New Cancer Study Obligates FDA 2 Recall Aspartame

[Guest guest]

New Cancer Study Obligates FDA To Recall AspartameFrom Dr. Betty Martini, D.Hum2-28-6

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

OPEN LETTER TO FDA - VIA CERTIFIED MAIL

DELANEY AMENDMENT: If a product causes cancer in animals it cannot be put in food!

 

 

 

The late FDA Toxicologist, Dr. Adrian Gross, testified to the Senate: "In view of all these indications that the cancer-causing potential of aspartame is a matter that had been established way beyond any reasonable doubt, one can ask: What is the reason for the apparent refusal by the FDA to invoke for this food additive the so-called Delaney Amendment to the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act? Is it not clear beyond any shadow of a doubt that aspartame has caused brain tumors or brain cancer in animals?

 

 

"Given that this is so (and I cannot see any kind of tenable argument opposing the view that aspartame causes cancer) how would the FDA justify its position that it views a certain amount of aspartame (50mgm/kgm body weight) as constituting an ADI (Allowable Daily Intake) or "safe" level of it? Is that position not equivalent to setting a "tolerance" for this food additive and thus a violation of that law? And if the FDA itself elects to violate the law, who is left to protect the health of the public?"

 

 

 

Your toxicologist admitted you broke the law by approving aspartame. He also said the significance of the studies is much greater if one considers that brain tumors in rats is very rare: "the historical control r ate for such tumors amongst large populations of rats indicates that no more than 49 animals afflicted with them have been found amongst nearly 60,000 rats, an incidence rate of less than 1/10th of 1% FDA never fails to consider this aspect of the "historical control" incidence. ...

 

 

One cannot help wondering just why they failed to consider this particular aspect in reference to the cancer-induction of aspartame. Had they addressed the historical incidence of brain tumors amongst rats as presented by Dr. Olney, they could not have failed to conclude what I have concluded: - tumors amongst the rats exposed to aspartame increases many-fold " 8/1/85 Senate, S 10839 - 10840

 

FDA broke other laws, as shown in the National Soft Drink Association's long protest against approval, found in the Senate Congressional Record of 5/7/85 P ages S5507-9: "Section 402 of the FDC Act 21 provides a food is adulterated if it contains, in whole or in part 'a decomposed substance or if it is otherwise unfit for food'. Searle has not demonstrated to a reasonable certainty that aspartame and its degradation products are safe for use in soft drinks. ...

 

 

Aspartame is inherently markedly and uniquely unstable in aqueous media. In a liquid such as a soft drink aspartame will degrade as a function of temperature and pH."

 

The hotter it gets the quicker aspartame decomposes. NSDA next reveals Searle deliberately used the wrong test: "High pressure liquid chromatography is a far superior analytical method relative to thin layer chromatography and numerous HPLC methods exist for the detection and quantification of amino acids. Searle's choice of TLC over HPLC adversely aff ected the quality and type of analytical data generated on aspartame and its decomposition products in soft drinks.. ..

 

an important decomposition product of aspartame, aspartic acid cannot be detected at all using TLC. The inability to account for as much as 39% of aspartame's decomposition products is significant. The marked and rapid decomposition of aspartame in soft drinks under temperatures known to prevail is apparent from data in the present record and discussed above in these objections."

 

When responsible scientists, physicians and legislators try to protect us from these criminals the industry with bottomless checkbooks annihilate our rights and welfare. Arizona DHS studies showed aspartame in beverages breaks down into free methanol, wood alcohol, formaldehyde, diketopiperazine, formic acid (among other toxins), and a ban of aspartame was being con sidered. In 1985 Dr. Woodrow Monte, Director of Food Science and Nutrition Lab, Arizona State University, petitioned for a hearing to ban aspartame, because high temperatures in that state accelerate methanol and formaldehyde formation. By an unusual maneuver the legislature altered the text in a Toxic Waste Bill so to ban regulation of FDA-approved food additives. This scuttled the hearing Dr. Monte had been promised.

 

 

 

How are these abominations maneuvered? G. D. Searle lobbyists were Andrew Herwitz, Governor Babbitt's former Chief of Staff, and other powerful hacks. Then Searle officials contributed to the campaign of Arizona House Majority Leader Burton Barr. The Committee to Reelect Barr gave campaign contributions to state representatives Don Aldridge, Karen Mills, & Jan Breuer. They all voted on the side of G. D. Searle. The legislators were bought and paid for, and cared not for Arizona citizens. (Go rdon 1987)

 

Another trampled law: Interstate Commerce regulations prohibit shipping adulterated products, including drugs, across state lines. All aspartame products are adulterated!

 

 

 

By law an additive must be inert. It's illegal to sell a drug as an additive. In original studies aspartame triggered brain, mammary, uterine, ovarian, testicular, thyroid and pancreatic tumors and is an excitoneurotoxic carcinogenic drug. The 2005 3-year Ramazzini Study on 1,800 rats confirmed what FDA knew from the beginning: aspartame is a multipotential carcinogen that caused leukemia, cancer of the kidneys, lymphoma and cancer of the cranial peripheral nerves. Only the rats fed aspartame developed malignant brain tumors. Producers complain researchers let test animals finish their lives rather than killing them at 24 months before most cancers develop. Standard practice i s to kill the animals before they get sick. The Ramazzini study was peer reviewed by 7 world experts.

 

 

 

So FDA's Consumer Online Magazine, February 2006 assures us: "[Aspartame] has come under fire in recent years from individuals who have used the Internet in an attempt to link the sweetener to brain tumors and other serious disorders. But FDA stands behind its original approval of aspartame, and subsequent evaluations have shown that the product is safe. A tiny segment of the population is sensitive to one of the sweetener's byproducts and should restrict intake. However, the agency continually monitors safety information on food ingredients such as aspartame and may take action to protect public health if it receives credible scientific evidence indicating a safety problem" More- http://www.rense.com/general69/assp.htm