To Martin Johnston: Diet Drinks Lose Out to Sugary Alternatives: New Zealand Herald

[Guest guest]

nzherald.co.nz

Dear Mr. Johnston:

 

In response to your story, it should be known

that " If you want to get fat, NutraSweet is where its at " .

Aspartame also marketed as

NutraSweet/Equal/951/Canderel, Benevia, etc is

not an additive. It's a deadly addictive

excitoneurotoxic carcinogenic drug that interacts

with virtually all drugs and vaccines because of

damage to the mitochondria or life of the

cell. All this is established in the medical

text, Aspartame Disease: An Ignored Epidemic, by

H. J. Roberts, M.D., www.sunsentpress.com It's

over 1000 pages of symptoms, diseases and tumors

triggered by this chemical poison. You can get a

copy from Alison White the Safe Food Campaign of

New Zealand, alison

 

Dr. Sandra Cabot, Mission Possible Australia

wrote an excellent article titled: Aspartame

Makes You Fatter:

http://www.mpwhi.com/aspartame_makes_you_fatter.htm

Dr. Ralph Walton said in a report: " Food seeking

behavior and satiety are drive by an area of the

brain known as the hypothalamus. Stimulation of

the medial hypothalamus in a laboratory rate

leads to eating. Stimulation of the lateral

hypothalamus leads to satiety and cessation of

eating. Placing a lesion in the lateral

hypothalamus produces an obese rate. The lateral

hypothalamus is drive by serotonin. There are

many papers in the current literature

demonstrating that antidepressants which increase

serotonin (but not antidepressants which act on

other neurotransmitters) are useful in treating

binge eating disorders. I believe that consuming

large amounts of aspartame decreases the

availability of serotonin and is thus analogous

to placing a lesion in the lateral

hypothalamus. Although much of this work is

recent, clinical suggestions that aspartame can

lead to a paradoxical increased appetite date back to Blunder's work of l986.

 

A study by Sharon Fowler of the University of

Texas using 7 years of data link diet drinks to

obesity. I will send it to you by separate

email. Aspartame is a drug that makes you crave

carbohydrates so you gain weight. This

information from the 1985 Congressional Record is

included in Dr. Sandra Cabot's paper mentioned above.

 

Here is Abby Cormack's story:

http://www.mpwhi.com/abby_cormack_story.htm Here

is what the aspartame experts say about Abby's

case: http://www.mpwhi.com/experts_on_aspartame_and_abby_cormack.htm

 

Keep in mind that aspartame is very addictive and

a cash cow, so naturally Coke had to do

something. I wouldn't call Dr. Bernadene

Magnuson an aspartame expert. I would call her

someone who defends aspartame, and this must be

done with propaganda because true facts show

aspartame triggers all sorts of neurodegenerative

diseases from Parkinson's to Lou Gehrigs, can

mimic and precipitate MS, trigger birth defects,

behavioral and psychiatric problems and more than

92 Symptoms listed on the FDA list. These

include four types of seizures, male sexual

dysfunction, headaches, joint pain and mood

disorders to blindness, coma and death.

www.mpwhi.com/92_aspartame_symptoms.pdf

 

Around the world there is concern about the

epidemic of obesity which is caused by aspartame

as well as the epidemic of diabetes. As diabetic

specialist H. J. Roberts, M.D., brings out in the

medical text, aspartame can not only precipitate

diabetes but simulates and aggravates diabetic

retinopathy and neuropathy, destroys the optic

nerve from the free methyl alcohol, causes

diabetics to go into convulsions and even

interacts with insulin. The methanol is also the

reason so many diabetics are losing limbs.

 

I lectured in New Zealand last year with Abby

Cormack and Sue Kedgley from the New Zealand

Parliament. A lot of the problem is the New

Zealand Food Safety Authority who uses the

aspartame manufacturers propaganda. In the face

of the publicity many Kiwi's got off this poison

and got well, while the NZFSA put out press

releases not to listen to the campaigners. When

those responsible to solve the problem ARE the

problem it works against the efforts to free New

Zealand of this chemical poison. I had with me

congressional records and enough information to

show aspartame to be a poison, so the NZFSA

refused me entrance to their meeting on the

subject. They feared being exposed with the records.

 

Here is the usual propaganda on aspartame

rebutted with medical

references: http://www.dorway.com/offasprt.html

The aspartame industry is fond of evading the

issue. For instance when you explain there is a

methyl ester which becomes free methyl alcohol, a

severe metabolic poison, they will tell you that

there is more methanol in oranges than in

aspartame. What they fail to tell you is that in

nature methanol is always accompanied by ethanol

which is the antidote to methanol toxicity and

takes it safely out of the body. Here is a peer

reviewed journal article by Dr. Woodrow Monte who

now resides in New

Zealand.

http://dorway.com/dorwblog/?page_id=1000 Further,

methanol in nature binds to pectin. In aspartame

methanol is free. It is also classified as a

narcotic. It causes chronic methanol poisoning

which affects the dopamine system of the brain. This causes the addiction.

 

Let's take it a step further. The NZFSA is

concerned about formaldehyde in clothing from

China but what about the embalming by

formaldehyde of the human using aspartame. The

formaldehyde converted from the free methyl

alcohol embalms living tissue and damages

DNA. Here is the complete Trocho

Study:

www.mpwhi.com/formaldehyde_from_aspartame.pdf I

flew to Barcelona and spoke with Dr. Alemany who

did this study and he admitted aspartame could

kill 200 million people. In as much as aspartame

is an abortifacient and triggers fatal diseases

and cancers it no doubt already has.

 

Could it get any worse? Aspartame also triggers

an irregular heart rhythm, interacts with cardiac

medication, damages the cardiac conduction system

and causes sudden

death:

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

and http://www.wnho.net/aspartame_msg_scd.htm

 

What I am particularly concerned with is the fact

the last health minister made a deal with Coke to

eliminate regular Coke in schools in favor of

Diet Coke which can destroy the brains of the

children. Here is our Report For Schools

http://www.mpwhi.com/report_on_aspartame_and_children.htm

The Honorable Pete Hodgson read this report and

agreed it wasn't for children. Now there is a

new health minister and he's done nothing to

prevent this

travesty.

http://www.mpwhi.com/health_minister_admitted_aspartame_not_for_kids.htm .

 

Many people in New Zealand have now gotten off of

aspartame and gotten well and the information is

spreading fast. For this reason Coke sent in

Bernadene to defend their product. Here is the

rebuttal to the Burdock Study:

http://www.mpwhi.com/aspartame_and_manufacturer_funded_reviews.htm

 

You can save the people of New Zealand from

aspartame and Bernadine and her propaganda. All

you have to do is write the facts in the press

when she spins her yarn. If you need further

facts I'm delighted to help and can also connect you to world experts.

 

While I was in New Zealand, Chris Wheeler,

Mission Possible New Zealand and an excellent

journalist wrote this article: Dying for a Diet

Coke: http://www.rense.com/general78/dying.htm

 

Keep in mind that the Food and Drug

Administration of the US knew aspartame caused

cancer before it ever was approved, and their own

FDA toxicologist, told Congress by approving it they violated the law:

 

 

On August 1, l985 the FDA's own toxicologist, Dr.

Adrian Gross, told Congress at least one of

Searle's studies " has established beyond ANY

REASONABLE DOUBT that aspartame is capable of

inducing brain tumors in experimental animals and

that this predisposition of it is of extremely

high significance. ... In view of these

indications that the cancer causing potential of

aspartame is a matter that had been established

WAY BEYOND ANY REASONABLE DOUBT, one can ask:

What is the reason for the apparent refusal by

the FDA to invoke for this food additive the

so-called Delaney Amendment to the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act? "

 

The Delaney Amendment makes it illegal to allow

any residues of cancer causing chemicals in

foods. In his concluding testimony Gross asked,

" Given the cancer causing potential of aspartame

how would the FDA justify its position that it

views a certain amount of aspartame as

constituting an allowable daily intake or 'safe'

level of it? Is that position in effect not

equivalent to setting a 'tolerance' for this food

additive and thus a violation of that law? And if

the FDA itself elects to violate the law, who is

left to protect the health of the public? "

Congressional Record SID835:131 (August 1, l985)

 

Two of the congressional records on aspartame are

on the front page of www.mpwhi.com Bernadine will

attempt to rebut the prestigious Ramazzini

Studies peer reviewed by 7 world experts which

showed aspartame to be a multipotential

carcinogen, and can be passed on to the offspring

if the mother uses aspartame during pregnancy and

the baby survives. Aspartame in original studies

caused all types of tumors from mammary and brain

to testicular and pancreatic. First the European

Food Safety Authority tried to say the rats had

respiratory disease and then Dr. Soffritti who

did the studies explained to them that

respiratory disease is the dying process. After

this Dr. Koeter of the EFSA confessed that they

were pressured by industry to highjack science. Here is that confession:

<http://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/news/ng.asp?n=70720-efsa-health-claims-antibio\

tics>http://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/news/ng.asp?n=70720-efsa-health-claims-ant\

ibiotics

 

 

Here is Dr. Soffritti's rebuttal already to the Magnuson letter:

Carcinogenicity of Aspartame: Soffritti Responds

 

Environ Health Perspect. doi:10.1289/ehp.10881R

available via <http://dx.doi.org/>http://dx.doi.org [Online 27 May 2008]

 

Magnuson and Williams's letter is substantially a

repetition of the arguments set forth in a recent

article (Magnuson et al. 2007), which was a

" safety evaluation " sponsored entirely by

Ajinomoto, the manufacturer of aspartame. Their

article (Magnuson et al. 2007) and this letter

contain numerous erroneous statements about the

long-term carcinogenesis studies on aspartame

conducted by the European Ramazzini Foundation (ERF).

 

First, Magnuson and Williams imply that our

findings (Soffritti et al. 2007) should be

discounted because the incidence of

lymphomas/leukemias in the high-dose group " were

within or near the reported historical control

ranges. " As reported in our study (Soffritti et

al. 2007), the incidence of lymphomas/leukemias

observed in both sexes treated with 2,000 ppm

aspartame is nearly double the concurrent control

(Soffritti et al. 2007). The suggestion that

concurrent control data should be ignored is

contrary to the widely accepted standard of good laboratory science.

 

Second, Magnuson and Williams attribute our

findings (Soffritti et al. 2007) to some kind of

bias (i.e., infection) that would affect only

treated animals but not the controls. We have

responded in detail to this hypothesis in our

article (Soffritti et al. 2007) and in an earlier

letter (Soffritti 2006). To support their

assertion, Magnuson and Williams mislead readers

by stating that " the lung was often the site of

lymphoma again in this [second] study. " However, we actually reported that

we observed the diffusion of neoplastic tissue

not only in the lung but also concurrently in

various organs (liver, spleen, mediastinal and

other lymph nodes). (Soffritti et al. 2007)

 

Infection as a mode of action for induction of

rat lymphoma has been recently examined by a

group of scientists at the National Center for

Environmental Assessment of the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency; Caldwell et al. (2008) found that

a careful examination of available information

does not support the hypothesis that the observed

lymphomas/leukemias in the ERF bioassays are a

general effect from infection. The reports of

chemically-induced lymphomas/leukemias by the ERF

seem to be chemical specific.

 

Third, the idea that we must provide a

" biologically plausible explanation " for human or

rodent carcinogens is a time-honored approach to

postpone or prevent the application of regulatory

measures to minimize carcinogenic risks. The

reality is that this explanation is quite often

unknown, as is, in general, the mode of action

behind the carcinogenic process.

 

I regard the other questions raised by Magnuson

and Williams as trivial. For example, whatever

the doses at various ages and weights, the

finding of any effect should be a cause for

concern. Likewise, the authors' observation that

some methodologic details were omitted from the

publication certainly does not change the oncologic results of this research.

 

Magnuson and Williams express disappointment that

Environmental Health Perspectives would publish

original scientific research by the ERF after

regulatory agencies went through so much trouble

to review our first aspartame study (Soffritti

2006) only to disagree with our conclusions. It

is the obligation of the agencies responsible for

food safety to review any new scientific data

available and to make their opinion available to

the public. The Food and Drug Administration

(FDA) did not make public the contents of their

review, but rather they issued a short press

release a full year after the European Food

Safety Authority (EFSA) concluded its evaluation,

and coincidentally, just days before I presented

new aspartame data in a lecture at the Mount

Sinai School of Medicine in New York (FDA 2007).

 

I find it unfortunate that some scientists have

such a low tolerance for original, independent

scientific research; however, I welcome continued

discussion and more importantly, additional

long-term experimental studies on aspartame and

other artificial sweeteners. We at the ERF stand

behind our results, and we remain convinced that

a review of the current regulations governing the

use of aspartame is necessary to better protect public health.

 

The author declares he has no competing financial interests.

Morando Soffritti

European Foundation of Oncology and Environmental

Sciences " B. Ramazzini " Cesare Maltoni Cancer Research Center Bologna, Italy

E-mail: <crcfrcrcfr

 

References

 

Caldwell J, Jinot J, DeVoney D, Gift JS. 2008.

Evaluation of evidence for infection as a mode of

action for induction of rat lymphoma. Environ Mol Mutagen 49: 155–164.

 

FDA (Food and Drug Administration). 2007. FDA

Statement on European Aspartame Study. Available:

<http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~lrd/fpaspar2.html>http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~lrd/fpasp\

ar2.html

[accessed 12 January 2008].

 

Magnuson BA, Burdock GA, Doull J, Kroes RM, Marsh

GM, Pariza MW, et al. 2007. Aspartame: a safety

evaluation based on current use levels,

regulations, and toxicological and

epidemiological studies. Crit Rev Toxicol 37: 629–727.

 

Soffritti M. 2006. Acesulfame potassium:

Soffritti responds [Letter]. Environ Health Perspect 114: A516–A519.

 

Soffritti M, Belpoggi F, Tibaldi E, Degli Esposti

D, Lauriola M. 2007. Life-span exposure to low

doses of aspartame beginning during prenatal life

increases cancer effects in rats. Environ Health Perspect 115:1293–1297.

spacer

 

 

I was in New York at Mt. Sinai School of Medicine

when Dr. Morando Soffritti gave a lecture on his

second study. At that time he was honored with

the Irving J. Selikoff Award for Outstanding

contributions to the identification of

environmental and industrial carcinogens, and his

promotion of independent scientific research. It

was created in 1993 by the Collegium Ramazzini,

an academy of 180 internationally renowned

experts in occupational and environmental health

from over 30 nations. It has been awarded just

twice before being presented to Dr. Soffritti.

 

The Ramazzini studies are so prestigious that

industry had to scramble to the bottom of the

barrel to try and rebut it. The government and

the aspartame manufacturers found an old AARP

survey (American Association of Retired People)

sent to a million American seniors: 16 pages

with 56 questions. It asked: How high did you

go in school? Had a hysterectomy? Do you eat

brownies? Oatmeal? Margarine? Question #25

asked " Over the last 12 months when you drank

coffee or tea, what kind of sweetener did you

regularly add? " There were 6 multi-choice

selections, one of which was Equal or aspartame.

 

This 10 year old 3 word item instantaneously

converted the questionnaire into the biggest

aspartame study in history! It showed no

problems at all! (None were asked for!). Thru

saturation news releases this propaganda spread

planetwide in major magazines and other

media.

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

We call it the Oatmeal/Brownie study.

 

Dr. H. J. Roberts said: " The failure of the FDA

to acknowledge and act on the ongoing revelations

over the last two decades about the hazards of

aspartame products in a number of realms,

especially when taken by children and pregnant

women, remains a source of professional

embarrassment. This chemical constitutes an

imminent public health hazard. I congratulate

Dr. Soffritti for independently underscoring this waring. "

 

Neurosurgeon Dr. Russell Blaylock remarked on Dr.

Soffritti's first study: " The study released in

the European Journal of Oncology by Morando

Soffritti and co-worker should terrify mothers

and all those consuming aspartame sweetened

products. This was a carefully done study, which

clearly demonstrated a statistically significant

increase in several types of lymphomas and

leukemias in rats. Both of these malignancies

have increased significantly in this country

since the widespread use of aspartame. The type

of damage was a duplicate of that associated with

cancers. Along with this most recent study, this

means that drinking a single diet cola sweetened

with aspartame can cause the development of lymphoma or leukemia. "

 

Dr. Blaylock further stated: " They also found an

increased incidence of malignant brain tumors,

even though it was not statistically

significant. This does not mean there is no

association to brain tumors, since only the

animals exposed to aspartame developed the

tumors. With children and pregnant women

drinking the largest amount of diet colas, this

puts their children at the greatest risk of

developing one of these horrible diseases. their

study found that even low doses of aspartame

could cause these malignancies; yet, the higher

the dose, the more cancers that were seen. "

 

Dr. Ralph Walton of Safe Harbor Behavioral

Health, Erie, PA, emphasized: " Dr. Soffritti's

two outstanding studies on the multipotential

carcinogenic effects of aspartame add

significantly to the evergrowing body of evidence

on the hazards of this artificial sweetener. The

FDA's stubborn adherence to their original, and

controversial, approval of aspartame is

unconscionable. the public must be informed that

the approvals, both in this country and Europe,

are based on highly questionable industry-funded

research, or in the case of recently issue

statements on aspartame's supposed safety, on a

questionnaire which in no way represents

legitimate research. Independent research, such

as the recent Soffritti studies invariable

demonstrates the extremely hazardous nature of this product. "

 

It's so easy to show aspartame triggers tumors

even a grandmother did a

study:

http://www.mpwhi.com/aspartame_study_female_rats_developed_visible_tumors.doc

This is why the aspartame industry is known to

threaten researchers and try to assassinate their

character: www.mpwhi.com/upi_1987_aspartame_report[1[.pdf

 

The aspartame industry will rebut any independent

study which is why Dr. Ralph Walton some years

ago did research for 60 Minutes showing that 92 %

of independent scientific peer reviewed research

shows the problems aspartame

causes: http://www.dorway.com/peerrev.html In

the past two or three years there are probably 30

more studies showing aspartame toxicity. We have many of them on web.

 

How did such a deadly, deadly poison get

marketed? It was through the political chicanery

of Donald Rumsfeld after FDA revoked the petition

for approval. See the movie, Sweet Misery: A

Poisoned

World:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-566922170441334340

Here you can see and hear the experts and listen

to Attorney James Turner who exposes Rumsfeld.

 

Coming is a blazing conflagration of

misinformation by Coke and Bernadene

Magnuson. All you need to put out the inferno

and save New Zealand is the facts. If you need

further information that they will not be able to answer simply email me.

 

All my best,

 

Dr. Betty Martini, D.Hum, Founder

Mission Possible International

9270 River Club Parkway

Duluth, Georgia 30097

770 242-2599

www.mpwhi.com, www.dorway.com

Aspartame Toxicity Center, www.holisticmed.com/aspartame

 

 

 

 

 

Diet drinks lose out to sugary alternatives

 

 

 

 

4:00AM Monday Sep 22, 2008

By

<http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/

/martin-johnston/news/headlines.cfm?a_id=110>Martin Johnston

 

Shoppers are ignoring low/no sugar options like Coke Zero. Phot

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Shoppers are ignoring low/no sugar options like

Coke Zero. Photo / Herald on Sunday

 

Anxieties about the health effects of aspartame

appear to have turned many consumers against the

artificial sweetener, sparking new public health

worries this could boost obesity.

 

Supermarket sales of low- or no-calorie diet soft

drinks such as Coke Zero have slumped this year

while their sugar-charged alternatives have

experienced a boom, according to figures from

research agency Nielsen. This reverses an earlier trend.

 

" I think it's a concern, " Auckland University

population health expert Professor Rod Jackson said yesterday.

 

In the face of New Zealand's growing obesity

rate, he supports replacing sugary drinks with

those containing aspartame - except for those

with a rare disease that prevents them from

processing the sweetener - to reduce energy intake.

 

" There's no such thing as a safe anything.

Anything you eat is going to have some harms and possibly some benefits.

 

" But what's clear is that having too many

calories increases your weight, your blood

pressure, your risk of diabetes, your risk of heart disease. "

 

New Zealand's acceptable daily aspartame intake

is 40mg/kg of bodyweight - 17.5 cans for a 70kg

adult if measured by aspartame drinks. In 2003,

individuals were typically consuming 6-15 per

cent of the recommended limit, according to the Health Ministry.

 

The aspartame controversy erupted after Abby

Cormack's case became the subject last year of a

petition to Parliament's health select committee

calling for restrictions on the chemical.

 

Ms Cormack, who chewed four packets of sugar-free

gum a day and drank large quantities of diet soft

drink, reported dizziness, tingling, insomnia,

paranoia and other problems which she said ended when she quit aspartame.

 

The committee did not agree to the petitioners'

request, but in a minority report, the Green

Party called for warning labels to highlight

aspartame's " potential adverse effects " .

 

Coca-Cola Oceania has financed the trip to New

Zealand of Canadian aspartame expert Dr Bernadene

Magnuson, who will speak at Nutrition Foundation

seminars this week on the " myths " surrounding the chemical.

 

Dr Magnuson, an independent consultant

toxicologist and Toronto University adjunct

professor in nutritional sciences, contributed to

a review of aspartame last year. It was funded by

a leading producer of the sweetener, but the

researchers were not told this until after they had reached their conclusions.

 

" At current levels of consumption of aspartame,

the evidence is that it's completely safe, " Dr

Magnuson told the Herald yesterday. " There is no

credible evidence of an effect of aspartame in

cancer, neurological problems or reproductive problems. "

 

She discounted studies which purported to show

adverse health effects from the chemical.