It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


New Study Reveals: Aspartame Damages The Brain at Any Dose!

page: 3
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in


posted on Oct, 9 2012 @ 07:11 PM
reply to post by Kluute

Guess it's a good thing i started craving drinking bottled spring water. If you wanna drink the sodapop, take the sugary drink, or drink sweet tea. If not then bottled water. Wish i could drink bottled water while pissing in the faces of whoever invented aspartame and those other cancer sweetners. Some people just can't let those sodapops go and thats whats killing them. This is part of the Illuminati plan to cull the world pop down to 500 million per Georgia Guidestones and the stupid hairless monkies keep falling for their tricks.
edit on 9-10-2012 by lonewolf19792000 because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 9 2012 @ 07:40 PM
I always drink bottled water, beats our local fluoride-poisoned water.

posted on Oct, 9 2012 @ 07:49 PM

While it is true that aspartame does break down into methanol then formaldehyde, it actually happens much more in fruit juices (about 2x in a banana, or 6x in an 8oz glass of tomato juice2).
To break it down:
1. Formaldehyde build-up has not in fact been detected even when 200mg/kg is given to humans (which is a huge amount)
2. Even when large does of direct methanol (which is what breaks down into formaldehyde) were given to monkeys, it did not produce formaldehyde build-up
3. There are other explanations for the labelled-carbon staying in the body, aside from formaldehyde build-up which will also occur with other substances (such as fruit pectin).
Links to related papers and research on source page.

As long as you aren't a phenylketonuric person that cannot handle the amino acid phenylalanine that occurs naturally in whole foods, there really isn't much of a risk. However, if you're really concerned about it... only eat and drink what you produce yourself! There are far worse chemicals that occur in other food items........

posted on Oct, 9 2012 @ 07:51 PM
reply to post by Kluute

I believe it. I always try to avoid the stuff.

Natural = good (probably)
Unnatural = bad (probably)

posted on Oct, 9 2012 @ 08:21 PM
I use the sweetener xylitol and have not heard or read anything bad about it. It is good in iced teas and for some baking plus if Donald rumsfeld was pushing aspartame on the masses you have to be weary lol.

posted on Oct, 9 2012 @ 08:26 PM
reply to post by butcherguy

As a Diabetic I've found that agave syrup is very helpful as a sweetener and doesn't mess with blood sugar , also switching to whole grain EVERYTHING makes a huge impact.

I have to admit I am very dependent on sweeteners also and the fact that it's in everything is unsettling.

posted on Oct, 9 2012 @ 09:06 PM
instead of replacements how about using sugar in moderation? as you should with every other food items.
and preferably brown or yellow sugar, the least processed the best.

posted on Oct, 9 2012 @ 09:30 PM

Originally posted by Kluute
Formaldehyde is what is causing the brain damage. While animals are able to detoxify methanol in the body, humans do not have this capability.

Except for the minor detail that this claim SIMPLY ISNT TRUE.

Neither yourself nor the author of the article at collective evolution have understood the reference in the Monte report (cited in the article) to the FDA description of Methanol as "a cumulative poison", nor has either of you understood the truth that the human body CAN remove Formaldehyde.

The author, yourself and every single person who has replied to the thread so far seem to believe that "cumulative" is used in the casual ordinary everyday sense of the word as continully building up.
This is not the case.
What the FDA mean by that is that excretion from the body is slow.
Slow, not "non existant."

The alcohol in drinks (beer, wine, spirits) is ethanol.
When you have an alcoholic drink, the human body processes this ethanol also through the formaldehyde pathway mentioned in the article. It is eventually removed.
How long does this take? Try the experiment. Get drunk, time how long it takes before you feel better the next day.

How long does Methanol take to be removed? About 5 to 7 times longer.

Not cumulative.

posted on Oct, 9 2012 @ 09:44 PM

Originally posted by TXRabbit
if you or your kids chew gum, you're ingesting it

Read the labels folks

This is true. It's almost impossible to find gum that doesn't contain aspartame these days. I was killing time in a supermarket about a year ago and decided to pick up some gum packages to read how many contained aspartame. To my surprise I didn't find ONE that contained real sugar. Why are they all pushing aspartame so hard?

posted on Oct, 9 2012 @ 09:47 PM
reply to post by alfa1

well duh

it is cumulative if your intake is larger than what you're able to expel.
when there's more input than output, there will be accumulation and subsequently excess, or is it not?

posted on Oct, 9 2012 @ 10:06 PM
reply to post by longlostbrother

The FDA said the seafood covered in oil was safe to eat. Would you eat it?

All of the federal waters and all but a few state harvest waters have reopened and the tests have shown that the seafood from these reopened areas is as safe to eat as it was before the oil spill.


posted on Oct, 9 2012 @ 10:15 PM

Originally posted by UziLiberman
it is cumulative if your intake is larger than what you're able to expel.

Interesting definition, but its not what the author of the article is saying.

They really have no idea what they're talking about when talking about biochemistry, and another area where they expose their ignorance is this bit...

While having NO methanol in the body makes most sense, the EPA has accepted that a limit of consumption of 7.8 mg/day is still OK. Why we accept even small amounts of toxic stuff in our body is beyond me, but some feel we can still consume this stuff in small doses.

The answer lies in the fact that methanol is a simple natural molecule found in quite a large number of things, naturally.
One of his own sources even says that, so if he'd bothered to learn something before writing that rubbish on then we all would have been much better off.

The only reason this thread exists is that the article author is an ignoramus, and the OP didnt bother to check against a single other reference (or even the wikipedia page) before rushing to create a new thread.

posted on Oct, 9 2012 @ 10:38 PM
reply to post by alfa1

okay then, that makes it clear.

so besides discrediting and using ad hominems both against the author and the op, tell me what's your view of the substance in the thread topic.

in your view and knowledge is aspartame safe or not? a viable alternative to sugar or not?

posted on Oct, 9 2012 @ 11:21 PM

Originally posted by UziLiberman
in your view and knowledge is aspartame safe or not? a viable alternative to sugar or not?

I dont claim to have any inider or expert knowledge of aspartame (which I'm drinking now as in Pepsi Max).

if it is dangerous, it wont be for the reasons listed in the article, since they're rubbish.
If it is dangerous, it will be for different reasons altogether.

posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 01:52 AM
reply to post by alfa1

I dont claim to have any inider or expert knowledge of aspartame (which I'm drinking now as in Pepsi Max). But if it is dangerous, it wont be for the reasons listed in the article, since they're rubbish. If it is dangerous, it will be for different reasons altogether.

Dude. Lets step aside from the author of that article and his knowledge or lack of about biochemistry. You sure do seem to be making a case in support of aspartame in our food.

Put down that Pepsi Max now and listen up. Industry funded research accounts for 100% of those published studies claiming Aspartame is safe. Sounds good until you consider these are company employed scientists.
But then look at those studies claiming Aspartame is not 'safe'.

92% of the independently funded studies find Aspartame is potentially harmful!

The bottom line here is this. Why would the FDA state Aspartame is safe? This allows food companies, like those that make chewing gum etc to simply state 'sugar free' on their packaging and not a mention of what is the sweetener used. One word. Profit. Not health first, but profit.

FYI there are stacks of peer reviewed articles pointing out that Aspartame is not safe to consume.

posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 02:22 AM
reply to post by Xaphan

Find "Glee Gum", it uses Xylitol and Chicle (the real gum).

posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 02:30 AM
reply to post by Kluute

Pretty much every thing kills you.

posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 02:38 AM
There still exists something inside the human mind from way back when we were apes....: if it feels wrong, tastes wrong or smells wrong... it probably is wrong.

While sugar does taste nice, the refined kind is no less a substance of abuse than say alcohol, tobacco or similar refined stuff. The refined versions are made for one purpose only... addiction. The manufacturers know we get hooked. They didn't start out because they want to improve public health, please don''t be gullible.

Like many have said; use with careful moderation, avoid use at all if possible (and it is).

You don't need the sweet taste, your tongue just still like it, because the body recognizes it as free "here and now" energy. It was useful back when us surviving a drought, flood, cold spell, hot spell, whatever made it difficult for the human or ancestor to survive.

At this point in time, food is still for most of us abundant and therefore as such we don't need the fast carbohydrates.

Having said all this, I have my doubts that sweeteners are actually as deadly as pointed out several times in this thread and articles. There's simply not enough proof or cross examination.
But my own approach to it is that if it is manufactured, it probably isn't that good for us.

The cavemen didn't die early because of their diet, they died because they didn't know medicine.

Choose with your heart and intuition... not based on what the establishment wants you to or what the adverts tell you is healthy and not.

Being a commercial photographer, I've had my share of involvement in making bad things look good and I know how easy it is to trick the human mind.

posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 02:53 AM
reply to post by Kluute

It does far more than damage the braib, google it

posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 03:11 AM

Originally posted by moniesisfun
Assumptions made in this thread:

1. All gum contains aspartame.

Incorrect. The last time I looked at gum from the local market, this was correct. It doesn't mean you can't find gum that doesn't contain aspartame. A quick google search proves this to be true.

I call BS on that $sisfun, the last time I checked, the ONLY gum I could find that had real sugar in in & not aspartame was "Fruit Stripe" brand... You know the one that tastes good for about 7 seconds?

I actually remember about 3 yrs ago when my last 2 holdout gums, Wrigley's Spearmint/Double Mint & Juicy Fruit Gums, could no longer be found with sugar but now with aspartame - everywhere I looked (in local markets, not online). I wrote Wrigley's a letter explaining my dissatisfaction with this choice. They wrote me back a smarmy email with "our published studies show yada yada yada,..." I emailed them back and told them they had lost a lifelong customer & that I would spread the bad news of their decision to poison us.

2. Your body can't detoxify certain chemicals.

This is BS. Your excretory system has two main channels, via the digestive tract, and through sweating. If one can't pass it through the digestive tract, you can still sweat it out.

That's why many people heal these days after high intensity exercise, and sauna therapy.

Try to sweat each day in some way. Be sure to wipe off the sweat directly after this activity is through.

The only drawback to this is that vitamin-d will lay on the skin and takes up to 48 hours to be fully absorbed. So I would suggest first reaching a certain degree of health, then allowing the stench to continue, and forgo a bath/shower for at least a few hours.
edit on 9-10-2012 by moniesisfun because: (no reason given)

I admit sweating is good for one but to say we break down all things is also BS,.. HFC's made from GMO's are good for us now? Really? Have diet mountain dew everyday and call me in 5 yrs if you still can remember how.

top topics

<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in