Aspartame in Milk?

Options
24567…13

Replies

  • sunnyside1213
    sunnyside1213 Posts: 1,205 Member
    Options
    aspartame = evil.
  • Shock_Wave
    Shock_Wave Posts: 1,573 Member
    Options
    Obviously aspartame would be in the ingredients if it was added.

    But what's so special about milk products that you can't put aspartame or sucralose in them? What's the reasoning there? You can put it in any other product, as long as you list it in the ingredients.

    If that's the case then I don't have a problem with it. The wording in the article implied that they're not changing the label.... which implies that it won't be in the ingredients....? or is this some Brit Eng. vs Am Eng thing?

    lol Reading is hard for some people.
  • jonnythan
    jonnythan Posts: 10,161 Member
    Options
    I'm intolerant to aspartame, it makes me ill. So no, I really don't agree AT ALL with it going in food without it being on the label

    Also, I don't get this whole thing about putting *anything* in food without listing it on the ingredients.... for every food or additive that exists, you can probably find someone, somewhere who's allergic or intolerant to it. And people have the right to choose what they eat and don't eat. They can put what they like in processed food as far as I'm concerned, but I at the very least want to be able to read the list of ingredients and make my own choice about whether or not I eat food that contains any particular ingredient.

    Unless I'm missing something major, no one said anything about putting aspartame into anything without putting it on the label.

    Instead of adding sugar or HFCS to "chocolate milk" they would add aspartame or sucralose or whatever. It would still be on the label.

    As it is right now, they're literally not allowed to add it at all. Which seems crazy to me. They're allowed to add HFCS but they can't add artificial sweetener.
  • LuckyLeprechaun
    LuckyLeprechaun Posts: 6,296 Member
    Options
    aspartame = evil.

    Your exaggeration is quite over the top.

    Things like rape and genocide are evil.

    Aspartame has been proven to be safe to consume.
  • Iron_Pheonix
    Iron_Pheonix Posts: 191 Member
    Options
    What makes them think that they can improve on a natures produce? Milk is natural (putting aside the raw issue) why on earth would you want to remove its natural sugars and replace with artificial ingredients? People aren't obese from consuming too much dairy...they are consuming too much food...mainly processed crap! They'd get a better response by educating people of what a healthy diet looks like.

    In the UK they have removed flavoured milk in most schools- thank goodness!
  • neandermagnon
    neandermagnon Posts: 7,436 Member
    Options
    Obviously aspartame would be in the ingredients if it was added.

    But what's so special about milk products that you can't put aspartame or sucralose in them? What's the reasoning there? You can put it in any other product, as long as you list it in the ingredients.

    If that's the case then I don't have a problem with it. The wording in the article implied that they're not changing the label.... which implies that it won't be in the ingredients....? or is this some Brit Eng. vs Am Eng thing?

    lol Reading is hard for some people.

    Yes I'm dyslexic, would you like to take the p*** some more about it?
  • jonnythan
    jonnythan Posts: 10,161 Member
    Options
    If that's the case then I don't have a problem with it. The wording in the article implied that they're not changing the label.... which implies that it won't be in the ingredients....? or is this some Brit Eng. vs Am Eng thing?

    No, what they mean by "changing the label" is that, if they put artificial sweeteners, they're not allowed to call it milk anymore. So you can sell "chocolate milk" that has a ton of HFCS poured into it, but you can't call it "chocolate milk" if you use any aspartame.

    That's what this is about.

    This article is much more clear:
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/26/aspartame-milk_n_2764729.html?utm_hp_ref=business
  • dwalt15110
    dwalt15110 Posts: 246 Member
    Options
    How is artificial anything considered as nutritious? There is one company that does put artificial sweetener in their chocolate milk. I accidently bought it. There was no little symbol on the label to tell that it was contained. It was absolutely horrid. It is essential that these additives be listed. Unfortunately, if this is given the green light by the FDA, it will take the death of many individuals to change it. Thanks for the info.
  • jonnythan
    jonnythan Posts: 10,161 Member
    Options
    why on earth would you want to remove its natural sugars and replace with artificial ingredients?

    They don't want to do that.

    They want to *add* sweetener and still be able to call it milk.

    Right now they can add high fructose corn syrup and still call it milk. If they add aspartame, they can't call it milk.
  • neandermagnon
    neandermagnon Posts: 7,436 Member
    Options
    I'm intolerant to aspartame, it makes me ill. So no, I really don't agree AT ALL with it going in food without it being on the label

    Also, I don't get this whole thing about putting *anything* in food without listing it on the ingredients.... for every food or additive that exists, you can probably find someone, somewhere who's allergic or intolerant to it. And people have the right to choose what they eat and don't eat. They can put what they like in processed food as far as I'm concerned, but I at the very least want to be able to read the list of ingredients and make my own choice about whether or not I eat food that contains any particular ingredient.

    Unless I'm missing something major, no one said anything about putting aspartame into anything without putting it on the label.

    It says "without changing the label" - that's an ambiguous phrase. The list of ingredients is on the label, so to me "without changing the label" implies they're not going to put it on the list of ingredients. From the responses on the thread, a lot of people took it to mean that. Maybe it's a difference in British or American English...? or maybe it's just a poorly written article (a good writer avoids ambiguous phrases).
  • Shock_Wave
    Shock_Wave Posts: 1,573 Member
    Options
    Obviously aspartame would be in the ingredients if it was added.

    But what's so special about milk products that you can't put aspartame or sucralose in them? What's the reasoning there? You can put it in any other product, as long as you list it in the ingredients.

    If that's the case then I don't have a problem with it. The wording in the article implied that they're not changing the label.... which implies that it won't be in the ingredients....? or is this some Brit Eng. vs Am Eng thing?

    lol Reading is hard for some people.

    Yes I'm dyslexic, would you like to take the p*** some more about it?

    I was agreeing with you with your quote to tiger boy.
  • Iron_Pheonix
    Iron_Pheonix Posts: 191 Member
    Options
    aspartame = evil.

    Your exaggeration is quite over the top.

    Things like rape and genocide are evil.

    Aspartame has been proven to be safe to consume.


    I wouldn't even go there, that thread has been rehashed a hundred times! A great deal of us consider it to be a fairly nasty product. Especially those of us that eat food that lived or grew. No aspartame trees that I know of?
  • jonnythan
    jonnythan Posts: 10,161 Member
    Options
    I'm intolerant to aspartame, it makes me ill. So no, I really don't agree AT ALL with it going in food without it being on the label

    Also, I don't get this whole thing about putting *anything* in food without listing it on the ingredients.... for every food or additive that exists, you can probably find someone, somewhere who's allergic or intolerant to it. And people have the right to choose what they eat and don't eat. They can put what they like in processed food as far as I'm concerned, but I at the very least want to be able to read the list of ingredients and make my own choice about whether or not I eat food that contains any particular ingredient.

    Unless I'm missing something major, no one said anything about putting aspartame into anything without putting it on the label.

    It says "without changing the label" - that's an ambiguous phrase. The list of ingredients is on the label, so to me "without changing the label" implies they're not going to put it on the list of ingredients. From the responses on the thread, a lot of people took it to mean that. Maybe it's a difference in British or American English...? or maybe it's just a poorly written article (a good writer avoids ambiguous phrases).

    Yes, see my above posts. The article in the OP is pretty horrid. I linked to a better one:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/26/aspartame-milk_n_2764729.html?utm_hp_ref=business
  • cscheiern
    cscheiern Posts: 45
    Options
    here is a link to comment on this to the FDA, I dont know if it will make any difference in the end, but...

    https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2013/02/20/2013-03835/flavored-milk-petition-to-amend-the-standard-of-identity-for-milk-and-17-additional-dairy-products

    and the article from a different place:

    http://www.prisonplanet.com/u-s-dairy-industry-petitions-fda-to-approve-aspartame-as-hidden-unlabeled-additive-in-milk-yogurt-eggnog-and-cream.html
  • neandermagnon
    neandermagnon Posts: 7,436 Member
    Options
    If that's the case then I don't have a problem with it. The wording in the article implied that they're not changing the label.... which implies that it won't be in the ingredients....? or is this some Brit Eng. vs Am Eng thing?

    No, what they mean by "changing the label" is that, if they put artificial sweeteners, they're not allowed to call it milk anymore. So you can sell "chocolate milk" that has a ton of HFCS poured into it, but you can't call it "chocolate milk" if you use any aspartame.

    That's what this is about.

    This article is much more clear:
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/26/aspartame-milk_n_2764729.html?utm_hp_ref=business

    Okay, I wasn't aware that they wouldn't be allowed to call it "milk" if they added artificial sweeteners. That's kind of weird. Is that the law in the UK too?

    I agree, i.e. double standard, can add HFCS but not articifial sweetener.
  • Iron_Pheonix
    Iron_Pheonix Posts: 191 Member
    Options
    why on earth would you want to remove its natural sugars and replace with artificial ingredients?

    They don't want to do that.

    They want to *add* sweetener and still be able to call it milk.

    Right now they can add high fructose corn syrup and still call it milk. If they add aspartame, they can't call it milk.


    Honestly I don't understand that either, why add anything to milk? Is it not sweet enough without adding sweeteners?
  • concordancia
    concordancia Posts: 5,320 Member
    Options
    Other articles refer to the "front label". Dairy products have to include "reduced sugar" on the front if they use artificial sweeteners. The ingredients list must be complete, no matter what.

    Since people know this, non dieters tend to avoid reduced anything, as do all people avoiding artificial sweeteners.
  • rocket_ace
    rocket_ace Posts: 380 Member
    Options
    i don't understand....are we saying that regular milk you buy in the store has added sugar in it but doesn't list it on the ingredients? wha?
  • LuckyLeprechaun
    LuckyLeprechaun Posts: 6,296 Member
    Options
    aspartame = evil.

    Your exaggeration is quite over the top.

    Things like rape and genocide are evil.

    Aspartame has been proven to be safe to consume.


    I wouldn't even go there, that thread has been rehashed a hundred times! A great deal of us consider it to be a fairly nasty product. Especially those of us that eat food that lived or grew. No aspartame trees that I know of?

    There aren't any penecillin trees either.

    Just because a lab is the origin, there is no reason to fear the product.

    Again, aspartame has been proven to be safe to consume. Unless you have PK. Which is very rare.
  • neandermagnon
    neandermagnon Posts: 7,436 Member
    Options
    Obviously aspartame would be in the ingredients if it was added.

    But what's so special about milk products that you can't put aspartame or sucralose in them? What's the reasoning there? You can put it in any other product, as long as you list it in the ingredients.

    If that's the case then I don't have a problem with it. The wording in the article implied that they're not changing the label.... which implies that it won't be in the ingredients....? or is this some Brit Eng. vs Am Eng thing?

    lol Reading is hard for some people.

    Yes I'm dyslexic, would you like to take the p*** some more about it?

    I was agreeing with you with your quote to tiger boy.

    Sorry, I thought you were taking the mick because I misunderstood it initially (see my first post).

    thanks for the clarification

Categories