FDA asked to reconsider aspartame due to link to breast ca and lymphoma

[Lani]

FDA Should Reconsider Aspartame Cancer Risk, Say Experts: New Rat Study Links Artificial Sweetener with Lymphomas, Breast Cancer [Center for Science in the Public Interest]
WASHINGTON—A new long-term animal test from an Italian cancer institute raises serious safety questions about the artificial sweetener aspartame, which is marketed generically as well as under the NutraSweet and Equal brand names. A dozen toxicology and epidemiology experts and the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest are calling on the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to immediately review the study, which found increases in lymphomas, leukemias, and breast cancers in rats. If FDA concludes that aspartame does cause cancer in animals, the agency is required by law to revoke its approval for the controversial sweetener, which is used in Diet Pepsi, Diet Coke, tabletop packets, and countless other foods.
The new study, conducted by the respected Ramazzini Foundation and published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives, found statistically significant increases in lymphomas and leukemias in rats that were fed as little as 20 milligrams of the sweetener per kilogram of body weight—an amount that's in the ballpark of what some people consume. The new study is superior to a similar one released in 2005 in that it began exposing the rats to aspartame before their birth.
"Because aspartame is so widely consumed, it is urgent that the FDA evaluate whether aspartame still poses a 'reasonable certainty of no harm,' the standard used for gauging the safety of food additives," said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. "But consumers, particularly parents, shouldn't wait for the FDA to act. People shouldn't panic, but they should stop buying beverages and foods containing aspartame."
The Acceptable Daily Intake of aspartame in the United States is 50 mg per kg of body weight. The new study looked at doses less than that (20 mg per kg) and greater (100 mg per kg). Though few people would consume aspartame at the higher dose, the lower does is equivalent to a 50-pound child drinking 2½ cans of diet soda per day, or a 150-pound adult drinking about 7½ cans of diet soda per day. But aspartame also enters the diet through sugar-free or reduced-sugar gums, candies, yogurts, and hundreds of other products. Many aspartame-containing products are likely to be consumed by kids, including sugar-free Kool-Aid, Jell-O gelatin dessert and pudding mixes, and some Popsicles.
A 2006 National Cancer Institute study seemed to ease cancer fears related to aspartame, but that study had major limitations, including its reliance on imprecise food-frequency questionnaires, and it included only subjects between the ages of 50 and 69 who first consumed aspartame as adults. The effects of consuming aspartame from infancy or childhood might be very different, says CSPI, as suggested by the new animal study.
Among those who today called on FDA Commissioner Andrew von Eschenbach to review the new aspartame study are former Occupational Safety and Health Administration officials John Froines (now at UCLA) and Peter F. Infante (now at George Washington University); James Huff, current Associate Director for Chemical Carcinogenesis at the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS); and Kamal M. Abdo, a toxicologist formerly at the National Toxicology Program of the NIEHS.
As a result of the new study, for the first time CSPI downgraded aspartame on its online Chemical Cuisine directory from a "use caution" rating to "everyone should avoid." CSPI also urges everyone to avoid the artificial sweeteners acesulfame potassium and saccharin. It rates sucralose, also known by the brand name Splenda, as safe.
CSPI also called on the food industry to voluntarily switch to other sugar substitutes.
"Switching to safer ingredients now could be a wise precautionary action," Jacobson wrote to Cal Dooley, president of the Food Products Association/Grocery Manufactures Association.
According to a 1996 report in the Minneapolis Star Tribune, the FDA rejected repeated proposals by NIEHS to test aspartame using more modern methods than were originally used. David Rall, the former director of NIEHS and its National Toxicology Program, said, "any compound that is that widely used needs to be retested with modern methods every once in a while." The State of California, too, has urged new testing of aspartame. The FDA also rejected NIEHS's proposal to test acesulfame potassium, which CSPI says was "abysmally tested" by its manufacturer and showed signs of causing cancer in animals.

The abstract:

Lifespan Exposure to Low Doses of Aspartame Beginning During Prenatal Life Increases Cancer Effects in Rats [Environmental Health Perspectives]
Background: In a previous study conducted at the Cesare Maltoni Cancer Research Center of the European Ramazzini Foundation (CMCRC/ERF), we demonstrated for the first time that aspartame (APM), administered with feed at various doses to 8 week-old Sprague Dawley rats for the lifespan, is a multipotent carcinogenic agent.
Objective: The aim of this second study is to better quantify the carcinogenic risk of APM, beginning treatment during fetal life.
Methods: The study was conducted on groups of 70-95 male and female Sprague Dawley rats, administered APM with feed at concentrations of 2000, 400, or 0 ppm from the 12th day of fetal life until natural death.
Results: The results of the study show: a) a significant dose-related increase of malignant tumor-bearing animals in males (p<0.01), in particular in the group treated at 2000 ppm (p<0.01); b) a significant increase of the incidence in lymphomas/leukemias in males treated at 2000 ppm (p<0.05) and a significant dose-related increase of the incidence of lymphomas/leukemias in females (p<0.01), in particular in the group treated at 2000 ppm (p<0.01); c) a significant dose-related increase of the incidence of mammary cancer in females (p<0.05), in particular in the group treated at 2000 ppm (p<0.05).
Conclusions: The results of this carcinogenicity bioassay not only confirm, but also reinforce the first experimental demonstration of APM's multipotential carcinogenicity at a dose level close to the acceptable daily intake (ADI) for humans. Furthermore, the study demonstrates that when lifespan exposure to APM begins during fetal life, its carcinogenic effects are increased.

[KellyA]

VERY SCAREY I had been a heavy long term user of diet products, beginning around the age of fifteen (dx'd at 37). I really was like a smoker as far as diet cokes go- I always had a "big gulp" of diet coke in my hand and drank several a day in addition to consuming other sugar free items. I have stopped this for the most part since diagnosis, but now don't even want to use Splenda, even though its supposed to be safe. I have been shocked at the number of very young women I know that have been diagnosed with breast cancer and generallly would say that diet items are used by many young women and have really only been around for the last 25 years or so. The rates of bc certainly have skyrocketed since then. Definitely something to take note of.

Kelly

[CLTann]

My hunch is that FDA will not act on this. The agency is noted for its link with big businesses. For an alarming case like this, they probably would just ignore the subject and hope no one will notice its ineptness.

[RhondaH]

"progress" setting us back. I would prefer to have a little "real" sugar than something that could possible kill me. Artificial this, that and the other...this is why I cook from scratch Take care and God bless.

Rhonda

[hutchibk]

I seem to remember that aspartame has been implicated in recent years as a potential cause of brain cancers... and the FDA has fought to deny that possibility and has swept it under every rug they can find.

[Barbara H.]

My father in-law (now deceased) was a biochemist, and always warned me against using artificial sweetners. My children went to one of the best pediatricians in Boston, and he also felt very, very strongly about not using them. I know we have to limit sugar, but I would not eat that artificial stuff. Interestingly, when I had my CAT scan two weeks ago, I had to drink the mixture in a sugar free drink. I complained and was told that it was easier to have a drink that diabetics could also drink.
Best regards,
Barbara H.