*******************************************************

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1326
The upchuck rebellion, from corporate pap to local organic food,
Jim Hightower: Murray 2006.04.06

http://www.alternet.org/columnists/story/33950/

The Upchuck Rebellion
By Jim Hightower, Hightower Lowdown. Posted April 6, 2006.

The Good Food movement is leading the charge against
expensive, nutrient-free, artificial, unhealthy, corporate crap-food.
21 COMMENTS

Also by Jim Hightower:

All Good Politics Are Local
Washington may be squandering our democratic promise,
but out beyond the Beltway,
America's progressive grassroots are thriving. Feb 27, 2006

Vanquishing the American Dream
As General Motors shuts down well-paid middle-class jobs,
the old slogan 'What's good for G.M. is good for America'
no longer applies. Jan 24, 2006

What I Want For Christmas
Santa, don't bring me any stuff.
The one and only thing I want is this:
A real Democratic party, alive and kicking! Dec 22, 2005

Illustration by Matt Wuerker.

Even though winter is just beginning to release its frigid grip on most
of the land, I'm already thinking out of season, looking ahead to one
special thing: fresh, ripe, right-out-of-the-soil, good-and-good-for-you
summer tomatoes. Oh, I can taste them now! And eggplant, too.
And peppers. And all kinds of other edible wonders.

I'm a food guy. I've got a small but richly composted garden plot
in my backyard, I'm a regular at several farmers' markets, and
I frequent a number of great restaurants here in Austin, Texas.

I love poking around food stores of any variety, I like to browse
through seed catalogs and cooking magazines, and I always try
to sample the local specialties as I travel around the country.
I enjoy friendships with quite a few chefs and restaurateurs,
and I love visiting with farmers and food artisans who are doing
creative things. Though it still pisses off the corporate establishment,
I was once the agricultural commissioner of Texas.

I know firsthand about the phenomenal cornucopia of good, fresh,
nutritious and delicious food that our country is capable of producing.
That's why it knocks me whopperjawed to see the stuff that dominates
too many American diets -- an array of industrialized, conglomeratized,
globalized products that have lost any connection to our good earth.
This stuff is saturated with fats, sugars, artificial flavorings,
chemical additives, pesticide residues, bacterial contaminants,
genetically altered organisms and who knows what else?
Plus, the major factor driving prices is not the cost of any actual food
that might still be in these products, but the cost of packaging,
advertising and long-distance shipping.

What has caused us to stray so far from the farm, so far from the
essential and wonderful sustenance provided by nature itself?
The answer, of course, is that the brute force of corporate power
has been applied both in politics and the marketplace to pervert
our food economy. During the past half century, control over our
nation's food policies has shifted from farmers and consumers to
corporate lawyers, lobbyists and economists. These are people who
could not run a watermelon stand if we gave them the melons and had
the highway patrol flag down customers for them! Yet they're in charge,
saddling us with a food system that enriches corporate middlemen
while driving good farmers off the land, poisoning our productive soil
and water supplies, and literally sickening those who consume these
adulterated foodstuffs.

Revolt!

Do we have to swallow this? Of course not -- we're Americans,
rebellious mavericks -- and the revolt is on! For the past few years,
a grassroots movement has quietly but rapidly been spreading
throughout the country. I call it The Upchuck Rebellion:
a growing number of people fed up with the destructive power of
industrialized food are declaring that they're not going to take it anymore.
More than declaring . they're taking action.
Part of this effort is political, trying to get the industrializers
and globalizers to clean up their act.

At another level, however, America's food rebels are taking on the idea
of industrialization itself
by creating their own alternative food economies.
These are based on local farmers, seasonal consumption, organic and
sustainable production, local food processors and artisans, and
local markets. The goals are
(1) to build a system that delivers tastier, healthier food;
(2) to keep a community's food dollars in the local economy; and
(3) to treat food not as a corporate commodity,
but as a centerpiece of our culture.

Naturally, the Powers That Be have howled in derision at these efforts,
sneering that local farmers, consumers, entrepreneurs, chefs, marketers,
gardeners, environmentalists, workers, churches, co-ops, community
organizers and just plain citizens simply don't have the savvy to create
and run any kind of significant food system. However, my friend
John Dromgoole, who runs a successful natural gardening and
composting center in Austin, has a snappy retort to these elites:
"Those who say it can't be done should not interrupt
those who are doing it."

This is a movement that has antecedents going back generations --
both J.H. Kellogg and C.W. Post, for example, were health-food
visionaries more than a century ago (and both would be appalled
by the products now bearing their names) -- but the modern-day
movement is barely 20 years old. In this short time, however,
these innovative doers have made astonishing gains. Just in terms
of raw numbers, today's "Good Food" movement is impressive:
Organic food topped $15 billion in sales in 2004 -- triple what they
were only seven years earlier. Sales are increasing by roughly 20
percent a year (compared to only about 2 percent for all other foods)
and are expected to reach $30 billion four years from now.
Nearly two thirds of American shoppers bought some organic foods
last year -- up from about half the year before. About 40 percent
of consumers now say that they regularly buy some organic foods.

There are now more than 8,000 organic farmers, with thousands
more trying to make the transition from industrialized production
to organic (a rigorous and costly process that should be assisted
and funded by the U.S. Department of Agriculture,
which instead remains either indifferent or hostile).

From white tablecloth restaurants to barbecue joints, chefs have been
in the lead in introducing organic food to the public and in creating
the fast-growing market for locally produced seasonal foods.

The growth and popularity of farmers' markets has mushroomed
in recent years, popping up in practically every city and most towns.
Some 4,000 of these bustling, vibrant markets now exist, bringing local
farmers and artisans together with customers at all economic levels.

Likewise, the community-supported agriculture movement is fast
spreading. These CSAs allow consumers to buy "shares" in the
production of a local farm or group of farms, giving the farmers
a defined and reliable cash market and the consumers a weekly share
of the crops. In addition, the food co-op movement (once the rather
funky domain of hippies) is thriving. About 300 of them are in cities
across the country, doing some $750 million a year in business and
providing local producers another way around the corporate
distribution system.

The demand for organic and locally produced food has become so
mainstream that major supermarket chains and such national food
wholesalers as SYSCO have had to alter their once-rigid
procurement practices to make some of their purchases from
organic and local producers.

By eliminating the corporate middlemen (with their voracious profit
demands, bloated executive salaries, advertising budgets,
bureaucracies, lobbyists, lawyers and so forth), this localized
marketing system links farms directly to forks. The results are
salutary -- small farmers get a fair price that lets them and their
families keep going, and we consumers get food that is what
it's supposed to be: tasty and nutritious. In the bargain, our food dollars
stay at home, generating more economic activity in our communities.

Yes, say opponents, but the food is extravagantly expensive.
No, it's not. In season, organic tomatoes from a local farm can be
cheaper than the industrial tomato at the supermarket. And as organic
production has increased, overall prices are coming in line
with nonorganic. In Portland, Ore., for example, a small chain of
grocery stores called New Seasons features locally produced foods,
and about 75 percent of its stock is organic. A monthly price survey
of Portland area supermarkets shows that prices at New Seasons
do not vary more than 3 percent either way from those at the
national chains.

But even when organic food costs more, it's important to consider
what you get for your money. Price is not the same as value.
As one farmer says, "You can get a day's worth of calories for
99 cents at a 7-Eleven, but not a day's worth of nutrition."
Or of flavor.

Plus, Washington spends billions of our tax dollars to subsidize
corporate-produced food, and the food industrialists also are
allowed to escape paying for the extensive pollution, soaring
health costs and ecological damage that are direct results of their
methods. Rather than paying for these enormous costs when we
buy corporate food at Wal-Mart or Burger King, we pay for them
in our tax bills or by suffering illnesses.

Another strong force propelling the good-food movement is cultural
connection. People are realizing that our corporatized world is out
of control -- empty, vapid, phony, valueless. One place where folks
sense that they might be able to get a grip again is food. By linking
directly with small farmers, cheesemakers and other homegrown
producers, we reclaim our place, our cultural identities, our values,
our humanness. Food, after all, is not merely fuel, but culture.
It's in our art, songs and literature. It's in our memories -- tastes,
smells, sounds, visuals and feelings. It's in our souls, giving us
shared experiences with family, friends, co-workers and community.
By taking charge of what goes on our plates and how it gets there,
we begin taking charge of our lives.

What's for lunch?

It's a cliche to say that our children are our society's future, but it
happens to be true. So, what are we teaching them about food?
In class, they get lessons on the five components of a good
nutritional lunch, Then the bell rings and they go face the reality
of their school lunch. Very few lyric poems have ever been written
in praise of the "mystery meat" and blah veggies of school lunch,
but lately this midday repast has gone from merely being bad to
being bad for you. In today's schools, the idea of lunch has been
reduced to corporate-delivered sugars, fats and calories, helping
produce a growing epidemic of childhood obesity and gross
ignorance of what food should be.

School cafeterias are eliminating cooks and even kitchens, for their
"meals" come prepackaged from food-service corporations or are
contracted out to McDonald's, Domino's and other fast-food chains.
Two-thirds of America's middle schools and high schools sell sodas
and junk-food snacks, usually under exclusive contracts that bring
big corporate money to the school system. Rather than viewing
school "food" as a natural resource for nurturing and educating kids,
administrators have turned it into a money-making, corporate-branded
commodity.

But a big change is coming. With little fanfare, a grassroots
"farm-to-cafeteria" movement has been spreading from school to school.
More than 400 school districts and 200 university cafeterias are now
building their menus (and, in many places, their educational curricula)
around fresh, local ingredients, much of which is organic. In nearly
every case, the change has come because some parent, farmer,
nutritionist, or other individual rose up to ask,
"What the hell is going on here?"

Vanessa Ruddy was one of them. In 2002, her son, Grant, enrolled
at Lincoln Elementary School in Olympia, Wash., and when she took
a look at the lunch menu, she did not like what she saw. While this
school had long shown an interest in good food (it had an organic
garden, a children's activity kitchen, and a harvest festival in the fall),
the lunch program at Lincoln was definitely old school.

At the bottom of the menu was the name of Paul Flock, the school
district's child-nutrition supervisor, and Ruddy decided to call him.
She put it off for a month, however, assuming he'd be a typical
bureaucrat, and she dreaded having to make a big fuss and wrestle
with the bureaucracy. Lo and behold, though, Flock welcomed her
call and was open to improving the menu.

Ruddy enlisted other parents to join her for a meeting in Flock's office,
and he asked what she wanted. "Organic Food" was her response.
Thus began an organizing process to get teachers, cafeteria staff,
the kids, farmers and other relevant parties involved and working
together. Sure enough, in October 2002, Lincoln Elementary
opened its "Organic Choices" salad bar, with a colorful and flavorful
array of fresh, organic, locally produced fruits and veggies. Ruddy
said that the school's cook told her, "You would have thought it was
Christmas! You should have seen the kids' eyes light up."

The chief concern was cost. For example, while the romaine, arugula,
and mustard leaf have far superior nutrient content, this mix of organic
greens costs four times more than iceberg lettuce's price tag of 72 cents
a pound. But the team of parents and others overseeing the
development of Organic Choices found savings elsewhere, primarily
by one simple act: eliminating desserts from the lunch offerings (a move
enthusiastically applauded by teachers and parents). Lincoln actually
has cut its per-meal lunch cost by 2 cents, and the lunch program has
even started making money, due to teachers and parents eating lunch
at the school.

Since 2002 the salad bar has become a full-meal option, with cheeses,
beans, eggs, whole-grain breads, etc. Today all elementary schools in
Olympia have some version of Organic Choice in their cafeterias.
"It's all about a long-term investment in the health of our children,"
says Lincoln Elementary's principal. "We are the responsible adults.
We can do this." Meanwhile, Ruddy has become a Johnny Appleseed
for the farm-to-cafeteria movement, speaking to others around the
country about bringing it to their schools. She offers two major tips:
Get active. Don't feel powerless.

The power of the table

This grassroots movement is not out simply to change some cafeterias,
but to change the corporate culture of food. And where better to start
than with our children? Why shouldn't every school have an Organic
Choices program, a school garden and a kitchen to give them the
hands-on experience of growing and preparing the food they eat,
regular trips to farms and farmers' markets, and a curriculum that
connects them both to nature and to their local community?

As school after school is finding, it's an awakening for kids to learn
that they have a relationship with food that is deeper, richer and
far more exciting than a Happy Meal at McDonald's. Alice Waters,
the wonderful pioneer of America's good-food movement who
has created her own "edible schoolyard" and "edible classroom"
programs, is a tireless promoter of this educational awakening.
She says, "Students can learn fundamental truths about where food
comes from, about actions and consequences, about the importance
of stewardship of the land, and the civilizing and socializing effect
of the table." The farm-to-cafeteria movement has now had an
abundance of experience in all sorts of school systems and is willing
to assist others who want to give it a go. They have learned a few
universal keys to success:

It takes a great deal of effort to break through the entrenched
food-procurement system.
Start with the right school, where parents, administrators and
food-service personnel are open to the idea.
Begin small, proceed slowly and build on success.
Reach out -- be inclusive and transparent.
Be understanding of the realities faced by both the food-service
staff and your local farming community.
Contact everyone who has expertise, funds, connections and
other resources to assist you.
Involve students in all phases of the process.
Build a strong curriculum component into the project from the start.
Make it fun -- have community tastings, festivals, food art projects, etc.
It's not easy to recapture power from an entrenched corporate culture,
but it is doable -- and the prize most definitely is worth the effort.
From The Hightower Lowdown, edited by Jim Hightower
and Phillip Frazer, March 2006.
Jim Hightower is the author of "Let's Stop Beating Around the Bush"
(Viking Press). He publishes the monthly Hightower Lowdown;
for more information about Jim, visit www.jimhightower.com
http://www.jimhightower.com/contact
*******************************************************

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1307
formaldehyde from 11% methanol part of aspartame or from red wine
causes same toxicity (hangover) harm: Murray 2006.04.06

"Of course, everyone chooses, as a natural priority,
to actively find, quickly share, and positively act upon the facts
about healthy and safe food, drink, and environment."

Rich Murray, MA Room For All rmforall@...
505-501-2298 1943 Otowi Road Santa Fe, New Mexico 87505

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/messages
group with 151 members, 1,326 posts in a public, searchable archive
http://RMForAll.blogspot.com http://AspartameNM.blogspot.com

Dark wines and liquors, as well as aspartame, provide
similar levels of methanol, above 120 mg daily, for
long-term heavy users, 2 L daily, about 6 cans.

Within hours, methanol is inevitably largely turned into formaldehyde,
and thence largely into formic acid -- the major causes of the dreaded
symptoms of "next morning" hangover.

Fully 11% of aspartame is methanol -- 1,120 mg aspartame
in 2 L diet soda, almost six 12-oz cans, gives 123 mg
methanol (wood alcohol). If 30% of the methanol is turned
into formaldehyde, the amount of formaldehyde, 37 mg,
is 18.5 times the USA EPA limit for daily formaldehyde in
drinking water, 2.0 mg in 2 L average daily drinking water.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1143
methanol (formaldehyde, formic acid) disposition: Bouchard M
et al, full plain text, 2001: substantial sources are
degradation of fruit pectins, liquors, aspartame, smoke:
Murray 2005.04.02

Any unsuspected source of methanol, which the body always quickly
and largely turns into formaldehyde and then formic acid, must be
monitored, especially for high responsibility occupations, often with
night shifts, such as pilots and nuclear reactor operators.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1291
European Food Safety Authority to decide aspartame safety by May:
caffeine diet drinks cause female hypertension, WC Winkelmayer et al,
JAMA 2005.11.09: PubMed lists 50 items for "diet soft drinks" since
2004 Oct.: Murray 2006.01.24

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1279
all three aspartame metabolites harm human erythrocyte [red blood cell]
membrane enzyme activity, KH Schulpis et al, two studies in 2005,
Athens, Greece, 2005.12.14: 2004 research review, RL Blaylock:
Murray 2006.01.14

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/939
aspartame (aspartic acid, phenylalanine) binding to DNA:
Karikas July 1998: Murray 2003.01.05 rmforall
Karikas GA, Schulpis KH, Reclos GJ, Kokotos G
Measurement of molecular interaction of aspartame and
its metabolites with DNA. Clin Biochem 1998 Jul; 31(5): 405-7.
Dept. of Chemistry, University of Athens, Greece
http://www.chem.uoa.gr gkokotos@...;
K.H. Schulpis inchildh@...; G.J. Reclos reklos@...;

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1271
combining aspartame and quinoline yellow, or MSG and brilliant blue,
harms nerve cells, eminent C. Vyvyan Howard et al, 2005
education.guardian.co.uk, Felicity Lawrence: Murray 2005.12.21

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/925
aspartame puts formaldehyde adducts into tissues, Part 1/2
full text Trocho & Alemany 1998.06.26
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona : Murray 2002.12.22

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1250
aspartame causes cancer in rats at levels approved for humans,
Morando Soffritti et al, Ramazzini Foundation, Italy &
National Toxicology Program
of National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
2005.11.17 Env. Health Pers. 35 pages: Murray

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1106
hangover research relevant to toxicity of 11% methanol in aspartame
(formaldehyde, formic acid): Calder I (full text): Jones AW:
Murray 2004.08.05 rmforall

Since no adaquate data has ever been published on the exact disposition
of toxic metabolites in specific tissues in humans of the 11% methanol
component of aspartame, the many studies on morning-after hangover
from the methanol impurity in alcohol drinks are the main available
resource to date.

Jones AW (1987) found next-morning hangover from red wine with
100 to 150 mg methanol
(9.5% w/v ethanol, 100 mg/l methanol, 0.01%,
one part in ten thousand).

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/870
Aspartame: Methanol and the Public Interest 1984: Monte:
Murray 2002.09.23

Humans suffer "toxic syndrome" (54) at a minimum lethal dose
of <1 gm/kg, much less than that of monkeys, 3-6 g/kg (42, 59).

The minimum lethal dose of methanol
in the rat, rabbit, and dog is 9.5, 7.0 , and 8.0 g/kg, respectively (43);
ethyl alcohol is more toxic than methanol to these test animals (43)."

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1302
The Lowdown on Sweet? (Ramazzini Foundation, M Soffritti proof that
aspartame causes cancers), Melanie Warner, The New York Times:
Murray 2006.02.12

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1303
David L. Katz MD comments briefly with Diane Sawyer on ABC
Good Morning America re Ramazzini aspartame cancer study:
excellent opus at Yale U: mainstream research on aspartame
(methanol, formaldehyde, formic acid) toxicity: Murray 2006.02.14

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1304
to DL Katz MD, Yale U: M. Soffritti, Ramazzini F., did not mention that
humans are about 10X more vulnerable to aspartame than are rats:
found methanol and formaldehyde carcinogenicity 2002: human ADI
levels must be reduced hugely: Katz: Murray 2006.02.15

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1306
ban aspartame speech, Roger Williams MP, UK Parliament
2005.12.14: www.TheyWorkForYou.com: Murray 2006.02.20

As a medical layman, I suggest that evidence mandates immediate
exploration of the role of these ubiquitious, potent formaldehyde
sources as co-factors in epidemiology, research, diagnosis,
and treatment in a wide variety of disorders.

Folic acid, from fruits and vegetables, plays a role by powerfully
protecting against methanol (formaldehyde) toxicity.

Many common drugs, such as aspirin, interfere with folic acid,
as do some mutations in relevant enzymes.

The majority of aspartame reactors are female.

In mutual service, Rich Murray
*******************************************************


http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1315
49% consumers want their local store to stock foods free of artificial
sweeteners, Steve French, The Natural Marketing Institute,
NMIsolutions.com: NaturalProductsInsider.com: Murray 2006.03.07

" And consumers are more than eager to support alternative sugar
substitutes, evidenced by the fact that over half of U.S. adults
(58 percent) indicate using artificial sweeteners over the past year,
a steady 25 percent increase in usage since 2002....

However, even with such high usage, half of consumers (55 percent)
are concerned about the negative side effects of artificial sweeteners.
About half of consumers (49 percent) even want their local store to
stock foods that are free from artificial sweeteners,
and a quarter (23 percent) prefer not to serve their family anything
with artificial sweeteners.
Such dichotomies create challenges for companies
throughout the supply chain.
Certain segments of consumers show even stronger conflicting
attitudes, creating even greater challenges for the food and
sweetener industries.

For instance, over three-quarters (78 percent) of consumers who use
organic foods/beverages on a daily basis are concerned about the
negative side effects of artificial sweeteners,
while just under three-quarters (73 percent) also desire foods
with no sugar added.
While 73 percent of diabetics use artificial sweeteners for a diabetic diet,
half (49 percent) are indeed concerned about the negative side effects.
So what's a consumer to do? "

http://www.naturalproductsinsider.com/articles/631feat05.html

Copyright © 2006 by Virgo Publishing. Posted : 03/06/2006

Divergent Sweetener Attitudes Highlight Emerging Opportunities
by Steve French


http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1312
the beginning of the end? USA diet soda volume sales up only 0.4%
last 52 weeks, after years of big jumps -- awareness of aspartame as
toxic methanol, formaldehyde, formic acid source?:
Melanie Warner, New York Times: Murray 2006.03.03


"After milk, eggs, bread and bananas, soda is the highest-volume item in
grocery stores. In recent years, sales of regular soda have been
declining, while sales of diet soda have boomed.
But even more recently, diet soda sales have tapered off,
with unit volumes up just 0.4 percent for the 52 weeks
that ended Jan. 28, according to ACNielsen."
*******************************************************


http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1316
PubMed abstract: aspartame (methanol becoming formaldehyde) causes
many cancers in rats, Ramazzini Foundation, M Soffritti et al:
Murray 2006.03.06

http://www.ehponline.org/members/2005/8711/8711.html free full text

Environ Health Perspect. 2006 Mar; 114(3): 379-85.
First experimental demonstration of the multipotential carcinogenic
effects of aspartame administered in the feed to sprague-dawley rats.
Soffritti M, Belpoggi F, Esposti DD,
Lambertini L, Tibaldi E, Rigano A.
Cesare Maltoni Cancer Research Center, European Ramazzini
Foundation of Oncology and Environmental Sciences, Bologna, Italy.

The Cesare Maltoni Cancer Research Center of the European Ramazzini
Foundation has conducted a long-term bioassay on aspartame (APM),
a widely used artificial sweetener.

APM was administered with feed to 8-week-old Sprague-Dawley rats
(100-150/sex/group), at concentrations of
100,000, 50,000, 10,000, 2,000, 400, 80, or 0 ppm.

The treatment lasted until natural death, at which time
all deceased animals underwent complete necropsy.

Histopathologic evaluation of all pathologic lesions and of all organs
and tissues collected was routinely performed
on each animal of all experimental groups.

The results of the study show for the first time that APM,
in our experimental conditions, causes
a) an increased incidence of malignant-tumor-bearing animals
with a positive significant trend in males (p </= 0.05)
and in females (p </= 0.01),
in particular those females treated at 50,000 ppm (p </= 0.01);

b) an increase in lymphomas and leukemias
with a positive significant trend in both males (p </= 0.05)
and females (p </= 0.01),
in particular in females treated at doses of
100,000 (p </= 0.01), 50,000 (p </= 0.01), 10,000 (p </= 0.05),
2,000 (p </= 0.05), or 400 ppm (p </= 0.01);

c) a statistically significant increased incidence,
with a positive significant trend (p </= 0.01),
of transitional cell carcinomas of the renal pelvis and ureter and their
precursors (dysplasias) in females treated at
100,000 (p </= 0.01), 50,000 (p </= 0.01), 10,000 (p </= 0.01),
2,000 (p </= 0.05), or 400 ppm (p </= 0.05);

and d) an increased incidence of malignant schwannomas
of peripheral nerves with a positive trend (p </= 0.05) in males.

The results of this mega-experiment indicate that APM
is a multipotential carcinogenic agent,
even at a daily dose of 20 mg/kg body weight,
much less than the current acceptable daily intake. [ 50 mg/kg bw ]

On the basis of these results,
a reevaluation of the present guidelines
on the use and consumption of APM is urgent
and cannot be delayed.

Key words: artificial sweetener, aspartame, carcinogenicity,
lymphomas, malignant schwannomas, rats, renal pelvis carcinomas.
PMID: 16507461 Feb 24 2006 04:49:50

Address correspondence to M. Soffritti, Cesare Maltoni Cancer
Research Center, European Ramazzini Foundation of Oncology and
Environmental Sciences, Castello di Bentivoglio, Via Saliceto, 3,
40010 Bentivoglio, Bologna, Italy. 39-051-6640460
Fax: 39-051-6640223 crcfr@...
We thank the U.S. National Toxicology Program for convening a group
of pathologists at the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
to provide a second opinion for a set of malignant lesions and their
precursors related to aspartame treatment, and for their help in statistical
analysis.
We also thank all of the staff involved in the project.
This research was supported by the European Ramazzini Foundation of
Oncology and Environmental Sciences.
The authors declare they have no competing financial interests.
Received 3 October 2005; accepted 16 November 2005.


http://www.ehponline.org/members/2005/8711/tab1.jpg
[ transcribed to plain text ]
Table 1. Beverages and diet products studied at the CMCRC/ERF:
status of studies.

Study---------------------------No. of bioassays
---Products-------------------------Species---------No. Study status

1 Water in
polyvinyl chloride bottles---------2 rat a--------------2,200 P b

2 Coca-Cola---------------------4 rat a--------------1,999 RP

3 Pepsi Cola----------------------1 rat-----------------400 E

4 Ethyl alcohol--------------------4 rat, mouse a------1,458 P c

5 Sucrose-------------------------1 rat-----------------400 E

6 Aspartame (APM)--------------6 rat, mouse a------4,460 BO, PP d

7 Sucralose (Splenda)-------------1 mouse *-----------760 BO

8 Caffeine-------------------------1 rat-----------------800 E

9 Vitamin A-----------------------5 rat----------------5,100 E

10 Vitamin C----------------------5 rat----------------3,680 E

11 Vitamin E----------------------5 rat----------------3,680 E

12 Feed sterilized by--------------1 rat a---------------2,000 E
gamma radiation

Total-----------------------------36-------------------26,937

Abbreviations:
BO, biophase ongoing
E, in elaboration
P, published
PP, partially published
RP, ready for publication
a, treatment started from embryonic life
b, data from Maltoni et al. (1997)
c, data from Soffritti et al. (2002a)
d, data from Soffritti et al. (2005).
*, data from Soffritti et al. (1992)


Investigations into the metabolism of APM have shown that,
in rodents, nonhuman primates, and humans,
it is metabolized in the gastrointestinal tract into three constituents --
aspartic acid, phenylalanine, and methanol --
which are absorbed into the systemic circulation (Ranney et al. 1976).

For each molecule of APM,
one molecule of each constituent is produced.

After absorption, they are then used, metabolized, and/or excreted by
the body following the same metabolic pathways
as when consumed through the ordinary diet:

aspartate is transformed into alanine plus oxaloacetate (Stegink 1984);

phenylalanine is transformed mainly into tyrosine and, to a smaller extent,
phenylethylamine and phenylpyruvate (Harper 1984);

and methanol is transformed into formaldehyde and then to formic acid
(Opperman 1984).
*******************************************************

Morando Soffritti 1, Fiorella Belpoggi 1, Davide Degli Esposti 1, Luca
Lambertini 1, Eva Tibaldi 1,
and Anna Rigano 1
1 Cesare Maltoni Cancer Research Center,
European Ramazzini Foundation of Oncology and
Environmental Sciences, Bologna, Italy
Address of the institution:
Cesare Maltoni Cancer Research Center,
European Ramazzini Foundation of Oncology and Environmental Sciences.
Castello di Bentivoglio, Via Saliceto, 3, 40010 Bentivoglio, Bologna, Italy
+39/051/6640460 Fax +39/051/6640223 crcfr@...

Address correspondence to
Dr. M. Soffritti, M.D., Scientific Director of the Cesare Maltoni
Cancer Research Center,
European Ramazzini Foundation of Oncology and Environmental
Sciences.
Castello di Bentivoglio, Via Saliceto, 3, 40010 Bentivoglio, Bologna, Italy
+39/051/6640460 Fax +39/051/6640223 crcfr@...

Acknowledgements: A special thanks to the
US National Toxicology Program (NTP)
for convening a group of pathologists at NIEHS
in order to provide a second opinion
for a set of lesions of malignancies and their precursors
related to the APM treatment, and for the help in statistical analysis.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1250
aspartame causes cancer in rats at levels approved for humans,
Morando Soffritti et al, Ramazzini Foundation, Italy &
National Toxicology Program of National Institute of Environmental
Health Sciences 2005.11.17 Env. Health Pers. 35 pages: Murray

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1226
USA National Institutes of Health National Toxicology
Program aids eminent Ramazzini Foundation, Bologna, Italy,
in more results on cancers in rats from lifetime low levels
of aspartame (methanol, formaldehyde), Felicity Lawrence,
www.guardian.co.uk: Murray 2005.09.30

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1186
aspartame induces lymphomas and leukaemias in rats, full plain text,
M Soffritti, F Belpoggi, DD Esposti, L Lambertini: Ramazzini
Foundation study 2005.07.14: main results agree with their previous
methanol and formaldehyde studies: Murray 2005.09.03

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1189
Michael F Jacobson of CSPI now and in 1985 re aspartame
toxicity, letter to FDA Commissioner Lester Crawford;
California OEHHA aspartame critique 2004.03.12; Center for
Consumer Freedom denounces CSPI: Murray 2005.07.27

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1016
President Bush & formaldehyde (aspartame) toxicity:
Ramazzini Foundation carcinogenicity results Dec 2002:
Soffritti: Murray 2003.08.03 rmforall

p. 88 "The sweetening agent aspartame hydrolyzes in the gastrointestinal
tract to become free methyl alcohol, which is metabolized in the liver
to formaldehyde, formic acid, and CO2. (11)"
Medinsky MA & Dorman DC. 1994; Assessing risks of low-level
methanol exposure. CIIT Act. 14: 1-7.

Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2002 Dec; 982: 87-105.
Results of long-term experimental studies on the carcinogenicity of
formaldehyde and acetaldehyde in rats.
Soffritti M, Belpoggi F, Lambertin L,
Lauriola M, Padovani M, Maltoni C.
Cancer Research Center, European Ramazzini Foundation for Oncology
and Environmental Sciences, Bologna, Italy. crcfr@...
Formaldehyde was administered for 104 weeks in drinking water
supplied ad libitum at concentrations of
1500, 1000, 500, 100, 50, 10, or 0 mg/L
to groups of 50 male and 50 female Sprague-Dawley rats beginning at
seven weeks of age.
Control animals (100 males and 100 females) received tap water only.
Acetaldehyde was administered to 50 male and 50 female
Sprague-Dawley rats beginning at six weeks of age at concentrations of
2,500, 1,500, 500, 250, 50, or 0 mg/L.
Animals were kept under observation until spontaneous death.
Formaldehyde and acetaldehyde were found to produce an increase
in total malignant tumors in the treated groups
and showed specific carcinogenic effects on various organs and tissues.
PMID: 12562630

Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2002 Dec; 982: 46-69.

Results of long-term experimental studies on the carcinogenicity of
methyl alcohol and ethyl alcohol in rats.
Soffritti M, Belpoggi F, Cevolani D,
Guarino M, Padovani M, Maltoni C.
Cancer Research Center, European Ramazzini Foundation for Oncology
and Environmental Sciences, Bologna, Italy. crcfr@...
Methyl alcohol was administered in drinking water
supplied ad libitum at doses of
20,000, 5,000, 500, or 0 ppm to groups of male and female
Sprague-Dawley rats 8 weeks old at the start of the experiment.
Animals were kept under observation until spontaneous death.
Ethyl alcohol was administered by ingestion in drinking water at a
concentration of 10% or 0% supplied ad libitum to groups of male and
female Sprague-Dawley rats; breeders and offspring were included in
the experiment.
Treatment started at 39 weeks of age (breeders), 7 days before mating,
or from embryo life (offspring) and lasted until their spontaneous death.
Under tested experimental conditions, methyl alcohol and ethyl alcohol
were demonstrated to be carcinogenic for various organs and tissues.
They must also be considered multipotential carcinogenic agents.
In addition to causing other tumors, ethyl alcohol induced malignant
tumors of the oral cavity, tongue, and lips.
These sites have been shown to be target organs in man by
epidemiologic studies.
Publication Types: Review Review, Tutorial PMID: 12562628
*******************************************************