Thanks for this. I thought I would let you know Jim I was in New York and just got back. I was talking to Shelly, President of the Board of the American Anti-Cancer Institute. She was telling me about a conversation with a funeral director. It seems they don’t understand why when embalming they no longer need as much formaldehyde for bodies, and said they are now using 25% less. The bodies are preserved. Nothing like getting embalmed before you die. If you remember, the case in Puerto Rica, where an aspartame victim died and they had to close the casket of what was suppose to be an open casket funeral. The formaldehyde was oozing out of the skin, from where the methanol had converted to formaldehyde.
This is also in Dr Roberts medical text, Aspartame Disease: An Ignored Epidemic, www.sunsentpress.com under pre-embalming. I really should have left a copy with Dr. Alemany when I was in Barcelona. He speaks of the funeral directors also not knowing why the bodies have so much formaldehyde. If you remember in the Trocho Study all the formaldehyde in the tissues. Every country should repeat the Trocho Study by independent researchers. However, as you know the government agencies who work with industry ignore all independent research. On the other hand, the use industry studies which are all fixed. There is no way to do a study on a chemical poison and have it show safety. As you recall in original studies they couldn’t get aspartame to show safety so committed fraud and the FDA tried to have them indicted but the two U.S. Prosecutors hired on with the defense team. The pharmaceutical companies have bottomless checkups and can pay for influence and power. Mark Gold of the Aspartame Toxicity Center has on his web site, www.holisticmed.com/aspartame abuse in research and shows how they fix the studies.
The problem is evidence doesn’t matter. After 30 years there is so much evidence on aspartame all you have to do is google aspartame and aspartame dangers and get millions of hits.
Abby Cormack who was so ill from aspartame (when I went to New Zealand) made the suggestion about the Trocho Study being repeated and she was absolutely right. She did a wonderful job getting the information on aspartame dangers in New Zealand. She and the New Zealand team did so much to expose aspartame in her country saving the lives of thousands.
Almost 100% of independent scientific peer reviewed research shows aspartame to be unsafe. Even though the last documentary was in Spanish you could see all the independent researchers told the truth and there was the FDA, Dr. Hattan, lying. He was there when the FDA tried to have G. D. Searle indicted and when the Board of Inquiry revoked the petition for approval. Their job means more than the lives of the people. So what it amounts to is Parliament not accepting anything EFSA says if they try again to say aspartame is safe knowing full well its a deadly poison.
I remember when I first got started over 20 years ago and someone told me to find out more about it from a book. I tried under aspartame, NutraSweet, Equal, etc and couldn’t find it. Taking it page by page I finally did. It was listed where it should have been listed under “Chemical Poison”. That’s what it is. Parliament has got to tell EFSA if they try to go along with industry again – no way. If they do it again EFSA should be dissolved and a new organization that is completely independent should be set up. A law should be made by Parliament that if they succumb to the power of industry instead of going by science it is a crime.
At 05:36 AM 7/5/2012, Jim McDonald wrote:
For the Attention of:
Mr. Tim Smith
Food Standards Agency
Dear Mr Smith,
The UK is getting a raw deal from FSA in relation to the current and past reviews of aspartame. From where I am sitting FSA, COT and EFSA are suppressing vitally important information pertaining to the current assessment of aspartame safety for their own ends and totally ignoring any new independent evidence which does not suit their apparent particular objective – Keep aspartame safe.
I am particularly concerned at the shenanigans going on with the Hull Pilot Study which will now be 2 years late in concluding; coincidentally 3 months AFTER EFSA is due to give its opinion on their review. This is not acceptable, a full review of aspartame which does not include the Pilot Study results and our particular challenges is a farce. FSA have not said a word about how the study is going and are very reluctant to give out any information, I wonder why??
The British Public are relying on honest, open and independent scientific advice from FSA based on full disclosure of the facts. Public money is paying for this study which is more than 200% over the original budget with unexplained delays. What is the scientific justification for the latest injection of £114,000, an additional 25 volunteers and another 12 months on the study time? Will the study be changed in any way? if so in what way and why?
For the last 4 years we have challenged with FSA, the UK ADI of aspartame, as being 35 times too high for safety and for 2 years that the methanol in the NOAEL used to set the ADI would likely kill a human – IE. The ADI is seriously WRONG. Neither the FSA nor EFSA have provided a shred of scientific evidence to disprove our challenges or shown any counter science to confirm the ADI as it stands. It is not acceptable to just say we (FSA and UKAAC) disagree on the source of and interpretation of the available data it is too important for that; one of us must be right. We have provided detailed data on our submissions from day one FSA must scientifically refute or agree them.
New Evidence: (see attachments)
Prompted by 2 letters from Dr Dianne Benford (FSA) from around June last year, I looked at her claims that the body handles all methanol in the same way, that it is the amount of methanol released by aspartame that counts and the MSDS is not a suitable source of data for “dietary” methanol – let us put all three of these to bed.
The covering letter above explains what I set out to do and the EU attachment is a spreadsheet containing the figures. In essence, using data from the MSDS :-
A 60kg adult who consumes the FSA daily “safe” limit of 240 mg of methanol each day, in 29 days will have ingested enough methanol equivalent to the acute blinding dose (6840mg – one tablespoon) – In 86 days they will have ingested methanol equivalent to the acute lethal dose (20580mg – 3 tablespoons)
The ADI of aspartame at 40mg/kg is not safe.
I would be grateful on behalf of the long suffering British population, if you would ensure the above letter and worksheet are included in the EFSA safety review, before it concludes at the end of September.
Filed Under: Aspartame