Reply #111: Absolutely, positively my last reply to the inexplicable attempt to defend [View All]

[Greyhound]

corrupt practices that lead to introduction of tons of toxins into our diet. If you're truly open to learning you will see in the report you claim to "debunk" although, apparently, did not bother to actually read beyond the abstract.

Although all of the aforementioned studies were considered negative with respect to the carcinogenicity of APM, in our opinion, http://www.ehponline.org/members/2005/8711/8711.html#resu">these studies did not comply with today's basic requirements for testing the carcinogenic potential of a physical or chemical agent, in particular concerning the number of animals for each experimental group and the duration of the experiment until 110 weeks of age of the animals.

For these reasons, and in light of the ever-increasing diffusion of APM in the diet of industrialized countries (particularly in products consumed by young children and pregnant women), we considered it important to perform a mega-experiment following today's internationally recognized good laboratory practices for carcinogenicity bioassays and, more specifically, the life-span carcinogenicity bioassay design followed for many years at the CMCRC and described in previous publications (Soffritti et al. 1999, 2002c)

Compared with untreated control groups, the increased incidence of lymphomas/leukemias in treated females was statistically significant at doses...

The most frequent histocytotypes observed in the experiment were lymphoimmunoblastic lymphomas, mainly involving lung and mediastinal/peripheral nodes, and histiocytic sarcomas, involving mainly lung, liver, spleen, and nodes.

The differential diagnoses were based on the morphologic criteria followed in our laboratory for several decades and are in line with the guidelines of the International Classification of Rodent Tumors .

Preneoplastic and neoplastic lesions of the renal pelvis and ureter.

Malignant schwannomas of peripheral nerves.

Preneoplastic and neoplastic lesions of the olfactory epithelium.

Malignant brain tumors.

Other malignant tumors.

In addition to the doubt this, http://www.aspartame.ca/page_a14.html">and previous studies, cast upon the safety of aspartame itself, http://www.dorway.com/bressler.txt">the Bressler Report dealt with the actual process of the testing that Searle used in reaching the conclusions they submitted to the FDA.

The report clearly shows that not only was the process flawed, but that there are strong indications that the was deliberate manipulation of the data to hide potentially damaging findings.

Now, I have provided a small sample (but much more than anybody not in the field or without an axe to grind wants to wade through) that, at the very least, casts a great deal of doubt on the neutrality of the "science" used to get this through to the amerikan sheeple.

The use of aspartame is already restricted in the EU and Canadians are re-examining their acceptance of the stuff, that was based largely on the "evidence" of US studies.

Please look through the data and tables, read the whole report and pass this on to Bornagainhooligan, since you two seem to share the goal of spreading corporate propaganda through this board.