Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Sucralose Inadequate Toxicity Tests

    Uploaded by

    homedica
    11 views1 page
    The document summarizes concerns about the toxicity testing of the food additive acesulfame potassium. It notes that acesulfame was approved by the FDA despite poor quality toxicity tests. It also discusses how acesulfame was nominated twice for testing by the National Toxicology Program but both nominations were rejected, and instead it underwent tests in genetically modified mice that provided no insight into its potential carcinogenicity. The author argues that acesulfame should undergo bioassay testing as soon as possible to properly assess its safety.

    Original Description:

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The document summarizes concerns about the toxicity testing of the food additive acesulfame potassium. It notes that acesulfame was approved by the FDA despite poor quality toxicity tests. It also discusses how acesulfame was nominated twice for testing by the National Toxicology Program but both nominations were rejected, and instead it underwent tests in genetically modified mice that provided no insight into its potential carcinogenicity. The author argues that acesulfame should undergo bioassay testing as soon as possible to properly assess its safety.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf or txt
    11 views1 page

    Sucralose Inadequate Toxicity Tests

    Uploaded by

    homedica
    The document summarizes concerns about the toxicity testing of the food additive acesulfame potassium. It notes that acesulfame was approved by the FDA despite poor quality toxicity tests. It also discusses how acesulfame was nominated twice for testing by the National Toxicology Program but both nominations were rejected, and instead it underwent tests in genetically modified mice that provided no insight into its potential carcinogenicity. The author argues that acesulfame should undergo bioassay testing as soon as possible to properly assess its safety.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 1

    Inadequate toxicity tests of food additive acesulf... [Int J Occup Environ Health. 2010 ...

    Page 1 of 1

    PubMed
    U.S. National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health

    Display Settings:

    Abstract

    Int J Occup Environ Health. 2010 Jan-Mar;16(1):89-96.

    Inadequate toxicity tests of food additive acesulfame.


    Karstadt M.
    Drexel University, School of Public Health, Philadelphia, USA. myrakarstadt@verizon.net

    Erratum in Int J Occup Environ Health. 2010 Apr-Jun;16(2):112.

    Abstract
    Despite poor-quality toxicity tests, acesulfame potassium was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for use as an artificial sweetener. At present, acesulfame is very widely used, most frequently in blends with the most popular artificial sweetener in the US, sucralose (Splenda). Acesulfame was nominated twice (in 1996 and again in 2006) for testing in the National Toxicology Program (NTP) bioassay program. Both nominations were rejected by NTP. Rather than carry out bioassays, NTP subjected acesulfame to tests in genetically modified mice (GMM). Those GMM tests yielded results that provided no insight into potential carcinogenicity of acesulfame. It is possible that FDA discouraged NTP from conducting bioassays of acesulfame. Acesulfame should be tested in the bioassay program as soon as possible, and steps should be taken to ensure the objectivity of the bioassay nomination process. PMID: 20166324 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

    MeSH Terms, Substances LinkOut - more resources

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20166324

    08/07/2011

    You might also like