FDA Approval of Aspartame Under Scrutiny - Canada

June 17, 2009

While this article is from 1987 its excellent on the approval

process. According to the UPI Investigation Dr. Richard Wurtman was

threatened by the VP of Searle originally that his research funds

would be rejected if he did a study on aspartame and seizures and

they were. The UPI Investigation is on the front page of

www.mpwhi.com Dr. Wurtman said there were enough seizures to take it

off the market. However, eventually Dr. Wurtman refused to speak

out, and now MIT gets research funds. You will note in this article

they were trying to get his records.

Consider if a product is safe you don't have to threaten researchers

not to do studies on aspartame because you wouldn't care. Almost 100

per cent of independent studies show the problems aspartame

triggers. The reason the FDA wanted Searle indicted in the first

place is because they couldn't get aspartame to show safety so they

resorted to fraud. So if they couldn't get it to show aspartame in

original studies you know the studies that are done today can't show

safety either. When independent studies show the problems there is

no way for industry studies not to show them unless they are

flawed. Mark Gold has pointed this out in many studies on

Therefore, industry studies should never be used in a review. They

are meaningless. Furthermore, Dr. Ralph Walton did this research for

60 minutes on scientific peer reviewed studies and funding. You will

All my best,

Betty

>LANE SHORE <-lane

>Betty Martini <bettym19

>Article

>Wed, 17 Jun 2009 10:50:09 -0500

>Importance: Normal

1 of 1 File(s)

FDA's_approval_of_aspartame_under_scrutiny_T1.pdf

Recommended Posts