Bevboard


Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 1999
    Location
    Santa Fe, NM 87505, USA
    Posts
    63

    Post

    ************************************************** ***********

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1233
    Aspartame -- the shocking story, The Ecologist,
    p. 35-51, full text: Murray 2005.09.30:
    thanks to Betty Martini for giving the correct author, Pat Thomas,
    What Doctors Don't Tell You www.wddty.co.uk : 2005.10.11

    [ Comments by Rich Murray are in square brackets. ]

    From: "Dr. Betty Martini,D.Hum." <Bettym19@mindspring.com>
    To: "Rich Murray" <rmforall@comcast.net>
    Subject: Rich, you wrote about the wrong Pat Thomas
    Date: Monday, October 10, 2005 7:10 PM

    Rich, I do wish you would check things because you put it everywhere. Pat
    Thomas does have impeccable credentials, but the one you wrote about is not
    the one who wrote the article in the Ecologist. Pat has written around 25
    books. She came to the UK as a teenager. In fact, she even was associate
    editor at What Doctors Don't Tell You and editor of its sister publication
    Proof! And she has been writing about health for more than 10 years. Most
    of her books have been translated into multiple languages. She is an
    incredible writer.

    Betty


    http://www.wddty.co.uk/cms/content.asp?pageid=home

    What Doctors Don't Tell You is one of the few information services that can
    justifiably claim to solve people's health problems - and even save lives.We
    tell you in plain language what works, what doesn't and what may harm you in
    both orthodox and alternative medicine so that you can make informed
    choices.Our information is available as an in-depth monthly subscription
    health bulletin, as a series of books, manuals and CDs, and as a searchable
    information database. We also provide a free e-mail news service.

    WDDTY, Satellite House, 2 Salisbury Road, London SW19 4EZ
    Telephone: 0870 444 9886 (International +44 870 444 9886)
    Fax : 0870 444 9887 (International +44 870 444 9887)
    Call us Direct on 0800 146 054 (UK) cs@wddty.co.uk
    ************************************************** ***********

    [ Comments by Rich Murray are in square brackets. ]

    http://www.ecologist.cognita.info/ar...content_id=451

    http://www.theecologist.org/current.asp [ photo of cover, re aspartame ]

    In this month's issue

    September 2005. On sale tomorrow - August 19, 2005

    Aspartame - COVER STORY
    Once on the list of potential Pentagon bioweapons... associated with cancer
    and neurological disorders... banned for years until a firm run by Donald
    Rumsfeld lobbied his contacts in Washington to get it legalised... and
    probably consumed by you within the last 24 hours.

    Life after Aspartame - COVER STORY
    Like Aspartame, artificial sweetener Sucralose is apparently 'safe'. So why
    is Tate & Lyle so keen to suppress any criticism of it?

    http://www.wnho.net/the_ecologist_aspartame_report.htm

    Aspartame-- the shocking story of the world's bestselling sweetener
    The Ecologist by Pat Thomas pat@theecologist.org

    The Ecologist, September 2005
    Cover Story, pages 35-46 Date: 2005/08/19 Author: Pat Thomas

    ASPARTAME -- The Shocking Story of the World's Bestselling Sweetener

    Aspartame is the most controversial food additive in history.
    The most recent evidence, linking it to leukaemia and lymphoma,
    has added substantial fuel to the ongoing protests of doctors, scientists
    and consumer groups who allege that this artificial sweetener should never
    have been released onto the market
    and that allowing it to remain in the food chain is killing us by degrees.

    Pat Thomas reports:

    Once upon a time, aspartame was listed by the Pentagon as a biochemical
    warfare agent.
    Today it's an integral part of the modern diet.
    Sold commercially under names like NutraSweet and Canderel,
    aspartame can be found in more than 5,000 foods,
    including fizzy drinks, chewing gum, table-top sweeteners, diet and diabetic
    foods, breakfast cereals, jams, sweets, vitamins, prescription and
    over-the-counter drugs. This means that there is a good chance that you and
    your family are among the two thirds of the adult population and 40 per cent
    of children who regularly ingest this artificial sweetener.

    Because it contains no calories,
    aspartame is considered a boon to health-conscious individuals everywhere;
    and most of us, if we think about it at all, think it is safe.

    But independent scientists say aspartame can produce a range of disturbing
    adverse effects in humans,
    including headaches, memory loss, mood swings, seizures, multiple sclerosis
    and Parkinson's-like symptoms, tumours and even death.

    Concerns over aspartame's toxicity meant that for eight years,
    the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) denied it approval,
    effectively keeping it off the world market.
    This caution was based on compelling evidence,
    brought to light by numerous eminent scientists, litigators and consumer
    groups, that aspartame contributed to serious central nervous system damage
    and had been shown to cause cancer in animals.
    Eventually, however, political muscle, won out over scientific rigour, and
    aspartame was approved for use in 1981 (see timeline for details).
    The FDA's about-turn opened the floodgates for aspartame's swift approval by
    more than 70 regulatory authorities around the world.
    But, as the remarkable history of the sweetener shows,
    the clean bill of health given to it by government regulators --
    whose raison d'être should be to protect the public from harm --
    is simply not worth the paper it is printed on.

    DECEMBER 1965

    While working on an ulcer drug, a chemist at pharmaceutical manufacturer GD
    Searle accidentally discovers aspartame, a substance that is 180 times
    sweeter than sugar, yet has no calories.

    SPRING 1967

    Searle begins safety tests, necessary for FDA approval.

    AUTUMN 1967

    GD Searle approaches eminent biochemist Dr Harry Waisman,
    director of the University of Wisconsin's Joseph P Kennedy Jr Memorial
    Laboratory of Mental Retardation Research and a respected expert in the
    toxicity of phenylalanine (which comprises 50 per cent of the aspartame
    formula), to conduct a study of the effects of aspartame on primates.
    Of seven monkeys fed aspartame mixed with milk,
    one dies and five others have grand mal epileptic seizures.

    SPRING 1971

    Dr John Olney, professor of neuropathology and psychiatry at Washington
    University in St Louis School of Medicine,
    whose research into the neurotoxic food additive monosodium glutamate
    (MSG, a chemical cousin of aspartame)
    was responsible for having it removed from baby foods,
    informs Searle that his studies show that aspartic acid,
    one of the main constituents of aspartame,
    causes holes in the brains of infant mice.
    One of Searle's researchers, Ann Reynolds,
    confirms Olney's findings in a similar study.

    FEBRUARY 1973

    Searle applies for FDA approval and submits over 100 studies it claims
    support aspartame's safety.
    Neither the dead monkeys nor the mice with holes in their brains are
    included in the submission.

    12 SEPTEMBER 1973

    In a memorandum, Dr Martha M Freeman of the FDA Division of Metabolic
    and Endocrine Drug Products criticises the inadequacy of the information
    submitted by Searle with particular regard to one of the compound's toxic
    breakdown products, diketopiperazine (DKP).
    She recommends that marketing of aspartame be contingent upon the
    sweetener's proven clinical safety.

    26 JULY 1974

    FDA commissioner Dr Alexander Schmidt grants aspartame its first approval as
    a 'food additive' for restricted use in dry foods.
    This approval comes despite the fact that his own scientists found serious
    deficiencies in the data submitted by Searle.

    AUGUST 1974

    Before aspartame can reach the marketplace,
    Dr John Olney, James Turner
    (attorney, consumer advocate and former 'Nader's Raider'
    who was instrumental in removing the artificial sweetener cyclamate from the
    US market),
    and the group Label Inc (Legal Action for Buyers' Education and Labeling)
    file a formal objection to aspartame's approval with the FDA,
    citing evidence that it could cause brain damage, particularly in children.

    JULY 1975

    Concerns about the accuracy of test data submitted to the FDA by Searle for
    a wide range of products prompt Schmidt to appoint a special task force to
    examine irregularities in 25 key studies for aspartame and Searle drugs
    Flagyl, Aldactone and Norpace.

    5 DECEMBER 1975

    Searle agrees to an inquiry into aspartame safety concerns.
    Searle withdraws aspartame from the market pending its results.
    The sweetener remains off the market for nearly 10 years while
    investigations into its safety and into Searle's alleged fraudulent testing
    procedures are ongoing.

    However, the inquiry board does not convene for another four years.

    24 MARCH 1976

    The FDA task force completes its 500 page report on Searle's testing
    procedures.

    The final report notes faulty and fraudulent product testing,
    knowingly misrepresented product testing,
    knowingly misrepresented and 'manipulated' test data,
    and instances of irrelevant animal research in all the products reviewed.

    Schmidt says: '[Searle's studies were] incredibly sloppy science. What we
    discovered was reprehensible.'

    JULY 1976

    The FDA forms a new task force,
    headed by veteran inspector Jerome Bressler,
    to further investigate irregularities in Searle's aspartame studies
    uncovered by the original task force.
    The findings of the new body will eventually be incorporated into a document
    known as the Bressler Report.

    10 JANUARY 1977

    FDA chief counsel Richard Merrill formally requests the US Attorney's office
    to begin grand jury proceedings to investigate whether indictments should be
    filed against Searle for knowingly misrepresenting findings and 'concealing
    material facts and making false statements' in aspartame safety tests.

    This is the first time in the FDA's history that it requests a criminal
    investigation of a manufacturer.

    26 JANUARY 1977

    While the grand jury investigation is underway,
    Sidley & Austin, the law firm representing Searle,
    begins recruitment negotiations with Samuel Skinner,
    the US attorney in charge of the investigation.
    Skinner removes himself form the investigation
    and the case is passed to William Conlon.

    8 MARCH 1977

    Searle hires prominent Washington insider Donald Rumsfeld as its new CEO
    to try to turn the beleaguered company around.
    A former member of Congress and defence secretary in the Ford
    administration, Rumsfeld brings several of his Washington colleagues in as
    top management.

    1 JULY 1977

    Samuel Skinner leaves the US Attorney's office
    and takes a job with Searle's law firm. Conlon takes over Skinner's old job.

    1 AUGUST 1977

    The Bressler Report is released.
    It focuses on three key aspartame studies conducted by Searle.

    The report finds that in one study 98 of the 196 animals died but weren't
    autopsied until later dates, making it impossible to ascertain the actual
    cause of death.

    Tumours were removed from live animals
    and the animals placed back in the study.

    Many other errors and inconsistencies are noted.
    For example, a rat was reported alive, then dead, then alive, then dead
    again.

    Bressler comments:
    'The question you have got to ask yourself is:
    why wasn't greater care taken?
    Why didn't Searle, with their scientists, closely evaluate this,
    knowing full well that the whole society, from the youngest to the elderly,
    from the sick to the unsick, will have access to this product.'

    The FDA creates yet another task force to review the Bressler Report.
    The review is carried out by a team at the FDA's Center for Food Safety and
    Applied Nutrition and headed by senior scientist Jacqueline Verrett.

    28 SEPTEMBER 1977

    The FDA publishes a report exonerating Searle of any wrongdoing in its
    testing procedures.
    Jacqueline Verrett will later testify to the US Senate that her team was
    pressured into validating data from experiments that were clearly a
    'disaster'.

    8 DECEMBER 1977

    Despite complaints from the Justice Department,
    Conlon stalls the grand jury prosecution for so long that the statute of
    limitations on the aspartame charges runs out
    and the investigation is dropped.

    Just over a year later Conlon joins Searle's law firm, Sidley & Austin.

    1978

    The journal Medical World News reports that the methanol content of
    aspartame is 1,000 times greater than most foods under FDA control.
    In high concentrations methanol, or wood alcohol, is a lethal poison.

    1 JUNE 1979

    The FDA finally establishes a public board of inquiry (PBOI),
    comprising three scientists whose job it is to review the objections of
    Olney and Turner to the approval of aspartame and rule on safety issues
    surrounding the sweetener.

    1979

    In spite of the uncertainties over aspartame's safety in the US,
    aspartame becomes available, primarily in pharmaceutical products, in
    France.
    It is sold under the brand name Canderel and manufactured by the food
    corporation Merisant.

    30 SEPTEMBER 1980

    The FDA's PBOI votes unanimously against aspartame's approval, pending
    further investigations of brain tumours in animals.
    The board says it 'has not been presented with proof of reasonable certainty
    that aspartame is safe for use as a food additive'.

    1980

    Canderel is now marketed throughout much of Europe (but not in the UK) as a
    low-calorie sweetener.

    JANUARY 1981

    Rumsfeld states in a Searle sales meeting that he is going to make a big
    push to get aspartame approved within the year.
    Rumsfeld vows to 'call in his markers' and use political rather than
    scientific means to get the FDA on side.

    20 JANUARY 1981

    Ronald Reagan is sworn in as president of the US.
    Reagan's transition team, which includes Rumsfeld,
    nominates Dr Arthur Hull Hayes Jr to be the new FDA commissioner.

    21 JANUARY 1981

    One day after Reagan's inauguration, Searle re-applies to the FDA for
    approval to use aspartame as a food sweetener.

    MARCH 1981

    An FDA commissioner's panel is established to review issues
    raised by the PBOI.

    19 MAY 1981

    Arthur Hull Hayes Jr, appoints a five-person commission to review the PBOI's
    decision.
    Three of the five FDA scientists on it advise against approval of aspartame,
    stating on the record that Searle's tests are unreliable and not adequate to
    determine the safety of aspartame.
    Hayes installs a sixth member on the commission,
    and the vote becomes deadlocked.

    15 JULY 1981

    Hayes ignores the recommendations of his own internal FDA team,
    overrules the PBOI findings and gives initial approval for aspartame to be
    used in dry products on the basis that it has been shown to be safe for its
    proposed uses.

    22 OCTOBER 1981

    The FDA approves aspartame as a tabletop sweetener and for use in tablets,
    breakfast cereals, chewing gum, dry bases for beverages, instant coffee and
    tea, gelatines, puddings, fillings, dairy-product toppings and as a flavour
    enhancer for chewing gum.

    1982

    The aspartame-based sweetener Equal, manufactured by Merisant, is launched
    in the US.

    15 OCTOBER 1982

    The FDA announces that Searle has filed a petition for aspartame to be
    approved as a sweetener in carbonated beverages, children's vitamins and
    other liquids.

    1983

    Searle attorney Robert Shapiro gives aspartame its commercial name,
    NutraSweet.
    The name is trademarked the following year.
    Shapiro later becomes president of Searle.
    He eventually becomes president and then chairman and CEO of Monsanto,
    which will buy Searle in 1985.

    8 JULY 1983

    Aspartame is approved for use in carbonated beverages and syrup bases in the
    US and, three months later, Britain.
    Before the end of the year Canderel tablets are launched in the UK.
    Granular Canderel follows in 1985.

    8 AUGUST 1983

    James Turner, on behalf of himself and the Community Nutrition Institute,
    and Dr Woodrow Monte, Arizona State University's director of food science
    and nutritional laboratories,
    file petitions with the FDA objecting to aspartame approval based on
    possible serious adverse effects from the chronic intake of the sweetener.
    Monet also cites concern about the chronic intake of methanol associated
    with aspartame ingestion.

    SEPTEMBER 1983

    Hayes resigns as FDA commissioner under a cloud of controversy about his
    taking unauthorised rides aboard a General Foods jet (General Foods was and
    is a major purchaser of aspartame).
    He serves briefly as provost at New York Medical College,
    and then takes a position as senior scientific consultant with
    Burston-Marsteller, the chief public relations firm for both Searle and
    Monsanto.

    AUTUMN 1983

    The first carbonated beverages containing aspartame go on sale in the US.

    17 FEBRUARY 1984

    The FDA denies Turner and Monte's requests for a hearing,
    noting that aspartame's critics had not presented any unresolved safety
    questions. Regarding aspartame's breakdown components,
    the FDA says that it has reviewed animal, clinical and consumption studies
    submitted by the sweetener's manufacturer,
    as well as the existing body of scientific data,
    and concludes that 'the studies demonstrated the safety of these
    components'.

    MARCH 1984

    Public complaints about the adverse effects of aspartame begin to come in.
    The FDA requests that the US agency the Centers for Disease Control and
    Prevention (CDC) begins investigations of a select number of cases of
    adverse reactions to aspartame.

    30 MAY 1984

    The FDA approves aspartame for use in multivitamins.

    JULY 1984

    A study by the state of Arizona Department of Health into aspartame is
    published in the Journal of Applied Nutrition.
    It determines that soft drinks stored at elevated temperatures promote more
    rapid deterioration of aspartame into poisonous methanol.

    2 NOVEMBER 1984

    The CDC review of public complaints relating to aspartame culminates in a
    report, Evaluation of Consumer Complaints Related to Aspartame Use,
    which reviews 213 of 592 cases and notes that re-challenge tests show that
    sensitive individuals consistently produce the same adverse symptoms each
    time they ingested aspartame.
    The reported symptoms include:
    aggressive behaviour, disorientation, hyperactivity, extreme numbness,
    excitability, memory loss, loss of depth perception, liver impairment,
    cardiac arrest, seizures, suicidal tendencies and severe mood swings.

    The CDC nevertheless concludes that aspartame is safe to ingest.

    On the same day that the CDC exonerates aspartame,
    Pepsi announces that it is dropping saccharin
    and adopting aspartame as the sweetener in all its diet drinks.
    Others quickly follow suit.

    1 OCTOBER 1985

    Monsanto, the producer of recombinant bovine growth hormone,
    genetically engineered soya beans, the pesticide Roundup and many other
    industrial and agricultural chemicals, purchases Searle for $2.7 billion.

    21 APRIL 1986

    The US Supreme Court,
    headed by Justice Clarence Thomas,
    a former Monsanto attorney,
    refuses to consider arguments
    from the Community Nutrition Institute and other consumer groups that the
    FDA has not followed proper procedures in approving aspartame, and that the
    liquid form of the artificial sweetener may cause brain damage in heavy
    users of low-calorie soft drinks.

    16 OCTOBER 1986

    Turner files another citizen's petition,
    this time concerning the risk of seizures and eye damage from aspartame.
    The petition argues that medical records of 140 aspartame users show them to
    have suffered from epileptic seizures and eye damage after consuming
    products containing the sweetener and that the FDA should ban aspartame as
    an 'imminent hazard to the public health'.

    21 NOVEMBER 1986

    The FDA denies Turner's new petition, saying:

    'The data and information supporting the safety of aspartame are extensive.
    It is likely that no food product has ever been so closely examined for
    safety. Moreover, the decisions of the agency to approve aspartame for its
    uses have been given the fullest airing that the legal process requires.'

    28 NOVEMBER 1986

    The FDA approves aspartame for non-carbonated frozen or refrigerated
    concentrates and single-strength fruit juice, fruit drinks, fruit-flavoured
    drinks, imitation fruit-flavoured drinks, frozen stock-type confections and
    novelties, breath mints and tea beverages.

    DECEMBER 1986

    The FDA declares aspartame safe for use as an inactive ingredient,
    provided labelling meets certain specifications.

    1987

    An FDA report on adverse reactions associated with aspartame states the
    majority of the complaints about aspartame -- now numbering 3,133 -- refer
    to neurological effects.

    2 JANUARY 1987

    NutraSweet's aspartame patent runs out in Europe, Canada and Japan.
    More companies are now free to produce aspartame sweeteners in these
    countries.

    12 OCTOBER 1987

    United Press International, a leading global news-syndication organisation,
    reports that more than 10 federal officials involved in the decision to
    approve aspartame have now taken jobs in the private sector that are linked
    to the aspartame industry.

    3 NOVEMBER 1987

    A US Senate hearing is held to address the issue of aspartame safety and
    labelling. The hearing reviews the faulty testing procedures and the
    'psychological strategy' used by Searle to help ensure aspartame's approval.
    Other information that comes to light includes the fact that aspartame was
    once on a Pentagon list of prospective biochemical-warfare weapons.

    Numerous medical and scientific experts testify as to the toxicity of
    aspartame.

    Among them is Dr Verrett, who reveals that, while compiling its 1977 report,
    her team was instructed not to comment on or be concerned with the overall
    validity of the studies.
    She states that questions about birth defects have not been answered.
    She also states that increasing the temperature of the product leads to an
    increase in production of DKP,
    a substance shown to increase uterine polyps and change blood cholesterol
    levels.

    Verrett comments: 'It was pretty obvious that somewhere along the line, the
    bureau officials were working up to a whitewash.'

    1989

    The FDA has received more than 4,000 complaints from consumers about
    adverse reactions to the sweetener.

    14 OCTOBER 1989

    Dr HJ Roberts, director of the Palm Beach Institute for Medical Research,
    claims that several recent aircraft accidents involving confusion and
    aberrant pilot behaviour were caused
    by ingestion of products containing aspartame.

    20 JULY 1990

    The Guardian publishes a major investigation of aspartame and delivers to
    government officials 'a dossier of evidence' that draws heavily on the
    transcripts of the Bressler Report and demands that the government review
    the safety of aspartame. No review is undertaken. The Guardian is taken to
    court by Monsanto and forced to apologise for printing its story.

    1991

    The US National Institutes of Health publishes Adverse Effects of Aspartame:
    January '86 through December '90, a bibliography of 167 studies documenting
    adverse effects associated with aspartame.

    1992

    NutraSweet signs agreements with Coca-Cola and Pepsi stipulating that it is
    their preferred supplier of aspartame.

    30 JANUARY 1992

    The FDA approves aspartame for use in malt beverages, breakfast cereals, and
    refrigerated puddings and fillings and in bulk form (in large packages like
    sugar) for tabletop use. NutraSweet markets these bulk products under the
    name 'NutraSweet Spoonful'.

    14 DECEMBER 1992

    NutraSweet's US patent for aspartame expires, opening up the market for
    other companies to produce the substance.

    19 APRIL 1993

    The FDA approves aspartame for use in hard and soft candies, non-alcoholic
    flavoured beverages, tea beverages, fruit juices and concentrates, baked
    goods and baking mixes, and frostings, toppings and fillings for baked
    goods.

    28 FEBRUARY 1994

    Aspartame now accounts for the majority (75 per cent) of all the complaints
    in the US adverse-reaction monitoring system.
    The US Department of Health and Human Services compiles a report that
    brings together all current information on adverse reactions attributed
    to aspartame.
    It lists 6,888 complaints, including 649 reported by the CDC
    and 1,305 reported by the FDA.

    APRIL 1995

    Consumer activist, and founder of anti-aspartame group Mission Possible,
    Betty Martini uses the US's Freedom of Information Act
    to force the FDA to release an official list of adverse effects
    associated with aspartame ingestion.

    Culled from 10,000 consumer complaints, the list includes four
    deaths and more than 90 unique symptoms, a majority of which are connected
    to impaired neurological function.
    They include: headache; dizziness or problems with balance;
    mood change; vomiting and nausea; seizures and convulsions;
    memory loss; tremors; muscle weakness; abdominal pains and
    cramps; change in vision; diarrhoea; fatigue and weakness; skin rashes;
    deteriorating vision; joint and musculoskeletal pain.

    By the FDA's own admission, fewer then 1 per cent of those
    who have problems with something they consume ever report it to the FDA.
    This means that around 1 million people could have been experiencing adverse
    effects from ingesting aspartame.

    12 JUNE 1995

    The FDA announces it has no further plans to continue to collect adverse
    reaction reports or monitor research on aspartame.

    27 JUNE 1996

    The FDA removes all restrictions from aspartame use, and approves it as a
    general-purpose sweetener', meaning that aspartame can now be used in any
    food or beverage.

    NOVEMBER 1996

    Drawing on data compiled by the US National Cancer Institute's Surveillance,
    Epidemiology and End Results programme, which collects and distributes data
    on all types of cancer, Olney publishes peer-reviewed research in the
    Journal of Neuropathology and Experimental Neurology.

    It shows that brain-tumour rates have risen in line with
    aspartame consumption
    and that there has been a significant increase
    in the conversion of less deadly tumours into much more deadly ones.

    DECEMBER 1996

    The results of a remarkable study conducted by Dr Ralph G Walton, professor
    of clinical psychology at Northeastern Ohio Universities, are revealed.

    Commissioned by the hard-hitting US national news programme 60 Minutes, it
    sheds some light on the absurdity of aspartame-safety studies.

    Walton reviewed 165 separate studies published in the preceding 20 years in
    peer-reviewed medical journals.

    Seventy-four of the studies were industry-funded, all of which attested to
    aspartame's safety.

    Of the other 91 non-industry funded studies, 84 identified adverse health
    effects.

    Six of the seven non-industry funded studies that were favourable to
    aspartame were from the FDA, which has a public record of strong
    pro-industry bias.

    To this day, the industry-funded studies are the ones that are always quoted
    to the press and in official rebuttals to aspartame critics.

    They are also the studies given the greatest weight
    during the approval process and in official safety reviews.

    10 FEBRUARY 1998

    Monsanto petitions the FDA for approval of a new tabletop sweetener called
    Neotame. It is around 60 times sweeter than aspartame and up to 13,000
    times sweeter than sugar.
    Neotame is less prone to breaking down in heat and in liquids than aspartame
    because of the addition of 3,3-dimethylbutyl, a poorly studied chemical with
    suspected neurotoxic effects.
    Strengthening the bond between aspartame's main constituents eliminates the
    need for a health warning directed at people suffering from PKU.

    13 MAY 1998

    Independent scientists from the University of Barcelona publish a landmark
    study clearly showing that aspartame is transformed into formaldehyde in the
    bodies of living specimens (in this case rats),
    and that this formaldehyde spreads throughout the specimens' vital organs,
    including the liver, kidneys, eyes and brain.

    The results fly in the face of manufacturers' claims that aspartame does not
    break down into formaldehyde in the body, and bolster the claims of
    aspartame critics that many of the symptoms associated with aspartame
    toxicity are caused by the poisonous and cumulative effects of formaldehyde.

    OCTOBER 1998

    The UK's Food Commission publishes two surveys on sweeteners.

    The first shows that several leading companies,
    including St Ivel, Müller and Sainsbury's,
    have ignored the legal requirement to state 'with sweeteners'
    next to the name of the product.

    The second reveals that aspartame not only appears in 'no-sugar added'
    and 'light' beverages but also in ordinary non-dietetic drinks because it's
    three times cheaper than ordinary sugar.

    8 FEBRUARY 1999

    Monsanto files a petition with the FDA for approval of the general use of
    Neotame.

    20 JUNE 1999

    An investigation by The Independent on Sunday reveals that aspartame is made
    using a genetic engineering process.
    Aspartame component phenylalanine is naturally produced by bacteria.
    The newspaper reveals that Monsanto has genetically engineered the bacteria
    to make them produce more phenylalanine.
    Monsanto claims that the process had not been revealed previously
    because no modified DNA remains in the finished product,
    and insists that the product is completely safe;
    though scientists counter that toxic effects
    cannot be ruled out in the absence of long-term studies.
    A Monsanto spokeswoman says that while aspartame for the US market
    is often made using genetic engineering,
    aspartame supplied to British food producers is not.
    The extent to which US brands of low-calorie products containing
    genetically engineered aspartame have been imported into Britain is unclear.

    MAY 2000

    Monsanto, under pressure -- not least from the worldwide resistance to
    genetically manipulated food and ongoing lawsuits --
    sells NutraSweet to JW Childs Associates, a private-equity firm comprised of
    several former Monsanto managers, for $440 m.
    Monsanto also sells its equity interest in two European sweetener joint
    ventures, NutraSweet AG and Euro-Aspartame SA.

    10 DECEMBER 2001

    The UK's Food Standards Agency requests that the European Commission
    Scientific Committee on Food conducts an updated review of aspartame.
    The committee is asked to look carefully at more than 500 scientific papers
    published between 1988 and 2000 and any other new scientific research not
    examined previously.

    9 JULY 2002

    The FDA approves the tabletop and general use of Neotame.
    The 'fast-track' approval raises eyebrows because, historically,
    the FDA takes at least 10 years to approve food additives.

    Neotame is also approved for use in Australia and New Zealand,
    but has yet to be approved in the UK.

    10 DECEMBER 2002

    The European Commission Scientific Committee on Food publishes its final
    report on aspartame.

    The 24-page report largely ignores independent research and consumer
    complaints, relying instead on frequently cited articles in books and reviews
    put together by employees or consultants of aspartame manufacturers.

    When independent research is cited,
    it is generally refuted with industry-sponsored data.

    An animal study showing aspartame's disruption of brain chemistry,
    a human study linking aspartame to neurophysiological changes that could
    increase seizure risk,
    another linking aspartame use with depression in individuals susceptible
    to mood disorder,
    and two others linking aspartame ingestion with headaches
    are all dismissed.

    The report's conclusion amounts to a single sentence:
    'The committee concluded that.there is no evidence to suggest that
    there is a need to revise the outcome
    of the earlier risk assessment or the [acceptance daily intake]
    previously established for aspartame.'

    As with the FDA, there are concerns about the neutrality of some of the
    committee's members and their links with the International Life Sciences
    Institute (ILSI), an industry group that funds,
    among other things, research into aspartame.
    ILSI members include Monsanto, Coca-Cola and Pepsi.

    19 FEBRUARY 2003

    Members of the European Parliament's
    Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy Committee
    approve the use of sucralose (see page 50) and an
    aspartame-acesulfame salt compound (manufactured in Europe by the
    aspartame-producing Holland Sweetener Company and sold under the name
    Twinsweet), agreeing to review of the use of both in three years' time.

    At the same time, a request by European greens
    that the committee re-evaluate the safety of aspartame
    and improve the labelling of aspartame-containing products is rejected.

    MAY 2004

    The feature-length documentary Sweet Misery is released on DVD (see
    http://www.soundandfuryproductions.com).
    Part-documentary, part-detective story, it includes interviews with people
    who have been harmed by aspartame, as well as credible testimony
    from advocates, doctors, lawyers and long-time campaigners,
    including James Turner, HJ Roberts and renowned neurosurgeon
    Dr Russell Blaylock. UK orders: Namaste Publishing,
    info@namastepublishing.co.uk

    SEPTEMBER 2004

    US consumer group the National Justice League files a $350 m class action
    lawsuit against the NutraSweet Corporation (the current owner of aspartame
    products), the American Diabetes Association and Monsanto. Some 50 other
    defendants have yet to be named, but mentioned throughout the lawsuit is the
    central role of Donald Rumsfeld in helping to get aspartame approved through
    the FDA. The plaintiffs maintain that this litigation will prove how deadly
    aspartame is when it is consumed by humans. Little progress has been made so
    far in bringing the action to court. [ The suits, claimed by conmen, were
    phoney. ]

    The NutraSweet Company reopens its plant in Atlanta, Georgia, (dormant since
    2003) in order to meet increased demand for its sweetener.
    Aspartame, sold commercially as
    NutraSweet, Equal, Equal-Measure, Spoonful, Canderel and Benevia,
    is currently available in more than 100 countries and
    used in more than 5,000 products by at least 250 million people every day.
    Worldwide, the aspartame industry's sales amount to more than $1 billion
    yearly.
    The US is the primary consumer.

    JULY 2005

    The Ramizzini Institute in Bologna, a non-profit, private institution set up
    to research the causes of cancer, releases the results of a very large,
    long-term animal study into aspartame ingestion.
    Its study shows that aspartame causes lymphomas and leukaemia in
    female animals fed aspartame
    at doses around 20 milligrams per kilogram of body weight,
    or around half the accepted daily intake for humans.
    [ Also, rats are as much as 20 times more resistant
    to methanol (formaldehyde) toxicity as humans. ]

    Page 47

    ASPARTAME REACTIONS: A HIDDEN EPIDEMIC
    Aspartame has been linked to a host of devastating central nervous system
    disorders

    When aspartame was approved for use, Dr HJ Roberts, director of the Palm
    Beach Institute for Medical Research, had no reason to doubt the FDA's
    decision. 'But my attitude changed,' he says, 'after repeatedly
    encountering serious reactions in my patients that seemed
    justifiably linked to aspartame.'
    Twenty years on, Roberts has coined the phrase 'aspartame
    disease' to describe the wide range of adverse effects he has seen among
    aspartame-guzzling patients.

    He estimates: 'Hundreds of thousands of consumers, more likely millions,
    currently suffer major reactions to products containing aspartame.
    Today, every physician probably encounters aspartame disease
    in everyday practice, especially among patients with illnesses
    that are undiagnosed or difficult to treat.'

    As a guide for other doctors, Roberts, a recognised expert in difficult
    diagnoses, has published a lengthy series of case studies, Aspartame
    Disease: an ignored epidemic (Sunshine Sentinel Press), in which he
    meticulously details his treatment of 1,200 aspartame-sensitive individuals,
    or 'reactors', encountered in his own practice. Following accepted medical
    procedure for detecting sensitivities to foods, Roberts had his patients
    remove aspartame from their diets.
    With nearly two thirds of reactors,
    symptoms began to improve within days of removing aspartame,
    and improvements were maintained
    as long as aspartame was kept out of their diet.

    [ Rich Murray: More accurately, page 66, "Aspartame Disease: An Ignored
    Epidemic:

    This book focuses on the first 1,200 aspartame reactors in the author's data
    base. These persons include the following:

    * 188 private patients and other individuals who were personally
    interviewed.
    * Complainants who described their aspartame-asssociated reactions to
    Aspartame Victims and Their Friends (295),
    The Community Nutrition Institute (68), and
    Dr. Woodrow Monte of Arizona State University (28)
    * The remainded supplied details of their reactions to the author or to
    Mission Possible, a volunteer consumer organization (Chapter I). Of this
    group, 697 (58%) completed the 9-page survey questionaire (Section 4).

    page 80: A chemist who developed migraine from certain foods and
    additives performed six double-blind studies on himself.
    He found that as little as 4.0 mg aspartame in a capsule
    predictably induced headache (Strong 2000)
    [ This dose is only 2% of a diet soda. ] ]

    Roberts' case studies parallel much of what was revealed in the FDA's report
    on adverse reactions to aspartame -- that toxicity often reveals itself
    through central nervous system disorders and compromised immunity.

    His casework shows that aspartame toxicity can mimic the symptoms of and/or
    worsen several diseases that fall into these broad categories (see the box
    above).

    Case studies, especially a large series like this, address some of the
    issues surrounding real-world use in a way that laboratory studies never
    can; and the conclusions that can be drawn from such observations aren't
    just startling, they are also potentially highly significant.

    In fact, Roberts believes that one of the major problems with
    aspartame research has been the continued over-emphasis
    on laboratory studies.
    This has meant that the input of concerned independent physicians
    and other interested persons, especially consumers,
    is 'reflexively discounted as "anecdotal"'.

    Many of the diseases listed by Roberts fall into the category of medicine's
    'mystery diseases' -- conditions with no clear aetiology and few effective
    cures. And while no one is suggesting that aspartame is the single cause of
    such diseases, Roberts' research suggests that some people diagnosed with,
    for example, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's or chronic fatigue syndrome may
    end up on a regimen of potentially harmful drugs that could have been
    avoided if they simply stopped ingesting aspartame-laced products.

    CONDITIONS MIMICKED BY ASPARTAME TOXICITY

    * multiple sclerosis
    * Parkinson's disease
    * Alzheimer's disease
    * fibromyalgia
    * arthritis
    * multiple chemical sensitivity
    * chronic fatigue syndrome
    * attention deficit disorder
    * panic disorder
    * depression and other psychological disorders
    * lupus
    * diabetes and diabetic complications
    * birth defects
    * lymphoma
    * Lyme disease
    * hypothyroidism

    Pages 48-49

    Roberts' research suggests that some people diagnosed with, for example,
    multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's or chronic-fatigue syndrome may end up on a
    regimen of potentially harmful drugs that could have been avoided if they
    simply stopped ingesting aspartame

    PHENYLALANINE

    The essential amino acid phenylalanine comprises 50 per cent of aspartame,
    In people with the genetic disorder, phenylketonuria (PKU), the liver cannot
    metabolise phenylalanine, causing it to build up in the blood and tissues.

    Chronically high levels of phenylalanine and some of its breakdown products
    can cause significant neurological problems, which is why foods and
    beverages containing aspartame must carry a warning for PKU sufferers.

    But according to Dr HJ Roberts, sensitivity to aspartame is not limited to
    PKU sufferers.
    PKU carriers -- people who inherited the gene for the disorder
    but do not themselves have the condition
    (around 2 per cent of the general population) --
    are also more prone to adverse effects.

    In Roberts' data there is also a high incidence of aspartame reactions
    among the close relatives of patients who cannot tolerate aspartame.

    Furthermore, there is evidence that ingesting aspartame,
    especially along with carbohydrates,
    can lead to excess levels of phenylalanine in the brain
    even among those not affected by PKU.

    Athough phenylalanine is sometimes used as a treatment for depression,
    excessive amounts in the brain can cause levels of the mood regulator
    serotonin to decrease,
    making depression more serious or likely.

    Build-up of phenylalanine in the brain can also worsen schizophrenia
    or make individuals more susceptible to seizures.

    Moreover, decrease in serotonin levels can result in carbohydrate craving.
    This could explain aspartame's lack of effectiveness as a diet aid.

    DKP

    DKP is a breakdown product of phenylalanine that forms when
    aspartame-containing liquids are stored for prolonged periods.

    In animal experiments it has produced
    brain tumours,
    uterine polyps and
    changes in blood cholesterol.

    Before the FDA approved aspartame, the amount of DKP
    in our diets was essentially zero.

    So no claim of DKP's safety can be accepted as genuine
    until good-quality long- term studies have been performed.

    No such studies have been done.

    ASPARTIC ACID

    Aspartic acid (also known as aspartate) is a non-essential amino acid that
    comprises 40 per cent of aspartame.

    In the brain, it functions as a neurotransmitter -- facilitating the
    transfer of information from one nerve cell (neuron) to another.

    Both human and animal experiments have demonstrated
    a significant spike in blood-plasma levels of aspartate
    after the administration of aspartame in liquids.

    Too much aspartate in the brain produces free radicals,
    unstable molecules that damage and kill brain cells.

    Humans are five times more sensitive to the effects of aspartic acid
    (as well as glutamic acid, found in MSG) than rodents,
    and 20 times more sensitive than monkeys,
    because we concentrate these excitatory amino acids
    in our blood at much higher levels and for a longer period of time.

    Aspartic acid has a cumulative harmful effect on the endocrine and
    reproductive systems.

    Several animal experiments have shown that excitotoxins
    can penetrate the placental barrier and reach the foetus.

    In addition, as levels of aspartic acid rise in the body so do levels of the
    key neurotransmitter norepinephrine (also known as noradrenaline),
    a 'stress hormone' that affects parts of the human brain where attention and
    impulsivity are controlled.
    Excessive norepinephrine is associated with symptoms
    such as anxiety, agitation and mania.

    METHANOL

    Methanol (wood alcohol) comprises 10 per cent of aspartame.
    [ Exactly, 11 % by weight ]
    It is a deadly poison that is liberated from aspartame
    at temperatures in excess of 86 Fahrenheit (30 centigrade) --
    for instance, during storage or inside the human body.

    The US Environmental Protection Agency considers methanol a
    'cumulative poison due to the low rate of excretion once it is absorbed',
    meaning that even small amounts in aspartame-containing foods can build up
    over time in the body.

    The most well known problems from methanol poisoning are vision disorders,
    including misty or blurry vision, retinal damage and blindness.

    Other symptoms include
    headaches, tinnitus, dizziness, nausea, gastrointestinal disturbances,
    weakness, vertigo, chills, memory lapses,
    numbness and shooting pains in the extremities,
    behavioural disturbances, and neuritis.

    The EPA tightly controls methanol exposure, allowing only very minute levels
    to be present in foods or in environmental exposures.

    But Blaylock says:
    'The level allowed in NutraSweet is seven times the amount that the EPA will
    allow anyone else to use.'

    FORMALDEHYDE

    The methanol absorbed from aspartame is converted to formaldehyde in the
    liver. Formaldehyde is a neurotoxin and known carcinogen.

    It causes retinal damage and birth defects,
    interferes with DNA replication,
    and has been shown to cause squamous-cell carcinoma,
    a form of skin cancer, in animals.

    Several human studies have found that chronic, low-level formaldehyde
    exposure has been linked with a variety of symptoms,
    including headaches, fatigue, chest tightness, dizziness,
    nausea, poor concentration and seizures.

    [ Fully 11% of aspartame is methanol --
    1,120 mg aspartame in 2 L diet soda, almost six 12-oz cans,
    gives 123 mg methanol (wood alcohol).
    If 30% of the methanol is turned into formaldehyde,
    the amount of formaldehyde is 18 times the USA EPA limit
    for daily formaldehyde in drinking water, 2 mg in 2 L water.

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/835
    ATSDR: EPA limit 1 ppm formaldehyde in drinking water July 1999:
    Murray 2002.05.30 rmforall ]


    FORMIC ACID

    Formic acid is a cumulative poison produced by the breakdown of
    formaldehyde. It concentrates in the brain, kidneys, spinal fluid and other
    organs, and is highly toxic to cells.

    Formic acid can lead to accumulation of excessive acid
    in the body fluids -- a condition known as acidosis.

    The small amounts of formic acid derived from the methanol absorbed from
    aspartame may or may not be dangerous;
    there are no human or mammalian studies to enlighten us.

    [ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1067
    eyelid contact dermatitis by formaldehyde from aspartame, AM Hill & DV
    Belsito, Nov 2003: Murray 2004.03.30 rmforall

    Biochemical Pharmcacology 1979: 28; 645-649.
    Lack of a role for formaldehyde in methanol poisoning in the monkey.
    Kenneth E. McMartin, Gladys Martin-Amat, Patricia E. Noker
    and Thomas R. Tephly
    The Toxicology Center, Dept. of Pharmacology,
    University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa 52242

    K.E. McMartin and T.R. Tephly, authors of many pro-aspartame studies, in
    Biochemical Pharmacology (1979) remarked, "It is now generally accepted
    that the toxicity of methanol is due to the formation of toxic metabolites,
    either formaldehyde or formic acid." They put damage doses of methanol
    into the stomachs of three monkeys, and, using insensitive tests, found no
    formaldehyde in many tissues-- except for a single datum in the midbrain,
    1.5 times the detection limit. They did report widespread accumulation of
    formic acid in five tissues. The use of inadequate tests is common in
    industry research that is funded to claim the safety of profitable toxins.
    Since then, industry scientists have been very wary of doing studies on
    primates, which all too easily show the dangers to humans.....

    Monkeys B and C were normal, not extra vulnerable to methanol, and were
    given 3,000 mg/kg methanol, and samples taken at 18 hr. Formaldehyde was
    detected only in the blood of Monkey B, while formate was found in 8 and 10,
    respectively, of the 10 fluid and tissue samples in Monkeys B and C. For
    instance, the lowest value of formate, except for zero-time blood, for each
    monkey was in the midbrain, 2.16 mmol/kg for Monkey B (24 times the
    detection limit for the chromatropic acid method) and 1.02 mmol/kg (1.3
    times the detection for the dimedon method) for Monkey C. This shows
    accumulation of formate in liver, kidney, optic nerve, cerebrum, and
    midbrain. ]

    Comment, page 49

    TIME FOR ACTION

    The story of aspartame is the story of the triumph of corporate might over
    scientific rigour.

    It shines a spotlight on the archaic and unbalanced procedure
    for approving food additives.

    We ingest food additives daily,
    yet their approval does not require the same scientific thoroughness
    as drug approval; and, unlike drugs,
    there is no requirement for surveillance of adverse effects that
    crop up once the additive is in use.

    Approval does not involve looking at what people are already eating and
    whether the proposed substance will interact with other additives.

    Nor does it take into account whether the additive exacerbates damage
    caused by other aspects of the modern lifestyle (for instance,
    the neurological damage caused by pesticide ingestion or exposure).

    Nor does it look for subtle chronic effects (for instance, the gradual
    build-up of methanol in the body with regular aspartame ingestion).

    There are other problems. Most studies into aspartame are animal studies,
    which are notoriously difficult to relate to humans.

    So why bother performing them in the first place?
    The answer is, manufacturers and regulators use animal research
    as a double-edged sword.
    If an animal study reveals no evidence of harm, the manufacturer
    can use it to support its case.

    If it reveals harm, however,
    the manufacturer is free to flip-flop into the argument
    that the results of animal studies are inconclusive in relation to humans.

    Faced with inconclusive evidence regulators will always
    erron the side of the manufacturer,
    who has after all demonstrated proper bureaucratic procedure
    by funding and submitting its animal tests for consideration.

    The approval process for any substance that humans put in their mouths on
    a daily basis should be based on solid human data and on the precautionary
    principle when such data is not available.

    But, as it stands, the regulation of food additives in the US, the UK
    and elsewhere leaves the burden of proof of harm on average people,
    despite the fact that most of us are either too detached or too timid to
    complain or simply don't have the energy to take on multinational
    corporations.

    The history of aspartame is all the more remarkable because of the number of
    motivated people who have refused to accept the mantra 'if it's approved by
    the government it must be safe'.

    Nearly every piece of independent research
    shows the outrage of these people,
    who have had to withstand threats of litigation
    and being vilified in the media as 'hysterics', is justified.

    After 30 years of aspartame's commercial success, it would be easy to
    conclude it is too late to act.

    And yet earlier this year hundreds of products were swept off
    supermarket shelves on the chance that they might have contained
    minuscule amounts of a potentially carcinogenic dye, Sudan 1.
    No studies existed to show that Sudan 1 could cause cancer in humans.
    The likelihood of any one person's exposure to Sudan 1 being high enough to
    produce a tumour was minute.
    Nevertheless, on the basis of the precautionary principle, action was taken.

    Aspartame is not a life-saving drug.

    It is not even a very effective diet aid, as shown by widespread obesity in
    the West.

    Until the many concerns about it have been examined in
    'corporate- neutral', large-scale, long-term, randomised,
    double-blind, placebo-controlled human trials
    (the gold standard of scientific proof)
    it should be taken out of our food.

    Pages 50-51

    SUCRALOSE: LIFE AFTER ASPARTAME:
    Aspartame should never have reached the marketplace. But even if the
    authorities were to remove it from sale tomorrow, how much faith should
    consumers place in the other artificial sweeteners on the market?
    PAT THOMAS REPORTS:

    There is not a single artificial sweetener on the market that can claim,
    beyond all reasonable doubt, to be safe for humans to consume.

    Saccharin, cyclamate and acesulfame-K have all been show to cause cancer in
    animals.

    Even the family of relatively benign sweeteners known as polyols, such as
    sorbitol and mannitol, can cause gastric upset if eaten in quantity.

    NutraSweet believes that its new aspartame-based sweetener, Neotame, is
    'revolutionary'; but, seemingly, it is only a more stable version of
    aspartame.

    This leaves the market wide open for sucralose.
    Sucralose, sold commercially as Splenda, was discovered in 1976 by
    researchers working for British sugar refiner Tate & Lyle.
    Four years later, Tate & Lyle joined forces with Johnson & Johnson
    to develop and commercialise sucralose under the auspices of a new company,
    McNeil Specialty Products (now called McNeil Nutritionals).
    Sucralose has been approved by more than 60 regulatory bodies
    throughout the world, and is now in more than 3,000 products worldwide.
    In the US, Coca-Cola has developed a new diet drink
    sweetened with Splenda,
    and other major soft drink manufacturers are expected to follow suit.

    Splenda has had to rethink its slogan
    "made from sugar, so it tastes like sugar"
    in the wake of a heated US legal challenge and a recent ruling by the
    New Zealand Advertising Standards Authority
    that said it confused and misled consumers.
    While it is true that sugar, or sucrose,
    is one of the starting materials for sucralose,
    its chemical structure is significantly different from that of sucrose.

    In a complex chemical process, the sucrose is processed with, among other
    things, phosgene (a chemical-warfare agent used during WWI,
    now a common intermediary in the production of plastics, pesticides and
    dyes),
    and three atoms of chlorine are selectively substituted for three hydroxyl
    (hydrogen and oxygen) groups naturally attached to the sugar molecule.

    This process produces
    1,6-dichloro-1,6-dideoxy-beta-D-fructofuranosyl-4-chloro4-deoxy-alpha-D-galactopyranoside
    (also known as trichlorogalactosucrose or sucralose),
    a new chemical substance which Tate & Lyle calls a
    'water-soluble chlorocarbohydrate'.
    Accepting Tate & Lyle's classification of sucralose as a chlorocarbohydrate
    at face value raises reasonable concerns about its suitability as a food
    additive. Chlorinated carbohydrates belong to a class of chemicals known as
    chlorocarbons.

    This class of chemicals includes
    a number of notorious human and environmental poisons,
    including polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs);
    aliphatic chlorinated carbohydrates;
    aromatic chlorinated carbohydrates such as DDT;
    organochlorine pesticides such as aldrin and dieldrin; and
    aromatic chlorinated ethers such as polychlorinated dioxins (PCDD) and
    polychlorinated dibenzofurans (PCDF).

    Most of the synthetic chlorinated compounds that we ingest, such as the
    pesticide residues in our food and water, bio-accumulate slowly in the body;
    and many cause developmental problems in the womb or are carcinogenic.
    How do we know that sucralose is any different?

    Tate & Lyle insists that sucralose passes through the body virtually intact,
    and that the tight molecular bond between the chlorine atoms and the sugar
    molecule results in a very stable and versatile product that is not
    metabolised in the body for calories.

    This doesn't mean, however,
    that sucralose is not metabolised in the body at all,
    and critics like HJ Roberts argue that, during storage and in the body,
    sucralose breaks down into among other things 1,6 dichlorofructose,
    a chlorinated compound that has not been adequately tested in humans.

    Tate & Lyle maintains that sucralose and its breakdown products have been
    extensively tested and proven safe for human consumption.
    The company notes that in seeking approval from the
    US Food and Drug Administration (FDA),
    McNeil Specialty Products submitted more than 110 studies
    that attested to the safety of sucralose.

    BUT CAN CONSUMERS TRUST THIS RESEARCH DATA?

    The vast majority of studies submitted to the FDA were unpublished
    animal and laboratory studies performed by Tate & Lyle itself,
    and therefore liable to charges of potentially unacceptable bias.

    Only five involved human subjects,
    and these were short-term, often single-dose, studies that
    clearly could not adequately reflect the expected real-world usage of
    sucralose.

    After questions were raised by the FDA about the safety of sucralose for
    diabetics, and prior to approval, a further five human studies were
    eventually submitted.

    On 1 April 1998 the FDA approved sucralose for limited uses;
    one year later it approved it as a general-purpose sweetener.

    Some questions about sucralose's safety, arising from the data submitted to
    the FDA, remain unanswered.
    These studies included unsettling findings about animals, which,
    when exposed to high doses of sucralose, experienced:

    § Shrunken thymus and spleen;

    § Enlarged liver and kidneys; and

    § Reduced growth rate in adults and newborns.

    In the FDA's 'final-rule' report, several of the studies submitted by McNeil
    were found to have 'inconclusive' results or were 'insufficient' to draw
    firm conclusions from them. These included:

    § A test that examined the clastogenic activity
    (ability to break chromosomes apart) of sucralose,
    and a test that looked for chromosomal aberrations
    in human lymphocytes exposed to sucralose';

    § A series of three animal genotoxicity studies; and

    § Laboratory studies using lymphoma tissue from mice which showed that
    sucralose was weakly mutagenic' (capable of causing cellular mutations).
    Clastogenic, genotoxic and mutagenic substances are all potential risk
    factors in the development of cancer.

    In addition to these, three studies that looked at very specific
    'anti-fertility' effects of sucralose and its breakdown products,
    especially with regard to sperm production were also deemed insufficient;
    this is particularly worrying, since other 'chlorosugars', such as
    6-chloroglucose,
    are currently being studied as anti-spermatogenic drugs.

    Furthermore, the administration observed that McNeil had failed to explain
    satisfactorily a reduction in body weight seen in animals fed sucralose and
    that 'additional study data were needed to resolve this issue'.

    Ironically for a product that 'tastes like sugar', McNeil argued that weight
    loss was due to the 'reduced palatability of sucralose-containing diets'.

    FDA reviewers also found that at mid to high doses there was a trend towards
    'decreasing white blood cell and lymphocyte counts with increasing dose
    levels of sucralose'.

    This was dismissed as having no 'statistical significance' by the FDA;
    in healthy animals and humans this may be so,
    but what happens when already immune-compromised individuals ingest
    sucralose?

    Tate & Lyle says that any lingering concerns about sucralose are unfounded
    and that only a small amount, 15-20 per cent, of sucralose is
    absorbed and broken down in the human gut.
    [ This is an alarming amount of absorption.
    Over the last three years, I have noticed about a dozen people who have
    joined the http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartame/ support group,
    now 931 members, who report reacting to both aspartame and to sucralose. ]

    The rest passes through the body unmetabolised
    and is excreted in urine and faeces.
    This in itself provokes important questions.

    § What happens to sucralose that is flushed down the toilet? Does it remain
    stable or react with other substances (for instance, the chlorine used in
    water-treatment plants, or microbial life) to form new compounds?

    § Is sucralose or any resulting chemical compound it may form safe for the
    environment? Is it harmful to aquatic life or wild animals?

    § Will sucralose begin to appear in our water supply, in the way that
    certain drugs have, silently increasing our exposure to it? And would that
    increased exposure be safe?

    PUBLISH AND BE SUED

    In the face of emerging public criticism, lawyers for Tate & Lyle are
    already gearing up for a battle.
    According to attorney James Turner, a key player in the aspartame drama,
    'There's going to be a huge fight about Splenda in the next few months.
    [Tate & Lyle's] lawyers are already on the case
    trying to shut everybody up'.

    It's a tactic that worked well for Monsanto, which certainly used legal
    pressure against anyone who criticised NutraSweet.

    Recently, the publisher of the local newspaper the Brighton Argus
    considered it prudent to publish an apology composed by Tate & Lyle
    (or their lawyers) or face a legal action for defamation and loss of sales
    after printing an article suggesting that sucralose was harmful to humans.

    Tate & Lyle's first high-profile victim, however,
    was www.mercola.com -- one of the world's
    most visited internet health sites.
    Run by Dr Joseph Mercola,
    the site has been a vocal critic of sucralose for years.
    Instead of carrying freely available information on sucralose
    that might stimulate spirited public debate,
    it now carries the following message:
    'Attorneys acting on behalf of the manufacturers of sucralose, Tate & Lyle
    Plc, based in London, England, have requested that the information contained
    on this page not be made available to internet users in England.'

    At this point, concerned consumers should be asking themselves several
    questions:

    Does the story of sucralose sound familiar?

    If sucralose is safe beyond any reasonable doubt, why is there
    such a fervent need to suppress any criticism of it?

    Finally, whom do such tactics really serve?

    Do they serve the consumer and the principles of choice, information, safety
    and redress?

    Or do they serve the corporate machine and its need to keep generating
    profits without taking responsibility for the human cost of doing so?
    ************************************************** ***********


    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1157
    Sales volume: saccharin > sucralose > aspartame, Harold Brubaker
    timesleader.com 2005.03.23: Murray rmforall

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1153
    Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Food on sucralose, European Union
    2000.09.07 25 pages plain text: Murray 2005.02.08 rmforall

    [ Comments by Rich Murray are in square bracketts. Only 4 of the 59
    citations were to studies published in open mainstream, peer-reviewed
    research journals.

    At the end of this post I provide reviews about flaws in research sponsored
    by vested interests. Surely, vested interests have much to gain by having
    their research qualify for mainstream research journals. ]

    http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/fs/sc/scf/out68_en.pdf

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1152
    reply to Ferne Hudson, Tate & Lyle PLC, re Splenda (sucralose) policy:
    Murray 2005.02.08 rmforall

    [ Selections ]

    I have been recommending sucralose for six years as a much safer alternative
    to aspartame. However, there are substantial deficiencies in the research
    for the safety of sucralose, including disturbing findings in animal
    studies, reviewed officially in 2000, as well as reasonable doubts about any
    research controlled by vested interests.

    This weekend I found a large, competent website by Mr. Mark J. Yannone, a
    programmer, who in email on 2001.01.22 reported that his seizures were cured
    by giving up aspartame. Aspartame and sucralose are only a small fraction
    of the issues listed on his voluminous site.

    http://www.foodanddiet.com/ foodanddiet@aol.com
    Mark J. & Cherie Yannone 1421 E Charleston Ave, Phoenix AZ 85022
    Phone 602-569-9632 Fax 602-569-9635

    http://www.foodanddiet.com/NewFiles/...tory-list.html lists an
    ever-growing archive, now 236 reports in a year, of posts about symptoms
    from sucralose -- about 10% of the posts said they had no problems.
    The sophistication, size, organization, and clarity of this site
    far exceeds what aspartame activists offered six years ago,
    as does the amount of user information.

    Here are the first titles:

    'I woke up with my very first migraine ever...
    There has never been any negative side effect...
    I have been headache free for two weeks now...
    Using Splenda for a year now with no problem...
    Uncontrollable bouts with gas...
    I'll continue with the Splenda...
    Hot and cold flashes, but also depressed for no reason...
    I plan to throw out the entire box...
    It IS the sucralose making me ill...
    At no point would I have ever put two-and-two together...
    We recently changed our way of eating...
    I can relate to the symptoms I have read...
    I know I feel better now, and I know how I was feeling then...
    Splenda was like a kick in the stomach...
    I felt so terrible I was not even able to go to work...
    My focus seems to be returning...
    I'm still in awe of my experience...
    I have had a whopping headache for hours now...
    I had one encounter with the use of Splenda...
    Splenda is not so splendid...
    I truly cannot attribute negative side effects to the sweetener...
    I can't believe that I have been poisoning myself ...
    I also stopped losing weight after adding sucralose...
    I found myself spinning into a dark depression...
    I started feeling "not myself"...
    I have only used Splenda a few times...
    I noticed incredible fatigue and sleepiness...
    I am not happy with the results...
    I didn't even realize it might be the Splenda ...
    I had the worst feeling...
    Two weeks ago, my wife decided to use Splenda ...
    What a terrible mistake!...
    I have had no side effects at all...
    I decided to try Splenda again...
    I wanted to pass along my story about sucralose...
    I started using Splenda in small doses..."

    "Based upon information supplied to us by our visitors, we note the
    following possible side effects from consumption of sucralose:

    bloating
    abdominal pain
    gas
    nausea
    diarrhea
    headaches
    migraines (severe headaches)
    heart palpitations (fluttering)
    shortness of breath
    depression or overwhelming anxiety
    spaced-out or drugged sensation
    joint pain
    dizziness"

    I notice that these are also common symptoms reported by aspartame reactors.

    He provides these links:

    http://www.holisticmed.com/splenda/

    http://proliberty.com/observer/20031112.htm

    http://www.laleva.cc/food/splenda.htm

    http://www.drmirkin.com/nutrition/N243.html

    http://www.vegsource.com/talk/sugarf...ges/56420.html

    "It should be noted that little positive information will be found on these
    websites. If you are interested in reviewing the benefits of Splenda, we
    recommend a visit to their website at http://www.splenda.com "


    Finally, an intripid and much published team in Japan has found DNA damage
    in 8 tissues from single non-lethal doses of aspartame (near-significant
    high levels of DNA damage in 5 tissues) and many other additives in groups
    of just 4 mice:

    '...Two antioxidants (butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA) and butylated
    hydroxytoluene (BHT)), three fungicides (biphenyl, sodium
    o-phenylphenol, and thiabendazole), and four sweeteners (sodium
    cyclamate, saccharin, sodium saccharin, and sucralose) also induced DNA
    damage in gastrointestinal organs." [ While aspartame had high levels,
    close to statistical significance -- testing more mice very likely
    would achieve the significant level of proof. ]

    Mutat Res 2002 Aug 26; 519(1-2): 103-19
    The comet assay with 8 mouse organs: results with 39 currently used food
    additives.
    Sasaki YF, Kawaguchi S, Kamaya A, Oh****a M, Kabasawa K, Iwama K,
    Taniguchi K, Tsuda S.
    Laboratory of Genotoxicity, Faculty of Chemical and Biological
    Engineering, Hachinohe National College of Technology,
    Tamonoki Uwanotai 16-1, Aomori 039-1192, Japan.
    yfsasaki-c@hachinohe-ct.ac.jp s.tsuda@iwate-u.ac.jp

    We determined the genotoxicity of 39 chemicals currently in use as food
    additives.
    They fell into six categories-dyes, color fixatives and
    preservatives, preservatives, antioxidants, fungicides, and sweeteners.

    We tested groups of four male ddY mice once orally with each additive at
    up to 0.5xLD(50) or the limit dose (2000mg/kg) and performed the comet
    assay on the glandular stomach, colon, liver, kidney, urinary bladder, lung,
    brain, and bone marrow 3 and 24 h after treatment.

    Of all the additives, dyes were the most genotoxic.
    Amaranth, Allura Red, New Coccine, Tartrazine, Erythrosine, Phloxine, and
    Rose Bengal induced dose-related DNA damage in the glandular stomach,
    colon,and/or urinary bladder.
    All seven dyes induced DNA damage in the gastrointestinal organs at a low
    dose (10 or 100mg/kg).

    Among them, Amaranth, Allura Red, New Coccine, and Tartrazine induced
    DNA damage in the colon at close to the acceptable daily intakes (ADIs).

    Two antioxidants (butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA) and butylated
    hydroxytoluene (BHT)), three fungicides (biphenyl, sodium
    o-phenylphenol, and thiabendazole), and four sweeteners (sodium
    cyclamate, saccharin, sodium saccharin, and sucralose) also induced DNA
    damage in gastrointestinal organs.

    Based on these results, we believe that more extensive assessment of
    food additives in current use is warranted. PMID: 12160896

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/934
    24 recent formaldehyde toxicity [Comet assay] reports:
    Murray 2002.12.31 rmforall

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/935
    Comet assay finds DNA damage from sucralose, cyclamate, saccharin in
    mice: Sasaki YF & Tsuda S Aug 2002: Murray 2003.01.01 rmforall
    [ Also borderline evidence, in this pilot study of 39 food additives,
    using test groups of 4 mice, for DNA damage from for stomach, colon,
    liver, bladder, and lung 3 hr after oral dose of 2000 mg/kg aspartame--
    a very high dose.]

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/961
    genotoxins, Comet assay in mice: Ace-K, stevia fine; aspartame poor;
    sucralose, cyclamate, saccharin bad: Y.F. Sasaki Aug 2002:
    Murray 2003.01.27 rmforall [A detailed look at the data] ]
    ************************************************** ***********


    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1208
    Life after aspartame, Pat Thomas, The Ecologist, UK 2005 Sept:
    three aspartame headache studies: HJ Roberts opus: Murray 2005.09.22

    http://www.theecologist.org theecologist@galleon.co.uk

    The Ecologist is the world's most respected environmental affairs magazine.
    Each month we examine the connection between a wide range of subjects.
    Whether it's food, war, politics, pharmaceuticals, farming, toxic chemicals,
    corporate fraud, mass media or supermarkets, the ecologist challenges
    conventional thinking and empowers readers to tackle global issues on a
    local scale.
    For 35 years The Ecologist has helped set environmental and political
    agendas around the world by focusing on the root causes, not just the
    after-effects, of current events.
    With thought-provoking, entertaining features by leading experts; topical
    debates and world-class photojournalism, The Ecologist is an indispensable
    guide for anyone re-thinking their basic assumptions
    about the world we live in.

    Each issue of The Ecologist includes:
    Compelling investigations from leading authors and experts
    Behind the label: Monthly examination of what's really in the name brand
    products we've come to rely on
    The latest news, findings and "greenwash" from countries around the world
    No-holds-barred comment and analyses of social and commercial trends
    Topical debates
    Notes on essential reading, surfing and listening
    Compelling stories the mainstream press won't print
    Free Green Pages in every issue: 32 pages of listings and solutions about
    how to make a difference in your daily life

    We're happy to receive feedback, ideas and your thoughts on all the issues
    we cover.

    editorial: editorial@theecologist.org ; press: press@theecologist.org

    The Ecologist Unit 18 Chelsea Wharf 15 Lots Road London SW10 0QJ
    Tel: +44 (0)20 7351 3578 Fax: +44 (0)20 7351 3617
    ************************************************** ***********


    www.aspartame.org

    The Calorie Control Council, established in 1966, is an international
    non-profit association representing the low-calorie and reduced-fat food and
    beverage industry.
    Today it represents 60 manufacturers and suppliers of low-calorie, low-fat
    and light foods and beverages, including the manufacturers and suppliers of
    more than a dozen different dietary sweeteners, fat replacers and other
    low-calorie ingredients.

    Calorie Control Council 5775 Peachtree-Dunwoody Rd. www.CalorieControl.org
    Bldg. G, Ste. 500 Atlanta, GA 30342 (404) 252-3663 fax (404) 252-0774
    ccc@KellenCompany.com Webmaster@caloriecontrol.org

    http://www.caloriecontrol.org/aspartame.html

    " Upon digestion, aspartame breaks down into three components (aspartic
    acid, phenylalanine and a small amount of methanol), which are then absorbed
    into the blood and used in normal body processes.

    Neither aspartame nor its components accumulates in the body.

    These components are used in the body in the same ways as when they are also
    derived from common foods.

    Further, the amounts of these components from aspartame are small compared
    to the amounts from other food sources. For example, a serving of no-fat
    milk provides about 6 times more phenylalanine and 13 times more aspartic
    acid compared to an equivalent amount of diet beverage sweetened 100% with
    aspartame. Likewise, a serving of tomato juice provides about 6 times more
    methanol compared to an equivalent amount of diet beverage with aspartame. "

    http://www.kellencompany.com/lnabors.html

    LYN O'BRIEN NABORS Vice President
    Lyn O'Brien Nabors serves as Vice President, Research Services and Account
    Executive for The Kellen Company. She has more than 23 years of experience
    in the association management industry and directs the activities of two
    client associations.
    Lyn supervises the research function of The Kellen Company and is
    responsible for the coordination of scientific programs for several client
    associations.
    She is involved in presenting comment on various food ingredients to
    scientific and regulatory agencies and new low-calorie ingredient approvals
    and coordinated activities resulting in the removal of the saccharin warning
    label requirement.
    She works closely with clients on industry labeling issues and is
    responsible for the development and updating of the company's food industry
    labeling manual.
    Lyn is editor of three editions of Alternative Sweeteners, a comprehensive
    textbook providing fundamental scientific and technical information on a
    broad range of sweeteners.
    She also has authored a number of book chapters and numerous journal
    articles on low-calorie foods and beverages, sweeteners and fat replacers.

    Lyn is a Phi Beta Kappa graduate of the University of Kentucky with a degree
    in Public Health.
    Prior to joining The Kellen Company in 1980, Lyn worked for several years in
    the scientific field performing both laboratory and clinical research.

    She is a member of the Institute of Food Technologists, serving three years
    as an IFT Scientific Lecturer, and the American Chemical Society.
    She currently serves as Executive Vice President of the Calorie Control
    Council and President of the International Food Additives Council.

    World Rev Nutr Diet. 1999; 85: 140-5.
    Consumer perceptions of products containing sweeteners: USA.
    Nabors LO.
    Calorie Control Council, Atlanta, Ga., USA. lnabors@assnhq.com
    Publication Types: Review Review, Tutorial
    PMID: 10647346
    ************************************************** ***********

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1018
    aspartame toxicity coverup increases danger of corporate meltdown:
    Michael C. Carakostas of Coca-Cola: Murray 2003.08.11 rmforall
    http://www.isrtp.org/new_members/members1.htm
    The International Society of Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology
    Carakostas, Michael C., DVM, PhD Director/Scientific & Regulatory
    Affairs The Coca-Cola Company PO Drawer 1734 Atlanta, GA 30301
    T. 404/676-4234 F. 404/676-7166 E-mail: mcarakostas@na.ko.com
    http://www2.coca-cola.com/ourcompany...aspartame.html [photo]
    Aspartame: The world agrees it's safe By Michael Carakostas, DVM, PhD
    Director, Scientific and Regulatory Affairs, Coca-Cola

    It is commendable that Carakostas mentions the core problem, albeit
    disparagingly, and overlaid with multiple untruths: "During digestion,
    aspartame yields a very small amount of methanol-- as do many other food
    substances. The body converts this methanol to formaldehyde, which is
    instantly converted to formate. Formate is quickly eliminated as carbon
    dioxide and water."

    Carakostas deceptively make claims, unsupported by research, that the amount
    of methanol from aspartame is "very small", that many foods release as much,
    and that little of the inevitable formaldehyde or formic acid toxic products
    accumulate in body tissues. This executive, with a PhD in veterinary
    science, is deceiving people about very serious multiple toxicities.

    Thus, there is evidence here cited from 1973 to 2004 that research and
    reviews by immense vested interests about aspartame must be scrutinized with
    the greatest skepticism. The greatest Internet myth about aspartame is
    this: "Aspartame is the most thoroughly tested food additive in history."
    ************************************************** ***********


    Dark wines and liquors, as well as aspartame, provide similar levels of
    methanol, above 100 mg daily, for long-term heavy users. Methanol is
    inevitably largely turned into formaldehyde, and thence largely into formic
    acid. It is the major cause of the dreaded symptoms of "next morning"
    hangover.

    Rich Murray, MA Room For All rmforall@comcast.net 505-501-2298
    1943 Otowi Road Santa Fe, New Mexico 87505 USA
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/messages
    group with 149 members, 1,233 posts in a public, searchable archive
    http://RoomForAll.blogspot.com http://AspartameNM.blogspot.com


    http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartame/ 932 members, 18,858 posts
    Aspartame Victims Support Group Edward Bryant Holman, Chief Moderator
    http://www.presidiotex.com/aspartame/ bryanth@presidiotex.net

    http://www.wnho.net/links-aspartame.htm many fine aspartame sites

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1215
    Edward M. Johnson, J.D. Attorney, Texas, supports legality and necessity of
    Fox petition for New Mexico Environmental Improvement Board
    to ban aspartame: Fox: Murray 2005.09.15

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1217
    battle to ban aspartame heats up in New Mexico Environmental Improvement
    Board, 9 AM Tuesday, October 4: Fox: Murray 2005.09.23

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1218
    James S. Turner, Esq. letter on improper approval of aspartame by FDA in
    1981, to New Mexico Environmental Improvement Board 2005.09.20,
    plain text: Murray 2005.09.24

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1220
    legal and factual basis for NM EIB to ban aspartame (methanol,
    formaldehyde), final paragraph from James S. Turner, Esq, letters from
    Kenneth P. Stoller MD (Pediatrics), C. Grant La Farge, MD (Pediatric
    Cardiology), Karen Ulehla, MSLS, Medical Librarian: Murray 2005.09.27

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1223
    complete info on NM EIB aspartame ban meeting, Oct. 4, Santa Fe,
    Leland Lehrman, www.MotherMedia.org : Murray 2005.09.30

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1228
    NM EIB votes 4-2 for 5-day aspartame toxicity hearing July, 2006, requesting
    a Hearing Officer and a medical expert from Environmental Dept. and legal
    advice from NM Attorney General: Murray 2005.10.04


    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1106
    hangover research relevant to toxicity of 11% methanol in aspartame
    (formaldehyde, formic acid): Calder I (full text): Jones AW: Murray
    2004.08.05 2005.09.28

    Since no adaquate data has ever been published on the exact disposition of
    toxic metabolites in specific tissues in humans of the 11% methanol
    component of aspartame, the many studies on morning-after hangover from the
    methanol impurity in alcohol drinks are the main available resource to date.

    Jones AW (1987) found next-morning hangover from red wine with
    100 to 150 mg methanol
    (9.5% w/v ethanol, 100 mg/l methanol, 0.01%, one part in ten thousand).

    Fully 11% of aspartame is methanol -- 1,120 mg aspartame in 2 L diet soda,
    almost six 12-oz cans, gives 123 mg methanol (wood alcohol) -- the same
    amount that produces hangover from red wine.


    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1186
    aspartame induces lymphomas and leukaemias in rats, full plain text,
    M Soffritti, F Belpoggi, DD Esposti, L Lambertini: Ramazzini Foundation
    study 2005.07.14: main results agree with their previous methanol and
    formaldehyde studies: Murray 2005.09.27

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1189
    Michael F Jacobson of CSPI now and in 1985 re aspartame toxicity, letter to
    FDA Commissioner Lester Crawford; California OEHHA aspartame critique
    2004.03.12; Center for Consumer Freedom denounces CSPI: Murray 2005.07.27

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1226
    USA National Institutes of Health National Toxicology Program aids eminent
    Ramazzini Foundation, Bologna, Italy, in more results on cancers in rats
    from lifetime low levels of aspartame (methanol, formaldehyde), Felicity
    Lawrence, www.guardian.co.uk: Murray 2005.09.30


    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1143
    methanol (formaldehyde, formic acid) disposition: Bouchard M et al, full
    plain text, 2001: substantial sources are degradation of fruit pectins,
    liquors, aspartame, smoke: Murray 2005.04.02 rmforall


    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1213
    aspartame (methanol, phenylalanine, aspartic acid) effects, detailed expert
    studies in 2005 Aug and 1998 July, Tsakiris S, Schulpis KH, Karikas GA,
    Kokotos G, Reclos RJ, et al, Aghia Sophia Children's Hospital, Athens,
    Greece: Murray 2005.09.09


    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1045
    http://www.holisticmed.com/aspartame...2-response.htm
    Mark Gold exhaustively critiques European Commission Scientific
    Committee on Food re aspartame ( 2002.12.04 ): 59 pages, 230 references

    http://www.HolisticMed.com/aspartame mgold@holisticmed.com
    Aspartame Toxicity Information Center Mark D. Gold
    12 East Side Drive #2-18 Concord, NH 03301 603-225-2100
    http://www.holisticmed.com/aspartame.../methanol.html
    "Scientific Abuse in Aspartame Research"

    Gold points out that industry methanol assays were too insensitive to
    properly measure blood methanol levels. ]

    Fully 11% of aspartame is methanol-- 1,120 mg aspartame in 2 L diet soda,
    almost six 12-oz cans, gives 123 mg methanol (wood alcohol). If 30% of
    the methanol is turned into formaldehyde, the amount of formaldehyde is 18
    times the USA EPA limit for daily formaldehyde in drinking water, 2 mg in 2
    L water.

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/835
    ATSDR: EPA limit 1 ppm formaldehyde in drinking water July 1999:
    Murray 2002.05.30 rmforall

    Aspartame is made of phenylalanine (50% by weight) and aspartic acid (39%),
    both ordinary amino acids, bound loosely together by methanol (wood alcohol,
    11%). The readily released methanol from aspartame is within hours turned
    by the liver into formaldehyde and then formic acid, both potent, cumulative
    toxins.


    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1182
    Joining together: short review: research on aspartame (methanol,
    formaldehyde, formic acid) toxicity: Murray 2005.07.08 rmforall

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1071
    research on aspartame (methanol, formaldehyde, formic acid) toxicity: Murray
    2004.04.29 rmforall


    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/935
    Comet assay finds DNA damage from sucralose, cyclamate, saccharin in
    mice: Sasaki YF & Tsuda S Aug 2002: Murray 2003.01.01
    [ Also borderline evidence, in this pilot study of 39 food additives,
    using test groups of 4 mice, for DNA damage from for stomach, colon,
    liver, bladder, and lung 3 hr after oral dose of 2000 mg/kg aspartame--
    a very high dose. ]


    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1131
    genotoxicity of aspartame in human lymphocytes 2004.07.29 full plain text,
    Rencuzogullari E et al, Cukurova University, Adana, Turkey 2004 Aug: Murray
    2004.11.06

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1088
    Murray, full plain text & critique: chronic aspartame in rats affects
    memory, brain cholinergic receptors, and brain chemistry, Christian B,
    McConnaughey M et al, 2004 May: 2004.06.05 rmforall

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1067
    eyelid contact dermatitis by formaldehyde from aspartame, AM Hill & DV
    Belsito, Nov 2003: Murray 2004.03.30 rmforall

    Thrasher (2001): "The major difference is that the Japanese demonstrated
    the incorporation of FA and its metabolites into the placenta and fetus.
    The quantity of radioactivity remaining in maternal and fetal tissues
    at 48 hours was 26.9% of the administered dose." [ Ref. 14-16 ]

    Arch Environ Health 2001 Jul-Aug; 56(4): 300-11.
    Embryo toxicity and teratogenicity of formaldehyde. [100 references]
    Thrasher JD, Kilburn KH. toxicology@drthrasher.org
    Sam-1 Trust, Alto, New Mexico, USA.
    http://www.drthrasher.org/formaldehy..._toxicity.html full text

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/939
    aspartame [aspartic acid, phenylalanine] binding to DNA:
    Karikas July 1998: Murray 2003.01.05 rmforall
    Karikas GA, Schulpis KH, Reclos GJ, Kokotos G
    Measurement of molecular interaction of aspartame and
    its metabolites with DNA. Clin Biochem 1998 Jul; 31(5): 405-7.
    Dept. of Chemistry, University of Athens, Greece
    http://www.chem.uoa.gr gkokotos@atlas.uoa.gr
    K.H. Schulpis inchildh@otenet.gr G.J. Reclos reklos@otenet.gr

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1052
    DMDC: Dimethyl dicarbonate 200mg/L in drinks adds methanol 98 mg/L
    [ becomes formaldehyde in body ]: EU Scientific Committee on Foods
    2001.07.12: Murray 2004.01.22 rmforall


    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/925
    aspartame puts formaldehyde adducts into tissues, Part 1/2
    full text Trocho & Alemany 1998.06.26: Murray 2002.12.22


    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1065
    politicians and celebrities hooked on diet sodas [aspartame]:
    Murray 2004.03.24 rmforall

    http://www.dorway.com/upipart1.txt
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/262
    aspartame expose 96K Oct 1987 Part 1/3: Gregory Gordon, UPI reporter:
    Murray 2000.07.10 rmforall

    http://www.dorway.com/enclosur.html
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/53
    aspartame history Part 1/4 1964-1976: Gold: Murray 1999.11.06 rmforall

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/928
    revolving door, Monsanto, FDA, EPA: NGIN: Murray 2002.12.23 rmforall

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/841
    RTM: Merisant Co., MSD Capital, Dell Computer Corp., NutraSweet Co.,
    JW Childs Assc.: aspartame-neotame toxicity 2002.07.10 rmforall

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/857
    www.dorway.com : original documents and long reviews of
    flaws in aspartame toxicity research: Murray
    2002.07.31 rmforall

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/858
    Samuels: Strong: Roberts: Gold: flaws in double-blind
    studies re aspartame and MSG toxicity: Murray
    2002.08.01 rmforall

    "Survey of aspartame studies: correlation of outcome
    and funding sources," 1998, unpublished: http://www.dorway.com/peerrev.html
    Prof. Ralph G. Walton, MD

    http://www.truthinlabeling.org/ Truth in Labeling Campaign [MSG]
    Adrienne Samuels, PhD The toxicity/safety of processed
    free glutamic acid [MSG]: a study in suppression of information.
    Accountability in Research 1999; 6: 259-310. 52-page review
    P.O. Box 2532 Darien, Illinois 60561
    858-481-9333 adandjack@aol.com


    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1224
    Aspartame disease: an FDA-approved epidemic, H. J. Roberts, MD 2004:
    Murray 2005.09.30

    http://www.dorway.com/tldaddic.html 5-page review
    Roberts HJ Aspartame (NutraSweet) addiction.
    Townsend Letter 2000 Jan; HJRobertsMD@aol.com
    http://www.sunsentpress.com/ sunsentpress@aol.com
    Sunshine Sentinel Press P.O.Box 17799 West Palm Beach, FL 33416
    800-814-9800 561-588-7628 561-547-8008 fax

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/669
    1038-page medical text "Aspartame Disease: An Ignored Epidemic"
    published May 30 2001 $ 60.00 postpaid data from 1200 cases
    available at http://www.amazon.com
    over 600 references from standard medical research

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/790
    Moseley: review Roberts "Aspartame Disease: An Ignored Epidemic":
    Murray 2002.02.07 rmforall

    Roberts, Hyman J., 1924- ,
    Useful insights for diagnosis, treatment and public heath: an updated
    anthology of original research, 2002, 798 pages,
    aspartame disease, pages 627-685, 778-780

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/859
    Roberts: the life work of a brilliant clinician: aspartame toxicity:
    Murray 2002.08.02 rmforall

    A very detailed, highly credible account of the dubious approval process for
    aspartame in July, 1981 is part of the just released two-hour documentary
    "Sweet Misery, A Poisoned World: An Industry Case Study of a Food Supply
    In Crisis" by Cori Brackett: cori@soundandfuryproductions.com
    http://www.soundandfuryproductions.com/ 520-624-9710
    2301 East Broadway, Suite 111 Tucson, AZ 85719

    http://www.aspartamesafety.com marystod@airmail.net
    Mary Nash Stoddard, Founder
    Aspartame Consumer Safety Network and Pilot Hotline [1987-2004]
    P.O. Box 2001 Frisco, TX 75034 1-214-387-4001 [ 25 miles N of Dallas ]

    http://www.sweetpoison.com/ Janet Starr Hull, PhD, CN jshull@sweetpoison.com

    Russell L. Blaylock, MD 601-982-1175 Madison, Mississippi
    "Excitotoxins: The Taste that Kills", 1977, 298 p., 493 references.
    "Health and Nutrition Secrets that can save your life", 2002, 459 p.,
    558 + 30 references, $ 30 http://www.russellblaylockmd.com/

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1090
    aspartame, MSG, excitotoxins, NMDA glutamate receptors, multiple sclerosis:
    Blaylock: Martini: Murray 2004.06.25 rmforall

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/97
    Lancet website aspartame letter 1999.07.29:
    Excitotoxins 1999 Part 1/3 Blaylock: Murray 2000.01.14 rmforall
    The Medical Sentinel Journal 1999 Fall; (95 references)
    http://www.dorway.com/blayenn.html

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1070
    critique of aspartame review, French Food Safety Agency AFSSA 2002.05.07
    aspartamgb.pdf (18 pages, in English), Martin Hirsch: Murray 2004.04.13

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/957
    safety of aspartame Part 1/2 12.4.2: EC HCPD-G SCF:
    Murray 2003.01.12 rmforall EU Scientific Committee on Food, a whitewash

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1045
    http://www.holisticmed.com/aspartame...2-response.htm
    Mark Gold exhaustively critiques European Commission Scientific
    Committee on Food re aspartame ( 2002.12.04 ): 59 pages, 230 references

    eatright.org/Nutritive(1).pdf
    J Am Diet Assoc. 2004 Feb; 104(2): 255-75.
    Position of the American Dietetic Association: use of nutritive and
    nonnutritive sweeteners. American Dietetic Association.

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1068
    critique of aspartame review by American Dietetic Association Feb 2004,
    Valerie B. Duffy & Madeleine J. Sigman-Grant: Murray 2004.05.14 rmforall


    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1108
    faults in 1999 July EPA 468-page formaldehyde profile:
    Elzbieta Skrzydlewska PhD, Assc. Prof., Medical U. of Bialystok, Poland,
    abstracts -- ethanol, methanol, formaldehyde, formic acid, acetaldehyde,
    lipid peroxidation, green tea, aging: Murray 2004.08.08 2005.07.11

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1140
    EPA Preliminary Remedial Goals, PRGs, 2003 Oct, air and tap water --
    methanol, formaldehyde, formic acid -- not mentioned is methanol from
    aspartame, dark wines and liquors: Murray 2004.11.20 rmforall

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aspartameNM/message/1141
    Nurses Health Study can quickly reveal the extent of aspartame (methanol,
    formaldehyde, formic acid) toxicity: Murray 2004.11.21 rmforall
    [ Any scientist can get access to this data for free by submitting a proper
    research proposal. No one has admitted mining the extensive data on diet
    soda use and many symtoms for decades for about 100,000 nurses. ]
    ************************************************** ***********

    www.aspartame.org

    The Calorie Control Council, established in 1966, is an international
    non-profit association representing the low-calorie and reduced-fat food and
    beverage industry.
    Today it represents 60 manufacturers and suppliers of low-calorie, low-fat
    and light foods and beverages, including the manufacturers and suppliers of
    more than a dozen different dietary sweeteners, fat replacers and other
    low-calorie ingredients.

    www.CalorieControl.org Calorie Control Council
    5775 Peachtree-Dunwoody Rd. Bldg. G, Ste. 500 Atlanta, GA 30342
    (404) 252-3663 fax (404) 252-0774
    ccc@KellenCompany.com Webmaster@caloriecontrol.org

    http://www.caloriecontrol.org/aspartame.html

    " Upon digestion, aspartame breaks down into three components (aspartic
    acid, phenylalanine and a small amount of methanol), which are then absorbed
    into the blood and used in normal body processes.

    Neither aspartame nor its components accumulates in the body.

    These components are used in the body in the same ways as when they are also
    derived from common foods.

    Further, the amounts of these components from aspartame are small compared
    to the amounts from other food sources. For example, a serving of no-fat
    milk provides about 6 times more phenylalanine and 13 times more aspartic
    acid compared to an equivalent amount of diet beverage sweetened 100% with
    aspartame. Likewise, a serving of tomato juice provides about 6 times more
    methanol compared to an equivalent amount of diet beverage with aspartame. "

    http://www.kellencompany.com/lnabors.html

    LYN O'BRIEN NABORS Vice President LNabors@kellencompany.com
    Lyn O'Brien Nabors serves as Vice President, Research Services and Account
    Executive for The Kellen Company.
    She has more than 23 years of experience in the association management
    industry and directs the activities of two client associations.
    Lyn supervises the research function of The Kellen Company and is
    responsible for the coordination of scientific programs for several client
    associations.
    She is involved in presenting comment on various food ingredients to
    scientific and regulatory agencies and new low-calorie ingredient approvals
    and coordinated activities resulting in the removal of the saccharin warning
    label requirement.
    She works closely with clients on industry labeling issues and is
    responsible for the development and updating of the company's food industry
    labeling manual.
    Lyn is editor of three editions of Alternative Sweeteners, a comprehensive
    textbook providing fundamental scientific and technical information on a
    broad range of sweeteners.
    She also has authored a number of book chapters and numerous journal
    articles on low-calorie foods and beverages, sweeteners and fat replacers.

    Lyn is a Phi Beta Kappa graduate of the University of Kentucky with a degree
    in Public Health.
    Prior to joining The Kellen Company in 1980, Lyn worked for several years in
    the scientific field performing both laboratory and clinical research.

    She is a member of the Institute of Food Technologists, serving three years
    as an IFT Scientific Lecturer, and the American Chemical Society.
    She currently serves as Executive Vice President of the Calorie Control
    Council and President of the International Food Additives Council.

    World Rev Nutr Diet. 1999; 85: 140-5.
    Consumer perceptions of products containing sweeteners: USA.
    Nabors LO.
    Calorie Control Council, Atlanta, Ga., USA. lnabors@assnhq.com
    Publication Types: Review Review, Tutorial PMID: 10647346
    ************************************************** ***********

    http://www.wddty.co.uk/cms/content.asp?pageid=home

    What Doctors Don't Tell You is one of the few information services that can
    justifiably claim to solve people's health problems - and even save lives.We
    tell you in plain language what works, what doesn't and what may harm you in
    both orthodox and alternative medicine so that you can make informed
    choices.Our information is available as an in-depth monthly subscription
    health bulletin, as a series of books, manuals and CDs, and as a searchable
    information database. We also provide a free e-mail news service.

    Contact Details

    WDDTY, Satellite House, 2 Salisbury Road, London SW19 4EZ
    Telephone: 0870 444 9886 (International +44 870 444 9886)
    Fax : 0870 444 9887 (International +44 870 444 9887)
    Call us Direct on 0800 146 054 (UK)
    Email : cs@wddty.co.uk

    About us

    What Doctors Don't Tell You first appeared as a newsletter at the end of
    1989. It grew from a sense of frustration with conventional medicine, and a
    desire to tell others about its short-comings and dangers.
    It was started by award-winning journalist Lynne McTaggart and her husband,
    Bryan Hubbard, also a senior journalist.

    Lynne had suffered from a mysterious illness for around five years, during
    which time she had passed through a medical odyssey of conventional,
    alternative and strange treatments. She encountered treatments that either
    didn't work or were dangerous.
    Before launching What Doctors Don't Tell You, Lynne had worked closely with
    the legendary Dr Robert Mendelsohn in America, who was one of the first
    doctors to blow the whistle on medical practices.

    Since its launch all those years ago, What Doctors Don't Tell You has been
    acknowledged as one of the world's very best health newsletters by several
    commentators, including leading publisher and health campaigner Burton
    Goldberg, leading holistic healer Dr John Diamond and the Holistic Health
    Library.

    It accepts no donations from government bodies, industry groups or
    companies, but relies for its survival and success only from the
    subscription income it receives from its many thousands of subscribers
    around the world.

    Its hallmark has been its in-depth research, and hard-won information of a
    quality that can change lives for the better. It's been cited in law courts,
    it's been used to encourage doctors to change their treatments, and our
    filing cabinets are full of testimonials from thousands of people whose
    lives have been helped by our information.

    We've also published around 35 books on health,
    we run regular workshops and conferences, and -- best of all --
    evrything we've ever written is available
    on this website for you to search.

    What Doctors Don't Tell You is based in London (in Wimbledon, where the
    tennis comes from). It's also part of a public company (Conatus plc), which
    is listed on the OFEX exchange in London, where its shares are traded.

    CONNECTIONS THAT MAY HELP YOU
    Here are some connections we've made in the last few months:
    *Crohn's disease may be linked to cow's milk
    *The prostate cancer test can fail. . .if the man has just had sex!
    *Hypertension (high blood pressure) may be triggered by lead from the
    environment
    *Steroids can cause serious side-effects after just one dose, and not only
    after long-term use as doctors maintain
    *90% of hysterectomies are unnecessary
    *Cholesterol-lowering drugs may trigger cancer 30 years on
    *Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) - Cot death - may be linked to low
    levels of iodine in the mother
    *Major antidepressants can cause tooth decay
    *Low-dose aspirin can reduce the risk of certain cancers if taken long term
    *Epilepsy is linked to diet and childhood vaccines
    *Soya products can lower your cholesterol levels better than animal fats
    products
    *Women who take zinc while pregnant will produce bigger babies
    *Foods that can fight depression naturally
    *Allergies are more likely to make you fat than just over-eating
    *Older people who eat an orange a day will reduce their risk of a heart
    attack by 10%
    *High cholesterol could be one of the great medical red herrings of the 20th
    Century

    THE WDDTY CHALLENGE

    Whatever the complaint, we bet you know of people
    who've come off worse from an encounter with medicine.
    It might be a neighbour, or someone you often
    bump into at the local store. Ever since they started some drug or
    treatment, their health has either deteriorated, or they've been complaining
    about symptoms they never had before.

    We're not usually gambling people, but we say "we bet" because we've never
    yet met anybody who can't think of someone who this has happened to.

    And we'd like to make another bet with you! We reckon on that virtually none
    of these people was told that they might suffer these side-effects. (We
    know, because one of the saddest comments we hear from victims is: "If only
    we had known...")


    What our members say
    Here're some of their comments (they're all genuine and the originals can be
    viewed at our offices):
    "What Doctors contains just the sort of medical information I was looking
    for, and which is very diffifcult to obtain elsewhere" - P.E., Surrey

    "As a medical doctor, I am really pleased with What Doctors..., my sincere
    good wishes for the special work that you are doing" - Dr. M.S., Beirut

    "I had a reasonable knowledge of the possible pitfalls of drug therapy, but
    your wide ranging well- written and easy-to-understand information has
    heightened my awareness of this most important subject and you are
    performing a much-needed and vital service to us all" - M.G., Bedfordshire

    "Instead of suffering from asthma, unwillingly forced into the last ditch
    resort of taking steroids in order to have any sort of liveable life, I am
    virtually free of it and, to boot, have lost a surplus two stone. This is
    all attributable to your informative publications" - MBC, P-B., Cornwall

    "Recently my mother-in-law was diagnosed with breast cancer. I cannot tell
    you how encouraging you were to the whole family... She is faring well and
    confident she is making the right deci- sions thanks to your timely
    advice" - J.B., Jersey

    "It's brilliant" - D.R. Norfolk

    OUR COMPREHENSIVE COVERAGE

    We've covered a wide range of illlnesses, treatments and drugs since we
    began publishing seven years ago. Here's a better flavour of our coverage:

    Women's health
    Hormone Replacement Therapy (HRT): the contraceptive pill; endometriosis;
    hysterectomy.
    Family health
    MMR vaccine infertility treatments; polio vaccine; the DPT vaccine;
    hepatitis B vaccine; hyperactivity.
    General health & treatments
    Glaucoma; amalgam fillings; hypertension; Alzheimers disease; epilepsy;
    migraine; melatonin; osteoporosis; depression; schizophrenia.
    Common complaints & treatments
    Candida albicans; arthiritis; high cholesterol; cataracts; diabetes; asthma;
    irritable bowel syndrome (IBS); psoriasis; ME; back pain; eczema; hernia;
    slimming.
    Life-threatening conditions
    HIV and AIDS; cancer (alternative therapies; nutritional treatments;
    chemotherapy; radiotherapy); breast cancer; prostate cancer.
    Drugs
    Tranquilisers & sleeping pills; anti-depressants; antibiotics; infertility
    drugs; steroids.
    Tests
    Cervical smear tests; foetal ultrasound monitoring; prenatal tests; x-rays.
    Surgery
    Angioplasty; keyhole surgery; surviving hospital stay; joint replacement
    surgery; blood transfusions.
    Consumer rights
    A 10-point plan for being assertive with your doctor; how to win a
    negligence case; when you can avoid medical treatment.
    Environmental issues
    VDUs; fluoride; the quality of our water supply; power lines; pesticides.

    http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:S...homas%22&hl=en

    This is the html version of the file
    http://www.curesmentalhealth.com/Art...l/100ways.pdf.
    Google automatically generates html versions of documents as we crawl
    the web.
    To link to or bookmark this page, use the following url:
    http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:SLQN-2MOYyoJ:www.curesmentalhealth.com/Articles/Non-Medical/100ways.pdf+%22What+Doctors+Don't+Tell+You+%22,+%2 2Pat+Thomas%22&hl=en

    Google is neither affiliated with the authors of this page nor responsible
    for its content.

    SPECIAL REPORT July 1998 Vol 9 No 4

    What Doctors Don't Tell You
    Satellite House, 2 Salisbury Road, London SW19 4EZ, United Kingdom
    Tel: +44 (0) 20 944 9555 Fax: +44 (0) 20 8944 9888
    E-mail: info@wddty.co.uk

    Editor Lynne McTaggart

    Contributing Editor Pat Thomas

    Marketing Manager Andrew Miller

    Subscription Manager Nigel Stannard

    Office Manager Emily Gordon

    Financial Controller Mark Brandwood

    Publisher Bryan Hubbard

    Editorial Panel --

    Dr John Mansfield
    Dr Leo Galland
    Dr Alan Franklin
    Dr Patrick Kingsley
    Dr Jean Monro
    Dr J Anthony Morris
    Annemarie Colbin
    Anne Gaskell (La Leche League)
    Janet Balaskas
    Dr Jack Levenson
    Dr Ellen Grant
    Dr Melvyn Werbach
    Dr Michael Odent
    Dr Keith Mumby
    Dr Jonathan Wr i g h t
    Prof Gordon Stewart
    Dr Vickie Rippere
    Dr Anthony Newbury
    Sally Bundy (Hyperactive Children's Support Group )

    While every care is taken in preparing this material, the publishers cannot
    accept any responsibility for any damage or harm caused by any treatment,
    advice or information contained in this publication. You should consult a
    qualified practitioner before undertaking any treatment.

    SUBSCRIPTIONS
    What Doctors Don't Tell You is published every month.
    An annual subscription is £52-79 (£60-79 for non-UK subscribers).
    An introductory subscription is £42-79(£50-79 for non-UK subscribers).
    All back issues are still available.
    An order form, which also contains details of our range of health booklets,
    can be obtained from the main UKoffice.
    © What Doctors Don't Tell You Ltd. 2002
    No part of this publication may be reproduced without permission.
    ISSN 1352-1241.

    Page 1

    In celebration of the 100th issue of What Doctors Don't Tell You, we've
    compiled what we consider the 100 most important pieces of advice we've
    written over the years into a ready-reference guide to leading a
    healthy life. In our view, this advice tends to run counter to what your
    doctor tells you, but all our tips are backed up by solid medical evidence.
    These include 50 general tips about diet, supplements, children, your
    environment and also a final 10 suggestions for your spiritual health.
    We also included five boxes of 10 tips apiece concerning
    which medical practices are useless or downright dangerous.
    Limited space has allowed only the briefest of summaries,
    but we've listed the relevant back publications
    (including those of WDDTY's sister publications PROOF! and Natural Parent),
    for anyone who requires more information. Happy hundredth !
    ************************************************** ***********

    From: carolguilford@sbcglobal.net
    To: "aspartame support" aspartame@yahoogroups.com
    Cc: editorial@theecologist.org
    Subject: [Aspartame Support] Ecologist article
    Date: Sunday, October 02, 2005 10:30 AM

    Dear Aspartame Victim's Support Group,

    As an anti-aspartame crusader for eight years, I am always pleased to see
    published reports about the dangers of aspartame.

    I have read a copy of Pat Thomas's long article about aspartame in the
    recent issue of "The Ecologist."

    Thomas's report has a lot of collected historical truth--and,I repeat, it is
    always good to see truth in print so that more people can learn about
    aspartame (Equal,NutraSweet.)

    However, most of the article, wit no credit given, is taken word for word
    from a piece written by written by lawyer and anti-aspartame crusader Jim
    Turner. http://www.swankin-turner.com/hist.html

    So,although, I appreciate Pat Thomas 'writing' about the lethal poison,
    aspartame and "The Ecologist's" willingness to publish the truth, as a
    researcher on aspartame, I must point out that it is not helpful to the
    anti-aspartame movement when a writer uses something as fact that has not
    been proven.

    The following statement (one of the few that seem actually to be written by
    Thomas) may be true, but there is only one reference to this ever in the
    literature of aspartame. I suspect Thomas doesn't even know where that one
    reference comes from.

    A writer must have at least two verified references
    to prove something as a fact.

    Pat Thomas writes:

    "Once upon a time, aspartame was listed by the Pentagon as a biochemical
    warfare agent."

    "Once upon a time"? What is this, a fairy tale? You can't just write this as
    a fact, without proof or references. Show me the list.

    The sole reference that aspartame might have been on a Pentagon list as a
    biochemical warfare agent comes from a early (brilliant) article about
    aspartame, "Nutrapoison", by Alex Constantine. And even Constantine's very
    well documented piece has only one reference to this information-- from a
    radio show done in Monterrey, CA by the late, great activist, Mae Brusell.

    Most of us who write about aspartame do not use unsubstantiated evidence,
    nor give unsupported information to journalists
    who ask us for our expertise.
    Writers include Mary Stoddard, founder of the Aspartame Consumer Safety
    Network, in 1987 www.aspartamesafety.com ,
    Dr. Janet Hull www.sweetpoison.com ,
    David Lawrence Dewey in his comprehensive article at
    www.dldewey.com/asp.htm ,
    Cori Brackett in her docu, "Sweet Misery" www.soundandfury.com ,
    endocrinologist, Dr. H.J. Roberts www.sunsentpress.com ,
    neurosurgeon Dr. Russell Blaylock www.russellblaylockmd.com ,
    Mark Gold www.holisticmed.com/aspartame ,
    Bryant Holman, list owner of the Aspartame Victim's Support Group
    www.predidiotex.com/aspartame
    and James Turner, the original author of the 'timeline' section of the piece.

    Turner and Thomas, in "The Ecologist" both use the original manufacturer's
    (GD Searle) own PR story about how aspartame was 'found' as a fact.
    Aspartame is complicated molecular poison, and, in my reluctant expert
    opinion, there is no way possible that it was discovered by accident, by Dr.
    James Schlatter.

    One question I have always asked, is: Why would any chemist be using wood
    alcohol (methanol,10% of aspartame) to construct an ulcer drug or any other
    drug, for that matter? Methanol is a known poison.

    From Thomas's article:

    "DECEMBER 1965

    While working on an ulcer drug, a chemist at pharmaceutical manufacturer GD
    Searle accidentally discovers aspartame, a substance that is 180 times
    sweeter than sugar, yet has no calories."

    Thomas, in the article, gives no reference as to where most of the
    information comes from, totally ignoring any credit to Turner or journalists
    such as Greg Gordon in his UPI investigation of aspartame, in 1996.

    Constantine's article.
    http://www.mindcontrolforums.com/hambone/npoi1.html

    Greg Gordon's article.
    http://www.mindfully.org/Food/Aspart...ted22nov96.htm

    Carol Guilford
    ************************************************** ***********
    Send blank post to: <br />aspartameNM-subscribe@onelist.com to join<br />free,open, list with searchable archives for toxicity issues.<br />Richard \"Rich\" T. Murray Room For All 1943 Otowi Road Santa Fe, NM 87505<br />rmforall@comcast.net 505-501-2298

  2. #2

    Default

    frinkin scarin me dude stop with these post

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    100

    Default

    Looks like we need to stick with drinks with pure can sugar in it. All of these artificial sweeteners will kill you faster than sugar will. We just have to moderate how many sodas we drink.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Jupiter, Florida, United States
    Posts
    1,575

    Default

    These "scientific" posts are jokes. Of course when you feed a rat that weighs 1lb an ounce of aspartame a day as a staple of his diet he will have negative side effects.
    That is equivalant of feeding a 200lb man 32lbs of sugar a day and expecting him to stay healthy!.
    Whether you think can or think you can\'t, you\'re probably right!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •