Can you answer?
I gave parallel examples to better explain what “clearance” means. On was in regards uric acid, a perfectly natural compound produced by the body which when not “cleared” at an adequate rate results in gout, as well as other problems. You knew that, right?
Well, are the phenylalanine, aspartic acid and methanol produced as products of the metabolism of aspartame cleared from those places they are produced at in the body a rate that is sufficient to prevent build-up, and toxic side effects, as can happen with uric acid in a gout situation?
Simple question for someone versed in food and food product metabolism, right?
I also mentioned mercury. I’ve studied survey papers and papers on mercury metabolism. While that was years ago, I still recollect enough to know when I’m getting a snow job from an “expert”. What do I recollect about the mercury studies that applies here?
That HOW the mercury gets into the body is significant, that how the particular body handles the chemistry of of ingesting swallowed mercury depends on the acidity of the stomach and gut, as well as the blood, that the chemical form of the ingested mercury is significant. In the survey of mercury toxicity I recollect tables showing accumulation rates by organ and by mercury chemical type, and toxicity effect levels. I recollect attention to the factors that can change a person’s internal metabolism and gut chemistry.
All these impact clearance. We haven’t you mentioned such factors? You do not know them? You’re too lazy to know them?
You can bluster as being an expert, but there’s no sign of knowledge or wisdom to use that knowledge in your responses.
Thanks, but your parallel examples have no relationship, at least that I can see, to the issue at hand. The issue here is your inability to explain why "clearance" is a problem when the three ingredients in aspartame are consumed as aspartame but not individually from the food we eat every day. If you're going to take issue with Snopes you will, eventually, have to deal with the large amount of information they referenced. My support of the findings by Snopes is what you initially took issue with. Since then you've labored to change the discussion to me rather than the facts surrounding aspartame. Why? If you're unable to take issue with the Snopes literature then just say so and we can both move on. I'm sure this isn't the first time you've run out of bullets early in a discussion.
. On was in regards uric acid, a perfectly natural compound produced by the body which when not “cleared” at an adequate rate results in gout, as well as other problems
Yeah, having a faulty nitrogen metabolism can be a bitch. What does that have to do with the body easily metabolizing amino acids and the minute amount of methanol found in aspartame?
Well, are the phenylalanine, aspartic acid and methanol produced as products of the metabolism of aspartame cleared from those places they are produced at in the body...
Your wording here is disjointed but it appears you think phenylalanine, aspartic acid and methanol are produced in the body. They are not produced in the body, they are metabolized in the body, mostly in the liver.
a rate that is sufficient to prevent build-up, and toxic side effects, as can happen with uric acid in a gout situation?
Your liver will have no problem metabolizing all the amino acids you want to send its way. Uric acid builds up because a faulty nitrogen metabolism doesn't allow the uric acid to go all the way to urea. What does that have to do with aspartame? If you consume too much methanol, you'll die. But that can't be an issue with aspartame because the small amount of methanol in aspartame is easily cleared by the liver. Apple juice contains many times more methanol than a soft drink sweetened with aspartame. I don't think you want to argue that apple juice is a killer. I guess it could be if you're willing and able to drink 500 quarts of it at one sitting.
also mentioned mercury. I’ve studied survey papers and papers on mercury metabolism. While that was years ago, I still recollect enough to know when I’m getting a snow job from an “expert”.
What is it exactly that I'm snowing you on? All I've asked is for you to explain why the literature offered by Snopes is wrong. You've done everything but that. Now you're off on mercury which I've said absolutely nothing about.
That HOW the mercury gets into the body is significant, that how the particular body handles the chemistry of of ingesting swallowed mercury depends on the acidity of the stomach and gut, as well as the blood, that the chemical form of the ingested mercury is significant
Yeah, ok. The chemical form of the mercury ingested is important. Why would I argue with that? Metallic mercury can be brutal on the body. So what? What's your point? We're not discussing mercury consumption.
All these impact clearance. We haven’t you mentioned such factors? You do not know them? You’re too lazy to know them?
You're an odd person. Why should we discuss the clearance of uric acid and mercury when we're trying to discuss aspartame? I never spent that much time studying the metabolism of mercury. Mercury toxicity is pretty rare. Why even bring it up?
You can bluster as being an expert, but there’s no sign of knowledge or wisdom to use that knowledge in your responses.
Huh? All I see is you trying to avoid what got this started in the first place. You've offered nothing in the way of facts to dispute the references Snopes offered as proof that aspartame is safe. Thirty years of use and you've got nuthin' to offer as proof that aspartame is anything but safe. You have managed to offer a bunch of information about mercury and uric acid that has nothing to do with the topic though. And that is something I suppose.
Any person who believes aspartame isn't safe (disclaimer: at normal levels of consumption) has to be able to explain why the components are dangerous when consumed as aspartame but not when consumed individually from the foods we normally eat. If you can explain this then you might have a case. Otherwise, you're just another person who believes in things he can't prove.