If at all I’m eating yogurt, I’ll stick to organic, very few and all natural ingredients or homemade yogurt. No more sucralose crap for me.

As someone who was misdiagnosed with IBS, but who in reality was drinking far too much aspartame-laden sodas, I can say with assurance that aspartame is not benign. Scientists will be quick to say, “That is just your unique metabolism” or what have you. The truth remains the same: we don’t NEED aspartame to live. We need whole foods, real foods and pure water in our systems to fuel our bodies. Anything else either displaces whole foods, as you have said, or bogs down the system.

Keep going. Don’t let the slings and arrows of PhD’s and people who want their diet colas get you down

I am grateful that there are professionals like you around to offer an educated perspective on the other side of the matter, and who would clearly be able to offer people taking pharamceuticals an explanation of how the drugs work in their body. My colleagues and I are here simply to offer an alternative lifestyle that helps reduce risk and prevent illness.

It is difficult even to begin to explain how misled you are. First, aspartame is perhaps the most studied substance in history, whether you believe it or not. It is generally recognized as safe (GRAS) by every viable regulatory authority in the Western world. There are no viable scientific studies that suggest any adverse effect from aspartame. One by one they can be systematically eliminated from rationale consideration. You cite a study- “A statistically significant increase in the incidence of malignant tumors, lymphomas…” claiming otherwise. But all work from that Ramazzini lab, not just on aspartame, but on many other substances has been dismissed, because their rats were sick, see the 2009 report on this Ramazzini Foundation work and the associated editorial at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19430000?ordinalpos=2&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum.

I discovered and reported at two national meetings in 2008 that all the original (Searle) work on aspartame was flawed by a design error that was also present in virtually all rat experiments including the Ramazzini work you cited. Cited FDA critics of Reagan, Rumsfeld and others alleging some sort of cover-up miss the point. All that early work was done incorrectly. It was redone with corn-soy rat diets rich in folate and the issue disappeared.

Below I explain more about this issue and why there is no issue. The fact is that methanol from aspartame is readily oxidized to formic acid (formate) and that is processed by the folate vitamin system. Folate reduces formate with the help of vitamin B12 to form methyl groups that are placed to protect tissue and DNA from damage. That methanol you seem to think is poisonous is actually not even toxic itself, but all its toxicity resides in its formate metabolite and it’s induced acidosis — stop the acidosis and the toxicity disappears and sufficient folic acid vitamin does just that.) That methanol is actually a vital substance for life, because without it there would be no formate for making methyl groups. Methyluracil (thymine) would not be formed and would not be incorporated into the DNA. Instead uracil would enter DNA and uracil makes the DNA fragile and break. Broken DNA is synonymous with cancer! Moreover, without the methylation and reduction of toxic homocysteine (perhaps the most powerful excitotoxin) to methionine (methylhomocystine), suffice it to say you simply wouldn’t live very long. The problem is that in this process some formate does destroy a very small amount of the folate that processes it. Vitamins by definition are required in small amounts and must be replenished daily irrespective of why they must be replenished. But over time, if not replaced that folate becomes deficient. All these early experiments fed aspartame to rats and nothing to control rats, but that is improper design because the methanol, just in the treated group will deplete the vitamin folic acid (folate). And folate deficiency is directly linked to lymphomas, leukemia, and other cancers. To do the work correctly you must feed methanol to the control group (difficult, because of its volatility) or one must provide supplemental vitamin to both groups. So not only did the Ramazzini group make their rats deficient in folic acid, but his rats were deficient in the first place (takes too much space to explain here) and their rats were a strain that becomes deficient as they age and at half the time of the Ramazzini experiment. So these and all Ramazzini rat experiments have been done incorrectly. Susceptibility to certain pathogens may stem directly from folate deficiency, so the M pulmonis infection of the Ramazzini rats probably occurred after the folate deficiency arose and that was likely even before the experiments began.

Second, let’s explore what you missed by relying just on the antiaspartame critic’s argument that is by far more important than aspartame. What new information is available to better explain any sensitivity to aspartame? Aspartame’s methanol is metabolized to vital formate by the folate vitamin system, just like the methanol from fruit juice or brandy. “… the 90 different documented symptoms” mentioned in the antiaspartame literature (and you cite above) are actually all symptoms not of aspartame, but of very personal issues including folate deficiency, folate enzyme problems and/or accrual of the very powerful excitotoxin homocysteine (that most often arises as a consequence of folate issues). And these folate/homocysteine issues are actually common and play a major role in human disease today.

Perhaps you should take one more course in nutrition. This time concentrate on folic acid, its metabolism and its deficiency links to cancer and to birth defects, including fetal alcohol syndrome in which ethanol acts as an antagonist to the folate system resulting in the accrual of toxic formate and insufficient methylation. If you do you will discover that folate deficiency, folate polymorphisms (that is genetic issues), and homocysteine explain all allegations against aspartame.

John E. Garst, Ph.D. (Medicinal Chemistry, Pharmacology, Toxicology, and Nutrition)

(FYI, the author has absolutely no financial or biasing connection with the aspartame, the soft drink or their related industries. The author has a Ph.D. in Medicinal Chemistry (Pharmacy) from the University of Iowa, postdoctoral experience at Yale University (Molecular Biophysics & Biochemistry) and at Vanderbilt University and taught nutritional toxicology at the University of Illinois (Champaign-Urbana) besides having conducted federally funded research at Vanderbilt, UIUC, and at several other universities before recently entering into retirement.

Here is the reason, explained by another writer as to why I don’t have specific URLs I can provide that site studies to support the nature in which toxins, including those of artificial sweeteners, push us towards cancer:

“With all of the cancer information and disinformation broadcasted continually through the major news media, rarely do we hear a mention of the greatest threat to our health – and the most prevalent cause of cancer: toxins. Toxins (poisons) are ubiquitous in our modern world. Although those cancer researchers and foundations making the news headlines, mostly funded by pharmaceutical corporations and chemical manufacturers, seem to be obsessed with finding a cancer virus or genetic predispositions to the disease, as a society we are not being given the whole truth that toxins cause most cancers.

Independent researchers (e.g., read Cancer-Gate: How to Win the Losing Cancer War, by Samuel Epstein, MD) understand that toxins cause disruptions in cellular function, cellular differentiation, cellular protection, and immune system function. Such poisons also place great stress on the eliminatory system that tries, often in vain, to rid our bodies of a toxic overload; this includes the kidneys, liver, cardiovascular system, lungs, bowels and skin. Toxins are known to rob our bodies of oxygen and cause free radical damage to cellular structures; they also are cumulative, leading to illness and symptoms now and into the future. With all of the cancer information and disinformation broadcasted continually through the major news media, rarely do we hear a mention of the greatest threat to our health – and the most prevalent cause of cancer: toxins…. Thanks to the power and greed of industry, the public is kept in the dark about many of the causes of cancer. Instead we are fed news reports about genetic connections, viruses and early screenings. Biologically speaking, as human beings, our bodies are not equipped to handle the onslaught (or combinations) of toxic overload that exists in our modern world. Until we realize that synthetic chemicals are causing most cancers, we cannot begin to stem the tide of disease and suffering. ” (Continue reading here: http://www.nutritionalwellness.com/archives/2006/mar/03_toxins.php

“A statistically significant increase in the incidence of malignant tumors, lymphomas and leukemias in rats exposed to varying doses of aspartame appears to link the artificial sweetener to a high carcinogenicity rate, according to a study accepted for publication by the peer-reviewed journal Environmental Health Perspectives (EHP).” http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/02/060213093019.htm

This link, lists many reputable professionals questioning the FDA’s results in the study you mentioned: http://www.naturalnews.com/011804_aspartame_tumors_brain_tumor.html

I strongly recommend you read this one as well: http://www.opednews.com/articles/FDA-HID-RESEARCH-THAT-DAMN-by-Dr-Betty-Martini-091103-94.html

These reports put us, as consumers, in the challenging role of having to question whether the boards that govern our health and safety are in fact looking out for our best interested and can be trusted.

As I said as well, we can always find studies to support an argument as well as disprove others. In response to whether I think Health Canada/DFA are wrong. No, not in the context in which they have presented this information. I don’t think they are wrong, but I do think they take a very narrow look.

The challenge is that scientific studies often have to take a black and white approach to thing. If for example, it has been proven (which it has) that artificial sweetener can lead to weight gain, and carrying of excess weight leads to an increased risk of cancer, doesn’t that than make it a contributing factor? The thing about these artificial sweeteners, in moderation as part of a generally healthy diet and lifestyle, they could be completely harmless with the assumption that the liver, kidney and bowels are working as efficiently as they should be. There are thousands of variables that would be impossible to address in a clinical study- especially one where it is in the best interests of parties involved to have the results go in their favour. That is the politics of the industrialized food industry and getting into that opens a whole other ginormous can of worms.

I digress, as one of my readers said, however, it tends not to be the really healthy people with clean diets that are drinking a couple diet cokes a day.

The thing about holistic health care is that we don’t look at a single study and say that x doesn’t lead to y in z part of the body, so it must be fine. The whole mindbody is address as a single entity, a network of interrelated systems and energies. This is where the challenge comes in when we try and merge scientific studies with real human beings in natural settings, living regular lives. If you are seriously interested in reading further into this, beyond what is stated in government and/or industry funded scientific studies I strongly recommend reading some of the following. These books take a completely different view of the body than is taught and shared in conventional medicine.

Sweet Deception: Why Splenda, NutraSweet, and the FDA May Be Hazardous to Your Health by Dr. Joseph Mercola and Dr. Kendra Degen Pearsall
Eat Safe: The Truth about Additives from Aspartame to Xanthan Gum by Bill Statham
Foods to Fight Cancer: Essential foods to help prevent cancer by Richard Beliveau
How to Prevent and Treat Cancer with Natural Medicine by Michael Murray
The Secret History of the War on Cancer by Devra Davis
Aspartame Disease: An Ignored Epidemic by H. J. Roberts

If I have still not answered your questions than you’ll have to move on. Ekhart Tolle has written that sometimes it is better to be at peace than to be right.

I would be happy to be proven wrong on this, but until cancer is eradicated while people continue to consume the volume of artificial sweeteners, other preservatives and carry the toxic load that we now bare, I suppose the debate could continue indefinitely.