What relevance does that have? I used to work for Pepsi and I only drink diet drinks.
I wouldn't either because it still tastes like **** due to being made from ****
simple really

What relevance does that have? I used to work for Pepsi and I only drink diet drinks.
A book people should read is Eyes wide open by Noreena Hertz. A fantastic book where she shows how these reports are compiled and how you should always look at the funding for them and the test group. Like the Yakult one and how it increases 'helpful bacteria' funded by the company and tested on sick newborns in Africa.
Its a great book for showing you just how balls most of these studies are!
I frequently see people throw links and articles, each from different body backing regarding Aspartame: Evil or Myth.
FSA have released a report today, done independently in a double blind study (i.e. both subjects and researcher have not a clue on sample they're testing) have essentially said
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0116212
http://www.food.gov.uk/news-updates/news/2015/13719/aspartame-study-findings-published
I hope this will help balance out some of the myth that aspartame is addictive, is evil, it causes health damage (some even blamed it for Michael J. Fox's Parkinson's!!).
Just remember to eat everything in moderation and you'll be fine.
Totally agree there will always be research backed by different companies with their motives. This was done as independently as possible with no direct pro/con companies.
Yes the pool is small, <100 people but it's a double blind, making it a lot more substantial than most pro/con backed research with narrow focus and conclusion, along with the countless number of non-peer reviewed, blogs about how bad Aspartame is with anecdotal facts.
And just to clarify, I do not work for or with Aspartame.
I am just interested in it due to my area of work and personal interest with myth and facts of raw materials.
Not having read it but surely the word to focus on here is "acute" meaning that the long term consumption of it may indeed be harmful
The Hull/York study was not designed to evaluate the overall safety of aspartame as it is already an approved additive
This does not address aspartame repeated consumption over longer periods of time.
I thought the issue was when tested on rats it caused an increased risk to various types of cancer. At varying dosages. Over the rats lifetimne.
This new study results (as posted) seem to sugest metabolic and psycho'cal test were done only.
I'm pretty sure these were not the issues that worried people.
So iis it true that arspratine causes an insulin spike or is that bunk?