What is Aspartame ??
In this article we will examine what is Aspartame?
Over a billion people consume aspartame
in their foods and beverages across the world, believing it to be a safe
ingredient, but what they probably don't know is that aspartame
currently accounts for over 75% of all side effects complaints received by the FDA's Adverse Reaction Monitoring System (ARMS) for the past 4 years.
It is banned by health-conscious countries all over the world,
especially where there is a national healthcare system in place.
Aspartame is best known by the brand names NutraSweet, Equal, Sweet One and Spoonful. Aspartame is asynthetic chemical combinationwhich is comprised of approximately 50% phenylalanine, 40% aspartic acid, and 10% methanol. Aspartame is found in thousands of foods, drinks, candy, gum, vitamins, health supplements and even pharmaceuticals. (http://www.wellsphere.com/wellpage/...)...
Each of the three ingredients in Aspartame poses its own dangersand each is well documented as causing a long list of side effects and dangerous health conditions. Watch for the ingredient Acesulfame Potassium, which is just another name for Aspartame.
Phenylalanine: Even a
single use of Aspartame raises the blood phenylalanine levels. High
blood phenylalanine can be concentrated in parts of the brain and isespecially dangerous for infants and fetuses.
Because it is metabolized much more efficiently by rodents than humans,
testing and research on rats alone is not sufficient enough to denounce
the dangers of Aspartame for human consumption. Excessive levels of
phenylalanine in the brain cause serotonin levels to decrease,leading to emotional disorders like depression.
Aspartic Acid: Aspartic acid is considered anexcito-toxin,
which means it over stimulates certain neurons in the body until they
die. Much like nitrates and MSG, aspartic acid can cause amino acid
imbalances in the body and result in the interruption of normal
neurotransmitter metabolism of the brain. (http://www.holisticmed.net/aspartam...)
The EPA's recommended limit of
consumption of Methanol is 7.8 milligrams per day, but a one liter
bottle of an Aspartame-sweetened beverage contains over 50 mg of
methanol. Heavy users of Aspartame-containing products consume as much
as 250 mg of methanol daily,which is over 30 times the EPA limit.
Suspiciously similar to the symptoms of Fibromyalgia and Multiple Sclerosis,
Aspartame's long list includes dizziness, headaches, behavioral
changes, hallucinations, depression, nausea, numbness, muscle spasms,
weight gain, rashes, fatigue, irritability, insomnia, vision problems,
hearing loss, heart palpitations, breathing difficulties, anxiety
attacks, slurred speech, loss of taste, tinnitus, vertigo, memory loss,
and joint pain. Also, many illnesses can be worsened by ingesting Aspartame,
including chronic fatigue syndrome, brain tumors, epilepsy,
Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, mental retardation, and especially diabetes.
Birth defects: According
to Dr. Louis Elsas, Pediatrician Professor of Genetics at Emory
University, Phenylalanine can concentrate in the placenta, causing
mental retardation of a fetus. Also, formaldehyde in the blood stream of
a pregnant woman can cause her immune system to target the fetal tissue
as a foreign substance and destroy it, the result being a miscarriage. This can happen before she even knows she is pregnant. (http://www.dorway.com/dr-elsas.txt)
Aspartame is known to cause weight gain
Products labeled Diet, Light or Zero most likely contain at least one of the major synthetic sweeteners, and Aspartame is used more widely than the three carcinogenic S's: Sucralose, Sorbitol and Saccharin. Nearly all diet sodas, gum and most candy (not chocolate - yet) are loaded with Aspartame. (http://buildingbodies.ca/diet-pop-d...) Some chewing gum brands contain only synthetic sugars, which are acid creating. The body in turn creates fat cells to store that extra acid, and this is why many people who consistently eat Aspartame will ironically put on weight.
Natural sugar-free alternatives:
Xylitol and the Brazilian Stevia leaf (Not Truvia) are natural and do
not cause side effects or nerve damage; however, truly effective weight
loss starts with organic vegetables and cardio exercise. To be safe,
simply avoid all "diet foods" and moderate sugar intake. (http://www.healingdaily.com/detoxif...)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FDA Lists 92 Symptoms from Nutrasweet (Aspartame)
(including Death!)
(including Death!)
Please Note: Nutrasweet is in Diet Coke and Diet Pepsi
Update: Aspartame - NutraSweet - Is now called AminoSweet
Note: This information required a Freedom Of Information Act request to pry it from the reluctant hands of the FDA.
Nutrasweet
(brand name for Aspartame) was not approved until 1981, in dry foods.
For over eight years the FDA refused to approve it because of the
seizures and brain tumors this drug produced in lab animals. The FDA
continued to refuse to approve it until President Reagan took office (a
friend of Searle) and fired the FDA Commissioner who wouldn't approve
it. Dr. Arthur Hull Hayes was appointed as commissioner. Even then there
was so much opposition to approval that a Board of Inquiry was set up.
The Board said: "Do not approve aspartame". Dr. Hayes OVERRULED his own
Board of Inquiry.
Shortly
after Commissioner Arthur Hull Hayes, Jr., approved the use of
aspartame in carbonated beverages, he left for a position with G.D.
Searle's Public Relations firm.
Long-Term
Damage. It appears to cause slow, silent damage in those unfortunate
enough to not have immediate reactions and a reason to avoid it. It may
take one year, five years, 10 years, or 40 years, but it seems to cause
some reversible and some irreversible changes in health over long-term
use.
METHANOL
(AKA WOOD ALCOHOL/POISON) (10% OF ASPARTAME) Methanol/wood alcohol is a
deadly poison. People may recall that methanol was the poison that has
caused some "skid row" alcoholics to end up blind or dead. Methanol is
gradually released in the small intestine when the methyl group of
aspartame encounter the enzyme chymotrypsin.
The
absorption of methanol into the body is sped up considerably when free
methanol is ingested. Free methanol is created from aspartame when it is
heated to above 86 Fahrenheit (30 Centigrade). This would occur when
aspartame-containing product is improperly stored or when it is heated
(e.g., as part of a "food" product such as Jello).
Methanol
breaks down into formic acid and formaldehyde in the body. Formaldehyde
is a deadly neurotoxin. An EPA assessment of methanol states that
methanol "is considered a cumulative poison due to the low rate of
excretion once it is absorbed. In the body, methanol is oxidized to
formaldehyde and formic acid; both of these metabolites are toxic." The
recommend a limit of consumption of 7.8 mg/day. A one-liter (approx. 1
quart) aspartame-sweetened beverage contains about 56 mg of methanol.
Heavy users of aspartame-containing products consume as much as 250 mg
of methanol daily or 32 times the EPA limit.
The
most well known problems from methanol poisoning are vision problems.
Formaldehyde is a known carcinogen, causes retinal damage, interferes
with DNA replication, and causes birth defects. Due to the lack of a
couple of key enzymes, humans are many times more sensitive to the toxic
effects of methanol than animals. Therefore, tests of aspartame or
methanol on animals do not accurately reflect the danger for humans. As
pointed out by Dr Woodrow C. Monte, Director of the Food Science and
Nutrition Laboratory at Arizona State University, "There are no human or
mammalian studies to evaluate the possible mutagenic, teratogenic, or
carcinogenic effects of chronic administration of methyl alcohol."
It
has been pointed out that fruit juices and alcoholic beverages contain
small amounts of methanol. It is important to remember, that the
methanol in natural products never appears alone. In every case, ethanol
is present, usually in much higher amounts. Ethanol is an antidote for
methanol toxicity in humans.
The
troops of Desert Storm were "treated" to large amounts of
aspartame-sweetened beverages which had been heated to over 86 degrees
F. in the Saudi Arabian sun. Many of them returned home with numerous
disorders similar to what has been seen in persons who have been
chemically poisoned by formaldehyde. The free methanol in the beverages
may have been a contributing factor in these illnesses. Other breakdown
products ofaspartame such as DKP, may also have been a factor.
In
a 1993 act that can only be described as "unconscionable", the FDA
approved aspartame as an ingredient in numerous food items that would
always be heated to above 86°degrees F (30°Degrees C).
Much
worse, on 27 June 1996, without public notice, the FDA removed all
restrictions from aspartame allowing it to be used in everything,
including all heated and baked goods.
The
truth about aspartame's toxicity is far different than what the
NutraSweet Company would have you readers believe. In February of 1994,
the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services released the listing of
adverse reactions reported to the FDA (DHHS 1994). Aspartame accounted
for more than 75% of all adverse reactions reported to the FDA's Adverse
Reaction Monitoring System (ARMS). By the FDA's own admission fewer
then ONE PERCENT of those who have problems with something they consume
ever report it to the FDA. This balloons the almost 10,000 complaints
they once had to around a million.
However,
the FDA has a record keeping problem (they never did respond to the
certified letter from the WEBMASTER of this site a major victim!) and
they tend to discourage or even misdirect complaints, at least on
aspartame. The fact remains, though, that MOST victims don't have a clue
that aspartame may be the cause of their many problems! Many reactions
to aspartame were very serious including seizures and death.
Those reactions included:
Abdominal Pain
Anxiety attacks
arthritis
asthma
Asthmatic Reactions
Bloating, Edema (Fluid Retention)
Blood Sugar Control Problems (Hypoglycemia or Hyperglycemia)
Brain Cancer (Pre-approval studies in animals)
Breathing difficulties
burning eyes or throat
Burning Urination
can't think straight
Chest Pains
chronic cough
Chronic Fatigue
Confusion
Death
Depression
Diarrhea
Dizziness
Excessive Thirst or Hunger
fatigue
feel unreal
flushing of face
Hair Loss (Baldness) or Thinning of Hair
Headaches/Migraines dizziness
Hearing Loss
Heart palpitations
Hives (Urticaria)
Hypertension (High Blood Pressure)
Impotency and Sexual Problems
inability to concentrate
Infection Susceptibility
Insomnia
Irritability
Itching
Joint Pains
laryngitis
"like thinking in a fog"
Marked Personality Changes
Memory loss
Menstrual Problems or Changes
Migraines and Severe Headaches (Trigger or Cause From Chronic Intake)
Muscle spasms
Nausea or Vomiting
Numbness or Tingling of Extremities
Other Allergic-Like Reactions
Panic Attacks
Phobias
poor memory
Rapid Heart Beat
Rashes
Seizures and Convulsions
Slurring of Speech
Swallowing Pain
Tachycardia
Tremors
Tinnitus
Vertigo
Vision Loss
Weight gain
Aspartame Disease Mimics Symptoms or Worsens the Following Diseases
Alzheimer's Disease
Arthritis
Birth Defects
Chronic Fatigue Syndrome
Diabetes and Diabetic Complications
Epilepsy
Fibromyalgia
Lupus
Lyme Disease
Lymphoma
Multiple Chemical Sensitivities (MCS)
Multiple Sclerosis (MS)
Parkinson's Disease
Methanol,
from aspartame, is released in the small intestine when the methyl
group of aspartame encounters the enzyme chymotrypsin (Stegink 1984,
page 143). Free methanol begins to form in liquid aspartame-containing
products at temperatures above 86 degrees F. also within the human body.
The
methanol is then converted to formaldehyde. The formaldehyde converts
to formic acid - ant sting poison. Toxic formic acid is used as an
activator to strip epoxy and urethane coatings. Imagine what it does to
your tissues! (Note from Stephanie Relfe - Even the Australian Cancer Council says that there are NO safe levels of formaldehyde).
Phenylalanine
and aspartic acid, 90% of aspartame, are amino acids normally used in
synthesis of protoplasm when supplied by the foods we eat. But when
unaccompanied by other amino acids we use [there are 20], they are
neurotoxic.
That
is why a warning for Phenylketonurics is found on EQUAL and other
aspartame products. Phenylketenurics are 2% of the population with
extreme sensitivity to this chemical unless it's present in food. It
gets you too, causing brain disorders and birth defects! Finally, the
phenyalanine breaks down into DKP, a brain tumor agent.
In
other words: Aspartame converts to dangerous by-products that have no
natural countermeasures. A dieter's empty stomach accelerates these
conversions and amplifies the damage. Components of aspartame go
straight to the brain, damage that causes headaches, mental confusion,
seizures and faulty balance. Lab rats and other test animals died of brain tumors.
Despite the claims of Monsanto and bedfellows:
1.
Methanol from alcohol and juices does not get converted to formaldehyde
to any significant extent. There is very strong evidence to confirm
this fact for alcoholic beverages and fairly strong evidence for juices.
2. Formaldehyde obtained from methanol is very toxic in *very small* doses as seen by recent research.
3.
Aspartame causes chronic toxicity reactions/damage due to the methanol
to formaldehyde and other break down products despite what is claimed
otherwise by the very short, industry-funded experiments using a test
substance that is chemically different and absorbed differently than
what is available to the general public. "Strangely enough", almost all
independent studies show that aspartame can cause health problems.
4.
A common ploy from Monsanto is to claim that aspartame is "safe" yet a
few select people may have "allergic" reactions to it. This is typical
Monsanto nonsense, of course. Their own research shows that it does not
cause "allergic" reactions. It is there way of trying to minimize and
hide the huge numbers of toxicity reactions and damage that people are
experiencing from the long-term use of aspartame.
Given
the following points, it is definitely premature for researchers to
discount the role of methanol in aspartame side effects:
1.
The amount of methanol ingested from aspartame is unprecedented in
human history. Methanol from fruit juice ingestion does not even
approach the quantity of methanol ingested from aspartame, especially in
persons who ingest one to three liters (or more) of diet beverages
every day. Unlike methanol from aspartame, methanol from natural
products is probably not absorbed or converted to its toxic metabolites
in significant amounts as discussed earlier.
2.
Lack of laboratory-detectable changes in plasma formic acid and
formaldehyde levels do not preclude damage being caused by these toxic
metabolites. Laboratory-detectable changes in formate levels are often
not found in short exposures to methanol.
3.
Aspartame-containing products often provide little or no nutrients
which may protect against chronic methanol poisoning and are often
consumed in between meals. Persons who ingest aspartame-containing
products are often dieting and more likely to have nutritional
deficiencies than persons who take the time to make fresh juices.
4. Persons with certain health conditions or on certain drugs may be much more susceptible to chronic methanol poisoning.
5.
Chronic diseases and side effects from slow poisons often build
silently over a long period of time. Many chronic diseases which seem to
appear suddenly have actually been building in the body over many
years.
6.
An increasing body of research is showing that many people are highly
sensitive to low doses of formaldehyde in the environment. Environmental
exposure to formaldehyde and ingestion of methanol (which converts to
formaldehyde) from aspartame likely has a cumulative deleterious effect.
7.
Formic acid has been shown to slowly accumulate in various parts of the
body. Formic acid has been shown to inhibit oxygen metabolism.
8.
The are a very large and growing number of persons are experiencing
chronic health problems similar to the side effects of chronic methanol
poisoning when ingesting aspartame-containing products for a significant
length of time. This includes many cases of eye damage similar to the
type of eye damage seen in methanol poisoning cases.
Note: It often takes at least sixty days without any aspartame NutraSweet to see a significant improvement. (Note
from Stephanie Relfe: Drink plenty of good water. Preferably water
filtered by reverse osmosis. If not that, spring water. Not tap,
distilled or mineral water).
Check
all labels very carefully (including vitamins and pharmaceuticals).
Look for the word "aspartame" on the label and avoid it. (Also, it is a
good idea to avoid "acesulfame-k" or "sunette.") Finally, avoid getting
nutrition information from junk food industry PR organizations such as
IFIC or organizations that accept large sums of money from the junk and
chemical food industry such as the American Dietetic Association.
If
you are a user of any products with aspartame, and you have physical,
visual, mental problems take the 60-day no aspartame test. If, after two
months with no aspartame your symptoms are either gone, or are much
less severe, please get involved to get this neurotoxin off the market.
Write a letter to the FDA, with a copy to Betty Martini (for proof of
how the FDA doesn't keep proper records). Write your congressmen. Return
products containing aspartame to the point of purchase... for a FULL
refund. Make a big stink if they WON'T give you a full refund! Tell all
your friends and family... and if they stop using aspartame and also
"wake up well"... get them involved in the same way.
Aspartame
is an "approved sweetener" because of a few greedy and dishonest people
who place profits above human life and well-being. With the FDA and our
Congress culpable, only an INFORMED and ACTIVE public will affects its
reclassification from "food additive" to TOXIC DRUG, and removed from
the human food chain.
From Stephane Relfe: Note that Michael J. Fox, who was spokesperson for Pepsi, has an old man's disease (Parkinson's Disease) at only 30 years old!
Also
Note: Aspartame has one use that I know of - it makes an EXCELLENT ant
poison. Put a few tablespoons on a nest of fire ants and see how long
before they disappear.
Sources for this article include
-------------
Aspartame is linked to Leukemia and Lymphoma in new Landmark Study on Humans
As few as one diet soda daily may
increase the risk for leukemia in men and women, and for multiple
myeloma and non-Hodgkin lymphoma in men, according to new results from
the longest-ever running study on aspartame as a carcinogen in humans.
Importantly, this is the most comprehensive, long-term study ever
completed on this topic, so it holds more weight than other past studies
which appeared to show no risk. And disturbingly, it may also open the
door for further similar findings on other cancers in future studies.
The most thorough study yet on aspartame - Over two million person-years
For this study, researchers prospectively
analyzed data from the Nurses' Health Study and the Health
Professionals Follow-Up Study for a 22-year period. A total of 77,218
women and 47,810 men were included in the analysis, for a total of
2,278,396 person-years of data. Apart from sheer size, what makes this
study superior to other past studies is the thoroughness with which
aspartame intake was assessed. Every two years, participants were given a
detailed dietary questionnaire, and their diets were reassessed every
four years. Previous studies which found no link to cancer only ever
assessed participants' aspartame intake at one point in time, which
could be a major weakness affecting their accuracy.
One diet soda a day increases leukemia, multiple myeloma and non-Hodgkin lymphomas
The combined results of this new study showed that just one 12-fl oz. can (355 ml) of diet soda daily leads to:
- 42 percent higher leukemia risk in men and women (pooled analysis)
- 102 percent higher multiple myeloma risk (in men only)
- 31 percent higher non-Hodgkin lymphoma risk (in men only)
These results were based on
multi-variable relative risk models, all in comparison to participants
who drank no diet soda. It is unknown why only men drinking higher
amounts of diet soda showed increased risk for multiple myeloma and
non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Note that diet soda is the largest dietary source
of aspartame (by far) in the U.S. Every year, Americans consume about
5,250 tons of aspartame in total, of which about 86 percent (4,500 tons)
is found in diet sodas.
Confirmation of previous high quality research on animals
This new study shows the importance of
the quality of research. Most of the past studies showing no link
between aspartame and cancer have been criticized for being too short in
duration and too inaccurate in assessing long-term aspartame intake.
This new study solves both of those issues. The fact that it also shows a
positive link to cancer should come as no surprise, because a previous
best-in-class research study done on animals (900 rats over their entire
natural lifetimes) showed strikingly similar results back in 2006:
aspartame significantly increased the risk for lymphomas and leukemia in
both males and females. More worrying is the follow on mega-study,
which started aspartame exposure of the rats at the fetal stage.
Increased lymphoma and leukemia risks were confirmed, and this time the
female rats also showed significantly increased breast (mammary) cancer
rates. This raises a critical question: will future, high-quality
studies uncover links to the other cancers in which aspartame has been
implicated (brain, breast, prostate, etc.)?
There is now more reason than ever to
completely avoid aspartame in our daily diet. For those who are tempted
to go back to sugary sodas as a "healthy" alternative, this study had a
surprise finding: men consuming one or more sugar-sweetened sodas daily
saw a 66 percent increase in non-Hodgkin lymphoma (even worse than for
diet soda). Perhaps the healthiest soda is NO SODA AT ALL.
-----------------------------
The Shocking Story of
How Aspartame Became Legal
Did you know that Aspartame was banned by the FDA twice?
How is this product legal now?
The bittersweet argument over whether
Aspartame is safe or not has been going on for a long time. On one side
we have medical evidence that suggests we should avoid using it and on
the other side we lean on the FDA’s approval that suggests it is safe.
Since generally that seems to be the factor that many continue to hold
trust based upon, I thought we could look into the Aspartame story to
find out how it came to be accepted as safe by the FDA. You would think
that something so widely used and so well accepted would have quite the
pristine story leading to its acceptance. I imagine one will discover
otherwise after reading this post.
It all starts in the mid 1960′s with a
company called G.D. Searle. One of their chemists accidentally creates
aspartame while trying to create a cure for stomach ulcers. Searle
decides to put aspartame through a testing process which eventually
leads to its approval by the FDA. Not long after, serious health affects
begin to arise and G.D. Searle comes under fire for their testing
practices. It is revealed that the testing process of Aspartame was
among the worst the investigators had ever seen and that in fact the
product was unsafe for use. Aspartame triggers the first criminal
investigation of a manufacturer put into place by the FDA in 1977. By
1980 the FDA bans aspartame from use after having
3 independent scientists study the sweetener. It was determined that one
main health effects was that it had a high chance of inducing brain
tumors. At this point it was clear that aspartame was not fit to be used
in foods and banned is where it stayed, but not for long.
Early in 1981 Searle Chairman Donald
Rumsfeld (who is a former Secretary of Defense.. surprise surprise)
vowed to “call in his markers,” to get it approved. January 21, 1981,
the day after Ronald Reagan’s inauguration, Searle took the steps to
re-apply aspartame’s approval for use by the FDA. Ronald Reagans’ new
FDA commissioner Arthur Hayes Hull, Jr., appointed a 5-person Scientific
Commission to review the board of inquiry’s decision. It did not take
long for the panel to decide 3-2 in favor of maintaining the ban of
aspartame. Hull then decided to appoint a 6th member to the board, which
created a tie in the voting, 3-3. Hull then decided to personally break
the tie and approve aspartame for use. Hull later left the FDA under
allegations of impropriety, served briefly as Provost at New York
Medical College, and then took a position with Burston-Marsteller.
Burstone-Marstella is the chief public relations firm for both Monsanto
and GD Searle. Since that time he has never spoken publicly about
aspartame.
It is clear to this point that if
anything the safety of aspartame is incredibly shaky. It has already
been through a process of being banned and without the illegitimate
un-banning of the product, it would not be being used today. Makes you
wonder how much corruption and money was involved with names
like Rumsfeld, Reagan and Hull involved so heavily. In 1985, Monsanto
decides to purchase the aspartame patent from G.D. Searle. Remember that
Arthur Hull now had the connection to Monsanto. Monsanto did not seem
too concerned with the past challenges and ugly image aspartame had
based on its past. I personally find this comical as Monsanto’s products
are banned in many countries and of all companies to buy the product
they seem to fit best as they are champions of producing incredibly
unsafe and untested products and making sure they stay in the market
place.
Since then, aspartame has been under a
lot of attack by scientists, doctors, chemists and consumers about it’s
safety and neurotoxic properties. Piles of comprehensive studies have
been completed that show aspartame is a cause for over 90 serious health
problems such as cancer, leukemia, headaches, seizures, fibromyalgia,
and epilepsy just to name a few. We have written several articles
discussing various affects of aspartame.
Timeline
December 1965– While working on an ulcer
drug, James Schlatter, a chemist at G.D. Searle, accidentally discovers
aspartame, a substance that is 180 times sweeter than sugar yet has no
calories.
Spring 1967– Searle begins the safety tests on aspartame that are necessary for applying for FDA approval of food additives.
Fall 1967– Dr. Harold Waisman, a
biochemist at the University of Wisconsin, conducts aspartame safety
tests on infant monkeys on behalf of the Searle Company. Of the seven
monkeys that were being fed aspartame mixed with milk, one dies and five
others have grand mal seizures.
November 1970– Cyclamate, the reigning
low-calorie artificial sweetener — is pulled off the market after some
scientists associate it with cancer. Questions are also raised about
safety of saccharin, the only other artificial sweetener on the market,
leaving the field wide open for aspartame.
December 18, 1970– Searle Company
executives lay out a “Food and Drug Sweetener Strategy’ that they feel
will put the FDA into a positive frame of mind about aspartame. An
internal policy memo describes psychological tactics the company should
use to bring the FDA into a subconscious spirit of participation” with
them on aspartame and get FDA regulators into the “habit of saying,
“Yes”.”
Spring 1971– Neuroscientist Dr. John
Olney (whose pioneering work with monosodium glutamate was responsible
for having it removed from baby foods) informs Searle that his studies
show that aspartic acid (one of the ingredients of aspartame) caused
holes in the brains of infant mice. One of Searle’s own researchers
confirmed Dr. Olney’s findings in a similar study.
February 1973– After spending tens of
millions of dollars conducting safety tests, the G.D. Searle Company
applies for FDA approval and submits over 100 studies they claim support
aspartame’s safety.
March 5, 1973– One of the first FDA
scientists to review the aspartame safety data states that “the
information provided (by Searle) is inadequate to permit an evaluation
of the potential toxicity of aspartame”. She says in her report that in
order to be certain that aspartame is safe, further clinical tests are
needed.
May 1974– Attorney, Jim Turner (consumer
advocate who was instrumental in getting cyclamate taken off the market)
meets with Searle representatives to discuss Dr. Olney’s 1971 study
which showed that aspartic acid caused holes in the brains of infant
mice.
July 26, 1974– The FDA grants aspartame its first approval for restricted use in dry foods.
August 1974– Jim Turner and Dr. John Olney file the first objections against aspartame’s approval.
March 24, 1976– Turner and Olney’s
petition triggers an FDA investigation of the laboratory practices of
aspartame’s manufacturer, G.D. Searle. The investigation finds Searle’s
testing procedures shoddy, full of inaccuracies and “manipulated” test
data. The investigators report they “had never seen anything as bad as
Searle’s testing.”
January 10, 1977– The FDA formally
requests the U.S. 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 they request a criminal investigation of a
manufacturer.
January 26, 1977– While the grand jury
probe is underway, Sidley & Austin, the law firm representing
Searle, begins job negotiations with the U.S. Attorney in charge of the
investigation, Samuel Skinner.
March 8, 1977– G. D. Searle hires
prominent Washington insider Donald Rumsfeld as the new CEO to try to
turn the beleaguered company around. A former Member of Congress and
Secretary of Defense in the Ford Administration, Rumsfeld brings in
several of his Washington cronies as top management.
July 1, 1977– Samuel Skinner leaves the U.S. Attorney’s office and takes a job with Searle’s law firm. (see Jan. 26th)
August 1, 1977– The Bressler Report,
compiled by FDA investigators and headed by Jerome Bressler, is
released. The report finds that 98 of the 196 animals died during one of
Searle’s studies and weren’t autopsied until later dates, in some cases
over one year after death. Many other errors and inconsistencies are
noted. For example, a rat was reported alive, then dead, then alive,
then dead again; a mass, a uterine polyp, and ovarian neoplasms were
found in animals but not reported or diagnosed in Searle’s reports.
December 8, 1977– U.S. Attorney Skinner’s
withdrawal and resignation stalls the Searle grand jury investigation
for so long that the statue of limitations on the aspartame charges runs
out. The grand jury investigation is dropped.
June 1, 1979– The FDA established a Public Board of Inquiry (PBOI) to rule on safety issues surrounding NutraSweet.
September 30, 1980– The Public Board of
Inquiry concludes NutraSweet should not be approved pending further
investigations of brain tumors in animals. The board states it “has not
been presented with proof of reasonable certainty that aspartame is safe
for use as a food additive.”
January 1981– Donald Rumsfeld, CEO of
Searle, states in a sales meeting that he is going to make a big push to
get aspartame approved within the year. Rumsfeld says he will use his
political pull in Washington, rather than scientific means, to make sure
it gets approved.
January 21, 1981– Ronald Reagan is sworn
in as President of the United States. Reagan’s transition team, which
includes Donald Rumsfeld, CEO of G. D. Searle, hand picks Dr. Arthur
Hull Hayes Jr. to be the new FDA Commissioner.
March, 1981– An FDA commissioner’s panel is established to review issues raised by the Public Board of Inquiry.
May 19, 1981– Three of six in-house FDA
scientists who were responsible for reviewing the brain tumor issues,
Dr. Robert Condon, Dr. Satya Dubey, and Dr. Douglas Park, advise against
approval of NutraSweet, stating on the record that the Searle tests are
unreliable and not adequate to determine the safety of aspartame.
July 15, 1981– In one of his first
official acts, Dr. Arthur Hayes Jr., the new FDA commissioner, overrules
the Public Board of Inquiry, ignores the recommendations of his own
internal FDA team and approves NutraSweet for dry products. Hayes says
that aspartame has been shown to be safe for its’ proposed uses and says
few compounds have withstood such detailed testing and repeated close
scrutiny.
October 15, 1982– The FDA announces that
Searle has filed a petition that aspartame be approved as a sweetener in
carbonated beverages and other liquids.
July 1, 1983– The National Soft Drink
Association (NSDA) urges the FDA to delay approval of aspartame for
carbonated beverages pending further testing because aspartame is very
unstable in liquid form. When liquid aspartame is stored in temperatures
above 85 degrees Fahrenheit, it breaks down into DKP and formaldehyde,
both of which are known toxins.
July 8, 1983– The National Soft Drink
Association drafts an objection to the final ruling which permits the
use of aspartame in carbonated beverages and syrup bases and requests a
hearing on the objections. The association says that Searle has not
provided responsible certainty that aspartame and its’ degradation
products are safe for use in soft drinks.
August 8, 1983– Consumer Attorney, Jim
Turner of the Community Nutrition Institute and Dr. Woodrow Monte,
Arizona State University’s Director of Food Science and Nutritional
Laboratories, file suit with the FDA objecting to aspartame approval
based on unresolved safety issues.
September, 1983– FDA Commissioner Hayes
resigns under a cloud of controversy about his taking unauthorized rides
aboard a General Foods jet. (General foods is a major customer of
NutraSweet) Burson-Marsteller, Searle’s public relation firm (which also
represented several of NutraSweet’s major users), immediately hires
Hayes as senior scientific consultant.
Fall 1983– The first carbonated beverages containing aspartame are sold for public consumption.
November 1984– Center for Disease Control
(CDC) “Evaluation of consumer complaints related to aspartame use.”
(summary by B. Mullarkey)
November 3, 1987– U.S. hearing,
“NutraSweet: Health and Safety Concerns,” Committee on Labor and Human
Resources, Senator Howard Metzenbaum, chairman.
Source:
www.thelibertybeacon.com
-------------------------------
What Causes Cancer? 7 Strange Cancer Claims Explained
Bras, deodorant, and mouthwash—just a
few of the everyday products that have been linked to cancer at some
point during the past several decades. Preposterous? Not at the time,
and new suspects have been added to the list. The following slides
reveal the real story behind ordinary household items that have come
under scrutiny.
Artificial Sweeteners
The link: Calorie
watchers scored a win when diet sodas were introduced in the early
1950s. Then lab studies suggested that the sweetener cyclamate caused
bladder cancer in rats, and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration banned
its use. Then saccharin, the replacement of choice, was also shown to
cause tumors in rats. Although saccharin was never banned, all products
containing the sweetener were required to carry a cancer warning on
their packaging.
The reality: No evidence
has since emerged that either cyclamate, which is used in other
countries, or saccharin causes cancer in humans, according to the
National Cancer Institute. Although cyclamate is still banned, saccharin
was taken off the government's list of possible carcinogens in 2000,
the same year in which saccharin products shed the warning label. The
sweetener aspartame has come under suspicion, but scientists have found
no increased risk of cancer in humans.
Mouthwash
The link: A handful of
studies since the late '70s have tied mouthwash that contains ethanol to
oral cancer. Investigators theorize that it may make oral tissues more
vulnerable to known carcinogens, such as those in cigarettes.
The reality: The
evidence against mouthwash is weak, according to the American Dental
Association. Studies don't show, for example, that brands with higher
alcohol content present a greater risk than those with lesser amounts.
Mouthwash is safe when used as directed, says the ADA, which, depending
on the product, may mean swishing once or twice daily and not
swallowing. People who smoke, have a family history of oral cancer, or
have other risk factors may want to choose alcohol-free brands to be on
the safe side, the ADA says.
Statins
The link: Could these
cholesterol-lowering drugs raise the risk of cancer? A 2007 study
inspired this belief when researchers investigating the side effects of
certain statins—lovastatin, simvastatin, pravastatin, fluvastatin, and
atorvastatin—found that participants taking high doses were more likely
to be diagnosed with various cancers, including those of the breast,
colon, and prostate.
The reality: A 2008
review of 15 clinical trials involving statins cast doubt on the initial
results; low LDL cholesterol levels, the reviewers found, were
associated with cancer, whether or not participants were taking statins,
suggesting that cholesterol levels, not the drugs, were to blame. "This
study should reassure those taking statins that they are not increasing
their risk of cancer by trying to reduce their risk of cardiovascular
disease," senior author Richard Karas of Boston's Tufts University
School of Medicine said in a statement. A separate review of research
involving roughly 170,000 participants found no link between statins and
cancer.
Cell Phones
The link: In 1993, a man
suing the manufacturer of his wife's mobile phone claimed on Larry King
Live that the device was responsible for her brain cancer. The
broadcast provoked a public outcry, a rash of similar lawsuits, and
millions of dollars poured into studying whether radio waves emitted by
cell phones could be harmful.
The reality: The largest
study to date, published in 2010, could neither confirm nor dismiss a
connection between cell phones and cancer. Scientists tracked nearly
13,000 adults for a decade and found a slightly higher rate of one of
four cancers—gliomas, a particularly aggressive variety of brain
cancer—among frequent cell users. But cell users overall had a lower
rate of the cancers than never-users. Participants gave their own
estimates of how much time they spent talking, which may have muddied
the results. Researchers have now embarked on an even larger study in
Europe.
Antiperspirant and Deodorant
The link: A decade ago,
an E-mail warning women that using antiperspirant could cause breast
cancer went viral. Since then, some research has suggested that aluminum
in antiperspirants and preservatives called parabens in both
antiperspirants and deodorants mimic the hormone estrogen, which in high
amounts can increase a woman's breast cancer risk.
The reality: There is no
evidence that antiperspirants or deodorants cause cancer. Although a
2004 study heightened concern when researchers found parabens in breast
cancer tissue samples, suggesting the chemicals may have caused the
tumors, the investigators did not check for the presence of parabens in
healthy tissue. Evidence suggests that 99 percent of us are exposed to
parabens from numerous sources, including various cosmetics and foods,
according to the American Cancer Society. Little evidence indicates they
may be harmful. The organization says more study is needed to be
certain that there is no risk. A 2002 study of hundreds of women with
and without breast cancer, found no sign the antiperspirants or
deodorants upped cancer risk.
Bras
The link: Women got a
shock in 1995 when "Dressed to Kill," written by a husband and wife team
of medical anthropologists, alleged that those who regularly wore bras
had a much higher risk of cancer than women who didn't wear them. They
theorized that bras promote the buildup of cancer-causing toxins in the
breast.
The reality: Experts
stress that a link between bras and breast cancer has never been proven.
Considerable evidence points to other variables affecting a woman's
risk of breast cancer, such as weight, age, and family history. Women
who don't wear bras tend to weigh less or have less dense breast tissue,
both of which reduce breast cancer risk. Those factors alone, according
to the American Cancer Society, "would probably contribute to any
perceived difference in risk."
Hair Dye
The link: In 2008
researchers from the World Health Organization's International Agency
for Research on Cancer (IARC) revived concern of a hair dye-cancer
connection after finding a pattern of bladder cancer in male
hairdressers and barbers. They found too little evidence to say whether
people who used the products every so often at home were also at risk.
The reality: The IARC
finding was based on studies conducted at different times, so any
increased risk could result from heavy exposure to chemicals that were
discontinued decades ago after scientists discovered they caused cancer
in rodents. It's unclear whether the chemicals used in current dyes
cause cancer, according to the National Cancer Institute. Most evidence,
however, does not support a link.
Source:
---------------------------------
Aspartame Associated with Increased Risk of Blood Cancers in Long-Term Human Study
Aspartame is an artificial sweetener used in diet soda and over 6,000 other sugar-free or "diet" products. New research linking
aspartame to cancer in some individuals has sparked a flurry of
commentary, including an "apology" from Brigham and Women's Hospital, a
Harvard University teaching facility, for promoting the results.
I first found out about the study when
ABC News contacted me and requested that I provide them with a
comprehensive analysis of this 40-page study within an hour.
Fortunately, I have extensively reviewed this topic and was able to
provide their requested review.
Funding was provided by grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the National Cancer Institute (NCI).
The Harvard hospital originally sent out a
press release with the headline: "The truth isn't sweet when it comes
to artificial sweeteners." Alas, just half an hour before the release of
the study, the hospital suddenly got cold feet, issuing the following
statement:
"Upon review of the findings, the
consensus of our scientific leaders is that the data is weak, and that
BWH Media Relations was premature in the promotion of this work. We
apologize for the time you have invested in this story."
According to Erin McDonough, senior vice
president of communication and public affairs, this was "the first time
something like this had ever happened in her 25 years of working in
media relations."
NBC News stated:
"Not all science deserves publicity.
Some is not done well. Some comes to equivocal conclusions and serves
solely to alert other researchers of the need for further study. The
research... about a potential cancer from aspartame falls squarely in
that second category. If such a study does get attention, it can often
increase the confusion and anger that many people feel about science in
general – and the study of possible risks and benefits of our diet, in
particular."
None of this surprises me. After all, can
you imagine the liability the food and beverage industries, not to
mention virtually every public health agency in the US, would face were
there convincing evidence that aspartame is carcinogenic? They simply
cannot afford such evidence to be accepted.
But make no mistake about it, this study
is of great importance because it's the most comprehensive and longest
human study — spanning 22 years — that has ever looked at aspartame
toxicity. The study evaluates the effect between aspartame intake and
cancer, and they found a clear association between aspartame consumption
and non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma and leukemia.
Ignoring First Long-Term Human Study Would Be a MAJOR Mistake
This is the first large-scale observational human study to report an association between aspartame consumption and blood cancers. The long-term nature of this study is really crucial because one of the primary tricks companies use to hide the toxicity of their products is short-term tests.As the study mentions, the longest study prior to this one was only four and half months, far too short to reveal any toxicity from chronic exposure. Unfortunately, because there are so many of these short-term trials, they get away with saying that aspartame is one of the most studied food additives ever made and no health concerns have ever been discovered. The beverage industry was quick to respond to the study saying aspartame has been "deemed safe for decades by the world's leading toxicologists."Well, they simply didn't look long enough! But the average person does not realize that all those industry-funded studies were so pathetically short, and the media doesn't inform them of this fact either. Hence, people are easily misled.A number of animal studies have clearly documented the association between aspartame and cancer, as the study points out. But what most researchers do not appreciate is that humans are the only animals that do NOT have the protective mechanism to compensate for methanol toxicity. So evaluating methanol toxicity in animals is a flawed model for testing human toxicity.This is due to alcohol dehydrogenase (ADH). In humans, methanol is allowed to be transported in the body to susceptible tissues where this enzyme, ADH, then converts it to formaldehyde, which damages protein and DNA that lead to the increased risk of cancer and autoimmune disease.Interestingly, the previous AARP Diet and Health Study, which did not find an association with aspartame and cancer, used fruit juice as the control. Most are unaware that canned or bottled fruit juice is loaded with methanol that dissociates from the pectin over time and can actually cause similar problems as aspartame. This does not occur in freshly consumed fruits and vegetables, only ones that are bottled or canned. Hence no major difference could be discerned between the aspartame and the control group.
Why Was Aspartame More Toxic in Men than Women?
The health statistics for nearly 48,000 men and over 77,000 women over the age of 20 were reviewed for the featured study. They found that men who consumed more than one diet soda per day had an increased risk of developing multiple myeloma and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Interestingly enough, this association was not found in women.Leukemia was associated with diet soda intake in both sexes.One hypothesis for the difference between the sexes is that men have a higher activity of the enzyme ADH, as I mentioned earlier, which metabolizes methanol and converts it to formaldehyde. More formaldehyde circulating in your blood would naturally have more opportunity to cause greater damage.While the findings from this study add credible evidence that consuming aspartame over a long period of time can pose significant health risks, it also demonstrates that our understanding of the precise mechanism of harm is still lacking and needs to be investigated further, as it's unclear why the women in this study didn't experience the same increased rates of cancer.It's possible that there is some hormonally mediated protection against the adverse effects of aspartame in women, in addition to men having higher ADH activity, but the study was not designed to answer that question.All in all however, I believe the study offers significant supporting evidence of the danger that "diet" drinks and foods pose. Many have indeed been injured by aspartame — there are more adverse reports to the FDA on aspartame than all other food additives combined. It's also widely known how massive industry and government collusion at the FDA was ultimately responsible for its approval after it failed to be approved for many years.Although the authors' summary conclusion mentions they do not rule out the possibility of chance for this association, it's worth noting that this is because they could not offer a conclusive explanation for the difference between the sexes.I carefully reviewed this study in its entirety, and found it to be extremely well executed. While the mechanism responsible for the difference between the sexes for certain cancers need to be studied further, a biological mechanism for cancer from aspartame does exist, which I'll review in a moment. Furthermore, it was the reviewers of the study that pushed back during the editing process, insisting that it should be made clear that chance was a plausible explanation for the findings6.Lead researcher Eva Schernhammer, MD, DrPH stated in the original press release (which has since been removed):"The sex difference we observed deserves consideration. There are many possible explanations in this, one being chance, however these differences could be related to a yet-to-be-discovered risk factor for lymphoma and leukemia, which are associated with soda consumption in men, but not women."
Methyl Alcohol — The Root of the Problem with Aspartame
Aspartame is primarily made up of aspartic acid and phenylalanine. The phenylalanine has been synthetically modified to carry a methyl group, which provides the majority of the sweetness. That phenylalanine methyl bond, called a methyl ester, is very weak, which allows the methyl group on the phenylalanine to easily break off and form methanol. This is in sharp contrast to naturally-occurring methanol found in certain fruits and vegetables, where it is firmly bonded to pectin, allowing the methanol to be safely passed through your digestive tract.
If the methyl alcohol is broken off from the phenylalanine, as easily happens when drinks sweetened with it are exposed to higher temperatures, it no longer tastes sweet. This is precisely what happened to most of the diet soda sent to the Middle East for US troops. They received non-sweet sodas that were loaded with dangerous levels of methanol, which can be toxic when it's in this already broken down state.Methanol acts as a Trojan horse; it's carried into susceptible tissues in your body, like your brain and bone marrow, where the ADH enzyme converts it into formaldehyde, which wreaks havoc with sensitive proteins and DNA. All other animals, on the other hand, have a protective mechanism that allows methanol to be broken down into harmless formic acid...According to aspartame expert Dr. Woodrow Monte, there's a major biochemical problem with methanol in humans, because of the difference in how it's metabolized, compared to all other animals. This is why toxicology testing on animals is a flawed model. It doesn't fully apply to humans.Both animals and humans have small structures called peroxisomes in each cell. There are a couple of hundred in every cell of your body, which are designed to detoxify a variety of chemicals. Peroxisome contains catalase, which help detoxify methanol. Other chemicals in the peroxisome convert the formaldehyde to formic acid, which is harmless, but this last step occurs only in animals.When methanol enters the peroxisome of every animal except humans, it gets into that mechanism. Humans do have the same number of peroxisomes in comparable cells as animals, but human peroxisomes cannot convert the toxic formaldehyde into harmless formic acid.So again, to recap: In humans, the methyl alcohol travels through your blood vessels into sensitive areas, such as your brain, that are loaded with alcohol dehydrogenase (ADH), which converts methanol to formaldehyde, and since there's no catalase present, the formaldehyde is free to cause enormous damage in your tissues.
Saccharin and Aspartame Cause Greater Weight Gain than Sugar
In related news, a study published on October 19 in the journal Appetite,
found that compared with sucrose (regular table sugar), saccharin and
aspartame caused greater weight gain in adult rats, and this weight gain
was unrelated to caloric intake. The underlying mechanism was not
determined.
However, a number of studies have already
shown that consuming artificial sweeteners breaks the connection
between a sweet sensation and a high-calorie food, thereby changing your
body's ability to regulate intake naturally. In a similar 2008 study,
rats that ate yogurt sweetened with an artificial sweetener consumed
more calories, gained more weight, and put on more body fat than rats
that ate yogurt sweetened with sugar. Other studies,
too, have shown that eating artificial sweeteners might hinder your
body's ability to estimate calorie intake, thus boosting your
inclination to overindulge.
The fact that aspartame is NOT a dieter's
best friend has been known by scientists for some time. The problem is
this news has not received the necessary traction in the media...
For example, a study from 1986, which
included nearly 80,000 women, found that those who used artificial
sweeteners were significantly more likely than non-users to gain weight
over time, regardless of initial weight. According to the authors, the
results "were not explicable by differences in food consumption
patterns," and concluded that:
" The data do not support the
hypothesis that long-term artificial sweetener use either helps weight
loss or prevents weight gain."
Another more recent study with the telling title of Gain Weight by "Going Diet?" Artificial Sweeteners and the Neurobiology of Sugar Cravings,
published in 2010, found that epidemiologic data suggest artificially
sweetened foods and beverages do not reduce weight. Quite the contrary:
"Several large scale prospective
cohort studies found positive correlation between artificial sweetener
use and weight gain. The San Antonio Heart Study examined 3,682 adults
over a seven- to eight-year period in the 1980s.
When matched for initial body mass
index (BMI), gender, ethnicity, and diet, drinkers of artificially
sweetened beverages consistently had higher BMIs at the follow-up, with
dose dependence on the amount of consumption... Saccharin use was also
associated with eight-year weight gain in 31,940 women from the Nurses'
Health Study conducted in the 1970s.
Similar observations have been reported in children.
A two-year prospective study
involving 166 school children found that increased diet soda consumption
was associated with higher BMI Z-scores at follow-up, indicating weight
gain. The Growing Up Today Study, involving 11,654 children aged 9 to
14 also reported positive association between diet soda and weight gain
for boys. For each daily serving of diet beverage, BMI increased by 0.16
kg/m2... A cross-sectional study looking at 3,111 children and youth
found diet soda drinkers had significantly elevated BMI."
Are Your Health Problems Related to Artificial Sweeteners?
Many people belatedly realize they've been suffering reactions to one artificial sweetener or another. If you suspect an artificial sweetener might be to blame for a symptom you're having, a good way to help you weed out the culprit is to do an elimination challenge. It's easy to do, but you must read the ingredient labels for everything you put in your mouth to make sure you're avoiding ALL artificial sweeteners. To determine if you're having a reaction to artificial sweeteners, take the following steps:Eliminate all artificial sweeteners from your diet for two weeks.After two weeks of being artificial sweetener-free, reintroduce your artificial sweetener of choice in a significant quantity (about three servings daily). Avoid other artificial sweeteners during this period.Do this for one to three days and notice how you feel, especially as compared to when you were consuming no artificial sweeteners.If you don't notice a difference in how you feel after re-introducing your primary artificial sweetener for a few days, it's a safe bet you're able to tolerate it acutely, meaning your body doesn't have an immediate, adverse response. However, this doesn't mean your health won't be damaged in the long run.If you've been consuming more than one type of artificial sweetener, you can repeat steps 2 through 4 with the next one on your list.Let me make it abundantly clear that even though you may not show immediate signs of any noticeable reaction after consuming artificial sweeteners, please don't make the mistake of telling yourself "they must be OK for me". I strongly urge you to avoid them at all costs. They are toxic to all humans and will not help you in any way, shape, or form.Also, if you do experience side effects from aspartame, please report it to the FDA (if you live in the United States) without delay. It's easy to make a report — just go to the FDA Consumer Complaint Coordinator page, find the phone number for your state, and make a call reporting your reaction. There's no telling just how many reports they might need to receive before taking another look at aspartame's safety and reconsidering their stance. But I CAN tell you, the more reports they get, the more likely that is to happen. So if you suspect you have experienced an adverse reaction from aspartame (or any other drug or food additive), please take a moment to make this important call.
Are there ANY Safe and Healthy Alternatives to Sugar?
The best strategy is to lower your use of
sugar and eat right for your nutritional type and make sure you have
enough high quality fats. Once your body has the proper fuel, your sweet
cravings will radically diminish and you will be satisfied without
them. If you still have cravings it is a strong suggestion you need to
further refine your attempt to identify the right fuel for your body. My
free Nutritional Plan can help you do this in a step by step fashion.
If you need a sweetener you could use stevia or
Lo Han, both of which are safe natural sweeteners. Remember, if you
struggle with high blood pressure, high cholesterol, diabetes or extra
weight, then you have insulin sensitivity issues and would benefit from
avoiding ALL sweeteners.
If you're having trouble weaning yourself off soda, try Turbo Tapping.
Turbo Tapping is a clever use of the Emotional Freedom Technique (EFT),
specifically designed to resolve many aspects of an addiction in a
concentrated period of time.
------------------------
8 Dangers of Diet Soda
You’ve probably noticed I mention diet
soda quite often as something you need to eliminate from your diet as
quickly as you can. It is a huge peeve of mine (along with a few others,
like agave). I know many people enjoy diet soda and feel it is a
“freebie” because it contains zero calories. What many people fail to
realize is diet soda can be very detrimental to their health. It is also
not beautifying at all- in fact it will diminish your beauty. ~ Health
Freedoms
Why is diet soda unhealthy? Let me count the ways!
1. Neurotoxic
While artificial sweeteners may be a zero
calorie alternative to sugar, they are in no way healthier. Diet sodas
may use a variety of artificial sweeteners in place of sugar, including
aspartame, which acts as a neurotoxin.
Also known as NutraSweet, aspartame
originally received FDA approval for use in carbonated beverages in1983,
and it still remains the most commonly used sweetener in diet soda.
Annually, reactions to aspartame result for a majority of the adverse
reaction reports made to the food and drug administration.
Made from
L-aspartyl-L-phenylalanyl-methyl-ester, aspartame is 200 times as sweet
as sugar and contains negligible calories. Once in the human body,
aspartame breaks down into phenylalanine, aspartic acid, and methanol.
Methanol is a wood alcohol poison that, when heated above 86 degrees
Fahrenheit (the human body temperature is 98.6 degrees), converts to
formaldehyde. Aspartame is also an excitotoxin that builds up in the
brain, and can excite brain neurons to the point of cell death.
2: Causes Headaches and Other Symptoms
Another artificial sweetener commonly used in diet sodas, sucralose, may cause a host of health problems including headaches.
Made from a modified sugar molecule,
sucralose is supposed to pass through the body unabsorbed. Because
sucralose is relatively new in the market still, its long-term effects
have not been measured. Some evidence1 suggests sucralose may cause
migraines, gastrointestinal issues, and thymus gland damage. Sucralose
may also intensify sugar cravings, increase appetite, and trigger
insulin release.
Soda is made up of a number of acidic
chemicals. It is one of the most acidic substances humans ingest. The
acids in diet soda demineralize the bones and teeth, and can lead to
fractures and osteoporosis. Acid in the body also can lead to a number
of health conditions such as inflammation and corrosion of body tissue.
When your body is overly acidic your skin will not be as beautiful or
youthful. It will contribute to looking older.
4: Caffeinated
Many diet sodas contain caffeine, which
is an artificial stimulant and an addictive substance. Caffeine also
excessively taxes the liver and can hamper its ability to cleanse and
filter toxins from the body. Additionally, caffeine can trigger stress
hormones, which can result in chronic stress and weight gain. Caffeine
is also a diuretic, which dehydrates the body. It’s best to avoid
caffeine in all its forms, particularly diet soda.
Studies show that although diet soda has
no caloric value, it may have an impact on insulin similar to sugar
ingestion. This is most likely due to the cephalic phase insulin
response in the brain. When you taste the sweet in diet soda, your body
perceives it as sugar and causes the pancreas to release insulin just as
it would if you were consuming actual sugar.
Some studies show that drinking diet soda
may increase the incidence of obesity and/or prevent you from losing
weight. In fact, researchers at the University of Texas Health Center
made some startling findings when testing the link between obesity and
diet soda.
Obesity risk increased as followed:
26.5 percent for people drinking up to ½
can of diet soda per day, and 24 percent for regular soda drinkers
consuming up to one can per day
54.5 percent for one to two cans of diet soda per day as opposed to 32.8 percent for those drinking the same amount of regular soda
57.1 percent for people drinking more than two cans of diet soda per day as opposed to 47.2 percent for people drinking the same amount of regular soda
54.5 percent for one to two cans of diet soda per day as opposed to 32.8 percent for those drinking the same amount of regular soda
57.1 percent for people drinking more than two cans of diet soda per day as opposed to 47.2 percent for people drinking the same amount of regular soda
In other words, diet soda consumption had
a higher correlation with obesity rates than consumption of caloric
soda containing sugar or high-fructose corn syrup.
6: Increases Toxic Load
There’s not a lot that’s natural in diet soda. Here are just a few of the ingredients you may find:
Carbonated water
Artificial coloring
Phosphoric acid
Potassium benzoate
Citric acid
Artificial coloring
Phosphoric acid
Potassium benzoate
Citric acid
Doesn’t sound so delicious and healthy,
does it! It sounds nasty, and that is because it is indeed a nasty
product. Diet soda places a significant toxic load on your liver and can
contribute to toxic sludge in your intestines. You are much better off
drinking pure, filtered, non-tap water.
7: Increases Risk of Heart Disease
A study at University of Miami Miller
School of Medicine4 showed that people who drank diet soda daily had a
61 percent increased risk of a cardiovascular event. The study followed
more than 2,500 participants for about nine years, during which 559
vascular events occurred. Even accounting for age and other risk
factors, the risk with diet soda consumption appeared to be at least 48
percent higher. With that kind of risk, why take a chance on diet soda?
8: May Contribute to Metabolic Syndrome
A study at University of Minnesota’s
School of Public Health in 2008 linked diet soda to metabolic syndrome, a
cluster of metabolic disorders including obesity, high blood pressure,
elevated triglycerides and hormone
resistance. According to the study, consuming diet soda increased the
risk of developing metabolic syndrome by 34 percent, which was higher
than the elevated risk from consuming two other unhealthy types of foods
– meat (26 percent increased risk), and fried foods (25 percent
increased risk).
With all of these health risks, you have
to ask yourself, is diet soda worth it? Avoiding soda may be one of the
best things you can do for your health and beauty.
--------------------------------
Aspartame: Safety Approved in 90 Nations, But Damages Brain
A new study on aspartame has the
potential to reignite the decades-old controversy behind this artificial
sweetener's safety, or lack thereof. As far back as 1996, folks were
writing about the potential link between aspartame and increasing brain
tumor rates. Indeed, its intrinsic neurotoxicity and carcinogenicity has
been confirmed in the biomedical literature. And yet, aspartame has
been approved for use in thousands of consumer products in over 90
countries, and is still being consumed by millions worldwide on a daily
basis – despite the fact that over
adverse health effects of aspartame have been documented.
The new study, published in the September edition of the Journal of Bioscience and
titled, "Effect of chronic exposure to aspartame on oxidative stress in
the brain of albino rats," aimed to test the hypothesis that chronic
consumption of aspartame may be causing neurological damage in exposed populations.
They found that chronic (90 day)
administration of aspartame to rats, at ranges only 50% above what the
FDA considers safe for human consumption, resulted in blood and brain
tissue changes consistent with brain damage.
Aspartame is metabolized into three
distinct components: aspartic acid, methanol and phenylalanine. While
aspartic acid is a well-known excitotoxin, phenylalanine only presents a
serious health concern to those with a genetic disorder known as
phenyletonuria. Methanol, on the other hand, is far more problematic, as
it is not naturally found in significant quantities in the human diet.
According to a recent review
Until 200 years ago, methanol was an
extremely rare component of the human diet and is still rarely consumed
in contemporary hunter and gatherer cultures. With the invention of
canning in the 1800s, canned and bottled fruits and vegetables, whose
methanol content greatly exceeds that of their fresh counterparts,
became far more prevalent. The recent dietary introduction of aspartame,
an artificial sweetener 11% methanol by weight, has also greatly
increased methanol consumption.
Moreover, the aspartame metabolite methanol (also known as wood alcohol) is highly toxic and is metabolized into the known human carcinogen formaldehyde and formic acid,[iv] which
is known to be highly toxic to the central nervous system. Considering
the fact that the normal human body temperature is approximately 98.6
degrees Farenheit, and that aspartame will convert to its toxic
metabolites at temperatures as low as 86 degrees Farenheit, the finding
that aspartame is neurotoxic to animals is not a surprise. The authors
of the new study surmised that the observed adverse brain changes were
due to the generation of oxidative stress in brain regions.
Aspartame, of course, is a proprietary
synthetic chemical not found in nature, and exists primarily because
plants like stevia, which have significant, clinically-substantiated
healing properties, can be grown in your back yard for free and are
therefore not profitable commodities that can be produced and controlled
only by a few.
But, aspartame is not the only toxic
sweetener on the market. A growing body of research now shows that
sucralose, known by the brand-name Splenda, is also capable of
suppressing the immune system, causing inflammatory bowel conditions
such as Crohn's and ulcerative colitis, migraine headaches, and DNA
damage.[v]
The trick is to stick with naturally
occurring compounds, whose sweetness is not associated with adverse
health effects. Below is a list of natural alternatives, along with the
number of potential health benefits associated with each, as indexed on
our website.
Compounds whose sweetness is not associated with adverse health effects
- Honey (69)
- Xylitol (21)
- Erythritol (2)
- Stevia (16)
Written by:
Source: http://www.greenmedinfo.com/
----------------------------------
Are PEPSI & COKE More Dangerous Then You Think?
Zero calorie sodas such as Coke Zero and
Pepsi Max are slowly but surely becoming the next generation of diet
soft drinks. Based on their popularity, people are obviously drinking
them, but if they don’t contain any calories, then what exactly is it
that you’re drinking?
As a result of consuming too much
processed food that’s high in sugar and refined carbohydrates, the
majority of the population is overweight and many of the people who are
trying to slim down by cutting calories are failing miserably. As such,
zero calorie beverages such as Coke Zero and Pepsi Max are not the
answer to weight loss that many people believe them to be, and to make
matters worse, the chemical additives in these beverages can compromise
your health.
Most diet sodas, including Diet Coke and
Diet Pepsi, have been virtually calorie free for years. As such, Coke
Zero and Pepsi Max are nothing more than diet sodas with some new
ingredients and a unique marketing spin. The following are some of the
more notable ingredients found in Coke Zero and Pepsi Max that don’t
exist in their full calorie Coke and Pepsi counterparts.
Aspartame
Aspartame is an
artificial sweetener that’s considered by many health experts to be one
of the most dangerous food additives in existence. Despite a significant
amount of controversy, aspartame is frequently associated with cancer,
neurological disorders including Parkinson’s disease and Alzheimer’s
disease, and a very long list of other conditions and unpleasant
symptoms.
Much of the
controversy surrounding aspartame is fueled by corporate interest. In
the late 1990s, Dr. Ralph Walden showed how significant this influence
is by conducting a peer review of the 165 studies that were available at
the time and were related to the safety of aspartame for humans. Of
these studies, 74 were funded by corporations with financial ties to
aspartame and the other 91 were funded by independent sources. All of
the research that had financial ties to aspartame deemed it to be safe
while 92% of the independent research indicated otherwise.
Acesulfame Potassium
Acesulfame potassium,
often referred to as Acesulfame K, is another artificial sweetener
that’s increasing in popularity. Although more research needs to be done
on Acesulfame K, it’s been shown to promote cancer and increased
insulin production in animals.
Potassium Benzoate
Potassium benzoate is a food preservative
that’s used to prevent the growth of yeast, mold, and bacteria. It’s
drawn a lot of negative attention due to it’s potential to form benzene
when combined with vitamin C. Long term exposure to benzene has been
found to cause cancer, anemia, suppressed immunity, irregular
menstruation, and infertility.
Trading One Problem for Another
As shown by the following table, the
biggest difference between Coke Zero, Diet Coke, Pepsi Max, and Diet
Pepsi is the introduction of the Acesulfame K sweetener and the
reduction of aspartame.
Acesulfame Potassium
| Coke Zero | Diet Coke | Pepsi Max | Diet Pepsi | |
| Acesulfame K | 46 mg | 0 mg | 32 mg | 0 mg |
| Aspartame | 87 mg | 187 mg | 123 mg | 177 mg |
Although Acesulfame K appears to be much
less of a risk than aspartame, it’s safety is still in question, and
that leaves Coke Zero and Pepsi Max with two potentially dangerous
artificial sweeteners instead of one.
The Max Factor
In addition to being a
zero calorie soft drink, Pepsi Max is also marketed for it’s increased
caffeine content and the addition of ginseng, both of which give it the
appeal of an energy drink. In comparison to the 38 mg of caffeine in
regular Pepsi, there’s 69 mg of caffeine in Pepsi Max. The inclusion of
ginseng, which is a natural herbal supplement used to promote better
mental and physical function, even gives Pepsi Max a bit of a misleading
health appeal.
Neither caffeine nor ginseng will ever
provide you with the long lasting and balanced sense of energy that can
only result from optimal health. Furthermore, frequently relying on
caffeine for energy will likely worsen the underlying problem that’s
causing you to be tired and eventually lead to adrenal fatigue and
poorer health.
Another suspect ingredient in Pepsi Max
is calcium disodium EDTA which is commonly used by health professionals
to help remove excess metals such as mercury, lead, and iron from the
body. What does this have to do with soda you may ask? According to
Pepsi, it helps to “protect flavor.” The real reason why it’s in Pepsi
Max is to reduce the risk of benzene forming from the potassium benzoate
preservative. How nice of Pepsi to look out for us like that.
A Better Perspective on Weight Loss
Clearly, the most obvious reason to drink
zero calorie beverages such as Coke Zero and Pepsi Max is to reduce
calorie intake, and in turn, lose weight. Ironically, although this is a
controversial topic with research supporting both sides, it’s been
shown in at least one study that people who rely on artificially
sweetened beverages are more likely to gain weight. In association with this, aspartame in particular has been shown to increase appetite and calorie consumption.
Losing weight is no different from
increasing your energy in the regard that it’s most effectively done
through a healthy lifestyle. Too many people prioritize their
appearance over their health, and as a result, fail to understand that
pursuing better health and following a healthy diet will naturally lead
to weight loss.
No type of soda, regardless of how many
or how few calories it has, is ever a good choice. However, by following
healthy habits on a regular basis, you’ll be able to enjoy soda in
moderation without much impact to your health or weight, and when you
do, you might as well enjoy the real thing.
Kids are heavy consumers of soft drinks,
according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and they are guzzling
soda pop at unprecedented rates.
Carbonated soda pop provides more added
sugar in a typical 2-year-old toddler's diet than cookies, candies and
ice cream combined.
Fifty-six percent of 8-year-olds down
soft drinks daily, and a third of teenage boys drink at least three cans
of soda pop per day.
These popular beverages account for more than a quarter of all drinks consumed in the United States.
More than 15 billion gallons were sold in 2000.
That works out to at least one 12-ounce can per day for every man, woman and child.
Not only are soft drinks widely available
everywhere, from fast food restaurants to video stores, they're now
sold in 60 percent of all public and private middle schools and high
schools nationwide, according to the National Soft Drink Association. A
few schools are even giving away soft drinks to students who buy school
lunches.
As soda pop becomes the beverage of
choice among the nation's young -- and as soda marketers focus on
brand-building among younger and younger consumers -- public health
officials, school boards, parents, consumer groups and even the soft
drink industry are faced with nagging questions:
How healthful are these beverages, which provide a lot calories, sugars and caffeine but no significant nutritional value?
And what happens if you drink a lot of them at a very young age?
Recently, representatives of the soft
drink industry, concerned that public opinion and public policy may turn
against them, will staged a three-day "fly-in" to lobby Congress to
maintain soft drinks sales in schools; and to educate lawmakers on the
"proper perspective" on soft drink use.
The industry plans to counter a US
Department of Agriculture proposal, announced in January, that would
require all foods sold in schools to meet federal nutrition standards.
That would mean that snack foods and soft drinks would have to meet the
same standards as school lunches.
Nearly everyone by now has heard the litany on the presumed health effects of soft drinks:
Obesity
Tooth decay
Caffeine dependence
Weakened bones
But does drinking soda pop really cause those things?
To help separate fact from fiction, the
Health section reviewed the latest scientific findings and asked an
array of experts on both sides of the debate to weigh in on the topic.
Be forewarned, however: Compared with the data available on tobacco and
even dietary fat, the scientific evidence on soft drinks is less
developed. The results can be a lot like soft drinks themselves, both
sweet and sticky.
Acesulfame Potassium
Obesity
One very recent, independent, peer-reviewed study demonstrates a strong link between soda consumption and childhood obesity.
One previous industry-supported,
unpublished study showed no link. Explanations of the mechanism by which
soda may lead to obesity have not yet been proved, though the evidence
for them is strong.
Many people have long assumed that soda
-- high in calories and sugar, low in nutrients -- can make kids fat.
But until this month there was no solid, scientific evidence
demonstrating this.
Reporting in The Lancet, a British
medical journal, a team of Harvard researchers presented the first
evidence linking soft drink consumption to childhood obesity. They found
that 12-year-olds who drank soft drinks regularly were more likely to
be overweight than those who didn't.
For each additional daily serving of
sugar-sweetened soft drink consumed during the nearly two-year study,
the risk of obesity increased 1.6 times.
Obesity experts called the Harvard
findings important and praised the study for being prospective. In other
words, the Harvard researchers spent 19 months following the children,
rather than capturing a snapshot of data from just one day. It's
considered statistically more valuable to conduct a study over a long
period of time.
Researchers found that schoolchildren who
drank soft drinks consumed almost 200 more calories per day than their
counterparts who didn't down soft drinks. That finding helps support the
notion that we don't compensate well for calories in liquid form.
Tooth Decay
Here's one health effect that even the
soft drink industry admits, grudgingly, has merit. In a carefully worded
statement, the NSDA says that "there's no scientific evidence that
consumption of sugars per se has any negative effect other than dental
caries." But the association also correctly notes that soft drinks
aren't the sole cause of tooth decay.
In fact, a lot of sugary foods, from
fruit juices to candy and even raisins and other dried fruit, have what
dentists refer to as "cariogenic properties," which is to say they can
cause tooth decay.
Okay, so how many more cavities are soft
drink consumers likely to get compared with people who don't drink soda?
This is where it gets complicated.
A federally funded study of nearly 3,200
Americans 9 to 29 years old conducted between 1971 and 1974 showed a
direct link between tooth decay and soft drinks. Numerous other studies
have shown the same link throughout the world, from Sweden to Iraq.
But sugar isn't the only ingredient in
soft drinks that causes tooth problems. The acids in soda pop are also
notorious for etching tooth enamel in ways that can lead to cavities.
"Acid begins to dissolve tooth enamel in only 20 minutes," notes the
Ohio Dental Association in a release issued earlier this month.
Caffeine Dependence
The stimulant properties and dependence potential of caffeine in soda are well documented, as are their effects on children.
Ever tried going without your usual cup
of java on the weekend? If so, you may have experienced a splitting
headache, a slight rise in blood pressure, irritability and maybe even
some stomach problems.
These well-documented symptoms describe
the typical withdrawal process suffered by about half of regular
caffeine consumers who go without their usual dose.
The soft drink industry agrees that
caffeine causes the same effects in children as adults, but officials
also note that there is wide variation in how people respond to
caffeine. The simple solution, the industry says, is to choose a soda
pop that is caffeine-free. All big soda makers offer products with
either low or no caffeine.
That may be a good idea, though it raises
the question of whether soda machines in schools should be permitted to
offer caffeinated beverages or at least be obligated to offer a
significant proportion of caffeine-free products.
It also raises the question of how one
determines a product's caffeine content. Nutrition labels are not
required to divulge that information. If a beverage contains caffeine,
it must be included in the ingredient list, but there's no way to tell
how much a beverage has, and there's little logic or predictability to
the way caffeine is deployed throughout a product line.
Okay, so most enlightened consumers
already know that colas contain a fair amount of caffeine. It turns out
to be 35 to 38 milligrams per 12-ounce can, or roughly 28 percent of the
amount found in an 8-ounce cup of coffee. But few know that diet colas
-- usually chosen by those who are trying to dodge calories and/or sugar
-- often pack a lot more caffeine.
A 12-ounce can of Diet Coke, for example,
has about 42 milligrams of caffeine -- seven more than the same amount
of Coke Classic. A can of Pepsi One has about 56 milligrams of caffeine
-- 18 milligrams more than both regular Pepsi and Diet Pepsi.
Even harder to figure out is the caffeine
distribution in other flavors of soda pop. Many brands of root beer
contain no caffeine. An exception is Barq's, made by the Coca-Cola Co.,
which has has 23 milligrams per 12-ounce can. Sprite, 7-Up and ginger
ale are caffeine-free. But Mountain Dew, the curiously named Mello
Yellow, Sun Drop Regular, Jolt and diet as well as regular Sunkist
orange soda all pack caffeine.
Caffeine occurs naturally in kola nuts,
an ingredient of cola soft drinks. But why is this drug, which is known
to create physical dependence, added to other soft drinks?
The industry line is that small amounts
are added for taste, not for the drug's power to sustain demand for the
products that contain it. Caffeine's bitter taste, they say, enhances
other flavors. "It has been a part of almost every cola -- and
pepper-type beverage -- since they were first formulated more than 100
years ago," according to the National Soft Drink Association.
But recent blind taste tests conducted by
Roland Griffiths at Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions in Baltimore
found that only 8 percent of regular soft drink consumers could identify
the difference between regular and caffeine-free soft drinks.
The study included only subjects who
reported that they drank soft drinks mainly for their caffeine content.
In other words, more than 90 percent of the self-diagnosed caffeine
cravers in this small sample could not detect the presence of caffeine.
That's why the great popularity of
caffeinated soft drinks is driven not so much by subtle taste effects as
by the mood-altering and physical dependence of caffeine that drives
the daily self-administration.
And the unknown could be especially
troublesome for the developing brains of children and adolescents. Logic
dictates that when you are dependent on a drug, you are really
upsetting the normal balances of neurochemistry in the brain. The fact
that kids have withdrawal signs and symptoms when the caffeine is
stopped is a good indication that something has been profoundly
disturbed in the brain.
Exactly where that leads is anybody's
guess -- which is to say there is little good research on the effects of
caffeine on kids' developing brains.
Bone Weakening
Animal studies demonstrate that phosphorus, a common ingredient in soda, can deplete bones of calcium.
And two recent human studies suggest that
girls who drink more soda are more prone to broken bones. The industry
denies that soda plays a role in bone weakening.
Animal studies -- mostly involving rats
-- point to clear and consistent bone loss with the use of cola
beverages. But as scientists like to point out, humans and rats are not
exactly the same.
Even so, there's been concern among the
research community, public health officials and government agencies over
the high phosphorus content in the US diet. Phosphorus -- which occurs
naturally in some foods and is used as an additive in many others --
appears to weaken bones by promoting the loss of calcium. With less
calcium available, the bones become more porous and prone to fracture.
The soft drink industry argues that the
phosphoric acid in soda pop contributes only about 2 percent of the
phosphorus in the typical US diet, with a 12-ounce can of soda pop
averaging about 30 milligrams.
There's growing concern that even a few
cans of soda today can be damaging when they are consumed during the
peak bone-building years of childhood and adolescence. A 1996 study
published in the Journal of Nutrition by the FDA's Office of Special
Nutritionals noted that a pattern of high phosphorus/low calcium
consumption, common in the American diet, is not conducive to optimizing
peak bone mass in young women.
A 1994 Harvard study of bone fractures in
teenage athletes found a strong association between cola beverage
consumption and bone fractures in 14-year-old girls. The girls who drank
cola were about five times more likely to suffer bone fractures than
girls who didn't consume soda pop.
Besides, to many researchers, the
combination of rising obesity and bone weakening has the potential to
synergistically undermine future health. Adolescents and kids don't
think long-term. But what happens when these soft-drinking people become
young or middle-aged adults and they have osteoporosis, sedentary
living and obesity?
By that time, switching to water, milk or fruit juice may be too little, too late
--------------------------------------
Hard Facts About Aspartame That All Should NOT Ignore
If you have not read my previous articles about Aspartame you can
read each article by clicking on the links below.
The top 10 worst Sources of Aspartame
If you think you are making a healthier
option because you chose to have diet soda over a regular soda drink,
its time to think again. Crafty advertising may have given the term
"sugar free" an impression of healthy alternative, but the truth of the
matter is that chemical sweeteners are far from healthy.
Despite the dismissive stand of aspartame
producers that aspartame is safe for human consumption, various studies
over the years have shown that aspartame is actually linked to
headaches, migraines, dizziness, tumors and even cancer. The U.S. FDA
made public 92 symptoms attributed to aspartame from submitted
complaints. Despite its questionable effect, aspartame was approved for
use in 1981 and still continues to be so today. Ironically, aspartame
was never tested in humans before its approval. Its use in over 6,000
products and by 250 million people has made the public its unwitting
guinea pig in a grand experiment 40 years in the making.
Stocking up on diet foods is the best way
to gain weight. Latest research on aspartame has revealed that it
actually increases the risk of weight gain. Being 200 times sweeter than
sugar, aspartame appears to be the perfect answer to dieting since it
contains only a few calories while still having the sweet taste of
sugar. Unfortunately, phenylalanine and aspartic acid, major components
of aspartame, trigger the release of insulin and leptins. The latter are
hormones that stimulate storage of body fat.
Moreover, large doses of phenylalanine
lower serotonin levels and lead to food cravings. Since both real and
artificial sweeteners stimulate the taste buds, they affect the same
taste and pleasure pathways in the brain. Artificial sweeteners,
however, merely activate but do not satiate the pleasure-related region
of the brain, proving to be an inferior system in preventing sugar
cravings. In the Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine, researcher Qing Yang - a faculty at the Department of Molecular, Cellular and Developmental Biology- published findings that revealed artificial sweeteners more likely to cause weight gain than weight loss.
This is over and above the fact that
aspartame is also highly addictive. The phenylalanine and methanol
components increase the dopamine levels in the brain and cause a certain
high. This further creates an addiction that is only made worse by the
release of methyl alcohol or methanol, which is considered a narcotic.
Keeping this in mind, it's time we reconsider the "health benefits"
aspartame is supposed to give.
Products containing aspartame
The following are well-known products that use aspartame:
Diet sodas
Diet Coca Cola (all varieties)Coca
Cola Zero (all varieties)Diet Pepsi (all varieties)Pepsi Max (all
varieties)Diet Irn Bru (all varieties)Lilt Zero (all varieties)Sprite
Zero (all varieties)Tango (all varieties)Tango no added sugar (all
varieties)7up Free (all varieties)Lucozade Sport (all
varieties)Schweppes Slimline Drinks (all varieties)Fanta Zero (all
varieties)Fanta OrangeDr Pepper ZeroOasis Summer Fruits Extra LightOasis
Citrus Punch
Yogurts
Muller Light Cherry
Muller Light Blueberry
Muller Light Raspberry
Muller Light Banana and Custard
Danone Activia Cherry
Weight Watchers Fromage Frais
Weight Watchers Toffee and Vanilla
Chewing gum
Wrigleys Airwaves (all varieties)
Wrigleys Orbit (all varieties)
Wrigleys Extra (all varieties)
Cooking sauces
Uncle Ben’s Sweet and Sour Light
Crisps
Walkers Sensations Sweet Thai Chilli
Walkers Sensations Lime and Thai Spices
Walkers Prawn Cocktail
Tabletop sweeteners
CanderelSilver Spoon Sweetness and LightSilver Spoon Light Granulated Sugar
Drink powders
Cadburys Highlights (all varieties)Options Hot Chocolate Drink (all varieties)
Flavored water
Sugar-free products
Cereals
The above mentioned popular products are
just a few of many that contain aspartame. Despite the rising reports of
aspartame's toxicity, a re-investigation by the FDA as well as of key
regulatory bodies worldwide doesn't seem to be coming anytime soon. We
can only protect ourselves by making a conscious choice to check the
label of every product we buy at the grocery store.
If you have complaints regarding
aspartame, don't be shy in making your complaint known. The last thing
you want to be is a face in a crowd lining up before a government office
that doesn't have your interest at heart.
Our research demonstrated the lack of
conclusive evidence as to the danger or safety of aspartame, and the
necessity for more independent studies to ensure the health and
wellbeing of consumers.
This topic is of significant interest
because of the popularity of artificially-sweetened products within
Western markets, and in particular the high consumption of aspartame in
diet carbonated drinks within Australia. We chose this item as it had
broad links to different areas studied within the course, including
seizures, depression and pharmacological effects on the brain, but also
because of its pertinence to our group: young women being the second
highest consumers of aspartame-laden beverages (second only to sufferers
of diabetes).
=============================================================================
Aspartame is an white, odourless, powdered methyl ester comprised of aspartic acid and phenylalanine; hence its IUPAC name N-(L-?-Aspartyl)-L-phenylalanine,1-methyl ester (Figure 1). It is ~200 times sweeter than sucrose. While having a similar caloric profile to sucrose, its intensity of sweetness renders calorie intake negliable. It is slightly soluble in water (3x10-2 g mL-1 at ph 3 and 25oC). Solubility increases with high and low pH and heating, but various types of degredation also occur- in particularly strong acidic or alkaline conditions, aspartame may be used to produce methanol, or free amino acids via hydrolysis.
Aspartame was 'discovered' in 1965 when chemist James Schattler, while using aspartame in the development of an anti-ulcer drug, found it had a sweet flavour (ibid, p. 1806). At the time, Schattler was working for the G.D. Searle & Co. (now owned pharmaceutical giant Pfizer), who quickly patented it and put it up for approval for the consumable market by the Food and Drug Administration. While made legal in 1974, it was not until 1981 that Searle were permitted to market Aspartame in dry goods, and then in carbonated drinks in 1983 (GOA 1987, p. 2).
During the delay in marketing-approval,
the FDA assessed the quality of Searle's findings, as well as those of a
1975-1980 Public Board of Inquiry. While the PBI concluded that
"aspartame did not cause brain damage... studies did not conclusively
show that aspartame did not cause brain tumours" (ibid, p. 3). In the
1987 United States General Accounting Office's review of Aspartame's
approval, scientists indicated "neurological function, brain tumours,
seizures, headaches, and adverse effects on children and pregnant women"
(ibid, p. 3) as being key areas which needed further investigation
before approval could be given. While approval was given without
addressing these concerns, research in all aforementioned issues
continues.
Neurotoxicity:
After consumption, aspartame metabolises
into two common amino acids, aspartic acid and phenylalanine, and
methanol. While these can be harmful in large amounts, they are also
naturally occurring in many of the foods we eat. In fact, foods such as
milk, tomato juice and chicken have much higher amounts of these
chemicals than aspartame. The chemical which has had the most focus from
a neuroscientific perspective is phenylalanine, which is a Large
Neutral Amino Acid (LNAA). Studies have focused on how consumption of it
impacts upon the ratio of phenylalanine to other LNAAs, and whether
this leads to inhibition of other important LNAAs and enzymes in the
brain, such as decreased catecholamine, serotonin and dopamine
concentrations. There are two fates for phenylalanine: firstly, some is
metabolized in the liver to tyrosine, essential for the synthesis of
important neurotransmitters such as dopamine (Figure 2a); secondly,
phenylalanine readily crosses the blood brain barrier (BBB) by competing
for binding on the NAAT, a co-transporter of phenylalanine, tryptopahn
(precursor for serotonin) and other amino acids (Figure 2b and 2c). At
high concentrations, the competitive binding of phenylalanine results in
lower concentrations of dopamine hence disturbing its negative feedback
pathway (Figure 2d). However, studies such as those by Stegink et al.
(1996), show that while consumption of aspartame leads to a small
increase in phenylalanine to LNAA ratio, it is not significant enough to
cause any adverse effects. (Humphries, Pretorius & Naude, 2008)
High concentrations of phenylalanine
will bind more effectively to NAAT, rather than tyrosine, hence leading
to lower concentrations of dopamine. There are two pathways of uptake of
phenylalanine in the body: (a) firstly, some phenylalanine is
hydrolysed into tyrosine in the liver; and (b) secondly, phenylalanine
will compete with tyrosine, methionine and other amino acids for binding
on the NAAT and transported across the BBB. (c) Tyrosine must enter the
BBB via NAAT since it cannot be synthesized in the brain. (d) Inside
the brain, tyrosine is converted to dopamine. (Humphries, Pretorius
& Naude, 2008, p. 453)
Aspartame also releases aspartate during
digestion, a type of excitatory amino acid and neurotransmitter used by
the neurons in the brain. Aspartate is purported to act on the NMDA
receptors on the glutamate binding sites, causing calcium ion influx
into the cell (Figure 3), thereby promoting greater chances of
depolarization or increased firing of action potentials. This high rate
of neuron depolarization can potentiate neurodegeneration (Humphries,
Pretorius & Naude, 2008). Therefore, when such excitatory
neurotransmitters are in excess, the potential toxicity may lead to the
neuronal death in the CNS. Additionally, excess aspartame in
extracellular space will pump back into glial cells by using enormous
amounts of ATP; as the level of ATP stores decrease, the synthesis of
glutamate and GABA also falls, thus affecting the functionality of
glutamate. In essence, disrupting the balance of neurotransmitters
potentially affects a wide range processes in the CNS and the rest of
the body, such as amino acid metabolism.
It is purported that aspartate may act
directly on the glutamate binding sites on the NMDA receptor, causing
calcium ion influx and hence excitation. ("Neuroactive steroids:
Synthesis of positive and negative modulators of NMDA receptor", n.d.)
Headaches:
A headache is a common
ailment in the general population due to pain caused by structures
within the cranium (e.g. blood vessels, meninges), or structures outside
the cranium (e.g. nerves, muscles). Aspartame has been accused of being
a precipitant of headaches in consumer reports and questionnaires
(Butchko et al., 2002). Yet, the unreliability of these studies have
prompted further research using a double-blind crossover method. A
double-blind crossover study conducted by Schiffman et al. (1987) did
not find significance in the incidence of headaches in subjects who took
aspartame compared to placebo. On the contrary, another study showed a
subset of the study group were indeed more vulnerable to headaches (Van
Den Eeden et al., 1994). However, this study only comprised a small
sample of 33 subjects leading to potential statistical issues.
Therefore, the answer to whether aspartame provokes headaches is still
unclear given such variable reports.
Depression:
Depression is a mood
disorder characterized by many symptoms, including: depressed mood, loss
of interest or pleasure, guilt, loss of appetite or overeating, and
cognitive problems affecting concentration, memory or decision making.
The ingestion of aspartame is suggested to increase the ratio of
phenylalanine to other large neutral amino acids, possibly altering
central neurotransmitter concentrations (Butchko et al., 2002). These
alterations might modify brain function, such as mood or cognition.
Walton, Hudak and Green-Waite (1993) conducted a study which examined
the effect of aspartame on subjects already suffering from mood
disorders; however, this study was cancelled due to severity of
reactions in the initial 13 subjects. On the contrary, a completed study
on healthy volunteers showed no significant effects of aspartame on
mood or cognitive function (Spiers et al., 1998).
Phenylketonuria:
Phenylketonuria (PKU) is
an autosomal recessive disease resulting in dysfunction in metabolism
caused by deficiency of the enzyme, phenylalanine hydroxylase (PAH). PAH
is essential for converting phenylalanine consumed in food to tyrosine,
which is the precursor for dopamine, noradrenaline and adrenaline. As a
consequence to deficient or inactive PAH, the concentration of
phenylalanine in patients suffering from PKU can become toxic
("Pheylketonuria", n.d.) since phenylalanine is hydrophobic, and
competes with large, neutral amino acids to cross the blood brain
barrier. Some common symptoms of PKU are neurological comprising of
seizures, behavioural problems, psychiatric disorders and mental
retardation. Therefore, aspartame consumption is theorized to cause
adverse effects on vulnerable individuals, such as the heterozygous
parents of PKU sufferers (PKUH). Despite this studies have once more
produced inconclusive evidence, as some studies found high phenylalanine
concentrations caused generalized EEG slowing (Epstein et al., 1989);
whereas other data show no medical and biochemical changes (Koch, Shaw,
Williamson, & Haber, 1976); nor significant effects on cognitive
performance and EEGs (Trefz, et al., 1994). Further, a review by Butchko
et al. (2002) on the vulnerability of PKUH to aspartame shows that
several studies have demonstrated the tolerance of high levels of
aspartame in PKUH, and studies employing more sophisticated EEG analysis
found no statistically significant differences.
Brain Tumours:
A brain tumour is an abnormal growth of
cells within the brain or the central canal of the spinal cord, causing
neurologic symptoms which are focal or generalised (DeAngelis, 2001).
Generalized symptoms are due to intracranial hypertension leading to
headaches, nausea and vomiting. Focal symptoms indicate the location of
the tumour and can include weakness on one side of the body
(hemiparesis) and impairment of producing or comprehending language
(aphasia). One of the most controversial purported adverse effects of
aspartame use is that it causes brain tumours. Investigations conducted
in the 1970s showed a high occurrence of brain tumours in rats exposed
to aspartame (Reynolds, Butler & Lemkey-Johnston, 1976). A more
recent rat study showed a statistically significant increase in
malignant schwannomas (cancer of Schwann cells on peripheral nerves), in
addition to other cancers (Soffritti et al., 2006). Thus, suggesting
that aspartame is a potential carcinogenic agent, particularly affecting
the central nervous system.
Consequently, there is much controversy
regarding whether aspartame may be a causative factor in human brain
tumours. The incidence of human brain tumours increased significantly in
the United States within 1-2 years following the approval of aspartame
by the FDA (Roberts, 1991). A comparison of total CNS tumour trends
showed a substantial fluctuation pre- and post-aspartame introduction in
the US (Olney, Farber, Spitznagel & Robins, 1996). Given results
from rat studies and the correlation between aspartame approval and
brain tumour incidences, it is highly suggestive that aspartame causes
brain tumours.
However, the same experimental procedure
which found hypothalamic lesions in neonatal mice had no effect on
infant monkeys (Reynolds, Butler & Lemkey-Johnston, 1976),
indicating that primates may manage high amino acid loads better than
rats, metabolically or at the level of the blood brain barrier.
Furthermore, recent research found no risk associated with aspartame and
brain cancer (Lim et al., 2006).
Seizures:
A seizure generally
manifests in physical convulsions or other physical signs and the
underlying mechanism is due to uncontrolled electrical activity in the
brain. Given that aspartame is a purported excitotoxin, consumption may
cause disturbance to the balance of central neurotransmitters, hence
provoking seizures. In animal models aspartame promoted an increase in
seizure frequency in those that were already at risk, yet it is unclear
whether these results translate to humans (Maher & Wurtman, 1987).
Although self reports of aspartame induced seizures may appear to be
significant, a double-blind crossover model applied to such indivudals
did not cause seizures even though phenylalanine concentrations were
found to be significantly higher with aspartame consumption (Spiers et
al, 1998).
A study by Helali et. al (1996) suggested that aspartame played an antagonistic role against anti-epileptic drugs possibly through decreased epinephrine and norepinephrine levels and increased GABA levels. Some studies (i.e. Sze, 1989) have shown that doses of 1000 mg aspartame/kg body weight (bw) or greater did enhance chemically induced seizures, however according to the review by Magnusson et. al. (2007), these results were not consistent, as another study (Reynolds et. al., 1984) claimed that doses of 2000 mg/kg bw had no effect on inducing seizures. There has been a general consensus amongst nearly all studies that doses of under 1000 mg/kg bw have no effect on inducing seizures. Considering that the average amount of aspartame consumed by the top-consuming 90th percentile of society is around 2-3 mg/kg bw, there should be very little concern for seizures as a symptom of aspartame consumption.
A study by Helali et. al (1996) suggested that aspartame played an antagonistic role against anti-epileptic drugs possibly through decreased epinephrine and norepinephrine levels and increased GABA levels. Some studies (i.e. Sze, 1989) have shown that doses of 1000 mg aspartame/kg body weight (bw) or greater did enhance chemically induced seizures, however according to the review by Magnusson et. al. (2007), these results were not consistent, as another study (Reynolds et. al., 1984) claimed that doses of 2000 mg/kg bw had no effect on inducing seizures. There has been a general consensus amongst nearly all studies that doses of under 1000 mg/kg bw have no effect on inducing seizures. Considering that the average amount of aspartame consumed by the top-consuming 90th percentile of society is around 2-3 mg/kg bw, there should be very little concern for seizures as a symptom of aspartame consumption.
As becomes clearly apparent from our
research, there is no conclusive evidence to suggest that aspartame is
dangerous or safe for consumption. It would be our recommendation that
more studies with improved methodologies commence so as to ensure the
safety of the public.
-----------------------------
Is Chewing Gum the Most Toxic Substance in the Supermarket?
Recently, about thirty women, were
asked whose ages were mostly under the age of forty, if they carried
chewing gum with them. Twenty seven of the thirty were able to pull out a
pack of gum, some even going as far as telling me why they loved a
particular brand/flavor of gum.
While this demographic is not
representative of all women, 90% of them chewed gum on a daily basis,
some consuming more than one stick per day. As with many things that we
expose our bodies to on a daily basis, let’s take a moment and analyze
the ingredients of chewing gum and ask some important questions that
pertain to whether it contributes to good health.
How many of us have looked at the ingredients on a pack of gum?
If you have, do you know what each one of the substances is?
Is a stick of chewing gum more of a “cancer stick” than a cigarette?
As you will see below, commercial gum
products are some of the most toxic substances that you can expose your
body too and literally can lead to some of the worst diseases on the
planet.
Here is a list of the most common ingredients in the most popular chewing gum products on the market:
Ingredient #1: Gum Base.
Imagine if someone came
up to you and said, “Hey, would you like to chew on some tire rubber and
plastic?” You probably would politely decline and want to report this
person to a doctor for a psychological evaluation. “Gum base” is a blend
of elastomers, plasticizers, fillers, and resin. Some of the other
ingredients that go into this mix are polyvinyl acetate, which is
frequently referred to as “carpenter glue” or “white glue”. Paraffin wax
is another ingredient that is a byproduct of refined petroleum. Is
chewing plastic, petroleum and rubber safe? As you chew, these
substances leach into the mouth and body. Yummy.
Ingredient #2: Aspartame.
The controversy surrounding this
substance is widespread. It is one of the most body toxic substances we
can consume. The political corruption and money trail behind this agent
of disease is a mile long. Aspartame has been linked to all of the major
brain diseases including Alzheimer’s and ALS. It is also considered a
prime contributor to many other diseases such as diabetes, multiple
sclerosis, asthma, obesity, and many others. It is in many diet products
on the market today, but in the long run actually contributes to
obesity due to his extreme acidity. Aspartame is an excitotoxin, which
over excites neurons in the brain until they burn out and die. Dr.
Russell Blaylock is the leading expert on Aspartame and other
excitotoxins and I would highly encourage you to see the documentary
entitled “Sweet Misery: A Poisoned World”.
#3: Hydrogenated Coconut Oil and Starch.
Hydrogenation is chemical process that
adds hydrogen across a double bonded carbon. This is done to increase
the shelf life of a product, turning oil into a more plastic like
substance. This process also creates Trans fats, which are now known to
be very harmful to health.
Ingredient #4: Colors (titanium dioxide, blue 2 lake, red 40).
Titanium dioxide is a nanoparticle that
is very common in sunscreen and many other health products, including
synthetic nutritional supplements. New evidence is leading in the
direction of this substance being carcinogenic, leading to cancer. We as
humans are drawn to things that are colorful. Artificial food
colorings, such as red 40, are made from petroleum and are dangerous to
our health. Many people have extreme allergies to these substances and
they have been implicated in contributing to ADD and other disorders and
diseases.
Ingredient #5: Sorbitol, Xylitol, Mannitol, Maltitol.
These sugar alcohols are originally made
from sugar, but are altered so much that they are considered sugar free.
As a general rule, when nature is altered and changed to make a
“better” product, more often than not, the result is something that is
not healthy. Some even go so far as to say that these products are far
worse than sugar and can stimulate weight gain. Other side effects can
include abdominal pain and diarrhea. Is sugar alcohol better than sugar?
Neither are good substances, so comparing the two is somewhat
pointless.
Chewing Gum and Digestion
Every time you chew gum, your brain is
tricked into thinking that you are eating food. Therefore, it sends
signals to your stomach, pancreas and other organs involved in digestion
to prepare for this “food”. Your salivary glands and pancreas will
begin to emit enzymes, which are necessary to digest food and absorb
nutrients from food. Constant emission of enzymes over time will deplete
enzymes and over time this process can slow down. If you are not
breaking down and absorbing food properly over time, you will get
disease because the body needs nutrients to rebuild and thrive.
A Great Alternative for Fresh Breath
A great alternative to chewing gum is to
carry around a small bottle of organic food grade peppermint oil and
when you would like fresh breath, just put one drop in your mouth and
you will have achieved the same effect. You can find many food grade
oils that are wonderful for helping you have fresh breath.
Nothing in chewing gum is natural. It is
chemical goop that in no way contributes to health or is good for your
teeth. Don’t be fooled by fancy advertising. The five ingredients that
we reviewed above, in one form or another, contribute to disease and
poor health. Is this really a risk that you want to expose yourself to
all for the sake of fresh breath? In the future, perhaps we will see
that chewing gum may be as much of a contributor to disease as are
cigarettes.
Source : http://www.activistpost.com/
-----------------------------
Top 10 Worst Sources of Aspartame
Millions of Americans still have no idea
that many of the beverages and foods they eat on a regular basis are
contaminated with a neurotoxin posing as a sugar substitute. So to help
raise awareness about the pervasive presence of toxic aspartame in the
American food supply, the Health Ranger, has released a helpful
infographic that identifies the top ten worst sources of aspartame.
The infographic highlights the use of
aspartame in chewing gums, tabletop sweeteners, flavored water products,
sugar-free foods and beverages, diet sodas, drink flavoring products,
cooking sauces, children's medicines, yogurts, and cereals. And while
these are not the only sources of aspartame in the food supply, they are
among the most common.
"At every point in the fertility process
aspartame destroys, beginning with the gleam in Mom and Pop's eyes: it
ruins female sexual response and induces male sexual dysfunction," wrote
Dr. James Bowen, a neurologist and chemist. "Beyond this, aspartame
disrupts fetal development by aborting it or inducing defects. And if a
live child is born aspartame may have heinously damaged the DNA of the
baby, cursing future generations."
This is just one of the many side effects
of consuming aspartame, of course, but it is one of the most serious.
Millions of people think that using aspartame instead of sugar will help
them safely lose weight, when in fact aspartame is far more harmful
than even processed sugars like high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS).
"Both amino acids in aspartame freely
enter the arcuate nucleus (at low dose), cause inappropriate release of
hormones, and at high dose actually destroy these regulatory neurons,"
says Dr. Madelon Price, another aspartame expert. "This is why sexual
dysfunction is associated with aspartame."
Contrary to the claims made by theU.S. Food and Drug Administration(FDA)
and others that aspartame is safe, a wealth of independent research has
verified that aspartame is linked to causing autism spectrum disorders,
neurological problems, birth defects, and gastrointestinal problems,
among other things (http://www.dorway.com/doctors.html).
If you think you are making a healthier
option because you chose to have diet soda over a regular soda drink,
its time to think again. Crafty advertising may have given the term
"sugar free" an impression of healthy alternative, but the truth of the
matter is that chemical sweeteners are far from healthy.
Despite the dismissive stand of aspartame
producers that aspartame is safe for human consumption, various studies
over the years have shown that aspartame is actually linked to
headaches, migraines, dizziness, tumors and even cancer. The U.S. FDA
made public 92 symptoms attributed to aspartame from submitted
complaints. Despite its questionable effect, aspartame was approved for
use in 1981 and still continues to be so today. Ironically, aspartame
was never tested in humans before its approval. Its use in over 6,000
products and by 250 million people has made the public its unwitting
guinea pig in a grand experiment 40 years in the making.
Key to health: Low-Sugar, not sugar-free
Stocking up on diet foods is the best way
to gain weight. Latest research on aspartame has revealed that it
actually increases the risk of weight gain. Being 200 times sweeter than
sugar, aspartame appears to be the perfect answer to dieting since it
contains only a few calories while still having the sweet taste of
sugar. Unfortunately, phenylalanine and aspartic acid, major components
of aspartame, trigger the release of insulin and leptins. The latter are
hormones that stimulate storage of body fat.
Moreover, large doses of phenylalanine
lower serotonin levels and lead to food cravings. Since both real and
artificial sweeteners stimulate the taste buds, they affect the same
taste and pleasure pathways in the brain. Artificial sweeteners,
however, merely activate but do not satiate the pleasure-related region
of the brain, proving to be an inferior system in preventing sugar
cravings. In the Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine, researcher Qing Yang - a faculty at theDepartment of Molecular, Cellular and Developmental Biology- published findings that revealed artificial sweeteners more likely to cause weight gain than weight loss.
This is over and above the fact that
aspartame is also highly addictive. The phenylalanine and methanol
components increase the dopamine levels in the brain and cause a certain
high. This further creates an addiction that is only made worse by the
release of methyl alcohol or methanol, which is considered a narcotic.
Keeping this in mind, it's time we reconsider the "health benefits"
aspartame is supposed to give.
Products containing aspartame
The following are well-known products that use aspartame:
Diet sodas
Yogurts
Chewing gum
Cooking sauces
Crisps
Tabletop sweeteners
Drink powders
Flavored water
Sugar-free products
Cereals
The above mentioned popular products are
just a few of many that contain aspartame. Despite the rising reports of
aspartame's toxicity, a re-investigation by the FDA as well as of key
regulatory bodies worldwide doesn't seem to be coming anytime soon. We
can only protect ourselves by making a conscious choice to check the
label of every product we buy at the grocery store.
Sources for this article:
http://www.naturalnews.com
http://supersweetblog.wordpress.com
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2892765/?tool=pubmed
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2892765/?tool=pubmed
------------------------
Seven Toxic Foods, Drinks, & Additives to Cut Out of Your Diet for Good
By Ethan A, Huff
With so much conflicting information out
there about which foods are healthy and which foods are not, it can be
difficult for many people to determine how best to approach a healthy
lifestyle that includes eating well. But a good place to start is to
avoid these seven toxic foods, beverages, and additives that are quite
common in the American diet.
Diet sodas and beverages sweetened with artificial chemicals.
One of the more common dietary misconceptions in mainstream society
today is the idea that "diet" beverages are somehow healthier than their
sugar-sweetened beverages. Aspartame (NutraSweet, Equal) saccharin
(Sweet'N Low), and sucralose (Splenda) are among the more popular
artificial sweeteners used in many diet sodas, juices, chewing gums, and
other foods (http://www.naturalnews.com).
Not only are artificial sweeteners bad for your health (http://www.naturalnews.com), but they also tend to promote obesity (http://www.naturalnews.com/022785.html).
If you want to protect yourself against chronic illness and toxicity --
aspartame literally converts to formaldehyde in the body and causes
metabolic acidosis -- it is best to stick with either raw sugars or
natural sugar substitutes like pure stevia extract.
High-fructose corn syrup (HFCS), the silent killer.
It is not really much of a secret anymore that HFCS, despite all the
corn industry shilling, is a toxic sweetener that should be avoided (http://www.naturalnews.com/hfcs.html).
Since it is linked to obesity, brain damage, low IQ, and even mercury
poisoning, avoiding all foods that contain HFCS -- this can include
breads, cereals, and other seemingly innocuous foods -- will do wonders
for your health.
Most vegetable oils, including hydrogenated and 'trans' fat varieties.
The misdirected war on saturated fats has convinced millions of people
that unsaturated vegetable oils are a healthy alternative. Not only do
many vegetables oils turn rancid quickly, which means they are toxic (http://healthwyze.org),
but many of them also contain high levels of omega-6 fatty acids which,
apart from omega-3 fatty acids, can cause severe health problems like
heart disease and cancer. (http://www.naturalnews.com/022860.html)
Many vegetable oils are also derived from
genetically-modified organisms (GMOs), including canola, soy, and corn
oils. These same oils are often hydrogenated as well, a process that
turns them into heart-destroying solid oils. Avoiding these and sticking
instead to healthy fats like grass-fed butter, coconut oil, olive oil,
and hemp oil will greatly improve your health and lower your risk of
disease.
White bread, pasta, and other refined flour foods.
They are cheap, plentiful, and come in hundreds of varieties. But white
breads, pastas, and other foods made from refined flour are among the
top health destroyers in America today. Not only are most white flour
products carcinogenic because they are bleached and bromated, but they
also lack vital nutrients that are stripped away during processing.
Avoid them, and all processed wheat products if possible, to optimize
your health.
Monosodium glutamate (MSG), carrageenan, and refined salt. Often hidden in foods under deceptive names (http://www.truthinlabeling.org/hiddensources.html),
MSG is a pervasive salt chemical you will want to avoid that is linked
to causing headaches, heart problems, brain damage, and other problems.
Carrageenan, another chemical additive often hidden in "natural" and
organic foods like nut milks and lunch meats, is similarly worth
avoiding, as it can cause gastrointestinal upset and colon cancer. (http://www.cornucopia.org)
And processed salt, which is added to
just about everything these days, lacks the trace minerals normally
present in sea and earth salts, which means it ends up robbing your body
of these vital nutrients (http://www.naturalnews.com/028724_Himalayan_salt_sea.html).
Hypertension, cardiovascular disease, and stroke are just a few of the
many conditions that can result from refined salt intake, so your best
bet is to stick with unrefined sea salts and other full-spectrum salts.
Sources:
--------------------
Aspartame – Sweet Killer – It puts the DIE in Diet Soda
Aspartame (E951) is an artificial
sweetener, used in over 6000 products. The food industry claims that
aspartame helps in losing weight, but why is obesity then becoming such
an ever increasing problem?
Aspartame is a very sweet chemical, responsible for a host of health problems such as obesity, diabetes, cancer, brain diseases, migraines, ADHD, etc.
Aspartame is a very sweet chemical, responsible for a host of health problems such as obesity, diabetes, cancer, brain diseases, migraines, ADHD, etc.
Aspartame breaks down into three toxic components:
1. Methanol.
This is poisonous alcohol. In the body, methanol breaks down into formaldehyde, which is a poison.
2. Phenylalanine.
This decreases the amount serotonin in your brain, which leads to mood swings (depressions) and an increased appetite! That is why aspartame is one of the main causes for the current obesity epidemic.
3. Aspartic acid.
This is a neurological toxin comparable to MSG.
This is poisonous alcohol. In the body, methanol breaks down into formaldehyde, which is a poison.
2. Phenylalanine.
This decreases the amount serotonin in your brain, which leads to mood swings (depressions) and an increased appetite! That is why aspartame is one of the main causes for the current obesity epidemic.
3. Aspartic acid.
This is a neurological toxin comparable to MSG.
The US Department of Health has recorded
92 (!) symptoms following complaints about aspartame. In fact, over 80%
of all complaints filed with FDA are related to aspartame consumption!
Some of the brand names for aspartame:
AminoSweet, NutraSweet, Equal, NatraTaste, Canderel, Spoonful, Equal-Measure, etc.
AminoSweet, NutraSweet, Equal, NatraTaste, Canderel, Spoonful, Equal-Measure, etc.
Aspartame is used in any of the following products:
Sugarfree, Light, Diet, Zero (Coke, Sprite & Fanta), Coke 007, Pepsi Max, Crystal Clear, Low-Calorie, Crystal Light, No Sugar Added, Smint, Stimorol Ice, Stimorol Fusion, Freedent, Mentos, Sportlife, etc.
Sugarfree, Light, Diet, Zero (Coke, Sprite & Fanta), Coke 007, Pepsi Max, Crystal Clear, Low-Calorie, Crystal Light, No Sugar Added, Smint, Stimorol Ice, Stimorol Fusion, Freedent, Mentos, Sportlife, etc.
Do no longer believe the lies of the food
industry and the 'main stream' media. Contrary to what so-called
'health experts' claim, aspartame is NOT safe!
In fact, aspartame is a sweet poison
developed to make people sick so the pharmaceutical industry can sell
expensive medication to 'treat' the chronic diseases that are caused by
it's use.
Avoid this toxic chemical for 60 days and discover how your health will improve dramatically!
Shocking aspartame documentary 'Sweet Misery':
Other artificial sweeteners that you should avoid:
Acesulfame K (E950), Cyclamate (E952), Isomalt (E953), Saccharin (E954), Sucralose or Splenda (E955), Alitame (E956), Neohesperidine (E959), Neotame (E961), Salt of Aspartame-Acesulfame (E962), Maltitol (E965), Lactitol (E966), Sorbitol (E420), Mannitol (E421), Glycerol (E422).
Acesulfame K (E950), Cyclamate (E952), Isomalt (E953), Saccharin (E954), Sucralose or Splenda (E955), Alitame (E956), Neohesperidine (E959), Neotame (E961), Salt of Aspartame-Acesulfame (E962), Maltitol (E965), Lactitol (E966), Sorbitol (E420), Mannitol (E421), Glycerol (E422).
According to a research review conducted
by South African scientists from the University of Pretoria and the
University of Limpopo and published in the European Journal of Clinical
Nutrition, high intake of the artificial sweetener aspartame may lead to
the degeneration of brain cells and various mental disorders.
Sweet misery
The researchers also noted that aspartame
appears to cause excessive signaling of nerve cells, and nerve cell
damage or even death. By disrupting the functioning of the cells'
mitochondria, or energy source, aspartame leads to a cascade of effects
on the whole system.
"The energy systems for certain required
enzyme reactions become compromised, thus indirectly leading to the
inability of enzymes to function optimally," the researchers wrote.
Same face, different name
Previous research was reviewed
and it was found that aspartame, marketed as NutraSweet, Equal, Canderal
and Tropicana Slim, leads to both direct and indirect changes in the
brain when consumed in high quantities. It was found that the chemical
can disrupt amino acid metabolism and structure, degrade nucleic acids,
and interfere with the function of nerve cells and hormonal systems. It
also appears to change the concentration of certain neurotransmitters in
the brain.
The FDA and the European Food Safety Agency (EFSA), however, continue to insist that the sweetener is safe.
You can't imagine how hard soft drinks sweetened with Aspartame are on your body.
A must-see for anybody with a sweet tooth, this exposé reveals the dangers of Aspartame consumption.
A must-see for anybody with a sweet tooth, this exposé reveals the dangers of Aspartame consumption.
Americans constantly obsess over the
latest diet fads and skinny trends, yet we're one of the unhealthiest
nations on the planet.
According to the US Surgeon General,
obesity plagues more than 30% of Americans, killing over 300,000 people
every year! Heart disease, cancer, and diabetes are also all on the
rise, with one of the main culprits in this disturbing trend being
sugar. Almost 20% of our daily calorie intake comes from refined white
sugar. That works out to about 150 pounds of sugar per year!
Consumed in small amounts, sugar actually
helps your metabolism and supplies a quick boost of energy. In excess,
sugar adds nothing but empty calories to your body. Many people have
recognized this and now opt for sugar free alternatives, allowing for
the rise of the artificial sugar industry. The most prevalent artificial
sugar in our food supply today is called aspartame, which is also
recognized as NutraSweet or Equal. Aspartame has made its way into more
than 6,000 products including almost all diet sodas, chewing gum, frozen
desserts, yogurt, and even vitamins and cough drops.
200 times sweeter than sugar, aspartame is a combination of two amino acids: aspartic acid and phenylalanine.
200 times sweeter than sugar, aspartame is a combination of two amino acids: aspartic acid and phenylalanine.
Even though the safety of aspartame has
been affirmed by the Food and Drug Administration 26 times in the past
23 years, the FDA has received more complaints about adverse reactions
to aspartame than any other food ingredient in the agency's history. In
fact, at least 30% of the US population is sensitive to even moderate
doses of aspartame and may suffer several symptoms. Immediate reactions
include severe headaches, dizziness, attention difficulties, memory
loss, throat swelling, and seizures.
Aspartame, the artificial
sweetener found in many diet sodas and used as an ‘alternative’
sweetener, has been found recently to have detrimental – specifically,
cancerous – effects.
-------------------------------
Ten Consumer Products You Should Avoid
Most of the consumer products in
conventional stores these days contain harmful ingredients that can
destroy your health. These harmful ingredients are sometime listed in
ways that make them hard to detect. The purpose of this is to prevent
you from finding these dangerous ingredients. Many of these harmful
ingredients are not lethal because they are not going to kill you right
away, but in the long run they can help cause serious health problems,
such as diabetes, cancer, sterility, Alzheimer’s and heart disease.
The amount of consumer products that
contain harmful chemicals are so overwhelming that one conventional
store can carry over tens of thousands of these products. Many of these
chemicals are intentionally put into products for mostly business
purposes. It is all about saving as much money as possible even if it is
harmful to consumers. Whenever a harmful chemical becomes well known,
manufacturers would try to change its name to fool consumers. An example
of this is aspartame which is now being named as AminoSweet.
Manufactures will also try to use long scientific names to confuse
consumers. These marketing strategies are designed to trick the
consumers into buying their so called “safe and healthy products.”
Before you go shopping this weekend make
sure you read the list below, because it will help educate you to avoid
ten of the most popular consumer products that contain harmful
ingredients.
Fluoride toothpaste
Toothpaste that contains fluoride is
dangerous to your health because it is a toxin. Before fluoride was
introduced as a cavity fighter, it was used as a rat poison. The health
claims about fluoride is very misleading. It does little to prevent
tooth decay but does a great job destroying your thyroid gland,
metabolism, and increasing your risk of cancer and sterility. Toothpaste
that contains toxic ingredients, such as fluoride and sodium lauryl
sulphate (SLS), will usually have warning labels on the back of its
tube. On the other hand, toothpaste that does not contain toxic
ingredients usually has no warning labels. Now, why would fluoride
toothpaste manufacturers put warning labels on their product? The main
reason is because they know that it is toxic. People have been known to
die from swallowing fluoridated toothpaste. A good rule of thumb when
buying consumer product is to look for warning labels. If the warning
labels tell you information that is life threatening, you should avoid
it, especially if it is something that you put in your mouth or on your
body.
Bottled water
According to researchers, about half of the bottled water in the market
is filtered tap water. The laws and regulations that govern the bottled
water industry are not very specific. As a result, bottled water
manufacturers can easily manipulate their labels to mislead consumers.
In many cases, chlorine is added to bottled water as a sanitizer to
prevent organisms from breeding in the water. Chlorine is not dangerous
in small amounts but it still affects your health. Another chemical
found in bottled water that may even be more dangerous than chlorine is
phthalates. High doses of phthalates have been known to disrupt hormones
in rodents, and cause damages to the liver, testes and increase birth
defects.
Chips
This product is one of the most popular
consumer products. Chips contain a large variety of harmful synthetic
ingredients. One of the most dangerous is monosodium glutamate (MSG).
Have you ever wonder why after eating a bag of chips you get headaches?
One of the main reasons is because most chips contain MSG which is an
excitotoxin. Independent studies have shown a significant relationship
toward Alzheimer’s and MSG. In animal studies, the animals that consumed
large doses of MSG experienced permanent brain damage due to the
destruction of their pyramidal neurons.
Corn products
Most corn products in the United States,
such as corn oil, flour, meal, starch, gluten and syrups are genetically
modified. Corn that has been genetically modified is known to produce
its own pesticides so insects cannot eat it. Genetic engineering is
something that scientists is very poor at doing because they still have
little clues to how genes truly work. Many of the studies done on
genetically modified food lacked the concrete data to support their
claims. Because of scientists immature and naive studies, the consumers
are the ones that end up suffering from health problems. To avoid
genetically modified corn products only buy the ones that are labeled
non-GMO or organic.
Ice cream
Most ice creams found in conventional
stores are full of harmful synthetic chemicals. Three of the most
popular synthetic chemicals found in ice cream are acetiel C17, benzyl
acetate and pepernial. Acetiel C17 is an aniline dye that is used in the
manufacture of plastic, rubber and pharmaceuticals. It is used to mimic
the cherry flavor in ice cream. Benzyl Acetate is a nitrate solvent
that is widely used as artificial strawberry flavoring. Pepernial is a
chemical that is popular for killing lice. Pepernial is used in ice
cream to mimic the vanilla flavor
Sugar free products
A lot of consumers believed that sugar
free products are healthy and great for preventing weight loss. These
consumers have been tricked by the food industry. Sugar free products
usually contained artificial sweeteners. The most popular ones are
sucralose (also known as Splenda) and aspartame (also known as Equal,
AminoSweet, NutraSweet). These two artificial sweeteners are considered
by independent researchers as neurotoxins. Artificial sweeteners are
great for causing weight gain even though they contain less calories.
Artificial sweeteners are also found in baby products. If you have
babies, please do not feed them baby food that contains artificial
sweeteners.
Soda
One of the most dangerous ingredients
found in soda is high fructose corn syrup (HFCS). HFCS is not like
regular sugar. Most HFCS has been genetically modified because it is a
product of corn. Many studies have linked HFCS to obesity, heart disease
and certain cancer. To learn more about how HFCS causes obesity please visit this site.
Diet soda is even worst because it contains artificial sweetener which
is great for causing weight gain and destroying brain cells. If you are
pregnant, you should stay twice as far away from diet soda because you
have twice as many reasons to not drink it.
Conventional shampoo
Most of the shampoo in conventional
stores are filled with harmful chemicals. The common ones are sodium
lauryl sulfate and methylisothiazoline (MIT). Some of the chemicals
found in shampoo are known to be harmful to the skin and hair. Some of
them are even considered to be neurotoxins. If you are worried about
going bald or having skin problems, you may want to avoid conventional
shampoo. When buying shampoo read the ingredients list. If it contains
the two chemicals I mentioned above avoid it. For more information about
the hidden dangers in shampoo please read this article.
Cow milk
Got milk? I hope not. The health claims
made by the dairy industry about milk are very misleading. They are
designed to trick you into buying its product. Cow milk does little to
strengthen bone. Cow milk is full of harmful chemicals, animal proteins
and synthetic vitamins. In order for your body to effectively absorb
calcium it needs assistance from vitamin D. The vitamin D in milk is
synthetic and does not have all the necessary components to help your
body effectively absorb calcium. The best source of calcium is not from
cow milk but from plant-based food. Many plant-based food contains more
calcium per calorie than milk, plus it contains other nutrients that are
necessary for the utilization of calcium. Examples of plant-based food
that contains more calcium per calorie than milk are: arugula, bok choy,
turnip greens, collard greens, mustard greens, spinach and broccoli.
For more information about bone health please read Bone Health: Truth and Myth.
Cell phone
This consumer product is a little off
topic but I decided to put it in the list because of its tremendous
growth. Cell phone has changed the way we communicate so much that it
can make us crazy when we go a day without it. Cell phone is a great
technology but its manufacturers has lied to you about how it affects
your health. One of the main problem with cell phone is electromagnetic
pollution which is caused by scalar waves. Scalar wave is an
electromagnetic longitudinal wave that is of multi-dimensional quality.
It is one of the mediums that fills the empty space between all things.
Scalar wave can be used for good or for bad. When scalar wave is used
for good, it can rejuvenate the body back to its original state. It is
very important for your health because your cells use this wave to
communicate. Unfortunately, the scalar wave generated by cell phone
vibrates at certain frequencies that are harmful to your cells. In the
long-run, this may cause cellular mutations which can lead to cancer. To
reduce electromagnetic pollution do not use your cell phone for too
long. If you use your cell phone a lot, you may want to buy a wave
shield for cell phone. This type of wave shield is designed to reflect
most electromagnetic radiation emitted from cell phone.
Source:
energyfanatics.com
-------------------------
Changing aspartame’s name to something that is “appealing
and memorable”, in Ajinomoto’s own words, may hoodwink some but
hopefully most will reject this clever marketing tactic as nothing more
than a desperate attempt to preserve the company’s multi-billion dollar
cash cow. Do not be deceived.
4) Environmental Toxins
BPA, fluoride, parabens, phthalates, PFOA, fiberglass, oxybenzone, BHA and dozens of other chemicals makes up a very long laundry list of environmental toxins affecting every household. Combine this with geoengineering intiatives polluting the entire atmosphere with toxins, and you have a toxic planet from soil to sky.
-------------------------
Aspartame has been Renamed and is Now Being Marketed as a Natural Sweetener
Artificial sweeteners especially
aspartame has gotten a bad rap over the years, most likely due to
studies showing they cause cancer. But not to worry Ajinomoto the
company that makes
Aspartame has changed the name to
AminoSweet. It has the same toxic ingredients but a nice new sounding
name. And if you or your child happens to be allergic to Aspartame, well
don’t take it personally it’s just business.
Despite the evidence gained over the
years showing that aspartame is a dangerous toxin, it has remained on
the global market . In continues to gain approval for use in new types
of food despite evidence showing that it causes neurological brain
damage, cancerous tumors, and endocrine disruption, among other things.
Most consumers are oblivious to the fact
that Aspartame was invented as a drug but upon discovery of its’ sweet
taste was magically transformed from a drug to a food additive. HFA
wants to warn our readers to beware of a wolf dressed up in sheep’s
clothing or in this case Aspartame dressed up as Aminosweet.
Over 25 years ago, aspartame was first
introduced into the European food supply. Today, it is an everyday
component of most diet beverages, sugar-free desserts, and chewing gums
in countries worldwide. But the tides have been turning as the general
public is waking up to the truth about artificial sweeteners like
aspartame and the harm they cause to health. The latest aspartame
marketing scheme is a desperate effort to indoctrinate the public into
accepting the chemical sweetener as natural and safe, despite evidence
to the contrary.
Aspartame was an accidental discovery by
James Schlatter, a chemist who had been trying to produce an anti-ulcer
pharmaceutical drug for G.D. Searle & Company back in 1965. Upon
mixing aspartic acid and phenylalanine, two naturally-occurring amino
acids, he discovered that the new compound had a sweet taste. The
company merely changed its FDA approval application from drug to food
additive and, voila, aspartame was born.
G.D. Searle & Company first patented
aspartame in 1970. An internal memo released in the same year urged
company executives to work on getting the FDA into the “habit of saying
yes” and of encouraging a “subconscious spirit of participation” in
getting the chemical approved.
G.D. Searle & Company submitted its
first petition to the FDA in 1973 and fought for years to gain FDA
approval, submitting its own safety studies that many believed were
inadequate and deceptive. Despite numerous objections, including one
from its own scientists, the company was able to convince the FDA to
approve aspartame for commercial use in a few products in 1974, igniting
a blaze of controversy.
In 1976, then FDA Commissioner Alexander
Schmidt wrote a letter to Sen. Ted Kennedy expressing concern over the
“questionable integrity of the basic safety data submitted for aspartame
safety”. FDA Chief Counsel Richard Merrill believed that a grand jury
should investigate G.D. Searle & Company for lying about the safety
of aspartame in its reports and for concealing evidence proving the
chemical is unsafe for consumption.
The details of aspartame’s history are
lengthy, but the point remains that the carcinogen was illegitimately
approved as a food additive through heavy-handed prodding by a powerful
corporation with its own interests in mind. Practically all drugs and
food additives are approved by the FDA not because science shows they
are safe but because companies essentially lobby the FDA with monetary
payoffs and complete the agency’s multi-million dollar approval process.
Update: As many comments are being posted
by readers who are allergic to Aspartame we ask that you please forward
this article to as many people as you can.
Source:
-------------------------
Top Health Threats Affecting Children, Yet Denied By The Mainstream Media
The mainstream media and government have
peddled the same lame health concerns affecting children for decades.
Whether it's drug abuse, smoking, teen pregnancy, obesity or any other
perceived public health threat, no officially recognized health concern
affecting children compares to the actual threats which are rarely if
ever discussed by public health entities or the mainstream media. The
reasons for this convenient ignorance are simple...deception and
distraction.
The typical diatribe coming out of
government organizations who claim to be enforcing good health and
protecting our children is nonsense and always has been. They parrot the
same mundane health threats affecting children decade after decade
without actually doing anything about them or telling us what actually
causes them. They insist things like smoking, drug abuse, obesity, teen
pregnancy, bullying and abuse are the top health concerns for children
and teens when they are nothing but a miniscule fraction of a threat
compared to the following:
1) Vaccines
A German study with 17461 children between 0-17 years of age (KIGGS) showed that 4.7% of vaccinated children suffer from asthma, 10.7% of these children from hayfever and 13.2% from neurodermatitis. These numbers differ in western countries, i.e. the prevalence of asthma among children in the US is 6% whereas it is 14-16% in Australia (Australia's Health 2004, AIHW). The prevalence of asthma among unvaccinated children in our study is 0.2%, hayfever 1.5% and neurodermatitis 2%.
1) Vaccines
A German study with 17461 children between 0-17 years of age (KIGGS) showed that 4.7% of vaccinated children suffer from asthma, 10.7% of these children from hayfever and 13.2% from neurodermatitis. These numbers differ in western countries, i.e. the prevalence of asthma among children in the US is 6% whereas it is 14-16% in Australia (Australia's Health 2004, AIHW). The prevalence of asthma among unvaccinated children in our study is 0.2%, hayfever 1.5% and neurodermatitis 2%.
According to the KIGGS study more than 40% of children between the ages of 3 and 17 years were sensitized against
at least one allergen tested (20 common allergens were tested) and
22.9% had an allergic disease. Although we did not perform a blood test,
less than 10% stated that their children had an allergy.
Vaccinated children are up to 14 times
more likely to have asthma than the unvaccinated and up to nine times
more like to have skin problems.http://www.impf-report.de/jahrgang/2005/02.htm#06
An estimated 100-180 Indian children are
diagnosed with vaccine-associated polio paralysis (VAPP) each year. In
fact, the clinical presentation of the disease, including paralysis,
caused by VAPP is indistinguishable from that caused by wild polio
viruses.
Vaccines, all vaccines, are immune
suppressing; that is they depress our immune functions. The chemicals in
the vaccines depress our immune system; the virus present depresses
immune function, and the foreign DNA/RNA from animal tissues depresses
immunity. Chemical toxicity and depressed immunity likely make vaccines
the number one long-term health threat to children.
2) Artificial Sweeteners, Colors, Flavors and Preservatives
Dangerous food additives are creating a toxic environment for our children's health spurring allergies and ADHD.
Two recent British studies found that
certain food dyes, as well as the common preservative sodium benzoate,
may have an adverse effect on some children's behavior. Researchers said
the increase in ADHD diagnoses could be partly to blame on the
preservative.
"It can affect their focus, their
concentration. They become more easily distractible, become more
impulsive. I think we're looking at a whole population of kids with
skewed immune systems," said Dr. Kenneth Bock, who wrote a book that
supports the theory that food additives could lead to hyperactivity in
children.
A Southampton Study in the UK showed that
additives cause hyperactivity in children within an hour after
consumption. Food additives, especially the artificial colors are made
from coal tar derivatives and synthetic chemicals. Within an hour of
ingestion, hyperactive behavior is evident.
MSG is not a nutrient, vitamin, or
mineral and has no health benefits. The part of MSG that negatively
affects the human body is the "glutamate", not the sodium. The breakdown
of MSG typically consists of 78% glutamate, 12% sodium, and about 10%
water. Any glutamate added to a processed food is not and cannot be
considered naturally occurring. Natural glutamate in plants and animals
is known as L-glutamic acid.
A study on infant rats showed that
administration of MSG lead to five shrunken glands, including the
testes. Other studies have shown that growth hormone, thyroid hormones
and many other endocrine functions can be assaulted by excitotoxins
which may lead to growth retardation of children before the age of
puberty.
One study on mice showed that aspartate, the excitotoxin in diet drinks,gum and aspartame,
did the same kind of neuronal damage to the hypothalamus that previous
studies on glutamate exhibited. This study mentioned that the research
showed that excitotoxins lead to "subsequent obesity, skeletal stunting
and reduced mass of pituitaries, ovaries and testes. Yes,
the research is clear that excitotoxins can literally damage (and
reduce in size) the future development of your child's testes and
ovaries.
Colouring agents are derived from coal
tar, and nearly all colouring is synthetic. Though some artificial food
dyes have been banned because they are believed to cause cancer, most
dyes used today are of the artificial variety. They are also linked to
allergies, asthmas, and hyperactivity. They have been found to provoke
asthma attacks and have links to thyroid tumours. Coincidently,
artificial colors are very prevalent in ice cream products which are
directly marketed to children. Every single artificial color in the food
industry has some kind of detrimental health effect. These include
neurotoxicity, organ, developmental, and reproductive toxicity and
cancer. Children are being fed these chemicals in such large quantities
that they begin to have nervous system malfunctions that ultimately are
misdiagnosed as ADHD, learning disabilities, or violent behavior.
As one of the most prolific preservatives
in the food industry, it is difficult to find many foods without
potassium sorbate. Food and chemical toxicology reports have labeled
potassium sorbate as a carcinogen, showing positive mutation results in
the cells of mammals. Other studies have shown broad systemic and toxic
effects on non-reproductive organs in animals. No long term studies have
ever been initiated on either animals or humans, but many suspect the
preservative to be toxic to young children.
Sodium Benzoate can convert into lethal
carcinogenic poison when combined with absorbic acid. Professor Peter
Piper, a professor of molecular biology and biotechnology, tested the
impact of sodium benzoate on living yeast cells in his laboratory. What
he found alarmed him: the benzoate was damaging an important area of DNA
in the "power station" of cells known as the mitochondria. "These
chemicals have the ability to cause severe damage to DNA in the
mitochondria to the point that they totally inactivate it: they knock it
out altogether." he stated.
"The food industry will say these
compounds have been tested and they are complete safe," he said. "By the
criteria of modern safety testing, the safety tests were inadequate.
Like all things, safety testing moves forward and you can conduct a much
more rigorous safety test than you could 50 years ago."
Sodium Benzoate, as most other
preservatives, should not be ingested in any quantity by children,
however the toxin is still available in many foods that children ingest.
In the current climate of escalating
obesity rates, artificially sweetened soft drinks are marketed to
children as healthier alternatives to sugar-sweetened beverages, due to
their lack of calories. However, past research has shown very serious
long-term health consequences due to highly toxic additives and
artificial sweeteners such as sodium benzoate, aspartame, acesulfame potassium, sucralose and high-fructose corn syrup.
Artificial flavors and colors means it is
derived from a chemical made in a laboratory and has no nutritional
value. Every single artificial flavor and color in the food industry has
some kind of detrimental health effect. These include neurotoxicity,
organ, developmental, reproductive toxicity and cancer.
* Examples
- Glutamates
- Monosodium Glutamate (MSG)
- Maltodextrin
- Autolyzed Yeast Extract
- Disodium Guanylate
- Disodium Inosinate
- Blue 1, Blue 2
- Yellow 5, Yellow 6
- Red 3, Red 40
- Glutamates
- Monosodium Glutamate (MSG)
- Maltodextrin
- Autolyzed Yeast Extract
- Disodium Guanylate
- Disodium Inosinate
- Blue 1, Blue 2
- Yellow 5, Yellow 6
- Red 3, Red 40
3) Genetically Modified Foods
Genetically Modified (GM) foods are likely the single biggest threat to humanity in the coming decades and certainly a threat to the health of future generations. If you're new to the dangers of GM foods this article "The 7 Biggest Reasons To Never Eat Genetically Modified Foods" sums up the reasons to stay away from them. Problem is, they're everywhere and it's almost impossible to escape from them.
Genetically Modified (GM) foods are likely the single biggest threat to humanity in the coming decades and certainly a threat to the health of future generations. If you're new to the dangers of GM foods this article "The 7 Biggest Reasons To Never Eat Genetically Modified Foods" sums up the reasons to stay away from them. Problem is, they're everywhere and it's almost impossible to escape from them.
GM foods pose a threat to the
environment, polluting the fertile soils of the world with unnatural
genetic material that may have unknown long-term consequences.
Cross-pollination with non-GM crops, monoculture practices and the
liberal use of chemical pesticides alongside GM crops are just a few of
the serious threats to sustainable life on Earth posed by food
scientists playing God with seeds.
Researchers have found clear links among
the consumption of GM-corn and immunological alterations in the gut and
the exacerbation and creation of allergies which more children are
suffering from every year.
GM Foods causes allergies, organ damage,
cancer, immunotoxicty, and damaging transgenes which affect future
generations. Many fruits and vegetables for sale in the U.S. are already
genetically modified.
The data from comprehensive studies on
GM corn “clearly underlines adverse impacts on kidneys and liver, the
dietary detoxifying organs, as well as different levels of damages to
heart, adrenal glands, spleen and haematopoietic system,” reported
Gilles-Eric Seralini, a molecular biologist at the University of Caen.
Ninety-nine percent of GMO crops either
tolerate or produce insecticide which also damage a child's health. This
may be the reason we see bee colony collapse disorder and massive butterfly deaths.
If GMOs are wiping out Earth’s pollinators, they are far more
disastrous than the threat they pose to future generations of all humans
and other mammals.
Children who consume the processed foods with the following are likely consuming ingredients that are GM.
* Examples
- Corn flour, meal, oil, starch, gluten, and syrup
- Corn Sweeteners such as fructose, dextrose, and glucose
- Modified food starch
- Soy flour, lecithin, protein, isolate, and isoflavone
- Most vegetable oils and vegetable proteins
- Canola oil (also called rapeseed oil)
- Cottonseed oil
- Anything not listed as 100% cane sugar
- Corn flour, meal, oil, starch, gluten, and syrup
- Corn Sweeteners such as fructose, dextrose, and glucose
- Modified food starch
- Soy flour, lecithin, protein, isolate, and isoflavone
- Most vegetable oils and vegetable proteins
- Canola oil (also called rapeseed oil)
- Cottonseed oil
- Anything not listed as 100% cane sugar
4) Environmental Toxins
BPA, fluoride, parabens, phthalates, PFOA, fiberglass, oxybenzone, BHA and dozens of other chemicals makes up a very long laundry list of environmental toxins affecting every household. Combine this with geoengineering intiatives polluting the entire atmosphere with toxins, and you have a toxic planet from soil to sky.
Developing children are at even greater
risk than adults for harm from the above chemicals. There toxic effects
are far reaching affecting almost every body system.
Researchers at Yale School of Medicine
have discovered that exposure during pregnancy to Bisphenol A (BPA), a
common component of plastics, causes permanent abnormalities in the
uterus of offspring, including alteration in their DNA.
Fluoride alters
the minds and brains of children. There has been considerable research
done on fluoride regarding cancer, birth defects, and risks to the
respiratory, gastrointestinal, and urinary systems, however, very little
has been done on its neurological effects.
For years, experts have been warning
women about some very toxic ingredients the cosmetic industry uses which
put users at risk of cancer and hormonal changes. A number of studies
since 1998 have raised concerns about the potential role of these parabens in breast cancer as they possess estrogenic properties.
"We have to do a better job at protecting
the health of our children, but we also have to do a better job of
protecting the women that feed our children, especially in their first
year of life," said Patricia Ongo a breastfeeding specialist.
Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA)
is another extremely toxic and persistent contaminant in groundwater.
Many states are exposed to much higher concentrations of the notorious
Teflon chemical under a proposed state regulations that allow unsafe
levels of the contaminant in drinking water, scientists at Environmental
Working Group (EWG) have warned.
Phthalates are a group of chemical
compounds that occur in construction materials and a great number of
common consumer goods such as toys, cleaning solvents, packaging, etc.
Phthalates are suspected of disrupting hormones, premature births and may be related to several chronic diseases in children, like asthma and allergies, as shown in earlier studies.
A whistleblower and former hazardous materials expert recently exposed the shocking and under-reported evidence that
attenuated fiberglass, the kind used to insulate your home and found in
countless consumer products, is more carcinogenic than asbestos.
Synthetic preservatives, such as BHA and
butylhydroxytoluene (BHT), used to slow down the oxidative deterioration
of food are toxic nightmares for children. They used in everything from
orange juice to butter, cereals and snack foods. These chemicals are
lethal to the health and long-term development of children's hormonal
regulation and brain.
5) Mainstream Medicine
Perhaps the biggest health myth today (although more people are catching on) is the public's misconception that mainstream medicine and the healthcare system helps sick children. Nothing could be further from the truth since physicians and psychiatrists alone are extremely dangerous to the health of children. They are the ones that prescribe the dangerous medications, vaccines, antibiotics, and debilitating psychotic drugs.
Perhaps the biggest health myth today (although more people are catching on) is the public's misconception that mainstream medicine and the healthcare system helps sick children. Nothing could be further from the truth since physicians and psychiatrists alone are extremely dangerous to the health of children. They are the ones that prescribe the dangerous medications, vaccines, antibiotics, and debilitating psychotic drugs.
90 percent of all diseases (cancer,
diabetes, depression, heart disease, etc.) are easily preventable
through diet, nutrition, sunlight and exercise. None of these solutions
are rarely if ever promoted by conventional medicine to parents and
their children because they make no money.
One can only hope that a child does not contract cancer as physicians only have one tool for that--cut, poison and burn via surgery, chemotherapy and radiation.
No pharmaceuticals actually cure or
resolve the underlying causes of disease. Even "successful" drugs only
manage symptoms, usually at the cost of interfering with other precious
physiological functions in young bodies that will cause side effects
down the road. There is no such thing as a drug without a side effect.
Mainstream medicine is the leading cause
of death in the United States. They recruit children into the system
when they are young and vulnerable and they attempt to keep them as
life-long clients as they age.
Health drinks are always known for their instant energy boosting capabilities. But people often skip the after effects of drinking such beverages which harm their health from inside. The best health drink which doesn't have any side effects is Goji Berry Juice.
ReplyDeleteI am using AVG security for a number of years, and I'd recommend this product to all of you.
ReplyDeleteWhy don't you go and do some research before you listen to this shit. Sorbitol, sac archon, aspartame, and other sweeteners were thought to have been proven to be carcinogenic. However, this has been proven wrong by independent, and I stress the word independent, researchers, in the same way that the flat earth was proven wrong.Any bans or warning labels were removed from that point. Also, methanol is derived from the mint leaf. Aspartic acid is an AMINO ACID, something that is literally essential for life on earth. Humans get amino acids from other things, but I don't see how something that is essential can be toxic. Phenilalene is also an amino acid, although there are two types. D-phenilalene is not an essential amino acid, although it has some benefits. L-phenilalene is essential for humans. Also, why are you so morbidly afraid of all chemicals? Water, vitamin c (as ascorbic acid), vitamin d (cholecalciferol), and a whole bunch of other things that you may not consider as chemicals are chemicals! EVERY SINGLE SUBSTANCE IN THE UNIVERSE IS A CHEMICAL!!! I am sure that if I told you about ascorbic acid and cholecalciferol and it's side effects, whether made up or true, you would believe me until I told you what their common names are. Here's a little test:
ReplyDeleteDihydrogen monoxide is an odourless, colourless, chemical. It is exposed to us through a variety of methods. Here are some facts about this:
It is used as an industrial solvent,
It can cause severe burns when it is a gas,
From 2005-2014, 3514 people died from this, excluding burn related deaths, and 1 in 5 of these were 14 or younger.
This chemical can be used to make nitroglycerin, sulphuric acid, and ethyl alcohol.
Nitroglycerin is extremely explosive, sulphuric acid is found in Venus clouds, and ethyl alcohol is a poison.
Would you want to ban this substance from the earth?
Say that you succeeded. I would say, congratulations ! You have successfully banned dihydrogen monoxide from the earth! Now let me tell you about its chemical name.
It is H2O. Yes, you thought of banning WATER from the earth. Good job. By the way, all of the facts that I told you were true.