Aspartame - May be safe after all

[gdogg75]

in about a year from now another study will be done stating the negative effects after a 5yr case study... isn't that how everything goes?
what i want to know is how reliable are these studies? and how many people are actually involved in the "testing process"?

[PanzeR-]

if anything then I guess an artificial sweetener (ANY artificial sweetener, btw.) could potentially cause a hypoglycemia by inducing insulin secretion.
I don't think that there's proof for this but it is a possible physiological reaction to sweet taste.

That's indeed what she get

Maybe all the complainers are closets-diabetics? :P

[deke]

That is incorrect. Most people do not have genetic problems with bodybuilding or supplements in regards to your dilemma. You probably have other problems that you haven't even mentioned due to the lack of time you've spent here.

TOO FUNNY! On the heels of wild and incorrect conjecture, you do it AGAIN! FOR THE RECORD, I DO NOT HAVE ANY HEALTH RELATED PROBLEMS OR GENETIC ISSUES. Please stop with the uneducated conjecture, it is getting really lame.

Also, I had asked you to previously show us where I stated that I experienced problems with aspartame. Again, PLEASE show me where I said I am "experiencing problems" with aspartame.

You conveniently did not respond to that question. You did, however, state now that I have a dilemma. You now escalated your fabricated "problem" into a fabricated "dilemma". CLASSIC!

HOW CAN I HAVE A DILEMMA IF I DO NOT EVEN HAVE A PROBLEM????

As for the sentence in bold it was directed towards you and your excessive whining.

Please tell me how one whines about an imaginary problem (and now upgraded to a dilemma, LOL!) prior to it being created by you???

[deke]

I didn't just dismantle it, I just blew it into dust. -- So you dismantled, and blew my "monkey truth" into dust with rat truth?.... Priceless.

No, actually I blew it into dust based on very simple fatal flaws in testing procedure. The same flaw was in both of the studies you listed.

Stop downplaying the importance of needing INDEPENDENT NON INDUSTRY studies. -- I never downplayed (or denied) the importance of independent studies.

Agreed. My mistake. However, you did not acknowledge that there are manipulated/bought and paid for studies in regards to aspartame even after this was brought up by myself and others. I repeatedly addressed it with no response from you except dodging it.

You kept me up late but it was worth it. -- Woah.... easy there fella.

LMAO! Nice!

If the minority is a statistically significant part of the population, then something is going on and needs to be looked into. -- It is being looked into.... reguardless of the babble that you've posted.

I hardly call showing 2 major pro-aspartame studies were manipulated as babble.

NO ONE has listed any POSITIVE effects of aspartame, only NEGATIVE ones. -- Please.... you are acting as if aspartame was a nutritional supplement.

I don't deny that there are negative reactions to aspartame.... but it is an effective sweetener (and this is an aspartame thread so I really don't give a sh!t if there are other sweeteners to choose from). So what POSITIVE effects should we expect from a sweetener deke?

But you already listed one, straight from the horses mouth:

Originally Posted by deke View Post
NO ONE has listed any POSITIVE effects of aspartame, only NEGATIVE ones.
"Well here's one that CANNOT be denied....

Aspartame is a useful sweetener for millions of people who do not want the added calories of sugar."

Other sweeteners are relevent to this discussion if they have a higher safety profile, no known side effects, no implications of tumors, no toxic pharmacology, etc.

make comments like 26 years of daily consumption worldwide (which is incorrect - don't get me started), -- Oh no, deke.... don't get started! It's around 28-years of public consumption (France/1979, US/1981).

Nice try. You said 26 years of daily consumption worldwide. Then you say 28 years consumption in France.

You are being misleading here. The European Union as a whole did not approve aspartame until 1994. That would be ONLY 13 years of worldwide consumption at the Most if they were the last to approve aspartame.

continually challenge anything negative in regards to aspartame. -- That is a lie, and you know it. Here is an example of my open admission to the fact that the negative reactions to aspartame, are indeed an evident truth.... Any questions?

I was referring to mechanics - formaldehyde, formic acid, single amino's, and it's long unsavory history for approval. It is obvious that you could not discredit people's anecdotal experiences with aspartame. You could not call everyone who chimed in with side effects a liar without making yourself look like an idiot. That was a given and for you to take that out of my statement is strange.

This is NOT babble as someone on this thread would like to call it. This is the TRUTH and does have a MAJOR implication to this topic. -- So can you tell me how the metabolism of aspartame to aspartate, phenylalanine and methanol changes, based on who conducts the study?

That babble has ZERO influence on the pharmacokinetics of aspartame.

I guess my documenting 2 studies were manipulated and that one "expert panel" was paid for by the largest aspartame manufacturer in the world does not show that there is an influence based on manipulation or gross negligence of testing methods.

[deke]

If you look at Deke's other posts, and there aren't many,

So, Lawdog1379, I can use the search button as well. Just how many of your 2,087 posts are in bodybuilding related threads? I see that you posted in a grand total of a whopping 6 whole threads pertaining to bodybuilding. Your posts in this thread were the first that you have ever done in supplements, period.

[deke]

Lets summarize some of the information or ideas that have come about during this thread.

In no particular order of importance:

SIDE EFFECTS
1. Possible isolated single amino acid aspartic acid (aspartate) negative side effect
2. Possible isolated single amino acid Phenylalanine negative side effect
3. Possible methanol and it's metabolites, formaldehyde and formic acid (formate), negative side effects.
4. Possible potential for hypoglycemia
5. Any combination of the first four
6. Large amount of reports of anecdotal side effects

MECHANICS AND STUDIES
1. Actual counteraction to methanol by ethanol (a known antidote for methanol poisoning)
2. Theorized counteraction to methanol by supplementation of folic acid/B vitamins
3. Possible tumor causing in 2 independent studies (questioned by governments)
4. Numerous studies showing no negative side effects (some have been proven to be flawed)

HISTORY
1. Possible unsavory history for approval
2. Still in use worldwide with no known bans. Multiple governments claim to be safe.

Did I miss anything or does anyone else have anything else to add to the list?

No Hype (or anyone else), do you want to add anything in regards to non-negative information?

[NO HYPE]

No, actually I blew it into dust based on very simple fatal flaws in testing procedure. The same flaw was in both of the studies you listed.

It's funny that you should speak of flaws....

Prenatal exposure to aspartame (at 2,000 ppm) to simulate an assumed daily aspartame intake of 100 mg/kg bw?

So after being born.... how many babies do you know, that are consuming 100 mg/kg bw of aspartame when they get home from the hospital?

"a dose level close to the acceptable daily intake for humans".... Yeah ok, let's be realistic for a minute. How many 150 lb individuals do you know, that are consuming nearly 7000 mg of aspartame per day?

That would be the equivalent of about 35 cans of soda. Next?



So hey, speaking of "malignant tumors" and Sprague-Dawley rats....

"Tumors frequently develop in rats; they are particularly common in females, because many of them originate in the mammary glands. Approximately 30% of these tumors are malignant; however, even those that may be considered benign on pathologic examination grow progressively to a large size and contribute to an early death of the animal, particularly because two or three tumors frequently develop in short sequence in the same animal." http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/pag...geindex=1#page

What I've gathered.... when consumed normally (e.g. NOT AT 100 mg/kg from birth to death), aspartame is no worse than regular Coca-Cola in reguards to negative effects on health from lifetime administration.




1: Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2006 Sep;1076:736-52. Links
Results of long-term carcinogenicity bioassays on Coca-Cola administered to Sprague-Dawley rats.

Belpoggi F, Soffritti M, Tibaldi E, Falcioni L, Bua L, Trabucco F.
Cesare Maltoni Cancer Research Center, European Foundation for Oncology and Environmental Siences B. Ramazzini, 40010 Bentivoglio, Italy.

Coca-Cola was invented in May 1886 in Atlanta, Georgia by a pharmacist who, by accident or design, mixed carbonated water with the syrup of sugar, phosphoric acid, caffeine, and other natural flavors to create what is known as "the world's favorite soft drink." Coca-Cola is currently sold in more than 200 countries and in early 2000, the company sold its 10 billionth unit case of Coca-Cola branded products. Given the worldwide consumption of Coca-Cola, a project of experimental bioassays to study its long-term effects when administered as substitute for drinking water on male and female Sprague-Dawley rats was planned and executed. The objective of the project was to study whether and how long-term consumption of Coca-Cola affects the basic tumorigram of test animals. The bioassays were performed on rats beginning at different ages, namely: (a) on males and females exposed since embryonic life or from 7 weeks of age; and (b) on males and females exposed from 30, 39, or 55 weeks of age. Overall, the project included 1999 rats. During the biophase, data were collected on fluid and feed consumption, body weight, and survival. Animals were kept under observation until spontaneous death and underwent complete necropsy. The results indicate: (a) an increase in body weight in all treated animals; (b) a statistically significant increase of the incidence in females, both breeders and offspring, bearing malignant mammary tumors; (c) a statistically significant increase in the incidence of exocrine ademonas of the pancreas in both male and female breeders and offspring; and (d) an increased incidence, albeit not statistically significant, of pancreatic islet cell carcinomas in females, a malignant tumor which occurs very rarely in our historical controls. On the basis of the results of this study, excessive consumption of regular soft-drinks should be generally discouraged, in particular for children and adolescents. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/en...t=AbstractPlus

However, you did not acknowledge that there are manipulated/bought and paid for studies in regards to aspartame even after this was brought up by myself and others.

So the fact that I did not acknowledge aspartame corruption, implies that I deny it's existance entirely? Once again.... priceless.

I repeatedly addressed it with no response from you except dodging it.

I need not adress, that which does not apply. The flawed studies/corruption in which you speak of, simply do not change the pharmacokinetics of aspartame to aspartate, phenylalanine and methanol.

I hardly call showing 2 major pro-aspartame studies were manipulated as babble.

.... and despite the manipulation that was demonstrated, the metabolism of aspartame remains unchanged.

continually challenge anything negative in regards to aspartame.

That is a lie, and you know it.

I was referring to mechanics - formaldehyde, formic acid, single amino's,

Bullsh!t. I never challenged the mechanics of formaldehyde, formic acid, and single amino's.... Are you done?

I guess my documenting 2 studies were manipulated and that one "expert panel" was paid for by the largest aspartame manufacturer in the world does not show that there is an influence based on manipulation or gross negligence of testing methods.

You've pointed out the corruption of aspartame.... that's obvious, but it simply does not change the fact that aspartame is a safe sweetener for millions of people.

[NO HYPE]

Lets summarize some of the information or ideas that have come about during this thread.

In no particular order of importance:

SIDE EFFECTS
1. Possible isolated single amino acid aspartic acid (aspartate) negative side effect
2. Possible isolated single amino acid Phenylalanine negative side effect
3. Possible methanol and it's metabolites, formaldehyde and formic acid (formate), negative side effects.
4. Possible potential for hypoglycemia
5. Any combination of the first four
6. Large amount of reports of anecdotal side effects

MECHANICS AND STUDIES
1. Actual counteraction to methanol by ethanol (a known antidote for methanol poisoning)
2. Theorized counteraction to methanol by supplementation of folic acid/B vitamins
3. Possible tumor causing in 2 independent studies (questioned by governments)
4. Numerous studies showing no negative side effects (some have been proven to be flawed)

HISTORY
1. Possible unsavory history for approval
2. Still in use worldwide with no known bans. Multiple governments claim to be safe.

Did I miss anything or does anyone else have anything else to add to the list?

No Hype (or anyone else), do you want to add anything in regards to non-negative information?

I just want to know if these effects are being caused by methanol.

If anyone that normally experiences negative interactions with aspartame (provided the symptoms are normally mild), is willing to try supplementing some folic acid/B vitamins prior to ingestion.... we might be able to find out.

In reguards to anyone experiencing negative side effects from aspartame, hepatic H4folate status determines the individual's susceptibility to methanol, therefore I have a strong intuition that the supplementation of folic acid/B vitamins will likely ameliorate the severity of these symptoms.

[deke]

I am done saber rattling with you. We are getting nowhere. Apparently, you need to be right no matter what. I have clearly stated what was important up to this point on this topic. I feel you have as well.

Even though I disagree with things you said in your last response, I will instead focus on the topic at hand.

For the benefit of the thread, I gave you the last word with your last response. Hopefully that is sufficient.

[dannov]

OK, thread officially closed. Plenty of back-and-forth information to inform readers, so I think the goal was accomplished and contributive to the BB forums.

[deke]

I did some heavy reading yesterday on the Ramazzini study. I will respond later with some thoughts I had on the study. I developed a couple situational lines of thought where there could be potential risk to subgroups of the population.

[deke]

OK, thread officially closed. Plenty of back-and-forth information to inform readers, so I think the goal was accomplished and contributive to the BB forums.

To me, there is still plenty of information/ideas that could be followed up.

For example, No Hype presented a theory that he would like to research and I would be curious as well.

Any of the items in the groups in the summary could be explored further, especially under "Side Effects" and "Mechanics and Studies" categories.

[deke]

I just want to know if these effects are being caused by methanol.

If anyone that normally experiences negative interactions with aspartame (provided the symptoms are normally mild), is willing to try supplementing some folic acid/B vitamins prior to ingestion.... we might be able to find out.

A good way to do this would be to do two groups (or three for placebo). One group given the B complex (which includes folic acid) vitamins and another group given ethanol (the antidote for methanol poisoning). Then switch the ethanol and B complex group to see which is more effective.

[NO HYPE]

To me, there is still plenty of information/ideas that could be followed up.

I agree.

[Lawdog1379]

TOO FUNNY! On the heels of wild and incorrect conjecture, you do it AGAIN! FOR THE RECORD, I DO NOT HAVE ANY HEALTH RELATED PROBLEMS OR GENETIC ISSUES. Please stop with the uneducated conjecture, it is getting really lame.

Also, I had asked you to previously show us where I stated that I experienced problems with aspartame. Again, PLEASE show me where I said I am "experiencing problems" with aspartame.

You conveniently did not respond to that question. You did, however, state now that I have a dilemma. You now escalated your fabricated "problem" into a fabricated "dilemma". CLASSIC!

HOW CAN I HAVE A DILEMMA IF I DO NOT EVEN HAVE A PROBLEM????



Please tell me how one whines about an imaginary problem (and now upgraded to a dilemma, LOL!) prior to it being created by you???

My goodness, someone's upset. Why don't you cool off with a delicious thirst quenching Diet Coke.

[deke]

My goodness, someone's upset. Why don't you cool off with a delicious thirst quenching Diet Coke.

Sure, thanks. I will make sure to give it to No Hype.

It must be a genetic defect in you that makes you do all that conjecture. Now who does that sound like? LOL!

[NO HYPE]

Apparently, you need to be right no matter what.

No.... only when I am.

[deke]

No.... only when I am.

Whatever you say, Mr. right.

[D3Baseball]

I wanted to bump this because it's fun to see NO HYPE do his thing

[NO HYPE]

I wanted to bump this because it's fun to see NO HYPE do his thing

lol

Thanks for the support. I think I'd rather forget this one though.

[wanaBsedated]

My responses were old as hell but current eeg studies on brain activity in people with epilepsy and depression show that aspartame does increase irregular brain activity in these people. It isn't shown to be harmful in small amounts in the general population yet except that it may lead to increased susceptibility to weight gain. I still don't think its ideal and I'd rather do steviol.

[DGetsCut]

in about a year from now another study will be done stating the negative effects after a 5yr case study... isn't that how everything goes?
what i want to know is how reliable are these studies? and how many people are actually involved in the "testing process"?

You can pay some scientists to do a study to prove just about anything. All depends on your test group, what related factors there are (healthy people usually Already have healthy habits), and where they are located. You'll usually get different data for a study done on rural farmers in Alabama vs yuppies in Seattle. Seriously.

[DGetsCut]

Aspartame gives me some pretty bad, stabbing headaches. Within 30-60 minutes I get a sharp pain in the side of my head, followed by kind of a mental fog or haze for the next 4 or 5 hours. This was happening to me back since my early teens, before I even had a clue on what aspartame was. I never get these headaches unless I consume something with aspartame in it, which is why I stay the hell away from that stuff, period.

I think that's what the rats with giant tumors reported too....

[thefleshlight]

You can pay some scientists to do a study to prove just about anything. All depends on your test group, what related factors there are (healthy people usually Already have healthy habits), and where they are located. You'll usually get different data for a study done on rural farmers in Alabama vs yuppies in Seattle. Seriously.

Strong conspiracy theory. gjdm