>From palnet@servint.comWed Dec 27 17:03:32 1995 Date: Sat, 16 Dec 1995 15:55:35 -0500 From: Mail AutoResponder To: bettym19@mindspring.com Subject: Regarding your mail "info mp_aspartame2" ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 29 Jun 1995 17:17:55 -0400 (EDT) From: Mark D. Gold To: bettym19@mindspring.com Subject: Re: Aspartame: Literature Review (repost) From:SMTP%"MGOLD" 26-JUN-1995 23:24:11.89 To:MGOLD CC: Subj:Re: Aspartame: Literature Review Date: Mon, 26 Jun 1995 23:24:06 -0400 (EDT) From: "Mark D. Gold" To: mgold@purple.mit.edu Message-Id: <950626232406.662@PURPLE.MIT.EDU> Subject: Re: Aspartame: Literature Review >From: Laura Clift >Newsgroups: misc.health.diabetes >Subject: Aspartame - Literature Review >Date: 26 Jun 1995 19:21:27 GMT Laura, What you have to realize is that a significant portion of the reviews that you read from medline are written by researchers for NutraSweet and therefore somewhat biased and inaccurate. I will attempt to provide more detailed information than what is presented in the industry PR that appears in the literature. I would be happy to go into as much detail as you like on these issues -- I only have time to put together a "quick and dirty" response. Please let me know if you would like more detail on any particular subject. >MedLine Search using Aspartame and (safety or adverse effects) >Approx 1989-present > >Aspartame (NutraSweet) metabolizes into the following: 50% >phenyalanine, 40% aspartic acid, and 10% methanol (1). The acceptable >daily intake for aspartame is set at 40 mg/kg/day by the World Health >Organization (WHO) and at 50 mg/kg/day by the FDA (2). Estimated >daily consumption, including the 90th percentile, is 2-10 mg/kg. This is not an accurate picture of real-world aspartame. For example, see enclosure #1 for a more accurate description of aspartame's breakdown products. The review you cited about the aspartame intake was written by NutraSweet researchers and defies common sense and is in conflict with their own studies. See enclosure #2 for a more detailed look of this subject. >Conern over the toxicity of phenylalanine and methanol products have >been raised. Methanol is produced in small amounts in regular use, >comparable to the metabolism of many foods, including fruits and >vegetables (3). The reference you cited for methanol in foods is also written by a researcher for the NutraSweet company. The researcher probably forgot to mention that human beings do not have the enzymes to break down the pectin in fruits and vegetables to release the methanol. Please see enclosure #3 for a more detailed discussion of this subject. >In fact, at abuse levels of aspartame (200 mg/kg) no abnormal amounts >of methanol or formate concentrations were detected in the blood (3). The reference cited does not refer to this experiment. However, this experiment was also conducted by NutraSweet researchers. It was a single-dose experiment of encapsulated aspartame. The fact is that experiments with low doses of methanol or formaldehye (a toxic metabolite of methanol) have been shown to cause adverse health effects even though a single exposure would not cause a significant increase in the plasma formate levels. In addition, the researchers only showed average values for each time period, obscuring individual differences. Finally, adding to the load of formaldehyde and formic acid in diabetics is not a good idea in light of recent experiments which relate to diabetes and formaldehyde. Please remember, these are single-dose experiments, but chronic methanol poisoning can happen very slowly over a period of years. I could go into this subject in more detail with an enclosure, but this is already too long, so email me if you want more detail. That goes for the rest of this text. I'll only go into detail and cite studies in the enclosures. Please feel free to email me for more detail and citations. >The increase in serum phynelalanine was the same with aspartame as with >the sweetness equivalent of sucrose (4). Phenylalanine only increased to >half of the toxic concentration at abuse level, 200 mg/kg (which, by the >way is equal to the amount found in 24L of soda) (3). This is because the aspartame was taken in encapsulated form. A more recent experiment by Stegink in 1987 showed that when taken in liquid form (as compared to encapsulated) form that plasma phenylalanine levels spike to extremely high levels. The dosage was many times less, by the way. An independent experiment presented at the Dietary Phenylalanine and Brain Function conference in 1987 also showed dangerously high spikes when aspartame was taken in liquid form. Again, months and years of spiking plasma phenylalanine is a concern that cannot be fully addressed in single-dose experiments. >No evidence has been found in controlled studies of any connection >between aspartame and brain tumors, brain damage, mental retardation, >or endocrine dysfuntion (3). No human studies have been conducted testing for these. So, I guess you can say that no evidence has been found. :-) However, one pre-approval test showed a significant increase in brain tumors (12) as compared to controls (0) even though the dose was very likely much less than intended (as evidence showed that the DKP particles were so large that the animals probably eat around them). Animal experiments have also shown brain damage in infants at dosages of excitotoxins that could easily be reached by the combination of MSG in broth plus aspartame in liquids. The brain tumor rate has been shown to increase since the mid-1980's even when taking into account changes in diagnostic procedures and brain tumors from immune system depression. While this can have many possible causes, no independent epidemiological studies have been conducted looking to see whether aspartame may have played a part. > After long-term studies, aspartame was >judged "free of long-term cancer risks (3). Only one person "judged" aspartame free of cancer risks -- that was the FDA Commissioner. A number of FDA Investigators were strongly against approval because of strong evidence of the cancer-causing potential from life-time use of aspartame, the Public Board of Inquiry (including the President of the American Association of Neuropathologists) voted unanimously against approval because of the brain tumor issue. The FDA Commissioner's own scientific review team was against approval because of the brain tumor issue. Shortly after the FDA Commissioner approved aspartame in soft drinks, he took a high paying consulting position with the PR firm of the manufacturer of aspartame. >Adverse effects have been noted in aspartame studies, however these >were seen with intraperitoneal injection in rats, but not with oral >administration (dose = 176-704 mg/kg) (5). This is just plain incorrect. A number of short-term human studies have shown adverse reactions. However, this statement appears to be refering to the excitotoxic effect of *aspartate* on rats. A number of experiments have shown that oral ingestion of aspartame or glutamate can cause brain lessions in rats. When they refer to a minimum dose of 176 mg/kg as the minimum dose required to cause brain lesions in rats, they probably do not mention that rodents concentrate glutamate and aspartate at levels 5 times greaters than humans. Thus the equivalent human dose would be ~35 mg/kg. It is also important to remember that glutamate and aspartate cause significant changes in hormonal levels at 1/4 the dose required to cause brain lesions. In addition, these were single dose experiments. Regular spiking of plasma aspartate to nearly acutely toxic levels is not something I would consider health-building. >Studies have indicated that aspartame is safe for use in heterozygous >phenylketonuriacs and has no effect on their cognitive performance, >EEG, or urinary organic acids (1,6). There have been *zero* properly conducted long-term experiments on heterzygous phenylketonurics. Months and years of spiking the plasma phenylalanine level can change brain chemistry. The longest experiment I am aware of was less than 6 months and that was conducted using a product different than what is available to real consumers. The only experiment which approached a proper test of heterzygous phenylketonurics was presented at the 1987 Dietary Phenylalanine and Brain Function conference. Even though it was only medium-term in length, it pointed to evidence of possible dangers from aspartame ingestion in such a population. >Aspartame has also been judged safe in pregnate women (6), The Stegink study I refered to above showed that the plasma phenylalanine of one subject spiked to very close to the level that is recommended against for preganant women. Since the fetal brain will concentrate the phenylalanine to levels four times that of the woman's plasma phenylalanine, this is playing a very dangerous game with the health of the fetus. A number of well-known and experienced researchers testified about the hazards of ingesting aspartame in pregnancy. There have been *no* long-term experiments of real-world aspartame ingestion in pregnant humans and the development of the child post-pregnancy. I feel sorry for women who jeapordize their child's health (i.e., long-term development) by constantly spiking their plasma phenylalanine levels. I would be happy to email references for this section as NutraSweet researchers "judging" aspartame as "safe" in pregnant women has me (and a number of scientists) extremely concerned. >diabetics (6), diabetics with chronic renal failure (7), in obese >children (8) and in people with Parkinson's Disease who recieved 600 >or 1200 mg/kg (9). Again, short-term experiments (which are nearly worthless to judge long-term safety -- kind of like testing cigarettes by smoking a pack a day for a week) and a very few, poorly-conducted medium-term experiments. A growing number of people are experiencing serious problems after several years of use (including diabetics), but there are not studies looking at long-term use. >A 24 week study in which subjects received 75 mg/kg/day (equals 10L >soda/day) no adverse effects were obsereved (10). This experiment was conducted with encapsulated, freshly prepared aspartame. As you can see from enclosure # 1, the makeup of fresh and real-world aspartame products can differ significantly. The use of encapsulated aspartame invalidates the experiment because the breakdown product absorption and therefore the biochemical effects of encapsulated and liquid aspartame is completely different. The capsules were taken with full meals which also contributes to the lessening of toxicity of aspartame. The methanol tests were taken at the wrong time. A large proportion of the population which submits adverse reaction reports was excluded from this "experiment." The investigators failed to follow their protocol accurately. This was probably the worst post-approval experiment that NutraSweet conducted. >Anectdotal reports of adverse effects have been reported and studied. >The most common compliant is head aches connected to use of >aspartame. Studies have shown that there are people who develop >headaches; once aspartame is discontinued, the headaches cease and no >other adverse effects are noted (13). Aspartame should also be >avoided by people with pre-existing mood disorders as a deepening >of depression could occur (although aspartame does not appear to cause >the onset of depression) (14). Headaches happen to be the most common adverse acute reaction reported. However, that is far from all of the common (and uncommon) adverse reactions. See, for example, J. Applied Nutrition, 40:85-94. A large number of very serious reactions from long-term use have been reported (see below) including worsening of diabetic control (in some patients) and vision problems >In two double-blind, placebo controlled, crossover studies and a >third study connecting seziures with medical histories, it was >concluded that aspartame does not cause seziures or worsen >existing sezures (15,16). The keywords "double-blind, placebo controlled, crossover studies" are meaningless if the experiments are conducted improperly. These references are not the citations of studies on seizures. The independent publications on seizures always point to hazards, while the NutraSweet-controlled research cites not hazards. However, their research is usually conducted with *encapsulated* aspartame which significantly lessens the effect of the phenylalanine (thought to make one more susceptible to seizures over time), it is usually a very short experiment as persons ingesting aspartame for several years are more likely to report seizures, it is usually conducted while the patients are medicated, and is often not conducted on persons who report seizures from aspartame. Pilots seem to be more susceptible to aspartame-induced seizures, vertigo and blurred vision and a significant number of piloting publication have warned pilots about this problem. Given that seizures are one of the more common reactions reported, it would be useful to conduct *long-term* corporate-neutral studies on aspartame as well as epidemiological studies. >In separate studies, uriticaria and angioedema were not induced by >aspartame (17). No reproducable results could be obtained with people >claiming allergy to aspartame (18). The problem with these NutraSweet allergy studies is that reactions to aspartame are not allergic reactions. Kulczycki addressed a number of the flaws in the Geha study cited above (J. Allergy Clin. Immunol, 2/95, 639-640). Unfortunately, he didn't point out that *capsules* were used which significantly changes the biochemical reactions (see Stegink study mentioned above). Also the dose of DKP was significantly less than what may occur in real world products. Finally, this was a single-dose experiment and does not address the fact that most people do not start to experience acute adverse reactions until they have been ingesting aspartame for a few weeks. The other study cited was nearly as bad, consisting of only a small number of subjects, who received only a single dose of real-world aspartame products. Headaches, for example, were not considered a reaction unless they happened within one hour of the challenge. However, idenpendent studies have shown that headaches and other adverse reactions can occur as long as 12 hours after excitotoxin containing products such as glutamate and aspartame. >persons with self-reported sensitivity to aspartame exihibited no >effects in a study which aspartame was administered in a single >dose (15 mg/kg) which raised the serum phynelalanine (not to toxic >levels) (19). >Most self-reported effects (ie menstrual, gastric) were mild and hard >to substantiate/study and were not of a magnitude or distribution >to be a health threat (3). Recommendations are for hypersensitive >people to avoid aspartame. *Many* reported *acute* adverse reaction are mild. However, *many* other commonly reported reactions *are not* mild, such as seizures, vomitting, worsening of vision (including blindness), memory loss, fatigue, sleep problems, difficulty breathing (e.g., asthmatic reactions), joint pain and shooting pains, change in mood, migraines, other various neurological disorders, fainting, worsening to triggering of serious chronic illness, etc. Other less common reactions which have been reported to the FDA are sometimes much more serious. If you are reading from the *summary statement* of the CDC review, please keep in mind the following points: 1) that review was conducted only a short time after aspartame began to appear in carbonated beverages, 2) I believe you will find the actual text of the study to be quite a bit more worisome than the summary statement (which was written by a different party I believe). Best regards, - Mark ---------------------------------- BEGIN ENCLOSURE #1 ---------------------------------- 1. By-Products and Breakdown constituents Myth: "Let's begin the safety question by examining aspartame's components: aspartic acid, phenylalanine, and methanol. This is an inaccurate picture of the chemical composition of aspartame-containing products at the time of consumption. Aspartame is created from aspartic acid, phenylalanine, and methanol to form the chemical, L-aspartyl-L-phenylalanine methyl ester. However, what is consumed is often much different than what was created in the laboratory. Aspartame in Solution --------------------- As soon as aspartame is dissolved in liquid is becomes unstable and begins to break down into its individual components as opposed to keeping a single stable chemical structure. In addition, aspartylphenylalanine diketopiperazine begins to form. (Note: There are different forms of diketopiperazines (DKP), but to simply terminology, we will, from now on, refer to aspartylphenylalanine didetopiperazine simply as "DKP.") The rate of breakdown is dependant upon several factors, mainly temperature and pH (Stamp 1989). G.D. Searle, the company which originated aspartame conducted their own stability research and forwarded their results to the FDA as part of the effort to get aspartame approved in carbonated beverages (Federal Register 1983). According to G.D. Searle, when carbonated beverages are stored for eight weeks at 68oF, 11-16% of the aspartame will break down into methanol, aspartic acid, phenylalanine, and significant amounts of DKP. At 86oF for eight weeks of storage, 38% of the aspartame will break down into its components. At 104oF, over 50% of the aspartame stored for nine weeks will break down forming large amounts of DKP, methanol and free amino acids. In 1983, the National Soft Drink Association (NSDA) drafted a document objecting to the use of aspartame in soft drinks (NSDA 1983). In that document they described in detail the many mistakes that were made by G.D. Searle when testing for aspartame's by-products and breakdown constituents. A selection of problems found by the NSDA follows: a. "Only in the cases of APM [aspartame] and DKP did Searle use high pressure liquid chromotography (HPLC). For the other four known principal breakdown products, Searle used think-layer chromotography (TLC). HPLC is a far superior analytical method relative to TLC and numerous HPLC methods exist for the detection and quantification of amino acids. . . . The unfortunate and inexplicable choice of an inferior analytical technique, when superior and recognized methods are available, has resulted in inadequate characterization of [aspartame's] decomposition products." b. "Aside from its choice of TLC over HPLC, the anaylses conducted by the petitioner [Searle] to identify and quantify the breakdown products of [aspartame] in soft drinks are plagued by numerous significant deficiences which result in clear and unmistakeable inadequacies in the detection and quantification of the major decomposition products of [aspartame] in soft drinks." The NSDA goes on to list six major deficiencies in Searle's HPLC testing procedure and analysis. c. "Likewise, the TLC analyses are deficient (these deficiencies are in addition to the inherent limitations of the TLC method). The NSDA goes on to list three major deficiencies in Searle's TLC testing procedure and analysis. d. "The inability to account for as much as thirty-nine (39) percent of [aspartame's] decomposition porducts is significant. With such a high unknown factor, judgments about the safety of [aspartame] in soft drinks cannot be made confidently." e. "Searle has not characterized the decomposition products of [aspartame] in soft drinks under temperature conditions to which the beverages are likely to be exposed in the United States." More recent independent tests by Tsang have shown how quickly aspartame can break down in carbonated beverages stored near room temperature (Tsang 1985). One of his tests was conducted on a diet cola with aspartame stored at 71.6oF. The following are relevant figures for a one liter (1.057 quarts) bottle of diet cola. Sampe 1 Sample 2 Date of 6 Months 36 Months Bottling After Bottling After Bottling Aspartame 550.0 mg* 155.34 mg 19.70 mg L-phenylalanine methyl 0.0 mg** 28.62 mg 13.01 mg ester DKP 0.0 mg** 135.66 mg 173.28 mg L-aspartylphenylalanine 0.0 mg** 158.31 mg 189.05 mg L-phenylalanine 0.0 mg** 42.22 mg 101.27 mg Total aspartame account for (%) 108.38 % 111.74 % *Amount of aspartame claimed on label of diet cola from Canada. **Trace amounts may be present at time of bottling. Other breakdown chemicals such as free methanol which were not included in the list above, appear in much larger amounts at temperatures over 145oF. It is not difficult to imagine that carbonated beverages being shipped in unairconditioned trucks or trains can be exposed to very high temperatures for significant periods of time. It is obvious that wharehouse and grocery store storage conditions can lead to significant temperatures or long storage times. Finally, a person, family, group sometimes purchase large quanities of diet soda for indenfinate storage. The time from when the beverage was created to when it was ingested can be a significant length of time. I beleive that Pepsi is the only brand that stamps their date of manufacture on their aspartame-containing products. On April 2, 1995 I saw a bottle of diet Pepsi which had a stamped date of May 23, 1994, 09:45am. In their objection to approval of aspartame in carbonated beverages, the National Soft Drink Association addressed the issue of temperature exposure (NSDA 1983): "The range of temperature conditions to which soft drinks are exposed during the summer months in the southern United States is illustrated by a study conducted by the Coca-Cola Company's Corporate Packaging Department in 1976 and submitted to the Consumer Product Safety Commission. (High summer temperatures are by no means limited to the southern states. During the period July 10 to July 24, 1983, for example, St. Louis, Missouri experienced 14 consecutive days of temperatures over 90oF, and 10 days of temperatures of 95oF or greater.) That study shows that during the summer months, soft drinks are often exposed to relatively high temperatures for certain time periods in the course of distribution from the bottling plant to the consummer. High temperatures do, of course, routinely occur in much of the United States, including the southern regions; conditions of storage and distribution for soft drinks can elevate these temperatures significantly. "In summary, the study assessed: (1) warehouse temperatures in Marietta, Georgia and Wichita Falls, Texas; (2) route truck temperatures in Wichita Falls; (3) full sun and outside ambient temperatures in Wichita Falls; and (4) parked car temperatures in Atlanta, Georgia and Wichita Falls. Each of these test environments is known to occur in practice and the tests were performed under actual, as opposed to laboratory, conditions. "Several significant conclusions can be drawn from this study. First, in those situations where the bottled beverage is heated only by conduction from the surrounding air (shaded location in a warehouse or in an automobile trunk parked indoors) the raio of product temperature to the termperature of the surrounding air would be 0.92 to 0.94. In enclosed environments exposed to sunlight, however, ratios much greater than one would be expected. For example, a ratio of product temperature to air temperature of 1.45 was found for a test car parked in full sunlight. In other situations where sunlight was a direct heating factor (e.g., open air service station promotions or open bay delivery trucks) typical ratios were 1.10 to 1.15. "The effects of these ratios on product temperature are domonstrated by using summer temperatures for Phoenix, Arizona, where the average daily high in July is 40oC (104oF). During July in Phoenix, a soft drink in full sunlight could reach a temperature of 49oC (120oF) (104oF x 1.15). The same product in a car parked in full sunlight could reach 66oC (151oF) (104oF x 1.45); soft drinks in a warehouse with an ambient temperature of 110oF could reach temperatures of 38oC (101oF) to 39oC (103oF) (0.92-0.94 x 110oF). "Overall, the study, considered together with representative historical temperature data show that soft drinks will frequently be exposed to temperatures of 32oC (90oF) to 49oC (120oF). In some cases product temperatures as high as 66oC (151oF) (especially in the southwestern United States) can be reached. "The effects of these high product temperatures on [aspartame] degradation and the formation of degradation products, and the effects of temperature variation (for example, soft drinks displayed at a service station may reach temperatures of 49oC (120oF) for most of the afternoon, drop in temperature overnight, and heat up again during the following day) cannot be determined from the data submitted by Searle to the FDA." When aspartame in liquid is subjected to high temperatures, the breakdown of aspartame and the formation of large amounts of DKP happens very quickly as shown by Prudel (1986). In addition, Boehm and Bada showed that high tempatures can cause racemization of the free amino acids leading to significant amounts of unnatural D-type amino acids--much more than is produced through cooking normal, healthy foods (Boehm 1984). Gaines (1987) also showed that racemization can occur in the breakdown products of aspartame. The health affects of large amounts of these D- type amino acids are not well known. In a statement provide to U.S. Senate hearings, Dr. Jeffrey Bada had this to say about aspartame decomposition (Bada 1987): "Aspartame, a dipeptide containing the amino acids phenylalanine and aspartic acid, is prone to a number of decomposition/alteration reactions. Dominant are cyclization to the cyclic dipeptide or diketopiperazine [DKP] and stereochemical (racemization) inversion producing the unnatural D- stereoisomers of the amino acids. . . In some instances, however, these reactions are very significant, and the reaction products which are produced are not well-studied as far as their nutritional/toxicological properties are concerned. Some examples where these reactions could be significant are in soft drinks exposed to warm temperatures for prolonged periods and in consumer misuse of aspartame such as in cooking or baking." In an article for the Wednesday Journal, Jeffrey Bada, Ph.D. discusses some of his concerns relating to the chemical rearrangement of aspartame (Mullarkey 1992): "The chemistry of aspartame is changed when Boiled," says Bada. "There is internal rearrangement of its structure. The L-isomers of phenylalanine and aspartic acid change to unnatural D-isomers which are metabolized differently. How it is metabolized is anybody's guess. "Searle people," Bada Continues, "tend to dismiss stereo chemical inversion as unimportant. Chris Tschanz, director of aspartame clinical research, and Louis D. Stegnik, M.D. of the University of Iowa College of Medicine, visited me and admitted that nobody thought of looking at aspartame the way we did." In 1993, the FDA approved aspartame for use in tea beverages, baked goods and mixes, frostings and toppings (Mullarkey 1994b). There are many products on the market which contain aspartame and are heated to high temperatures. Therefore, Dr. Bada's comment of aspartame's "misuse" in cooking or baking no longer applies--it is now a condoned use of aspartame. It has been shown that aspartame can react with other food additives to form chemicals of unknown health consequence. Hussein showed that aspartame reacts with aldehydes which are commonly found flavor compounds in sodas and chewing gum (Hussein 1984). Cha has shown that aspartame can react with vanillin used in foods (Cha 1988). These reactions are very important considerations. As an example of how additive reactions caan cause the formation of toxic substances, in 1973 an experiment in the Journal of Food Science tested three different food additives individually on mice. None of the mice reacted negatively. When the three food additives were tested in pairs, the mice became ill. When all three food additives were tested at once, the mice died (zzzzzz 1973). Aspartame In Solid Food Products -------------------------------- Graves showed that in a dried and acidified state, aspartame that is heated to 230oF breaks down into its components as described above (Graves 1987). It was also shown that other, previously unknown degredation products are formed when the dried product is heated to high temperatures. This type of aspartame breakdown would occur in baking goods that contain aspartame. Conclusion ---------- Aspartame-containing products which are ingested in the real- world are chemically very different than 98-100% aspartame which is given in laboratory experiments. The large amount of breakdown products such as DKP, free phenylalanine, methanol, and others may play the most important role in aspartame's negative health affects. Aspartame's strong tendancy to react with other food ingredients to form unique chemical compounds and the tendancy of the free amino acids to racemize at high temperatures are also very important considerations regarding its toxicity. What people are ingesting in the real world IS NOT the same aspartame as it was originally put into the food, but a very different and even more dangerous chemical soup. ---------------------------------- BEGIN ENCLOSURE #2 ---------------------------------- 2. Average Daily Intake of Aspartame Myth: "The replacement of all sweeteners with aspartame has been estimated to yield an intake of 867 mg of aspartame/day, which translates to only 87 mg of methanol." Before we can discuss aspartame toxicity, it is crucial to set the record straight regarding aspartame intake. The statement in the article has three problems: a. The increasing use of aspartame has not lead to a decreased use in caloric sweeteners such as sucrose. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the per capita consumption of aspartame quadrupled between the years 1983 and 1988 (USDA 1988). Since that time, the use of aspartame has continued to increase. Dr. H.J. Roberts reported on Wall Street Journal articles which stated that "the diet beverage market was increasing at a rate of 20-25% annually" and that "consumers began drinking up to six times as many diet drinks as those using sugared sodas." (WSJ 1988, WSJ 1989) Gregory Gordon wrote in a UPI Investigation that "Roy Burry, an analyst with Kidder-Peabody, Inc., said the exploding diet market now accounts for 24 percent of soft drink sales, compared with 10 percent in the late 1970s, and is growing at 20 to 25 percent a year (Gordon 1987). From 1982 to 1988, the per capita consumption of caloric sweeteners jumped from 123.2 pounds to 133.5 pounds per year. Therefore the increased use of aspartame has not decreased the use of caloric sweetener products in the United States (USDA 1988). b. Studies have shown that most people use aspartame in addition to sugar products and not instead of sugar products (Ryan-Harshman 1987, Knoop 1976). Therefore, the suggestion to increase the use of aspartame will not alter the sugar-craving feeding behavior of the large majority of persons. If they consume a non-sugar, aspartame-containing beverage at one point in the day, they will simply make up for the lack of sugar at some other point in the day. Some studies have shown an increased consumption of sugar due to aspartame (Blundell 1986). c. Since diet products with aspartame have few calories and since many people have been conned into believing that it is safe, a significant percentage of people would likely "throw caution to the wind" and drink large quantities of diet soft drinks and eat large quantities of other products with aspartame. This is something that they would not be as likely to do with high-calorie, sugar-containing products. The NutraSweet Company has been trying to convince people that persons who ingesting aspartame regularly -- approximately 50% of the U.S. population (US Senate, page 418) -- ingest only 1-3 mg/kg body weight/day of aspartame (Butchko 1991, Abrams 1992). This is based on surveys and diaries of consumers. What these surveys do not mention is that aspartame-containing products are often ingested as part of snacks and that people often forget what snacks they've eaten. This was aptly described by Dr. Richard Wurtman of MIT in a meeting with FDA officials on April 21, 1986 (Lisa 1994, page 201): "[NutraSweet's estimates of current use] show, among other things, that people consume less aspartame in the summer than in other months, a finding which violates good sense and reason. (This probably reflects the fact -- affirmed in our laboratories at MIT -- that people have much more difficulty accurately remembering snack than meal intakes . . . and most of the aspartame in the American diet comes via cold beverages and other snack foods.)" Another set of similar surveys shows that Canada which has fairly cold average temperature has more than 2.5 times the daily intake of aspartame than in U.S. which has much hotter average temperatures (Butchko 1994). This is ridiculous not only because aspartame ingestion in warm climates would almost certainly be larger than in cold climates, but also aspartame net sales outside the U.S. amounts to only 10% of