The Aspertame Lawsuit (Equal Sugar Sweetener Is Toxic!)

page: 13
11
<< 10  11  12    14  15 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 13 2007 @ 01:09 PM
link   
...so, here's the People's Chemist website and a little intro to Splenda:



If there were a contest for the best example of total disregard for human life the victor would be McNeil Nutritionals - makers of Splenda. Manufacturers of Vioxx and Lipitor would tie for a very distant second. A keen student in corporate drug dealing, McNeil learned from aspartame and saccharine pushers that if a drug tastes sweet then let the masses eat it in their cake.

Splenda was strategically released on April fools day in 1998.

Splenda contains the drug sucralose. This chemical is 600 times sweeter than sugar. To make sucralose, chlorine is used. Chlorine has a split personality. It can be harmless or it can be life threatening.

In combo with sodium, chlorine forms a harmless "ionic bond" to yield table salt. Sucralose makers often highlight this worthless fact to defend its' safety. Apparently, they missed the second day of Chemistry 101 - the day they teach "covalent" bonds.

When used with carbon, the chlorine atom in sucralose forms a "covalent" bond. The end result is the historically deadly "organochlorine" or simply: a Really-Nasty Form of Chlorine (RNFOC).

Unlike ionic bonds, covalently bound chlorines are a big no-no for the human body. They yield insecticides, pesticides, and herbicides - not something you want in the lunch box of your precious child.

The RNFOC is lethal because it allows poisons to be fat soluble while rendering the natural defense mechanisms of the body helpless.

A poison that is fat soluble is akin to a bomb exploding internally. It invades every nook and cranny of the body. Cell walls and DNA - the genetic map of human life - become nothing more than potential casualties of war when exposed. Sucralose is only 25% water soluble. (3) Which means a vast majority of it may explode internally. In general, this results in weakened immune function, irregular heart beat, agitation, shortness of breath, skin rashes, headaches, liver and kidney damage, birth defects, cancer, cancer and more cancer - for generations! (1)


Is it that tough in the modern age to use natural sweeteners and not put money into these drug company's pockets? I guess it is, since these are still top-selling sweeteners, but it seems like people are waking up, w/ Jones Soda not using HFCS anymore and the rise of (mostly) organic grocers like Whole Foods all over America -- there's no reason not to avoid this artificial waste.

www.healthmyths.net...

Oh, and the People's Chemist -- Shane Ellison, he has a Masters degree in organic chemistry.



[edit on 13-11-2007 by anhinga]




posted on Nov, 13 2007 @ 01:49 PM
link   
I found out something funny about HFCS.

Its balance of fructose and glucose (55% to 45%) is the same as that of honey. I guess we'd all better start avoiding honey too.

I'd be worried much sooner about the caffeine in soft drinks than about the HFCS or aspartame.

[edit on 13-11-2007 by RatRanger]



posted on Nov, 13 2007 @ 02:30 PM
link   
reply to post by RatRanger
 


Check my other post in the HFCS thread, you're not investigating the situation enough.... sugar consumption became a "Rome, written upside down" American habit, it's unhealthy and when half your population is overweight -- any researcher has to consider artificial food ingredients more...

www.usatoday.com...



posted on Nov, 13 2007 @ 02:35 PM
link   
reply to post by anhinga
 


Well, you are right about that. High sugar consumption is definitely bad for us and definitely leads to obesity. And artificial food additives can certainly play a part. But lets stop playing Chicken Little and let the research speak for itself.



posted on Nov, 13 2007 @ 02:44 PM
link   
reply to post by RatRanger
 


Mr or Ms Ratranger -- the research? Have you gone though the numerous pages of these threads -- the actual ingredients is what's questionable in any usage of processed, artificial synthetic foods. The fact that Americans refuse to eat healthy is what this is turning into. People are too habitual to change their eating habits and it's costing them their lives, being overweight must effect their everyday existence.

Europe has at least banned aspartame in children's foods. Look through this thread for other countries that ban this stuff, people used to say this about other artificial foods prior to their banning -- out of habit or special interest.

Most other countries in the world have true delicacy in their meals, minus fattening, fake susbstances. Or, you're part of that other half of the world -- where 3+ BILLION people are starving on less then $2 a day.

[edit on 13-11-2007 by anhinga]



posted on Nov, 13 2007 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by anhinga
reply to post by RatRanger
 


Mr or Ms Ratranger -- the research? Have you gone though the numerous pages of these threads -- the actual ingredients is what's questionable in any usage of processed, artificial synthetic foods. The fact that Americans refuse to eat healthy is what this is turning into. People are too habitual to change their eating habits and it's costing them their lives, being overweight must effect their everyday existence.

Europe has at least banned aspartame in children's foods. Look through this thread for other countries that ban this stuff, people used to say this about other artificial foods prior to their banning -- out of habit or special interest.

Most other countries in the world have true delicacy in their meals, minus fattening, fake susbstances. Or, you're part of that other half of the world -- where 3+ BILLION people are starving on less then $2 a day.

[edit on 13-11-2007 by anhinga]
Yes. Have you done any reading yourself? The research bears out that the harm in aspartame is very low. Much lower than sugar or caffeine which you'll find in so many other soft drinks.

As for general trends in American foods and eating, I understand what you're saying, but that belongs in its own discussion.



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 05:13 AM
link   
www.eatright.org...

[edit on 18-11-2007 by UScitizen]



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 11:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by UScitizen
www.eatright.org...

[edit on 18-11-2007 by UScitizen]


Some people will go to any lengths to keep spreading the lies.



posted on Nov, 21 2007 @ 11:04 AM
link   
I used to drink loads of coke / diet coke, yet, Aspartame seems to have done NOTHING to me.

ZERO effects, ZERO adverse effect.

After ages I stopped drinking coke / diet coke, guess what.

ZERO adverse effects from ''quitting coke''.

Same blood pressure, 0 ''injuries'' or diseases"

So now I have a question for you:
Did I just die and reincarnate in the same body 20 times without noticing, with Aspartame induced memory loss making me not remember my reincarnations?
Am I somehow a holy angel and rendered immune to the effects of Aspartame, due to superhuman powers?

Or...
Is aspartame not harmful at all, or at least not in amounts that any regular person would drink?

After all, ANYTHING is toxic, but only in the right amounts.

And since I have 0 side-effects from drinking soft drinks AND not drinking them after drinking them for ages, I'll side with the "it's not that dangerous" people.


But that's impossible, because all that say that Aspartame is not dangerous are disinfo agents!

So there's only one logical conclusion:
I am God, and God is immune to Aspartame.

Worship me.

[edit on 21/11/07 by -0mega-]



posted on Nov, 21 2007 @ 05:21 PM
link   
Well, God, I doubt you're going to be saying that down the road
as you support literal, toxic poisoning, let's look at the recent studies:


"This study confirmed the previous study by Dr. Trocho and co-workers, which also found the formaldehyde breakdown product of aspartame to be damaging to cellular DNA and that this damage was accumulative. The type of damage was a duplicate of that associated with cancers. Along with this most recent study, this means that drinking a single diet cola sweetened with aspartame every day could increase one's risk of developing a lymphoma or leukemia.


"Aspartame: New Study Renews Cancer Concern, Says CSPI"
"Combining Food Additives May Be Harmful, Say Researchers"
"New study reignites aspartame cancer concerns"

www.wnho.net...


Also enclosed is the FDA report of 92 documented symptoms from seizures and blindness to coma and death. Among the allergic reactions listed are rash, itching, change in sensation (numbness, tingling), local swelling, skin problems, eye irritation, changes in skin and nail coloration, sinus problems, eczema and conjunctivitis. From the case histories flowing in everyday aspartame is notorious at triggering hives.

Notice a FDA memorandum written by the late FDA toxicologist, Dr. Adrian Gross who says about the original studies:

"The report of the Task force submitted in March l976 in essence
constituted a stinging indictment of Searle and it contained various
recommendations for regulatory action including referral to the
Justice Department for review of possible criminal violations of
the law."



"Sweet Talking - research shows potential health risks of aspartame"



"About 99 percent of genes in humans have counterparts in the mouse," said Eric Lander, Director of the Whitehead Institute Center for Genomic Research in Cambridge, Massachusetts. "Eighty percent have identical, one-to-one counterparts."

What's even more astonishing, scientists say, is that 90 percent of genes associated with disease are identical in humans and mice. Because new generations of mice are born just weeks or months apart, and because medical experiments with humans are usually not done for ethical reasons, mice have become valuable research tools.

In the process of comparing the mouse and human genomes, researchers also discovered 1,200 new human genes


"Mice, men share 99 percent of genes"

And from some other searches, it looks like only a couple of thousand gene functions have been understood completely to date.... I'm getting a couple thousand hits relating cancer to mice from aspartame in experiments.

Does anyone give a hoot that Rumsfeld, stole trillions from Americans, got tamiflu (angel dust) approved as well, has put said country into sickening debt w/ an unprepared war and countless other topics. Why bother using this artificial product when it's 'known' to poison? "Known unknowns" speech, he's a criminal.

911research.wtc7.net...
www.youtube.com...

[edit on 21-11-2007 by anhinga]



posted on Nov, 24 2007 @ 04:22 AM
link   
If it doesn't occur in nature, then living beings have never been exposed to it. Therefore, no mechanism of dealing with this substance in the body has ever had a chance of evolving.

Therefore, it's most likely poison.



posted on Nov, 24 2007 @ 11:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by dionysius9

If it doesn't occur in nature, then living beings have never been exposed to it. Therefore, no mechanism of dealing with this substance in the body has ever had a chance of evolving.

Therefore, it's most likely poison.


Just about every "poison" being discussed here occurs in nature.

Chlorine:



Chlorine is made from common salt (sodium chloride) and water.

*snip*

Chlorine is one of the most common elements in nature.

Chlorinated compounds occur naturally in humans and are found in blood, skin and teeth. Even white blood cells need chlorine to enable them to fight off infections. In nature, chlorine is more plentiful than carbon. It occurs in both plants and animals and makes up 2.9% of the world’s oceans and 0.045% of the earth’s crust.
www.eurochlor.org...


Methanol:


After the consumption of fruit, the concentration of methanol in the human body increases by as much as an order of magnitude. This is due to the degradation of natural pectin (which is esterified with methyl alcohol) in the human colon.
www.blackwell-synergy.com...



Finally, one of the most common and natural (anhinga's Moby Dick)....

Formaldehyde:


Formaldehyde is naturally produced in very small amounts in our bodies as a part of our normal, everyday metabolism and causes us no harm. It can also be found in the air that we breathe at home and at work, in the food we eat, and in some products that we put on our skin. A major source of formaldehyde that we breathe everyday is found in smog in the lower atmosphere. Automobile exhaust from cars without catalytic converters or those using oxygenated gasoline also contain formaldehyde. At home, formaldehyde is produced by cigarettes and other tobacco products, gas cookers, and open fireplaces. It is also used as a preservative in some foods, such as some types of Italian cheeses, dried foods, and fish. Formaldehyde is found in many products used every day around the house, such as antiseptics, medicines, cosmetics, dish-washing liquids, fabric softeners, shoe-care agents, carpet cleaners, glues and adhesives, lacquers, paper, plastics, and some types of wood products. Some people are exposed to higher levels of formaldehyde if they live in a new mobile home, as formaldehyde is given off as a gas from the manufactured wood products used in these homes.
www.eco-usa.net...


All found in nature.




[edit on 24-11-2007 by 27jd]



posted on Nov, 24 2007 @ 12:02 PM
link   
reply to post by 27jd
 


Using a site that lists these 'ingredients' as "toxins" shows that there's no argument left; plus you go on and on, "but they occur in nature" but fail to realize that the processing of said chemicals is what needs to be questioned, time and again you neglect to see that point.


Olney, a professor in the department of psychiatry, School of Medicine, Washington University, a neuroscientist and researcher, and one of the world's foremost authorities on excitotoxins. (He informed Searle in 1971 that aspartic acid caused holes in the brain of mice.)


"The Dangers Of Aspartame"
www.healingcancernaturally.com...


What's even more astonishing, scientists say, is that 90% of genes associated with disease are identical in humans and mice. Because new generations of mice are born just weeks or months apart, and because medical experiments with humans are usually not done for ethical reasons, mice have become valuable research tools.


"Mice, men share 99% of genes"
archives.cnn.com...


Aspartame's abortifacient properties are inherent in its structure. As the 3- cornered molecule is metabolized it releases methyl alcohol, plus phenylalanine and aspartic acid, both neurotoxins. The methyl alcohol breaks down into formaldehyde, then formic acid. APM methyl alcohol/formaldehyde poisoning, engenders a host of cumulative degenerative diseases and functional abnormalities. Isolated phenyalanine and aspartic acid are neurotoxic.


"Dr. Bowen on aspartame-induced genocide"
www.dorway.com...

[edit on 24-11-2007 by anhinga]



posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 10:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by anhinga
Using a site that lists these 'ingredients' as "toxins" shows that there's no argument left; plus you go on and on, "but they occur in nature" but fail to realize that the processing of said chemicals is what needs to be questioned, time and again you neglect to see that point.


Using just about any of your sites shows there is no argument left. Nobody is saying the 'ingredients' aren't "toxins" (you remind me of Joey on Friends, "quoting" words inappropriately), they are toxic in the right amount, just about anything is.


The Nutrasweet scaremail is so larded with claims that it is difficult sort fact from fiction from innuendo from the outrageous quackery. To refute every claim in the email would be tedious, we'll address just the central claims.

Let's start with the 'facts' contained in the screed.

When the temperature of this sweetener exceeds 86 degrees F, the wood alcohol in ASPARTAME converts to formaldehyde and then to formic acid, which in turn causes metabolic acidosis.

This is about a close as the email gets to scientific fact, which is to say, in the neighborhood but not at the right address.

Aspartame is composed of two substances, aspartic acid and a methyl ester of phenylalanine. High heat can cause aspartame to break down into byproducts, including methanol, but so do the normal digestive and metabolic processes in the body.

The process of digesting aspartame goes something like this. Phenylalanine is broken down into methanol. Methanol is broken down into formaldehyde. Formaldehyde is turned to formic acid. Ultimately the formic acid is turned into water and carbon dioxide.

But aren't methanol (also known as wood alcohol) and formaldehyde (commonly used as an organic preservative, embalming fluid, for example) highly toxic substances? Yes, they are. But it's important to remember that the human body is a happy little chemical factory built to handle the conversion of methanol and formaldehyde into water and carbon dioxide.
tafkac.org...




"Mice, men share 99% of genes"
archives.cnn.com...


Why do you keep posting that nonsense? Humans are not even remotely similar species to mice. Come on now. We share alot of genetic similarities with fruit flies as well. Our closest genetic relative is the chimpanzee.


As predicted by preliminary studies, the human and chimpanzee genetic codes are essentially 99 percent identical, a testament to how fundamentally similar the two species remain. At the same time, it is powerful evidence that seemingly modest changes in molecular code can lead to very different stations in the web of life.
www.washingtonpost.com...



"Scientists have long known that humans share many similar genes with fruit flies," says Ethan Bier, a professor of biology at UCSD who headed the research. "The surprise is how deep these similarities really are. Basically, every category of human genetic disease is well represented with a counterpart in the fly."
www-biology.ucsd.edu...


Finally, there is a known saying among cancer researchers that if mice and humans were the same, they would have cured cancer long ago.



posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 11:11 AM
link   
I bring up the studies because there aren't studies done on humans to access any long-term effects on humans; um, this is how science works and how a lot of toxic substances like aspartame are 'considered safe' and approved. Let's take a look at this Guardian article from 2005; where the UK is trying to ban the substance:


Mr Williams, the MP for Brecon and Radnorshire and a Cambridge science graduate, said he had been looking into the safety of aspartame for more than a year. At first he had been unconvinced by the "internet conspiracy theories" but he said what he had found had "truly horrified" him.

Sound science and proper regulatory and political independence had been notable by their absence from the approval of aspartame, he said. In addition to Mr Rumsfeld being instrumental in securing aspartame's approval, with the support of the then newly elected president Ronald Reagan, there had been numerous examples of decision makers who were worried about aspartame's safety being discredited or being removed from their positions. Industry sympathisers had been appointed to replace them and were in turn recompensed with lucrative jobs working for the sweetener industry.


"
MP calls for ban on 'unsafe' sweetener"



Even the FDA revoked the petition for approval. In the aspartame documentary, "Sweet Misery: A Poisoned World, Attorney James Turner explains how Don Rumsfeld called in his markers to get it approved.

Rumsfeld was on Reagan's transition team and the day after he took office he appointed Arthur Hull Hayes as FDA Commissioner to get it approved. So concerned it would take 30 days to get Hayes there President Reagan actually wrote an executive order making the current FDA Commissioner powerless to do anything about aspartame until Hayes arrived.

What political clout. Somebody needs to ask Rumsfeld to go into more detail about those markers he held. After Hayes arrived at FDA a scientific Board of Inquiry was convened and the petition for approval of this deadly neurotoxin was revoked because it triggered brain tumors, and never proven safe. Hayes over-ruled the Board and went to work for the PR Agency of the manufacturer and has refused to talk to the press ever since.

H. J. Roberts, M.D., who testified before Congress warned at his first press conference if something wasn't done then we would have a global plague on our hands in five or ten years. And indeed it was Dr. Roberts who declared Aspartame Disease to be a global plague and published a 1038 page medical text, Aspartame Disease: An Ignored Epidemic, www.sunsentpress.com...


www.wnho.net...


If you are going to do something, at least read this report on aspartame used as an effective ant poison.


www.health-report.co.uk...



posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 12:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by anhinga
I bring up the studies because there aren't studies done on humans to access any long-term effects on humans


Whoa! Am I looking at an admission that you aren't positive about long-term effects on humans??? Just keep in mind mice get cancer easier, and can also be treated and cured easier.


Dr. Cheryl London, a veterinarian oncologist at Ohio State University, noted: "It's much easier to cause cancer in mice than it is in people. So it may be that what you're seeing in mice represents an exaggerated phenomenon of what may occur in people."
www.washingtonpost.com...




um, this is how science works and how a lot of toxic substances like aspartame are 'considered safe' and approved.


Um, yeah. Well, since you know how science works, than you know full well what happens in mice is often completely different than what happens in us. So maybe, since you admitted there are not enough long-term studies on people to make the call, you can stop bolding toxic in a scary manner to intentionally cause alarm about something you aren't sure of.



posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 12:59 PM
link   
Pigs will fly when I listen to you telling me what to do, but thanks anyway... back to the OP:


Researchers at MIT surveyed 80 people who suffered brain seizures after eating or drinking products with Aspartame. Said the Community Nutrition Institute: "These 80 cases meets the FDA's own definition of an imminent hazard to the public health, which requires the FDA to expeditiously remove a product from the market."

America is seeing a tremendous increase in seizures. Phenylalanine in Aspartame lowers the seizure threshold in the brain and blocks serotonin production. Today our nation is swept by a rage of violence. Researchers attribute this is part to low brain serotonin levels inducing depression, rage and paranoia. So President Clinton, Diet Coke in hand, programs billions of $'s to buy penitentiaries for the paranoid.

Fetal tissue cannot tolerate methanol, and Dr. James Bowen calls NutraSweet instant birth control. The fetal placenta can concentrate phenylalanine and cause mental retardation.

In July, 1983 the National Soft Drink Assoc. drafted a 30 pg. protest questioning the safety of Aspartame in soft drinks. Then they found weight-conscious Americans would sip soda all day if it was sugarless, so they forgot their objections: nor did they tell us that Aspartame makes you crave carbohydrates and so you gain weight. The formaldehyde stores in fat cells, particularly on the hips and thighs. Drink diet soda, get fat now, and later develop seizures, diabetes, blindness, Epstein Barr, MS depression and death.


"WARNING! Aspartame: The Thalidomide of the '90s"
www.tetrahedron.org...

"Aspartame promotes grand mal seizures, say health experts"
www.newstarget.com...

[edit on 26-11-2007 by anhinga]



posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 02:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by anhinga
Pigs will fly when I listen to you telling me what to do, but thanks anyway... back to the OP:


Ah, well that's good cuz I wasn't telling you to do anything, just letting you know that you can stop making yourself look like an irrational, alarmist Chicken Little. But go right ahead and continue if it makes you feel good. Yeah, and back to the scaremail OP. Back to posting link after link of recycled email garbage about the huge, elaborate artifical sweetener conspiracies to kill us all, when there would of course be much easier, quicker, and reality based ways to do it if that was "Big Sweetener's" evil agenda.

All these ridiculous conspiracy theories about diet coke and mayonaise really muddy the waters and allow the real criminals in the government to slide right by allowing real toxins, that are proven to kill on a regular basis, such as cigarettes, alcohol, etc. Imagine if aspartame caused the deaths of an average of 440,000 people a year, DIRECTLY, cigarettes do. Imagine the number of deaths caused by alcohol, either by irresponsible behavior or the toxic effects it has on the body, you know, the ones you can actually feel the next day? All those are legal, and in fact, sought after. But here you are, SO sure of yourself that you will stop at nothing to post EVERY aspartame scare site available on the internet and present it as further evidence that you're right. I think you NEED to be right on this, even if reality is sinking in, you'll never admit it. Oh well. Carry on.

[edit on 26-11-2007 by 27jd]



posted on Nov, 30 2007 @ 07:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by 27jd conspiracies to kill us all [edit on 26-11-2007 by 27jd]


...spare me your 'absolute' statement about "us" since I'll never be categorized w/ somebody like you who obviously loves poison and pushing it's shaky argument... also, there's quite a difference between "emails" and legitimate studies done on the toxic poison should you know how to read.

The "naturally occurring" stance has become a passé, broken record by now, since you're obviously not understanding how the molecular structure of the artificial, synthetic structure is broken down.

Look at this, 'breaking news' out of New Zealand about said topic; I know you really tried changing the subject to cigarettes in that last 'post' (should it even be considered that -- so, stop derailing this thread) -- and remember, it took 30 years to get warnings on cigarettes.

"Aspartame Research Needed, Not Coca-Cola Soft Sell"


The Soil & Health Association is calling for open and independent research into how widespread the effects of the artificial sweetener aspartame are on the health and well-being of New Zealanders, following last week's admission by the Ministry of Health that there were links to adverse effects.


My italics.



posted on Nov, 30 2007 @ 05:26 PM
link   
reply to post by anhinga
 


Um, okay....your source makes it VERY clear that research is needed to determine the effects, and you post it as if it's vindication? It's not, SO when that research is complete, lemme know what it says...k? Until then, my point stands, like everything else, some people will not react well to it. And spare me the "you obviously know nothing about molecular, yada yada", cuz i'm sure you don't either, you're just a googling machine, pulling and linking ANYTHING that supports your position, which I could care less about anyway, don't drink diet soda, that's TOTALLY cool with me.





new topics
top topics
 
11
<< 10  11  12    14  15 >>

log in

join