The Aspartame "Conspiracy"

[rw4th]

I've been cutting stuff out of my diet lately and now I'm down to Aspartame, so obviously I'm asking myself the usual question: is there anything to all the conspiracy hype surrounding aspartame?

Most people I consider rational seem to agree that the hype is just that, but I'm looking to base my opinion on actual peer reviewed science and that's what this thread is for: real peer reviewed science, not conspiracy theories about Dick Cheney wanting to poison people.

Here's the only one I have found so far, and the result is that aspartame is benign at "current levels of consumption"

http://www.bio-medicine.org/medicine...t-Users-967-1/

Here a site that I found that contains a study that purports to have analyzed multiple peer reviewed studies on the subject of Aspartame and human safety from peer-reviewed journals and compared them in terms of where their funding came from and whether or not any adverse effects were identified.

Studies of aspartame in the peer reviewed medical literature were surveyed for funding source and study outcome. Of the 166 studies felt to have relevance for questions of human safety, 74 had Nutrasweet® industry related funding and 92 were independently funded. One hundred percent of the industry funded research attested to aspartame’s safety, whereas 92% of the independently funded research identified a problem. A bibliography supplied by the Nutrasweet® Company included many studies of questionable validity and relevance, with multiple instances of the same study being cited up to 6 times. Questions are raised both about aspartame’s safety and the broader issue of the appropriateness of industry sponsorship of medical research.

http://dorway.com/dorwblog/?page_id=776

I've haven't yet had the time to track down the studies referenced in this one to see what they considered "adverse results", but it's on my to do list.

So I'm the question here: does anybody have any more links to actual science on the subject?

[TheRuss]

http://www.bullshido.net/forums/show...27#post1881327 and subsequent posts.

Note that I may have been technically incorrect about the "no effect on insulin" part:

The ability of saccharin, in comparison with glucose and tap water, to elicit glycemia-independent neurally mediated insulin secretion was investigated in chronically catheterized, freely moving rats. Plasma glucose and insulin concentrations were measured continuously from venous blood with a sampling resolution of one per minute. In normal rats, 1 ml of 0.15% saccharin caused a significant rapid rise in peripheral plasma insulin levels lasting up to 5 min, without significant changes in glycemia. Tap water alone also induced a transient elevation in insulinemia but was much smaller than the saccharin-induced response. In streptozotocin diabetic rats bearing intrahepatic, presumably denervated islet isografts, these rapid insulin responses to oral saccharin and tap water stimulation were completely abolished, whereas the early insulin response to intravenous glucose was decreased by only about 30%. These results are consistent with the concept of gustatory and other oral sensory signals acting as triggers for neurally mediated insulin release.

-Berthoud et al., Cephalic-phase insulin secretion in normal and pancreatic islet-transplanted rats."

[cyrijl]

I looked around for days for some info on this and what I came up with is:

There is a certain allergy related to asparteme and asparteme derived substances and that is the main reason for the warnings.

[Da Pope]

Review paper claiming no carcinogenic or neurotoxic effect if daily intake regulations aherred to

http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/con...08440701516184

Dont know if you have access via Science Direct to the Food and Chemical Toxicology Journal but doing a quick search there I got 88 hits for asprtame.

Or try Pubmed http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/ there were loads of aspatame hits there.

[Cayvmann]

I apparently have the allergy. Every time I use aspartame, I get muscle soreness, chest pains, and headaches. It's a shame too, because the taste is almost like sugar, unlike those other sweeteners.......

My brother, the pharmacist, says that data is good on aspartame, but if you have reactions to it, you should leave it the heck alone.

[socratic]

If you're looking for a sugar alternative, T-nation's nutritionist was pimping a product called 'Lo Han' (named after the Luo Han Guo plant it's made from, apparently) that is sweeter and apparently way lower in calories than real sugar. Might be worth checking out if you want to cut things from your diet.

[Kid Miracleman]

If you're looking for a sugar alternative, T-nation's nutritionist was pimping a product called 'Lo Han' (named after the Luo Han Guo plant it's made from, apparently) that is sweeter and apparently way lower in calories than real sugar. Might be worth checking out if you want to cut things from your diet.

Stevia and agave syrup are some other natural sweeteners that haven't particularly offended my palate. Furthermore, agave supposedly has a low glycemic index compared to other sweeteners, if that's worth anything to youse guys. If you're looking for an alternative to cane sugar or corn syrup, they're not bad.

Regarding aspartame, I'm not wild about the taste, but I don't mind having a Diet Coke every now and then; based on the evidence available, I have a REALLY hard time believing that it's a slow-killing toxin like so many are claiming. Yes, there are going to be some people who get an allergic reaction from consuming it, but I suppose the same can be said regarding just about any sweetener or foodstuff.

I have a co-worker who just loathes aspartame and thinks that its consumption is responsible for a number of neurological illnesses, including MS and Lou Gehrig's Disease (hell, even brain cancer), and that it's acceptance and proliferation as a sweetener is due to a government conspiracy. On one occasion when I dared to flaunt packets of Splenda on my work desk, he took the liberty of writing "Yellow Death" on all of them with a black Sharpie. I generally get along with him, but the dude's a serious woo-woo and I have a hard time taking anything he says seriously; he promotes stuff like homeopathy, reiki, spiritual response therapy, the antivax movement, and just about anything with the word "alternative" in front of it.

So when I inquired WHERE he gleaned his information regarding aspartame, he pointed me to a feature-length indie documentary called "Sweet Misery: A Poisoned World". Here's the trailer:

YouTube - Aspartame - Sweet Misery, A Poisoned World (trailer)

I have yet to actually watch the thing, but if any of you are curious and wish to offer criticisms, it's available to watch in its entirety online for free:

SWEET MISERY, A Poisoned World - The FDA Aspartame Conspiracy - NWO Depopulation



(Seriously y'all, my co-worker's a walking woo stereotype, it's both hilarious and sad ("hilarisad?"). I ain't even playin', dawg, I may actually start a dedicated thread on him one of these days.)

EDIT: To be fair, my aforementioned co-worker was the one who introduced me to stevia and agave as alternatives to aspartame. I honestly don't know much about the supposed health benefits of such sweeteners over aspartame or plain jane sugar; the ONLY reason I'm suggesting their use is because I don't find their taste particularly offensive. Agave syrup in particular is pleasantly mild-tasting and seems to mix well in hot/cold liquids.

[rw4th]

Kid Miracleman, thanks for the substitute suggestions, but when it come to the video I think I've seen part of it and it's more conspiracy crap. I'd rather we stick to actual peer reviewed science for the purpose of this thread.

[mike321]

As far as I know all research looking for a "red flag" from aspartame have been negative. The next place to look is epedimiological (can't spell tonight) studies, but I have only heard of these on diet drinks, I don't know if there are any specific to aspartame.

[Kid Miracleman]

I'd rather we stick to actual peer reviewed science for the purpose of this thread.

Sounds good to me. Again, I haven't actually watched the video at hand, so I do apologize if, by posting it, I unintentionally gave it more credit than it actually deserves. However, if there are some incorrect assertions in that video that we can handily refute using peer-reviewed scientific studies on a point-by-point basis, I think that would be swell.