Aspartame "causes cancer" in strict laboratory testing. This is no surprise to people like me who get severe migraines every time I drink something that has aspartame in it, even without my foreknowledge. I've avoided the stuff for years just because it fucks me up.
"In fact, the results indicate that APM causes, in our experimental conditions, a) an increased incidence of malignant-tumor-bearing animals with a positive significant trend in males (p ≤ 0.05) and in females (p ≤ 0.01)"
Source:
http://www.ehponline.org/members/2005/8711/8711.html
Graph:
http://www.ehponline.org/members/2005/8711/tab2.jpg
Journalist Analysis of study:
The study uses a special hybrid of lab-rats which have a shorter lifespan than other creatures, and is susceptible to human diseases. They make it easier to perform important life-cycle studies over a more reasonable period of time. It takes 60+ years to study humans. The study was performed on young rats and continued until the last rat died. Because all things eventually die, obviously ALL the rats died from one cause or another. "Natural death" is usually due to system failure at some point. The biological machine is not perfect.
39% of the control group died of cancerous causes. This is not at all unusual or deserving of being called out as a problem, in that all rats were studied until death. Some things get cancer even without dosing them. Above 20ppm, a significant increase in cancer related deaths is proved. Nearly 60% died of cancer at the higher dosages, which are equal to drinking about 2 liters of soda per day for a few years if you're about 140lbs.
In other words, humans can be given cancer from asparame. It is now a "known carcinogen."
Again, the study isn't saying that *everyone* will get cancer from aspartame, but that it's an elevated risk, and it's absolutely an exposure to that risk. I choose to take that information as the same kind of warning given when I see a sign that says "bridge out."
Seriously.
D
2 comments:
I suspect this is part of a plan to keep the number of Social Security recipients in the future low, and the profits from pharmacological cancer treatment high.
I don't see that as a true conspiracy, but I also would not be surprised if these same events unfolded as a happy [for the pharms] coincidence. They certainly work harder to provide treatments than cures, but for some things like AIDS there are BILLIONS of dollars being paid out to find a CURE.
If I had a drug research lab, I'd want some of that salad. It's a very large pie that doesn't seem hard to get a slice of. Furthermore, curing something like AIDS will make any corporation a White Knight to the world, and bring fabulous wealth and fame.
I think even Smith Kline or Johnsons would take a liking to that opportunity.
Post a Comment