- Liittynyt
- 27.4.2003
- Viestejä
- 417
Joo, kuten Critter tuossa totesi, ADI-arvo on turvallisuusraja, jonka verran kyseistä lisäainetta voidaan nauttia päivittäin, läpi koko elämän, kehon painoa kohti. 
Lähteeseen kannattaa suhtautua varauksella, mutta ihan mielenkiintoista spekulaatiota kyseisestä italialaistutkimuksesta ao. osoitteessa:
Overwhelming Scientific Evidence Confirms Aspartame Safety
FDA, Others Affirm Safety of Aspartame
http://www.aspartametruth.net/ramazzini/news_001.html
“The design and execution of the study did not follow guidelines set up by the National Toxicology Program (NTP), the U.S. government toxicology initiative administered by the National Institute of Environmental and Health Sciences (NIEHS).
…
Ramazzini researchers did not follow internationally established protocols for evaluation of animal carcinogenicity study findings. Further, the NTP and other organizations have established guidelines for pathology peer review in order to provide scientific consensus that study conclusions are valid. Such an independent review of the pathology slides from this study has not been conducted.
…
NTP has recently completed three animal studies designed to evaluate whether aspartame is capable of causing cancer. These U.S. government-funded and managed studies were conducted using Good Laboratory Practices (GLP) and individuals considered experts in their profession reviewed the results. The results of these cancer studies, in which aspartame was fed at levels similar to those reportedly fed in the Ramazzini study, unequivocally indicated that “there was no evidence of carcinogenic activity [cancer] of aspartame.”
…
Previous findings by the Ramazzini researchers at the same institution using a similar protocol have been reviewed by the FDA’s Cancer Assessment Committee, which noted that those reported data were “unreliable” due to a “lack of critical details … and … questionable histopathological conclusions… .” The aspartame findings from the Ramazzini researchers recently were reviewed by the expert United Kingdom Committee on Carcinogenicity of Chemicals in Food, Consumer Products and the Environment. Members of that Committee characterized aspects of the study findings as “implausible,” with other aspects “cast(ing) doubt” on the entire study. Members of the committee were “critical” of the study design and the statistical approach used.
…
:U.S. government-funded: :evil: :kippis1:
Lähteeseen kannattaa suhtautua varauksella, mutta ihan mielenkiintoista spekulaatiota kyseisestä italialaistutkimuksesta ao. osoitteessa:
Overwhelming Scientific Evidence Confirms Aspartame Safety
FDA, Others Affirm Safety of Aspartame
http://www.aspartametruth.net/ramazzini/news_001.html
“The design and execution of the study did not follow guidelines set up by the National Toxicology Program (NTP), the U.S. government toxicology initiative administered by the National Institute of Environmental and Health Sciences (NIEHS).
…
Ramazzini researchers did not follow internationally established protocols for evaluation of animal carcinogenicity study findings. Further, the NTP and other organizations have established guidelines for pathology peer review in order to provide scientific consensus that study conclusions are valid. Such an independent review of the pathology slides from this study has not been conducted.
…
NTP has recently completed three animal studies designed to evaluate whether aspartame is capable of causing cancer. These U.S. government-funded and managed studies were conducted using Good Laboratory Practices (GLP) and individuals considered experts in their profession reviewed the results. The results of these cancer studies, in which aspartame was fed at levels similar to those reportedly fed in the Ramazzini study, unequivocally indicated that “there was no evidence of carcinogenic activity [cancer] of aspartame.”
…
Previous findings by the Ramazzini researchers at the same institution using a similar protocol have been reviewed by the FDA’s Cancer Assessment Committee, which noted that those reported data were “unreliable” due to a “lack of critical details … and … questionable histopathological conclusions… .” The aspartame findings from the Ramazzini researchers recently were reviewed by the expert United Kingdom Committee on Carcinogenicity of Chemicals in Food, Consumer Products and the Environment. Members of that Committee characterized aspects of the study findings as “implausible,” with other aspects “cast(ing) doubt” on the entire study. Members of the committee were “critical” of the study design and the statistical approach used.
…
:U.S. government-funded: :evil: :kippis1:
