Talk:NutraSweet

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Apparently the legalization of Aspartame was expedited through the FDA via then Searle Corporation's CEO Donald Rumsfeld. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Rumsfeld " Private career

In early 1977 Rumsfeld briefly lectured at the Woodrow Wilson School and Northwestern's Kellogg School of Management, in Evanston.

From 1977 to 1985 Rumsfeld served as Chief Executive Officer, President, and then Chairman of G.D. Searle & Company, a worldwide pharmaceutical company based in Skokie, Illinois whose products included, among others, the oral contraceptive pill Enovid. During his tenure at Searle, Rumsfeld led a financial turnaround of the company that earned him awards as the Outstanding Chief Executive Officer in the Pharmaceutical Industry from the Wall Street Transcript (1980) and Financial World (1981). Rumsfeld is believed to have earned around US$12 million from the sale of Searle to Monsanto.It was under Rumsfeld that Searle got FDA approval for the controversial artificial sweetener, aspartame, which it marketed as NutraSweet. Some believe that the approval of aspartame was influenced by conflict of interest and that persons involved in the aspartame approval process were rewarded with high paying jobs or consulting positions." Donald Rumsfeld How come does a known excitoxin get passed through the FDA and by that matter food additive Glutamate? --210.10.179.214 14:04, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] rico suit

Apparently nonexistent:

[WNHO on the "National Justice League"]

[edit] Previous Name?

Trying to confirm that NutraSweet was originally marketed under the trademarked name "Sugar Delight"...?

It is in the title of two articles published in "Food Features" newsletter

The product is also the subject of two advertisments animated by Bill Plympton and narrated by Emo Phillips. --Samatva 23:33, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Suggesting non-NPOV and factual error issues

First, I believe this article should be removed and used a redirect for Aspartame (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspatame) which does link to Aspartame Controversy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspartame_controversy) which really is the subject of this article. Thus, it is redundant.

Concerning NPOV:

This article clearly possesses a non-neutral point of view (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view). I believe the orignal poster best demostrates this in the following statements:

"However, the FDA has a record keeping problem (they never did respond to the certified letter from the WEBMASTER of this site a major victim!)" "The truth about aspartame's toxicity is far different than what the NutraSweet Company would have you readers believe."

Capitialization is mis-used as editorial emphasis:

"Dr. Hayes OVERRULED his own Board of Inquiry." "METHANOL (AKA WOOD ALCOHOL/POISON) (10% OF ASPARTAME) " "By the FDA's own admission fewer then ONE PERCENT of those who have problems..." "The fact remains, though, that MOST victims don't have a clue that..."''

More imporantly, the Aspartame Controversy page indicates that there is scientific data both supporting and disproving potentially harmful effects of Nutrasweet; this entry only suggests data that supports a harmful linkage, eschewing other studies.

Concerning facts:

This article is entirely devoid of references. All 'facts' are unsubstantiated. Virtually all claims need supporting references:

''"For over eight years the FDA refused to approve it because of the seizures and brain tumors this drug produced in lab animals." "Even then there was so much opposition to approval that a Board of Inquiry was set up. The Board said: "Do not approve aspartame"" "It may take one year, five years, 10 years, or 40 years, but it seems to cause some reversible and some irreversible changes in health over long-term use" "An EPA assessment of methanol states that methanol "is considered a cumulative poison due to the low rate of excretion once it is absorbed. In the body, methanol is oxidized to formaldehyde and formic acid; both of these metabolites are toxic." "The recommend a limit of consumption of 7.8 mg/day." "Formaldehyde is a known carcinogen, causes retinal damage, interferes with DNA replication, and causes birth defects" "Therefore, tests of aspartame or methanol on animals do not accurately reflect the danger for humans." "As pointed out by Dr Woodrow C. Monte, Director of the Food Science and Nutrition Laboratory at Arizona State University, "There are no human or mammalian studies to evaluate the possible mutagenic, teratogenic, or carcinogenic effects of chronic administration of methyl alcohol."" "Many of them returned home with numerous disorders similar to what has been seen in persons who have been chemically poisoned by formaldehyde." "Aspartame accounted for more than 75% of all adverse reactions reported to the FDA's Adverse Reaction Monitoring System (ARMS)" "However, the FDA has a record keeping problem (...) and they tend to discourage or even misdirect complaints, at least on aspartame." "Many reactions to aspartame were very serious including seizures and death."''

There are factual issues as well. Consider the following:

"The absorption of methanol into the body is sped up considerably when free methanol is ingested. Free methanol is created from aspartame when it is heated to above 86 Fahrenheit (30 Centigrade). This would occur when aspartame-containing product is improperly stored or when it is heated (e.g., as part of a "food" product such as Jello)."

Alcohols (whether methanol or ethanol) have a very high vapor pressure and "cook-out" of food during the cooking process. This is how a bourben barbeeque sauce, for instance, is actually alcohol free. One must assume that far, far less than 100% of all methyl groups are present as methyl alcohol in the food after heating.

"A one-liter (approx. 1 quart) aspartame-sweetened beverage contains about 56 mg of methanol."

This is factually untrue. Perhaps the original author meant to say "A one-liter aspartame-sweeted beverage contains about 56mg of aspartame. The beverage is not sold with methanol suspended in it.

"Heavy users of aspartame-containing products consume as much as 250 mg of methanol daily or 32 times the EPA limit."

This statement is only true if 100% of aspartame is taken into the body during digestion, 100% of aspartame is demethylated and coupled to form methanol, which in return 100% of that would be dehydrated into formaldehyde. Facts regarding formaldehyde poisoning are provided, but the extent of the linkage between aspartame-methanol-formaldehyde are not presented in this article; it is only implied.

"In every case, ethanol is present, usually in much higher amounts"

This is untrue. Methanol is present in several fruit juice formulations in the absense of ethanol.

"The free methanol in the beverages may have been a contributing factor in these illnesses. Other breakdown products ofaspartame such as DKP, may also have been a factor."

This is non-factual (i.e., speculation)

"Much worse, on 27 June 1996, without public notice, the FDA removed all restrictions from aspartame allowing it to be used in everything, including all heated and baked goods."

All FDA decisions are matter of public notice.

"The fact remains, though, that MOST victims don't have a clue that aspartame may be the cause of their many problems!"

More speculation.

Jaccox 19:56, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Nearly the entire contents of this article are serious violations of WP:NPOV. Most of it should be deleted because the subject is covered well (and from a neutral point of view) at aspartame controversy. That article can then be linked to from this article. Everything that is not about NutraSweet the brand or NutraSweet the company should be removed. Everything that is about aspartame should be merged into aspartame. Deli nk 15:03, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Deli nk: everything that is not about NutraSweet the brand or NutraSweet the company should be removed. However, "clean-up" of this article seems to have consisted of replacing anti-POV with pro-POV statements relating to the aspartame controversy! The new pro-aspartame paragraph asserts incorrectly that no "major researchers" are bringing aspartame "under fire" (contradicted by the presence of articles such as by the neurosurgeon Dr Russell Blaylock[1] and also a 29 Dec 2006 reply[2] to the cited European Food Safety Authority article[3]). Be that as it may, please let us focus on the fact that this article is about NutraSweet (brand and company), and not aspartame per se. Links to aspartame-related articles should be present in case readers wish to read further (I will add these to a "See also" section). This article should NOT be a place to air grievances about aspartame, and it also should NOT be a place to promote aspartame either. Bezapt 10:49, 31 December 2006 (UTC)