76-11-5
- Main Page \ Reagan Radio Commentaries \ 1977
| << Previous Broadcast | Next Broadcast >> |
Saccharin
TranscriptNearly 20 years ago, Congress enacted the Delaney Clause which required that foods which caused cancer in animals had to be banned from human consumption. That sounds sensible enough on the face of it, but the intent of Congress was to prevent people from taking as part of their daily diet foods that might involve pretty clear risks. Leave it to the bureaucrats to stretch that original intent to a far-fetched conclusion. Take the proposed ban on saccharin as a case in point. It all started in Canada where laboratory researchers were feeding 100 rats a diet of five percent pure saccharin for their entire lives. Some second-generation rats developed bladder tumors. In fact, 14 of them did, while only two rats not on the saccharin diet did. Viola, the scientists concluded, saccharin must cause cancer! The Canadian government immediately ordered a ban on the sugar substitute which has been in use worldwide with no known ill effects on humans for more than 80 years. Not to be outdone, the zealous bureaucrats at the Federal Drug Administration in Washington called for a similar ban in this country. Now, the earliest date the United States ban could go into effect is July. The FDA is in the middle of a 60-day period of soliciting comments from what it calls "interested parties" before it writes up its final ruling. Let's see what caused all the fuss. Saccharin, widely used by persons with diabetes as a needed sugar substitute, is also the only substitute sweetener currently allowed in this country. Americans use more than five million pounds of it a year, most of it in dietetic foods and soft drinks and in commercially sold sweeteners for use in coffee and tea. A little is used in mouthwashes and cosmetics. While it's estimated that users of these products consume only a very small amount of saccharin in a year, they would have to swallow more than 800 12-ounce diet sodas every day for life in order to equal the dosage those poor rats ingested. Remember cyclamates? The FDA banned them in 1969 with much fanfare and accusatory fingers pointed at those using them. That ban, it turned out, also rested on the theoretical 800-can-a-day soft drink diet. Having swallowed the FDA's line once and found it not quite all it was supposed to be, people reacted skeptically to the saccharin ban. And, the skepticism is bipartisan. Republican Congressman Jim Martin of North Carolina immediately introduced a bill to set aside the saccharin ban. Democrat Andrew Jacobs, Jr. of Indiana, with tongue-in-cheek, introduced a bill to allow continued use of saccharin but with this wording on the label. "Warning! The Canadians have determined that saccharin is dangerous to your rat's health." Congressman Andrews calls his bill the "Un-Crazying of Federal Regulations Act of 1977" . I'd say "amen" to that, but first, I remind you that there's still time to make your voice heard. If you think the government's gone too far this time, sit down and write your Representative and your Senator and the President. This is Ronald Reagan. Thanks for listening. |
Details
| |||||||||||
Added Notes
|
