Keep informed here about important healthcare news Plano-Fort Worth!
NOTE: We received the following link from Ms.
Nenah Sylver and found it of such importance
that we are posting it hoping that the author
will contact us so we can give full attribution.
Below is a science fair project that my
granddaughter did for 2006. In it she took
filtered water and divided it into two parts.
The first part she heated to boiling in a pan on
the stove, and the second part she heated to
boiling in a microwave. Then after cooling she
used the water to water two identical plants to
see if there would be any difference in the
growth between the normal boiled water and the
water boiled in a microwave. She was thinking
that the structure or energy of the water may be
compromised by microwave. As it turned out, even
she was amazed at the difference.
I have known for years that the problem with
microwaved anything is not the radiation people
used to worry about, it's how it corrupts the DNA
in the food so the body can not recognize it. So
the body wraps it in fat cells to protect itself
from the dead food or it eliminates it fast. Think
of all the Mothers heating up milk in these "Safe"
appliances. What about the nurse in Canada that
warmed up blood for a transfusion patient and
accidentally killed them when the blood went in
dead. But the makers say it's safe. Never mind
then, keep using them. Ask your Doctor. I am sure
they will say it's safe too. Proof is in the
pictures of living plants dying. Remember You are
also Living. Take Care.
Action Alert from the Organic Consumers
Congress Poised to Pass Bill
Taking Away Right to Know What's in Your Food
Tell your Congressman or Congresswoman to
vote "No" on House of Representatives Bill H.R.
4167, the "National Uniformity for Food Act"
House of Representatives will vote this week on
a controversial "national food uniformity"
labeling law that will take away local
government and states' power to require food
safety food labels such as those required in
California and other states on foods or
beverages that are likely to cause cancer, birth
defects, allergic reactions, or mercury
poisoning. This bill would also prevent citizens
in local municipalities and states from passing
laws requiring that genetically engineered foods
and ingredients such as Monsanto's recombinant
Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH) be labeled.
The House will vote March 2, 2006 on a bill that
would gut state food safety and labeling laws.
H.R. 4167, the "National Uniformity for Food
Act," lowers the bar on food safety by
overturning state food safety laws that are not
"identical" to federal law. Hundreds of state
laws and regulations are at risk, including
those governing the safety of milk, fish, and
shellfish. The bill is being pushed by large
supermarket chains and food manufacturers,
spearheaded by the powerful Grocery
Manufacturers of America.
Big food corporations and the biotech industry
understand that consumers are more and more
concerned about food safety, genetic
engineering, and chemical-intensive agriculture,
and are reading labels more closely. They
understand that pesticide and mercury residues
and hazardous technologies such as genetic
engineering and food irradiation will be
rejected if there are truthful labels required
on food products. Industry-sponsored H.R. 4167
is gaining momentum and must be stopped! Act
now! Preserve local and regional democracy and
protect yourself and your family from unsafe
food by sending an email or calling your
Representative and urging them to vote "No" on
Please Take Action Now--Send a Message to Your
Congress Member in the House of Representatives
to Vote "No" on H.R. 4167
And please call your Congress Member at
Regards & Solidarity,
Organic Consumers Association
ORGANIC CONSUMERS ASSOCIATION
6771 South Silver Hill Drive
Finland, MN 55603
Phone: (218)- 226-4164 Fax: (218) 353-7652
FDA Commission Lester Crawford abruptly resigned on
Friday, Sept. 23, 2005.
His resignation is effective immediately.
“After three and a half years as
Deputy Commissioner, Acting Commissioner and,
finally, as Commissioner, it is time at the age of
67, to step aside,” Crawford said in a memorandum to
with his departure said Crawford was asked to
Crawford's tenure was marked by increasing criticism
of the agency by those who contended it had become
more interested in politics than in its mission to
protect consumers. Asked if he was forced to
resign, HHS spokeswoman Christina Pearson declined
to comment further, calling it a personnel issue.
Last month, morale at the agency
plummeted when Crawford indefinitely postponed
nonprescription sales of morning-after contraception
over the objections of staff scientists who had
declared the pill safe. FDA's women's health chief
Many FDA critics lauded Crawford's
“The American consumer should shed no
tears at Mr. Crawford's resignation," said Sen.
Byron Dorgan, a North Dakota Democrat who voted
against Crawford's confirmation. “The fact is, he
took the side of the pharmaceutical industry and
against consumers at virtually every opportunity.”
“In recent years, the FDA has
demonstrated a too-cozy relationship with the
pharmaceutical industry and an attitude of shielding
rather than disclosing information,” said Sen.
Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, who has spent 18 months
investigating the agency.
Crawford was confirmed as head of the
FDA by the Senate on July 18. President Bush
nominated him for the position in February. He had
managed the agency since he became acting
commissioner in March 2004 following Dr. Mark B.
McClellan's tenure as commissioner. Previously
Crawford had served as deputy commissioner during
Full coverage of Crawford's
resignation and the possible impact on health
freedom will appear in our next member newsletter.
Don't forget to
voice your concerns to Congress. Click
to visit our Legislation Action Center and contact
your representatives. It's easy, fast, and
important! Did you
know that 1 letter = 1,000 voices or more to members
of Congress? Here are just a few of
the health freedom bills currently in Congress.
Oppose Dietary Supplement Access and Awareness Act
(HR 3156) - This legislation would regulate almost
all dietary supplements like prescription drugs.
Support Consumer Access to
Health Information (HR
2352) - This bill would
ensure that the FDA does not suppress accurate
Dietary Supplement Regulatory Implementation (H.R.
2510) - this bill is trying a back-door approach to
modifying DSHEA with focus on banning all
supplements containing ephedrine alkaloids and
establishing a system for the requirements for the
reporting of serious adverse experiences.
Safety Administration (S. 729/HR 1507) – this bill
would create a new food agency and transfers the FDA
food functions, except dietary supplements, to the
new agency and in essence repeal the Dietary
Supplement Act (DSHEA).
to Medical Treatment Act (HR 2792) - would provide a
much-needed federal statutory authority for
Americans to use therapies and devices that have not
yet been approved (or which may never be approved)
by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
Monday Feb. 18, 2004 By Rob Stein
Antibiotics Increase Risk for Breast Cancer
Antibiotics could increase the risk for breast
cancer by affecting bacteria in the digestive system
in ways that interfere with the way the body uses
foods that protect against cancers and other
diseases. Or antibiotics increase the risk by
affecting the immune system. Remember, "Everything
you put in your mouth that isn't food, has
side-effects!" Here is a case in point! - Dr. Robin
the American Medical Association:
released Monday Feb. 18,
2004 By Rob Stein
Antibiotic use is
associated with an increased risk for breast cancer,
a new study has found, raising the possibility that
women who take the widely used medicines are prone
to one of the most feared malignancies.
first-of-its-kind study of more than 10,000 women in
Washington state concluded that those who used the
most antibiotics had double the chances of
developing breast cancer, that the association was
consistent for all forms of antibiotics and that the
risk went up with the number of prescriptions, a
powerful indication that the link was real.
A variety of
experts quickly cautioned, however, that the
findings should not stop women from taking the often
lifesaving drugs when needed to treat infections.
There could be other explanations for the
association, and much more research is needed before
scientists understand what the surprising results
mean, they said.
"This is not saying
that women should stop taking antibiotics. Women
should take antibiotics for infections," said
Stephen H. Taplin, a senior scientist at the
National Cancer Institute who helped conduct the
study. "We need to follow up and find out if this is
a real association."
consistency of the findings in a study with such
careful methodology could indicate that antibiotic
use is an important, previously unrecognized risk
factor for breast cancer, experts said.
increase the risk for breast cancer by, for example,
affecting bacteria in the digestive system in ways
that interfere with the way the body uses foods that
protect against cancer, experts said. Another
possibility is that antibiotics increase the risk by
affecting the immune system.
Even if it turns
out that antibiotics do not increase the risk for
breast cancer, the finding is likely to be important
because it could lead to the discovery of whatever
it is about women who use the drugs that appears to
make them prone to the disease, researchers said.
"This has opened up a picture that people had not
been thinking about," Taplin said. "The important
thing is more research and asking more questions
about what it could be."
Until the results
are sorted out, experts said, the findings provide
yet another reason for doctors to more judiciously
prescribe antibiotics, which are often used
proposed in 1981
proposed that antibiotics may increase the risk for
breast cancer in 1981, but the only other study to
examine the question was in Finland in 2000. That
study also found an association, but prompted the
The study's design,
however, made it impossible to rule out the chance
that women who tend to use the medicines are
biologically predisposed to breast cancer for other
reasons, such as by having weak immune systems or a
hormonal imbalance that could be the cause of both
their increased risk for breast cancer and for
infections that prompted antibiotic use.
used extensively in this country and in many parts
of the world. The possible association between
breast cancer and antibiotic use was important to
examine," said Christine M. Velicer, an
epidemiologist with Group Health Cooperative's
Center for Health Studies who was the lead author of
strikes more than 211,000 women each year in the
United States and kills more than 40,000, making it
the leading cause of cancer and the second leading
cancer killer among women.
Velicer, Taplin and
their colleagues examined computerized pharmacy and
cancer screening records of 2,266 women in the Group
Health Cooperative, a Seattle area health plan, who
developed breast cancer, and 7,953 similar women who
Women who had more
than 25 individual prescriptions for antibiotics
over an average period of 17 years had twice the
risk of breast cancer as those who had taken no
antibiotics. The risk was lower for women who took
fewer antibiotics, but even those who had between
one and 25 prescriptions were about 50 percent more
likely to develop breast cancer, the researchers
"It was surprising
for me that there was an association," Velicer said.
"The overall consistency across a number of common
antibiotics was really notable."
tried to explain the results by looking at other
known risk factors, such as a family history of
breast cancer and hormone use. But none could. They
also did an analysis comparing women who were taking
large amounts of antibiotics because of a skin
condition associated with a hormonal imbalance with
those taking antibiotics because of respiratory
infections to see if the real cause might be the
hormonal imbalance. That, too, failed to explain the
findings, though it could not completely rule it
Jeanne Calle, the
society's director of analytical epidemiology,
called the study important because "it appears to be
the first major work to describe a possible
association between antibiotic use and the increased
risk of cancer."
Antioxidants may protect kids from asthma
FRIDAY, Feb. 13 (HealthDayNews)
— Children with high levels of antioxidants have
lower rates of asthma, a new study finds. The
reduction in asthma prevalence proved most dramatic,
Cornell University researchers report in the
February issue of the American Journal of
Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine.
"This study raises
the possibility that dietary intervention may be
something to consider for prevention or treatment of
asthma," says study author Patricia Cassano.
researchers focused on 6,153 children, aged 4 to 16,
who took part in the third National Health and
Nutrition Examination Survey, conducted by the U.S.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention from 1988
to 1994. The researchers looked at results of a
health exam, a household questionnaire on whether
asthma had been diagnosed, and blood tests measuring
antioxidant levels and exposure to cigarette smoke.
higher levels of selenium had a 10 percent reduction
in asthma prevalence compared with other children.
In children exposed to secondhand smoke, the
reduction associated with selenium climbed to 50
carotene levels in children also were associated
with a reduction in asthma — by 40 percent among
those exposed to secondhand smoke and by 10 percent
among those not exposed to smoke. Higher vitamin C
levels, too, were associated with reducing asthma,
by about 40 percent for those exposed to smoke and
by 10 percent for others.
Beta carotene is
found in fruits and vegetables such as carrots,
mangos and oranges. Vitamin C is plentiful in
oranges and other citrus fruits, as well
strawberries, red and green peppers, broccoli and
Brussels sprouts. Selenium can be found in liver,
grains, fish and some nuts.
Other research has
linked chronic asthma and low levels of antioxidants
in the lungs. "I agree that antioxidants play a
role in inflammation, and there might be a role for
using these agents" in asthma patients, says Dr.
Marianne Frieri, director of allergy and immunology
at Nassau University Medical Center in East Meadow,
With higher levels
of antioxidants, "you can potentially help certain
forms of asthma," says Frieri, who's also a
professor of medicine at the Stony Brook University,
part of the State University of New York. But, she
adds, asthma has many different triggers.
The American Lung
Association estimates that 6.3 million U.S. children
under 18 have asthma, the leading serious chronic
illness among children. The number of cases of
asthma has been on the rise, but the reason why
Dr. Jerry Shier, a
doctor at the Asthma and Allergy Center in
Montgomery County, Md., calls the Cornell study
"provocative" and says the possible relationship
between antioxidants and asthma deserves further
for a reason why we should have this increase in
asthma cases —poor nutrition," says Shier, an
assistant clinical professor at George Washington
University School of Medicine. "Has our diet
changed, leading to an increase in asthma?"
-- Gary Gately,
Health Day News
URGENT DRUG ALERT
All drugs containing PHENYLPROPANOLAMINE are
being recalled. You may want to try calling the
800 number listed on most drug boxes and inquire
about a refund. Please read this CAREFULLY. Also,
please pass this on to everyone you know.
STOP TAKING anything containing this ingredient.
It has been linked to increased hemorrhagic stroke
(bleeding in the brain) among women ages 18-49 in
the three days after starting use of medication.
Problems were not found in men, however, the FDA
recommended that everyone (even children) seek an
The following medicines contain PHENYLPROPANOLAMINE:
Acutrim Diet Gum Appetite Suppressant
Acutrim Plus Dietary Supplements
Acutrim Maximum Strength Appetite Control
Alka-Seltzer Plus Children's Cold Medicine
Alka-Seltzer Plus Cold Medicine (Cherry & Orange)
Cold Medicine Original Alka-Seltzer Plus Cold &
Alka-Seltzer Plus Cold & Flu Medicine
Alka-Seltzer Plus Cold & Sinus Effervescent
Alka-Seltzer Plus Night-time Cold Medicine
BC Allergy Sinus Cold Powder
Comtrex Flu Therapy and Fever Relief
Night and Day Contac 12 Hour Cold Capsules
Contac 12 Hour Caplets
Coricidin D Cold Flu and Sinus
Dexatrim Caffeine Free
Dexatrim Extended Duration
Dexatrim Vitamin C\Caffeine Free
Dimetapp Cold and Allergy Chewable Tablets
Dimetapp Cold and Allergy Liqui-Gels
Dimetapp DM Cold and Cough Elixer
Dimetapp 4 Hour Liquid Gels
Dimetapp 4 Hour Tablets
Dimetapp 12 Hour Extentabs Tablets
Naldecon DX Pediatric Drops
Permathene Mega 16
Tavist-D 12 Hour Relief of Sinus and Nasal
Triaminic DM Cough Relief
Triaminic Expectorant Chest and Head
Triaminic Syrup Cold and Allergy
Triaminic Triaminicol Cold and Cough
I just found out and called the 800 number on the
container for Triaminic and they informed me they
are voluntarily recalling the following medicines
because of a certain ingredient that is causing
strokes and seizures in children.
Orange 3D Cold and Allergy Cherry (Pink)
3D Cold and Cough Berry
3D Cold Relief Yellow 3D EXPECTORANT
They are asking you to call them at 800-548-3708
with the lot number on the box so they can send you
postage for you to send it back to them and they
send you a refund. If you know anyone with small
children, please pass this on as it is serious
DO PASS THIS ALONG TO ALL ON YOUR MAILING LIST so
people are informed. They can then pass it along to
To confirm these findings please take time to check
the following URL Phenylpropanolamine Information
Obesity catching tobacco as top
preventable cause of early death
WASHINGTON (AP) - Americans are sitting around and
eating themselves to death, with obesity closing
in on tobacco as the nation's No. 1 underlying
government is offering constructive, even
lighthearted, advice to fight what it calls an
epidemic of expanding waistlines. Americans will
be told in a new ad campaign they can lose
midsection "love handles" and double chins one
step at a time if they eat less and exercising
just too darn fat, ladies and gentlemen, and we're
going to do something about it," Health and Human
Services Secretary Tommy Thompson said Tuesday at
a news conference.
diet and physical inactivity caused 400,000 deaths
in 2000, a 33 percent jump over 1990, said a study
released Tuesday by the federal Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention. Tobacco-related
deaths in the same period climbed by less than 9
percent and the gap between the two narrowed
tragic," said Dr. Julie Gerberding, the CDC's
director and an author of the study.
report predicts obesity would surpass tobacco if
current trends continue. "Our worst fears were
confirmed," Gerberding said.
study is the latest in a long line of research
documenting widespread weight gain _ and its
consequences _ among Americans, from children to
researchers analyzed data from 2000 for the
leading causes of death and for those preventable
factors known to contribute to them. Like tobacco,
obesity and inactivity increase the risks for the
top three killers: heart disease, cancer and such
cerebrovascular ailments as strokes. Obesity and a
sedentary lifestyle also strongly increase the
risk of diabetes, the sixth leading cause of
results appear in Wednesday's Journal of the
American Medical Association.
Americans' fast-food lifestyle, increased use of
computers and a decline in school physical
education programs all were cited by Thompson and
other officials as factors contributing to the
nation's fat problem. Two out of three adults and
9 million children are overweight or obese, they
than call for dramatic changes in diet and
exercise, Thompson said Americans could begin a
gradual exercise program. They could get off the
bus a block farther from their homes, he said, and
slowly cut back on unhealthful foods.
public service announcements debuted by Thompson
use humor to tell people they can slowly trim
their waistlines. In one ad, someone turns in a
pair of love handles found near the stairs in a
shopping mall. "Lots of people lose them taking
the stairs instead of the escalator," says a clerk
at the lost and found.
another ad, a shopping cart gets stuck on a double
chin that someone lost near a supermarket's fruit
and vegetable display.
said President Bush would play a prominent part in
the campaign, but did not elucidate.
Thompson, a fierce anti-smoking advocate, drew
parallels between the drives to stop smoking and
to get Americans to eat less and exercise more.
But unlike his campaign to end smoking, he is
advocating only voluntary measures at this point.
and Drug Administration also is expected to issue
a report on obesity later this week. The FDA has
been considering whether to require restaurants to
provide more nutrition information and change
nutrition labels on food sold in grocery stores
and other outlets to help consumers.
praised McDonald's for its decision to end
Supersize fries and drinks in its more than 13,000
U.S. restaurants by year's end except for
Several soft-drink makers also have announced
steps to offer a larger number of healthier
Thompson would not take a position on the bill
to be debated Wednesday in the House. It would
shield restaurants and fast food franchises from
lawsuits seeking to blame them for obesity and
health problems related to it. The bill was
prompted by the fast-food industry's complaints
about a rash of lawsuits that fault their food for
Americans' bulging bellies.
Many states are making attempts to slow the
increase in obesity among children. About two
dozen of them are considering bans or limits on
vending machine products in schools. Roughly 20
states already restrict students' access to junk
food until after lunch.
The Texas Agriculture Department is revamping
rules on what foods public schools in the state
can serve to their 4.2 million students, cutting
out deep-fried foods and reducing fat and sugar in
Americans need to drastically reduce our
consumption of "poor "food choices, and
dramatically increase our consumption of "good"
food choices like fruits, vegetables, and grains
in our daily lives.
Dangerous Supplements: Still at large
Consumer Reports, May 2004
If you can buy it at a clean, well-lighted store,
if it’s “all natural,” it’s not going to do you
serious harm, right? That’s what many Americans
assume about dietary supplements. But while most
supplements are probably fairly benign, Consumer
Reports has identified a dozen that according to
government warnings, adverse-event reports, and top
experts are too dangerous to be on the market. Yet
they are. We easily purchased all 12 in Feburary in
a few days of shopping online and in retail stores.
These unsafe supplements include Aristolochia, an
herb conclusively linked to kidney failure and
cancer in China, Europe, Japan, and the U.S.;
yohimbe, a sexual stimulant linked to heart and
respiratory problems; bitter orange, whose
ingredients have effects similar to those of the
banned weight-loss stimulant
chaparral, comfrey, germander, and
kava, all known or
likely causes of liver failure. (For a complete list
of the “dirty dozen.”
U.S. consumers shelled out some $76 million in
2002 for just three of these supplements:
androstenedione, kava, and yohimbe, the only ones
for which sales figures were available, according to
the Nutrition Business Journal, which tracks the
The potentially dangerous effects of most of
these products have been known for more than a
decade, and at least five of them are banned in
Asia, Europe, or Canada. Yet until very recently,
the U.S. Food and Drug Administration had not
managed to remove a single dietary supplement from
the market for safety reasons.
After seven years of trying, the agency announced
a ban on the weight-loss aid ephedra in December
2003. And in March 2004 it warned 23 companies to
stop marketing the body-building supplement
Despite these actions against high-profile
supplements, whose dangers were so well known that
even industry trade groups had stopped defending
them, the agency continues to be hamstrung by the
1994 Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA,
pronounced de-shay). While drug manufacturers
are required to prove that their products are safe
before being marketed, DSHEA makes the FDA prove
that supplements on the market are unsafe and
denies the agency all but the sketchiest information
about the safety record of most of them.
“The standards for demonstrating a supplement is
hazardous are so high that it can take the FDA years
to build a case,” said Bruce Silverglade, legal
director of the Center for Science in the Public
Interest, a Washington, D.C., consumer-advocacy
At the same time, the FDA’s supplement division
is understaffed and underfunded, with about 60
people and a budget of only $10 million to police a
$19.4 billion-a-year industry. To regulate drugs,
annual sales of which are 12 times the amount of
supplement sales, the FDA has almost 43 times as
much money and almost 48 times as many people.
“The law has never been fully funded,” said
William Hubbard, FDA associate commissioner for
policy and planning. “There’s never been the
resources to do all the things the law would command
us to do.”
The agency has learned that it must tread
carefully when regulating supplements. The first
time it tried to regulate the dangerous stimulant
ephedra, in 1997, overwhelming opposition from
Congress and industry forced it to back down.
As a result, the FDA is sometimes left practicing
what Silverglade calls “regulation by press
release”--issuing warnings about dangerous
supplements and hoping that consumers and health
There are signs of hope. The FDA has said that if
the ban on ephedra holds up against likely legal
challenges, it plans to go after other harmful
supplements. Legislation has been introduced to
strengthen the FDA’s authority under DSHEA and give
the agency more money to enforce the act.
But the supplement marketplace still holds hidden
hazards for consumers, especially among products
that aren’t in the headlines. “Consumers are
provided with more information about the composition
and nutritional value of a loaf of bread than about
the ingredients and potential hazards of botanical
medicines,” said Arthur Grollman, M.D., professor of
pharmacological sciences at the State University of
New York, Stony Brook, and a critic of DSHEA.
A question of safety
Supplement-industry advocates say the ephedra ban
demonstrates that DSHEA gives the FDA enough power
to protect consumers from unsafe products. “I don’t
think there’s anything wrong except that FDA has
only recently begun vigorous and active enforcement
of the law,” said Annette Dickinson, Ph.D.,
president of the Council for Responsible Nutrition,
a major trade association for the supplement
But critics of DSHEA think the ban illustrates
the extremes to which the FDA must go to outlaw a
When the agency initially tried to rein in
ephedra use in 1997, after receiving hundreds of
reports of adverse events, it sought not an outright
ban but dosage restrictions and sterner warning
labels. The industry mounted a furious
counter-attack, including the creation of a
public-relations group called the Ephedra Education
Council and a scientific review from a private
consulting firm, commissioned by Dickinson’s trade
group, that concluded ephedra was safe. After the
U.S. General Accounting Office said the FDA “did not
establish a causal link” between taking ephedra and
deaths or injuries, the agency was forced to drop
The industry continued to vigorously market and
defend ephedra. Metabolife International, a leading
ephedra manufacturer, did not let the FDA know that
it had received 14,684 complaints of adverse events
associated with its ephedra product, Metabolife 356,
in the previous five years, including 18 heart
attacks, 26 strokes, 43 seizures, and 5 deaths. It
took the pressure of congressional and Justice
Department investigations to get the company to turn
over the complaints in 2002. Then Steve Bechler, a
pitcher for the Baltimore Orioles, died unexpectedly
in 2003 while taking another ephedra supplement,
Xenadrine RFA-1. With sales suffering from the bad
publicity, manufacturers began to replace ephedra
with other stimulants such as bitter orange, which
mimics ephedra in chemical composition and function.
“All of a sudden Congress dropped objections to
an ephedra ban andstarted demanding the FDA act,”
To amass the necessary scientific evidence that
it hoped would satisfy the demanding standard set by
DSHEA, the FDA took aggressive action: It
commissioned an outside review from the RAND
Corporation, analyzed adverse-event reports, and
pored over every available shred of scientific
“We’ve gone the whole nine yards to collect and
evaluate all the possible evidence,” Mark McClellan,
commissioner of the FDA, said in announcing the ban.
“We will be doing our best to defend this in court,
and if that’s not sufficient, it may be time to
re-examine the act.”
Drugs vs. supplements
In an October 2002 nationwide Harris Poll of
1,010 adults, 59 percent of respondents said they
believed that supplements must be approved by a
government agency before they can be sold to the
public. Sixty-eight percent said the government
requires warning labels on supplements’ potential
side effects or dangers. Fifty-five percent said
supplement manufacturers can’t make safety claims
without solid scientific support.
They were wrong. None of those protections exist
for supplements--only for prescription and
over-the-counter medicines. Here are the major
differences in the safety regulations:
Testing for hazards. Before approval,
drugs must be proved effective, with an acceptable
safety profile, by means of lab research and
rigorous human clinical trials involving a minimum
of several thousand people, many millions of
dollars, and several years.
In contrast, supplement manufacturers can
introduce new products without any testing for
safety and efficacy. The maker’s only obligation is
to send the FDA a copy of the language on the label.
“Products regulated by DSHEA were presumed to be
safe because of their long history of use, often in
other countries,” said Jane E. Henney, M.D.,
commissioner of the FDA from 1998 to 2001. “As their
use dramatically increased in this country after the
passage of DSHEA, the presumption of safety may have
been misplaced, particularly for products other than
traditional vitamins and minerals. Some, like
ephedra, act like drugs and thus have similar
The only exceptions to this “presumption of
safety” are supplement ingredients that weren’t
being sold in the U.S. when DSHEA took effect.
Makers of such “new dietary ingredients” must show
the FDA evidence of the products’ safety before
marketing them. The FDA invoked that rarely used
provision in its action against androstenedione.
After years of allowing andro to be marketed without
restriction, the agency declared that it was “not
aware” that the supplement was used before DSHEA, so
it couldn’t be sold without evidence of safety.
Disclosing the risks. Drug labels and
package inserts must mention all possible adverse
effects and interactions. But supplement makers
don’t have to put safety warnings on the labels,
even for products with known serious hazards.
We bought a product called Relaxit whose label
had no warning about the kava it contained, even
though the American Herbal Products Association, an
industry trade group, recommends a detailed, though
voluntary warning label about potential liver
toxicity on all kava products.
Ensuring product quality. Drugs must
conform to “good manufacturing practices” that
guarantee that their contents are pure and in the
quantities stated on the label. While DSHEA gave the
FDA authority to impose similar standards on
supplements, it took until 2003 for the agency to
propose regulations--as yet not final--to implement
that part of the law.
Contaminants, too, regularly turn up in
supplements. In 1998 Richard Ko, Ph.D., of the
California Department of Health Services reported
that 32 percent of the Asian patent medicines he
tested contained pharmaceuticals or heavy metals
that weren’t on the label. The FDA has seized
supplements adulterated with prescription drugs,
including, in 2002, an herbal “prostate health”
supplement called PC SPES that turned out to contain
a powerful prescription blood thinner, warfarin.
Reporting the problems. By law, drug
companies are required to tell the FDA about any
reports of product-related adverse events that they
receive from any source. Almost every year, drugs
are removed from the market based on safety risks
that first surfaced in those reports.
In contrast, supplement makers don’t have to
report adverse events. Indeed, in the five years
after DSHEA took effect, 1994 to 1999, fewer than 10
of the more than 2,500 reports that the FDA received
came from manufacturers, according to a 2001
estimate from the inspector general of the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services. (Other
sources of reports included consumers, health
practitioners, and poison-control centers.) Overall,
the FDA estimates that it learns of less than 1
percent of adverse events involving dietary
THE ‘NATURAL’ MYSTIQUE
Many makers market their supplements as
“natural,” exploiting assumptions that such products
can’t harm you. That’s a dangerous assumption, said
Lois Swirsky Gold, Ph.D., director of the
Carcinogenic Potency Project at the University of
California, Berkeley, and an expert on chemical
carcinogens. “Natural is hemlock, natural is
arsenic, natural is poisonous mushrooms,” she said.
A cautionary example is aristolochic acid, which
occurs naturally in species of Aristolochia vines
that grow wild in many parts of the world. In
addition to being a powerful kidney toxin, it is on
the World Health Organization’s list of human
carcinogens. “It’s one of the most potent chemicals
of 1,400 in my Carcinogenic Potency Database,” Gold
said. “People have taken high doses similar to the
doses that animals are given in tests, and they both
get tumors very quickly.”
The dangers of aristolochic acid have been known
since at least 1993, when medical-journal articles
began appearing about 105 patrons of a Belgian
weight-loss clinic who had suffered kidney failure
after consuming Chinese herbs adulterated with
Aristolochia. At least 18 of the women also
subsequently developed cancer near
These findings prompted the FDA to issue a
nationwide warning against Aristolochia in 2001 and
to impose a ban on further imports of the herb. But
in early 2004, more than two years after the import
ban went into effect, Consumer Reports was
able to purchase products online that were labeled
as containing Aristolochia.
In 2003, Gold identified more than 100 products for
sale online with botanical ingredients listed by the
FDA as known or suspected to contain aristolochic
Donna Andrade-Wheaton, a former aerobics
instructor in Rhode Island, learned those facts too
late to save her kidneys. After taking Chinese herbs
containing Aristolochia for more than two years, she
suffered severe kidney damage; her kidney tissues
were found to contain aristolochic acid. In late
2002, at age 39, she underwent a kidney transplant.
Andrade-Wheaton is suing both the acupuncturist
who gave her the herbs and several companies that
manufactured them. The acupuncturist declined to
discuss the case on the record, and the manufacturer
did not return our phone calls.
There’s another widespread and false assumption
about natural supplements: that they’re always pure,
unprocessed products of the earth. Because DSHEA
permits the marketing of concentrates and extracts,
supplement makers can and do manipulate ingredients
to increase the concentrations of pharmacologically
That’s especially true of the many weight-loss
supplements designed for “thermogenic” stimulant
effects--boosting calorie expenditure by revving the
On one Internet shopping tour, for instance, we
bought a product called Thermorexin--”the Hottest
new Thermogenic on the market!” Its label says it
contains, among its 22 ingredients, 30 milligrams of
theophylline derived from a black tea extract and
the stimulant bitter orange. Sold as Theo-Dur and
other brands, theophylline is a prescription drug
and an effective asthma treatment, but most doctors
seldom prescribe it because it can cause seizures
and irregular heartbeats at relatively low doses.
Larry Berube, president of Anafit, Thermorexin’s
manufacturer, based in Orlando, Fla., described how
the product’s combination of ingredients was
developed: “Once we find out that the FDA says it’s
OK, we put them together in the lab, run our tests,
and do our trials, and if it comes up good, we
capsulate it, put it online and in the stores and
sell it,” he said.
Those tests involved asking fitness professionals
to use the supplement, and measuring their heart
rate and blood pressure, Berube said. The company
doesn’t use a control group, he said. Then “we go to
the fitness discussion boards and let trainers and
people know we have a new product and do they want
to try it,” he said. “And then they try it, and they
report back.” Berube said he has not heard of any
bad reactions to Thermorexin.
"According to a study done at Washington State
the average American child eats 275 pounds of sugar
per year - almost 3/4 of a pound per day!
The problem with this sugar consumption is that
sugar contains no vitamins, protein or fiber. It
usually is consumed instead of nutritious foods.
Sugar, while it contains no nutrients, does cause
health problems. For example, just 100 grams of
sugar (the equivalent of a candy bar and a soft
drink) can suppress the immune system for up to 6
hours. According to Judith Hallfrish at the USDA -
"When sugar consumption rises to about 30% of
calories, there are elevations in blood pressure,
triglycerides, total and LDL (bad) cholesterol, uric
acid, glucose and insulin responses." Most people
believe that the real damage done by sugar is weight
gain, but that is only a small part of its
Where does all this sugar come from? Soft drinks,
cokes and baked goods are some obvious sources.
But some foods perceived to be "healthy" contain
amazing amounts of sugar. The following chart
illustrates this point:
(4grams of sugar = 1 teaspoon = 1 packet of sugar)
Minute Maid Orange Soda 12 OZ 48 gr.
McDonald's Chocolate Shake 10 oz. 38 gr.
Hawaiian Punch Double C 1 C 28 gr.
Motts Apple Sauce 1/2 C 18 gr.
Dannon Raspberry Yogurt 1 C. 43 gr.
Hostess Snowballs 1 pkg. 35 gr.
Oreos 3 cookies 13 gr.
3 Musketeers 2.1 oz 40 gr.
Dannon Yogurt has more sugar than a 3 Musketeers
bars or a McDonald's chocolate shake!" (try reading
“My Kids a Garbologist” by Dr. Pam Popper Ph.D.
SACRAMENTO -- April 6th, Lawsuits
were filed in three separate California courts
against twelve companies who either produce or use
the artificial sweetener aspartame as a sugar
substitute in their products. The suits were filed
in Shasta, Sonoma and Butte County, California.
The suits allege that the food
companies committed fraud and breach of warranty by
marketing products to the public such as diet Coke,
diet Pepsi, sugar free gum, Flintstone's vitamins,
yogurt and children's aspirin with the full
knowledge that aspartame, the sweetener in them, is
Aspartame is a drug masquerading as
an additive. It interacts with other drugs, has a
synergistic and additive effect with MSG, and is a
chemical hyper-sensitization agent. As far back as
1970, Dr. John Olney founded the field of
neuroscience called excitotoxicity when he did
studies on aspartic acid, which makes up 40% of
aspartame, and found it caused lesions in the brains
of mice. He made world news on the aspartame/brain
tumor connection in l996. Dr. Ralph Walton,
Professor and Chairman of the Department of
Psychiatry, Northeastern Ohio Universities College
of Medicine has written of the behavioral and
psychiatric problems triggered by aspartame-caused
depletion of serotonin.
Aspartame causes headache, memory
loss, seizures, vision loss, coma and cancer. It
worsens or mimics the symptoms of such diseases and
conditions as fibromyalgia, MS, lupus, ADD,
diabetes, Alzheimer's, chronic fatigue and
Aspartame liberates free methyl
alcohol. The resulting chronic methanol poisoning
affects the dopamine system of the brain causing
addiction. Methanol, or wood alcohol, constitutes
one-third of the aspartame molecule and is
classified as a severe metabolic poison and
narcotic. Recent news is full of reports of
world-class athletes and other healthy consumers of
aspartame suddenly dropping dead. Sudden death can
occur from aspartame use because it damages the
cardiac conduction system.
Dr. Woodrow Monte in the peer
reviewed journal, Aspartame: Methanol and the Public
Health, wrote: "When diet sodas and soft drinks,
sweetened with aspartame, are used to replace fluid
loss during exercise and physical exertion in hot
climates, the intake of methanol can exceed 250
mg/day or 32 times the Environmental Protection
Agency's recommended limit of consumption for this
The effects of aspartame are
documented by the FDA's own data. In 1995 the agency
was forced, under the Freedom Of Information Act, to
release a list of ninety-two aspartame symptoms
reported by thousands of victims. This is only the
tip of the iceberg. H. J. Roberts, MD, published the
medical text "Aspartame Disease: An Ignored
Epidemic" -- 1,000 pages of symptoms and diseases
triggered by this neurotoxin including the sordid
history of its approval.
Since its discovery in 1965,
controversy has raged over the health risks
associated with the sugar substitute. From
laboratory testing of the chemical on rats,
researchers have discovered that the drug induces
brain tumors. On Sept 30, l980 the Board of Inquiry
of the FDA concurred and denied the petition for
approval. In l981, the newly appointed FDA
Commissioner, Arthur Hull Hayes, ignored the
negative ruling and approved aspartame for dry
goods. As recorded in the Congressional Record of
1985, then CEO of Searle Laboratories Donald
Rumsfeld said that he would call in his markers to
get aspartame approved. Rumsfeld was on President
Reagan's transition team and a day after taking
office appointed Hayes. No FDA Commissioner in the
previous sixteen years had allowed Aspartame on the
In 1983, aspartame was approved for
use in carbonated beverages. Today it is found in
over 5000 foods, drinks and medicines.
Neurosurgeon Russell Blaylock, MD,
author of "Excitotoxins: The Taste That Kills" (www.russellblaylockmd.com)
wrote about the relationship between aspartame and
macular degeneration, diabetic blindness and
glaucoma (all known to result from excitotoxin
accumulation in the retina).
All of these neurodegenerative
diseases are worsened by aspartame. In addition, we
now have evidence that excitotoxins play a major
role in exacerbation of MS and other demyelinating
disorders including trigeminal neuraliga. Blaylock
says that new studies show excitotoxins trigger
significant elevation of free radicals in the lining
(endothelial cells) of arteries, which means that
aspartame will increase the incidence of heart
attacks and strokes (atherosclerosis).
In original studies, aspartame has
triggered brain, mammary, uterine, ovarian,
testicular, thyroid and pancreatic tumors.
Defendants in the lawsuits include
Coca-cola, PepsiCo, Bayer Corp., the Dannon Company,
William Wrigley Jr. Company, ConAgra Foods, Wyeth,
Inc., The NutraSweet Company, and Altria Corp.
(parent company of Kraft Foods and Philip Morris).
Plaintiffs have asked for an
injunction to stop companies from producing,
manufacturing, processing, selling or using
Plaintiffs in all three cases are
seeking a jury trial.
If you would like to schedule
someone from the National Justice League for an
interview, please call or fax us at (530) 248-3483.
of the controversial sweetener:
Aspartame sugar substitutes cause worrying
symptoms from memory loss to brain tumors. But
despite US FDA approval as a 'safe' food additive,
aspartame is one of the most dangerous substances
ever to be foisted upon an unsuspecting public.
Aspartame is the technical name for the brand
names, NutraSweet, Equal, Spoonful, and
Equal-Measure. Aspartame was discovered by accident
in 1965, when James Schlatter, a chemist of G.D.
Searle Company was testing an anti-ulcer drug.
Aspartame was approved for dry goods in 1981 and for
carbonated beverages in 1983. It was originally
approved for dry goods on July 26, 1974, but
objections filed by neuroscience researcher Dr John
W. Olney and Consumer attorney James Turner in
August 1974 as well as investigations of G.D.
Searle's research practices caused the US Food and
Drug Administration (FDA) to put approval of
aspartame on hold (December 5, 1974). In 1985,
Monsanto purchased G.D. Searle and made Searle
Pharmaceuticals and The NutraSweet Company separate
Aspartame is, by far, the most dangerous
substance on the market that is added to foods.
Aspartame accounts for over 75 percent of the
adverse reactions to food additives reported to the
US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Many of these
reactions are very serious including seizures and
death as recently disclosed in a February 1994
Department of Health and Human Services report.(1) A
few of the 90 different documented symptoms listed
in the report as being caused by aspartame include:
Headaches/migraines, dizziness, seizures,
nausea, numbness, muscle spasms, weight gain,
rashes, depression, fatigue, irritability,
tachycardia, insomnia, vision problems, hearing
loss, heart palpitations, breathing difficulties,
anxiety attacks, slurred speech, loss of taste,
tinnitus, vertigo, memory loss, and joint pain.
According to researchers and physicians studying
the adverse effects of aspartame, the following
chronic illnesses can be triggered or worsened by
ingesting of aspartame:(2)
Brain tumors, multiple sclerosis, epilepsy,
chronic fatigue syndrome, parkinson's disease,
alzheimer's, mental retardation, lymphoma, birth
defects, fibromyalgia, and diabetes.
Aspartame is made up of three chemicals:
Aspartic acid, phenylalanine, and methanol. The
book, Prescription for Nutritional Healing, by James
and Phyllis Balch, lists aspartame under the
category of "chemical poison." As you shall see,
that is exactly what it is.
ASPARTIC ACID (40% OF ASPARTAME) Dr Russell
L. Blaylock, a professor of Neurosurgery at the
Medical University of Mississippi, recently
published a book thoroughly
detailing the damage that is caused by the ingestion
of excessive aspartic acid from aspartame. [Ninety
nine percent of monosodium glutamate 9MSG) is
glutamic acid. The damage it causes is also
documented in Blaylock's book.] Blaylock makes use
of almost 500 scientific references to show how
excess free excitatory amino acids such as aspartic
acid and glutamic acid in our food supply are
causing serious chronic neurological disorders and a
myriad of other acute symptoms.(3)
SUMMARY OF HOW ASPARTATE (AND GLUTAMATE) CAUSE
Aspartate and glutamate act as neurotransmitters
in the brain by facilitating the transmittion of
information from neuron to neuron. Too much
aspartate or glutamate in the brain kills certain
neurons by allowing the influx of too much calcium
into the cells. This influx
triggers excessive amounts of free radicals which
kill the cells. The neural cell damage that can be
caused by excessive aspartate and glutamate is why
they are referred to as "excitotoxins." They
"excite" or stimulate the neural cells to death.
Aspartic acid is an amino acid. Taken in its
free form (unbound to proteins) it significantly
raises the blood plasma level of aspartate and
glutamate. The excess aspartate and glutamate in the
blood plasma shortly after ingesting aspartame or
products with free glutamic acid (glutamate
precursor) leads to a high level of those
in certain areas of the brain.
The blood brain barrier (BBB) which normally
protects the brain from excess glutamate and
aspartate as well as toxins 1) is not fully
developed during childhood, 2) does not fully
protect all areas of the brain, 3) is damaged by
numerous chronic and acute conditions, and 4) allows
seepage of excess glutamate and aspartate into the
The excess glutamate and aspartate slowly begin
to destroy neurons. The large majority (75%+) of
neural cells in a particular area of the brain are
killed before any clinical symptoms of a chronic
illness are noticed. A few of the many chronic
illnesses that have been shown to be contributed to
by long-term exposure excitatory amino acid damage
Multiple sclerosis (MS), ALS, memory loss,
hormonal problems, hearing loss, epilepsy,
Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease,
hypoglycemia, AIDS dementia, brain lessions, and
The risk to infants, children, pregnant women,
the elderly, and persons with certain chronic health
problems from excitotoxins are great. Even the
Federation of American Societies For Experimental
Biology (FASEB), which usually understates problems
and mimics the FDA
party-line, recently stated in a review that "it is
prudent to avoid the use of dietary supplements of
L-glutamic acid by pregnant women, infants, and
children. The Existence of evidence of potential
endocrine responses, i.e., elevated cortisol and
prolactin, and differential responses between males
and females, would also suggest a neuroendocrine
link and that supplemental L-glutamic acid should be
avoided by women of childbearing age and individuals
with affective disorders."(4) Aspartic acid from
aspartame has the same deleterious effects on the
body as glutamic acid.
The exact mechanism of acute reactions to excess
free glutamate and aspartate is currently being
debated. As reported to the FDA, those reactions
include:(5) Headaches/migraines, nausea,
abdominal pains, fatigue (blocks sufficient glucose
entry into brain), sleep problems, vision problems,
anxiety attacks, depression, and asthma/chest
One common complaint of persons suffering from
the effect of aspartame is memory loss. Ironically,
in 1987, G.D. Searle, the manufacturer of aspartame,
undertook a search for a drug to combat memory loss
caused by excititory amino acid damage. Blaylock is
many scientists and physicians who are concerned
about excititory amino acid damage caused by
ingestion of aspartame and MSG. A few of the many
experts who have spoken out against the damage being
caused by aspartate and glutamate include Adrienne
Samuels, Ph.D., an experimental psychologist
specializing in research design. Another is Olney, a
professor in the department of psychiatry, School of
Medicine, Washington University, a neuroscientist
and researcher, and one of the world's foremost
authorities on excitotoxins. (He informed Searle in
1971 that aspartic acid caused holes in the brain of
included is Francis J. Waickman, M.D., a recipient
of the Rinkel and Forman Awards, and Board certified
in Pediatrics, Allergy, and Immunology.
Other concerned scientists include: John R. Hain,
M.D., Board Certified Forensic Pathologist, and H.J.
Roberts, M.D., FACP, FCCP, Diabetic Specialist, and
selected by a national medical publication as "The
Best Doctor in the US"
John Samuels is concerned, also. He compiled a
list of scientific research sufficient to show the
dangers of ingesting excess free glutamic and
And there are many more who can be added to this
PHENYLALANINE (50% OF ASPARTAME)
Phenylalanine is an amino acid normally found in
the brain. Persons with the genetic disorder,
phenylketonuria (PKU) cannot metabolize
phenylalanine. This leads to dangerously high levels
of phenylalanine in the brain (sometimes lethal). It
has been shown that ingesting aspartame, especially
along with carbohydrates can lead to excess levels
of phenylalanine in the brain even in persons who do
not have PKU. This is not just a theory, as many
people who have eaten large amounts of aspartame
over a long period of time and do not have PKU have
been shown to have excessive levels of phenylalanine
in the blood. Excessive levels of phenylalanine in
the brain can cause the levels of serotonin in the
brain to decrease, leading to emotional disorders
such as depression. It was shown in human testing
that phenylalanine levels of the blood were
increased significantly in human subjects who
chronically used aspartame.(6) Even a single use of
aspartame raised the blood phenylalanine levels. In
his testimony before the US Congress, Dr Louis J.
Elsas showed that high blood phenylalanine can be
concentrated in parts of the brain, and is
especially dangerous for infants and
fetuses. He also showed that phenylalanine is
metabolized much more efficiently by rodents than by
One account of a case of extremely high
phenylalanine levels caused by aspartame was
recently published the the "Wednesday Journal" in an
article entitled "An Aspartame Nightmare." John Cook
began drinking 6 to 8 diet drinks every day. His
symptoms started out as memory loss and frequent
headaches. He began to crave more
aspartame-sweetened drinks. His condition
deteriorated so much that he experienced wide mood
swings and violent rages. Even though he did not
suffer from PKU, a blood test revealed a
phenylalanine level of 80 mg/dl. He also showed
abnormal brain function and brain damage. After he
kicked his aspartame habit, his symptoms improved
As Blaylock points out in his book, early
studies measuring phenylalanine buildup in the brain
were flawed. Investigators who measured specific
brain regions and not the average throughout the
brain notice significant rises in phenylalanine
levels. Specifically the
hypothalamus, medulla oblongata, and corpus striatum
areas of the brain had the largest increases in
phenylalanine. Blaylock goes on to point out that
excessive buildup of phenylalanine in the brain can
cause schizophrenia or make one more susceptible to
Therefore, long-term, excessive use of aspartame
may provided a boost to sales of seratonin reuptake
inhibitors such as Prozac and drugs to control
schizophrenia and seizures.
METHANOL (AKA WOOD ALCOHOL/POISON) (10% OF
Methanol/wood alcohol is a deadly poison. Some
people may remember methanol as 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
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
Symptoms from methanol poisoning include
headaches, ear buzzing, dizziness, nausea,
gastrointestinal disturbances, weakness, vertigo,
chills, memory lapses, numbness and shooting pains
in the extremities, behavioral disturbances, and
neuritis. The most well known problems from methanol
poisoning are vision problems including misty
vision, progressive contraction of visual fields,
blurring of vision, obscuration of vision, retinal
damage, and blindness. Formaldehye is a known
carcinogen, causes retinal damage, interferes with
replication, causes birth defects.(10) 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
He was so concerned about the unresolved safety
issues that he filed suit with the FDA requesting a
hearing to address these issues. He asked the FDA to
"slow down on this soft drink issue long enough to
answer some of the important questions. It's not
fair that you are
leaving the full burden of proof on the few of us
who are concerned and have such limited resources.
You must remember that you are the American public's
last defense. Once you allow usage (of aspartame)
there is literally nothing I or my colleagues can do
to reverse the course. Aspartame will then join
saccharin, the sulfiting agents, and God knows how
many other questionable compounds enjoined to insult
the human constitution with governmental
approval."(10) Shortly thereafter, the Commissioner
of the FDA, Arthur Hull Hayes, Jr., approved the use
of aspartame in carbonated beverages, he then left
for a position with G.D.
Searle's Public Relations firm.(11)
It has been pointed out that some fruit juices
and alcoholic beverages contain small amounts of
methanol. It is important to remember, however, that
methanol never appears alone. In every case, ethanol
is present, usually in much higher amounts. Ethanol
antidote for methanol toxicity in humans.(9) 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 of aspartame such as DKP
below) 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).
DKP is a by-product of aspartame metabolism. DKP
has been implicated in the occurance of brain
tumors. Olney noticed that DKP, when nitrosated in
the gut, produced a compound which was similar to N-nitrosourea,
a powerful brain tumor causing chemical. Some
authors have said that DKP is produced after
aspartame ingestion. I am not sure
if that is correct. It is definately true that DKP
is formed in liquid aspartame-containing products
during prolonged storage.
G.D. Searle conducted animal experiments on the
safety of DKP. The FDA found numerous experimental
errors occurred, including "clerical errors,
mixed-up animals, animals not getting drugs they
were supposed to get, pathological specimens lost
because of improper handling," and many other
errors.(12) These sloppy laboratory procedures may
explain why both the test and control animals had
sixteen times more brain tumors than would be
expected in experiments of this length. In an ironic
twist, shortly after these experimental errors were
discovered, the FDA used guidelines recommended by
G.D. Searle to develop the Industry-wide FDA
standards for Good Laboratory Practies.(11) DKP has
also been implicated as a cause of uterine polyps
and changes in blood cholesterol by FDA Toxicologist
Dr Jacqueline Verrett in her testimony before the US
AILMENTS RESULTING FROM ASPARTAME
The components of aspartame can lead to a wide
variety of ailments. Some of these problems occur
gradually, others are immediate, acute reactions.
There is an enormous population of people who are
suffering from symptoms contributed to by aspartame,
yet they have no idea why herbs or drugs are not
helping relieve their problems. There are other
users of aspartame who appear not to be suffering
immediate reactions to aspartame. But even these
individuals are susceptible to the long-term damage
caused by excitatory amino acids, phenylalanine,
methanol, and DKP. A few of the many disorders that
are of particular
concern to me include the following.
Dr Diana Dow Edwards, a researcher was funded by
Monsanto to study possible birth defects caused by
the ingestion of aspartame. After preliminary data
showed damaging information about aspartame, funding
for the study was cut off. A Genetic Pediatrician at
Emory University has testified that aspartame is
causing birth defects.7360-367.
In the book, While Waiting: A Prenatal Guidebook
by George R. Verrilli, M.D. and Anne Marie Mueser,
it is stated that aspartame is suspected of causing
brain damage in sensitive individuals. A fetus may
be at risk for these effects. Some researchers have
suggested that high doses of aspartame may be
associated with problems ranging from dizziness and
subtle brain changes to mental retardation.
Cancer (Brain Cancer).
In 1981, Satya Dubey, an FDA statistician,
stated that the brain tumor data on aspartame was so
"worrisome" that he could not recommend approval of
NutraSweet.(14) In a two-year study conducted by the
manufacturer of aspartame, twelve of the 320 rats
fed a normal diet and aspartame developed brain
tumors while none of the control rats had tumors.
Five of the twelve tumors were in rats given a low
dose of aspartame.(15) The approval of aspartame was
a violation of the Delaney Amendment which was
supposed to prevent cancer-causing substances such
as methanol (formaldehye) and DKP from entering our
food supply. The
late Dr Adrian Gross, an FDA toxicologist, testified
before the US Congress that aspartame was capable of
producing brain tumors. This made it illegal for the
FDA to set an allowable daily intake at any level.
He stated in his testimony that Searle's studies
were "to a large extent unreliable" and that "at
least one of those studies has established beyond
any reasonable doubt that aspartame is capable of
inducing brain tumors in experimental animals...."
He concluded his testimony by asking, "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? .... And if the FDA
itself elects to violate the law, who is left to
protect the health of the public?"(16)
In the mid-1970s it was discovered that the
manufacturer of aspartame falsified studies in
several ways. One of the techniques used was to cut
tumors out of test animals and put them back in the
study. Another technique used to falsify the studies
was to list animals that
had actually died as surviving the study. Thus, the
data on brain tumors was likely worse than discussed
above. In addition, a former employee of the
manufacturer of aspartame, Raymond Schroeder told
the FDA on July 13, 1977 that the particles of DKP
were so large that the rats could discriminate
between the DKP and their normal diet.(12)
It is interesting to note that the incidence of
brain tumors in persons over 65 years of age has
increase 67% between the years 1973 and 1990. Brain
tumors in all age groups has jumped 10%. The
greatest increase has come during the years
In his book, Aspartame (NutraSweet). Is it
Safe?, Roberts gives evidence that aspartame can
cause a particularly dangerous form of cancer -
primary lymphoma of the brain.
The American Diabetes Association (ADA) is
actually recommending this chemical poison to
persons with diabetes. According to research
conducted by H.J. Roberts, a diabetes specialist, a
member of the ADA, and an authority on artificial
1) Leads to the precipitation of clinical
2) Causes poorer diabetic control in diabetics
on insulin or oral drugs.
3) Leads to the aggravation of diabetic
complications such as retinopathy, cataracts,
neuropathy and gastroparesis.
4) Causes convulsions.
In a statement concerning the use of products
containing aspartain by persons with diabetes and
hypoglycemia, Roberts says: "Unfortunately, many
patients in my practice, and others seen in
consultation, developed serious metabolic,
neurologic and other complications that could be
specifically attributed to using aspartame products.
This was evidenced by:
"The loss of diabetic control, the
intensification of hypoglycemia, the occurrence of
presumed 'insulin reactions' (including convulsions)
that proved to be aspartame reactions, and the
precipitation, aggravation or simulation of diabetic
complications (especially impaired vision and
neuropathy) while using these products.
"Dramatic improvement of such features after
avoiding aspartame, and the prompt predictable
recurrence of these problems when the patient
resumed aspartame products, knowingly or
Roberts goes on to say:
"I regret the failure of other physicians and
the American Diabetes Association (ADA) to sound
appropriate warnings to patients and consumers based
on these repeated findings which have been described
in my corporate-neutral studies and publications."
Blaylock stated that excitotoxins such as that
found in aspartame can precipitate diabetes in
persons who are genetically susceptible to the
A double blind study of the effects of aspartame
on persons with mood disorders was recently
conducted by Dr Ralph G. Walton. Since the study
wasn't funded/controlled by the makers of aspartame,
The NutraSweet Company refused to sell him the
aspartame. Walton was forced to obtain and certify
it from an outside source.
The study showed a large increase in serious
symptoms for persons taking aspartame. Since some of
the symptoms were so serious, the Institutional
Review Board had to stop the study. Three of the
participants had said that they had been "poisoned"
by aspartame. Walton concludes that "individuals
with mood disorders are particularly sensitive to
this artificial sweetener; its use in this
population should be discouraged."(18) Aware that
the experiment could not be repeated because of the
danger to the test subjects, Walton was recently
quoted as saying, "I know it causes seizures. I'm
convinced also that it definitely causes behavioral
changes. I'm very angry that this substance is on
the market. I personally question the reliability
and validity of any studies funded by the NutraSweet
There are numerous reported cases of low brain
serotonin levels, depression and other emotional
disorders that have been linked to aspartame and
often are relieved by stopping the intake of
aspartame. Researchers have pointed out that
increasing in phenylalanine levels in the brain,
which can and does occur in persons without PKU,
leads to a decreased level of the neurotransmitter,
serotonin, which leads to a variety of emotional
disorders. Dr William M. Pardridge of UCLA testified
before the US Senate that a youth drinking four
16-ounce bottles of diet soda per day leads to an
enormous increase in the phenylalanine level.
With the large and growing number of seizures
caused by aspartame, it is sad to see that the
Epilepsy Foundation is promoting the "safety" of
aspartame. At Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
80 people who had suffered seizures after ingesting
surveyed. Community Nutrition Institute concluded
the following about the survey:
"These 80 cases meet the FDA's own definition of
an imminent hazard to the public health, which
requires the FDA to expeditiously remove a product
from the market."
Both the Air Force's magazine Flying Safety and
the Navy's magazine, Navy Physiology published
articles warning about the many dangers of aspartame
including the cumlative deliterious effects of
methanol and the greater likelihood of birth
defects. The articles note
that the ingestion of aspartame can make pilots more
susceptible to seizures and vertigo. Twenty articles
sounding warnings about ingesting aspartame while
flying have also appeared in the National Business
Aircraft Association Digest (NBAA Digest 1993),
Aviation Medical Bulletin (1988), The Aviation
Consumer (1988), Canadian General Aviation
News (1990), Pacific Flyer (1988), General Aviation
News (1989), Aviation Safety Digest (1989), and
Plane and Pilot (1990) and a paper warning about
aspartame was presented at the 57th Annual Meeting
of the Aerospace Medical Association (Gaffney 1986).
Recently, a hotline was set up for pilots
suffering from acute reactions to aspartame
ingestion. Over 600 pilots have reported symptoms
including some who have reported suffering grand mal
seizures in the cockpit due to aspartame.(21)
One of the original studies on aspartame was
performed in 1969 by an independent scientist, Dr
Harry Waisman. He studied the effects of aspartame
on infant primates. Out of the seven infant monkeys,
one died after 300 days and five others had grand
mal seizures. Of course, these negative findings
were not submitted to the FDA during the approval
Why don't we hear about these things?
The reason many people do not hear about serious
reactions to aspartame is twofold:
1) Lack of awareness by the general population.
Aspartame-caused diseases are not reported in the
newspapers like plane crashes. This is because these
incidents occur one at a time in thousands of
different locations across the US.
2) Most people do not associate their symptoms
with the long-term use of aspartame. For the people
who have killed a significant percentage of the
brain cells and thereby caused a chronic illness,
there is no way that they would normally associate
such an illness with
aspartame consumption. How aspartame was approved is
a lesson in how chemical and pharmaceutical
companies can manipulate government agencies such as
the FDA, "bribe" organizations such as the American
Dietetic Association, and flood the scientific
community with flawed and fraudulent
industry-sponsored studies funded by the makers of
Erik Millstone, a researcher at the Science
Policy Research Unit of Sussex University has
compiled thousands of pages of evidence, some of
which have been obtained using the freedom of
information act 23, showing:
1. Laboratory tests were faked and dangers were
2. Tumors were removed from animals and animals
that had died were "restored to life" in laboratory
3. False and misleading statements were made to
4. The two US Attorneys given the task of
bringing fraud charges against the aspartame
manufacturer took positions with the manufacturer's
law firm, letting the statute of limitations run
5. The Commissioner of the FDA overruled the
objections of the FDA's own scientific board of
inquiry. Shortly after that decision, he took a
position with Burson-Marsteller, the firm in charge
of public relations for G.D. Searle.
A Public Board of Inquiry (PBOI) was conducted
in 1980. There were three scientists who reviewed
the objections of Olney and Turner to the approval
of aspartame. They voted unanimously against
aspartame's approval. The FDA Commissioner, Dr
Arthur Hull Hayes, Jr. then created a 5-person
Scientific Commission to review the PBOI findings.
became clear that the Commission would uphold the
PBOI's decision by a vote of 3 to 2, another person
was added to the Commission, creating a deadlocked
vote. This allowed the FDA Commissioner to break the
deadlock and approve aspartame for dry goods in
1981. Dr Jacqueline Verrett, the Senior Scientist in
an FDA Bureau of Foods review team created in August
1977 to review the Bressler Report (a report that
detailed G.D. Searle's abuses during the
pre-approval testing) said:
"It was pretty obvious that somewhere along the
line, the bureau officials were working up to a
whitewash." In 1987, Verrett testified before the US
Senate stating that the experiments conducted by
Searle were a "disaster." She stated that her team
was instructed not to
comment on or be concerned with the overall validity
of the studies. She stated that questions about
birth defects have not been answered. She continued
her testimony by discussing the fact that DKP has
been shown to increase uterine polyps and change
blood cholesterol and that increasing the
temperature of the product leads to an increase in
production of DKP.(13)
The FDA and the manufacturers of aspartame have had
a revolving door of employment for many years. In
addition to the FDA Commissioner and two US
Attorneys leaving to take positions with companies
connected with G.D. Searle, four other FDA officials
connected with the approval of aspartame took
positions connected with the NutraSweet industry
between 1979 and 1982 including the Deputy FDA
Commissioner, the Special Assistant to the FDA
Commissioner, the Associate Director of the Bureau
of Foods and Toxicology and the Attorney involved
with the Public Board of Inquiry.(24)
It is important to realize that this type of
revolving-door activity has been going on for
decades. The Townsend Letter for Doctors (11/92)
reported on a study revealing that 37 of 49 top FDA
officials who left the FDA took positions with
companies they had regulated. They also reported
that over 150 FDA officials owned stock in drug
companies they were assigned to manage. Many
organizations and universities receive large sums of
money from companies connected to the NutraSweet
Association, a group of companies promoting the use
of aspartame. In January 1993, the American Dietetic
Association received a US$75,000 grant from the
NutraSweet Company. The American Dietetic
stated that the NutraSweet Company writes their
Many other "independent" organizations and
researchers receive large sums of money from the
manufacturers of aspartame. The American Diabetes
Association has received a large amount of money
from Nutrasweet, including money to run a cooking
school in Chicago
(presumably to teach diabetes how to use Nutrasweet
in their cooking).
A researcher in New England who has pointed out
the dangers of aspartame in the past is now a
Monsanto consultant. Another researcher in the
Southeastern US had testified about the dangers of
aspartame on fetuses. An investigative reporter has
discovered that he was told to keep his mouth shut
to avoid causing the loss of a large grant from a
diet cola manufacturer in the NutraSweet
What is the FDA doing to protect the consumer
from the dangers of aspartame? Less than nothing.
In 1992, the FDA approved aspartame for use in
malt beverages, breakfast cereals, and refrigerated
puddings and fillings. In 1993 the FDA approved
aspartame for use in hard and soft candies,
non-alcoholic favored beverages, tea beverages,
fruit juices and concentrates, baked goods and
baking mixes, and frostings, toppings and fillings
In 1991, the FDA banned the importation of
stevia. The powder of the leaf has been used for
hundreds of years as an alternative sweetner. It is
used widely in Japan with no adverse effects.
Scientists involved in reviewing stevia have
declared it to be safe for human consumption -
something which has been well known in many parts of
the world where it
is not banned. Everyone that I have spoken with in
regards to this issue believes that stevia was
banned to keep the product from taking hold in the
US and cutting into sales of aspartame.(26)
What is the US Congress doing to protect the
consumer from the dangers of aspartame? Nothing.
What is the US Administration (President) doing
to protect the consumer from the dangers of
Aspartame consumption is not only a problem in
the US. It is being sold in over 70 countries
throughout the world.
ASPARTAME CAN BE FOUND IN:
- instant breakfasts
- breath mints
- sugar-free chewing gum
- cocoa mixes
- coffee beverages
- frozen desserts
- gelatin desserts
- juice beverages
- milk drinks
- pharmaceuticals and supplements
- shake mixes
- soft drinks
- tabletop sweeteners
- tea beverages
- instant teas and coffees
- topping mixes
- wine coolers
I have been told that aspartame has been found
in products where it is not listed on the label. One
must be particular careful of pharmaceuticals and
supplements. I have been informed that even some
supplements made by well-known supplement
manufacturers such as Twinlabs contain aspartame.
The information I have related above is just the
tip of the iceberg as far as damaging information
about aspartame. In order for the reader to find out
more, I have included some resources below.
* Blaylock, Russell L., Excitotoxins: The
Taste That Kills
(Health Press, Santa Fe, New Mexico, c1994). One of
the best books
available on excitotoxins. Well worth reading!
* H. J. Roberts, M.D., Aspartame (NutraSweet),
Is it Safe?
Available from the Aspartame Consumer Safety
* Sweet'ner Dearest, Available from the
* Mary Nash Stoddard, The Deadly Deception,
the Aspartame Consumer Safety Network.
* Barbara Mullarkey, Editor, Bittersweet
Aspartame - A
* Available from the Aspartame Consumer Safety
* The Aspartame Consumer Safety Network, The
Consumer Safety Network Synopsis.
* Dennis Remington, M.D. and Barbara Higa,
Bitter Truth About Artificial Sweetners, Available
from the Aspartame
Consumer Safety Network
ASPARTAME CONSUMER SAFETY NETWORK
PO Box 780634
Plano, Texas 75378, USA.
Phone: (214) 352-4268
(1) Department of Health and Human Services,
Report on All
Adverse Reactions in the Adverse Reaction Monitoring
25 and 28, 1994).
(2) Compiled by researchers, physicians, and
experts for Mission Possible, a group dedicated to
(3) Excitotoxins: The Taste That Kills, by
Russell L. Blaylock,
(4) Safety of Amino Acids, Life Sciences
Research Office, FASEB,
FDA Contract No. 223-88-2124, Task Order No. 8.
(5) FDA Adverse Reaction Monitoring System.
(6) Wurtman and Walker, "Dietary Phenylalanine
Function," Proceedings of the First International
Meeting on Dietary
Phenylalanine and Brain Function., Washington, D.C.,
May 8, 1987.
(7) Hearing Before the Committee On Labor and
United States Senate, First Session on Examing the
Health and Safety
Concerns of Nutrasweet (Aspartame).
(8) Account of John Cook as published in
Magazine. "How Safe Is Your Artificial Sweetner" by
(9) Woodrow C. Monte, Ph.D., R.D., "Aspartame:
Methanol and the
Public Health," Journal of Applied Nutrition, 36
(10) US Court of Appeals for the District of
No. 84-1153 Community Nutrition Institute and Dr
Woodrow Monte v. Dr
Mark Novitch, Acting Commissioner, US FDA (9/24/85).
(11) Aspartame Time Line by Barbara Mullarkey as
Informed Consent Magazine, May/June 1994.
(12) FDA Searle Investigation Task Force. "Final
Investigation of G.D. Searle Company." (March 24,
(13) Testimony of Dr Jacqueline Verrett, FDA
the US Senate Committee on Labor and Human
Resources, (November 3,
(14) Internal FDA memorandum.
(15) Analysis prepared by Dr John Olney as a
the Aspartame Board of Inquire of the FDA. Also
Excitotoxins by Russell
(16) Congressional Record SID835: 131 (August 1,
(17) National Cancer Institute SEER Program
(18) Walton, Ralph G., Robert Hudak, Ruth
Reactions to Aspartame: Double-Blind Challenge in
Patients from a
Vulnerable Population," Biological Psychiatry,
(19) Barbara Mullarkey, "How Safe Is Your
September/October 1994 issue of Informed Consent
(20) US Air Force. "Aspartame Alert." Flying
Safety, 48 (5):
20-21 (May 1992).
(21) Reported by the Aspartame Consumer Safety
(22) Barbara Mullarkey, Bittersweet Aspartame, A
(23) Millstone, Eric "Sweet and Sour." The
(24) Mary Nash Stoddard, Editor, "The Deadly
Aspartame Consumer Safety Network.
(25) ADA Courier, January 1993, Volume 32,
Number 1. (26) "FDA
Rejects AHPA Stevia Petition" by Mark Blumenthal,
Whole Foods, April
Extracted from Nexus Magazine, Volume 2, #28
(Oct-Nov '95) and
Volume 3, #1 (Dec '95-Jan '96).
PO Box 30, Mapleton Qld 4560 Australia.
Telephone: +61 (0)7 5442 9280; Fax: +61 (0)7
From our web page at:
C 1995 by Mark D. Gold, 35 Inman St, Cambridge,
MA 02139, USA
Phone: (617) 497 7843,
Originally published in Blazing Tattles, Vol. 4,
Nos. 4, 5, 6,
PO Box 1073, Half Moon Bay,
CA 94019 USA.
Carbonated Beverages May Increase Risk of
Charlotte Grayson, MD
on Tuesday, May 18, 2004
WebMD Medical News
2004 -- You may want to think twice before
reaching for a soda. A new study suggests that
carbonated soft drinks may raise the risk of cancer
of the esophagus, the tube that connects the mouth
to the stomach.
the esophagus is one of the fastest growing cancers
in the western world. It is often in an advanced
stage when it is diagnosed. In advanced stages,
esophageal cancer can be treated but rarely can be
many cancers are affected by what we eat and drink,
we looked back at data from the U.S. Department of
Agriculture to see what [changes in the diet] could
explain the [more than fivefold] increase in
esophageal cancer rates over the past 50 years,"
says Mohandas K. Mallath, MD, professor and head of
the department of digestive diseases and clinical
nutrition at Tata Memorial Hospital.
presented the results of his study at a meeting of
digestive disease specialists this week in
found was a huge rise in intake of carbonated soft
drinks," he tells WebMD. Per capita consumption of
carbonated soft drinks rose by more than 450% during
the past half-century, from 11 gallons in 1946 to 50
gallons in 2000 -- the equivalent of two cans of
soft drinks per person per day, he says.
exposure to cancer-causing agents usually precedes
the disease by about two decades, "an association
seemed possible," Mallath says.
the medical literature for evidence to bolster the
theory, his team found a study offering a strong
biological basis to explain the link, he says.
showed that drinking carbonated beverages exposes
the gastrointestinal tract to excess acid, the
hallmark of acid reflux disease, or GERD, he says.
And other studies show that GERD is a risk factor
for esophageal cancer.
countries in which people drink very few carbonated
beverages, including Eastern Europe,
Japan, China, Taiwan, Korea, and India, have had
little increase in the incidence of esophageal
cancer, Mallath notes.
ADD/ADHD or Other Names for Malnutrition
by Samuel C. Zeiler M.S., C.N.
I find it disturbing with the increase in numbers
of children I see and hear about who receive
recommendations for undergoing therapy with Ritalin
and other drugs to "quiet" the mind. Certainly, the
drugs do work to hide the symptoms of a much deeper
problem. They do not correct the underlying factors
The problem, from my professional perspective as
a clinical nutritionist, is one of multiple dietary
imbalances compounded by increased stress and
environmental factors. Consider these alarming
Recent statistics indicate that 25% of our
children are clinically overweight. The most
popular vegetable in American society is the potato
in the form of french fries. The most frequently
purchased item in the grocery store is prepackaged
meals. The average adolescent consumes six
carbonated soft drinks per day.
Our fast-paced, fast-food, fast-everything,
convenience oriented, sedentary lifestyle has put
demands on our bodily systems that were never
intended. In the process of preparing packaged and
fast-foods, most of the available nutrients and
fiber are removed. Couple this with the fact that
most children avoid eating raw vegetables and fruits
for one reason or another.
How does this relate to ADD and ADHD? Consider
that the brain runs on vitamins, minerals, oxygen
and blood sugar in a combinations that are called
neurotransmitters. Under stress and a diet high in
simple carbohydrates, the natural brain function
uses up the neurotransmitters and can only replace
them if the necessary building blocks are present.
These building blocks come from fresh fruits and
vegetables, essential fats and high quality, protein
Due to genetic predisposition and variations in
environment, diet and exercise, some children are
more noticeably affected with neuro-developmental
disorders. Neuro-developmental disorders like ADD
and ADHD can be helped with a return to a proper
food regimen and specific supplementation designed
to restore the building blocks for brain and
A change in lifestyle is most beneficial over
time, not drugs. Specifically, diet, exercise and
environment. Environment plays an important role in
developing habits that improve health instead of
degrade health. We are all born with a full
complement of life factors and due to our
environment (mental, emotional and physical) we
follow a process of slow destruction, status quo or
growth. Our resilience to disease and mental
processes is partially determined by our
environment. For example, a house where mold is
present can impair immune and brain function because
the body is using many resources to keep the mold
from infecting the cells. This takes a lot of
cellular energy that is then not available to
operate the nervous system properly and other body
functions at peak efficiency.
This all sounds pretty complex and is when all
the interactions in our bodies are considered.
Suffice it to say that all conditions occurring in
our bodies, including ADD and ADHD have a
significant relationship to nutritional status.
Where does one begin? The environment,
physically, mentally and emotionally is a good place
to start. The presence of toxins in our homes create
health challenges for everyone. I recommend removing
all household chemicals at least. Replace them with
environmentally safe products with no fragrances.
Mold from an overly damp environment or poor
ventilation can cause a myriad of health challenges
including neurologic disturbances. Clean up the mold
that may or may not be visible. Keep the house well
ventilated with fresh clean air. A filter system may
be additional benefit in more polluted or high
On an individual level, improving the diet will
clearly improve neurologic function. This means:
Remove all processed foods made from white flour,
corn syrup and sugar.
Eliminate dairy products.
Eliminate sweets and high starch foods.
Eliminate processed meats (i.e. hot dogs, hamburger,
Eliminate carbonated beverages in any form.
Include a wide variety of raw vegetables to equal 3
cups per day.
Increase raw, fresh fruit to 3 half cup servings
Sip plenty of filtered water throughout the day.
Include chicken, cold water fish, and vegetable
Include essential fats like pure virgin olive oil
and nut oils.
Because we are all biochemically unique, it is
necessary to evaluate each individual for specific
nutrient deficiencies to further support the body in
correcting and healing itself. The same is true for
exercise except in the case of walking, which we all
could benefit from. I recommend 35-40 minutes per
day of relaxed walking. This helps the mind focus
and stimulates all body systems to function more
For more information, please contact Samuel C.
Zeiler MS, CN at firstname.lastname@example.org or by phone:
This information is provided by OSPI and New
Horizons for Learning, funded by a development grant
from the Discuren Charitable Foundation.
Office of State Superintendent of Public
P O Box 47200
Olympia, WA 98504-7200
E-mail: Kathy Bartlett
long will you and your kids "last"... Very
insightful letter by a 10 year old.
Future Health Systems, Inc.
Trans Fats are "Hiding" in
Your Food Dr. Carol Watson
Trans fatty acids are hydrogenated or partly
hydrogenated vegetable oils which have undergone an
industrial process of conversion from their liquid
state to a semi-solid state by adding hydrogen in
order to make them last longer on the grocers shelf
(and in your pantry). This is beneficial for the
food industry as it prolongs shelf life, but not
without a higher cost to your health!!
I would like to share with you a very moving
letter written by a 10-year old boy, Jacob Schultz,
on his perception of the dangers trans
fats/hydrogenated oils. This should serve as a great
educational piece for you to help you understand
what trans fats are and their associated dangers.
According to his mother, Kristen Schultz of San
Clemente, CA, the educational process for Jacob was
prompted by going to a restaurant one day where she
requested fruit as a substitute for French fries for
his little sister and the restaurant didn’t have
any!!!! A big “thank you” goes out to his parents
for educating this young boy so that he will grow up
to be an informed adult, taking responsibility for
his own health! He is now 11 y/o and in the 5th
grade…if we could all educate our children like
this, our future would look much better for healthy
generations to come!
“I would like to talk about hydrogenated
fats. They are bad fats. They are found in most sugary and baked foods,
including white crackers, Pringles, Doritos, Cheetos, cookies, doughnuts,
chocolate candy, cupcakes, cake, and stuff like that.
Hydrogenated fats were once ‘OK’ fats. Then they are injected with hydrogen so
they can last longer. Then they become bad fats. That's how Ding Dongs, Krispy Kreme doughnuts and McDonald's French fries can sit
on the shelves and then in a few years you can say, ‘Look it's the Krispy Kreme doughnuts we got three years ago! They look as good as
new.’ Hydrogenated fats clog up your arteries. When you eat a Twinkie,
you are pretty much dumping garbage into your arteries. Your
arteries are pretty much like little rivers that carry blood throughout your
body. Eating Twinkies is kind of like dumping trash into a river. When
the rivers get clogged up with trash, they can't deliver water to the
factory that bottles water for us and we have a problem. Same thing with your
body. That beloved Twinkie is actually clogging up your arteries
so your blood can't flow to your brain and heart good and over a course of
40 to 60 years you could die. My grandpa had this sort of problem.
He died at 55 years old, just before I was born. His arteries were
clogged and his heart got sick. They spotted it too late. Don't let that
happen to you! After all, how long your body lasts is a lot more important
than how long your food lasts. I wished I had my grandpa.” By Jacob
Schultz, 10 years old.
Texas Group Takes Aim at
Splenda's Campaign of Misinformation
FTC to Investigate
AUSTIN, Texas, Jan. 31 /PRNewswire/
-- The Texas Consumer Association today asked the
U.S. Federal Trade Commission to investigate the
misleading and deceptive marketing campaign being
conducted by Johnson & Johnson's McNeil Nutritionals
for its artificial sweetener Splenda.
By continually using the word
"sugar" in its advertisements and in its packaging,
McNeil is attempting to link Splenda and sugar in
consumers' minds and convince consumers that Splenda
is somehow "more natural" -- and therefore more
healthy -- than any other artificial sweetener or
"With consumers across the
country concerned about their health and trying to
eat more natural foods, it is alarming that McNeil
is engaged in an underhanded campaign to confuse
consumers into believing Splenda is natural,"
commented Sandra Haverlah, president of the Texas
The Texas Consumer Association
asked the FTC to step in and mandate that McNeil
provide consumers with accurate and truthful
information about Splenda.
McNeil has no foundation for
the claims it is making in its deceptive ads, since
Splenda is not a natural
derivative of sugar. What's more, it is not even
necessary to use sugar to manufacture Splenda.
"McNeil's campaign is a sham,"
Haverlah asserted. "It's time for the FTC to
McNeil's deception, however,
has begun to have a significant impact: Splenda has
grabbed almost 40% of the U.S. consumer sweetener
market, taking market share not just from artificial
sweeteners, but also from natural sugar.
Splenda's success in the
marketplace comes as Texas and the rest of the
country grapple with a growing obesity crisis.
Thirty-five percent of children in Texas are
overweight or obese, according to the Texas
Agriculture Commission, and childhood obesity in
Texas has doubled over the past 20 years.
Haverlah said that many
consumers are purchasing Splenda based on a belief
that it is in some way "more natural" than -- and
therefore preferable to -- other artificial
sweeteners or food additives.
"Consumers should be given the
truth about the products they buy and eat, and
McNeil is trying to pull the wool over consumers'
eyes," Haverlah continued. "This campaign of
misinformation must be stopped."
Sandra Haverlah, President of
Texas Consumer Association, sent the following
letter, dated Jan. 31, to the Division of
Advertising Practices, Bureau of Consumer
Protection, at the Federal Trade Commission:
Consumers in Texas and across
the country deserve to be told the truth about the
food they eat and the products they buy. That's why
it's so alarming that throughout the course of its
marketing campaign, Johnson & Johnson company McNeil
Nutritionals has been attempting to confuse
consumers into believing that its artificial
sweetener Splenda is a natural product by linking
Splenda to sugar. It's up to the Federal Trade
Commission to ensure that the information provided
to us through advertising is accurate. The Texas
Consumer Association therefore asks the FTC to fully
investigate this misleading advertising campaign and
stop McNeil from continuing its campaign of
By continually using the word
"sugar" in its advertisements and in its packaging,
McNeil is attempting to link Splenda and sugar in
consumers' minds. But McNeil has no foundation for
its claims. Splenda isn't natural. On the contrary,
it is a man-made artificial sweetener formed by a
complex chemical reaction.
With obesity at an all-time
high in the U.S. and the low-carbohydrate diet
phenomenon remaining strong, Splenda has grabbed
almost 40% of the U.S. consumer sweetener market
share. An increasing number of consumers are
purchasing Splenda based on their belief that it is
in some way "more natural" -- and therefore more
healthy -- than any other artificial sweetener or
Consumers need to understand
that developing good, healthy eating habits will
lead to weight loss. This is especially important
for children, who are developing eating habits they
will carry with them throughout life. Thirty- five
percent of children in Texas are overweight or
obese, according to the Texas Agriculture
Commission. Childhood obesity in Texas has doubled
over the past 20 years. These are startling
Luckily, Texas schools have
started to take constructive steps toward helping
students eat better. Like the latest edition of the
U.S. Dietary Guidelines, the state of Texas is
recommending eating natural, whole grain foods,
fruits and vegetables.
Given the state and national
push for healthy, natural foods, it is greatly
disturbing that McNeil would try to confuse and
mislead consumers into believing that Splenda is
natural. Even more troubling, many of Splenda's new
advertisements focus on children and many of the new
foods that include Splenda are juices, cereals, and
snacks children tend to eat. In its recent letter to
the FTC on this topic, Generation Green noted that
these ads aim to encourage children to eat low-sugar
products suggesting that "low sugar" and "with
Splenda" means the product is healthier. The Texas
Consumer Association shares Generation Green's
concern that this misleading marketing campaign is
hindering the ability of parents to make informed,
health-guided decisions about the food they buy for
It's time for McNeil to stop
misleading the public. The Texas Consumer
Association strongly urges the FTC to investigate
this advertising campaign and instruct McNeil to
tell the truth about Splenda.
Your life and health could
be severely affected if this law passes.
Please read carefully.
Your life and health
could be severely affected if this law passes.
Please read carefully. Read this very important
health message below and contact everyone you know
to try to prevent this.
Your right to choose your vitamin, mineral, herb,
and other supplements may end in June of this year
After that, US supplements will be defined and
controlled by the World Trade Organization (WTO) and
the World Health Organization (WHO).
It is called the CODEX ALIMENTARIUS (food code) and
it is setting the supplement standards for all
countries in the WTO. CODEX met secretly in
November, 2004 and finalized ‘Step 8 (the final
stage)’ to begin implementation in June, 2005,
severely restricting the use and availability of
numerous vitamins, minerals and other supplements.
The US president and congress agreed to the takeover
when the WTO treaty was signed, therefore these
supplement standards WILL BE ENFORCED BY THE WTO AND
WILL OVERRIDE US LAWS. CODEX violations are/will be
punished by WTO trade sanctions.
No supplement can be sold for preventive or
therapeutic use. Any potency higher than RDA
(recommended daily allowance, aka minimal strength)
is a ‘drug’ requiring a prescription and must be
produced by drug companies. Over 5000 safe items now
in health stores will be banned, terminating health
stores as we now know them. CODEX regulations become
New supplements are banned unless given very
expensive CODEX testing and approval.
CODEX now applies to Norway and Germany, among
Zinc tablets rose from $4 per bottle to $52.
Echinacea (an ancient immune-enhancement herb) rose
from $14 to $153.
Both examples above are now allowed by prescription
only. They are now ‘drugs’.
Vitamin C above 200mg? Banned for over-the-counter.
Sold as a prescription drug only.
Niacin above 32 mg? Banned for over-the-counter.
Sold as a prescription drug only.
Bitamin B6 above 4 mg? Banned for over-the-counter.
Sold as a prescription drug only.
Same for Amino Acids like arginine, lysine,
Same for the Omega Essential Fatty Acids and many
more supplements including DMEA, DHEA, CoQ10, MSM,
beta-carotene, etc.The CODEX rules are not based on
real science. They were made by a few people meeting
in secret (see web sites below); not necessarily
scientists. In 1993 the FDA and drug companies tried
to put all supplements under restriction and
prescription, but over 4 million Americans told
congress and the president to protect their freedom
of choice on health supplements. The DSHEA law was
passed in 1994 which does so, but this will be
overruled by CODEX and the WTO.
Virtually nothing about it has been in the media.
What the drug corporations have failed to do through
congress, they have gotten by sneak attachk through
CODEX with the help of a silent media.
So…what can be done at this late hour?
Spread the word as much as possible. Inform
yourselves fully at
www.iahf.com. Oppose bills
S.722 and H.R.3377. These support the CODEX
restrictions with US laws, changing the DSHEA law.
Support H.R.1146 which would restore the sovereignty
of the US Constitution over CODEX, etc. Express your
wishes ASAP to the president, senators and
representatives (they got us into this!). Contact
multi-level health marketing groups that can get
their members to inform the government. Send
donations, however small, to the British Alliance
for Natural Health (see website above). It has
succeeded in challenging the CODEX directives in
World Court later this month or next. They need help
financially, having carried the fight effectively
for everyone. CODEX claims to wish to protect us the
same way the FDA protects us from prescription
drugs. To accomplish this, they used a study of
prescription drugs (not supplements) by three
medical scientists as reported in the Journal of the
American Medical Association, April 15, 1998-Vol.
279, No. 15, p. 1200, "…Incidence of Adverse Drug
Reactions (ADRs) was found to be extremely high."
Covering 30 years from 1966 to 1996, it was found
that in the US, an average of 106,000 hospitalized
patients per year die from ADRs. That’s equivalent
to 290 people per day. 2.2 MILLLION need more
hospitalization for recovery. And these were FDA
approved drugs, properly administered by competent
professionals in hospitals…yet none were considered
malpractice. ADRs represent the number four cause of
death in the US. When combined, they account for 7%
of all hospitalized patients. This is equivalent to
a 9/11 attach every ten days.
Contrary to pharmaceutical drugs, there are few
fatalities from supplements. Can you just imagine
the news coverage if vitamins and supplements
created the amount of death that drugs do?
There is no need for more FDA control of supplements
than is already in place, which is substantial.
Instead of drastically restricting supplements, why
doesn’t the FDA better control and restrict the
extremely dangerous pharmaceutical drugs which are
now killing us at the rate of a major airline crash
Wallace G. Heath, PhD.
1145 Marine DriveBellingham, WA98225
There is a tendency in some older people to think of
diabetes as "just a little sugar," a common family
problem. They fail to take it seriously and make the
connection between it and the costly, crippling and
often fatal diseases that can ensue.
Diabetes, with its consequences of heart attack,
stroke, kidney failure, amputations and blindness,
among others, already ranks No. 1 in direct health
care costs, consuming $1 of every $7 spent on health
'Diabesity,' a Crisis in an Expanding Country
By JANE E. BRODY
Published: March 29, 2005
I can't understand why we
still don't have a national initiative to control
what is fast emerging as the most serious and costly
health problem in America: excess weight.
Are our schools, our parents,
our national leaders blind to what is happening - a
health crisis that looms even larger than our former
and current smoking habits?
Just look at the numbers, so graphically described
in an eye-opening new book, "Diabesity: The
Obesity-Diabetes Epidemic That Threatens America -
and What We Must Do to Stop It" (Bantam), by Dr.
Francine R. Kaufman, a pediatric endocrinologist,
the director of the diabetes clinic at Children's
Hospital Los Angeles and a past president of the
American Diabetes Association.
In just over a decade, she noted, the prevalence of
diabetes nearly doubled in the American adult
population: to 8.7 percent in 2002, from 4.9 percent
in 1990. Furthermore, an estimated one-third of
Americans with Type 2 diabetes don't even know they
have it because the disease is hard to spot until it
causes a medical crisis.
An estimated 18.2 million Americans now have
diabetes, 90 percent of them the environmentally
influenced type that used to be called adult-onset
diabetes. But adults are no longer the only victims
- a trend that prompted an official change in name
in 1997 to Type 2 diabetes.
More and more children are developing this
health-robbing disease or its precursor, prediabetes.
Counting children and adults together, some 41
million Americans have a higher-than-normal blood
sugar level that typically precedes the development
of full-blown diabetes.
'Then Everything Changed'
And what is the reason for this runaway epidemic?
Being overweight or obese, especially with the
accumulation of large amounts of body fat around the
abdomen. In Dr. Kaufman's first 15 years as a
pediatric endocrinologist, 1978 to 1993, she wrote,
"I never saw a young patient with Type 2 diabetes.
But then everything changed."
Teenagers now come into her clinic weighing 200,
300, even nearly 400 pounds with blood sugar levels
that are off the charts. But, she adds, we cannot
simply blame this problem on gluttony and laziness
and "assume that the sole solution is individual
The major causes, Dr. Kaufman says, are "an economic
structure that makes it cheaper to eat fries than
fruit" and a food industry and mass media that lure
children to eat the wrong foods and too much of
them. "We have defined progress in terms of the
quantity rather than the quality of our food," she
Her views are supported by a 15-year study published
in January in The Lancet. A team headed by Dr. Mark
A. Pereira of the University of Minnesota analyzed
the eating habits of 3,031 young adults and found
that weight gain and the development of prediabetes
were directly related to unhealthful fast food.
Taking other factors into consideration, consuming
fast food two or more times a week resulted, on
average, in an extra weight gain of 10 pounds and
doubled the risk of prediabetes over the 15-year
Other important factors in the diabesity
epidemic, Dr. Kaufman explained, are the failure of
schools to set good examples by providing only
healthful fare, a loss of required physical activity
in schools and the inability of many children these
days to walk or bike safely to school or to play
Genes do play a role as well for certain people.
Some people are more prone to developing Type 2
diabetes than others. The risk is 1.6 times as great
for blacks as for whites of similar age. It is 1.5
times as great for Hispanic-Americans, and 2 times
as great for Mexican-Americans and Native Americans.
Unless we change our eating and exercise habits and
pay greater attention to this disease, more than
one-third of whites, two-fifths of blacks and half
of Hispanic people in this country will develop
It is also obvious from the disastrous patient
histories recounted in Dr. Kaufman's book that the
nation's medical structure is a factor as well. Many
people do not have readily accessible medical care,
and still many others have no coverage for
preventive medicine. As a result, millions fall
between the cracks until they are felled by heart
attacks or strokes.
A Devastating Disease
There is a tendency in some older people to think of
diabetes as "just a little sugar," a common family
problem. They fail to take it seriously and make the
connection between it and the costly, crippling and
often fatal diseases that can ensue.
Diabetes, with its consequences of heart attack,
stroke, kidney failure, amputations and blindness,
among others, already ranks No. 1 in direct health
care costs, consuming $1 of every $7 spent on health
Nor is this epidemic confined to American
borders. Internationally, "we are witnessing an
epidemic that is the scourge of the 21st century,"
Dr. Kaufman wrote.
Unlike some other killer diseases, Type 2 diabetes
issues an easily detected wake-up call: the
accumulation of excess weight, especially around the
abdomen. When the average fasting level of blood
sugar (glucose) rises above 100 milligrams per
deciliter, diabetes is looming.
Abdominal fat is highly active. The chemical output
of its cells increases blood levels of hormones like
estrogen, providing the link between obesity and
breast cancer, and decreases androgens, which can
cause a decline in libido. As the cells in abdominal
fat expand, they also release chemicals that
increase fat accumulation, ensuring their own
The result is an increasing cellular resistance to
the effects of the hormone insulin, which enables
cells to burn blood sugar for energy. As blood sugar
rises with increasing insulin resistance, the
pancreas puts out more and more insulin (promoting
further fat storage) until this gland is exhausted.
Then when your fasting blood sugar level reaches 126
milligrams, you have diabetes.
Two recent clinical trials
showed that Type 2 diabetes could be prevented by
changes in diet and exercise. The Diabetes
Prevention Program Research Group involving 3,234
overweight adults showed that "intensive lifestyle
intervention" was more effective than a drug that
increases insulin sensitivity in preventing diabetes
over three years.
Many changes are needed to combat this epidemic,
starting with schools and parents.
Dr. Kaufman tells of a challenge to get fit and lose
weight by Caesars Entertainment in which 4,600
workers who completed the program lost a total of
45,000 pounds in 90 days. Others could follow this
Drug Companies Spend More on Lobbying Than
From the April 25, 2005 edition of USA Today comes
an expose` story showing how much influence the
pharmaceutical industry has over US lawmakers. The
article starts by describing how drug companies
allow their corporate jets to be used by
politicians, and that the politicians are only
legally required to pay the cost of a first class
addition to flights and numerous other perks, the
article chronicles the vast amount of money that the
drug industry contributes to political candidates.
They note that drug companies and their officials
contributed at least $17 million to federal
candidates in last year's elections. Additionally it
was noted that they contributed nearly $1 million to
President Bush and more than $500,000 to his
opponent, John Kerry.
The Center for Responsive Politics, who keeps track
of contributions, listed that in the year 2004 the
drug companies spent $158 million dollars to lobby
the federal government. They spent $17 million in
campaign contributions in 2004 to federal
candidates, and an additional $7.3 million in
support for the 2004 political party conventions.
The article theorizes that the reasoning behind this
scale of activity is that drug companies are heavily
dependent on federal decisions. They note that it is
the federal government that determines which
products drug companies can market and how they're
labeled. The article also pointed out that the
government buys large quantities of drugs through
Medicaid, the Veterans Administration and several
other programs. When the new Medicare prescription
drug benefit takes effect in 2006, the government
will be paying 41% of Americans` drug bills, up from
24% at present.
Money also buys manpower. According to Amy Allina of
the National Women's Health Network, 1,274 people
were registered in Washington to lobby for drug
makers in 2003. Of that amazing number, some 476 are
former federal officials, including 40 former
members of Congress. Ms. Allina commented, "They are
one of the strongest, most well-connected and most
effective lobbies in Washington. Going up against
them is more often than not a losing battle."
Is what you're putting in your
body contributing to health or dis-ease?!
Future Health Systems, Inc.
discovered that obesity is a disease of malnutrition
and that we need to nourish the body back to health,
not starve it," Patricia
McPeak, CEO of NutraCea and member of the California
Breaking News on Supplements & Nutrition in the USA
study showing that sweet drinks have overtaken
white bread as the leading source of calories in
the American diet may mean that the nutrition gap
is even wider than previously thought, reports
Jess Halliday. But according to the lead
researcher, functional and fortified alternatives
may not be a safe bridge.
Dr Odilia Bermudez studied information obtained
from the 1999 to 2000 National Health and
Nutrition Survey and found that 67 percent of
respondents reported drinking as much as three
servings of soda or sweet drinks each day.
“Now soda accounts for 14 percent of total
energy, and that is surprising,” Dr Bermudez
Previously white bread was identified as the main
energy contributor in the American diet, accounting
for between five and six percent of calories
consumed. Although white bread is not a good food
compared with other more nutritious foodstuffs, this
was seen as a preferable state of affairs since
sweet drinks are nothing more than empty calories.
“If sweet drinks are displacing bread, they are
also displacing other foods below bread,” said
Bermudez. “We can assume that people are eating less
of other nutritional foods.”
Despite this, she does not advocate bridging the
nutrition gap through wholesale replacement of sweet
drinks with functional or fortified alternatives
because of the quantities that are being consumed.
Replacing three cups of soda a day with fortified
or functional beverages could result in over
supplementation of the population, she said, as is
currently no across-the-board advice as to
quantities that can be safely consumed.
The findings may also indicate that not as many
people are becoming aware of the connection between
diet and health as media reports may suggest.
Bermudez said that the survey could encourage the
industry to take a long, hard look at how they
advertise food and drink products with little or no
nutritional value, as well as serve as a tool to
help educate consumers about how to obtain the most
nutritional benefit from calories consumed.
This message was key to the new Dietary
Guidelines for Americans, published in January of
this year. Although she hopes that these, as well as
the new food guidance system known as MyPyramid,
will help improve the nation’s diet, Bermudez
believes there is scope for the government to
introduce more initiatives.
Dr Bermudez’s initial findings were presented at
Experimental Biology in March and more
controlled analysis currently underway using same
data looks set to deliver the same results.
Although more recent data have been gathered,
they are not available for use in the current
analysis. Given the continuing increase in obesity
rates in the US, Dr Bermudez said she would expect
these to show similar trends.
According to the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, 64 percent of adults age 20 years and
over are overweight or obese. In recent months the
industry voices have pronounced a link between
obesity and malnutrition.
In December Patricia McPeak, CEO of NutraCea and
member of the California obesity-prevention
committee told NutraIngredients-USA.com that
malnutrition is the main problem faced by the US
because of its eating habits.
"I have discovered that obesity is a
disease of malnutrition and that we need to nourish
the body back to health, not starve it," she
Can you imagine working for a company that
has a little more than 500 employees and has the
* 29 have been accused of spousal abuse
* 7 have been arrested for fraud
* 19 have been accused of writing bad checks
* 117 have directly or indirectly bankrupted at
least 2 businesses
* 3 have done time for assault
* 71 cannot get a credit card due to bad credit
* 14 have been arrested on drug-related charges
* 8 have been arrested for shoplifting
* 21 are currently defendants in lawsuits
* 84 have been arrested for drunk driving in the
Can you guess which organization this is?
Give up yet?
It's the 535 members of the United States
Congress. The same group of idiots that crank
out hundreds of new laws each year designed to
keep the rest of us in line.
You gotta pass this on.
2006 Biggest Health Threat to the United States
- US Dentistry...
Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen
Monday, May 22nd, 2006
The US Health Care System, rated 72nd in
quality, but number one in cost - worldwide, is
known, by government reports, to be the NUMBER
ONE KILLER of Americans - ahead of heart
disease, cancer, and strokes. There is no
argument against facts.
But what is up for speculation are the REASONS
why this is so. No one I know of (government
agencies, think tanks, etc.) has taken the time
to describe, and rate, the reasons why US
citizens are being so short-changed.
It is easy to point fingers at the US Food &
Drug Administration (FDA), Hospitals, health
insurance companies, etc...
But what if there is an industry, completely
trusted by the public, that knowingly, and
intentionally, is causing significant harm to
There is one. It is called "Official dentistry"
and I believe that this entity, by itself, is
the number one problem in American health care.
Let me tell you why I think so...
The Self-Serving Dental Bureaucracy - "Official
dentistry" is not now, and has not been for some
time, about Dentists or dentistry. It is about
the Dental Bureaucracy protecting the IMMENSE
CASH FLOW FROM OUTSIDE SOURCES, into that
bureaucratic system. That huge amount of cash
sets "Official dentistry's" priorities, and
THOSE PRIORITIES do not serve the needs of
America's Dentists, and certainly not the needs
of the American public. Dentists, within the
system, have little, or no, control over what
happens in American Dentistry.
Simply, "Official dentistry" is controlled by
those that write the checks to that bureaucracy.
For instance, forty-two percent of the ADA's
annual income is from "Product Endorsement."
And, to my knowledge, that 42% DOES NOT INCLUDE
the money "Official dentistry" gets from the US
The fertilizer industry? Did I say "The
Yup, that's exactly what I said. And, that's not
all. There are FOUR reasons I think "Official
Dentistry" is the number one US health care
problem. All of those reasons will shock and
To read the entire article, and access the
interesting links, click on the URL below:
Tim Bolen - Consumer Advocate
This "Millions of Health Freedom Fighters -
Newsletter" is a NON-COMMERCIAL email newsletter
about the politics of “Health Care” on Planet
Earth. It talks about the raging battle between
the forces of "Health” and “Medicine." In the
US, the ultra-expensive “Medical System” has
failed. It is the NUMBER ONE killer of Americans
– ahead of heart disease and cancer. That
failing system protects itself, and attacks its
critics viciously. But, there are literally,
"Millions" of people forcing change on that
This newsletter is about all of that. Tim Bolen
is an op/ed writer with extensive knowledge, and
contacts, on this subject.
Recent research shows that microwave
oven-cooked food suffers severe molecular
damage. When eaten, it causes abnormal changes
in human blood and immune systems.
Not surprisingly, the public has been denied
details on these significant health dangers.
Extracted from NEXUS Magazine, Volume 2, #25
PO Box 30, Mapleton Qld 4560 Australia.
Telephone: +61 (0)7 5442 9280; Fax: +61 (0)7
From our web page at: www.nexusmagazine.com
Originally printed from the April 1994 edition
of Acres, USA.
PO Box 8800, Metairie, Louisiana, 70011 USA
Telephone: (504) 889 2100; Fax: (504) 889 2777
Back in May
of 1989, after Tom Valentine first moved to St
Paul, Minnesota, he heard on the car radio a
short announcement that bolted him upright in
the driver's seat. The announcement was
sponsored by Young Families, the Minnesota
Extension Service of the University of
"Although microwaves heat food quickly,
they are not recommended for heating a baby's
bottle," the announcement said. The bottle may
seem cool to the touch, but the liquid inside
may become extremely hot and could burn the
baby's mouth and throat. Also, the buildup of
steam in a closed container such as a baby's
bottle could cause it to explode. "Heating the
bottle in a microwave can cause slight changes
in the milk. In infant formulas, there may be
a loss of some vitamins. In expressed breast
milk, some protective properties may be
destroyed." The report went on. "Warming a
bottle by holding it under tap water or by
setting it in a bowl of warm water, then
testing it on your wrist before feeding, may
take a few minutes longer, but it is much
Valentine asked himself: If an established
institution like the University of Minnesota
can warn about the loss of particular nutrient
qualities in microwaved baby formula or
mother's milk, then somebody must know
something about microwaving they are not
In early 1991, word leaked out about a
lawsuit in Oklahoma. A woman named Norma
Levitt had hip surgery, only to be killed by a
simple blood transfusion when a nurse "warmed
the blood for the transfusion in a microwave
Logic suggests that if heating or cooking
is all there is to it, then it doesn't matter
what mode of heating technology one uses.
However, it is quite apparent that there is
more to 'heating' with microwaves than we've
been led to believe.
Blood for transfusions is routinely
warmed-but not in microwave ovens! In the case
of Mrs Levitt, the microwaving altered the
blood and it killed her.
Does it not therefore follow that this form
of heating does, indeed, do 'something
different' to the substances being heated? Is
it not prudent to determine what that
'something different' might do?
A funny thing happened on the way to the bank
with all that microwave oven revenue: nobody
thought about the obvious. Only 'health nuts'
who are constantly aware of the value of
quality nutrition discerned a problem with the
widespread 'denaturing' of our food. Enter
In the tiny town of Wattenwil, near Basel
in Switzerland, there lives a scientist who is
alarmed at the lack of purity and naturalness
in the many pursuits of modern mankind. He
worked as a food scientist for several years
with one of the many major Swiss food
companies that do business on a global scale.
A few years ago, he was fired from his job for
questioning procedures in processing food
because they denatured it.
"The world needs our help," Hans Hertel
told Tom Valentine as they shared a fine meal
at a resort hotel in Todtmoss, Germany.
"We, the scientists, carry the main
responsibility for the present unacceptable
conditions. It is therefore our job to correct
the situation and bring the remedy to the
world. I am striving to bring man and
techniques back into harmony with nature. We
can have wonderful technologies without
Hans is an intense man, driven by personal
knowledge of violations of nature by corporate
man and his state-supported monopolies in
science, technology and education. At the same
time, as the two talked, his intensity
shattered into a warm smile and he spoke of
the way things could be if mankind's immense
talent were to work with nature and not
Hans Hertel is the first scientist to
conceive of and carry out a quality study on
the effects of microwaved nutrients on the
blood and physiology of human beings. This
small but well-controlled study pointed the
firm finger at a degenerative force of
microwave ovens and the food produced in them.
The conclusion was clear: microwave cooking
changed the nutrients so that changes took
place in the participants' blood; these were
not healthy changes but were changes that
could cause deterioration in the human
Working with Bernard H. Blanc of the Swiss
Federal Institute of Technology and the
University Institute for Biochemistry, Hertel
not only conceived of the study and carried it
out, he was one of eight participants.
"To control as many variables as possible,
we selected eight individuals who were strict
macrobiotic diet participants from the
Macrobiotic Institute at Kientel,
Switzerland," Hertel explained. "We were all
housed in the same hotel environment for eight
weeks. There was no smoking, no alcohol and no
One can readily see that this protocol
makes sense. After all, how could you tell
about subtle changes in a human's blood from
eating microwaved food if smoking, booze, junk
food, pollution, pesticides, hormones,
antibiotics and everything else in the common
environment were also present?
"We had one American, one Canadian and six
Europeans in the group. I was the oldest at 64
years, the others were in their 20s and 30s,"
Valentine published the results of this study
in Search for Health in the Spring of
1992. But the follow-up information is
available only in a later edition, and also in
In intervals of two to five days, the
volunteers in the study received one of the
food variants on an empty stomach. The food
variants were: raw milk from a biofarm (no.
1); the same milk conventionally cooked (no.
2); pasteurised milk from Intermilk Berne (no.
3); the same raw milk cooked in a microwave
oven (no. 4); raw vegetables from an organic
farm (no. 5); the same vegetables cooked
conventionally (no. 6); the same vegetables
frozen and defrosted in the microwave oven
(no. 7); and the same vegetables cooked in the
microwave oven (no. 8). The overall experiment
had some of the earmarks of the Pottenger cat
studies, except that now human beings were
test objects, the experiment's time-frame was
shorter, and a new heat form was tested.
Once the volunteers were isolated at the
resort hotel, the test began. Blood samples
were taken from every volunteer immediately
before eating. Then blood samples were taken
at defined intervals after eating from the
above-numbered milk or vegetable preparations.
Significant changes were discovered in the
blood of the volunteers who consumed foods
cooked in the microwave oven. These changes
included a decrease in all haemoglobin values
and cholesterol values, especially the HDL
(good cholesterol) and LDL (bad cholesterol)
values and ratio. Lymphocytes (white blood
cells) showed a more distinct short-term
decrease following the intake of microwaved
food than after the intake of all the other
variants. Each of these indicators point in a
direction away from robust health and toward
degeneration. Additionally, there was a highly
significant association between the amount of
microwave energy in the test foods and the
luminous power of luminescent bacteria exposed
to serum from test persons who ate that food.
This led Hertel to the conclusion that such
technically derived energies may, indeed, be
passed along to man inductively via
consumption of microwaved food.
"This process is based on physical
principles and has already been confirmed in
the literature," Hertel explained. The
apparent additional energy exhibited by the
luminescent bacteria was merely extra
"There is extensive scientific literature
concerning the hazardous effects of direct
microwave radiation on living systems," Hertel
continued. "It is astonishing, therefore, to
realise how little effort has been made to
replace this detrimental technique of
microwaves with technology more in accordance
"Technically produced microwaves are based
on the principle of alternating current.
Atoms, molecules and cells hit by this hard
electromagnetic radiation are forced to
reverse polarity 1 to 100 billion times a
second. There are no atoms, molecules or cells
of any organic system able to withstand such a
violent, destructive power for any extended
period of time, not even in the low energy
range of milliwatts.
"Of all the natural substances-which are
polar-the oxygen of water molecules reacts
most sensitively. This is how microwave
cooking heat is generated-friction from this
violence in water molecules. Structures of
molecules are torn apart, molecules are
forcefully deformed (called structural
isomerism) and thus become impaired in
"This is contrary to conventional heating
of food, in which heat transfers
convectionally from without to within. Cooking
by microwaves begins within the cells and
molecules where water is present and where the
energy is transformed into frictional heat."
The question naturally arises: What about
microwaves from the sun? Aren't they harmful?
Hertel responded: "The microwaves from the Sun
are based on principles of pulsed direct
current. These rays create no frictional heat
in organic substance."
In addition to violent frictional heat
effects (called thermic effects), there are
also athermic effects which have hardly ever
been taken into account, Hertel added.
"These athermic effects are not presently
measurable, but they can also deform the
structures of molecules and have qualitative
consequences. For example, the weakening of
cell membranes by microwaves is used in the
field of gene altering technology. Because of
the force involved, the cells are actually
broken, thereby neutralising the electrical
potentials-the very life of the cells-between
the outer and inner sides of the cell
membranes. Impaired cells become easy prey for
viruses, fungi and other micro-organisms. The
natural repair mechanisms are suppressed, and
cells are forced to adapt to a state of energy
emergency: they switch from aerobic to
anaerobic respiration. Instead of water and
carbon dioxide, hydrogen peroxide and carbon
monoxide are produced."
It has long been pointed out in the
literature that any reversal of healthy cell
processes may occur because of a number of
reasons, and our cells then revert from a
"robust oxidation" to an unhealthy
The same violent friction and athermic
deformations that can occur in our bodies when
we are subjected to radar or microwaves,
happens to the molecules in the food cooked in
a microwave oven. In fact, when anyone
microwaves food, the oven exerts a power input
of about 1,000 watts or more. This radiation
results in destruction and deformation of
molecules of food, and in the formation of new
compounds (called radiolytic compounds)
unknown to man and nature.
Today's established science and technology
argues forcefully that microwaved food and
irradiated foods do not have any significantly
higher "radiolytic compounds" than do broiled,
baked or other conventionally cooked foods-but
microwaving does produce more of these
critters. Curiously, neither established
science nor our ever-protective government has
conducted tests-on the blood of the eaters-of
the effects of eating various kinds of cooked
foods. Hertel and his group did test it, and
the indication is clear that something is
amiss and that larger studies should be
funded. The apparently toxic effects of
microwave cooking is another in a long list of
unnatural additives in our daily diets.
However, the establishment has not taken
kindly to this work.
"The first drawing of blood samples took
place on an empty stomach at 7.45 each
morning," Hertel explained. "The second
drawing of blood took place 15 minutes after
the food intake. The third drawing was two
From each sample, 50 millilitres of blood
was used for the chemistry and five
millimetres for the haematology and the
luminescence. The haematological examinations
took place immediately after drawing the
samples. Erythrocytes, haemoglobin, mean
haemoglobin concentration, mean haemoglobin
content, leukocytes and lymphocytes were
measured. The chemical analysis consisted of
iron, total cholesterol, HDL cholesterol and
The results of erythrocyte, haemoglobin,
haematocrit and leukocyte determinations were
at the "lower limits of normal" in those
tested following the eating of the microwaved
"These results show anaemic tendencies. The
situation became even more pronounced during
the second month of the study," Hertel added.
"And with those decreasing values, there was a
corresponding increase of cholesterol values."
Hertel admits that stress factors, from
getting punctured for the blood samples so
often each day, for example, cannot be ruled
out, but the established baseline for each
individual became the "zero values" marker,
and only changes from the zero values were
With only one round of test substances
completed, the different effects between
conventionally prepared food and microwaved
food were marginal-although noticed as
definite "tendencies". As the test continued,
the differences in the blood markers became
"statistically significant". The changes are
generally considered to be signs of stress on
the body. For example, erythrocytes tended to
increase after eating vegetables from the
microwave oven. Haemoglobin and both of the
mean concentration and content haemoglobin
markers also tended to decrease significantly
after eating the microwaved substances.
"Leukocytosis," Hertel explained, "which
cannot be accounted for by normal daily
deviations such as following the intake of
food, is taken seriously by haematologists.
Leukocyte response is especially sensitive to
stress. They are often signs of pathogenic
effects on the living system, such as
poisoning and cell damage. The increase of
leukocytes with the microwaved foods was more
pronounced than with all the other variants.
It appears that these marked increases were
caused entirely by ingesting the microwaved
The cholesterol markers were very
interesting, Hertel stressed:
"Common scientific belief states that
cholesterol values usually alter slowly over
longer periods of time. In this study, the
markers increased rapidly after the
consumption of the microwaved vegetables.
However, with milk, the cholesterol values
remained the same and even decreased with the
raw milk significantly."
Hertel believes his study tends to confirm
newer scientific data that suggest cholesterol
may rapidly increase in the blood secondary to
acute stress. "Also," he added, "blood
cholesterol levels are less influenced by
cholesterol content of food than by stress
factors. Such stress-causing factors can
apparently consist of foods which contain
virtually no cholesterol-the microwaved
It is plain to see that this individually
financed and conducted study has enough meat
in it to make anyone with a modicum of common
sense sit up and take notice. Food from the
microwave oven caused abnormal changes,
representing stress, to occur in the blood of
all the test individuals. Biological
individuality, a key variable that makes a
mockery of many allegedly scientific studies,
was well accounted for by the established
So, how has the brilliant world of modern
technology, medicine and 'protect the public'
government reacted to this impressive effort?
A GAG ORDER
As soon as Hertel and Blanc announced their
results, the hammer of authority slammed down
on them. A powerful trade organisation, the
Swiss Association of Dealers for
Electroapparatuses for Households and
Industry, known simply as FEA, struck swiftly.
They forced the President of the Court of
Seftigen, Kanton Bern, to issue a 'gag order'
against Hertel and Blanc. The attack was so
ferocious that Blanc quickly recanted his
support-but it was too late. He had already
put into writing his views on the validity of
the studies where he concurred with the
opinion that microwaved food caused the blood
Hertel stood his ground, and today is
steadfastly demanding his rights to a trial.
Preliminary hearings on the matter have been
appealed to higher courts, and it's quite
obvious the powers that be do not want a 'show
trial' to erupt on this issue.
In March 1993, the court handed down this
decision based upon the complaint of the FEA:
1. Request from the plaintiff (FEA)
to prohibit the defendant (Dr Ing. Hans Hertel)
from declaring that food prepared in the
microwave oven shall be dangerous to health
and lead to changes in the blood of consumers,
giving reference to pathologic troubles as
also indicative for the beginning of a
cancerous process. The defendant shall be
prohibited from repeating such a statement in
publications and in public talks by punishment
laid down in the law.
2. The jurisdiction of the judge is
given according to law.
3. The active legitimacy of the
plaintiff is given according to the law.
4. The passive legitimacy of the
defendant is given by the fact that he is the
author of the polemic [published study] in
question, especially since the present new and
revised law allows to exclude the necessity of
a competitive situation, therefore delinquents
may also be persons who are not
co-competitors, but may damage the competing
position of others by mere declarations.
[Apparently, Swiss corporations have lobbied
in a law that nails "delinquents" who
disparage products and might do damage to
commerce by such remarks. So far, the US
Constitution still preserves freedom of the
5. Considering the relevant situation
it is referred to three publications: the
public renunciation [sic] of the so-called
co-author Professor Bernard Blanc, the
expertise of Professor Teuber [expert witness
from the FEA] about the above-mentioned
publication, the opinion of the public health
authorities with regard to the present stage
of research with microwave ovens as well as to
repeated statements from the side of the
defendant about the danger of such ovens.
6. It is not considered of importance
whether or not the polemic of the defendant
meets the approval of the public, because all
that is necessary is that a possibility exists
that such a statement could find approval with
people not being experts themselves. Also,
advertising involving fear is not allowed and
is always disqualified by the law. The
necessity for a fast interference is in no
case more advised than in the processes of
competition. Basically, the defendant has the
right to defend himself against such
accusations. This right, however, can be
denied in cases of pressing danger with regard
to impairing the rights of the plaintiff when
this is requested.
On grounds of this pending request of the
plaintiff, the court arrives at the conclusion
that because of special presuppositions as in
this case, a definite disadvantage for the
plaintiff does exist, which may not easily be
repaired, and therefore must be considered to
be of immediate danger. The case thus warrants
the request of the plaintiff to be justified,
even without hearing the defendant. Also,
because it is not known when the defendant
will bring further statements into the public.
The judge is also of the opinion that because
the publications are made up to appear as
scientific, and therefore especially
reliable-looking, they may cause additional
bad disadvantages. It must be added that there
does obviously not exist a just reason for
this publication because there is no public
interest for pseudo-scientific unproved
declarations. Finally, these ordered measures
do not prove to be disproportionate.
The defendant is prohibited, under
punishment of up to F5,000, or up to one year
in prison, to declare that food prepared in
microwave ovens is dangerous to health and
leads to pathologic troubles as also
indicative for the beginning of a cancerous
process. The plaintiff pays the costs.
(Signed) President of the Court of Seftigen
If you cannot imagine this kind of decision
coming from a court in the United States, you
have not been paying attention to the advances
of administrative law.
Hertel defied the court and has loudly
demanded a fair hearing on the truth of his
claims. The court has continued to delay,
dodge, appeal and avoid any media-catching
confrontation. As of this writing, Hans is
still waiting for a hearing with media
coverage-and he's still talking and publishing
"They have not been able to intimidate me
into silence, and I will not accept their
conditions," Hertel declared. "I have appeared
at large seminars in Germany, and the study
results have been well-received. Also, I think
the authorities are aware that scientists at
Ciba-Geigy [the world's largest pharmaceutical
company, headquartered in Switzerland] have
vowed to support me in court."
As those powerful special interests in
Switzerland who desire to sell microwave ovens
by the millions continued to suppress open
debate on this vital issue for modern
civilisation, new microwave developments
blossomed in the United States.
In the journal Pediatrics (vol. 89,
no. 4, April 1992), there appeared an article
titled, "Effects of Microwave Radiation on
Anti-infective Factors in Human Milk". Richard
Quan, M.D. from Plano, Texas, was the lead
name of the study team. John A. Kerner, M.D.,
from Stanford University, was also on the
research team, and he was quoted in a summary
article on the research that appeared in the
25 April 1992 issue of Science News. To
get the full flavour of what may lie ahead for
microwaving, here is that summary article:
"Women who work outside the home can express
and store breast milk for feedings when they
are away. But parents and caregivers should be
careful how they warm this milk. A new study
shows that microwaving human milk-even at a
low setting-can destroy some of its important
"Breast milk can be refrigerated safely for
a few days or frozen for up to a month;
however, studies have shown that heating the
milk well above body temperature-37°C-can
break down not only its antibodies to
infectious agents, but also its lysozymes or
bacteria-digesting enzymes. So, when
paediatrician John A. Kerner, Jr, witnessed
neonatal nurses routinely thawing or reheating
breast milk with the microwave oven in their
lounge, he became concerned.
"In the April 1992 issue of Pediatrics
(Part I), he and his Stanford University
co-workers reported finding that unheated
breast milk that was microwaved lost lysozyme
activity, antibodies and fostered the growth
of more potentially pathogenic bacteria. Milk
heated at a high setting (72 degrees Celsius
to 98 degrees C) lost 96 per cent of its
immunoglobulin-A antibodies, agents that fend
off invading microbes.
"What really surprised him, Kerner said,
was finding some loss of anti-infective
properties in the milk microwaved at a low
setting-and to a mean of just 33.5 degrees C.
Adverse changes at such low temperatures
suggest 'microwaving itself may in fact
cause some injury to the milk above and beyond
"But Randall M. Goldblum of the University
of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston
disagrees, saying: 'I don't see any
compelling evidence that the microwaves did
any harm. It was the heating.' Lysozyme
and antibody degradation in the coolest
samples may simply reflect the development of
small hot spots-potentially 60 degrees C or
above-during microwaving, noted Madeleine
Sigman-Grant of Pennsylvania State University,
University Park. And that's to be expected,
she said, because microwave heating is
inherently uneven-and quite unpredictable when
volumes less than four millilitres are
involved, as was the case in the Kerner's
"Goldblum considers use of a microwave to
thaw milk an especially bad idea, since it is
likely to boil some of the milk before all has
even liquefied. Stanford University Medical
Center no longer microwaves breast milk,
Kerner notes. And that's appropriate, Sigman-Grant
believes, because of the small volumes of milk
that hospitals typically serve
newborns-especially premature infants."
CHASING A STORY
Journalist Tom Valentine, after chasing
this story, found it interesting that
'scientists' have so many 'beliefs' to express
rather than prove fact. Yet facts eventually
snuff out credential-based conjecture.
Researcher Quan, in a phone interview, said
that he believed the results of research so
far warranted further detailed study of the
effects of microwave cooking on nutrients. The
summary sentence in an abstract of the
research paper is very clear:
- "Microwaving appears to be
contra-indicated at high temperatures, and
questions regarding its safety exist even at
The final statement of the study conclusion
- "This preliminary study suggests that
microwaving human milk could be detrimental.
Further studies are needed to determine
whether and how microwaving could safely be
done." Unfortunately, further studies are
not scheduled at this time.
If there are so many indications that the
effects of microwaves on foods can degrade the
foods far above the known breakdowns of
standard cooking, is it not reasonable to
conduct exhaustive studies on living,
breathing human beings to determine if it's
possible that eating microwaved foods
continuously, as many people do, can be
significantly detrimental to individual
If you wanted to introduce a herbal
supplement into the American mainstream and
make any health claims for it, you would be
subjected to exhaustive documentation and
costly research. Yet the microwave-oven
industry had only to prove that the dangerous
microwaves could, indeed, be contained within
the oven and not escape into the surrounding
area where the radiation could do damage to
people. The industry must admit that some
microwaves escape even in the best-made ovens.
So far, not one thought has been given by the
industry to the possibility that the nutrients
could be so altered as to be deleterious to
Well, this makes sense in a land that
encourages farmers to poison crops and soils
with massive amounts of synthesised chemicals,
and encourages food processors to use
additives that enhance shelf-life of foods
regardless of the potential for degrading the
health of the consumer.
How many hundreds of pounds of microwaved food
per capita is consumed in America each year?
Are we going to continue to take it from
established authority, without question, on
the premise that they know best?
published May 14 2007
by Staff writer
The American College of Physicians has
recommended women in their 40s consult with
their doctors before undergoing routine annual
mammography screening. An expert panel from the
American College of Physicians (ACP), which
represents 120,000 internists, made this
recommendation in the April 3rd issue of the
journal Annals of Internal Medicine.
After reviewing 117 studies conducted between
1966 and 2005, the panel found the data on
mammography screening for women in their 40s are
so unclear that the effectiveness of reducing
breast cancer death could be either 15 percent
or "...nearly zero."
The panel pointed out that benefits must be
weighed against the harmful effects of
mammograms, including exposure to radiation and
unnecessary biopsies, surgery, and chemotherapy.
Dr. Amir Qaseem, lead author of the ACP
guidelines, stated "It is important to tailor
the decision of screening mammography by
discussing the benefits and risks with a woman,
addressing her concerns, and making it a joint
decision between her and her physician." The ACP
noted cancer risk varies from woman to woman,
and decisions about annual mammography
screenings are best made on a case-by-case
The ACP pointed out for women who have a known
high risk of breast cancer (family history or
early menarche, for example) annual screenings
The group is not opposed to mammography, but
rather questions the efficacy of annual
mammography exams commencing at age 40. "We
agree that mammography can save lives," said
Douglas K. Owens of Stanford University, who
chaired the committee that wrote the guidelines,
"But there are also potential harms. We don't
think the evidence supports a blanket
The dangers of mammography are recognized in the
medical field. According to Dr. Samuel Epstein
of the Cancer Prevention Coalition, "Screening
mammography poses significant and cumulative
risks of breast cancer for pre-menopausal women.
The routine practice of taking four films of
each breast annually results in approximately 1
rad (radiation absorbed dose) exposure, about
1,000 times greater than that from a chest
x-ray. The pre-menopausal breast is highly
sensitive to radiation, each 1 rad exposure
increasing breast cancer risk by about 1
percent, with a cumulative 10 percent increased
risk for each breast over a decade's screening.
These risks are even greater for younger women
subject to 'baseline screening.'"
The coalition reports women who carry the A-T
gene are especially prone to risk from early
mammography screening: "Radiation risks are some
four-fold greater for the 1 to 2 percent of
women who are silent carriers of the A-T
(ataxia-telangiectasia) gene; by some estimates
this accounts for up to 20 percent of all breast
cancers diagnosed annually."
"Mammography is used primarily as a tool to
recruit new patients into conventional cancer
treatments, regardless of whether they would
actually benefit from such treatments," said
Mike Adams, author of Natural Health Solutions
and the Conspiracy to Keep You From Knowing
About Them. "The breast cancer industry harms
ten women for every one it helps. It is an
industry of greed, profits, and scare tactics,"
At the heart of the current blanket
recommendations to begin annual mammography
exams at age 40 is the American Cancer Society
(ACS). Robert A. Smith, director of cancer
screening at the ACS,
responded to the new recommendations stating,
"The danger here is that some women will elect
not to get screened. Mammography is the single
most effective way of finding breast cancer
early, and when we find breast cancer early,
women have the greatest chance of successful
treatment." Just last month the ACS advised
women who are at a perceived "high risk" of
breast cancer to also undergo annual MRIs.
heard cancer cells explained this
AFTER YEARS OF TELLING PEOPLE
CHEMOTHERAPY IS THE ONLY WAY TO
TRY ("TRY" IS THE KEY WORD) AND
ELIMINATE CANCER, JOHN HOPKINS IS
FINALLY STARTING TO TELL YOU THERE
IS AN ALTERNATIVE WAY ..
Cancer Update from John Hopkins
1. Every person has cancer cells
in the body. These cancer cells do
not show up in the standard tests
until they have multiplied to a
few billion. When doctors tell
cancer patients that there are no
more cancer cells in their bodies
after treatment, it just means the
tests are unable to detect the
cancer cells because they have not
reached the detectable size.
2. Cancer cells occur between 6 to
more than 10 times in a person's
3. When the person's immune system
is strong the cancer cells will be
destroyed and prevented from
multiplying and forming tumors.
4. When a person has cancer it
indicates the person has multiple
nutritional deficiencies. These
could be due to genetic,
environmental, food and lifestyle
5. To overcome the multiple
nutritional deficiencies, changing
diet and including supplements
will strengthen the immune system.
6. Chemotherapy involves poisoning
the rapidly-growing cancer cells
and also destroys rapidly-growing
healthy cells in the bone marrow,
gastro-intestinal tract etc, and
can cause organ damage, like
liver, kidneys, heart, lungs etc.
7. Radiation while destroying
cancer cells also burns, scars and
damages healthy cells, tissues and
8. Initial treatment with
chemotherapy and radiation will
often reduce tumor size. However
prolonged use of chemotherapy and
radiation do not result in more
9 When the body has too much toxic
burden from chemotherapy and
radiation the immune system is
either compromised or destroyed,
hence the person can succumb to
various kinds of infections and
10. Chemotherapy and radiation can
cause cancer cells to mutate and
become resistant and difficult to
destroy. Surgery can also cause
cancer cells to spread to other
11. An effective way to battle
cancer is to starve the cancer
cells by not feeding it with the
foods it needs to multiply.
CANCER CELLS FEED ON:
a. Sugar is a cancer-feeder. By
cutting off sugar it cuts off one
important food supply to the
cancer cells. Sugar substitutes
like NutraSweet, Equal,Spoonful,
etc are made with Aspartame and it
is harmful. A better natural
substitute would be Manuka honey
or molasses but only in very small
amounts. Table salt has a chemical
added to make it white in color.
Better alternative is Bragg's
aminos or sea salt.
b. Milk causes the body to produce
mucus, especially in the
gastro-intestinal tract. Cancer
feeds on mucus. By cutting off
milk and substituting with
unsweetened soya milk cancer cells
are being starved.
c. Cancer cells thrive in an acid
environment. A meat-based diet is
acidic and it is best to eat fish,
and a little chicken rather than
beef or pork. Meat also contains
livestock antibiotics, growth
hormones and parasites, which are
all harmful, especially to people
d. A diet made of 80% fresh
vegetables and juice, whole
grains,seeds, nuts and a little
fruits help put the body into an
alkaline environment.About 20% can
be from cooked food including
beans. Fresh vegetable juices
provide live enzymes that are
easily absorbed and reach down to
cellular levels within 15 minutes
to nourish and enhance growth of
healthy cells. To obtain live
enzymes for building healthy cells
try and drink fresh vegetable
juice (most vegetables including
bean sprouts)and eat some raw
vegetables 2 or 3 times a day.
Enzymes are destroyed at
temperatures of 104 degrees F (40
e. Avoid coffee, tea, and
chocolate, which have high
caffeine.Green tea is a better
alternative and has
Water-best to drink purified
water, or filtered, to avoid known
toxins and heavy metals in tap
water. Distilled water is acidic,
12. Meat protein is difficult to
digest and requires a lot of
digestive enzymes. Undigested meat
remaining in the intestines become
putrified and leads to more toxic
13. Cancer cell walls have a tough
protein covering. By refraining
from or eating less meat it frees
more enzymes to attack the protein
walls of cancer cells and allows
the body's killer cells to destroy
the cancer cells.
14. Some supplements build up the
immune system (IP6,
vitamins, minerals, EFAs etc.) to
enable the body's own killer cells
to destroy cancer cells. Other
supplements like vitamin E are
known to cause apoptosis, or
programmed cell death, the body's
normal method of disposing of
damaged, unwanted, or unneeded
15. Cancer is a disease of the
mind, body, and spirit. A
proactive and positive spirit will
help the cancer warrior be a
survivor. Anger, unforgiveness and
bitterness put the body into a
stressful and acidic environment.
Learn to have a loving and
forgiving spirit. Learn to relax
and enjoy life.
16. Cancer cells cannot thrive in
an oxygenated environment.
Exercising daily, and deep
breathing help to get more oxygen
down to the cellular level. Oxygen
therapy is another means employed
to destroy cancer cells.
CANCER UPDATE FROM JOHN HOPKINS
1. No plastic containers in micro.
2. No water bottles in freezer.
3. No plastic wrap in microwave.
Johns Hopkins has recently sent
this out in its newsletters. This
information is being circulated at
Walter Reed Army Medical Center as
well. Dioxin chemicals
causes cancer, especially breast
cancer. Dioxins are highly
poisonous to the cells of our
bodies. Don't freeze your plastic
bottles with water in them as this
releases dioxins from the plastic.
Recently, Dr. Edward Fujimoto,
Wellness Program Manager at Castle
Hospital , was on a TV program to
explain this health hazard. He
talked about dioxins and how bad
they are for us.. He said that we
should not be heating our food in
the microwave using plastic
containers. This especially
applies to foods that contain fat.
He said that the combination of
fat, high heat, and plastics
releases dioxin into the food and
ultimately into the cells of the
body. Instead, he recommends using
glass, such as Corning Ware, Pyrex
or ceramic containers for heating
food. You get the same results,
only without the dioxin. So such
things as TV dinners, instant
ramen and soups, etc., should be
removed from the container and
heated in something else. Paper
isn't bad but you don't know what
is in the paper. It's just safer
to use tempered glass, Corning
Ware, etc. He reminded us that a
while ago some of the fast food
restaurants moved away from the
foam containers to paper. The
dioxin problem is one of the
reasons. Also, he pointed out
that plastic wrap, such as Saran,
is just as dangerous when placed
over foods to be cooked in the
microwave. As the food is nuked,
the high heat causes poisonous
toxins to actually melt out of the
plastic wrap and rip into the
food. Cover food with a paper
Special Update from the
American Holistic Health
Association with items of
interest to those actively
enhancing their health and
well-being. Another free
service from AHHA.
Many people consider
poor vision an inevitable
fact of aging. The most
common cause of
diminishing visual acuity
is the condition called
cataracts. A cataract is a
clouding of the lens in
the eye. Most results of
Internet searches for
information on cataracts
offer only surgery under
According to Jonathan
Wright, M.D., there is,
however, a natural
treatment with no negative
side effects. If you or a
loved one are dealing with
cataracts, you may want to
allow Congress to let you
go blind!: Reverse
cataracts with a
simple-and safe-eye drop
and related research with
your ophthalmologist. This
article appeared in the
July, 2008, issue of Dr.
Jonathan V. Wright's
Nutrition & Healing
Have you been reading the
articles about the
possible danger of using a
cell phone? The U.S. Food
and Drug Administration
(FDA), first reports, "The
evidence does not show
that any health problems
are associated with using
wireless phones." Then
adds, "There is no proof,
however, that wireless
phones are absolutely
safe." When you are
educating yourself on this
subject, you might want to
keep in mind that many
experts feel any studies
tracking the impact of
using cell phone handsets
need to cover a minimum of
ten years, though most are
far shorter studies. If
you are concerned about
any possible risk, a
simple solution is to use
"Experts Revive Debate
Over Cellphones and
New York Times
"Mobile phones 'more
dangerous than smoking'"
"Health Hazards of Cell
Cell Phone Safety
"Cell Phone Facts:
Consumer Information on
U.S. Food and Drug
FEATURED AHHA RESOURCE
How many different
healing modalities have
you experienced along your
healing journey? The
dozens of modalities on
Sources list offer
numerous options, most of
which are referral
programs to professional
modality associations, so
they are also an excellent
resource for learning
about healing options.
AHHA Special Update
Editor: Suzan Walter
AMERICAN HOLISTIC HEALTH
PO Box 17400, Anaheim,
CA 92817-7400 USA
Phone: (714) 779-6152
Web site: ahha.org
AHHA Special Updates are
The information and resources presented on this site
are not intended to replace the care of a qualified
health professional. While the ideas presented here
are based on extensive research, they are not
intended to provide specific advice for any
individual person's medical concerns. The resources
on this site are for educational purposes; it is
recommended that each individual choose a trusted
health care professional for diagnosis and treatment
purposes. The author of this site encourages
visitors to educate themselves about the various
theories and treatment approaches for health care
issues, so that the safest, most effective approach
can be identified.
Copyright © 1999-2010 Body Harmony by Dr. Stephen
rights reserved. Revised:
28 Mar 2011 19:38:47 -0500.