I need help with writing to ASDA to tell them that I don't think that their 'good for you'

[UCM]

chocolate mousses are particularly good for you. I tasted one recently after buying them (stupidly didn't read the label) and immediately knew there was sweetener in it. Straight away, looked at the label and there it was 'aspartame'.

I don't know if this does anything bad to you. I did grow up with a diabetic Mother who could only have diabetic chocolate with 'sorbitol' in it and when aspartame was introduced, her specialist told her to avoid it as 'it will end in tears', this was nearly 30 years ago.

So before I go all hot tempered and write an essay, can anyone tell me why it's bad. I WAS REALLY surprised to find it in a 'good for you' food.

I'm not surprised it was in there.

I was absolutely shocked by how many products sold in the UK have this shite in them.

And MSG.

Even six years on, I feel compelled to read ALL labels.

It is bad as it is metabolised to toxic entities.
It is bad as it is tumourigenic in rats.

I will see if I can find a balanced article.

Marrows are good Epis, but I want to know in one sentence how to tell them that they are talking bollox.

bump as I want to write my complaint tonight.

Chocolate mousse is never going to be 'good for you' surely

scroll down to teh 1969 section

Remember though to acknowledge that it still has approval to be used in foods - i.e. it is officially safe.

Well to an extent if it contains milk cream and chocolate, it is, as there isn't any nasty shit in it. Ok so by buying shop bought choc mousse, I was being a bit stupid, but I am so terribly fucked off that it's made of crap and listed as good for you. I very rarely buy these foods.

apparently sugar is bad
& artificial sweetner is good

I don't know where anyone would get that idea

on what basis do asda claim it is 'good foryou'?

Is it to do with dieting? If so, then I suppose it is 'good' if it helps you to lose weight. Quite different to being 'good' because the ingredients are balanced and chemical free.

I have only read a bit of this and it's making me tearful. This is utterly and totally bollox. 30 years ago the diabetic specialist told my Mother not to touch the stuff and it's looking like it was right. It first came out in 'koolmints' in this country and my Mother warned me then. But to read about the breakdown of the 3 ingredients and wonder how many parents are buying sugar free because it's healthier without knowing this is....haven't got a word for it. Will continue to read.

UCM - look at the credentials of the the author of that article too

The bit that made me really really was the bit that basically says it is really bad for developing brains...then I thik about fruit shoots abd all of the other sugar free products which are thrown at parents as a safe alternative to sugar to feed their child .

Give me sugar any day.

Saisnburys is the same. 'Be Good To Yourself' = 'Eat Diet Shit Full of Sweeteners and Other Crap". I don't know if other 'good for you' supermarket ranges equate to anything other than minimal calories at the cost of anything resembling proper food.

Katsma, chocolate mousse at its purest consists of dark chocolate and eggs, that's good for you accoridng to some set of requirements.

agree, baby. If it's diet stuff it'll be garbage.

Right after very briefly skimming through I come to this conclusion, they produced it, someone worried about it, they back themselves up by saying they had done tests, the test were found to be inconclusive, then some money was found to be paid to whoever was in charge of the investigation, then, when ruling came through, it was lost due to changing parties/legislation and to this day there is no conclusive evidence apart from the original studies to say it's bad but those have been swept away.

Did I read it right?

Oh and when a friend pointed out the sugar free jelly in Asda, I said 'not on your nelly, they have aspartame in', this is very confusing but not really.

I need either Tamum, Gess or Monkeytrousers (all the scientists)for this as I think we should start up something after reading that report.

I still need to write my letter though.

Those are the only scientists I know on here, Slightly, it never occured to me that you are, are you

OK - as for practicle help UCM...I would write something along hte lines of

Whilst I appreciate that aspartame currently has FSA approval for use in food products - I don't really believe that this can considered a 'good' or 'better' alternative for sugar. Sugar is a natural product present in many fruits and vegetables. Aspartame is an artificially, chemically synthesised compound. Furthermore its metabolism releases 3 compounds (aspartate, phenylalanine and methanol) which have all, independantly been shown to have toxic effects on various physiological organs/systems.....

Yes - I was SlightlyMadScientist (and I am still a scientist although I am now a spider....)

I havn't read teh whole thing end to end (it was far to long). But my skiming brings me to teh same conclusions as you. Scientific data appears to have been 'lost' to facilitate its approval. Very difficult to prove though. And most of the more recent 'journal' literature supports the fact that aspartame is safe.

However - the 3 metabolites are known to be toxic. That is without question. The argument (in the literature - pro aspratame) is that you ingest more of the metabolites from other dietry sources than from dietry aspartame. Which is why in my statement below - I only said the metaolites are previously known to be toxic.

Basically it causes cancer and nerve damage. Am copy and pasting rant that I had to do recently for something else hope it helps. FYI it changes the way that the body metabolises food making you put on weight. that why people who drink diet coke are prone to obesity. Donald Rumsfeld was CEO of company which developed it and had FDA man who wouldn't licence it sacked and replaced.

Sorry its so long
Aspartame breaks down into three components - a methyl ester and two amino acids: phenylalanine and aspartic acid.
The sweetener industry repeatedly pointed out that these compounds occur naturally in food and drink, yet that statement hides the complex science that makes each one harmful to humans when found in aspartame. In food, phenylalanine and aspartic acid are bound to other amino acids in long, complex chains of proteins so that they are not absorbed in a way that could cause damage. But in aspartame they are not, and enzymes in the gut can easily split them apart.
Once phenylalanine is released in its free form, it is metabolised into diketopiperazine, a suspected carcinogen. Aspartic acid in its free form becomes an excitotoxin, a toxic molecule that stimulates nerve cells to the point of damage or death. When taken together, aspartic acid and the common food additive monosodium glutamate have a synergistic toxic effect on neurones in the brain
The third component of aspartame, methyl ester, is the most harmful. It is metabolised by the body into methanol, a well-known poison. In the US, the environmental protection agency defines safe consumption of methanol as no more than 7.8mg a day. Anyone drinking three cans of a drink sweetened with aspartame a day is consuming about 56mg of methanol. Methanol breaks down into formic acid and formaldehyde in the body. Formaldehyde is a deadly neurotoxin. Methanol is considered a cumulative poison due to the low rate of excretion once it is absorbed. In the body, methanol is oxidized to formaldehyde and formic acid; both of these metabolites are toxic. The most well known problems from methanol poisoning are vision problems. Formaldehyde is a known carcinogen, causes retinal damage, interferes with DNA replication, and causes birth defects. Due to the lack of a couple of key enzymes, humans are many times more sensitive to the toxic effects of methanol than animals. Therefore, tests of aspartame or methanol on animals do not accurately reflect the danger for humans. It has been pointed out that fruit juices and alcoholic beverages contain small amounts of methanol. It is important to remember, that the methanol in natural products never appears alone. In every case, ethanol is present, usually in much higher amounts. Ethanol is an antidote for methanol toxicity in humans.

Elizabeths synopsis is a very well worded one UCM...you should consider using it (depending on how large a critique you want)

Helpful shorthand to save you reading labels - if a supermarket is promoting any packaged or processed food item as 'healthy' they mean that it tastes nasty and might make you thinner (perhaps by means of vomiting and diarrhoea).

MartianBishop is another scientist BTW

Thank you so much for that SMS, I should have guessed, but for some reason I get you mixed up with spookymadmummy .

SueW, I did cotton on 30 years ago as I did trust my Mothers advice. But for some stupid reason didn't think that this would happen as Tescos Healthy Eating stuff wouldn't normally contain this stuff (and it is stuff, horrible stuff), being a usual fluff head and NEVER buying anything diet, make my own all the way, just was stupid enough to buy this crap cos that's what it is.

Ah well, it's one hiccup, but I will still be writing to Asda and using that very long post by Elizabeth. Thank you for that advice SMS.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx to all of you that answered me. Now the uphill struggle will be to tell everyone about this. I wanted to print out the bit you found me but I think it might send my printer into apoplexy and a no ink situation unless I can print it in black and white (there was a lot of grey blackground). I will work out a way to print that off and I WILL BE PUTTING IT to so many friends who insist that sugar, yes good old cane sugar is bad for their kids teeth. FFS you can get dentures!!!!!!!!!!!!!