PepsiCo to Drop Aspartame From Diet Pepsi

[icyfroth]

PepsiCo said it would switch to sucralose, a less controversial but still artificial sweetener. The beverage giant said the change—the boldest soda reformulation since Coca-Cola's New Coke fiasco—was in response to consumer surveys showing aspartame as the No. 1 reason Americans are shunning diet colas.

The new sweetener is a blend of sucralose and acesulfame potassium that will be used in Diet Pepsi, Caffeine Free Diet Pepsi and Wild Cherry Diet Pepsi in the U.S. beginning in August. The new sweetener formulation “was developed after extensive research and testing with U.S. diet cola drinkers,” the company said.

The Center for Science in the Public Interest, a public health group and soft drink critic, said Friday that, while consumers should still avoid acesulfame potassium, more commonly known as Ace K, sucralose is “likely’’ a safer sweetener than aspartame. It cited past studies suggesting aspartame had caused tumors in rats, and said tests in the 1970s flagged Ace K as a potential cancer risk.

Coke and Pepsi have both been trying to solve the diet sweetener problem for years. Pepsi tweaked Diet Pepsi a couple of years ago to a blend that retained aspartame but mixed it with acesulfame potassium.

They have both spent heavily in recent years trying to develop zero-calorie sweeteners that can be marketed as natural, not artificial. Each has placed bets on stevia, which is derived from a plant but can leave a bitter aftertaste.

Coke and Pepsi rolled out cola variations sweetened with stevia in the U.S. last year, but mixed in sugar, turning them into mid-calorie colas instead of diet colas.

Entire Article Here

Again the aluminium connection:

Artificial Chemical Sweeteners - Grocery Warning

Making matters worse, soft drink companies put their liquid products containing aspartame in containers made of aluminum.

When this aluminum - a known neurotoxin - is combined with aspartame, the results are multiplied:

In the case of diet drinks in aluminum cans, the very brain-toxic aluminum fluoride compound co-exists with multiple toxins found in aspartame, thus creating the most powerful government-approved toxic soup imaginable. With the strong association between aluminum, excitotoxins, aluminum fluoride complexes and Alzheimer’s disease, it would be completely irresponsible to encourage people to consume this toxic mixture.

Yet, this is done literally billions of times every year in advertising. It is important to remember that the aluminum can has been around for only about three decades, and most toxin-related diseases take years of accumulation to produce the full clinical expression of the disorder.
-Russell Blaylock, M.D., Health and Nutrition Secrets That Can Save Your Life

[icyfroth]

---

@siggie-reported-by-alarmists wrote:

---

@curmu-curmu wrote:

---

@icyfroth wrote:

I think I've spotted a few astroturfers:

"Does it scare off genuine community members who have an opposing point of view through violent and aggressive behaviour? Astroturfers incite the irrational and volatile in our community (sometimes using psychosocial tactics) for one reason: to make a lot of noise and drown out opposition."

How To Spot An Astroturfer

---

@curmu-curmu wrote:

"So not only a nutter - a conspiracy theorist to boot!" and "retards"

@siggie-reported-by-alarmists wrote:

The Dr quoted in the OP is a nutter.

@am*3 wrote:

"Not surprising these 'quacks' always have their own products to sell to prevent/cure what ever they are going on about.

They aren't informing people for the good of  the people, just to make money for themselves.

---

---

Icy...not having a shot at you, but please...google Blaylock. So many unsubstantiated claims, unsupported by medical evidence, unsupported by research - even unsupported by his peers!

Here's just one...

http://vaccineconspiracytheorist.blogspot.com.au/2011/06/quack-of-day-dr-russell-blaylock.html

---

   From this link....

---

Ok thank you. Exactly as I thought.

I found that site earlier today following your "Quack of the day" trail.

Youv'e quoted from a blog by an unnamed author from 2011. 

Against a published a Professor of Neurosurgery and Biology.

Very disappointed in you, Siggie. 😞

[the_great_she_elephant]

https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/are-artificial-sweeteners-safe/

http://www.snopes.com/medical/toxins/aspartame.asp

http://hoaxbusters.org/aspartame.html

http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4127

http://theconversation.com/sweet-news-no-evidence-that-artificial-sweetener-aspartames-bad-for-you-1...

Do all these sites have a vested interest in lying to us about safety of aspartame? and are all the scientests and studies quoted on their sites  being paid off by  "THEM."

[siggie-reported-by-alarmists]

---

@icyfroth wrote:

---

@siggie-reported-by-alarmists wrote:

---

@curmu-curmu wrote:

---

@icyfroth wrote:

I think I've spotted a few astroturfers:

"Does it scare off genuine community members who have an opposing point of view through violent and aggressive behaviour? Astroturfers incite the irrational and volatile in our community (sometimes using psychosocial tactics) for one reason: to make a lot of noise and drown out opposition."

How To Spot An Astroturfer

---

@curmu-curmu wrote:

"So not only a nutter - a conspiracy theorist to boot!" and "retards"

@siggie-reported-by-alarmists wrote:

The Dr quoted in the OP is a nutter.

@am*3 wrote:

"Not surprising these 'quacks' always have their own products to sell to prevent/cure what ever they are going on about.

They aren't informing people for the good of  the people, just to make money for themselves.

---

---

Icy...not having a shot at you, but please...google Blaylock. So many unsubstantiated claims, unsupported by medical evidence, unsupported by research - even unsupported by his peers!

Here's just one...

http://vaccineconspiracytheorist.blogspot.com.au/2011/06/quack-of-day-dr-russell-blaylock.html

---

   From this link....

---

Ok thank you. Exactly as I thought.

I found that site earlier today following your "Quack of the day" trail.

Youv'e quoted from a blog by an unnamed author from 2011. 

Against a published a Professor of Neurosurgery and Biology.

Very disappointed in you, Siggie. 😞

---

 Indeed..... yet you cannot come up with any evidence that supports your Dr Blaylock.

 You have proven the quote by the nameless author to be correct!......lol.

 If he had produced a study/research, you would have posted it.

I'm used to you supporting these nutters...... so no surprise there!

[icyfroth]

---

@siggie-reported-by-alarmists wrote:

---

@icyfroth wrote:

---

@siggie-reported-by-alarmists wrote:

---

@curmu-curmu wrote:

---

@icyfroth wrote:

I think I've spotted a few astroturfers:

"Does it scare off genuine community members who have an opposing point of view through violent and aggressive behaviour? Astroturfers incite the irrational and volatile in our community (sometimes using psychosocial tactics) for one reason: to make a lot of noise and drown out opposition."

How To Spot An Astroturfer

---

@curmu-curmu wrote:

"So not only a nutter - a conspiracy theorist to boot!" and "retards"

@siggie-reported-by-alarmists wrote:

The Dr quoted in the OP is a nutter.

@am*3 wrote:

"Not surprising these 'quacks' always have their own products to sell to prevent/cure what ever they are going on about.

They aren't informing people for the good of  the people, just to make money for themselves.

---

---

Icy...not having a shot at you, but please...google Blaylock. So many unsubstantiated claims, unsupported by medical evidence, unsupported by research - even unsupported by his peers!

Here's just one...

http://vaccineconspiracytheorist.blogspot.com.au/2011/06/quack-of-day-dr-russell-blaylock.html

---

   From this link....

---

Ok thank you. Exactly as I thought.

I found that site earlier today following your "Quack of the day" trail.

Youv'e quoted from a blog by an unnamed author from 2011. 

Against a published a Professor of Neurosurgery and Biology.

Very disappointed in you, Siggie. 😞

---

 Indeed..... yet you cannot come up with any evidence that supports your Dr Blaylock.

 You have proven the quote by the nameless author to be correct!......lol.

 If he had produced a study/research, you would have posted it.

I'm used to you supporting these nutters...... so no surprise there!

---

nice try.

[icyfroth]

---

@the_great_she_elephant wrote:

If we can't trust the peer reviewed studies that tell us asparteme is harmless and vaccines and fluoride added to drinking water are actually beneficial, does it follow that the reverse is also true - that when Government funded researchers produce studies to show smoking causes cancer, excessive drinking causes liver damage or  doing drugs will fry your brain, they are all lying to us because they have a hidden agenda?

---

What you seem to be overlooking, She-el, is that despite all the peer reviewed studies showing that smoking, drinking alcohol and doing drugs is harmful, even deadly, it is still being marketed and increasingly accessible to the public. With government approval.

Smoking was also declared harmless by medical bodies before they were discedited.

There's BIG BUCKS to be made out of public addiction, and government are pocketing their slice, even if indirectly.

Theres! BIG BUCKS to be made out of pharmaceuticals, too.

With plenty left over to silence and discredit those who raise concerns about them.

[the_great_she_elephant]

What you seem to be overlooking, She-el, is that despite all the peer reviewed studies showing that smoking, drinking alcohol and doing drugs is harmful, even deadly, it is still being marketed and increasingly accessible to the public. With government approval.

1) They tried prohibition in America - it was an absolute disaster and caused way more problems than it cured.  

2) Statistics show that smoking has decreased significently following Government intitiatives such as palin packaging and graphic health warnings (therebye decreasing significently Government revenue from tobacco, but saving it millions in health care)

3) I'd be very interested to know what harmful drugs you believe are marketed "with government approval"  - unless of course you are referring to morphine and prescribed painkillers.

[siggie-reported-by-alarmists]

---

@icyfroth wrote:

---

@siggie-reported-by-alarmists wrote:

---

@icyfroth wrote:

---

@siggie-reported-by-alarmists wrote:

---

@curmu-curmu wrote:

---

@icyfroth wrote:

I think I've spotted a few astroturfers:

"Does it scare off genuine community members who have an opposing point of view through violent and aggressive behaviour? Astroturfers incite the irrational and volatile in our community (sometimes using psychosocial tactics) for one reason: to make a lot of noise and drown out opposition."

How To Spot An Astroturfer

---

@curmu-curmu wrote:

"So not only a nutter - a conspiracy theorist to boot!" and "retards"

@siggie-reported-by-alarmists wrote:

The Dr quoted in the OP is a nutter.

@am*3 wrote:

"Not surprising these 'quacks' always have their own products to sell to prevent/cure what ever they are going on about.

They aren't informing people for the good of  the people, just to make money for themselves.

---

---

Icy...not having a shot at you, but please...google Blaylock. So many unsubstantiated claims, unsupported by medical evidence, unsupported by research - even unsupported by his peers!

Here's just one...

http://vaccineconspiracytheorist.blogspot.com.au/2011/06/quack-of-day-dr-russell-blaylock.html

---

   From this link....

---

Ok thank you. Exactly as I thought.

I found that site earlier today following your "Quack of the day" trail.

Youv'e quoted from a blog by an unnamed author from 2011. 

Against a published a Professor of Neurosurgery and Biology.

Very disappointed in you, Siggie. 😞

---

 Indeed..... yet you cannot come up with any evidence that supports your Dr Blaylock.

 You have proven the quote by the nameless author to be correct!......lol.

 If he had produced a study/research, you would have posted it.

I'm used to you supporting these nutters...... so no surprise there!

---

nice try.

---

    What do you disagree with?........"Nice try" is a strange response. 

[siggie-reported-by-alarmists]

Aspartame is a highly studied food additive with decades of research showing that it is safe for human consumption.

Some just like to be hysterical.......and create new conspiracy theories....lol.

[icyfroth]

---

@the_great_she_elephant wrote:

What you seem to be overlooking, She-el, is that despite all the peer reviewed studies showing that smoking, drinking alcohol and doing drugs is harmful, even deadly, it is still being marketed and increasingly accessible to the public. With government approval.

1) They tried prohibition in America - it was an absolute disaster and caused way more problems than it cured.  

That was a long time ago. For many years the licensing of liqour sales in Australia was restricted. Pubs were closed at 6 pm, then 10 pm, now they can remain open until 3am.

The amount of liquor now causing the inundation of emergency wards in hospitals, brawling in the streets on Friday and Saturday nights,  and domestic violence is probably now back around the levels which prompted prohibition in the first place.

2) Statistics show that smoking has decreased significently following Government intitiatives such as palin packaging and graphic health warnings (therebye decreasing significently Government revenue from tobacco, but saving it millions in health care)

That's a good start, but it's still legally available despite the known adverse affects smoking has on health. And that's not just the nicotine but the other additives as well. 

At an ever increasing price. So what the companies and the governments are losing through the shortfall they're making up on the increase.

3) I'd be very interested to know what harmful drugs you believe are marketed "with government approval"  - unless of course you are referring to morphine and prescribed painkillers.

I didn't actually specifically say "harmful drugs are marketed with government approval".

What I actually said was: smoking, drinking alcohol and doing drugs is harmful, even deadly, it is still being marketed and increasingly accessible to the public. With government approval.

Indulging in a bit of cherry-picking there, She-el?

Although I have heard there are calls to legalise ICE as a response to the ice epidemic the country is in. Sheesh.

---

[the_great_she_elephant]

You specifically said: despite all the peer reviewed studies showing that smoking, drinking alcohol and doing drugs is harmful, even deadly, it is still being marketed and increasingly accessible to the public. With government approval.

which part of that did you not mean?