Aspartame in Milk Without a Label? Big Dairy Petitions FDA For Approval

Codex Ailimentarius at work. Slow killing through food. Try to eat as little prosessed food as possible. If it's in a box, make sure it says non-gmo verified. Hemp milk builds the immune system and fights cancer. Contains omega-3,6 and 9 plus globular edestin. This is why hemp was removed from our plates. It was keeping us healthy.

reply to post by D.Wolf


Sorry, I read the word "buy" and assumed there was some sort of commerce taking place.

reply to post by ModernAcademia


My wife loves milk, but aspartame gives her migraines... Thank you so much to the industry giants giving my wife ONE MORE THING TO BITCH ABOUT! J/K... but not about the migraines. Next they will be trying to add lead to baby foods stating that lead is actually good for you and that they have been wrong about it for decades... bastages...

Originally posted by davjan4
I only drink raw milk. I can still get it at a farm nearby

You should not be posting this information online.
In fact ATS should think of making this part of the T&Cs perhaps.

There are other "products" that are also legal within a state, but that doesn't mean the feds won't come a barging in, as they are doing currently based on current events.

Just a thought!

think about it and the raids

Originally posted by ModernAcademia

Originally posted by davjan4
I only drink raw milk. I can still get it at a farm nearby

You should not be posting this information online.
In fact ATS should think of making this part of the T&Cs perhaps.

There are other "products" that are also legal within a state, but that doesn't mean the feds won't come a barging in, as they are doing currently based on current events.

Just a thought!

think about it and the raids

It's legal. In fact there is a bill pending now that will make it even more legal. Currently I have to pick it up at the farm. The bill will allow sale of raw milk at fairs, farmers markets and dropoff points.

texasrealmilk.org...

There was a "raid" of sort here just a week or two ago, but they were doing a dropoff point for milk sold. Soon, if the bill passes, that will be legal.

I'm not worried about posting that I just eat Real Food. Fortunatly I live in Texas, not California etc etc. All of my milk is picked up personally be me at the farm. Even if they start dropoff points I'll still pick up at the farm. It's a plesant drive and that way I know my farmer.

This is not good news.

Who'd have thought they'd get this far without everyone waking up.
If you'd asked me ten years ago I'd have sworn on my life that there'd be a mass awakening and a revolution before these kinds of moves would ever be realised.

It's getting worse quicker than I'd thought and yet we carry on the same, stumbling round with our eyes closed as these sick parasites rumble on like locusts, voracious and largely unopposed.

Sad days.

reply to post by chrome413


I never attacked you....so.....

Not one time in my post did I refer to you.

reply to post by WaterBottle


Then why reply to my post, instead of coming up with your own original post? Why direct your comments to me? Why nit-pick an extremely minor point of the overall thought I was relaying? Anyone can clearly see your comments were directed toward me.

Originally posted by sad_eyed_lady
I repeatedly tried to express my views on their "Submit a comment" form and it would not send. Wondering if anyone else had this problem??????

Update: Even though I identified myself as an individual consumer the form would not sumit until I listed an organization, so I put "Mothers Against Agenda 21" and for Submitter Representative I put "God." Obviously the consumer doesn't matter to them at all.

reply to post by merkins


True either people don't care anymore or they don't understand what aspartame does.
Just look at diet soda sales

It was the biggest victory in the Cola Wars since Michael J. Fox picked up his first can of Pepsi: Diet Coke last year passed Pepsi to move into second place in U.S. soft drink popularity

www.nbcnews.com...

Diet Coke is the 2nd highest sold soft drink
That's people drinking that by choice

5 pages of outrage over aspertame in the milk, but not one mention of Bovine Growth Hormone? No mention of the absurd amounts of puss that finds it's way into the milk due to infections caused by the milking machines?

(sigh)

Read the bill, folks.

Acidified milk (§ 131.111), cultured milk (§ 131.112), sweetened condensed milk (§ 131.120), nonfat dry milk (§ 131.125), nonfat dry milk fortified with vitamins A and D (§ 131.127), evaporated milk (§ 131.130), dry cream (§ 131.149), heavy cream (§ 131.150), light cream (§ 131.155), light whipping cream (§ 131.157), sour cream (§ 131.160), acidified sour cream (§ 131.162), eggnog (§ 131.170), half-and-half (§ 131.180), yogurt (§ 131.200), lowfat yogurt (§ 131.203), and nonfat yogurt (§ 131.206). The petition asks that the standards of identity for these products be amended to provide for the use of any safe and suitable sweetener in the optional ingredients

In other words, they're not asking for it to be used in regular old milk. It's in other types of milk (sweetened condensed, dry milk, evaporated milk, etc, etc.)

Yoplait and other low calorie yoghurts have been made with aspertame for years

It seems to be a clarification measure rather than adding anything new.

The regulatory framework governing the naming of standardized foods that do not fully comply with the relevant standards of identity changed with the passage of the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act of 1990 and FDA's rulemaking establishing the Agency's requirements for foods named by use of a nutrient content claim and a standardized term (§ 130.10 (21 CFR 130.10)). Section 130.10(d) allows the addition of safe and suitable ingredients to a food named by use of a nutrient content claim and a standardized term when these ingredients are used to, among other things, add sweetness to ensure that the modified food is not inferior in performance characteristic to the standardized food even if such ingredients are not specifically provided for by the relevant food standard. Therefore, while the milk standard of identity in § 131.110 only provides for the use of “nutritive sweetener” in an optional characterizing flavor, milk may contain a characterizing flavor that is sweetened with a non-nutritive sweetener if the food's label bears a nutrient content claim (e.g., “reduced calorie”) and the non-nutritive sweetener is used to add sweetness to the product so that it is not inferior in its sweetness property compared to its standardized counterpart. However, IDFA and NMPF argue that nutrient content claims such as “reduced calorie” are not attractive to children, and maintain that consumers can more easily identify the overall nutritional value of milk products that are flavored with non-nutritive sweeteners if the labels do not include such claims. Further, the petitioners assert that consumers do not recognize milk—including flavored milk—as necessarily containing sugar.
Source: (from the original, which you can read here)

This also allows for (say) companies that work with "Organic" products to produce yoghurt (etc) flavored with stevia (which, frankly, tastes rather bitter to me.) Wikipedia lists a LOT of sweeteners that might be used

Their concern about kids drinking heavily sugared milk is actually right on the mark, because kids will drink chocolate and strawberry milk rather than regular milk.

reply to post by sad_eyed_lady


They're not in a "public comment" phase, so you won't be able to comment. That's probably a good thing, since they are not proposing to put aspartame in milk, nor are they proposing to put it in flavored milk products -- because it's already approved for that use and has been used in low fat milk products like ice cream for years (or possibly decades.)

The original story is a bit... uninformed, IMHO, and designed to whip up public outrage (and is rather light on facts.) In any case, you might find it interesting to read the original bill and to look up what sweeteners are allowed in various milk products.

reply to post by Byrd


I did read it and know it meant certain products but none the less adding aspartame to ANYTHING without saying should be illegal and shouldn't even be proposed, IMO that counts for ANYTHING added to anything.

Some people cannot have aspartame as they have PKU, also because it has a dubious reputation, people should have choice of consuming such things.

I created a petition on whitehouse.gov please take the time to find it and add your voice of protest to this horrible idea.

petitions.whitehouse.gov...

not difficult to avoid if you don't want to drink it. just don't buy sweetened milk...pretty easy to detect the difference.

Yes, you should be up in arms about them adding ANYTHING to a food product and not labeling it. That begs the question - what are they hiding?

Same with irradiated meat. For years, they've been allowed to blast meat with toxic doses of radiation to kill the dangerous microbes because they can't provide sanitary or safe conditions for the billions of animals that are slaughtered, due to the sheer number of food animals produced, and WITHOUT A LABEL.

Yes, if you eat meat, you're probably eating irradiated meat. Do they even know the long term effects? Guess.

reply to post by Byrd



Thank you for information about the bill.

Actually, I am surprised it has made the news at all. Yet regardless of what products have aspartame, it really should be identified on the label so people who have severe reactions (like migraines - as mentioned by a couple posters) can avoid it and those of us who consider it poison can avoid it as well.

It is quite understandable how one would suspect the food industry of shenanigans. Renaming aspartame to "amino sweet" to get away from it's bad publicity is an example of how they will dupe whoever they can. Since they will not require GMO food to be labelled as such, I pretty much suspect most of it is unless it claims to be non-GMO.

All ingredients should be listed on products IMHO. What the heck are natural flavors? Could be anything. Same with artificial flavors. Yum-yum.

My son was born with PKU or Phenylketonuria. It's a metabolic disorder. His body doesn't make enough of the enzyme needed to break up one of the many different acids in protein called phenylalanine (phe). Therefore, left uncontrolled by diet, the acid builds up in the brain and deteriorates cells eventually causing server mental retardation.

My son is absolutely fine he was tested at birth and has been on his strict pku diet all along. One part of learning the diet, and a very important part, are the 'never ever foods'. Foods high in protein, or foods that contain aspartame.

The amount of phe he ingests per day is calculated and is measured in exchanges. I have a book that lists every food you can think of that tells me how much phe is in each food. While learning about this i realized that for the foods containing aspartame I didn't have the measurement available.

When I asked his dietitian yeas ago why diet sodas and other things with this stuff in it were never ever foods but didn't list the phe levels. She told me that they don't know how much phe is in aspartame, therefore, it can't be measured and should never be eaten on the pku diet.

That always struck me as strange. I mean EVERY other food imaginable is measured and available for reference except aspartame?? It's been about ten years since i asked this question at pku clinic, i think i will bring it up again next time.

I'm not sure if this has been pointed out - but as I read it the petition is NOT for the artificial sweetener to be removed from the list of ingredients at all, nor for milk to be "redefined" in any way.

It is for the requirement that the milk be advertised as "reduced calorie" or "Lite" or similar to be removed.

Other foods already do this eg icecream swettened with non-sugar additives is not required to have this labelling.