Aspartame’s founder, GD Searle, didn’t expect aspartame to be approved when they first applied for FDA approval in the 1970s because of the cancer concerns and the holes that it ate inside the brains of the lab mice.
After two FDA denials and a ban placed on aspartame, Searle packed the FDA with their corporate goons and lobbyists, and they finally slipped aspartame’s approval through overnight in 1981.
FDA approvals don’t mean much for consumer safety anymore. They used to do their job (or at least they tried to) decades ago, but they have a history of shoddy safety approvals now.
After the FDA saw the original studies from the independent researchers in the 1970s showing cancerous tumors, fetal deformities, holes in the brains, and seizures in their research, FDA officials did what was right and rescinded GD Searle Pharmaceuticals’s first approval for aspartame, but they eventually gave in to the pressure from Big Pharma over the following 10 years.
It was an approval for a product that never should have been approved for public consumption.
Approval Denied
-
- In 1974, GD Searle Pharmaceuticals first applied for FDA approval for aspartame. Relying on nothing but corporate research, FDA Commissioner Alexander Schmidt, M.D. quickly approved aspartame as a food additive in dry foods only;
- In 1975, FDA Commissioner Schmidt’s aspartame approval was rescinded due to the cancer issues;
- In 1980, after six years of safety debates, Special Counsels, and Senate hearings, the FDA Public Board of Inquiry officially revoked aspartame’s second approval request pending further brain tumor testing and they banned aspartame for human consumption;
- In January 1981, G.D. Searle reapplied for aspartame approval;
- In April 1981, newly-elected President Ronald Reagan appointed Arthur Hull Hayes, Jr., M.D. as the new FDA Commissioner;
- In July 1981, Dr. Hayes solely overruled the Public Board of Inquiry’s 1980 recommendation that aspartame “not be approved until further animal testing be conducted to resolve the brain tumor issue.” Hayes then solely granted FDA approval for aspartame in dry foods (marketed as NutraSweet®), and as a tabletop, sugar substitute (marketed as Equal®);
- In 1982, NutraSweet’s patent was extended by the FDA until 1992;
- In 1983, NutraSweet was approved in carbonated beverages and carbonated beverage syrup bases;
- In 1984, aspartame was approved in children’s chewable multivitamins. The brain tumor issue had still not been resolved;
- In 1987, NutraSweet received FDA approval in baked goods and baking products;
- By 1988, researchers began tallying increases in headaches, seizures, tumors, depression, and brain lesions – all confirming the previous predictions of aspartame’s neurotoxicity from twenty years before;
- By 1992, 92 deaths from aspartame were submitted to the FDA, but this was the last year the FDA excepted death counts attributed to aspartame;
- In July 2023, the WHO finally declared that aspartame causes cancer;
- As of today, aspartame is still on the market.
Read my book Sweet Poison and check out my newsletter archives for the complete, detailed Aspartame FDA Approval timeline.
This Is A Pattern
Remember Vioxx? For those who don’t, 88,000 Americans had heart attacks from taking Vioxx – an FDA approved drug.
Five years after the FDA approved Vioxx, Merck withdrew the drug from the market after over 38,000 deaths were reported from this drug. By that time, Merck had sold billions of dollars of the drug worldwide.
- In November 1998, Merck applied for FDA approval of Vioxx;
- By May 1999, after only eight studies were performed, the FDA rushed the approval of Vioxx, making the drug available by prescription in the United States only;
- In 2004, research published in the medical journal Lancet estimated that 88,000 Americans had heart attacks from taking Vioxx, and 38,000 of them died;
- On September 30, 2004, Vioxx was pulled from the market, five years after FDA approval;
- In August 2005, the first Vioxx liability case went to trial in Texas. Some 13,000 lawsuits had been filed against the company on behalf of 23,000 plaintiffs who allege that the drug causes heart attacks and strokes;
- By November 2007, Merck paid $4.85 billion to end thousands of lawsuits over Vioxx.
Questioning COVID-19’s Vaccine Approval
COVID and the safety of the COVID jab will be debated for decades. It’s just another case history proving FDA approval is flawed.
- Mid-March 2020: Scientists began Phase 1 trials of experimental vaccines for COVID-19. Before a vaccine is available to the public, it must go through several stages of testing; but that didn’t happen.
- December 18, 2020: the FDA issued an emergency use authorization (EUA) for a second vaccine for the prevention of coronavirus;
- August 2021: the FDA-approved Pfizer-BioNTech product Comirnaty (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA) and authorized Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine under EUA, which means it’s still experimental.
Do you see a pattern here? Questionable FDA approval has been going on for decades.
As with aspartame, many medications like Vioxx and the COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine are examples of the FDA approving dangerous pharmaceuticals onto the public knowing they are not safe.
We are NOT performing good science anymore, and the FDA has proven itself untrustworthy, over and over again. Aspartame’s approval confirms this has been going on for a very long time.
_______________
If you want to learn more about healthy living and disease prevention, contact me at janethull.com. Remember that you are never alone when you are looking for good health!
Gain access to all of my online programs, ongoing support, monthly Q&A, and more by joining me on janethull.com. I look forward to supporting you on your journey to alternative health and wellness.
_____________
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only, and is educational in nature. The FDA may not have evaluated some of the statements. This article is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease. Please discuss with your own, qualified health care provider before adding supplements or making any changes to your dietary program.
Before taking vitamins, consult your doctor; pre-existing medical conditions or medications you are taking can affect how your body responds to multivitamins.
You have our permission to reprint this article if you attribute us with a live back-link to this article and the youtube links. http://www.janethull.com/
INFORMATION ON THIS WEB SITE IS PROVIDED FOR INFORMATIONAL AND EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. THE INFORMATION IS A RESULT OF YEARS OF PRACTICE EXPERIENCE BY THE AUTHOR. THIS INFORMATION IS NOT INTENDED AS A SUBSTITUTE FOR THE ADVICE PROVIDED BY YOUR PHYSICIAN OR OTHER HEALTHCARE PROFESSIONAL OR ANY INFORMATION CONTAINED ON OR IN ANY PRODUCT LABEL OR PACKAGING. DO NOT USE THE INFORMATION ON THIS WEB SITE FOR DIAGNOSING OR TREATING A HEALTH PROBLEM OR DISEASE, OR PRESCRIBING MEDICATION OR OTHER TREATMENT. ALWAYS SPEAK WITH YOUR PHYSICIAN OR OTHER HEALTHCARE PROFESSIONAL BEFORE TAKING ANY MEDICATION OR NUTRITIONAL, HERBAL OR HOMEOPATHIC SUPPLEMENT, OR USING ANY TREATMENT FOR A HEALTH PROBLEM. IF YOU HAVE OR SUSPECT THAT YOU HAVE A MEDICAL PROBLEM, CONTACT YOUR HEALTH CARE PROVIDER IMMEDIATELY. DO NOT DISREGARD PROFESSIONAL MEDICAL ADVICE OR DELAY IN SEEKING PROFESSIONAL ADVICE BECAUSE OF SOMETHING YOU HAVE READ ON THIS WEB SITE. INFORMATION PROVIDED ON THIS WEB SITE AND THE USE OF ANY PRODUCTS OR SERVICES PURCHASED FROM OUR WEB SITE BY YOU DOES NOT CREATE A DOCTOR-PATIENT RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN YOU AND ANY OF THE PHYSICIANS AFFILIATED WITH OUR WEB SITE. INFORMATION AND STATEMENTS REGARDING DIETARY SUPPLEMENTS HAVE NOT BEEN EVALUATED BY THE FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION AND ARE NOT INTENDED TO DIAGNOSE, TREAT, CURE, OR PREVENT ANY DISEASE AND SERVE ONLY AS EDUCATIONAL
_______________
