http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1054
substantial formaldehyde dose from 11% methanol of aspartame (600 mg/L Diet
Coke): Oppermann 1973: Monte 1984: Schwarcz: Murray 1.23.4 rmforall

From: "JOE SCHWARCZ" <joe.schwarcz@...>
To: "Rich Murray" <rmforall@...>
Subject: Re: leukemia from formaldehyde in air [from 11% methanol in
aspartame?]: NIH NCI, Hauptmann 11.5.3: Murray 1.23.4 rmforall
Date: Friday, January 23, 2004 7:41 AM

Hi
I'm very aware of this paper because of a situation that I have
looked into myself about formaldehyde exposure in our
anatomy labs and possible risk to students. Without a doubt
occupational exposure to inhaled formaldehyde is a real
concern. But this has nothing to do with trace amounts of
formaldehyde derived from the diet. Also it is interesting to
note that the study found a significantly reduced risk of non-
Hodgkin's lymphoma associated with formaldehyde exposure.
So does aspartame protect against non-Hodgkin's lymphoma?
Of course not. That argument would be just as irresponsible
as arguing that formaledhyde from aspartame increases the
risk of leukemia based on this study.
Regards
Dr. Joe Schwarcz Director, McGill Office for Chemistry and Society
514-398-6238 joe.schwarcz@...
*******************************************************************

From: "JOE SCHWARCZ" <joe.schwarcz@...>
To: "Rich Murray" <rmforall@...>
Subject: Re: European Union aspartame reevaluation status? Schwarcz
communications: Martini: Linsley: Murray 1.20.3 rmforall
Date: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 11:53 AM

Let me just clarify a few things. First of all, I am not "pro-
aspartame." I am "pro-science." I have absolutely no reason
to support or oppose aspartame use. I go by the published
evidence. I do not "have a radio station in Canada": as Betty [Martini]
states but I do host an hour long science show every week.
And I did have Betty on. Frankly, she was not very good.
Couldn't believe some of the silly things she said. We have a
rather sophisticated audience and I had numerous e-mails after
her appearance asking me why we had such twaddle on the
air. I think she is well-meaning and sees herself as some sort
of latter day Galileo. She isn't.
You also say that scientists don't look at the "anti-aspartame"
literature. Wrong. We look at the overall picture. Unlike
activists with preconceived ideas we do not try to fit square
pegs into round holes. We fit the theory to the facts, not the -
other way around.
I hope your anti-aspartame campaign does not end up
increasing people's appetite for sugar. Trading in a theoretical
risk for an established one is not a very good way to go.
Dr. Joe Schwarcz Director, McGill Office for Chemistry and Society
514-398-6238 joe.schwarcz@...
*******************************************************************

Jan 23 2004 Hello Joe Schwarcz, I enjoy studying your pointed remarks.

Do you use aspartame?

The strikingly meager biochemical evidence, considering that aspartame
studies in monkeys and rats date back to the industry's Oppermann research
in 1973, justifies assuming that 30% of the 11% methanol component of
ingested aspartame remains in the body each day as formaldehye and formic
acid products in all tissues. The problem for users is that this is by no
means "trace amounts of formaldehyde", especially since these are
cumulative, durable toxic products. The USA EPA has set the limit for
formaldehyde in drinking water at 1 ppm, or 2 mg daily for an average use of
2 L water-- summing to
60 mg monthly.

For the common high dose of 2 L diet soda daily, as much as average daily
drinking water, the 1120 mg aspartame immediately releases 123 mg methanol
in the GI tract, and the liver the same day converts it to formaldehyde and
formic acid.

Metabolism of aspartame in monkeys.
Oppermann JA, Muldoon E, Ranney RE.
J. Nutrition 1973 Oct; 103(10): 1454-1459.

We estimate then that the 30% retention of toxic products of formaldehyde
and formic acid in all tissues amounts to 37 mg daily, 1,200 mg monthly,
about 60 times more than the daily 0.6 mg ( 18 mg monthly ) from 30%
retention of the 2 mg EPA daily limit for formaldehyde in water.

Bear in mind that the EPA limit for formaldehyde in drinking water is
1 ppm, or 2 mg daily for a typical daily consumption of 2 L of water.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/835
RTM: ATSDR: EPA limit 1 ppm formaldehyde in drinking water July 1999
5.30.2 rmforall
*******************************************************************

I was unable with an hour search on Google to find any specific figures for
the precise amount of aspartame in Diet Coke, except for this:

This analysis by Winston Laboratories in 1997 gave the percentage of
aspartame as
0.060% in a new can, which is 600 mg per L.
I've been using a value of 555 mg/L, the average for diet sodas.

http://www.dorway.com/jcohen.html Jennifer Cohen report in April, 1997
[extracts]
THE EFFECTS OF DIFFERENT STORAGE TEMPERATURES
ON THE TASTE AND CHEMICAL COMPOSITION OF DIET COKE
BY JENNIFER COHEN

Jennifer Cohen is an eleven-year old student in Mrs. Simmons' sixth
grade Oradell, New Jersey class. The principal of Oradell Public School is
Scott Ryan. He may be reached at 201 261-1181. Jennifer conducted
an experiment proving aspartame, the artificial sweetener in diet soda,
breaks down into two deadly neurotoxins when stored at room temperature
and under refrigeration.

METHOD: I did my own experiment on aspartame. On January 21, l997, I
bought a new case of Diet Coke from the supermarket.

Table 2 ASPARTAME DKP FORMALDEHYDE
% % Parts per billion
BASELINE CAN 0.060% * *

SAMPLE # 502 0.058% 0.001% 53.5
(refrigerated)

SAMPLE # 517 0.051% 0.002% 231.0 [ 0.23 mg/L]
(room temperature)

SAMPLE #540 0.026% 0.010% 76.2
(incubator)

SAMPLE # 563 * * *
(new can)

* Sample #563 (new can of Diet Coke was not tested by the lab. It was
used for the taste test only. The baseline can was not tested for
formaldehyde or DKP because it was assumed that FDA would ban any new
product containing poison. The total cost of testing was $1250. This
may not be a lot of money to a drug company but it is to me. As it is,
I will be baby-sitting for the summer of 1997 to pay for this study. -JC)

Winston Laboratories located in Ridgefield, New Jersey,
(201-440-0022) ran the tests on the diet cokes used in this experiment.
*******************************************************************

"An average aspartame-sweetened beverage would have a conservative
aspartame content of about 555 mg/liter (48, 51)...

48. Searle Research and Development., Aspartame for use as a
Sweetener in Carbonated Beverages. Petition submitted to the United
States Food and Drug Administration - FAP 2A3661.

51. Staples, R.E., Teratogenicity of Formaldehyde. Formaldehyde
Toxicity. J.E. Gibson, Ed., Hemisphere Publishing Company pp 51-60
(1983)."

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/870
Aspartame: Methanol and the Public Interest 1984:
Monte: Murray 9.23.2 rmforall

Rereading this prescient classic review from 1984, I find its findings
are supported in much recent research, so I am again making the full
text widely available.
[I have put my comments or corrections in square brackets, and spaced
the text to ease the reader's task]

For instance, I had forgotten this, which answers the industry PR
"science" that fruits and vegetables supply much more methanol than does
aspartame:

"Fruit and vegetables contain pectin with variable methyl ester content.
However, the human has no digestive enzymes for pectin (6, 25)
particularly the pectin esterase required for its hydrolysis to methanol
(26).

Fermentation in the gut may cause disappearance of pectin (6) but the
production of free methanol is not guaranteed by fermentation (3). In
fact, bacteria in the colon probably reduce methanol directly to formic
acid or carbon dioxide (6) (aspartame is completely absorbed before
reaching the colon). Heating of pectins has been shown to cause
virtually no demethoxylation; even temperatures of 120 deg C produced
only traces of methanol (3). Methanol evolved during cooking of high
pectin foods (7) has been accounted for in the volatile fraction during
boiling and is quickly lost to the atmosphere (49).
Entrapment of these volatiles probably accounts for the elevation in
methanol levels of certain fruit and vegetable products during canning (31,
33).

Recent research [see links at end of post] supports his focus on the
methanol to formaldehyde toxic process:

The United States Environmental Protection Agency in their Multimedia
Environmental Goals for Environmental Assessment recommends a minimum
acute toxicity concentration of methanol in drinking water at 3.9 parts
per million, with a recommended limit of consumption below 7.8 mg/day
(8). This report clearly indicates 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." (8)....

Recently the toxic role of formaldehyde (in methanol toxicity) has been
questioned (34). No skeptic can overlook the fact that, metabolically,
formaldehyde must be formed as an intermediate to formic acid
production (54).

Formaldehyde has a high reactivity which may be why it has
not been found in humans or other primates during methanol poisioning
(59)....

If formaldehyde is produced from methanol and does have a reasonable
half life within certain cells in the poisoned organism the chronic
toxicological ramifications could be grave.

Formaldehyde is a known
carcinogen (57) producing squamous-cell carcinomas by inhalation
exposure in experimental animals (22). The available epidemiological
studies do not provide adequate data for assessing the carcinogenicity
of formaldehyde in man (22, 24, 57).

However, reaction of formaldehyde
with deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) has resulted in irreversible
denaturation that could interfere with DNA replication and result in
mutation (37)...."

http://www.dorway.com/wmonte.txt

Dr. Woodrow C. Monte Aspartame: methanol, and the public health.
Journal of Applied Nutrition 1984; 36 (1): 42-54.
(62 references) Professsor of Food Science [retired 2002 to New Zealand]
Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona 85287 woodymonte@...
The methanol from 2 L of diet soda, 5.6 12-oz cans, 20 mg/can, is
112 mg, 10% [precisely 11%] of the aspartame.
The EPA limit for water is 7.8 mg daily for methanol (wood alcohol),
a deadly cumulative poison. Many users drink 1-2 L daily.
The reported symptoms are entirely consistent with chronic methanol
toxicity.
(Fresh orange juice has 34 mg/L, but, like all juices, has 16 times more
ethanol, which strongly protects against methanol.]

ASPARTAME: METHANOL AND THE PUBLIC HEALTH
Woodrow C. Monte, Ph.D., R.D.**

ABSTRACT

Aspartame (L-asparty-L-phenylalanine methyl ester), a new sweetener
marketed under the trade name NutraSweet*, releases into the human
bloodstream one molecule of methanol for each molecule of aspartame
consumed.

This new methanol source is being added to foods that have considerably
reduced caloric content and, thus, may be consumed in large amounts.

Generally, none of these foods could be considered dietary methanol
sources prior to addition of aspartame.
When diet sodas and soft drinks, sweetened with aspartame,
are used to replace fluid loss during exercise and physical exertion in hot
climates, the intake of methanol can
exceed 250 mg/day or 32 times the Environmental Protection Agency's
recommended limit of consumption for this cumulative toxin (8).
[ 7.8 mg daily methanol from 2 L drinking water:
8. Cleland, J.G. and Kingsbury, G.L., Multimedia Environmental
Goals For Environmental Assessment. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency: EPA-600/7-77-136b, E-28, November 1977. ]

There is extreme variation in the human response to acute methanol
poisoning, the lowest recorded lethal oral dose being 100 mg/kg, with
one individual surviving a dose over ninety times this level (55).

Humans, due perhaps to the loss of two enzymes during evolution, are
more sensitive to methanol than any laboratory animal; even the monkey
is not generally accepted as a suitable animal model (42).

There are no human or mammalian studies to evaluate the possible
mutagenic, teratogenic, or carcinogenic effects of chronic
administration of methyl alcohol (55).

The average intake of methanol from natural sources varies, but limited
data suggests an average intake of considerably less than 10 mg/day (8).

Alcoholics may average much more, with a potential range of between 0
and 600 mg/day, depending on the source
and in some cases the quality of their beverages (15).

Ethanol, the classic antidote for methanol toxicity,
is found in natural food sources of methanol
at concentrations 5 to 500,000 times that of the toxin (Table 1).
Ethanol inhibits metabolism of methanol and allows the body
time for clearance of the toxin through the lungs and kidneys (40, 46).

The question asked is whether uncontrolled consumption of this new
sweetener might increase the methanol intake
of certain individuals to a point beyond which
our limited knowledge of acute and chronic human
methanol toxicity can be extrapolated to predict safety.

*NutraSweet is a trademark of G.D. Searle & Co.

**Director of the Food Science and Nutrition Laboratory
Arizona State University Tempe, Arizona 85287

[Last section of review]
METHANOL CONTENT OF ASPARTAME SWEETENED BEVERAGES

An average aspartame-sweetened beverage would have a conservative
aspartame content of about 555 mg/liter (48, 51) and therefore, a
methanol equivalent of 56 mg/liter (56 ppm).

For example, if a 25 kg child consumed on a warm day,
after exercising, two-thirds of a two-liter bottle
of soft drink sweetened with aspartame, that child
would be consuming over 732 mg of aspartame (29 mg/kg). This alone
exceeds what the Food and Drug Administration considers the 99+
percentile daily consumption level of aspartame (48). The child would
also absorb over 70 mg of methanol from that soft drink. This is almost
ten times the Environmental Protection Agency's recommended daily limit
of consumption for methanol [in water].

To look at the issue from another perspective, the literature reveals
death from consumption of the equivalent of 6 gm of methanol (55, 59).
It would take 200 12 oz. cans of soda to yield the lethal equivalent of
6 gm of methanol.

According to FDA regulations, compounds added to foods that are found
to cause some adverse health effect at a particular usage level are
actually permitted in foods only at much lower levels. The FDA has
established these requirements so that an adequate margin of safety
exists to protect particularly sensitive people and heavy consumers of
the chemical.
Section 170.22 of Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations
mandates that this margin of safety by 100-fold below the
"highest no-effect" level.

If death has been caused by the methanol equivalent of 200 12 oz. cans
of aspartame sweetened soda, one hundredth of that level
would be two cans of soda.

The relationship of the lethal dose to the "highest no effect" level
has tragically not been determined for methanol (9, 11) but assuming very
conservatively that the level is one tenth of the lethal dose, the FDA
regulations should have limited consumption to approximately 2.4 ounces
of aspartame sweetened soft drink per day. [Published case reports show
severe reactions to tiny doses of aspartame in some reactors: 1.5, 4, or
6-8 mg aspartame, while a 12 oz can of diet soda provides about 200 mg
aspartame.]

The FDA allows a lower safety margin only when "evidence is submitted
which justifies use of a different safety factor." (21.C.F.R.170.22)
No such evidence has been submitted to the FDA for methanol.

Thus, not only have the FDA's requirements for acute toxicity not been
met, but also, no demonstration of chronic safety has been made. The
fact that methyl alcohol appears in other natural food products
increases greatly the danger of chronic toxicity developing by adding
another unnatural source of this dangerous cumulative toxin to the food
system.

NATURAL SOURCES OF METHANOL

Methanol does appear in nature.

To determine what impact the addition of a toxin will have on an
environment it is very helpful to accurately determine the background
levels of consumption.

Fruit and vegetables contain pectin with variable methyl ester content.
However, the human has no digestive enzymes for pectin (6, 25)
particularly the pectin esterase required for its hydrolysis to methanol
(26).

Fermentation in the gut may cause disappearance of pectin (6) but the
production of free methanol is not guaranteed by fermentation (3). In
fact, bacteria in the colon probably reduce methanol directly to formic
acid or carbon dioxide (6) (aspartame is completely absorbed before
reaching the colon). Heating of pectins has been shown to cause
virtually no demethoxylation; even temperatures of 120? C produced
only traces of methanol (3). Methanol evolved during cooking of high
pectin foods (7) has been accounted for in the volatile fraction during
boiling and is quickly lost to the atmosphere (49). Entrapment of
these volatiles probably accounts for the elevation in methanol levels of
certain fruit and vegetable products during canning (31, 33).

In the recent denial by the Food and Drug Administration of my request
for a public hearing on this issue (13), the claim is made by them that
methanol occurs in fruit juices at an average of 140 parts per million
(a range of between 15-640 parts per million). This often used average
originates from an informative table in a conference paper presented by
Francot and Geoffroy (15). The authors explain that the data presented
in the table "may not" represent their work but "other authors" (15).

There is no methodology given nor is the original source cited and only
the identity of the lowest methanol source, grape juice (12 ppm), and
the highest, black currant (680 ppm), are revealed. The other 22 samples
used to generate this disarmingly high average are left completely to
the imagination.

The authors conclude their paper by insisting that "the
content of methanol in fermented or non-fermented beverages should not
be of concern to the fields of human physiology and public health."
They imply that wines "do not present any toxicity" due to the presence
of certain natural protective substances (15).

When they present their original data
relating to the methanol content of French wines (range 14-265 ppm)
or when the methanol content of any alcoholic beverage is given,
the ration of methanol to ethanol is also presented. Of the wines
they tested, the ratio associated with the highest methanol content
(265 ppm) indicates over 262 times as much ethanol present as methanol.

The scientific literature indicates that a fair estimate of methanol
content of commonly consumed fruit juices is on the order of 40 parts
per million (Table 1). Stegink, et al. Points out that some neutral spirits
contain as much as 1.5 grams/liter of methanol (51); what is not
mentioned is the fact that if these spirits are at least 60 proof
(30% ethanol) this still represents the presence of over 200 molecules
of ethanol for every molecule of methanol that is digested.

An exhaustive search of the present literature indicates that no testing
of natural substances has ever shown methanol appearing alone; in
every case ethanol is also present, usually, in much higher
concentrations (15, 27, 28, 30, 31, 35, 44, 45).

Fresh orange juices can have very little methanol (0.8 mg/liter), and
have a concomitant ethyl alcohol content of 380 mg/liter (28).

Long term storage in cans has a tendency to cause an increase in these
levels, but even after three years of storage, testing has revealed only
62 mg/liter of methanol, with an ethanol content of 484 mg/liter. This
is a ratio of almost eight times ethanol/methanol (28).

Testing done recently in Spain showed orange juice with
33 mg/liter methanol and 651 mg/liter ethanol (20/1 ratio) (45).

The range for grapefruit juices are similar, ranging
from 0.2 mg methanol/liter (27) to 43 mg methanol/liter (27).

The lowest ratio of any food item was found in canned grapefruit
sections with 50-70 mg/liter methanol and 200-400 mg/liter ethanol (27),
thus averaging six molecules ethanol for every molecule of methanol.

This high ethanol to methanol ratio, even at these low ethanol
concentrations, may have some protective effect. As stated previously,
ethanol slows the rate of methanol's conversion to formaldehyde and
formate allowing the body time to excrete methanol in the breath and
urine. Inhibition is seen in vitro even when the concentration of ethyl
alcohol was only 1/16th that of methanol (62). The inhibitory effect is
a linear function of the log of the ethyl alcohol concentration, with a
72% inhibition rate at only a 0.01 molar concentration of ethanol (2).

Therefore if a liter of a high methanol content orange juice is
consumed, with 33 mg/liter of methanol and a 20/1 ration of
ethanol/methanol, only one molecule of methanol in 180 will be
metabolized into dangerous metabolites until the majority of the ethanol
has been cleared from the bloodstream.

If a similar amount of methanol equivalent from aspartame were consumed,
there would be no competition (46).

Another factor reducing the potential danger associated with methanol
from natural juices is that they have an average caloric density of 500
Kcal/liter and high osmolarity which places very definite limits to
their consumption level and rate.

Data obtained in a Department of Agriculture survey of the food intake
of a statistically sampled group of over 17,000 consumers nationwide
(1), indicate that the 17.6% of the population that consume orange juice
daily take in an average of 185.5 gm of that juice. These statistics
indicate that 1.1% of the population consume an average of 173.9 gm of
grapefruit juice while only 1.8% drink approximately 201 gm of tomato
juice daily. Table 1 shows that under normal conditions these
individuals would only be expected to consume between 1 and 7 mg of
methanol a day from these sources. Even if an individual consumed two
juices in the same day or a more exotic juice such as black currant,
there would still be some protection afforded by the ethanol present in
these natural juices.

Consumption of aspartame sweetened drinks at
levels commonly used to replace lost fluid during exercise yields
methanol intake between 15 and 100 times these normal intakes (Table 1).

This is comparable to that of "winos" but without the metabolic reprieve
afforded by ethanol. An alcoholic consuming 1500 calories a day from
alcoholic sources alone may consume between 0 and 600 mg of methanol
each day depending on his choice of beverages (Table 1).

The consumption of aspartame sweetened soft drinks or other beverages is
not limited by either calories or osmolarity, and can equal the daily
water loss of an individual (which for active people in a state like
Arizona can exceed 5 liters). The resultant daily methanol intake might
then rise to unprecedented levels.

Methanol is a cumulative toxin (8)
and for some clinical manifestations it may be a human-specific toxin.

CONCLUSION

Simply because methanol is found "naturally" in foods, we can not
dismiss the need for carefully documented safety testing in appropriate
animal models before allowing a dramatic increase in its consumption.

We know nothing of the mutagenic, teratogenic or carcinogenic effect of
methyl alcohol on man or mammal (55, 59). Yet, if predictions are
correct (5), it won't be long before an additional 2,000,000 pounds of
it will be added to the food supply yearly (53).

Must this, then, constitute our test of its safety?
********************************************************************

The only research that I've heard about that could have studied the actual
biochemical residuals of aspartame in humans only used three humans and did
not attempt using C-14 labelled methanol, although they did test both C-14
labelled phenylalanine and aspartic acid separately in their aspartame.

Their report in 1976 included only three human subjects, who were tested
with aspartame made with C-14 phenylalanine and then C-14 aspartate--
but never the methanol component! Instead of mentioning the dreaded word
"formaldehyde" anywhere in the text and citations, they only showed, on
Figure 1, Metabolic pathways followed by aspartame, using arrows to show
reaction paths,

Asp-Phe-Me --> intestinal esterases ---> Asp-Phe + MeOH -->
one-carbon metabolic pool --> CO2 + formyl metabolites

J Toxicol Environ Health. 1976 Nov; 2(2): 441-51.
Comparative metabolism of aspartame in experimental animals and humans.
Ranney RE, Oppermann JA, Muldoon E, McMahon FG.

Aspartame [SC-18862; 3-amino-N-(alpha-carboxyphenethyl) succinamic acid,
methyl ester, the methyl ester of aspartylphenylalanine] is a sweetening
agent that organoleptically has about 180 times the sweetness of sugar.
The metabolism of aspartame has been studied in mice, rats, rabbits, dogs,
monkeys, and humans.
The compound was digested in all species in the same way as are natural
constituents of the diet.
Hydrolysis of the methyl group by intestinal esterases yielded methanol,
which was oxidized in the one-carbon metabolic pool to CO2.
The resultant dipeptide was split at the mucosal surface by dipeptidases and
the free amino acids were absorbed.
The aspartic acid moiety was transformed in large part to CO2 through its
entry into the tricarboxylic acid cycle.
Phenylalanine was primarily incorporated into body protein either unchanged
or as its major metabolite, tyrosine. PMID: 827618

Their 1973 report clearly showed that 30% of C-14 labelled methanol in oral
aspartame was no longer being excreted from small monkeys after 8 hours.
What could this possibly be except toxic residuals in all body tissues of
the only possible biochemical products, formaldehyde and formic acid, both
cumulative?

J. Nutrition 1973 Oct; 103(10): 1454-1459.
Metabolism of aspartame in monkeys.
Oppermann JA, Muldoon E, Ranney RE.
Dept. of Biochemistry, Searle Laboratories,
Division of G.D. Searle and Co. Box 5110, Chicago, IL 60680
They found that about 70% of the radioactive methanol in aspartame put
into the stomachs of 3 to 7 kg monkeys was eliminated within 8 hours,
with little additional elimination, as carbon dioxide in exhaled air
and as water in the urine. They did not mention
that this meant that about 30% of the methanol must transform
into formaldehyde and then into formic acid, both of which must remain
as toxic products in all parts of the body. They did not report any
studies on the distribution of radioactivity in body tissues, except
that blood plasma proteins after 4 days held 4% of the initial
methanol. This study did not monitor long-term use of aspartame.

The low oral dose of aspartame and for methanol was 0.068 mmol/kg,
about 1 part per million [ppm] of the acute toxicity level of 2,000
mg/kg, 67,000 mmol/kg, used by McMartin (1979). Two L daily use of
diet soda provides 123 mg methanol, 2 mg/kg for a 60 kg person, a dose
of 67 mmole/kg, a thousand times more than the dose in this study.

By eight hours excretion of the dose in air and urine had leveled off
at 67.1 +-2.1% as CO2 in the exhaled air and 1.57+-0.32% in the urine,
so 68.7 % was excreted, and 31.3% was retained. [This data is the
average of 4 monkeys.]

These dire possibilities were confirmed in rats by the Trocho study in 1998.

The hundreds of case reports by aspartame reactors are entirely consistent
with chronic long-term, low-level toxicity from methanol or formaldehyde.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/925
aspartame puts formaldehyde adducts into tissues, Part 1/2
full text, Trocho & Alemany 6.26.98: Murray 12.22.2 rmforall
[selection]
"These are indeed extremely high levels for adducts of formaldehyde, a
substance responsible of chronic deleterious effects (33), that has also
been considered carcinogenic (34,47). The repeated occurrence of claims
that aspartame produces headache and other neurological and
psychological secondary effects-- more often than not challenged by
careful analysis-- (5,9,10,15,48) may eventually find at least a partial
explanation in the permanence of the formaldehyde label, since
formaldehyde intoxication can induce similar effects (49).

The cumulative effects derived from the incorporation of label in the
chronic administration model suggests that regular intake of aspartame
may result in the progressive accumulation of formaldehyde adducts.

It may be further speculated that the formation of adducts can help to
explain the chronic effects aspartame consumption may induce on
sensitive tissues such as brain (6,9,19,50). In any case, the possible
negative effects that the accumulation of formaldehyde adducts can
induce is, obviously, long-term. The alteration of protein integrity
and function may needs some time to induce substantial effects.

The damage to nucleic acids, mainly to DNA, may eventually induce cell
death and/or mutations.

The results presented suggest that the conversion of aspartame methanol
into formaldehyde adducts in significant amounts in vivo should be
taken into account because of the widespread utilization of this
sweetener. Further epidemiological and long-term studies are needed to
determine the extent of the hazard that aspartame consumption poses for
humans."

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/926
aspartame puts formaldehyde adducts into tissues, Part 2/2
full text, Trocho & Alemany 6.26.98: Murray 12.22.2 rmforall

http://ww.presidiotex.com/barcelona/index.html
Trocho C, Pardo R, Rafecas I, Virgili J, Remesar X,
Fernandez-Lopez JA, Alemany M ["Trok-ho"]
Formaldehyde derived from dietary aspartame binds to tissue
components in vivo. Life Sci 1998 Jun 26; 63(5): 337-49.
Departament de Bioquimica i Biologia Molecular, Facultat de Biologia,
Universitat de Barcelona, Spain.
http://www.presidiotex.com/barcelona/index.html
Maria Alemany, PhD (male) alemany@...

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/864
Murray: Butchko, Tephly, McMartin: Alemany: aspartame formaldehyde
adducts in rats 9.8.2 rmforall
Prof. Alemany vigorously affirms the validity of the Trocho study
against criticism:
Butchko, HH et al [24 authors], Aspartame: review of safety.
Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 2002 April 1; 35 (2 Pt 2): S1-93, review
available for $35, [an industry paid organ]. Butchko:
"When all the research on aspartame, including evaluations in both the
premarketing and postmarketing periods, is examined as a whole, it is
clear that aspartame is safe, and there are no unresolved questions
regarding its safety under conditions of intended use."
[ They repeatedly pass on the ageless industry deceit that the methanol
in fruits and vegetables is as as biochemically available as that in
aspartame-- see the 1984 rebuttal by Monte, below.
In the same report, Schiffman concludes on page S49, not citing any
research after 1997, "Thus, the weight of the scientific evidence
indicates that aspartame does not cause headache."
Dr. Susan S. Schiffman, Dept. of Psychiatry, Duke University
sss@... 919-684-3303, 660-5657
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/864
Murray: Butchko, Tephly, McMartin: Alemany: aspartame formaldehyde
adducts in rats 9.8.2 rmforall ]

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/911
RTP ties to industry criticized by CSPI: Murray: 12.9.2 rmforall
******************************************************************

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1044
aspartame and formaldehyde toxicity discussion:
Schwarcz: Murray 12.13.3 rmforall

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1048
hangovers from formaldehyde from methanol (aspartame?):
Schwarcz: Linsley: Murray 1.18.4

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1049
let us examine an aspartame reactor: Schwarcz: Murray 1.18.4 rmforall

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1053
leukemia from formaldehyde in air [from 11% methanol in aspartame?]: NIH
NCI, Hauptmann 11.5.3: Murray 1.23.4 rmforall
http://www.ajc.com/health/content/shared-auto/healthnews/occu/515908.html
*******************************************************************

Rich Murray, MA Room For All rmforall@...
1943 Otowi Road, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87505 USA 505-986-9103

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1039
three-page review: aspartame (methanol, formaldehyde) toxicity:
Murray 11.22.3 rmforall

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1026
brief aspartame review: formaldehyde toxicity: Murray 9.11.3 rmforall

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/989 On 4.10.2003
the European Union Parliament voted 440 to 20 to approve sucralose,
limit cyclamates & reevaluate aspartame & stevia: Murray 4.12.3 rmforall

http://google.com gives 221,000 websites for "aspartame" , with the top
9 of 10 listings being anti-aspartame, while
http://groups.google.com finds on 700 MB of posts from 20 years of
Usenet groups, 83,800 posts, the top 10 being anti-aspartame.
http://news.google.com 28 recent aspartame items from 4500 sources.
http://www.AllTheWeb.com gives 291,700, the top 7 of 10 being
leading and very well informed volunteer anti-aspartame sites.
http://teoma.com/index.asp gives 85,700 websites, top 8 of 10 anti.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PubMed lists 742 aspartame items.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1025
aspartame & formaldehyde toxicity: Murray 9.9.3 rmforall

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/messages
for 1054 posts in a public searchable archive 125 members

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartame/messages 759 with 16,425 posts

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1047
Avoiding Hangover Hell 12.31.3 Mark Sherman, AP writer: Robert Swift, MD:
[formaldehyde from methanol in aspartame]: Murray 1.16.4 rmforall

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1052
DMDC: Dimethyl dicarbonate 200mg/L in drinks adds methanol 98 mg/L (becomes
formaldehyde in body):
EU Scientific Committee on Foods 7.12.1: Murray 1.22.4 rmforall

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1024
aspartame review: methanol, formaldehyde, formic acid toxicity:
Murray 9.5.3 rmforall

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/910
formaldehyde & formic acid from methanol in aspartame:
Murray: 12.9.2 rmforall

It is certain that high levels of aspartame use, above 2 liters daily
for months and years, must lead to chronic formaldehyde-formic acid
toxicity, since 11% of aspartame (1,120 mg in 2L diet soda, 5.6 12-oz
cans) is 123 mg methanol (wood alcohol), immediately released into the
body after drinking (unlike the large levels of methanol locked up in
molecules inside many fruits), then quickly transformed into
formaldehyde, which in turn becomes formic acid, both of which in
time are partially eliminated as carbon dioxide and water.

However, about 30% of the methanol remains in the body as cumulative
durable toxic metabolites of formaldehyde and formic acid-- 37 mg daily,
a gram every month. [Metabolism of aspartame in monkeys.
Oppermann JA, Muldoon E, Ranney RE.
J. Nutrition 1973 Oct; 103(10): 1454-1459.]
If 10% of the methanol is retained as formaldehyde, that would give 12
mg daily formaldehyde accumulation, about 60 times more than the 0.2 mg
from 10% retention of the 2 mg EPA daily limit for formaldehyde in water.

Bear in mind that the EPA limit for formaldehyde in drinking water is
1 ppm, or 2 mg daily for a typical daily consumption of 2 L of water.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/835
RTM: ATSDR: EPA limit 1 ppm formaldehyde in drinking water July 1999
5.30.2 rmforall

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/915
formaldehyde toxicity: Thrasher & Kilburn: Shaham: EPA: Gold: Murray:
Wilson: CIIN: 12.12.2 rmforall

Thrasher (2001): "The major difference is that the Japanese demonstrated
the incorporation of FA and its metabolites into the placenta and fetus.
The quantity of radioactivity remaining in maternal and fetal tissues
at 48 hours was 26.9% of the administered dose." [Ref. 14-16]

Arch Environ Health 2001 Jul-Aug; 56(4): 300-11.
Embryo toxicity and teratogenicity of formaldehyde. [100 references]
Thrasher JD, Kilburn KH.
Sam-1 Trust, Alto, New Mexico, USA.
http://www.drthrasher.org/formaldehyde_embryo_toxicity.html full text

http://www.drthrasher.org/formaldehyde_1990.html full text Jack Dwayne
Thrasher, Alan Broughton, Roberta Madison. Immune activation and
autoantibodies in humans with long-term inhalation exposure to formaldehyde.
Archives of Environmental Health. 1990; 45: 217-223. "Immune activation,
autoantibodies, and anti-HCHO-HSA antibodies are associated with long-term
formaldehyde inhalation." PMID: 2400243

Confirming evidence and a general theory are given by Pall (2002):
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/909
testable theory of MCS type diseases, vicious cycle of nitric oxide &
peroxynitrite: MSG: formaldehyde-methanol-aspartame:
Martin L. Pall: Murray: 12.9.2 rmforall
*******************************************************************