return


Dr. Moser, official aspartame "expert", ducks questions!



    Dr. Moser is the aspartame industry's "mouthpiece".     He is paid to defend NutraSweet when they are exposed and is known for his long letters to magazines and papers whenever the facts leak out on the deadly effects of this toxin.     When Jennifer's experiment was published in the Food Chemical News, Dr. Moser, wrote Jennifer explaining that he would be interested in answering any of her questions.     He enclosed an article on junk science and encouraged Jennifer not to accept Internet information.     Dr. Moser knows the truth of the matter is on many web pages now all over the Internet system.
    Usually the FDA/Monsanto (maker of NutraSweet) doesn't want to answer questions, and continues to say aspartame is the most tested additive in history.     Yet, the studies never proved aspartame safe - it proved brain tumors, seizures, several other tumors and serious medical problems.
    So Jennifer took the opportunity to ask Dr. Moser about the RAO study.     She couldn't understand how a pivotal study on 7 monkeys showing 6 had grand mal seizures (l died) proved safety.     Dr. Moser wrote back and said he would answer that but he had to go to Europe.
    Obviously, he needed a long time to think on how to get out of answering this question when he himself had opened the door.
    Finally Jennifer got an answer with a bunch of excuses and Dr. Moser shut the door on any future embarrassing questions the NutraSweet Company doesn't want to answer!
Betty Martini
Mission Possible International
 



Here is Jennifer's reply to Dr. Moser's cop-out, dated July 14, l997:





Robert H. Moser, M.D.
The NutraSweet Kelco Company
Box 730
1751 Lake Cook Road
Deerfield, Illinois 60015-5239

Dear Dr. Moser:

Thank you for answering my last letter, although you have not answered my
questions.  You answered many questions that I did not ask but ignored the
one question which I thought should be answered.  You wrote:

    "This has been an interesting correspondence, and I have attempted
    to respond to your comments.  I feel, however, that any further
    communication would not be productive."

I was curious about the RAO study.  The FDA thought that the study was
important enough to call that study a "PIVOTAL" study.  You are now
calling this important study, which resulted in aspartame approval, a bad
study.  Your actual words were:

    "..the study should never have been undertaken, much less
    submitted as legitimate observation.  This particular (Rao)
    experiment represents an unpardonable breach in methodology".

I do not think that it is fair of you to have used the study to get
aspartame approved and then criticize the study as being unreliable.  You
remind me of a boy in my class who once cheated in a game, making up the
rules as he went along, and then took his ball an went home during the
middle o the game when others complained.

The RAO study was different than all of the other studies you listed.
This is what I asked you to comment on.  In the RAO study the monkeys ate
aspartame with milk based baby formula.  I believe that this milk would
have changed the acidity of the stomach.  The aspartame would have acted
differently because the acid in the stomach might not have affected it.

In the other experiments that I read, the aspartame was either taken with
orange juice or water.  I can understand how the strong acid in the
stomach destroys aspartame, but in milk or dairy products it may not.  We
learned about pH in science class.  The stomach acids with a pH of less
than 2 would destroy aspartame.  When we add something to the stomach to
raise or buffer the pH the aspartame might survive.  That's why this study
was different from all other studies.  In real life we drink milk and
dairy products which may allow the aspartame to not be destroyed.

The evidence was there for all of the scientists and FDA reviewers to see.
It seems to me that they did not review this evidence very well.

I am sorry that you do not want to answer my question.  I also apologize
for thinking that it was you I saw on "60 Minutes".  It must have been
somebody from the FDA who said that there was no evidence that animals
suffered any ill effects from eating aspartame.  You obviously agree.

Whether it was you or some FDA official.  I am sorry that you still cannot
see the evidence.  Your own study was a good study when you needed it to
be and it was a "Pivotal Study".  Why is it now a bad study>  Is it
because there is proof that aspartame caused seizures?

I find it interesting that you give your own theory of why the monkeys got
epileptic seizures.  RAO said that the seizures occurred as a result of
the increase in phenylalanine in the blood... phenylalanine from the
aspartame.  The monkeys were observed  for 60 days after the experiment.
When the aspartame stopped, so did the seizures.  You might call this a
coincidence.  I would call it a clue.

You offered to help me by answering my questions and now you advise me
that our correspondence is ended.  You gave me hope and once showed me
that you cared.  Was I wrong to compliment you and the NutraSweet Kelco
Company in my last letter to you?

Your friend,
Jennifer Cohen

         Webmasters note: If anyone should desire to ask why this highly paid Nutrasweet (aspartame) industry spokesman refuses to tell the truth, or to comment on his honesty or integrity as relates to the consumer, perhaps you will consider using the address above to tell him what you think.
         Dr. Arthur Hull Hayes, the FDA commisioner who disregarded the Delaney ammendment, and approved aspartame for use in dry goods (1981) against the recommendation of his OWN Board of Inquiry, and this "Dr." Moser, have a great deal in common.   It appears that lack of honesty, integrity, and ignoring the tennants of the hippocratic oath were commonplace many years ago!
To quote the more significant parts of that oath:
A doctor must always maintain the highest standards of professional conduct.
(Where are the "high standards" as applied to approving a substance full of known carcinogens and tumor agents for use by all the world's population, from gestating babies and beyond?)
A doctor must practice his profession uninfluenced by motives of profit.
(How much was it worth to Dr. Hayes to quit the FDA to work for a Public Relations Firm that serviced Searle, after approving aspartame in 1981, then increasing the allowable intake of aspartame ingredients as a prelude to approving it for use in beverages in 1983?)
Any act, or advice which could weaken physical or mental resistance of a human being may be used only in his interest.
(Both of these "Doctors" approve of everyone using aspartame. Yet, Dr. Hayes should have known about the FDA's growing list of significant complaints and many symptoms of aspartame poisoning, reported by a minimum of 8000 victims (which should have been, by FDA admission, over 800,000 complaints!) Dr. Moser HAD to know, because as one who works in close alliance with the FDA on every word spoken about aspartame... it IS his JOB to know what problems and questions he must counter! Yet, despite this they infer that aspartame poisoning is in OUR best interest, but they neglect to tell us why!)
A doctor should certify or testify only to that which he has personally verified.
(According to this one, both the above doctors certify and testify that a steady diet of methanol, formaldehdyed, formic acid, PKU which breaks down to DKP a tumor agent and perhaps other "unknown" breakdown components, are ALL personally verified by these two experts to be "safe" for YOU, the consumer!)




return