Aspartame

Knowing the federal government as well as I do, the FDA probably recommended against it because it's too sweet and delicious.

0 Replies

Re: Aspartame

gollum wrote:

Someone told me that the staff of the FDA voted to recommend that aspartame not be approved for human consumption but the FDA rejected its staff's recommendation and approved it.

Is this true?

I use aspartame and splenda all the time. I asked my cardiologist if they were alright for me to use and he said, yes!

0 Replies

Whew! You had me worried there for a minute. I use Splenda all the time in place of sugar.

All the polls, scientific tests, political pacs, and anyone who wants to stir up fear in consumers, will start insinuating that something like Splenda is dangerous. Wonder how many people have simply stopped paying attention to test results. How can most of us know if the tests are credible, double blind, using enough people to reach a significant result?
Listen to the government? Don't be silly.

0 Replies

You might find this article of interest

http://www.foodcomm.org.uk/latest_aspartame_may_06.htm

One clarification to your original post. The FDA advisory committee that recommended against approval of aspartame is not comprised of FDA staff, but is comprised of representatives of the scientific, business, and consumer communities.

Of interest is the fact that Donald Rumsfeld was the CEO of Searle at the time of the submission and there has long been the accusation that the approval was made for political reasons rather then medical/scientific ones. On the other hand, consumers SCREAMED when cyclomates were banned by FDA due to evidence of increased cancer risk in monkeys. Nutrasweet (aspartame) was not held to the same strict measure in part due to the desires of the American consumers to have a viable alternative to sugar-based products.

0 Replies

JPB-
Thank you very much. It is a very interesting -- and disturbing -- article.

I am surprised that the FDA did not revisit the issue during the Clinton administration.

0 Replies

FDA is supposedly nonpartisan but the director is appointed by the President and confirmed by Congress. That, and they are a government agency so to think they are apolitical is somewhat naive.

They are not in the habit of reviewing decisions made previously in the absence of new data such as an increase in the number of adverse events or new study data submitted for review.

0 Replies

Whether any of these chemicals are harmless or harmful, I'd be interested in whether they promote sugar lust.

I used to be pretty caught up in a sugar then salty grease then sugar, and so on, cycle, and have gotten, if not free of that cycle, more free of it than I was. I still love the occasional bit of confection, but have gotten away from sugary (of any kind) of pop drinks and snacks - well, mostly. Not for any virtue on my part, but that my taste changed as I ate less of it. I'm less attracted to sugar as such, and more for slightly sweet things every so often. Very different than my old self. I am guessing one doesn't reclimatize re sugar craving if one uses a lot of substitute. But... I don't know.

0 Replies

Aspartane is NOT good. Use sweet and low. Aspartane in diet drinks turns into formaldehyde if it sits on the shelf too long.

JPB, didn't read all of your article, but I am almost certain that it contains this info.

0 Replies

JPB, thank you for that, as gollum says, interesting and disturbing link. Another good reason not to trust government studies as long as those in charge can be promised a well paying job while still in charge of an important operation to determine the safety of new food products.

Osso is very familiar with my addicted-to-sweets problem. I use lots of Splenda. I am now going to try to cut way back.

It isn't wise to get frantic about any test, but something like the Italian test does make a huge difference in thoroughness and reliability.

Ah, I guess it's back to the pure, addictive Godivas.

0 Replies

Yes!

I don't know that I'm right, Diane. Just self observation as previous sugar fiend.

0 Replies

ossobuco wrote:

Whether any of these chemicals are harmless or harmful, I'd be interested in whether they promote sugar lust.

I used to be pretty caught up in a sugar then salty grease then sugar, and so on, cycle, and have gotten, if not free of that cycle, more free of it than I was. I still love the occasional bit of confection, but have gotten away from sugary (of any kind) of pop drinks and snacks - well, mostly. Not for any virtue on my part, but that my taste changed as I ate less of it. I'm less attracted to sugar as such, and more for slightly sweet things every so often. Very different than my old self. I am guessing one doesn't reclimatize re sugar craving if one uses a lot of substitute. But... I don't know.

Hmmmmm....using substitute probably means that you keep your sweet tooth. I am trying to wean off any sweetener in tea and coffee. It's odd...I still sweeten my morning, huge, coffee...but anything I have during the day is unsweetened.

As for the cravings.....I doubt sweeteners feed that. I think the craving for sugar is more around getting that sugar "high" as the sugar temporarily overwhelms your insulin....and then you crave as your insulin tends to overcompensate, leaving you low on blood sugar.

I now LOATHE the sugar high, and never get the craving, as long as I never eat a high processed sugar thing alone. If you are also digesting protein, or low GI carbs, I find it stops the high/low thing.

In fact, I seldom crave anything sweet any more.

I suspect liking both sugar and fat is kind of hardwired in, from eons where we never were sure where our next meal was coming from, and had high calorie needs.

0 Replies

Diane wrote:

JPB, thank you for that, as gollum says, interesting and disturbing link. Another good reason not to trust government studies as long as those in charge can be promised a well paying job while still in charge of an important operation to determine the safety of new food products.

Osso is very familiar with my addicted-to-sweets problem. I use lots of Splenda. I am now going to try to cut way back.

It isn't wise to get frantic about any test, but something like the Italian test does make a huge difference in thoroughness and reliability.

Ah, I guess it's back to the pure, addictive Godivas.

The Italians need to cut back on their garlic!

0 Replies

Diane wrote:

JPB, thank you for that, as gollum says, interesting and disturbing link. Another good reason not to trust government studies as long as those in charge can be promised a well paying job while still in charge of an important operation to determine the safety of new food products.

Osso is very familiar with my addicted-to-sweets problem. I use lots of Splenda. I am now going to try to cut way back.

It isn't wise to get frantic about any test, but something like the Italian test does make a huge difference in thoroughness and reliability.

Ah, I guess it's back to the pure, addictive Godivas.

Godivas are good!

Another minor clarification... product approval studies such as those done be Searle for the approval of Nutrasweet are not government studies. They are fully funded by the manufacturer who hopes to gain approval for his product. The burden of proof falls to the manufacturer to prove the safety of it's product to the satisfaction of the FDA. FDA tends to be very conservative and usually, but not always, concur with the recommendation of the advisory committees. Government studies, on the other hand, are funded by the NIH, or other agency, and are scientific in nature.

Osso, I think you're right about sugar substitutes not resulting in sugar cravings because they don't affect your glucose level.

0 Replies

That makes sense, Deb, and is similar to my experience.

0 Replies

is there anything wrong with having a little sugar in your tea or coffee ?
i enjoy some homemade strawberry jam on a buttered bun for breakfast ; so far hasn't harmed me much .
isn't there the old joke about someone indulging at the buffet and to ask for 'sweetener' with the coffee ,cause "i've got to watch my diet ?" .
i can't remember ever having put artificial sweetener into my food , but i do go easy on sugar .
luckily , chocolates and sweets don't interest me much - but it now seems that i should be eating dark chocolate for health benefits - too late for me , i'm afraid .
hbg

0 Replies

JPB and Deb and Diane, on non sugar sweeteners - I don't know what I'm saying.. maybe just trying to distinguish sweet tooth from craving. All I really know is that as I've grandually eaten less sugar, I don't like sweet things as much as I used to. But I don't use non sugar sweeteners, so I don't personally know that if I did, I'd be more attracted to sugar than I am now.

0 Replies

Aspartame sounds like what a street person would say if someone asked him the relationship of his derriere to his being.

0 Replies

Groan. Hey, Gus--as parta me or as part a you, derriere has a very nice ring to it. Now go ahead and do your best with that one--I left it wide open for you.

JPB, Thanks for clearing up my dyslexic reading of the article. I meant the FDA as government not to be trusted. With Rumsfeld as head of Searle, I'm sure the OK was railroaded through.

Hamburger, you are one of the lucky ones. For those of us with a real sweet tooth, it is quite like an addiction. And yes, dark chocolate is good for you, something most chocolate lovers could have told you many years ago. Plus, it is one of the important food groups, being a bean.

0 Replies

"Plus, it is one of the important food groups, being a bean. "

now i know why i stay away from it Shocked

.
hbg

0 Replies

Aspartame

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know