22MOON.COM
You can see the whole Earth from the Moon!

.

.

_____

.

.

.

Aspartame

Alert:

Diet soda

destroys

kidney

function

ByE. Huff

December 17th, 2009

NATURAL NEWS

.

.

Scientists from Brigham and

Women’s Hospital in Boston

have revealed results from a

study outlining some of the

effects of artificial sweeteners

on the body.

Conducted on a group

of 3,000 women,

the results indicated that those

who drank two or more

artificially-sweetened beverages

a day doubled their risk of

more-rapid-than-normal

kidney function decline.

The study accounted for

various other risk factors

including the woman’s age,

her blood pressure,

if she smoked,

and if she had any other

pre-existing conditions

such as heart disease

or diabetes.

The 11-year study evaluated

the effects of all sweetened

drinks on progressive kidney

decline and discovered that

two or more diet drinks

leads to a two-fold increase

in rapid kidney

decline incidences.

.

.

Though study results did not

show any correlation between

sugar- or corn syrup-sweetened

drinks and the onset of rapid

kidney decline,

these ingredients are

implicated in causing diabetes

and obesity and should not

be perceived as safe merely

because they did not have

a direct correlation in this

particular study topic.

High sodium intake was also

implicated in the study as

promoting progressive

kidney decline.

Since diet soda contains

excessive amounts of sodium,

higher than sugar soda,

it is no surprise that diet sodas

were the primary offenders in

the study.

However it is unclear from

this particular study which

ingredient plays the larger

role in progressive kidney

decline,

the artificial sweeteners

or the sodium content.

.

.

Studies on aspartame

When aspartame was first

approved in the 1970s under

the name “NutraSweet”,

studies were submitted as

supposed proof that the

artificial chemical was safe.

.

.

The FDA initially approved

the chemical in 1974 for use

in a limited number of foods

based upon the studies

submitted by G.D. Searle Co.,

the company

that invented aspartame.

Following a discovery made

shortly thereafter by a

research psychiatrist who

found that aspartic acid,

a primary ingredient

in aspartame,

caused holes to form in

the brains of mice,

the FDA decided to form

its own internal task force

to investigate the initial

claims made by the Searle Co.

What the agency discovered

was a series of falsified claims,

compromised study results,

and missing information.

The claims made in favor

of aspartame were so dubious

and the evidence so faulty

that the FDA decreed that a

grand jury should investigate

Searle Co.’s claims.

Unfortunately,

the case failed to move forward

when U.S. Attorney Thomas

Sullivan and Assistant U.S.

Attorney William Conlon failed

to initiate any legal action.

Conlon was later hired by

the law firm that

represented Searle Co.

Investigation revealed that

aspartame had caused tumors,

seizures,

brain holes,

and death in many

of the studies.

All negative findings had

been altered or scrubbed

from the final reports

delivered to the FDA

when aspartame was

first reviewed.

.

.

Time and time again the

question over whether

aspartame is safe has led

to investigations that never

go anywhere.

Studies are continually

released in support of the

chemical’s safety even

though they fail to address

the results of other studies

that show it to be harmful.

Other artificial sweeteners

A study published in the

January, 2008 issue of the

Journal of Toxicology and

Environmental Health

revealed that the newer

artificial sweetener,

sucralose,

alters gut microflora and

inhibits the assimilation

of dietary nutrients.

.

.

Commonly marketed

as being “made from sugar”,

sucralose had undergone

no long-term human studies

to verify its safety in humans.

.

.

Like aspartame,

initial studies revealed

negative reactions by lab

animals on whom it was tested,

indicating that there could

be the same potential

problems in humans.

.

.

The EU Food Commission,

Canadian health officials,

and the U.S. FDA all rejected

the initial studies submitted

by McNeil Nutritionals,

the marketers of sucralose,

because of the negative results.

However they encouraged

the company to continue

researching until they

“got it right”.

McNeil simply lowered the

levels of sucralose used in

their studies until an

acceptable limit was found.

.

_

.

After several tries,

sucralose was

finally approved.

Stevia,

a safe alternative

A great many varieties

of artificial sweeteners

have been approved,

many scandalously,

despite the fact that safe,

natural alternatives exist.

 

Stevia,

for instance,

is a sweet herb from

South America that is up to

300 times sweeter than sugar.

.

.

Claiming inadequate

safety research,

the FDA has long refused

the herb from being included

on the “generally

recognized as safe”

(GRAS) list.

Up until last year,

all forms of stevia could

only be sold as dietary

supplements.

.

.

The extract could not be

labeled as a “sweetener”

and it could not be included

in any food items.

Once the parent companies

of both Pepsi and Coca-Cola

discovered how to manipulate

and patent a segment of

stevia,

however,

it suddenly became safe

to use as a sweetener and

is now sold on grocery

store shelves in packets

similar to the artificial

sweeteners.

The FDA reluctantly added

the natural stevia extract

to the GRAS list as well.

Stick with natural

and unprocessed

When it comes to health,

a person’s best bet is to

avoid artificial sweeteners

altogether.

There are plenty of preferable,

safe alternatives such as

stevia which will allow for

a little extra sweetness

without all the harmful

side effects.

.

_Stevia sweetener link in GREEN

.

.

Aspartame/Sucralose

.

_____

.

.