Originally published January 15 2006
Opponents of aspartame band together to promote awareness of its health risks
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews Editor
H. J. Roberts, M.D., attorney James Turner and the producers of "Sweet Misery: A Poisoned World," a documentary that examines the health consequences of aspartame, have all redoubled efforts to raise awareness of aspartame's dangers.
In the aspartame documentary, Sweet Misery: A Poisoned World, www.docworkers.com Attorney James Turner explains how Don Rumsfeld called in his markers to get it approved.
Rumsfeld was on Reagan's transition team and the day after he took office he appointed Arthur Hull Hayes as FDA Commissioner to get it approved.
Obviously had he not called in those bloody markers the revoked petition for approval would have prevented the marketing of this chemical poison for human consumption and the disability and death it causes.
A member of the parliamentary select committee on food and the environment yesterday called for emergency action to ban the artificial sweetener aspartame, used in 6,000 food, drink and medicinal products.
The Liberal Democrat MP Roger Williams said in an adjournment debate in the Commons that there was "compelling and reliable evidence for this carcinogenic substance to be banned from the UK food and drinks market altogether".
He said the history of aspartame's licensing put "regulators and politicians to shame", with the likes of Donald Rumsfeld, the US defence secretary and former head of Searle, the company that discovered the sweetener, "calling in his markers" to get it approved.
Responding for the government, the public health minister, Caroline Flint, said a thorough independent review of safety data had been conducted as recently as 2001 and the Food Standards Agency advice remained the same: aspartame is safe for use in food.
The European Food Safety Authority would be reviewing the Italian study as soon as it had full data on it, but an initial review by the UK's expert committee on toxicity had not been convinced by its authors' interpretation of their data.
Yet the science that supported its approval was "biased, inconclusive and incompetent".
The contrast between the quality of the science in the Ramazzini study and the industry studies could not be more clear and more damaging to the industry."
All content posted on this site is commentary or opinion and is protected under Free Speech. Truth Publishing LLC takes sole responsibility for all content. Truth Publishing sells no hard products and earns no money from the recommendation of products. NaturalNews.com is presented for educational and commentary purposes only and should not be construed as professional advice from any licensed practitioner. Truth Publishing assumes no responsibility for the use or misuse of this material. For the full terms of usage of this material, visit www.NaturalNews.com/terms.shtml