Why Aspartame Isn't Scary

Options
1…5960626465…89

Replies

  • Wheelhouse15
    Wheelhouse15 Posts: 5,575 Member
    Options
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    By the way, lets do some more math. Assuming the toxicity was caused by the large amount of methanol in the rats blood (which is likely) and there was 3888mg more of it in the aspartame group rats blood for whatever reason what would that be for a human? Well doing a basic conversion of weight a rat weighs 0.21kg. A human weighs 80kg, 380 times heavier. So that means the equivalent dosage in a human would be 1.48 KILOGRAMS of methanol in their blood. Understand the average person is going to have like 5 kilos of blood so that would mean your blood was like 25% methanol.

    Yeah if you drank enough methanol to have 1.5 kilos in your blood stream you wouldn't have brain damage, you'd be dead.

    With small animals such as mice it would be easy to salt their diet with small amounts of methanol over 90 days. I always give the benefit of the doubt but this seems rather suspicious. I always like to check the reputation of the journal and this one seems to be fairly solid so I have to wonder why the peer review process didn't catch it unless it is a journal that has a subtle bias.
  • Aaron_K123
    Aaron_K123 Posts: 7,122 Member
    Options
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    By the way, lets do some more math. Assuming the toxicity was caused by the large amount of methanol in the rats blood (which is likely) and there was 3888mg more of it in the aspartame group rats blood for whatever reason what would that be for a human? Well doing a basic conversion of weight a rat weighs 0.21kg. A human weighs 80kg, 380 times heavier. So that means the equivalent dosage in a human would be 1.48 KILOGRAMS of methanol in their blood. Understand the average person is going to have like 5 kilos of blood so that would mean your blood was like 25% methanol.

    Yeah if you drank enough methanol to have 1.5 kilos in your blood stream you wouldn't have brain damage, you'd be dead.

    This post made me realize what an insane amount that was so I double checked and caught a conversion error in my math that I explain above. So in the above example its 3.88mg and in a human it would be 1.5 grams in your blood stream which is much more reasonable.
  • Aaron_K123
    Aaron_K123 Posts: 7,122 Member
    edited November 2016
    Options
    Wheelhouse15 wrote: »
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    brentfostwood904 wrote: »
    here is a nice study for people if you cant find them so easily yourself http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213231714000640

    According to the study the toxicity they claim is due to the methanol present in the metabolic breakdown products of aspartame. I have already addressed this numerous times within this thread as well as in my original post. Unless fruit juice at the levels we typically injest also causes brain damage in us that doesn't really make sense given the relative concentration of methanol found in a can of diet coke versus a glass of fruit juice.

    If you don't accept that could you perhaps explain how the small amount of methanol in the metabolic breakdown drinks flavored with aspartame is neurotoxic while the relatively large amount present in say grape juice isn't? Or do you also avoid fruit juice or blame memory loss on O.J.

    So the paper is claiming the toxicity is via methanol, specifically the methanol comes from the metabolic breakdown of aspartame and then the methanol itself is converted into formaldhyde which is what causes the damage. There is a particularly interesting figure in the paper:

    63dzqge50ccq.jpg

    The figure legend states: "Effect of aspartame (40 mg/kg bwt) on blood methanol level (mM) in rat."

    It is interesting because it gives a hard number, a number we can then do math with. So lets do some math...yay! (nerd alert)

    The figure shows the concentration of methanol in the control rat as being 1mM while it is 10mM in the rats given aspartame. Animals used in the experiment were Wistar strain male albino rats that weighted between 200 and 220g, so on average lets say 210 grams.

    Aspartame was given at 40mg/kg of bodyweight daily for 90 days. So at 210 grams that means they were given 8.4mg per day or over the full 90 days they were given a grand total of 756mg.

    Aspartame is metabolically broken down into phenylalanine, aspartate and methanol...something I pointed out in my original post but is stated in this paper as well and is the source of the toxic methanol. The molar weight ratio of the breakdown is 4:5:1 (can see math in my original post). That means that the 8.4mg of aspartame daily or 756mg total is converted into 0.84mg of methanol or 75.6mg of methanol if 100% of the aspartame is metabolically converted (which is a bit unlikely some will be excreted but lets go with 100%.

    Methanol itself has a molecular weight of 32 grams per mol. That means a 1 molar solution (1M) would be 32g per liter and a 1milimolar solution (1mM) would be 32mg per mililiter.

    Blood volume in a rat is about 64mL per kg (citation: https://www.nc3rs.org.uk/rat-decision-tree-blood-sampling). That means for a 210 gram rat there is a total of 64*0.21 = 13.5mL of blood.

    So, with some basic math, the control rat with a methanol blood concentration of 1mM has 13.5mL*32mg = 432mg of methanol in its blood while the aspartame rat had 10mM which is 10*13.5*32 = 4320mg in its blood.

    That means the amount of methanol between control and aspartame rat increased by 4320-432=3888mg.

    So here is my question. How?

    Over the 90 days if 100% of the aspartame was metabolically broken down, 100% of the methanol created was transported into the blood, 100% of that methanol was not excreted and stayed within the blood and 100% of that stayed in the blood for the full 90 days building and building and building at most that would be the total amount of methanol they were given over 90 days which is 75.6mg...yet apparently the aspartame rats increased the amount in their blood by 3888mg? Not only that but the toxicity is caused by the CONVERSION of methanol to formaldhyde, which would mean its no longer methanol...so any methanol in the blood represents what has NOT had the toxic affect yet as when it is converted it would no longer be in the blood as methanol. Not to mention methanol would be processed and excreted by the liver so not all of it would remain in the blood.

    But even if 100% of what was given ended up in the blood and stayed there intact for 90 days its still about 50 times less than the amount they measured being in the blood.


    So how is it possible to feed a rat 756mg of aspartame over 90 days (which contains 75.6mg of methanol) and have its blood methanol increase by 3888mg as a result?


    Whoops, conversion error. I stated 1M would be 32g/L. So that means 1M would be 32mg/mL, not 1mM.. That means 1mM would be 0.032mg/mL.

    So that explains it. The mg calculation was off by 1000. So its not 432mg and 4320mg its 0.432mg and 4.32mg.

    So the aspartame group had 3.888 mg more methanol in their blood after having a total of 75.6mg of methanol from aspartame over the entire 90 days. That is still high, that is still the amount not converted to formaldhyde...but its much more reasonable. That said I really doubt you'd get to that high of a methanol blood content taking in at most assuming perfect conversion and update 0.84mg of methanol per day.

    Think of it this way. If you drank alcohol on 1 day to get your blood alcohol up to 0.08 and you drank another beer the next day would your blood alcohol be 0.16? no, of course not...your liver processes most of the alcohol over the course of 24 hours...it doesn't stay in your blood intact.

    That makes a little more sense, I was really hoping for a big drunk mouse party though! ;)

    I was thinking that was a bit insane. When I think something is insane though I doubt it and I double check, I doubted my own results so I checked to make sure and caught the mistake. Funny how when something sounds incredulous it often isn't true.
  • Wheelhouse15
    Wheelhouse15 Posts: 5,575 Member
    Options
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    Wheelhouse15 wrote: »
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    brentfostwood904 wrote: »
    here is a nice study for people if you cant find them so easily yourself http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213231714000640

    According to the study the toxicity they claim is due to the methanol present in the metabolic breakdown products of aspartame. I have already addressed this numerous times within this thread as well as in my original post. Unless fruit juice at the levels we typically injest also causes brain damage in us that doesn't really make sense given the relative concentration of methanol found in a can of diet coke versus a glass of fruit juice.

    If you don't accept that could you perhaps explain how the small amount of methanol in the metabolic breakdown drinks flavored with aspartame is neurotoxic while the relatively large amount present in say grape juice isn't? Or do you also avoid fruit juice or blame memory loss on O.J.

    So the paper is claiming the toxicity is via methanol, specifically the methanol comes from the metabolic breakdown of aspartame and then the methanol itself is converted into formaldhyde which is what causes the damage. There is a particularly interesting figure in the paper:

    63dzqge50ccq.jpg

    The figure legend states: "Effect of aspartame (40 mg/kg bwt) on blood methanol level (mM) in rat."

    It is interesting because it gives a hard number, a number we can then do math with. So lets do some math...yay! (nerd alert)

    The figure shows the concentration of methanol in the control rat as being 1mM while it is 10mM in the rats given aspartame. Animals used in the experiment were Wistar strain male albino rats that weighted between 200 and 220g, so on average lets say 210 grams.

    Aspartame was given at 40mg/kg of bodyweight daily for 90 days. So at 210 grams that means they were given 8.4mg per day or over the full 90 days they were given a grand total of 756mg.

    Aspartame is metabolically broken down into phenylalanine, aspartate and methanol...something I pointed out in my original post but is stated in this paper as well and is the source of the toxic methanol. The molar weight ratio of the breakdown is 4:5:1 (can see math in my original post). That means that the 8.4mg of aspartame daily or 756mg total is converted into 0.84mg of methanol or 75.6mg of methanol if 100% of the aspartame is metabolically converted (which is a bit unlikely some will be excreted but lets go with 100%.

    Methanol itself has a molecular weight of 32 grams per mol. That means a 1 molar solution (1M) would be 32g per liter and a 1milimolar solution (1mM) would be 32mg per mililiter.

    Blood volume in a rat is about 64mL per kg (citation: https://www.nc3rs.org.uk/rat-decision-tree-blood-sampling). That means for a 210 gram rat there is a total of 64*0.21 = 13.5mL of blood.

    So, with some basic math, the control rat with a methanol blood concentration of 1mM has 13.5mL*32mg = 432mg of methanol in its blood while the aspartame rat had 10mM which is 10*13.5*32 = 4320mg in its blood.

    That means the amount of methanol between control and aspartame rat increased by 4320-432=3888mg.

    So here is my question. How?

    Over the 90 days if 100% of the aspartame was metabolically broken down, 100% of the methanol created was transported into the blood, 100% of that methanol was not excreted and stayed within the blood and 100% of that stayed in the blood for the full 90 days building and building and building at most that would be the total amount of methanol they were given over 90 days which is 75.6mg...yet apparently the aspartame rats increased the amount in their blood by 3888mg? Not only that but the toxicity is caused by the CONVERSION of methanol to formaldhyde, which would mean its no longer methanol...so any methanol in the blood represents what has NOT had the toxic affect yet as when it is converted it would no longer be in the blood as methanol. Not to mention methanol would be processed and excreted by the liver so not all of it would remain in the blood.

    But even if 100% of what was given ended up in the blood and stayed there intact for 90 days its still about 50 times less than the amount they measured being in the blood.


    So how is it possible to feed a rat 756mg of aspartame over 90 days (which contains 75.6mg of methanol) and have its blood methanol increase by 3888mg as a result?


    Whoops, conversion error. I stated 1M would be 32g/L. So that means 1M would be 32mg/mL, not 1mM.. That means 1mM would be 0.032mg/mL.

    So that explains it. The mg calculation was off by 1000. So its not 432mg and 4320mg its 0.432mg and 4.32mg.

    So the aspartame group had 3.888 mg more methanol in their blood after having a total of 75.6mg of methanol from aspartame over the entire 90 days. That is still high, that is still the amount not converted to formaldhyde...but its much more reasonable. That said I really doubt you'd get to that high of a methanol blood content taking in at most assuming perfect conversion and update 0.84mg of methanol per day.

    Think of it this way. If you drank alcohol on 1 day to get your blood alcohol up to 0.08 and you drank another beer the next day would your blood alcohol be 0.16? no, of course not...your liver processes most of the alcohol over the course of 24 hours...it doesn't stay in your blood intact.

    That makes a little more sense, I was really hoping for a big drunk mouse party though! ;)

    I was thinking that was a bit insane. When I think something is insane though I doubt it and I double check, I doubted my own results so I checked to make sure and caught the mistake. Funny how when something sounds incredulous it often isn't true.

    I still want to see a couple more things from this study: one would be dosing protocols and two would be to see cognitive and behavioural measures but I think the second would be on the scope of this since it's not a biopsych study. Still, it would be interesting to see what the actual manifest effects of the oxidation stress was.
  • Aaron_K123
    Aaron_K123 Posts: 7,122 Member
    edited November 2016
    Options
    Wheelhouse15 wrote: »
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    Wheelhouse15 wrote: »
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    brentfostwood904 wrote: »
    here is a nice study for people if you cant find them so easily yourself http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213231714000640

    According to the study the toxicity they claim is due to the methanol present in the metabolic breakdown products of aspartame. I have already addressed this numerous times within this thread as well as in my original post. Unless fruit juice at the levels we typically injest also causes brain damage in us that doesn't really make sense given the relative concentration of methanol found in a can of diet coke versus a glass of fruit juice.

    If you don't accept that could you perhaps explain how the small amount of methanol in the metabolic breakdown drinks flavored with aspartame is neurotoxic while the relatively large amount present in say grape juice isn't? Or do you also avoid fruit juice or blame memory loss on O.J.

    So the paper is claiming the toxicity is via methanol, specifically the methanol comes from the metabolic breakdown of aspartame and then the methanol itself is converted into formaldhyde which is what causes the damage. There is a particularly interesting figure in the paper:

    63dzqge50ccq.jpg

    The figure legend states: "Effect of aspartame (40 mg/kg bwt) on blood methanol level (mM) in rat."

    It is interesting because it gives a hard number, a number we can then do math with. So lets do some math...yay! (nerd alert)

    The figure shows the concentration of methanol in the control rat as being 1mM while it is 10mM in the rats given aspartame. Animals used in the experiment were Wistar strain male albino rats that weighted between 200 and 220g, so on average lets say 210 grams.

    Aspartame was given at 40mg/kg of bodyweight daily for 90 days. So at 210 grams that means they were given 8.4mg per day or over the full 90 days they were given a grand total of 756mg.

    Aspartame is metabolically broken down into phenylalanine, aspartate and methanol...something I pointed out in my original post but is stated in this paper as well and is the source of the toxic methanol. The molar weight ratio of the breakdown is 4:5:1 (can see math in my original post). That means that the 8.4mg of aspartame daily or 756mg total is converted into 0.84mg of methanol or 75.6mg of methanol if 100% of the aspartame is metabolically converted (which is a bit unlikely some will be excreted but lets go with 100%.

    Methanol itself has a molecular weight of 32 grams per mol. That means a 1 molar solution (1M) would be 32g per liter and a 1milimolar solution (1mM) would be 32mg per mililiter.

    Blood volume in a rat is about 64mL per kg (citation: https://www.nc3rs.org.uk/rat-decision-tree-blood-sampling). That means for a 210 gram rat there is a total of 64*0.21 = 13.5mL of blood.

    So, with some basic math, the control rat with a methanol blood concentration of 1mM has 13.5mL*32mg = 432mg of methanol in its blood while the aspartame rat had 10mM which is 10*13.5*32 = 4320mg in its blood.

    That means the amount of methanol between control and aspartame rat increased by 4320-432=3888mg.

    So here is my question. How?

    Over the 90 days if 100% of the aspartame was metabolically broken down, 100% of the methanol created was transported into the blood, 100% of that methanol was not excreted and stayed within the blood and 100% of that stayed in the blood for the full 90 days building and building and building at most that would be the total amount of methanol they were given over 90 days which is 75.6mg...yet apparently the aspartame rats increased the amount in their blood by 3888mg? Not only that but the toxicity is caused by the CONVERSION of methanol to formaldhyde, which would mean its no longer methanol...so any methanol in the blood represents what has NOT had the toxic affect yet as when it is converted it would no longer be in the blood as methanol. Not to mention methanol would be processed and excreted by the liver so not all of it would remain in the blood.

    But even if 100% of what was given ended up in the blood and stayed there intact for 90 days its still about 50 times less than the amount they measured being in the blood.


    So how is it possible to feed a rat 756mg of aspartame over 90 days (which contains 75.6mg of methanol) and have its blood methanol increase by 3888mg as a result?


    Whoops, conversion error. I stated 1M would be 32g/L. So that means 1M would be 32mg/mL, not 1mM.. That means 1mM would be 0.032mg/mL.

    So that explains it. The mg calculation was off by 1000. So its not 432mg and 4320mg its 0.432mg and 4.32mg.

    So the aspartame group had 3.888 mg more methanol in their blood after having a total of 75.6mg of methanol from aspartame over the entire 90 days. That is still high, that is still the amount not converted to formaldhyde...but its much more reasonable. That said I really doubt you'd get to that high of a methanol blood content taking in at most assuming perfect conversion and update 0.84mg of methanol per day.

    Think of it this way. If you drank alcohol on 1 day to get your blood alcohol up to 0.08 and you drank another beer the next day would your blood alcohol be 0.16? no, of course not...your liver processes most of the alcohol over the course of 24 hours...it doesn't stay in your blood intact.

    That makes a little more sense, I was really hoping for a big drunk mouse party though! ;)

    I was thinking that was a bit insane. When I think something is insane though I doubt it and I double check, I doubted my own results so I checked to make sure and caught the mistake. Funny how when something sounds incredulous it often isn't true.

    I still want to see a couple more things from this study: one would be dosing protocols and two would be to see cognitive and behavioural measures but I think the second would be on the scope of this since it's not a biopsych study. Still, it would be interesting to see what the actual manifest effects of the oxidation stress was.

    They said the aspartame was administered once per day orally at 40mg/kg I thought. Presumably as a solution.
  • Aaron_K123
    Aaron_K123 Posts: 7,122 Member
    edited November 2016
    Options
    In terms of the methanol component let me use an analogy. Lets pretend that rather than aspartame orally the rats were just given methanol directly. Lets also treat methanol as just alcohol consumption which is fair because it is alcohol. So the rats were given alcohol once daily in one bulk amount. They were given a certain amount per day each day for 90 days.

    After 90 days the amount of alcohol was measured in their blood and the amount was 8 times higher than the amount that they were given each day.

    If that is how blood alcohol content worked that would mean if you drank one beer in a sitting per day that on the 8th day you'd be drunk and not only that but if you continued to drink one beer a day you would be drunk 24/7 for the next 82 days.

    That seems a bit odd to me. I'm going to look up the type of rats they used in the study, see if they have any impaired liver function or something. EDIT: nope, just the Wistar rats...so fairly normal. Are rats just crap at alcohol metabolism?
  • Wheelhouse15
    Wheelhouse15 Posts: 5,575 Member
    Options
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    Wheelhouse15 wrote: »
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    Wheelhouse15 wrote: »
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    brentfostwood904 wrote: »
    here is a nice study for people if you cant find them so easily yourself http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213231714000640

    According to the study the toxicity they claim is due to the methanol present in the metabolic breakdown products of aspartame. I have already addressed this numerous times within this thread as well as in my original post. Unless fruit juice at the levels we typically injest also causes brain damage in us that doesn't really make sense given the relative concentration of methanol found in a can of diet coke versus a glass of fruit juice.

    If you don't accept that could you perhaps explain how the small amount of methanol in the metabolic breakdown drinks flavored with aspartame is neurotoxic while the relatively large amount present in say grape juice isn't? Or do you also avoid fruit juice or blame memory loss on O.J.

    So the paper is claiming the toxicity is via methanol, specifically the methanol comes from the metabolic breakdown of aspartame and then the methanol itself is converted into formaldhyde which is what causes the damage. There is a particularly interesting figure in the paper:

    63dzqge50ccq.jpg

    The figure legend states: "Effect of aspartame (40 mg/kg bwt) on blood methanol level (mM) in rat."

    It is interesting because it gives a hard number, a number we can then do math with. So lets do some math...yay! (nerd alert)

    The figure shows the concentration of methanol in the control rat as being 1mM while it is 10mM in the rats given aspartame. Animals used in the experiment were Wistar strain male albino rats that weighted between 200 and 220g, so on average lets say 210 grams.

    Aspartame was given at 40mg/kg of bodyweight daily for 90 days. So at 210 grams that means they were given 8.4mg per day or over the full 90 days they were given a grand total of 756mg.

    Aspartame is metabolically broken down into phenylalanine, aspartate and methanol...something I pointed out in my original post but is stated in this paper as well and is the source of the toxic methanol. The molar weight ratio of the breakdown is 4:5:1 (can see math in my original post). That means that the 8.4mg of aspartame daily or 756mg total is converted into 0.84mg of methanol or 75.6mg of methanol if 100% of the aspartame is metabolically converted (which is a bit unlikely some will be excreted but lets go with 100%.

    Methanol itself has a molecular weight of 32 grams per mol. That means a 1 molar solution (1M) would be 32g per liter and a 1milimolar solution (1mM) would be 32mg per mililiter.

    Blood volume in a rat is about 64mL per kg (citation: https://www.nc3rs.org.uk/rat-decision-tree-blood-sampling). That means for a 210 gram rat there is a total of 64*0.21 = 13.5mL of blood.

    So, with some basic math, the control rat with a methanol blood concentration of 1mM has 13.5mL*32mg = 432mg of methanol in its blood while the aspartame rat had 10mM which is 10*13.5*32 = 4320mg in its blood.

    That means the amount of methanol between control and aspartame rat increased by 4320-432=3888mg.

    So here is my question. How?

    Over the 90 days if 100% of the aspartame was metabolically broken down, 100% of the methanol created was transported into the blood, 100% of that methanol was not excreted and stayed within the blood and 100% of that stayed in the blood for the full 90 days building and building and building at most that would be the total amount of methanol they were given over 90 days which is 75.6mg...yet apparently the aspartame rats increased the amount in their blood by 3888mg? Not only that but the toxicity is caused by the CONVERSION of methanol to formaldhyde, which would mean its no longer methanol...so any methanol in the blood represents what has NOT had the toxic affect yet as when it is converted it would no longer be in the blood as methanol. Not to mention methanol would be processed and excreted by the liver so not all of it would remain in the blood.

    But even if 100% of what was given ended up in the blood and stayed there intact for 90 days its still about 50 times less than the amount they measured being in the blood.


    So how is it possible to feed a rat 756mg of aspartame over 90 days (which contains 75.6mg of methanol) and have its blood methanol increase by 3888mg as a result?


    Whoops, conversion error. I stated 1M would be 32g/L. So that means 1M would be 32mg/mL, not 1mM.. That means 1mM would be 0.032mg/mL.

    So that explains it. The mg calculation was off by 1000. So its not 432mg and 4320mg its 0.432mg and 4.32mg.

    So the aspartame group had 3.888 mg more methanol in their blood after having a total of 75.6mg of methanol from aspartame over the entire 90 days. That is still high, that is still the amount not converted to formaldhyde...but its much more reasonable. That said I really doubt you'd get to that high of a methanol blood content taking in at most assuming perfect conversion and update 0.84mg of methanol per day.

    Think of it this way. If you drank alcohol on 1 day to get your blood alcohol up to 0.08 and you drank another beer the next day would your blood alcohol be 0.16? no, of course not...your liver processes most of the alcohol over the course of 24 hours...it doesn't stay in your blood intact.

    That makes a little more sense, I was really hoping for a big drunk mouse party though! ;)

    I was thinking that was a bit insane. When I think something is insane though I doubt it and I double check, I doubted my own results so I checked to make sure and caught the mistake. Funny how when something sounds incredulous it often isn't true.

    I still want to see a couple more things from this study: one would be dosing protocols and two would be to see cognitive and behavioural measures but I think the second would be on the scope of this since it's not a biopsych study. Still, it would be interesting to see what the actual manifest effects of the oxidation stress was.

    They said the aspartame was administered once per day orally at 40mg/kg I thought. Presumably as a solution.

    Ahh, I missed that part! Thanks, and that would mean that it would presumably do much more damage than the way humans consume it since the cellular defenses to free radicals would be much more overwhelmed than by slow administration.
  • Wheelhouse15
    Wheelhouse15 Posts: 5,575 Member
    Options
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    In terms of the methanol component let me use an analogy. Lets pretend that rather than aspartame orally the rats were just given methanol directly. Lets also treat methanol as just alcohol consumption which is fair because it is alcohol. So the rats were given alcohol once daily in one bulk amount. They were given a certain amount per day each day for 90 days.

    After 90 days the amount of alcohol was measured in their blood and the amount was 8 times higher than the amount that they were given each day.

    If that is how blood alcohol content worked that would mean if you drank one beer in a sitting per day that on the 8th day you'd be drunk and not only that but if you continued to drink one beer a day you would be drunk 24/7 for the next 82 days.

    That seems a bit odd to me. I'm going to look up the type of rats they used in the study, see if they have any impaired liver function or something. EDIT: nope, just the Wistar rats...so fairly normal. Are rats just crap at alcohol metabolism?

    According to the study they metabolize it immediately in the liver with folic acid, which was why I question how well the MTX mimics humans who have that anti-oxidant available.
  • Aaron_K123
    Aaron_K123 Posts: 7,122 Member
    Options
    Wheelhouse15 wrote: »
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    In terms of the methanol component let me use an analogy. Lets pretend that rather than aspartame orally the rats were just given methanol directly. Lets also treat methanol as just alcohol consumption which is fair because it is alcohol. So the rats were given alcohol once daily in one bulk amount. They were given a certain amount per day each day for 90 days.

    After 90 days the amount of alcohol was measured in their blood and the amount was 8 times higher than the amount that they were given each day.

    If that is how blood alcohol content worked that would mean if you drank one beer in a sitting per day that on the 8th day you'd be drunk and not only that but if you continued to drink one beer a day you would be drunk 24/7 for the next 82 days.

    That seems a bit odd to me. I'm going to look up the type of rats they used in the study, see if they have any impaired liver function or something. EDIT: nope, just the Wistar rats...so fairly normal. Are rats just crap at alcohol metabolism?

    According to the study they metabolize it immediately in the liver with folic acid, which was why I question how well the MTX mimics humans who have that anti-oxidant available.

    So if methanol is metabolized "immediately" then how does methanol end up at levels 8 times higher than the daily administered dose within the blood? From my (now correct) math 3.88mg extra total in the blood of the aspartame group who are recieving 8.4mg of aspartame daily which with perfect metabolic conversion and uptake would be at most 0.84mg of methanol into the blood daily.
  • Wheelhouse15
    Wheelhouse15 Posts: 5,575 Member
    edited November 2016
    Options
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    Wheelhouse15 wrote: »
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    In terms of the methanol component let me use an analogy. Lets pretend that rather than aspartame orally the rats were just given methanol directly. Lets also treat methanol as just alcohol consumption which is fair because it is alcohol. So the rats were given alcohol once daily in one bulk amount. They were given a certain amount per day each day for 90 days.

    After 90 days the amount of alcohol was measured in their blood and the amount was 8 times higher than the amount that they were given each day.

    If that is how blood alcohol content worked that would mean if you drank one beer in a sitting per day that on the 8th day you'd be drunk and not only that but if you continued to drink one beer a day you would be drunk 24/7 for the next 82 days.

    That seems a bit odd to me. I'm going to look up the type of rats they used in the study, see if they have any impaired liver function or something. EDIT: nope, just the Wistar rats...so fairly normal. Are rats just crap at alcohol metabolism?

    According to the study they metabolize it immediately in the liver with folic acid, which was why I question how well the MTX mimics humans who have that anti-oxidant available.

    So if methanol is metabolized "immediately" then how does methanol end up at levels 8 times higher than the daily administered dose within the blood? From my (now correct) math 3.88mg extra total in the blood of the aspartame group who are recieving 8.4mg of aspartame daily which with perfect metabolic conversion and uptake would be at most 0.84mg of methanol into the blood daily.

    The MTX made them folic deficient so that the methanol was free to enter the blood stream without formating in liver as normal (this is actually right from the study, which is why I think it's a great read in general). This is supposed to mimic human metabolism, but as I noted with some primate studies, folic acid can be used to alleviate the symptoms of -- you guessed it -- methanol toxicity.

    How they ended up with a higher amount than should have been expected when accounting for the control group levels is something I'm not sure of. Mice might generate there own methanol and it might be influenced by the aspartame? This bears investigation. I would like to see why this might end up with something like a 5% increase over expected values.
  • Aaron_K123
    Aaron_K123 Posts: 7,122 Member
    Options
    Wheelhouse15 wrote: »
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    Wheelhouse15 wrote: »
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    In terms of the methanol component let me use an analogy. Lets pretend that rather than aspartame orally the rats were just given methanol directly. Lets also treat methanol as just alcohol consumption which is fair because it is alcohol. So the rats were given alcohol once daily in one bulk amount. They were given a certain amount per day each day for 90 days.

    After 90 days the amount of alcohol was measured in their blood and the amount was 8 times higher than the amount that they were given each day.

    If that is how blood alcohol content worked that would mean if you drank one beer in a sitting per day that on the 8th day you'd be drunk and not only that but if you continued to drink one beer a day you would be drunk 24/7 for the next 82 days.

    That seems a bit odd to me. I'm going to look up the type of rats they used in the study, see if they have any impaired liver function or something. EDIT: nope, just the Wistar rats...so fairly normal. Are rats just crap at alcohol metabolism?

    According to the study they metabolize it immediately in the liver with folic acid, which was why I question how well the MTX mimics humans who have that anti-oxidant available.

    So if methanol is metabolized "immediately" then how does methanol end up at levels 8 times higher than the daily administered dose within the blood? From my (now correct) math 3.88mg extra total in the blood of the aspartame group who are recieving 8.4mg of aspartame daily which with perfect metabolic conversion and uptake would be at most 0.84mg of methanol into the blood daily.

    The MTX made them folic deficient so that the methanol was free to enter the blood stream without formating in liver as normal (this is actually right from the study, which is why I think it's a great read in general). This is supposed to mimic human metabolism, but as I noted with some primate studies, folic acid can be used to alleviate the symptoms of -- you guessed it -- methanol toxicity.

    How they ended up with a higher amount than should have been expected when accounting for the control group levels is something I'm not sure of. Mice might generate there own methanol and it might be influenced by the aspartame? This bears investigation. I would like to see why this might end up with something like a 5% increase over expected values.

    Aspartame is metabolically broken down into two common amino acids and methanol. So if aspartame "influences" methanol buildup it would have to be due to those common amino acids which would imply that protein would cause the same build-up which strikes me as unlikely. Not sure how that would even work to be honest.

    Do you have a science background, you seem like it?
  • Wheelhouse15
    Wheelhouse15 Posts: 5,575 Member
    Options
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    Wheelhouse15 wrote: »
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    Wheelhouse15 wrote: »
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    In terms of the methanol component let me use an analogy. Lets pretend that rather than aspartame orally the rats were just given methanol directly. Lets also treat methanol as just alcohol consumption which is fair because it is alcohol. So the rats were given alcohol once daily in one bulk amount. They were given a certain amount per day each day for 90 days.

    After 90 days the amount of alcohol was measured in their blood and the amount was 8 times higher than the amount that they were given each day.

    If that is how blood alcohol content worked that would mean if you drank one beer in a sitting per day that on the 8th day you'd be drunk and not only that but if you continued to drink one beer a day you would be drunk 24/7 for the next 82 days.

    That seems a bit odd to me. I'm going to look up the type of rats they used in the study, see if they have any impaired liver function or something. EDIT: nope, just the Wistar rats...so fairly normal. Are rats just crap at alcohol metabolism?

    According to the study they metabolize it immediately in the liver with folic acid, which was why I question how well the MTX mimics humans who have that anti-oxidant available.

    So if methanol is metabolized "immediately" then how does methanol end up at levels 8 times higher than the daily administered dose within the blood? From my (now correct) math 3.88mg extra total in the blood of the aspartame group who are recieving 8.4mg of aspartame daily which with perfect metabolic conversion and uptake would be at most 0.84mg of methanol into the blood daily.

    The MTX made them folic deficient so that the methanol was free to enter the blood stream without formating in liver as normal (this is actually right from the study, which is why I think it's a great read in general). This is supposed to mimic human metabolism, but as I noted with some primate studies, folic acid can be used to alleviate the symptoms of -- you guessed it -- methanol toxicity.

    How they ended up with a higher amount than should have been expected when accounting for the control group levels is something I'm not sure of. Mice might generate there own methanol and it might be influenced by the aspartame? This bears investigation. I would like to see why this might end up with something like a 5% increase over expected values.

    Aspartame is metabolically broken down into two common amino acids and methanol. So if aspartame "influences" methanol buildup it would have to be due to those common amino acids which would imply that protein would cause the same build-up which strikes me as unlikely. Not sure how that would even work to be honest.

    Do you have a science background, you seem like it?

    Yeah, I'm just trying to provide very generous answer without casting suspicious glances lol.

    Neuroscience degree so a bit of micro bio and biochem where involved in ways that I'm almost completely recovered from after long therapy sessions! ;) I'm not particularly well versed in mouse physiology but I did see a ton of studies like this, along with those giant squid axons! ;)
  • AnvilHead
    AnvilHead Posts: 18,344 Member
    Options
    Aaron_K123 wrote: »
    In terms of the methanol component let me use an analogy. Lets pretend that rather than aspartame orally the rats were just given methanol directly. Lets also treat methanol as just alcohol consumption which is fair because it is alcohol. So the rats were given alcohol once daily in one bulk amount. They were given a certain amount per day each day for 90 days.

    After 90 days the amount of alcohol was measured in their blood and the amount was 8 times higher than the amount that they were given each day.

    If that is how blood alcohol content worked that would mean if you drank one beer in a sitting per day that on the 8th day you'd be drunk and not only that but if you continued to drink one beer a day you would be drunk 24/7 for the next 82 days.

    That seems a bit odd to me. I'm going to look up the type of rats they used in the study, see if they have any impaired liver function or something. EDIT: nope, just the Wistar rats...so fairly normal. Are rats just crap at alcohol metabolism?

    A lot of the other math you guys are doing is over my head (although very interesting), but I can contribute to the bolded. The human body metabolizes ethyl alcohol at a rate of around .02% per hour (I believe this figure was given for a 150-pound person). So if a 150 pound person drank a bolus of 4 oz. of alcohol resulting in a BAC of 0.08%, then quit drinking, that ETOH would be completely oxidized/eliminated within the next 4 hours. If the same bolus was administered on the next day, their blood alcohol would again be back to 0.00% within 4 hours. And so on. The effect is not cumulative.

    I'm not sure how (or if) that correlates to rats, as I'm not familiar with the drinking habits or alcohol metabolism rates of rats.
  • Jeannie3099
    Jeannie3099 Posts: 61 Member
    Options
    Face it, it's nasty stuff. I'm losing and I include a little sugar, butter and all the real stuff. Won't risk any health concerns with aspartame. Or fake fat. I took in a lot of the sugar substitute once a long time ago and did not lose weight. I got hungrier! My ears also started ringing. Why mess with your body like that?

Categories