Back to...

GET VISIBLE! Advertise Here. Find Out More

Share Our Stories! - Click Here

FDA Knowingly Allowed Killer Aspartame On Market

By Dr. Betty Martini, D.Hum.

Aspartame in original studies was proven dangerous and against the law.  There were birth defects like neural tube, spina bifida and cleft palate.  A "pivotal study" showed grand mal seizures.  There were brain tumors and brain cancer with FDA Dr. Adrian Gross telling the Senate that aspartame violated the Delaney Amendment because of the cancer.

According to informant Jana Marie Kinnard who shredded the studies aspartame killed everything it touched.  Dr. James Bowen told the FDA they had mass poisoned the world. See below.  Over 30 years later diseases triggered by aspartame in medical texts by physicians are epidemic.  G. D. Searle hired Don Rumsfeld to get aspartame on the market.  Here is the Aspartame Resource Guide with details: aspartame_resource_guide.htm

EU experts call for ban.  There have been demands for bans in the US for years with FDA now protecting industry even though their own records prove aspartame is deadly.  See it in documentary:  Sweet Misery: A Poisoned World: v=toKyRlpmG7A    FDA's own report listed 92 symptoms and included death: aspartame_symptoms.pdf   Experts explain how aspartame triggers sudden cardiac death: aspartame_and_sudden_death.htm    References and more information on web sites below. 

Why The Artificial Sweetener In your Favorite Diet Drink Could Be Dangerous story/news/health/2019/07/25/ the-artificial-sweetener-in- your-favorite-diet-drink- could-be-dangerous/39801425/ 

Food & Drink Business:
Report questions safety of artificial sweetener aspartame
Read more at http://www. news/report-questions-safety- of-artificial-sweetener- aspartame#veaOgI6WHidCKiIo.99

Report Questions Safety Of Artificial Sweetener Aspartame
By Kim Berry

The artificial sweetener aspartame has not been adequately proven to be safe for human consumption, a University of Sussex study said. The report is also highly critical of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and EU food safety processes. 

Professor Erik Millstone and Dr Elisabeth Dawson's EFSA's toxicological assessment of aspartame: was it even-handedly trying to identify possible unreliable positives and unreliable negatives? Report  analysed the EFSA 2013 reassurance about the sweetener's safety. They found the EFSA panel "discounted the results of every single one of 73 studies that indicated that aspartame could be harmful while treating 84 per cent of studies providing no prima facie evidence of harm as unproblematically reliable".

Millstone had contributed a 30 document dossier to the 2013 proceedings which detailed inadequacies in 15 earlier studies which the EFSA had failed to pass on to its scientific advisors.  "It is clear from this research that the EFSA scientists failed to acknowledge numerous inadequacies in the reassuring studies but instead picked up on tiny imperfections in all the studies providing evidence that aspartame may be unsafe.

"In my opinion, based on this research, the question of whether commercial conflicts of interest may have affected the panel's report can never be adequately ruled out because all meetings all took place behind closed doors."

Since 1974, studies and scientists have warned of the risks of brain damage, liver and lung cancer, brain lesions and neuroendocrine disorders from consuming Nutrasweet, which is found in thousands of products around the world including diet soft drinks.

He is also advocating a radical overhaul of EU food safety processes including an end to behind closed door discussions.

Millstone said: "Our analysis of the evidence shows that, if the benchmarks the panel used to evaluate the results of reassuring studies had been consistently used to evaluate the results of studies that provided evidence that aspartame may be unsafe then they would have been obliged to conclude there was sufficient evidence to indicate aspartame is not acceptably safe.

"This research adds weight to the argument that authorisation to sell or use aspartame should be suspended throughout the EU, including in the UK, pending a thorough re-examination of all the evidence by a reconvened EFSA that is able to satisfy critics and the public that they operate in a fully transparent and accountable manner applying a fair and consistent approach to evaluation and decision making."

Flaws in the 2013 Opinion highlighted by Millstone and Dawson included the panel:
  • Breached EFSA guidelines on risk assessment transparency on multiple grounds;
  • Adopted a low-hurdle for the acceptability of negative studies - including studies previously dubbed "woefully inadequate" and "worthless" by experts;
  • Applied unreachably high hurdles for 'positive' studies indicating adverse effects - even though many of those 73 studies were far more reliable than most of the studies that provided no indication of risk; and
  • Demonstrated puzzling anomalies including inconsistent and unacknowledged assumptions.

The International Sweeteners Association responded to the study, saying scientific opinions from food safety authorities around the world "in line with the overwhelming body of scientific evidence available, have consistently confirmed that aspartame is safe". Aspartame has been subject to "extensive safety assessments" and the 2013 EFSA Opinion was "the most comprehensive assessment of the aspartame safety database", it said.

Food Standards Australian New Zealand (FSANZ) told Food & Drink Business that under the Australian New Zealand Food Standards Code aspartame is regulated as a food additive.

It said: "Standard 1.3.1, together with Schedules 15 and 16 of the Code lists the types of substances used as food additives, the foods that are permitted to contain food additives, the additives that are permitted in each food group and the maximum permitted concentration of the additive in that food group. Aspartame is a permitted intense sweetener (additive number 951), which is used in a variety of foods.

"The use of any food additive in the food supply would not be permitted under the Code if there was independent evidence that there is a safety concern with its use in food.

"FSANZ monitors new assessments of the safety of food additives, including  aspartame, and investigates reputable new research that comes to light, which could change our current conclusions and hence permissions."

FSANZ updated information about the safety of aspartame in September 2017.

Further information about how FSANZ assesses safety of substances added to food can be read here .

Martini Note:  I visited with Food Standards in New Zealand and when I showed them the FDA's own evidence against aspartame was told: "We did no studies in New Zealand and relied on FDA approval".  Dr. Ralph Walton did research for 60 Minutes showing 92 % of independent studies showed the problems, and if you eliminate 6 studies the FDA  were involved in and one pro industry study then 100% of independent research showed the dangers.  http://www. content/uploads/2014/07/Dr- Walton-survey-of-aspartame- studies.pdf
Looks like FSANZ never checked "independent" scientific peer reviewed research as recent studies have shown myocardial infarction, strokes, cancer, raising fasting blood sugar and obesity just for starters!  How can anyone look at the Trocho Study showing that the formaldehyde converted from the free methyl alcohol embalms living tissue and damages DNA and say aspartame is safe? It's listed in the 1000 medical text, "Aspartame Disease: An Ignored Epidemic" by the late world expert H. J. Roberts, M.D. under "pre-embalming". 
Dr. Woodrow Monte in "While Science Sleeps: A Sweetener Kills" says aspartame is a killing machine. 
Dr. Russell Blaylock, neurosurgeon and author of "Excitotoxins: The Taste That Kills" says "There is growing evidence that the artificial sweetener aspartame is one of the most dangerous food additives ever produced.  Looks like  FSANZ has simply decided to protect industry instead of the people .  Ramazzini Institute studies by Dr. Morando Soffritti have shown that aspartame is a multipotential carcinogen, and they did three studies.

Read more at http://www. news/report-questions-safety- of-artificial-sweetener- aspartame#veaOgI6WHidCKiIo.99

If you have not read Dr. Millstone's 22 page study you can access it here in the second paragraph: rumsfelds-plague.php

Here is Dr. James Bowen's letter over 30 years ago.  They sent an agent who appeared aggravated he had written the letter as he presented the agent with 29 more cases of aspartame disease.


JAMES D. BOWEN, M.D. 3118 S Logan Ste.3 Lansing, MI 48910

My statement for the public record regarding food labeling and the aspartame issue is serious if not somewhat facetious at times. The reason for this is because I have found little evidence of honesty, integrity or stability on the part of Food & Drug Administration officials regarding the aspartame issue, since its approval in 1981.

This attitude is largely shared by the general public. I come in contact with approximately two new people each week who are now being or who have in the past been poisoned by aspartame.All of them share the same reactions that it is not worth writing to the FDA or NutraSweet, because you and your agency have run amuck and are no longer a valid public benefactor.

The recent revelations about the problems surrounding generic drug approvals are compelling evidence of what happens when an agency considered itself above the law in dealing with these matters. In my opinion, this has resulted in the mass poisoning of the American public as well as seventy-plus countries in the rest of the world. Watching FDA officials walk through the revolving door and be further rewarded by being promoted to other positions of high public responsibility is clear evidence of a government out of control.

For this reason, I am opposed to labeling aspartame content of food and drinks. To do so would imply that the government is taking some sort of responsible action...when the only responsible action would be to immediately take aspartame off the market, fully disclose its toxicities, offer full compensation to the injured, public and criminally prosecute anyone who participated in the fraudulent placement of aspartame on the marketplace. That includes those who work so diligently to keep in on the market as well. Further, to label the purported aspartame content of a product would cover a number of toxic flaws in the product and its allowable daily intake (ADI) as follows:

1. That the amount stated on the label was accurate and factual rather than theoretical. Aspartame breaks down relatively quickly in solution. Given the well established modus operandi of the manufacturer, there is no concern given the ultimate consumer. And cover-ups seem to be a part of the routine of doing business. The public should be well advised that the amounts really used in liquid products are relatively greater than those stated to accomplish a relative compensation for the loss of product sweetness occurring during storage in solution.

2. That the ADI presently allowed is 50% greater than that expected to cause a reversal of the phenylalanine/tyrosine ratios in the human brain. This has profoundly bad implications for the human being, including dopamine and serotonin synthesis inhibition, causing depression, appetite changes, mental inabilities, increased susceptibility to seizures and a host of neurohormonal problems.

3. Every known metabolite of aspartame is of marked or questionable toxicity and patently unsafe for human use. Methyl alcohol is metabolized to nascent formaldehyde in the eye, nervous system and other metabolically active organs. It immediately attacks and denatures the tissue structure proteins in which is metabolized to nascent formaldehyde. This stimulates specific organ and subcellular autoimmunity which seems to be a preponderant source of the bad experiences reported by NutraSweet victims. Aspartic Acid is a neuroexcitotoxic present in damaging amounts, it own right, at the ADI for aspartame. Simple logic tells one that it will vastly increase the metabolism of methyl alcohol to formaldehyde attach there. This corresponds well with the symptomalogies often experienced, such as Lou Gehrigs Disease (ALS), bulbar palsies, neurohormonal disorders, diketopiperazine issue remains totally unresolved and dangerous. The amino acids that are released by hydrolysis, form eimers and isomers that are either not sufficiently studied, or which are known substrates in undesirable pathological states such as Alzheimers disease.

4. There is the issue of the approval of aspartame for market, which has violated every principle of responsible science and responsible government. Everyone responsible for this hearing should at least completely review the approval process and the comments of the participants and observers who have so excellently elucidated all the malfeasance for the public record, such as Dr. Adrian Gross and many, many others (all on the public record).

In light of the above 4 points, I highly recommend that you deny in every way possible any subterfuge of respectability that the aspartame people have enshrouded themselves and their product within hopes of quickly denying its access to the worldwide marketplace. I write this, not believing that it will do the slightest bit of good in the sense of affecting the labeling issue per se, but that instead, it might reach some honest, concerned, conscientious individuals in the process.

Dr. Betty Martini, D.Hum, Founder
Mission Possible World Health Intl

More information on , , , - search aspartame.

More info on , , web site hacked is now on ,