Ban aspartame (E951/Canderel/Equal/NutraSweet, etc)! Three decades of data have proven beyond any shadow of a doubt it's deadly. Regarding the study on additives and behavioral problems I ask some questions. Aspartame has been known to cause behavioral problems and damage the brains of our children since before it was approved. Here is Dr. John Olney's report to the Board of Inquiry of the FDA. Dr. Olney founded the field of neuroscience called excitotoxicity. http://www.wnho.net/dr_olney1.doc Russell Blaylock, M.D., wrote the book on it, "Excitotoxins: The Taste That Kills, http://www.russellblaylockmd.com
Dr. Blaylock, neurosurgeon, wrote: "Many recent studies have illustrated that food additives (such as red and yellow dyes, MSG, aspartame, gluten and gliadin) can adversely affect human behavior - especially in small children.
"But when Dr. Ben Feingold first made these assertions back in 1975, as you might expect, the medical community balked. Now powerfully convincing evidence indicates that when MSG and aspartame are combined with certain food dyes, the effects can have profound implications on learning, memory and behavior.
"In one study, researchers combined Brilliant Blue dyes, Quinoline Yellow, L-aspartyl-L-phenylalanine methyl ester (aspartame) and MSG. They discovered that when these substances were added together and given to a child, they inhibited brain cell development.
"For instance, compared to when the additives were used alone, the rate of inhibition on cell development was four times higher when MSG was combined with Brilliant Blue - and seven times higher when Quinoline Yellow was mixed with aspartame.
"In case you are wondering why children would be fed such harmful additives, these are the dyes used to make children's cereals and snacks look so colorful and attractive.
"It is important to appreciate that the child's brain is still undergoing major development for up to two years after birth - while the frontal lobes (essential to behavioral control and learning) continue to develop until age 20. It is crucial to realize that the food dye combinations, coupled with the presence of aspartame and MSG, can result in serious brain malfunction." http://www.blaylockreport.com
In a 2001 Norway study to see if aspartame is harmful to brain cells (cerebellar granule cells), they checked to see if the damage to the neurons were connected to the N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptors on these cells. Results showed damage/cell death from an added quantity of 0.06 mg/ml of aspartame each day for four days. As a comparison there is 0,24 mg/l aspartame in Cola light MTT. MTT - and LDH tests showed damage to the neurons at an added quantity of 1.5 and 3.00 mg/ml aspartame after 22 hours of incubation. The results also showed aspartame is in part acting through the NMDA-receptor because AP5 reduced or blocked the damage to the granule cells. NMDA receptors and the synapses involved also are connected to learning.
Even in the Liverpool study http://www.organicconsumers.org/toxic/msg010306.cfm when mouse nerve cells were exposed to MSG and brilliant blue or aspartame and quinoline yellow in laboratory conditions, combined in concentrations that theoretically reflect the compound that enters the bloodstream after a typical children's snack and drink, the additives stopped the nerve cells growing and interfered with proper signaling systems.
So aspartame triggering behavioral problems is a given. How many times does a study have to be done? In the Dominican Republic, Dr. Miguel Baret, changed the diet of 360 children from milk to aspartame juice. Most of them developed abnormal restlessness, lack of concentration, irritability and depression. He called me at the time and when he had aspartame removed from their diet he said the results were astonishing. Their symptoms disappeared in 4-6 days in ALL of them. This is in Dr. H. J. Roberts medical text, Aspartame Disease: An Ignored Epidemic, http://www.sunsentpress.com
My question to you since Food Standards sponsored the study why was aspartame not added to the study? Was it because you already knew since it's an established fact after a quarter of a century aspartame triggers birth defects, mental retardation, behavioral and psychiatric problems and much more? Furthermore, aspartame is in so many pediatric products in the UK the question of use should be part of any dietary history. My next question is why is the law not enforced in the UK since your own regulations stipulate that artificial sweeteners cannot be given to children up to age 3. When I was lecturing in the UK I used as a prop a product being consumed by young children called Bubbleee. It contains Brilliant Blue dye, aspartame, acesulfame potassium, saccharin, carbon dioxide, sodium benzoate, flavoring and citric acid. If they were trying to avoid sugar, it was added as well. Here's a product sold for little children that is just chemicals. Why is this allowed against your own regulation? If you want to destroy the brains of children you have the product.
When the study was announced Sainsbury, Tesco, Marks & Spencer, etc. sent out releases they were removing aspartame from their own products so they all knew. They had gotten complaints for years about it anyway. But to my horror they are replacing aspartame with Splenda/sucralose which is a chlorocarbon poison. Here is the article, "The Lethal Science of Splenda" http://www.wnho.net/splenda_chlorocarbon.htm Dr. Bowen said if you go from aspartame to Splenda because of the chemical hypersensitization they can maintain the reactions from aspartame and pick up those from Splenda. Because Sainsburys was removing aspartame by the end of June I wanted to make sure they didn't add Splenda and sent them all the data, including information about the last lawsuits. I told them surely with this all this data, and full knowledge they wouldn't use a product that liberates free chlorine. They have not answered me as to whether they actually added this poison. They could use a product like Just Like Sugar which has been approved there and is chicory and orange peel. There are no excuses acceptable for this continued poisoning of the population.
Here is the Report For Schools from many experts: http://www.mpwhi.com/report_on_aspartame_and_children.htm They need to get all these soda machines removed. Consider the case of Matthew Hobson in Yorkshire. The school started only providing Diet Coke. The police thought he was on crystal meth. What would you expect since aspartame is a psycho drug - an addictive excitoneurotoxic carcinogenic drug that interacts with all drugs and vaccines. The methanol causes victims to slur their words. Coke paid off. Just Like Sugar already has Fiber 1 water and it's in a pouch so children won't be drinking from plastic. I've already sent you a copy of the letter that went to Prince Charles about Matthew Hobson's case.
UK Parliamentarian Roger Williams asked that this toxin be banned:
TOXIC PROPERTIES OF ASPARTAME 30.01.2006 January 30, 2006
"That this House expresses deep concern over the numerous independent toxicological studies and thousands of subjective reports attesting to the toxic effects of the artificial sweetener aspartame on human health; notes that aspartame, once patented as a biochemical warfare agent, is the synthetically produced methyl ester of a dipeptide which is readily broken down in the gut to release methanol; further notes that in naturally occurring foodstuff methanol is either not released into the body or present together with natural defence mechanisms that mitigate its toxic effects; recognises that methanol is a well known poison and is further converted into formaldehyde, a class A carcinogen according to the World Health Organisation's International Agency for Research on Cancer; accepts that severe health concerns occur from the gradual accumulation of formaldehyde in the body which cannot be excreted and that further research has shown that long term low level exposure to formaldehyde induces leukaemia and nasopharyngeal cancer in humans; acknowledges that of the 166 studies conducted on aspartame's safety deemed relevant to humans, 92 per cent. of independently sponsored studies identified one or more problems with aspartame's safety whereas industry-sponsored studies found unanimously in favour of aspartame's safety; and urges the Government to abide by the precautionary principle and make use of Statutes 13 and 16 of the 1990 Food Safety Act to remove aspartame from the permitted list of additives on the UK market."
This was signed by 47 members of Parliament.
As to aspartame and cancer, this is a no brainer. Even the FDA admitted originally aspartame violated the Delaney Amendment because it can trigger cancer. This amendment makes it a crime to add a substance you know is a carcinogen. So when they try to protect the manufacturers today they forget they left a paper trail and their own FDA toxicologist, Dr. Adrian Gross exposed them to Congress: http://www.mpwhi.com/the_fda_fable.htm
Likewise the EFSA has lost all credibility. Dr. Koeter has already admitted they were pressured by industry to hijack science. http://www.mpwhi.com/letter_to_efsa.htm How could anyone take them serious anyway when they come up with an excuse on the Ramazzini Study that the rats had respiratory disease? They know that's the dying process?
Can Food Standards not hear the shouts around the world to ban aspartame? It should never have been approved? If Don Rumsfeld hadn't gotten involved as CEO of Searle aspartame would not be on the market today. Here is the FDA Board of Inquiry revoking the petition for approval with a commentary and clip from Sweet Misery: A Poisoned World, explaining how Rumsfeld accomplished this evil deed. http://www.wnho.net/fda_petition1.doc,p> The shrieks and cries of the victims on this planet are now a thunderous roar that cannot be quieted. Read about the death knell of Ajinomoto as they fund junk science to declare aspartame to be safe. http://www.newstarget.com/022032.html
As Mike Adams so eloquently states:
An excellent review of the Ramazzini Study in a lecture by Dr. Russell Blaylock is "The Truth About Aspartame" http://www.adavistik.com His DVD on Nutrition and Behavior should be required reading for every school. Here is a new report on aspartame and psychiatric Disorders: by Dr. Ralph Walton: http://www.mpwhi.com/aspartame_and_psychiatric_disorders.htm
Dr. Betty Martini
Founder, Mission Possible World Health International
9270 River Club Parkway
Duluth, Georgia 30097
Aspartame Toxiocity Center: http://www.holisticmed.com/aspartame
Prenatal Aspartame Exposure May Be Greatest Concern
By M. Nathaniel Mead
Sep 15, 2007 - 4:08:07 PM
Aspartame Cancer Risks Revisited Prenatal Exposure May Be Greatest Concern
Aspartame is an artificial sweetener used in more than 6,000 diet products, beverages, and pharmaceuticals. In March 2006, EHP published the first compelling experimental evidence for the carcinogenic effects of aspartame at a dose level within range of human daily intake http://www.ehponline.org/docs/2005/8711/abstract.html [EHP 14:379385; Soffritti et al.]. A second animal study by the same research team now indicates that the carcinogenic effects of aspartame are magnified when exposure begins during fetal life http://www.ehponline.org/docs/2007/10271/abstract.html [EHP 115:12931297; Soffritti et al.].
The first study involved a much larger sample size than had been used in previous experiments. It showed a dose-related increase in the incidence of various malignant tumors in female rats fed aspartame from 8 weeks of age until natural death. The experiment was impressive for its long observation period and comprehensive assessment of aspartame's carcinogenic potential. Nevertheless, as the researchers acknowledged, the study did not take into account prenatal or perinatal exposures.
In the new study, the investigators added aspartame to the standard diets of male and female Sprague-Dawley rats from the twelfth day of fetal life until natural death. Rats were fed in groups of 70 to 95 each at aspartame concentrations of 2,000, 400, and 0 ppm approximately equivalent to a daily intake of 100, 20, or 0 mg/kg body weight. The current limits for acceptable daily intake are set at 50 mg/kg body weight in the United States and 40 mg/kg body weight in Europe.
The researchers report that rats fed at the 400 ppm level showed nonsignificant increases in malignancies. For animals fed at the 2,000 ppm level, there was a significant increase in the incidence of lymphomas/leukemias and malignant mammary tumors. Furthermore, compared with the team's earlier study in which animals were dosed postnatally only, the incidence of animals bearing lymphomas/leukemias increased from 18.7% to 31.4%. The 2,000 ppm level corresponds to an assumed daily intake of 100 mg/kg body weight approximately the equivalent of a 45-pound child drinking 5 cans of diet soda or a 150-pound adult consuming 14 packets of sweetener per day.
Although recent epidemiologic studies have not found an association between aspartame and human cancers, those studies were not designed to measure cancer risks associated with fetal exposures. The public health implications of the new findings are considerable. Currently, more than 200 million people regularly consume aspartame, and children and women of childbearing age (which presumably includes many who are pregnant and breastfeeding) are among the major
consumers. If the U.S. FDA were to conclude that exposure to aspartame causes cancer in rodents, the agency would be required by law to revoke its approval for the popular sweetener.
M. Nathaniel Mead
Originally published on Environmental Health Perspectives Volume 115, Number 9, September 2007