This is in response to the article entitled, “European Food Regulator Strikes Down Splenda Cancer Study,” which may be found at: https://www.bna.com/european-food-regulator-n73014450756
EFSA is industry friendly and always uses excuses. When the first Ramazzini Study was done on aspartame the head of EFSA resigned saying they were pressured by industry to high jack science. He resigned rather than give in to industry looking for excuses. They said the rats had respiratory disease. Dr. Morando Soffritti told them, "of course the rats had respiratory disease. It was a lifetime study and respiratory disease is the dying process and the rats were dying." When Dr. Soffritti responded with explanations they had no more to say because they appeared to be out of excuses.
Dr. Soffritti's first study on aspartame was so prestigious he received an award that had only been given twice in history. I was there in New York when he received the award.
Of course, Splenda is carcinogenic. It's chlorinated sugar and consumers have terrible reactions from it. Sometimes consumers get so much of the chlorine their face turns red. Here is a good article: The Lethal Science of Splenda http://www.wnho.net/splenda_chlorocarbon.htm
ILSI mentioned in your article is the aspartame industry's research front group. If you're not willing to say aspartame is safe you don't get any research funds. Reminds me that Dr. Richard Wurtman said in the UPI Investigation that the vice president G. D. Searle (original manufacturer) that if he did a study on aspartame and seizures his research funds would be rejected. They were. http://www.mpwhi.com/upi_nutrasweet_questions_swirl.pdf He has now changed sides.
A Review on aspartame by the European Commission on Food Safety was found to be the result of only one person and not a committee. OLAF investigated. So they became inactive and EFSA was set up. They are no better as has been shown with half of them with conflicts of interest. Check out www.holisticmed.com/aspartame for particulars of the review and also how EFSA's review was plagiarized from an industry review. Discussed in this article: "Eat, Drink and Be Buried". https://www.thenhf.com/pdf/HFN_Fall2016_Introspective-Carla-Sanchez-Anderson.pdf
Splenda was discovered by insecticide researchers: http://www.rense.com/general96/splendainsect.htm I once found sucralose being sold as an insecticide on web but when I pointed it out they changed it to sweetener.
Industry seems to be running out of excuses even though they always deny. The Trocho Study is one of the most damning ever done on aspartame showing the formaldehyde converted from the methanol embalms living tissue and damages DNA. Industry tried to assassinate the character of Dr. M. Alemany who did the study. They are vicious in their defense but no way of getting around the fact that a poison is a poison that will never show safety,
EFSA has been exposed to such a degree as siding with industry you can't believe anything they say because its industry defending its product. Food Standards was set up in England to get away from industry and they too are influenced by industry. You can give them all the proof there is on a subject but they never change their propaganda. The lesson here is always use "Independent" scientific Peer Reviewed Research. Dr. Ralph Walton did research for 60 Minutes on scientific peer reviewed research and funding on aspartame. 92% showed the problems and he said if you eliminate 6 studies the FDA had something to do with because of their influence from industry and 1 industry summary, 100% of independent studies show the problems aspartame triggers or precipitates.
Dr. Betty Martini, D.Hum.
Founder, Mission Possible World Health International
9270 River Club Parkway
Duluth, Georgia 30097
Aspartame Toxicity Center: http://www.holisticmed.com/aspartame