Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The artificial sweetener aspartame has been the subject of several controversies since its initial approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 1974. The FDA approval of aspartame was highly contested, beginning with suspicions of its involvement in brain cancer, [1] alleging that the quality of the initial research supporting its safety was inadequate and flawed, and that ...
Aspartame has been in the American food supply since the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved it in 1974. Current FDA guidelines put the safe daily consumption figure at 50 milligrams per ...
The PBOI concluded aspartame does not cause brain damage, but it recommended against approving aspartame at that time, citing unanswered questions about cancer in laboratory rats. [60]: 94–96 [61] In 1983, the FDA approved aspartame for use in carbonated beverages and for use in other beverages, baked goods, and confections in 1993. [9]
November 2005 Online publication of Soffritti "First Experimental Demonstration of the Multipotential Carcinogenic Effects of Aspartame Administered in the Feed to Sprague-Dawley Rats" [10] "The results of this mega-experiment indicate that [aspartame] is a multipotential carcinogenic agent, even at a daily dose of 20 mg/kg body weight, much less than the current acceptable daily intake."
For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us
The sweetener aspartame is a "possible carcinogen" but it remains safe to consume at already agreed levels, two groups linked to the World Health Organization (WHO) declared on Friday. Aspartame ...
A low-calorie sugar substitute, it was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 1974 to be used as a tabletop sweetener and additive in breakfast cereals, among other foods.
To-do list for Aspartame controversy Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Cleanup : Scientific publications -- weak Gone -- SV Resolution ( Talk ) 15:29, 30 April 2009 (UTC) Alleged conflict of intrerest prior to 1996 -- should this be merged into discussion of approval?