April 22, 2018

FDA Rejects Calls for Aspartame Ban

The FDA has rejected calls for a ban on aspartame, stating that no credible scientific evidence for the ban has been presented. In a FDA Letter to Paul Stoller, the government says they have been monitoring scientific data on aspartame since the 1970s and believes that the compound is “safe for the general population except for individuals with phenylketonuria.”

Soda popAnd in another FDA Letter to Betty Martini, the government denies her request to recall aspartame. The FDA said it conducted an analysis of 195 cases of aspartame-related reported adverse events between January 2004 and December 2013 and “had not identified any causal link between aspartame consumption and the reported adverse events.”

The National Cancer Institute states “there is no clear evidence that the artificial sweeteners available commercially in the United States are associated with cancer risk in humans.” A 1996 report suggested that an increase in the number of people with brain tumors between 1975 and 1992 might be associated with the introduction of the sweetener in the U.S. The analysis of NCI stats found that the overall increase in cancers began in 1973, which was 8 years before aspartame was approved for use.

A 2005 study found that rats develop more lymphomas and leukemias when fed very high costs of aspartame, but some of the findings were inconsistent. Cancer cases did not increase as amounts of aspartame were increased, as would be expected.

Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) does not accept the FDA’s interpretation of the data. That organization says that aspartame has been found to cause cancer, but also say that the more “immediate danger” to health is the high-fructose corn syrup and other sugars found in soft drinks such as Coke and Pepsi. They say consumers should drink water instead of sugary drinks, diet or otherwise.

Comments

  1. The FDA has never sent me a letter regarding my petition to ban. I filed it 14 years ago, and if I hadn’t accidentally seen it on google I wouldn’t know they answered it. http://www.rense.com/general96/fdapet.html See also the URL in the context where I answered what I had of the report a couple of days before. Also, I filed an imminent health hazard amendment in 2007. By law they are suppose to answer it in a week or ten days. It has never to this day been answered. I can understand why they didn’t send it to me – they knew I would expose all the lies, and I did. Also see my website, http://www.mpwhi.com for congressional hearings and even the FDA’s own Board of Inquiry reply rejecting the petition for approval. Dr. Betty Martini, D.Hum, Founder, Mission Possible Intl, http://www.mpwhi.com

  2. k Paul Stoller, MD says:

    The NCI’s statement is inane… the issue is about cancer risk in animals and that has been documented. That is all that is required in invoke the Delaney Amendment.

  3. For many years, ‘they’ claimed that trans-fat was perfectly safe, too. ‘They’ can’t always be trusted, when there are profits to be made. Let the ‘buyer’ beware.

Report Your Food Poisoning Case
[contact-form-7 404 "Not Found"]
×
×

Home About Site Map Contact Us Sponsored by Pritzker Hageman, P.A., a Minneapolis, MN law firm that helps food poisoning victims nationally.