Is aspartame harmful to kitties?

Question:

I’m not going to argue aspartame with you, Mark; I’ve said my piece, and I stand by it. I will comment on the below, however, because it brings up an issue of importance to cats: > As far as aspartame toxicity and cats, there may be an obscure cat food > with aspartame. I don’t know. Clearly someone may choose to mix it into > the cat food (for some unknown reason). Rough estimates of comparative > toxicity can be made. Based on rodent, human, and non-human primate > published studies, the toxicity of methanol in cats is probably anywhere > from 2 to 10 times *less* toxic than in humans. Based on similar research > for aspartic acid, this free-form excitotoxin is like between 5 and 40 > times less of a problem than in humans. An estimate would be impossible > when it comes to aspartylphenylalanine diketopiperazine (DKP). That is > why I feel it is a reasonable assumption to make that aspartame is likely > to be somewhat less toxic in cats than in humans. (But I still wouldn’t > use it in cat food.)

There is, so far as I’ve been able to find, no product of any kind marketed for cats which contains aspartame, nor is it likely to occur. Unlike us omni- vorous primates, cats are not particularly known for having well-developed sweet-tooths, and while now and then you may meet a cat with a taste for fruit — or, dangerously, chocolate (which is toxic to cats) — it’s just un- common enough to be worthy of remark. More importantly, though, you cannot make a rough estimate of the toxicity of any given substance to cats based on studies on rodents, humans, and non-human primates. Cats are well-known for their sensitivity to toxins, the classic example being aspirin; a dose of ~40 mg can take up to four days to be fully metabolized, and an overdose of aspirin (over ~80 mg every three to four days) can result in severe poisoning; this information being from my vet, as I’ve the need to medicate an arthritic cat of mine. I’ve ga- thered over the years and illnesses of my cats, as well as my reading, that hepatoxoxity is of particular concern in cats treated with common antisei- zure medications and those used to control autoimmune disorders, in large part because of cats’ slow rates of metabolization, but also because, setting aside this and issues of relative dosage to mass, cats are often simply more sensitive to them, and hence more easily poisoned by them. Given this, then, any substance of potential toxicity to humans would be apt to be much more, rather than less, potentially toxic to cats, which is a major reason why we’ve all been warned against using human OTC products for feline illness without first consulting with a vet. Stacy Scott

Response:

> Newsgroups: rec.pets.cats.health+behav

Stacey, There is extensive scientific information proving that aspartame is toxic. Amongst independent (e.g., non-industry-funded) scientists who have studied the issue, there is little disagreement. Stating the current scientific understanding is no more scare-mongering that stating that smoking is unhealthy for humans (and probably cats too!). Medline is a poor source for scientific information because abstract do not detail methods of the study. As I pointed out in one example, all industry-funded research on aspartame and seizures sounds good in abstract format until one reads to study and finds out that 1) seizure-preventing drugs were taken by the subject; 2) aspartame was given in a form expected to reduce toxicity; and 3) a chemically-different form of aspartame was used than what one receives in the real world. While there is no long-term controlled studies on the exposure of methanol (wood alcohol) in humans, there is industrial research showing toxicity at levels which have been obtained by subjects in the manufacturer’s own studies. In addition, there is plenty of research on the toxicity of low-level, chronic formaldehyde exposure demonstrating immune system damage, nervous system damage, and irreversible genetic damage. "These are indeed extremely high levels for adducts of formaldehyde, a substance responsible for chronic deleterious effects that has also been considered carcinogenic. …. "It is concluded that aspartame consumption may constitute a hazard because of its contribution to the formation of formaldehyde adducts." [Life Sci. (scientific journal), Vol. 63, No. 5, pp. 337+, 1998] The amount of aspartame given in this experiment was quite small considering that it was not a long-term experiment. Long-term exposure may have proven a more serious risk. If you are looking for citations for methanol exposure, independent research showing toxicity, etc., please see the scientific FAQs for a start: http://www.holisticmed.com/aspartame/aspfaq.html As far as aspartame toxicity and cats, there may be an obscure cat food with aspartame. I don’t know. Clearly someone may choose to mix it into the cat food (for some unknown reason). Rough estimates of comparative toxicity can be made. Based on rodent, human, and non-human primate published studies, the toxicity of methanol in cats is probably anywhere from 2 to 10 times *less* toxic than in humans. Based on similar research for aspartic acid, this free-form excitotoxin is like between 5 and 40 times less of a problem than in humans. An estimate would be impossible when it comes to aspartylphenylalanine diketopiperazine (DKP). That is why I feel it is a reasonable assumption to make that aspartame is likely to be somewhat less toxic in cats than in humans. (But I still wouldn’t use it in cat food.) Best wishes, – Mark Healthier Sweetener Resource List http://www.holisticmed.com/sweet/

Response:

Hello! I’m wondering if anyone has any idea as to what might be going on with my cat. She sometimes develops a sort of swollen bottom lip that makes her look like she’s puckering up to kiss or pouting. It usually goes away after a couple of days. I haven’t seen it for quite a while now, but was wondering if anyone else’s cat had experienced such an odd feature (without the assistance of collagen . She goes outside and catches mice, and I read somewhere it could be a ‘rodent ulcer’. Thanks in advance, Jeanne

Response:

I didn’t see any junk science in his post. Looked to me like very well-reasoned, logical argument, very unlike any charlatanism. Saccharine has been shown to cause bladder cancer. Nothing junky about that. Nothing made up. Maybe you just feel a little overwhelmed with all the nasty stuff out there. I do. But that’s no reason to attack the messenger. Karen Hohne

Response:

> I didn’t see any junk science in his post. Looked to me > like very well-reasoned, logical argument, very unlike any > charlatanism. Saccharine has been shown to cause bladder > cancer. Nothing junky about that. Nothing made up. Maybe > you just feel a little overwhelmed with all the nasty stuff > out there. I do. But that’s no reason to attack the > messenger.

Um, you might try looking up abstracts from the original papers on aspartame, at: http://www4.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PubMed/ I’ve seen quite a bit of aspartame scare-mongering lately, as I noted in my earlier post in this thread; while there are some reasons for concluding that aspartame is not wholly harmless, there also seem to be no particular reasons for concluding that it’s extremely dangerous, all conspiracy theories aside. As for the danger posed by saccharine, so far as I know it has only been associated with cancer in lab rats gavaged with it, in doses completely out of pro- portion to normal human use. Since it’s likely that under such conditions any number of ordinary substances could be shown to cause disease, it doesn’t seem to me that such research, however important it may or may not be, can necessarily be used to realistically assess everyday health risks. As I also noted in the earlier post, I’ve been completely unable to find any product marketed for cats which con- tains aspartame, and I’ve also been uanble to find any research specifically examining the risks to cats posed by the use of aspartame — probably not surprisingly, gi- ven the first part of that statement. Therefore, any claim that aspartame is specifically dangerous to cats would be in the absence of any evidence whatever. The claims being made that aspartame is specifically danger- ous to human beings are not, I gather from the prepon- derence of the abstracts posted to Medline, supported by evidence — there are, rather, indications that it may not be as harmless as has sometimes been claimed, and it has been associated with an increase in migraine attacks, possibly with an increase in seizures in epilep- tics, with more violent mood swings in people with diagnosed mood disorders, and with an increased in- cidence of a particular sort of skin nodule; however, further research on these particular effects and aspar- tame have failed so far to establish a possible causa- tion. The claim that it is the methanol which is produced as a metabolite from aspartame does not appear to be supported by any of the abstracts available on Medline, and so far as I can find there has been no work done on chronic exposure to the extremely low levels of me- thanol that could be reasonably expected from long- term use of aspartame-containing food products. Thus, any claims of a danger posed by such are largely spec- ulative, based on extrapolations of what is known from much larger exposures to methanol, or acute methanol poisoning. This doesn’t mean it’s impossible that the claimed dangers posed by aspartame can’t possibly exist, or that the serum methanol levels produced by aspartame ingestion are not possibly of concern, but it does mean that no *specific* claims can be made in this area. There have been some troubling but so far inconclusive results shown from research on lab rats, as well; but, as with the saccharine above, these studies are mostly made with the animals being gavaged with the substance rather than given it in doses commensu- rate with ordinary human use, it is so far unclear as to how this research reflects real risk to human beings. But don’t take my word for it. It’s not as if information on aspartame is hard to obtain, or hidden; in fact, I was absolutely staggered by the amount of research on it that had been done — it’s probably the most studied of all food additives. Stacy Scott

Response:

Sounds like a localized reaction to something she’s eaten. Cats can have reactions to all sorts of things (chewing wires, plants etc.) My kitts are indoor only, but you still have to watch out. Don’t forget, too, that outdoor kitties are exposed to worms and other parasites… you need to either keep her indoors or have her tested often for parasites etc. (Some parasites can be easily transferred to humans…) >Hello! I’m wondering if anyone has any idea as to what might be going on with >my cat. She sometimes develops a sort of swollen bottom lip that makes her >look like she’s puckering up to kiss or pouting. It usually goes away after a >couple of days. I haven’t seen it for quite a while now, but was wondering if >anyone else’s cat had experienced such an odd feature (without the assistance >of collagen . She goes outside and catches mice, and I read somewhere it >could be a ‘rodent ulcer’. Thanks in advance, Jeanne

Jean ~~~~

Response:

Wow, thank you for this info. A friend of mine practially lives on diet soda. I’m going to show her this. Karen Hohne

Response:

>><snip> >Thank you Mark for a comprehensive and enlightening >post. >Monica

And don’t forget to thank Santa Claus :-) LShaping.

Response:

>Wow, thank you for this info. A friend of mine practially >lives on diet soda. I’m going to show her this. >Karen Hohne

Umm, if she "lives on diet soda" and if the troll were right, wouldn’t she be dead by now? LShaping.

Response:

Hi Mark, According to Deja News, this is the only post you have ever made to a cats discussion group. Also, you are a fruitcake. Merry Christmas. LShaping.

Response:

> >Wow, thank you for this info. A friend of mine practially >lives on diet soda. I’m going to show her this. >Karen Hohne > Umm, if she "lives on diet soda" and if the troll were right, wouldn’t > she be dead by now? > LShaping.

First of all, I said "practically." Second of all, she has had serious health problems. Thirdly, his post looked a lot less trollwise than yours do. Karen Hohne

Response:

You won’t find one post or article on the net that scientifically proves aspartame harmful to humans or animals. All these articles are vague attempts at scaring people and they work. Just read here. Good info? I don’t think so. Gould – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Hi Mark, >According to Deja News, this is the only post you have ever made to a >cats discussion group. >Also, you are a fruitcake. >Merry Christmas. >LShaping. > What is your problem? Do you work for Pepsi or something? Geez… who > cares if this is his first post? At least he’s providing some decent > information! This isn’t the first bit of info I’ve seen posted on > aspartame; when I finish my holidays, I’ll be sure to dig up at least a > dozen referenced articles from medical journals, and send them your way. > BTW, I’m surprised that you called him a fruitcake, and not some sort of > aspartame-laced crap.

Response:

>Hi Mark, >According to Deja News, this is the only post you have ever made to a >cats discussion group. >Also, you are a fruitcake. >Merry Christmas. >LShaping.

What is your problem? Do you work for Pepsi or something? Geez… who cares if this is his first post? At least he’s providing some decent information! This isn’t the first bit of info I’ve seen posted on aspartame; when I finish my holidays, I’ll be sure to dig up at least a dozen referenced articles from medical journals, and send them your way. BTW, I’m surprised that you called him a fruitcake, and not some sort of aspartame-laced crap.

Response:

> > Newsgroups: rec.pets.cats.health+behav > Hi! Since I am familiar with all of the scientific literature on the > subject and have helped put together articles for some researchers and > physicians, I’d like to address the issue of aspartame/NutraSweet toxicity > in cats and humans. Also, there are some inaccuracies floating around in > the article posted which relate to the World Environmental Conference. > 1. Aspartame Toxicity & Human Health

(snip) More junk science without substantiation. If what you post is true most americans will be dead or dying within the next 10 years. Junk Science. Cell phones give you brain tumors. Sacharrin is deadly. etc. etc. etc. and on and on and on. Things that can be harmful to people and cats. Cars, Buses. Airplanes. Guns. Dogs. Extension cords. I don’t think I will worry about aspartame. Gould

Response:

Thank you Mark for a comprehensive and enlightening post. Monica > Newsgroups: rec.pets.cats.health+behav >Hi! Since I am familiar with all of the scientific literature on the >subject and have helped put together articles for some researchers and >physicians, I’d like to address the issue of

aspartame/NutraSweet toxicity >in cats and humans. Also, there are some inaccuracies floating around in >the article posted which relate to the World

Environmental Conference. >1. Aspartame Toxicity & Human Health >There is now strong evidence that aspartame represents a significant >toxicity hazard to the human population. The damage from aspartame >metabolites appears to be gradual (in most cases) and often occurs long >before clinically-obvious symptons are evident. The

evidence can be seen >in three separate areas: >a. Significant toxicity of aspartame metabolites

(e.g., formaldehyde) > seen in numerous scientific studies. >b. Nearly 100% of the independent research has found problems with > aspartame. This includes animal studies and

controlled human studies – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> (as well as double-blind studies). >c. An enormous number of people have reported serious toxicity reactions > from extended use of aspartame. Keep in mind that the approx. only > 1% of serious reactions are reported when they are required to be > reported. >Before addressing aspartame use in cats, I’ll briefly address categories >"a." through "c." mentioned above. More scientific details, cases, and >resources for healthier sweeteners (Healthier Sweetener Resource List) >can be found at: http://www.holisticmed.com/aspartame/ . >a. Toxic metabolites. Aspartame breaks down into methanol (wood >alcohol) — whether it is heated or not, free-form aspartic acid, >aspartylphenylalanine diketopiperazine (DKP), phenylalanine, >beta-aspartame, and a few other chemicals. The methanol, free-form >aspartic acid and DKP appear to represent the most

significant hazards: > i. Methanol — is absorbed and converted to

formaldehyde. Formaldehyde > has been shown to cause gradual damage to the

immune system, nervous > system, and irreversible genetic damage. The manufacturer, > Monsanto, played a number of games (not unlike

the tobacco industry) > to convince scientists that the

methanol–>formaldehyde was not a – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> problem. I will briefly address a few: > 1) "Methanol is found in alcoholic beverages and fruits at 10 times > higher levels than in aspartame" > A. Both alcoholic beverages and fruits have been shown to > contain protective factors which prevent methanol conversion > to formaldehyde and subsequent toxicity. > 2) "Methanol levels are too low to cause toxicity" > A. They are only too low to cause immediate death. They are > within the range necessary to cause chronic, low-level > poisoning. The same can be said of the formaldehyde. > 3) "Methanol levels do not rise after aspartame ingestion." > A. The aspartame manufacturers funded 13 years of studies > where a 1960’s methanol testing procedure was used. The > method used was incapable of registering any increase > from normal aspartame ingestion. A

properly-conducted test – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> in the mid-1980’s showed a significant increase from the > equivalent of one can of soda in a 30 kg child. > 4) "The body contains methanol and formaldehyde already" > A. Metabolism does create an extremely low level of methanol > and formaldehyde in the body. However, these levels are > very tightly controlled. Even as little as 0.75 mg of > formaldehyde exposure in children (daily for several months) > has been shown to cause chronic toxicity. > 5) "Formaldehyde is found in some foods" > A. Formaldehyde is extremely toxic once it makes it into the > bloodstream and the rest of the body. The digestive system > can break down formaldehyde before it reaches the > bloodstream. With aspartame, however, it is absorbed as > methanol and breaks down into formaldehyde after it is > already in the bloodstream. (Actualy,

methanol is break down > into formic acid in other areas such as the eye, for > example.) > 6) "People ingesting aspartame do not have

increases in formic acid > levels" > A. Formaldehyde breaks down into formic acid (aka formate) in > the body. However, it appears that with aspartame, the > formaldehyde accumulates in the body as "adducts." Even if > it didn’t though, having excess levels of formaldehyde > passing through the body is a significant toxicity hazard. > The manufacturers used urine formic acid measurements. It > has recently been shown that such

measurements are not > reliable for low-level, chronic

formaldehyde poisoning. The > technique they used for plasma formic acid measurements was > flawed and has been called "notoriously inaccurate" by one > formic acid researcher. > ii. Aspartic acid. > It is well-known that excitotoxic amino acids

such as aspartic acid – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> can be used in conjunction with formaldehyde to increase pain and > adverse effects on the nervous system. The aspartic acid is in > "free-form" (unbound to protein), so unike food, it is absorbed > suddently, bypassing the normal absorption and metabolism process. > Combining this with formaldehyde from aspartame is bound to > increase the gradual damage. > iii. Aspartylphenylalanine diketopiperazine (DKP) > The DKP is suspected to be converted in the gut into a potential > brain tumor agent. One of the most reknowned neuroscientists in > the world called this an "enormously complex

subject" so I won’t go > into too many details. > There were two pre-approval studies which showed (upon > *independent* review) to cause dose-related brain tumors in the > test animals. DKP appears to be able to cause mutations (although > I think the formaldehyde could be a candidate as well). A recent > review of the epidemiological data shows a rise in certain types of > brain tumors (the same in the animals) in the most susceptible > population group within several years after

aspartame came on the – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> market. > 1) "A recent study (Gurney) did not show a rise in brain tumors" > A. That study looked at children. Children would be > considered to be the least likely population group to > experience the aspartame-caused brain tumor. The study > by Olney focused on the middle aged and older population > group. > 2) "Brain tumors rates have been increasing

since before aspartame > was approved." > A. A brain tumor in adults can take many years or decades to > become large and easily detectable. Aspartame couldn’t > have been the original cause of these

brain tumors because > it wasn’t on the market long enough.

However, it is known > that certain less deadly brain tumors can transform into > more deadly and larger forms in a

shorter period of time. > If aspartame was a brain tumor agent, that is what we > would see first. Olney showed that in

the most susceptible > population group, there has been an

enormous increase in > these deadly types of brain tumors since within a few years > after aspartame appeared on the market. Of course, there > has been a corresponding decrease in the less deadly > types of brain tumors during that time. That is why the > *overall* brain tumor rate looks

somewhat stable. So, > whenever some FDA beaurocrat talks about *overall* brain > tumor rates, they clearly didn’t read the Olney study. > 3) "Ishii study in Japan showed that aspartame didn’t cause brain > tumors" > A. The study was conducted by a close

business partner of the > manufacturer. At the time, this company who was leading the > International Technical Glutamate

Committee and sponsoring > research with aspartame hidden in the

beverages given to the > control group during double-blind MSG

"research." There is > a long history of what I think is clearly scientific fraud > on the part of this group who sponsored

the research. Still, – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> even if the study is accepted, there are two pre-approval > studies with opposite results. > 4) "The animals were given high doses of aspartame" > A. The metabolites of aspartame are anywhere from 5 to 60 times > more toxic in humans than in rodents (dependent upon the > metabolite). So high doses are required to simulate human > ingestion. >b. Independent studies find problems > Please see:

http://www.holisticmed.com/aspartame/100.html > The reason the manufacturers studies never find problems (at least > never report them in the abstract) is that they

play games (not unlike > the tobacco industry). For example, nearly 100% of the subjects in > their aspartame and seizure studies were on

anti-seizure medication. > Another study found that aspartame caused more

problems than placebo, – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> so they split up the reactions into enough tiny categories so they > could claim in the abstract that

Response:

>Why, pray tell, would you feed kitty diet soda?

Hey, I was enjoying this argument. Why introduce practicality into it! LShaping.

Response:

> Newsgroups: rec.pets.cats.health+behav

Hi! Since I am familiar with all of the scientific literature on the subject and have helped put together articles for some researchers and physicians, I’d like to address the issue of aspartame/NutraSweet toxicity in cats and humans. Also, there are some inaccuracies floating around in the article posted which relate to the World Environmental Conference. 1. Aspartame Toxicity & Human Health There is now strong evidence that aspartame represents a significant toxicity hazard to the human population. The damage from aspartame metabolites appears to be gradual (in most cases) and often occurs long before clinically-obvious symptons are evident. The evidence can be seen in three separate areas: a. Significant toxicity of aspartame metabolites (e.g., formaldehyde) seen in numerous scientific studies. b. Nearly 100% of the independent research has found problems with aspartame. This includes animal studies and controlled human studies (as well as double-blind studies). c. An enormous number of people have reported serious toxicity reactions from extended use of aspartame. Keep in mind that the approx. only 1% of serious reactions are reported when they are required to be reported. Before addressing aspartame use in cats, I’ll briefly address categories "a." through "c." mentioned above. More scientific details, cases, and resources for healthier sweeteners (Healthier Sweetener Resource List) can be found at: http://www.holisticmed.com/aspartame/ . a. Toxic metabolites. Aspartame breaks down into methanol (wood alcohol) — whether it is heated or not, free-form aspartic acid, aspartylphenylalanine diketopiperazine (DKP), phenylalanine, beta-aspartame, and a few other chemicals. The methanol, free-form aspartic acid and DKP appear to represent the most significant hazards: i. Methanol — is absorbed and converted to formaldehyde. Formaldehyde has been shown to cause gradual damage to the immune system, nervous system, and irreversible genetic damage. The manufacturer, Monsanto, played a number of games (not unlike the tobacco industry) to convince scientists that the methanol–>formaldehyde was not a problem. I will briefly address a few: 1) "Methanol is found in alcoholic beverages and fruits at 10 times higher levels than in aspartame" A. Both alcoholic beverages and fruits have been shown to contain protective factors which prevent methanol conversion to formaldehyde and subsequent toxicity. 2) "Methanol levels are too low to cause toxicity" A. They are only too low to cause immediate death. They are within the range necessary to cause chronic, low-level poisoning. The same can be said of the formaldehyde. 3) "Methanol levels do not rise after aspartame ingestion." A. The aspartame manufacturers funded 13 years of studies where a 1960’s methanol testing procedure was used. The method used was incapable of registering any increase from normal aspartame ingestion. A properly-conducted test in the mid-1980’s showed a significant increase from the equivalent of one can of soda in a 30 kg child. 4) "The body contains methanol and formaldehyde already" A. Metabolism does create an extremely low level of methanol and formaldehyde in the body. However, these levels are very tightly controlled. Even as little as 0.75 mg of formaldehyde exposure in children (daily for several months) has been shown to cause chronic toxicity. 5) "Formaldehyde is found in some foods" A. Formaldehyde is extremely toxic once it makes it into the bloodstream and the rest of the body. The digestive system can break down formaldehyde before it reaches the bloodstream. With aspartame, however, it is absorbed as methanol and breaks down into formaldehyde after it is already in the bloodstream. (Actualy, methanol is break down into formic acid in other areas such as the eye, for example.) 6) "People ingesting aspartame do not have increases in formic acid levels" A. Formaldehyde breaks down into formic acid (aka formate) in the body. However, it appears that with aspartame, the formaldehyde accumulates in the body as "adducts." Even if it didn’t though, having excess levels of formaldehyde passing through the body is a significant toxicity hazard. The manufacturers used urine formic acid measurements. It has recently been shown that such measurements are not reliable for low-level, chronic formaldehyde poisoning. The technique they used for plasma formic acid measurements was flawed and has been called "notoriously inaccurate" by one formic acid researcher. ii. Aspartic acid. It is well-known that excitotoxic amino acids such as aspartic acid can be used in conjunction with formaldehyde to increase pain and adverse effects on the nervous system. The aspartic acid is in "free-form" (unbound to protein), so unike food, it is absorbed suddently, bypassing the normal absorption and metabolism process. Combining this with formaldehyde from aspartame is bound to increase the gradual damage. iii. Aspartylphenylalanine diketopiperazine (DKP) The DKP is suspected to be converted in the gut into a potential brain tumor agent. One of the most reknowned neuroscientists in the world called this an "enormously complex subject" so I won’t go into too many details. There were two pre-approval studies which showed (upon *independent* review) to cause dose-related brain tumors in the test animals. DKP appears to be able to cause mutations (although I think the formaldehyde could be a candidate as well). A recent review of the epidemiological data shows a rise in certain types of brain tumors (the same in the animals) in the most susceptible population group within several years after aspartame came on the market. 1) "A recent study (Gurney) did not show a rise in brain tumors" A. That study looked at children. Children would be considered to be the least likely population group to experience the aspartame-caused brain tumor. The study by Olney focused on the middle aged and older population group. 2) "Brain tumors rates have been increasing since before aspartame was approved." A. A brain tumor in adults can take many years or decades to become large and easily detectable. Aspartame couldn’t have been the original cause of these brain tumors because it wasn’t on the market long enough. However, it is known that certain less deadly brain tumors can transform into more deadly and larger forms in a shorter period of time. If aspartame was a brain tumor agent, that is what we would see first. Olney showed that in the most susceptible population group, there has been an enormous increase in these deadly types of brain tumors since within a few years after aspartame appeared on the market. Of course, there has been a corresponding decrease in the less deadly types of brain tumors during that time. That is why the *overall* brain tumor rate looks somewhat stable. So, whenever some FDA beaurocrat talks about *overall* brain tumor rates, they clearly didn’t read the Olney study. 3) "Ishii study in Japan showed that aspartame didn’t cause brain tumors" A. The study was conducted by a close business partner of the manufacturer. At the time, this company who was leading the International Technical Glutamate Committee and sponsoring research with aspartame hidden in the beverages given to the control group during double-blind MSG "research." There is a long history of what I think is clearly scientific fraud on the part of this group who sponsored the research. Still, even if the study is accepted, there are two pre-approval studies with opposite results. 4) "The animals were given high doses of aspartame" A. The metabolites of aspartame are anywhere from 5 to 60 times more toxic in humans than in rodents (dependent upon the metabolite). So high doses are required to simulate human ingestion. b. Independent studies find problems Please see: http://www.holisticmed.com/aspartame/100.html The reason the manufacturers studies never find problems (at least never report them in the abstract) is that they play games (not unlike the tobacco industry). For example, nearly 100% of the subjects in their aspartame and seizure studies were on anti-seizure medication. Another study found that aspartame caused more problems than placebo, so they split up the reactions into enough tiny categories so they could claim in the abstract that there was no significant difference within the categories (e.g., 1 reaction to aspartame in a tiny category is not a significant difference (statistically) than 0 reactions to placebo in that category). c. Number of toxicity reactions. Please see the

Response:

Why, pray tell, would you feed kitty diet soda?

Response:

Two weeks ago, our year and a half old neutered male cat started showing symptoms of cystitis. I recognized it because I’ve had lots of experience managing the problem in my previous cat (13 years). (Of course the symptoms ALWAYS show up at 10:00 at night, on a Saturday if at all possible, and since a cat experiencing this problem can go into uremic poisoning within hours, I gave me that lovely sense of panic, urgency, and dread associated with this problem. Well, anyway …) In 1983, when I drove my first cat to the vet (25 miles away, at 10:00 on a Saturday night), the vet suggested, as an experiment, that I try using 125mg a day of vitamin C as a urinary acidifier. He told me that the ascorbic acid would reduce the chances of the cystitis becoming a problem again. When I got home, I took some 500mg tablets of C and figured out that 8 of them dissolved into 28.4ml of water in a dropper bottle would give me 125mg of C per 1ml dropper full. Every day for 13 years, along with feeding my kitty CD cat food, I’d mix a dropper full of dissolved vitamin C in with his low ash content canned food. Once, I followed the advice of a friend who just RAVED about how great IAMS cat food was for controlling cystitis. I switched to IAMS and two weeks later my kitty started showing symptoms of cystitis. I switched back to the "CD & C" and the symptoms went away. So, zooming forward 15 years, when I saw my current kitty showing the exact same symptoms (at 10:00 on, OK, a Monday night), I immediately ran to the drugstore and got some vitamin C, dissolved the appropriate number of tablets in water and mixed it with his food. After a vet visit and the kitty taking antibiotics, steroids, and anti-spasm meds (plus vitamin C) for 12 days, he started having trouble peeing again. I realize now that 1) I forgot to give him his C that day and 2) the other kitty was stealing about half of his food (& vitamin C). Since it was 7:00 on a Saturday night, I really wanted to get some C into him ASAP. I tried mixing it with his food but he wouldn’t eat it. I thought of just dripping the C directly into his mouth, but I’ve tasted the regular stuff and it tastes awful. I didn’t want to put him through that unless I had no other choice. Looking on the shelf, I found 1 500mg tablet of chewable C. I dissolved that into an appropriate amount of water and gave him a dropper full directly in the mouth. I’m sure it didn’t taste all that great to him, but I don’t think it was as traumatic as regular C would have tasted. Afterwards, I read the label on the chewable C bottle and found that the composition of the chewable C was different – it contained aspartame (a.k.a. Nutrasweet). Plus, the main ingredients weren’t the same as the other – it used sodium ascorbate and ascorbic acid rather than ascorbic acid alone. I made me wonder if any of these ingredients could do more harm than good. After I gave the kitty the dissolved chewable C (w/aspartame, sodium ascorbate, ascorbic acid) I didn’t notice any ill effects, so I’m assuming that it didn’t do any immediate harm. My question (I’m getting closer) (I’m a Southerner, OK??): Is aspartame (a.k.a. Nutrasweet) harmful to cats in any way? Is sodium ascorbate acidic? I’m wondering if it can also be used as a urinary acidifier for my kitty. Maybe I can just avoid these issues by finding some "chewable C" that contains ascorbic acid only and uses sugar as a sweetener. On the other hand, could the extra sugar in his diet be harmful? Thanks for any information! Chip Hoover San Francisco, CA

Response:

Not likely :-)

Response:

>Not likely :-)

Actually, yes it is! Aspartame (believe it or not) is known to cause many health problems in both people and animals. But the FDA approved it anyway. Actually, one guy approved after everyone else said no (they had read the literature), and a year later, he quit and started working for a major soft-drink company. Hmmm… Anyway, fact is that 10% of aspartame is actually the same stuff as PAINT THINNER!!! And consuming aspartame and smoked foods at the same time creates the strongest carcinogen known to man. Scary. I don’t touch the stuff.

Response:

Known to cause health problems by whom? What guy? How do you know 10% of aspartame is same as paint thinner? Are you a chemist? Of what chemicals does paint thinner consist? All smoked foods? What carcinogen might that be? It’s name? L J Gould – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Not likely :-) > Actually, yes it is! Aspartame (believe it or not) is known to cause many > health problems in both people and animals. But the FDA approved it anyway. > Actually, one guy approved after everyone else said no (they had read the > literature), and a year later, he quit and started working for a major > soft-drink company. Hmmm… Anyway, fact is that 10% of aspartame is > actually the same stuff as PAINT THINNER!!! And consuming aspartame and > smoked foods at the same time creates the strongest carcinogen known to man. > Scary. I don’t touch the stuff.

Response:

>>Not likely :-) >Actually, yes it is! Aspartame (believe it or not) is known to cause many >health problems in both people and animals. But the FDA approved it anyway. >Actually, one guy approved after everyone else said no (they had read the >literature), and a year later, he quit and started working for a major >soft-drink company. Hmmm… Anyway, fact is that 10% of aspartame is >actually the same stuff as PAINT THINNER!!! And consuming aspartame and >smoked foods <snip>

Speaking of smoking, Amy, what are you smoking? LShaping.

Response:

Search the Internet and you will find plenty of articles on the subject.Try for example links at http://www.trufax.org/aspartame/asprlink.html Sweet’Ner Dearest : Bittersweet Vignettes About Aspartame (Nutrasweet) by H.J. Roberts for more a more "positive" attitude see: http://ificinfo.health.org/brochure/aspartam.htm Aspartame is 200 times sweeter than ordinary sugar and a lot less *cheaper* to use. It has, by some, been described as the most dangerous additive to foods. There has certainly been far more alarming reports about the stuff than I personally care to ignore. Do you eat it yourself? I know I try to avoid it, and would definitely not give it to my cats. Why use it in the first place? There are more and more allergies and diseases surfacing that are linked to synthetic substances that have replaced natural ones in our food, or to "refined" versions of basic food stuff (gluten/wheat flour). As late as in the 1980s Aspartame was considered toxic and I have heard that it used to be listed among chemical weapons by Pentagon – maybe you could check this? I also understand that the FDA initially would not allow it’s use in foods, one of the reasons being that brain tumours developed in animals used in lab tests. An amazing tale I have heard is that later, after Ronald Reagan (personal friend of Searle, owner of Monsanto/Nutrasweet/, manufacturers of Aspartame) became president, the head of the FDA was changed. Dr A Hayes on the FDA approved the substance against the recommendations by the special investigations committee’s advice. Soon after Dr Hayes was employed by Searle’s company which led to allegations about bribery/corruption but not to prosecution. ?? What I have read and heard about Aspartame is in Swedish, I can’t refer you to exact articles, also I do not have notes since I am not studying the stuff but am merely concerned for my own health (and of course for the health of my cats). In the EU it is not allowed in foods for babies and small children (directive 96/83/EG). It would be most interesting to here what anyone else have to say, especially if any of you have chemistry training or insight into what has happened during the years, in the US or elsewhere. I understand lawsuits has been filed against the manufacturer during 1998. In the links above you can read how reactions to Aspartame is the biggest reason for complaints to the FDA, that American troops serving in the Gulf war could be poisoned by diet drinks supplied free from the manufactures and many other things of interest. Everyone has to make up their own mind about what they believe is good to eat and to serve their children and pets. I am sure I eat a lot of other stuff that I wouldn’t if I only knew more about them. Enjoy your Holiday dinner tables anyway! /L lewe at homemail dot com |Known to cause health problems by whom? What guy? How do you know 10% of |aspartame is same as paint thinner? Are you a chemist? Of what chemicals |does paint thinner consist? All smoked foods? What carcinogen might that |be? It’s name? | |L J Gould |

|> >Not likely :-) |> |> Actually, yes it is! Aspartame (believe it or not) is known to cause many |> health problems in both people and animals. But the FDA approved it anyway. |> Actually, one guy approved after everyone else said no (they had read the |> literature), and a year later, he quit and started working for a major |> soft-drink company. Hmmm… Anyway, fact is that 10% of aspartame is |> actually the same stuff as PAINT THINNER!!! And consuming aspartame and |> smoked foods at the same time creates the strongest carcinogen known to man. |> Scary. I don’t touch the stuff.

Response:

> As late as in the 1980s Aspartame was considered toxic and I have heard that > it used to be listed among chemical weapons by Pentagon – maybe you could > check this?

I’ve recently been looking into aspartame because of a scare-mongering post that made the rounds of some support ngs. I have been completely unable to confirm or deny the above claim, or any of the various conspir- acy theory tales about the history of aspartame; the only sources that I’ve so far found for these, unfortunately, are from people with an axe to grind against the additive or the FDA or government as a whole, and I have come to believe that the great majority of this material is folkloric. Nor was aspartame widely considered toxic in the 1980s. It was first given limited approval in 1981, the decision was reviewed in 1987, and it was subse- quently approved for general use. Judging from the sheer volume of cita- tions on Medline, it is probably one of the most — if not the most — research- ed food additives available. The majority of this research concludes that it is mostly safe, except, primarily, to people with a particular genetic meta- bolic disorder. Medline is at: http://www4.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PubMed/ > I also understand that the FDA initially would not allow it’s use in foods, > one of the reasons being that brain tumours developed in animals used in lab > tests.

After very extensive searching on Medline and throughout the ‘net, I have been unable to find any article which claimed outright that aspartame was the cause of brain tumors in rats. I did find a reference to a Japanese research paper, Ishii 1981, in which the researcher concluded that aspar- tame did not result in an increased incidence of brain tumors in rats. The more recent flaps over the possibility of an association between increases in human brain tumor incidence and aspartame has been the result of a single paper, Olney 1996. In this paper, Olney noted that brain tumor rates had been increasing, and noted that at the same time as this in- crease, the food additive aspartame became more widely used. He sug- gested that it might be a good idea to examine this. Unfortunately, I have only seen the abstract of this document; the abstract claims that there was an ‘early’ Japanese paper which demonstrated an increase in incidence of brain tumors in rats given aspartame. I’d be curious to know if the paper ref’d is Ishii 1981, which in fact found the opposite. Olney has since published other papers in which he claims that aspar- tame, among other food additives, is an ‘excitotoxin.’ Subsequent research papers, such as Gurney et al. 1997, appear to all show that aspartame is not, in fact, connected with the increase in human brain tumors noted in Olney 1996. According to the FDA, the increase in human brain tumors also began to be observed in 1973, which would rule out aspartame as a sole cause. > <snip> > In the links above you can read how reactions to Aspartame is the biggest > reason for complaints to the FDA, that American troops serving in the Gulf > war could be poisoned by diet drinks supplied free from the manufactures and > many other things of interest.

Most of the information widely available on aspartame appears to be, as I’ve labelled it at the beginning of this post, scare-mongering. However, the FDA has received many reports of adverse effects of aspartame in- gestion, and I gather from Medline that, besides individuals with the meta- bolic disorder (phenylketonuria, or PKU), it has been associated with worsening symptoms in people diagnosed with mood disorders, with an increased incidence and severity of migraine, and with seizures in epi- leptics. The FDA warns that it also should not be used by children and by pregnant women with high serum phenylketone levels. The ‘paint thinner’ claim that appears in another post is based on the fact that aspartame produces methanol as one of its metabolites. There are several studies which show that the serum methanol load that occurs as a result of aspartame ingestion is well below what is considered toxic. However, a recent study, Trocho et al 1998, reports a troubling finding that aspartame ingestion in rats was associated with a rise in formalde- hyde adducts, which may cause damage to dNA. > Everyone has to make up their own mind about what they believe is good to > eat and to serve their children and pets. I am sure I eat a lot of other > stuff that I wouldn’t if I only knew more about them.

IMO — as an interested layperson — aspartame doesn’t appear to be much of a bargain, but it isn’t an unholy terror, either. It probably is pretty safe for healthy human adults with good liver and kidney function if ingested at nor- mal levels. I think I’d avoid giving it to my cat, however, since cats are gen- erally much, much less efficient than human beings at metabolizing toxins, and it seems likely to me that the serum levels of aspartame metabolites would remain fairly high in a cat for some days. However, repeated searches have failed to turn up any research on aspartame’s effects on cats, and I’m coming to believe that it’s never been studied — probably because, so far as I’ve found, no product now marketed for cats contains it, and it is not used pharmalogically (although there is a paper which demonstrated some slight anti-inflammatory effect in people with OA). Stacy Scott