Dbennett: "And the Dr. Briffa letter I linked to was the longer version of his edited summary, I didn't want to be accused of editing his work.
I think it speaks clearly enough for itself."
So you don't have a link to where you said "John Briffa's letter was so comprehensably pulled apart" ?
Ok, but not realy sure why you made that statement other than to try and discredit Dr Briffa's points ?!
Dbennett: "As I said previously, I already has the ability to evaluate evidence. And, as I also said, it took me 20mins to establish the state of the evidence and demonstrate that your previous assertions were spurious."
In your post on the 17th July, you discredited a number of Dr Briffa's references as being irrelevant as the studies dealt with formaldehyde rather than, as you said, aspartame. You did not seem to know that methanol is one of the major decomposition products of aspartame within the body, and that this converts into formaldehyde. Even though the start of Dr Briffa's letter, that you were discrediting, was all about that fact!
If that's an example of 'speed researching' you'd be better to slow down and actually read some of the stuff you are commenting on.
Dr Russell Blaylock who wrote the book 'Excitotoxins: The Taste That Kills', writes in Aspartame and Pilots :
"a recent scientific study demonstrated that aspartame exposure significantly increases the level of formaldehyde in all tissue. Including brain and retina, and that this breakdown product of aspartame is very toxic to proteins and DNA, leading to permanent injury to these vital cellular components. Even more important, was the finding that this highly toxic substance accumulates in these with chronic exposure to aspartame. This could lead to significant injury to the brain, retina and other organs long after the exposure. Also, the effects appear to be dose related. That is, the more aspartame you consume, the greater the damage. It should be appreciated that formaldehyde is a powerful carcinogenic agent."
Re.your point re. fruit containing methanol :
In Dr. Woodrow C. Monte?s REPORT ASPARTAME: METHANOL AND THE PUBLIC HEALTH he discusses the fact that Methanol in fruit comes in combination with ethanol and it is thought that it is "This high ethanol to methanol ratio, even at these low ethanol concentrations, may have some protective effect. As stated previously, ethanol slows the rate of methanol's conversion to formaldehyde and formate allowing the body time to excrete methanol in the breath and urine"
"Another factor reducing the potential danger associated with methanol from natural juices is that they have an average caloric density of 500 Kcal/liter and high osmolarity which places very definite limits to their consumption level and rate."
"Simply because methanol is found "naturally" in foods, we can not dismiss the need for carefully documented safety testing in appropriate animal models before allowing a dramatic increase in its {aspartame's} consumption."
It's similar with the phenylalanine component of aspartame :
"Dr. Richard Wurtman, a neuroscientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said that while bananas, milk and NutraSweet all contain phenylalanine, one of 21 amino acids that form the "building blocks" of protein, there is more to the story. Wurtman said because aspartame lacks other important amino acids normally found in foods, the brain absorbs unusually high levels of phenylalanine that could increase the likelihood of epileptic seizures. Dr. Louis Elsas, director of medical genetics at Emory University, groans at the industry arguments that eating or drinking NutraSweet (aspartame) is just like eating a hamburger, saying that "Phenylalanine is a known toxin to the brain. Aspartame is phenylalanine, and drinking aspartame is like drinking phenylalanine as an individual amino acid." . From Source Watch - Aspartame and Here
Dbennett: "If a litre of aspartame sweetened soft drink contains around 600mg of aspartame, a human weighing 70kg can ingest around 5 litres before passing the acceptable daily intake. "
Going by your figures, then a child weighing 16 kg would exceed their acceptable daily intake by consuming just over 1 litre of aspartame sweetened soft drink a day!
However, even the FDA toxicologist, Dr. Adrian Gross, who had asked that Searle be indicted for fraud, admitted to Congress that no ADI should have been allowed to be made because aspartame caused cancer and violated the Delaney Amendment.
"In 1985 he testified against aspartame approval to Congress:
Dr. Adrian Gross, told Congress at least one of Searle's studies "has established beyond ANY REASONABLE DOUBT that aspartame is capable of inducing brain tumors in experimental animals and that this predisposition of it is of extremely high significance. ... In view of these indications that the cancer causing potential of aspartame is a matter that had been established WAY BEYOND ANY REASONABLE DOUBT, one can ask: What is the reason for the apparent refusal by the FDA to invoke for this food additive the so-called Delaney Amendment to the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act?"
The Delaney Amendment makes it illegal to allow any residues of cancer causing chemicals in foods. In his concluding testimony Gross asked, "Given the cancer causing potential of aspartame how would the FDA justify its position that it views a certain amount of aspartame as constituting an allowable daily intake or 'safe' level of it? Is that position in effect not equivalent to setting a 'tolerance' for this food additive and thus a violation of that law? And if the FDA itself elects to violate the law, who is left to protect the health of the public?" Congressional Record SID835:131 (August 1, l985)"
From RESPONSE LETTER TO THE FOOD STANDARDS AGENCY - Dr. Betty Martini, D.Hum.
Dbennett: "Good science, espeically good epidemiology costs money.
And if I was deciding who was to pay for work on this, I'd want the companies selling it to pay for research. "
I'd want this done by independent organisations with public funding, and approval of substances not decided upon by individuals in the industry's pocket. People's health depends on this.
As Dr. Woodrow C. Monte?s says REPORT ASPARTAME: METHANOL AND THE PUBLIC HEALTH : "We know nothing of the mutagenic, teratogenic or carcinogenic effect of methyl alcohol on man or mammal. Yet, if predictions are correct it won't be long before an additional 2,000,000 pounds of it will be added to the food supply yearly.
Must this, then, constitute our test of its safety?"
"Dbennett: "You don't seem to accept the existing evidence so I can ask a question, what piece of evidence are you waiting for?"
You're right, I don't accept the evidence saying aspartame is safe.
The Ramazzini Foundation studies (you refer to them as discredited Rat studies) have proven the carcinogenicity of Aspartame.
Interestingly, in 2008, a study by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences endorsed the Ramazzini methodology, saying that extending animal bioassays beyond 2 years and beginning exposure in utero provides more reliable and appropriate indicators of human risk.
I don't want to expose myself or my children, or you or your children, to a substance that is a proven carcinogenic.