow aspartame and other artificial sweeteners to be added to milk and other dairy products without a label.
Aspartame, also known by the brand name Nutrasweet, is made up of three components: 50% phenylalanine (a chemical that affects human brain activity by transmitting impulses), 40% aspartic acid and 10% methanol (poisonous wood alcohol).
Based on the FDA’s track record in handling the aspartame issue, things are not looking good to stop approval of this outrageous measure.
For one, back in 1996 when aspartame was first approved for use in thousands of food products, the FDA used 15 “pivotal” studies as the basis for its decision.
One of these pivotal studies involved oral dosage of aspartame to infant Rhesus monkeys for 52 weeks. The research was conducted by the University of Wisconsin Medical Center in Madison, Wisconsin.
The monkeys were divided into three groups. A low dose group which received 1.0 g of aspartame/kg of body weight per day, a medium dose group receiving 3.0g/kg per day and a high dose group receiving 4-6 g/kg per day.
The high dose group ended up ingesting about the same amount as the medium dose group as the high dose monkeys would not consume intended levels of aspartame possibly because it was too sweet at that amount. There was no control group.
The monkeys in this study were served their aspartame in an orally consumed milk based formula.
Starting about 7 months (218 days) into the experiment, ALL the medium and high dose monkeys began having brain seizures.
“All animals in the medium and high dosage groups exhibited seizure activity. Seizures were observed for the first time following 218 days of treatment… The seizures were of the grand mal type… One monkey, m38, of the high dose group, died after 300 days of treatment. The cause of death was not determined…”
Grand mal seizures also known as tonic clonic seizures are horrific – a very dangerous seizure which affects the entire brain.
The low dose monkeys might have started to have seizures as well, but the death of one of the researchers, H. A. Waisman, caused a lack of staffing for the study. As a result, the low dose monkeys were withdrawn from the group at 200 days which is before the seizures in the medium and high dose group began occurring.
As soon as the aspartame was withdrawn from the monkey’s diets, the seizures stopped.
How the FDA could call a study “pivotal” for approving aspartame’s use in thousands of products where every single monkey suffered from grand mal seizures and one died while consuming milk based formula containing this artificial sweetener is incomprehensible.
According to Robert Cohen of Oradell, New Jersey, who rediscovered this study which was reported in 1972, the dairy formula/aspartame milk which the monkeys ingested would have been a key reason for the brain seizures.
Cohen, who holds a degree in brain chemistry, suggests that the ingestion of dairy has the effect of elevating the pH of the stomach. He contends that drinking a single 12 oz. glass of milk would have the effect of buffering the pH of the human stomach from 2 to 6.
When the stomach pH is 6, Cohen explains that the simple proteins that comprise aspartame would pass through undigested and hence move into the blood intact.
Testing of the monkeys in this study showed that there was in fact phenylalanine (which comprises 50% of aspartame) in their blood which proves that it is absorbed. Phenylalanine affects human brain activity by transmitting impulses and the brain seizures started occurring after this compound was detected in the monkey’s blood.
With aspartame, aka Nutrasweet, already used but still included on the label of many dairy products, it’s not a big leap for the FDA to take it to unlabeled status based on the petition from Big Dairy.
This is especially probable given the FDA’s backward interpretation of the Rhesus monkey study which it called “pivotal” in proving human safety and yet all the monkeys suffered from grand mal seizures while ingesting aspartame laced dairy formula.
Sarah, The Healthy Home Economist
Sources: Aspartame in Milk Without a Label? Big Dairy Petitions FDA for Approval
FDA Pivotal Safety Study: Aspartame Caused Brain Seizures
OMG this is horrible news… I’m from Europe and they are now bringing the “bad cousine” of aspartame, neotamine over here as well, with the “no label required” idea. It is starting to be obvious that the elite wants to reduce the population of the world and have big pharma benefit of the last moments of the very sick people. With this particular news I’m just wondering why put sweetener into milk anyway…
scary!
people get sick he makes money..follow the money trail and you will know when people say and do stuff
I have claimed 99.9% of scientists believe aspartame is perfectly safe used as directed. Some of you think I am paid for trying to explain the issue. So I ask do you think the University of Maryland is a paid troll too with their report “The Truth About Aspartame”, ? Realize that the regulatory agencies of 90 countries agree that aspartame is perfectly safe used as directed and EFSA just reiterated the fact last month. I have suggested why some people are susceptible to aspartame. Frankly, I could care less whether people agree or disagree. I am presenting the facts.
And the undeniable fact is that some people have a problem with aspartame; I have never questioned that. But in the information I have presented, I have explained why the problem resides in their own metabolism and their own ability to process methanol, formaldehyde or formate or in frank allergy to formaldehyde or formate, not in aspartame safety. Allergy to formaldehyde can arise from childhood insect stings and related issues. People report allergy to milk, peanuts, and many foods. But allergy does in no way make milk and peanuts unsafe to most people, so why do people not recognize aspartame is not unsafe for most people either?
John E. Garst, Ph.D. (Medicinal Chemistry, Pharmacology, Toxicology, and Nutrition)
I only consume aspartame or other artificial sweetners if I want to make myself reaallly sick! Which is basically never.
I couldn’t find a clear answer about labeling one way or another after reading dozens of articles from dozens of sources. I finally tracked down the text of the petition from the dairy industry – should have just looked here first, as it is located in the above-linked regulations.gov page (here is the direct link should anyone be interested in reading it in its entirety: http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FDA-2009-P-0147-0012).
While I still think aspartame in milk is a terrible idea, this issue has been greatly misunderstood. The aspartame would still have to be labeled in the ingredients list. It just wouldn’t have to be marked “reduced calorie” or “sugar-free” on the front of the container as it currently is required to be.
One problem is that corporations are not human. Driven by humans these corporations use the power they need to increase profit. Once started, like a headless giant corporations tend to gather what ever can be used to further their needs (we might also call this greed).
Our governments now use the cooperate model. Who can tell them apart? Birds of a feather, love to stick together.
Kimball:
You need to get off your socialistic malfeasance and learn some science? Why do you try to blame still abundant folate deficiency (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=folate+deficiency) and the known natural folate polymorphisms that govern this problem (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=folate+polymorphisms) on corporations? What part of 90+ regulatory agencies worldwide being unified on the safety of aspartame do you consider corporations? Aspartame is deemed perfectly safe used as directed by all these agencies, because the only safety problem that can be shown reflect personal problems by individuals in metabolizing the methanol in aspartame. That is not corporations, those are simple personal deficiency or genetic issues that have nothing to do with the inate safety of this sweetener.
John E. Garst, Ph.D. (Medicinal Chemistry, Pharmacology, Toxicology, and Nutrition)
Obviously Mr Garst is a paid flunkie of BIG PHarma. big $$ = big lies
Nikki you need to read more: “Man made molecule-bad. Nature made molecule-good” is a totally manufactured philosophy. That nature-made material also includes the totally natural aflatoxin B1-(see Wikipedia), perhaps the most carcinogenic substance known. It kills hundreds a day in Africa from food grain contamination. By the way corn and peanuts that contain it are diverted to alcohol production and other purposes, since its discovery. By then it had probably killed hundreds of thousands in the good old USA too. And of course there are many, many other mycotoxins that have toxic effects that can be found in our food supply chain. Fortunately those foodstuffs are diverted by the FDA away from our consumption. Also does that include botulinum toxin, perhaps the most toxic substance known–it is totally natural. And then there are corn tortillas that may naturally contain folate antagonists, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15051815 and have even greater consequences than aspartame. And by the way methylsalicylate (oil of wintergreen) is a methyl ester of a completely natural plant product, indicating that other methyl esters like aspartame are probably a natural substance we just haven’t identified yet.
John E. Garst, Ph.D. (Medicinal Chemistry, Pharmacology, Toxicology, and Nutrition)
My friend has a son that is severely allergic to aspartame. He turns blue and stops breathing when he ingests it. This is criminal to hide it from the consumer. Makes me so mad. Just another reason to drink raw milk!
@Tina, the us gov is a disappointment in more than just the area of food….