Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

FDA's corrupt war against safe herbal sweetener stevia, Mary Nash Stoddard, 2006 January, Aspartame Consumer Safety Network: Murray 2007.05.24

Expand Messages
  • rmforall@comcast.net
    FDA s corrupt war against safe herbal sweetener stevia, Mary Nash Stoddard, 2006 January, Aspartame Consumer Safety Network: Murray 2007.05.24
    Message 1 of 1 , May 24, 2007
      FDA's corrupt war against safe herbal sweetener stevia, Mary Nash Stoddard, 2006 January, Aspartame Consumer Safety Network: Murray 2007.05.24

      Dear Rich,

      You have my permission to re-publish this referenced article and information on stevia, with full attribution.

      Best regards,
      Mary Nash Stoddard
      [Freelance Writer and FCC Licensed Broadcaster]
      Mary Nash Stoddard, Founder
      Aspartame Consumer Safety Network and Pilot Hotline [since 1987]
      P.O. Box 2001 -- Frisco, TX 75034 -- U.S.A.
      tel. 001-214-387-4001
      email: marystod@...

      [ See also:

      stevia, balanced factual detailed review in Wikipedia: Murray


      two recent warning studies on stevia toxicity on rats and bacteria, AP
      Nunes et al, 2007 April, 2006 Dec, links to 18 positive abstracts from
      2000 February to 2004 January: Murray 2007.05.03

      At the end of this post, I link to my 5 previous reviews in 2005
      August that give 18 full abstacts in PubMed on stevia toxicity from
      2000 February to 2004 January, which do not find that stevia is
      practically toxic to humans in ordinary use -- and give an opposite
      positive abstract using the Comet assay in 2002 December, and then
      share the conclusion from the full text of another study on
      mutagenicity, T Terai et al 2002 July. ]

      STEVIA -- Natural Contender for Title of World's Best No-cal Sweetener

      Mary Nash Stoddard [freelance journalist]
      [ published in January, 2006 issue of Atkins Monthly magazine ]

      Who will win the sweetener wars? At stake are billions of dollars shelled out by weight conscious and health conscious consumers world wide.

      Key players in this bitter battle for mega profits are: stevia [natural, sweet tasting herb] and the chemical sweeteners, aspartame [aka NutraSweet and Equal] and neotame.

      Is stevia really the forbidden natural alternative to aspartame?

      Stevia [Stevia rebaudiana Bertoli] has been used for centuries in the rest of the world as a low-calorie, no-adverse-reactions-reported, sweet herb.

      It can be purchased as crushed leaves, a dark liquid, a clear liquid or a fluffy white powder.

      Anyone can grow it.

      It's the sweetener that can't be called a sweetener in the U.S.!

      Shoved illogically into the �Dietary Supplement� category by the FDA in 1994 when DSHEA [Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act] went into effect, stevia remains in limbo, in a sort of �halfway house,� while the U.S. Food and Drug Administration [FDA] struggles to keep it off the market as a legally approved sweetener.

      Unlike aspartame and neotame [NutraSweet Company's potent, new sweetener], stevia is unquestionably safe to cook with. But, without guidance on ratios and conversions, the average consumer is at a loss to know how to use it.

      Stevia is much less expensive to use than its synthetic counterparts.

      By the way, aspartame, by law, has to appear on a product's ingredient label.

      NutraSweet Company's Neotame, on the other hand, may hide in a product, without its name appearing on the ingredient label. Some FDA watchers are baffled by this action.

      More and more consumers are rejecting the pharmaceutical versions of sugar such as: saccharin, acesulfame K, sucralose, aspartame and neotame, and are searching for the ideal �healthy� sweetener. This makes stevia, the natural choice [no pun intended], a very real threat to aspartame, neotame and the others.

      In July 2005, a study was published, showing aspartame created at least two forms of cancers [leukemia and lymphoma] in lab animals fed aspartame. The study was conducted by researchers from the European Ramazzini Foundation, an independent group located in Bologna, Italy.

      FDA points to only two questionable studies as their absolute proof that stevia is not safe.

      The first, ineptly done, by a graduate student in South America, says it may have [are you ready for this?] a mild contraceptive property.

      The other, published in 1988 in a Brazilian pharmacological journal, was extremely sloppy science and no one but the FDA gives it any credence whatsoever.

      On the off chance the public does not share FDA�s concern about stevia�s possible contraceptive qualities, they have come up with some strictly hearsay evidence, which they�ve never seen, through the South American �grapevine� that stevia might be unsafe for having a hypothetical hypoglycemic effect on some individuals. These are extremely flimsy straws the FDA is grasping at to support their ban on stevia as a sweetener.

      FDA claims no petitions have been filed by product manufacturers seeking to use stevia as a Generally Recognized as Safe [or GRAS] ingredient in their product.

      What they really mean is the FDA has never accepted a petition filed by a food or beverage manufacturer seeking to use stevia as a sweetener in their product.

      Several, including Lipton have filed petitions only to be denied acceptance for some FDA-invented technical error.

      FDA ignores the overwhelming evidence of stevia's benign and beneficial character.

      Usage in the rest of the world for centuries with no reported ill affects, counts for nothing in the closed regulatory mind.

      FDA even went so far as to attack one importer and distributor of stevia for perceived �violations� of the rules and regulations governing dietary supplements. The crime? Three books were being distributed by Stevita Co. of Arlington, Texas [owners of the Brazilian patent on stevia manufacturing] which described the history and usage of the sweet herb, stevia.

      Not only was the business-owner ordered to destroy his inventory of books -- he was also forced to remove all links to other sites on his internet web site. A clear violation of First Amendment rights by the FDA? Could this controversy over stevia be related to FDA�s defensive attitude over aspartame? [aka NutraSweet/Equal/Natrataste/Canderel, etc.]

      FDA continues to fiercely support the artificial sweetener aspartame [aka NutraSweet/Equal] based solely on industry-sponsored tests showing safety.

      [Monsanto, a former patent-holder on aspartame, has bought up and put on hold the U.S. patent on stevia manufacturing].

      FDA�s official position? Absolutely nothing is wrong or harmful about aspartame, despite the undisputed fact that approximately 80% of all adverse reaction complaints to FDA are aspartame related.

      Unlike pharmaceuticals -- serious adverse reactions to a food additive are not required by law to be reported by physicians.

      FDA lists over 92 symptoms consumers have tied to aspartame consumption -- including deaths.

      Reports show that when individuals cease ingesting aspartame, their symptoms usually go away.

      �Junk Science� or worse was used by G.D. Searle to gain approval for aspartame in the first place as a tabletop sweetener in 1981 and in 1983 for aqueous solution [soft drinks].

      Some concerned FDA toxicologists even went as far as to show the tests were �falsified� to get aspartame approved in the first place.

      Aspartame was first FDA-approved in 1974, but that approval was rescinded before it could get to market because of serious questions about one of the breakdown products, DKP , which caused brain tumors in the laboratory animals.

      At a Washington D.C. News Conference, November 1997, John Olney, M.D., noted brain researcher, presented his compelling findings of a 10% increase in brain tumors since the advent of aspartame on the market.

      Further troubling to many independent scientists is the fact that virtually all the studies showing harm are �corporate neutral� as one aspartame researcher put it.

      Many studies are available to show harm caused by aspartame�s phenylalanine, aspartic acid and toxic breakdown products: methanol - formaldehyde - formic acid and diketopiperazine.

      Tens of thousands of consumers and others have reported serious adverse reactions to the FDA and consumer advocacy organizations collecting reports, such as the international Aspartame Consumer Safety Network and Pilot Hotline.

      Woodrow Monte, R.D., Ph.D., a former director of the Arizona State University Food Sciences and Nutrition Laboratory, is uncomfortable with the methanol content of aspartame.

      In an 1986 interview, Monte called aspartame "a crime against humanity." "Humans are 10 times more sensitive to methanol than animals. When you ingest aspartame, it breaks down into methanol within one hour of ingestion. Methanol forms as soon as aspartame goes into solution and increases the longer it is in solution." according to Monte.

      Because heat speeds the breakdown of aspartame into methanol, this raises serious concern about aspartame's 1993 approval for use in baked goods and other heated products, like hot cocoa and tea.

      Although aspartame came about as the result of a search for a drug, and its compounds were the basis for a potential prescription medication, the petition for approval of NutraSweet was based on the premise that it was a food additive. The FDA followed its precedent of permitting manufacturers to conduct their own product safety research.

      Monte feels that aspartame was mislabeled from the beginning. "Aspartame is a drug, not a food additive," he said. "One hundred million people, from little babies to the elderly, are consuming this stuff in megadoses, more than they ever would if it were labeled a drug." [Informed Consent May/June �94]

      Outspoken critics are suggesting -- not that we rid ourselves of a Food and Drug Administration -- only that we rid ourselves of the present �corrupted� Food and Drug Administration, thus changing the current FDA focus of protecting the profits of the giants of industry to one of protecting the American public, which it is charged to serve.

      The FDA seems to have everything �backwards� in its regulatory thinking -- against the herbal sweetener with centuries of no adverse reactions to its credit, versus the artificial sweetener which has been surrounded by a storm of controversy since its flawed approval twenty four years ago.

      Follow the "Money and Political Trail".

      Conclusion: FDA�s ability to evaluate any substance objectively has been called into question by consumers and independent researchers alike. Senator Metzenbaum called FDA officials mere �Handmaidens to Industry� in the 1987 Senate Hearings on the Safety of aspartame. Corporate megabucks influence and determine the actions of that government agency, created to protect the consumer from harm.

      In an unfortunate ripple effect, FDA's seal of approval is the standard used by agencies around the world to allow food additives into their countries, without doing their own investigations.

      Corporations routinely cover themselves by donating millions to organizations such as: American Dietetic Association, American Diabetic Foundation and others.

      FDA officials routinely hop with jumping-bean-like ease from government to private industry and back.

      Who will win the Sweetener Wars? Greed versus health, which will win? It�s up to us, the consuming public. One person can and must work to make a difference in the way the world looks at sweeteners.


      Tell everyone you know about this issue.

      Work with those organizations lobbying to get stevia legally approved as a safe and natural sweetener.

      Let your grocer know you want a naturally healthy choice when it comes to sweeteners.

      Take aspartame-sweetened items back to the store to exchange for something healthy.

      Try the sweet taste of stevia -- many say it�s the beneficial, safe alternative to all of the unhealthy, chemical sweeteners.

      Books available on Stevia:

      The Stevia Story - A tale of incredible sweetness & intrigue - Linda and Bill Bonvie and Donna Gates

      Sugar-Free Cooking With Stevia - James and Tanya Kirkland

      Books on Aspartame:

      Deadly Deception - Story of Aspartame - Mary Nash Stoddard

      Deadly Deception - Story of Aspartame [One Hour Video Lecture at Science Symposium]

      Excitotoxins - The Taste That Kills - Russell Blaylock, M.D.

      Available from ACSN - P.O. Box 2001 - Frisco, TX 75034 - U.S.
      tel. 001. 1. 214.387.4001 http://www.aspartamesafety.com

      Incredible Case History of One Courageous Stevia Distributor
      Stevita Co. - Arlington Texas

      �Freedom of the Press embraces the circulation of books as well as their publication.�
      -- from Judge�s ruling in Bantam Books v Sullivan [1963]

      Chronology of Events

      Summer 1996
      Stevita Company imported the first shipment of Stevia spoonful (blend of stevioside and maltodextrin) with registered trade name of STEVIASWEET. FDA office in Dallas detained the shipment of approximately 3,000 jars, saying Stevita Co. could not use the trade name STEVIASWEET because the word 'Sweet' on the name implied that stevia could be used as a sugar substitute. So, Mr. Rodes changed the labels (at American Airlines warehouse) to STEVITA brand. Products with new labels were then released.

      Early 1997
      Stevita Co. started importing Stevita chocolate flavored and Stevita cappuccino flavored products. First shipments passed through customs with no problems.

      October, 1997

      A shipment of Stevita cappuccino flavored product was detained by FDA. They claimed Stevita Co. was selling coffee instead of Stevia. Mr. Rodes then submitted a new label (MAGIC) that removed the word coffee. After changing all the labels (about 5,000) the shipment was released.

      November 12, 1997
      FDA inspectors, Martha Baldwin and Pauline Logan inspected Stevita facilities and took samples of the books and some scientific literature.

      March 6, 1998
      Stevita Co. received a warning letter from FDA saying the presence of literature, including the information on Stevita's web site, was rendering the stevia products �adulterated.� Stevita Co. was given 5 days to reply. James Turner�s office (Swanken & Turner Washington D.C. law firm) then requested a 15 day extension.

      March 26, 1998
      James Turner�s office submitted an answer to the Warning Letter from FDA, agreeing with all the requests, with the exception of the destruction of the books and cessation of Stevita product sales.

      April 1, 1998
      Two shipments that had been detained by FDA had labels approved by FDA in Washington D.C.. However, Mr. James R. LaHar of the Dallas District office orders the shipments to continue being put on hold, because in his opinion, Mr. Oscar Rodes' Stevita Company's product is now contaminated by current literature -- already in circulation.

      April 27, 1998
      FDA Inspector, Martha Baldwin inspected Stevita Company's facilities and collected labels and documents. She also took an inventory of Stevita Company's products. In desperation to get the shipments released by FDA, Oscar Rodes told Stevita Co. attorney, James Turner to inform FDA that as of May 13, Stevita Company is ceasing distribution of all the books.

      May 19, 1998 (9:00 AM)
      A fax was received from James R. LaHar, Compliance Officer in the Dallas District Office of FDA, stating that investigators from his office were coming to Stevita�s facilities to witness destruction of the literature and books.

      May 19, 1998 (11:30 AM)
      FDA inspectors, Pauline Logan and Margarito Uribe walked into the office. They proceeded to take inventory of all products and literature. Oscar Rodes believed they were sent by Mr. LaHar to witness destruction of all the books. Stevita Co. employees videotaped most of the so-called inspection -- including the part when one of the inspectors is marking the cookbooks (Cooking With Stevia by James Kirkland) for destruction. FDA Compliance Officer, James R. Lahar faxed a letter to Stevita Co. addressing the destruction of 2,500 books he deemed "offending," at a cost to the company well in excess of $10,000. The letter threatens that investigators will conduct a current inventory and "witness the destruction of the cookbooks, literature, and other publications for the purpose of verifying compliance" upon visiting Stevita Co. for a fourth time in one year.

      May 20, 1998
      Both inspectors return to Stevita�s facilities for more inspection and counting of inventory.

      May 22, 1998
      The same two inspectors arrive again at Stevita Co. at 3:30 PM -- asking company owner, Oscar Rodes to sign some typewritten affidavits. Rodes said, "They also told me they wanted to look around.�

      June 6, 1998
      Banned cookbook author, James Kirkland made a shocking presentation at a Town Hall meeting, convened by Congressman Joe Barton, by holding up The Anarchist's Cookbook, a book that talks about how to construct killer "homemade bombs," a popular hard-core porn magazine and a copy of his book -- telling how to cook with an herb. "Which of these publications is illegal?" he asked. Congressman Barton shrugged. The author then pointed to his cookbook on how to cook with stevia. "This isn't right." Kirkland added to thunderous audience applause. He then went on to elaborate. Kirkland's book, Cooking With Stevia, published by Morris Press of Kearney Nebraska has been "marked" by FDA for immediate destruction and recall. FDA is also attempting to "regulate" web sites on the Internet by telling Stevita Co. to delete their web site links to other pages. Congressman Barton is Chairman of the Oversight and Investigation Subcommittee in Washington, which oversees the Food and Drug Administra

      Media covered the Town Hall event and that evening, the CBS TV News affiliate in Dallas aired a story showing the �banned books� and telling the Stevita Co. story of harassment by FDA. This news segment was picked up by other CBS affiliates and aired around the U.S.

      The Aftermath:

      In a blatant move to intimidate valued customers of Texas-based Stevita
      Co., importers of the sweet-tasting herbal dietary supplement stevia and
      distributors of three "banned" books about the herb, FDA raiders began
      relentlessly searching for their version of "the offensive literature" --
      according to a horrified eyewitness shopper at an Arlington, Texas Health Food Store.

      When called by a national cable television network news reporter, a
      Dallas District FDA spokesperson said they would neither confirm nor deny
      the allegation of literature search or seizure at health food stores,
      because it was part of an "ongoing investigation." FDA Spokesperson in
      Washington D.C., Monica Ravel in her misleading statement late Wednesday,
      told another local network news reporter on tape, "We have not banned any
      books." Stevita Co. has an FDA letter dated May 19,1998 signed by FDA's
      James R. LaHar clearly stating they have.

      These published books and literature offer the consumer information
      on the history, usage and scientific studies showing the safety of the
      legal herb stevia [aka stevia rebaudiana or stevioside]. One of three books
      in question is The Stevia Story - A tale of incredible sweetness &
      intrigue, by Linda Bonvie, Bill Bonvie and Donna Gates with Foreword by
      James S. Turner, author of The Chemical Feast.

      Ironically, Chapter Four of the book the FDA wants to destroy is titled:
      "What's wrong with the FDA?"

      The other books are: Nature's Sweet Secret - Stevia by David Richards and
      Cooking with Stevia by James Kirkland.

      In the course of the following months, the FDA seized all of Stevita's inventory, in an effort to force the company to comply with the recall and destruction order. This action, according to author, James Kirkland, "nearly put Stevita Company out of business." Only after lengthy, costly litigation was the company allowed to resume distribution of some publications, but not Cooking With Stevia.

      The following was taken from the Internet website of Linda and Bill Bonvie, authors of The Stevia Story, A Tale of Incredible Sweetness And Intrigue:

      "Given stevia's record as a completely safe and beneficial herbal product, and given that it now may be purchased legally in the U.S., just what is the FDA afraid of? That Americans will learn about stevia -- that it is actually both sweet and non-caloric? Try it? Want to use it? The FDA's prior attempts to control stevia as if it were a dangerous drug had the appearance to many of being a restraint of trade; now that it can be legally sold and used, the agency has gone further and is apparently trying to restrain ideas, information and criticism of its own behavior -- trying, in essence, to act as a sort of 'thought police.' This is a very important issue which should be carefully followed by everyone -- whether you like stevia or not -- even if you've never tasted it."


      Soffritti M., et al. Environ. Health Perspect, doi: 10.1289/eh.8711 (2005).

      Sugar-Free Cooking Wtih Stevia The Naturally Sweet & Calorie-Free Herb, 1998; Crystal Health Publishing, Arlington, Texas

      The Stevia Story - A Tale of Incredible Sweetness and Intrigue, Linda Bonvie, Bill Bonvie and Donna Gates, Atlanta: B.E.D. Publications, 1997.

      Deadly Deception - Story of Aspartame - Mary Nash Stoddard, Odenwald Press 1998.

      Nutrition and Healing, June 1998, Sweeteners Inspire Bitter Political Battle Between Feds and Consumers, Mary Nash Stoddard.

      The Mary Stoddard Show, Interview with authors, Tanya and James Kirkland on Real Talk Network, 2001.

      � 1998 All rights reserved. Use of this collected data is restricted.
      Email your request for permission to re-publish any part of this article to: marystod@....


      more from The Independent, UK, Martin Hickman, re ASDA (unit of Wal-
      Mart Stores) and Marks & Spencer ban of aspartame, MSG, artificial
      chemical additives and dyes to prevent ADHD in kids: Murray 2007.05.16

      ASDA (unit of Wal-Mart Stores WMT.N) and Marks & Spencer
      will join Tesco and also Sainsbury to ban and limit aspartame,
      MSG, artificial flavors dyes preservatives additives, trans fats,
      salt "nasties" to protect kids from ADHD: leading UK media:
      Murray 2007.05.15

      combining aspartame and quinoline yellow, or MSG and
      brilliant blue, harms nerve cells, eminent C. Vyvyan
      Howard et al, 2005 education.guardian.co.uk,
      Felicity Lawrence: Murray 2005.12.21

      50% UK baby food is now organic -- aspartame or MSG
      with food dyes harm nerve cells, CV Howard 3 year study
      funded by Lizzy Vann, CEO, Organix Brands,
      Children's Food Advisory Service: Murray 2006.01.13


      formaldehyde as a potent unexamined cofactor in cancer research --
      sources include methanol, dark wines and liquors, aspartame, wood and
      tobacco smoke: IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks
      to Humans implicate formaldehyde in #88 and alcohol drinks in #96:
      some related abstracts: Murray 2007.05.15

      aspartame (methanol, formaldehyde) toxicity research summary: Rich
      Murray 2007.05.24

      One liter aspartame diet soda, about 3 12-oz cans,
      gives 61.5 mg methanol,
      so if 30% is turned into formaldehyde, the formaldehyde
      dose of 18.5 mg is 37 times the recent EPA limit of
      0.5 mg per liter daily drinking water for a 10-kg child:
      2007.01.05 [ does not discuss formaldehyde from methanol
      or aspartame ]
      http://www.epa.gov/teach/teachsurvey.html comments

      "Of course, everyone chooses, as a natural priority,
      to actively find, quickly share, and positively act upon
      the facts about healthy and safe food, drink, and

      Rich Murray, MA Room For All rmforall@...
      505-501-2298 1943 Otowi Road, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87505

      group with 75 members, 1,436 posts in a public, searchable archive

      aspartame groups and books: updated research review of
      2004.07.16: Murray 2006.05.11

      Aspartame Controversy, in Wikipedia democratic
      encyclopedia, 72 references (including AspartameNM # 864
      and 1173 by Murray), brief fair summary of much more
      research: Murray 2007.01.01

      Dark wines and liquors, as well as aspartame, provide
      similar levels of methanol, above 120 mg daily, for
      long-term heavy users, 2 L daily, about 6 cans.

      Within hours, methanol is inevitably largely turned into
      formaldehyde, and thence largely into formic acid -- the
      major causes of the dreaded symptoms of "next morning"

      Fully 11% of aspartame is methanol -- 1,120 mg aspartame
      in 2 L diet soda, almost six 12-oz cans, gives 123 mg
      methanol (wood alcohol). If 30% of the methanol is turned
      into formaldehyde, the amount of formaldehyde, 37 mg,
      is 18.5 times the USA EPA limit for daily formaldehyde in
      drinking water, 2.0 mg in 2 L average daily drinking water.

      methanol products (formaldehyde and formic acid) are main
      cause of alcohol hangover symptoms [same as from similar
      amounts of methanol, the 11% part of aspartame]:
      YS Woo et al, 2005 Dec: Murray 2006.01.20

      methanol (formaldehyde, formic acid) disposition:
      Bouchard M et al, full plain text, 2001: substantial
      sources are degradation of fruit pectins, liquors,
      aspartame, smoke: Murray 2005.04.02

      "According to model predictions, congruent with the data in the
      literature [Dorman et al., 1994; Horton et al., 1992], a certain
      fraction of formaldehyde is readily oxidized to formate,
      a major fraction of which is rapidly converted to CO2 and exhaled,
      whereas a small fraction is excreted as formic acid in urine.

      However, fits to the available data in rats and monkeys of Horton et
      al. [1992] and Dorman et al. [1994] show that, once formed, a
      substantial fraction of formaldehyde is converted to unobserved forms.

      This pathway contributes to a long-term unobserved compartment.

      The latter, most plausibly, represents either the formaldehyde that
      [directly or after oxidation to formate] binds to various endogenous
      molecules [Heck et al., 1983; R�e, 1982] or is incorporated in the
      tetrahydrofolic-acid-dependent one-carbon pathway to become the
      building block of a number of synthetic pathways
      [R�e, 1982; Tephly and McMartin, 1984].

      That substantial amounts of methanol metabolites or by-products are
      retained for a long time is verified by Horton et al. [1992] who
      estimated that 18 h following an iv injection of 100 mg/kg of
      14C-methanol in male Fischer-344 rats,
      only 57% of the dose was eliminated from the body.

      >From the data of Dorman et al. [1994] and Medinsky et al. [1997],
      it can further be calculated that 48 h following the start
      of a 2-h inhalation exposure to 900 ppm of 14C-methanol vapors
      in female cynomolgus monkeys,
      only 23% of the absorbed 14C-methanol was eliminated from the body.

      These findings are corroborated by the data of Heck et al. [1983]
      showing that 40% of a 14C-formaldehyde inhalation dose remained
      in the body 70 h postexposure.

      In the present study, the model proposed rests on acute exposure
      data, where the time profiles of methanol and its metabolites were
      determined only over short time periods
      [a maximum of 6 h of exposure and a maximum of 48 h postexposure].

      This does not allow observation of the slow release from the long-term

      It is to be noted that most of the published studies on the detailed
      disposition kinetics of methanol regard controlled short-term
      [iv injection or continuous inhalation exposure over a few hours]
      methanol exposures in rats, primates, and humans
      [Batterman et al., 1998; Damian and Raabe, 1996;
      Dorman et al., 1994; Ferry et al., 1980; Fisher et al., 2000;
      Franzblau et al., 1995; Horton et al., 1992; Jacobsen et al., 1988;
      Osterloh et al., 1996; Pollack et al., 1993; Sedivec et al., 1981;
      Ward et al., 1995; Ward and Pollack, 1996].

      Experimental studies on the detailed time profiles following
      controlled repeated exposures to methanol are lacking."

      brain cell tangles and neuron death similar to Alzheimers
      via low dose formaldehyde from methanol,
      Chunlai Nie, Rongqiao He et al, China, 2007.01.23 BMC
      Neuroscience 28 pages, 63 references: Murray 2007.01.24

      Coca-Cola carcinogenicity in rats, Ramazzini Foundation,
      F Belpoggi, M Soffritti, Annals NY Academy Sciences
      2006 Sept, parts of 17 pages: Murray 2006.12.02

      Fiorella Belpoggi & Morando Soffritti of Ramazzini
      Foundation prove lifetime carcinogenicity of Coca-Cola,
      aspartame, and arsenic, Annals of the NY Academy of
      Sciences: Murray 2006.11.28

      Bristol, Connecticut, schools join state program to limit
      artificial sweeteners, sugar, fats for 8800 students,
      Johnny J Burnham, The Bristol Press: Murray 2006.09.22

      Connecticut bans artificial sweeteners in schools,
      Nancy Barnes, New Milford Times: Murray 2006.05.25

      soft drinks and adolescent hyperactivity, mental distress,
      conduct problems, Lars Lien, Nanna Lien, Sonja Heyerdahl,
      Mayne Thoresen, Espen Bjertness 2006 Oct., A J Pub Health:
      Murray 2006.10.21

      healthy diet, vitamins, and fish oil help reduce
      depression and violence, studies by Joseph Hibbeln,
      Bernard Gesch, and Stephen Schoenthaler, articles by
      Felicity Lawrence in UK Guardian Unlimited and Pat
      Thomas in The Ecologist: Murray 2006.10.21

      carcinogenic effect of inhaled formaldehyde, Federal
      Institute of Risk Assessment, Germany -- same safe level
      as for Canada: Murray 2006.06.02

      Home sickness -- indoor air often worse, as our homes
      seal in pollutants [one is formaldehyde, also from the 11%
      methanol part of aspartame],
      Megan Gillis, WinnipegSun.com: Murray 2006.06.01

      effect of aspartame on oncogene and suppressor gene expressions in
      mice, Katalin Gambos, Istvan Ember, et al, University of Pecs,
      Hungary, In Vivo 2007 Jan; scores of their relevant past studies since
      1977: Murray 2007.04.14

      toxicity in rat brains from aspartame, Vences-Mejia A,
      Espinosa-Aguirre JJ et al 2006 Aug: Murray 2006.09.06

      aspartame rat brain toxicity re cytochrome P450 enzymes,
      especially CYP2E1, Vences-Mejia A, Espinosa-Aguirre JJ
      et al, 2006 Aug, Hum Exp Toxicol: relevant abstracts re
      formaldehyde from methanol in alcohol drinks:
      Murray 2006.09.29

      combining aspartame and quinoline yellow, or MSG and
      brilliant blue, harms nerve cells, eminent C. Vyvyan
      Howard et al, 2005 education.guardian.co.uk,
      Felicity Lawrence: Murray 2005.12.21

      50% UK baby food is now organic -- aspartame or MSG
      with food dyes harm nerve cells, CV Howard 3 year study
      funded by Lizzy Vann, CEO, Organix Brands,
      Children's Food Advisory Service: Murray 2006.01.13

      all three aspartame metabolites harm human erythrocyte
      [red blood cell] membrane enzyme activity, KH Schulpis
      et al, two studies in 2005, Athens, Greece, 2005.12.14:
      2004 research review, RL Blaylock: Murray 2006.01.14

      NIH NLM ToxNet HSDB Hazardous Substances Data Bank
      inadequate re aspartame (methanol, formaldehyde,
      formic acid): Murray 2006.08.19

      HSDB Hazardous Substances Data Bank: Aspartame

      ASPARTAME CASRN: 22839-47-0
      METHANOL CASRN: 67-56-1
      FORMIC ACID CASRN: 64-18-6

      DMDC: Dimethyl dicarbonate 200mg/L in drinks adds methanol
      98 mg/L ( becomes formaldehyde in body ): EU Scientific
      Committee on Foods 2001.07.12: Murray 2004.01.22

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

      "Scientific Abuse in Aspartame Research"

      safety of aspartame Part 1/2 12.4.2: EC HCPD-G SCF:
      Murray 2003.01.12 EU Scientific Committee on Food,
      a whitewash

      Mark Gold exhaustively critiques European Commission
      Scientific Committee on Food re aspartame ( 2002.12.04 ):
      59 pages, 230 references

      RTM: Smith, Terpening, Schmidt, Gums:
      full text: aspartame, MSG, fibromyalgia 2002.01.17
      Jerry D Smith, Chris M Terpening,
      Siegfried OF Schmidt, and John G Gums
      Relief of Fibromyalgia Symptoms Following
      Discontinuation of Dietary Excitotoxins.
      The Annals of Pharmacotherapy 2001; 35(6): 702-706.
      Malcolm Randall Veterans Affairs Medical Center,
      Gainesville, FL, USA.
      BACKGROUND: Fibromyalgia is a common rheumatologic
      disorder that is often difficult to treat effectively.
      CASE SUMMARY: Four patients diagnosed with fibromyalgia
      syndrome for two to 17 years are described.
      All had undergone multiple treatment modalities with
      limited success.
      All had complete, or nearly complete,
      resolution of their symptoms within months after
      eliminating monosodium glutamate (MSG)
      or MSG plus aspartame from their diet.
      All patients were women with multiple comorbidities
      prior to elimination of MSG.
      All have had recurrence of symptoms whenever MSG
      is ingested.

      Siegfried O. Schmidt, MD Asst. Clinical Prof.
      Community Health and Family Medicine, U. Florida,
      Gainesville, FL Shands Hospital West Oak Clinic
      Gainesville, FL 32608-3629 352-376-5071

      formaldehyde toxicity: Thrasher & Kilburn: Shaham: EPA:
      Gold: Wilson: CIIN: Murray 2002.12.12

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

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

      http://www.drthrasher.org/formaldehyde_1990.html full text
      Jack Dwayne Thrasher, Alan Broughton, Roberta Madison.
      Immune activation and autoantibodies in humans with
      long-term inhalation exposure to formaldehyde.
      Archives of Environmental Health. 1990; 45: 217-223.
      PMID: 2400243
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.