Should I eliminate aspartame from my life? My Doctor says yes!

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

senecarr

JTWaldron wrote: »

Keep your doctor. That's one who not afraid to contradict Searle/Monsanto/Merisant. The only studies that were used to pass aspartame were the studies conducted by G.D. Searle and associated labs for FDA approval. Our conquerors love to change history. When the Bressler report was released, they set up a blue ribbon panel of scientists to look through and assess the Bressler report. They were instructed to avoid looking at the most damning aspects that were pointed out by the Bressler report and the result sanctified all those flawed studies used for passage through the FDA. Look at the story of FDA commissioner Arthur Hall Hayse, the excitotoxicity of aspartame, the rate of today's scientific studies altered to please funding sources and the continued findings science-based independent studies showing one thing or another wrong with aspartame.

Whenever an independent study with no stake in the game finds problems with aspartame (Ramazzini, for example), U.S. regulatory bodies will counter with claims disputing the study or the organization that conducts it. Sometimes they'll perform a ridiculous impromptu study with the aim to compete in the public arena with better news about the product. One is the infamous, deeply flawed AARP study aimed at reaffirming the safety of aspartame in 2005 conducted by the NCI. They merely took a survey of all folks who used diet products as a means to show no causal link to cancer. Europe will eventually be inundated with the same corporate scheme that regulatory agencies were put in place to protect. They will fall in line with the flagship regulatory agency, the FDA.

You are not only being poisoned. You're forbidden to notice.

Unfortunately, what you don't know is that the Ramazzini Institute receives all of its funding from the Lizard Men that live in the center of the earth. They have a vested interest in people giving up artificial sweeteners and going back to sugar because they'll make easier to catch, larger meals for them when they decide to harvest all of human kind for the great Lizard Man BBQ event set for 2045.

halilozkal

MercuryBlue wrote: »

halilozkal wrote: »

According to a systematic review from Crit Rev Toxicol. 2007;37(8):629-727, you can just go ahead and consume it, for further reading see below!

"Critical review of all carcinogenicity studies conducted on aspartame found no credible evidence that aspartame is carcinogenic. The data from the extensive investigations into the possibility of neurotoxic effects of aspartame, in general, do not support the hypothesis that aspartame in the human diet will affect nervous system function, learning or behavior. Epidemiological studies on aspartame include several case-control studies and one well-conducted prospective epidemiological study with a large cohort, in which the consumption of aspartame was measured. The studies provide no evidence to support an association between aspartame and cancer in any tissue. The weight of existing evidence is that aspartame is safe at current levels of consumption as a nonnutritive sweetener."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17828671

Peace Out!

Just who do you think you are, coming in here posting actual scientifically relevant information?

A doctor in the Netherlands

SarahSloth342634

I won't touch Aspartame , and I am very careful about labels on sugar free/ low calorie products. Always have been since I was a teenager. Aspartame leaves a horrible taste in my mouth.

PeachyCarol

Oh dear. We've entered metallic cranial encasement territory.

JustSomeEm

This thread has been closed. As a friendly reminder, you don't have to agree with others, but the debate should be on topic and respectful. Some guidelines that might be of interest to you.

1. No Attacks or Insults and No Reciprocation

a) Do not attack, mock, or otherwise insult others. You can respectfully disagree with the message or topic, but you cannot attack the messenger. This includes attacks against the user’s spelling or command of written English, or belittling a user for posting a duplicate topic.
b) If you are attacked by another user, and you reciprocate, you will also be subject to the same consequences. Defending yourself or a friend is not an excuse! Do not take matters into your own hands – instead, use the Report Post link to report an attack and we will be happy to handle the situation for you.


2. No Hi-Jacking, Trolling, or Flame-baiting

Please stay on-topic in an existing thread, and post new threads in the appropriate forum. Taking a thread off-topic is considered hi-jacking. Please either contribute politely and constructively to a topic, or move on without posting. This includes posts that encourage the drama in a topic to escalate, or posts intended to incite an uproar from the community.


15. Divisive Topics Are Better Suited For Groups, Not the Main Forums

Divisive topics and posts, particularly those that seek input from or are relevant only to a select group of users, are better placed within an appropriate Group rather than the Main Forums. For example, topics relevant to only one religion should not be placed on the main forums but rather within a group related to that religion.

And if you'd like to review ALL of the guidelines, they're located here: http://www.myfitnesspal.com/welcome/guidelines

Because... Science.
davis_em