Epic Idiot - Creation, Evolution, and Intelligent Design
  Home  Table of Contents  Creation and Evolution  Humor  Mission Statement  Contact
 
Intelligent Design - It's Just Evolution in Disguise

This Day In History


Rate This
Article
[click here]


Publish
YOUR
Article
[click here]


 

 

 

Two Important Threats to Your
Children's Health

Aspartame and Dihydrogen Monoxide


I was sent the following by a friend who was concerned for my health.  See my reply below.

Dear Reader,

Imagine 16,000 tons of powder. The weight of 10,600 cars approximately equals 16,000 tons, so we're talking about a LOT of powder.

But not just any powder. About 16,000 tons of aspartame is produced for worldwide consumption each year. In other words, people are consuming enormous quantities of this artificial sweetener, which is better known by its commercial names, such as NutraSweet and Equal.

The day may come when our grandchildren, or perhaps their grandchildren, look back on the decades around the turn of the century and wonder how so many people, year after year, could ingest such huge quantities of something that appeared to be such an obvious enemy of good health.

And what may be most baffling to our heirs: The warning signs are numerous. And they just keep coming.

--------------------------------------------
Daily intake...acceptable?
--------------------------------------------

The most recent aspartame findings come from a large animal study conducted by Italian researchers at the Ramazzini Foundation, which specializes in oncology and environmental sciences.

For more than three decades, researchers simulated daily human intake of aspartame on 1800 rats (equal amounts of males and females). Each rat was assigned to one of eight dosage levels: zero mg per kilogram of body weight, 4 mg/Kg, 20 mg/Kg, 100 mg/Kg, 500 mg/Kg, 2,500 mg/Kg, or 5,000 mg/Kg. Rats began receiving aspartame at eight weeks of age, continuing throughout their lives.

The results (reported in a recent issue of the European Journal of Oncology) showed a "statistically significant" increase in leukemias and lymphomas among female rats who received as little as 20 mg/Kg per day. Current European regulations place an acceptable daily intake (ADI) of aspartame at 40 to 50 mg/Kg of body weight. That ADI is for humans, of course, not rats.

But the research doesn't end there. The Ramazzini data, with full pathology reports, have been submitted to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), the European Union's counterpart to our FDA. A panel of experts (oh brother!) will then evaluate the findings "in the context of the previous extensive safety data available on aspartame."

In other words: Expect absolutely nothing to happen. Because the EFSA so far has done exactly what the FDA has done with the current available safety data: Nothing. But that's fine. You and I and other concerned citizens will take it from here with a little Water Cooler Regulation.

--------------------------------------------
61 revisited
--------------------------------------------

In the world of harmful food additives, aspartame may turn out to be the most notoriously harmful of them all. Research shows that aspartame may mimic or worsen diseases such as Parkinson's, multiple sclerosis, Alzheimer's, arthritis, lupus, fibromyalgia, and depression.

In 1994 the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) released a list of 61 reported adverse reactions to aspartame, including: chest pains, asthma, arthritis, migraine headaches, insomnia, seizures, tremors, vertigo, and weight gain. The surprising item on that list is "weight gain," given the fact that aspartame is the sweetener used in most diet sodas. In fact, according to one study, aspartame may actually STIMULATE appetite, prompting cravings for calorie-rich carbohydrates.

But weight gain is nothing compared to some of the horror stories out there.

Aspartame is made by combining two amino acids with methanol. According to an article by Dr. Joseph Mercola, methanol is the probable trigger for most of the adverse reactions associated with aspartame. When aspartame is combined with the enzyme chymotrypsin in the small intestine, methanol is released and breaks down into formaldehyde, a potent neurotoxin. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency considers methanol to be a "cumulative poison" and recommends a safe consumption of no more than 7.8 mg per day. If you drink a one-liter beverage containing aspartame, you body creates seven times that amount - about 56 mg of methanol.

But it gets even worse. Because if the product containing aspartame is heated to a temperature above 86 degrees Fahrenheit, "free methanol" is created, speeding up the absorption of methanol, and magnifying the effects of the neurotoxins. Nevertheless, in 1993 the FDA approved the use of aspartame in food items such as gelatin desserts that require heating well over the 86-degree range.

The result? People are hurting. According to the FDA's Adverse Reaction Monitoring System, approximately 75 percent of all complaints received about food additives are aspartame-related: 3 out of every 4! And yet the FDA still refuses to acknowledge the evidence that aspartame could be endangering public health.

-------------------------------------------- 
Hold the toxin 
-------------------------------------------- 

In spite of the clear dangers of aspartame, FDA officials have ignored calls for a ban and have resisted efforts to establish a warning label for aspartame, stating (completely contrary to all the evidence) that complaints against the sweetener aren't sufficient to warrant such a warning.

But really, what good would a warning label do? Does the average consumer actually read the fine print on his can of diet Mountain Dew?

What's needed here is not an FDA regulation, but rather some Water Cooler Regulation. Tell your friends and family about the potential dangers of aspartame. Spread the word. And as always, feel free to share this e-Alert with them.

To start receiving your own copy of the HSI e-Alert, visit: <http://www.hsiealert.com/freecopy.html> Or forward this e-mail to a friend so they can sign-up to receive their own copy of the HSI e-Alert.

*****************************************************
My reply to this letter
**************************************************** 

Thanks for the info.

While Aspartame may be a problem, there are bigger problems that need to be addressed.

Petition to ban Dihydrogen Monoxide
Copyright 2005 epicidiot.com

Dihydrogen Monoxide (DHM) is a compound being used in products across the globe.  It is one of the most common causes of death or other accidents worldwide.

It is used as an industrial solvent and coolant, in spray-on oven cleaners, as a fire retardant, and in the production of Styrofoam.  It is a highly reactive chemical and produces strong chemical reactions when it comes in contact with sodium, potassium, and other alkali metals such as fluorine.  It forms explosive gases when combined with calcium carbide.

DHM is colorless, odorless, tasteless, and kills uncounted thousands of people every year.  Most of  these deaths are caused by accidental inhalation of DHM.  Even small amounts when inhaled can cause severe bodily harm, even death.  Symptoms of DHM ingestion can include nausea and vomiting.  Prolonged exposure to its solid form causes severe tissue damage.

Its basis is the unstable radical Hydroxide, the components of which are found in a number of caustic, explosive, and poisonous compounds such as Sulfuric Acid, Nitroglycerine, and Ethyl Alcohol.

It is also used as a dispersant in the distribution of pesticides.  Varying amounts of DHM end up in food products.  It is estimated that over 75% of U.S. agricultural products that reach the consumer contain DHM.

Use by American dairy farmers is prevalent and DHM can now be found in most U.S. milk products.

It has been found in the biopsies of excised tumors of terminal cancer patients.  What is known about these cancers is that DHM is found in detectable and biologically significant levels in virtually all tumors and other cancerous and pre-cancerous growths.  Cancer research has made significant advances in the detection and treatment of many forms of cancers.  With each new advancement, the role DHM plays in the cause of cancer is likely to be better understood.

DHM contributes to global warming and the "Greenhouse Effect," and is one of the so-called "greenhouse gasses."

Companies dump waste DHM into rivers and the ocean, and nothing can be done to stop them because this practice is still legal!  The impact on wildlife is extreme, and we cannot afford to ignore it any longer.  Quantities of DHM have been found in almost every stream, lake, and reservoir in America today.  But the pollution is global, and measurable levels of DHM have been verified in ice samples taken from both the Arctic and Antarctic ice caps.

Meanwhile, federal (EPA) regulations are in place to make it illegal to dispose of DHM in landfills, including those licensed for hazardous waste.  Regulations also stipulate that any DHM appearing in a landfills must be removed.  Judging from these laws it appears that the U.S. government recognizes the inherent danger DHM poses to the environment, yet the government has refused to ban the use of this damaging chemical due to its "importance to the economic health of this nation," and is ignoring the tremendous risks associated with DHM.  In addition, it is our opinion that all products carrying DHM should bear a label warning consumers of the presence of DHM in that product.  Significant steps should be made to encourage farmers and manufacturers to avoid DHM, including some kind of incentive program for those who make their products DHM free.

Why haven't I heard about Dihydrogen Monoxide before?  Good question.  Historically, the dangers of DHM, for the most part, have been considered minor and manageable.  While the more significant dangers of DHM are currently addressed by a number of agencies including FDA, FEMA, and CDC, public awareness of the real and daily dangers of DHM is lower than some think it should be.

Critics of the government often cite the fact that many politicians and others in public office do not consider DHM to be a "politically beneficial" cause to get behind, and so the public suffers from a lack of reliable information on just what DHM is and why they should be concerned

DHM is dangerous, and should be eliminated.

 

 

 

 


If you haven't guessed by now, DHM is . . .WATER!!

That’s right, WATER – The stuff you drink every day.

Dihydrogen Monoxide = H2O.

Get it, Dihydrogen = H2, Monoxide = O.

This entire report was about WATER !!!!!!

The above statements about DHM (i.e. water) are TRUE.  Yet, they present a very distorted view of water (otherwise known as DHM or H2O).

The point of this is to illustrate how easy it is to use TRUE statements to create MISLEADING information to support a point of view.

See Article about the teenager who used DHMO (aka DHM) as the basis for his science project

But back to Aspartame . . .

I don't claim to know whether or not Aspartame is bad for you.  I'll let you be the judge of that.  However, here is some information and a different perspective that I hope is enlightening as well as entertaining and thought provoking.

----- Original Message ----- 

Subject: Aspartame

> Imagine 16,000 tons of powder. The weight of 10,600 cars approximately equals 
> 16,000 tons, so we're talking about a LOT of powder.
> But not just any powder. About 16,000 tons of aspartame is produced for 
> worldwide consumption each year. In other words, people are consuming 
> enormous quantities of this artificial sweetener, which is better known by its
> commercial names, such as NutraSweet and Equal.

Americans consume 17 billion quarts of popcorn every year.  What's your point?
Beware of scary sounding statistics.
Note: 16,000 tons averages to 0.08 ounces per person.  That's less than 1/10th of an ounce per year.  Your usage may vary.

> The most recent aspartame findings come from a large animal study
> conducted by Italian researchers at the Ramazzini Foundation, which specializes 
> in oncology and environmental sciences.
> For more than three decades, researchers simulated daily human intake of
> aspartame on 1800 rats (equal amounts of males and females). Each rat was
> assigned to one of eight dosage levels: zero mg per kilogram of body
> weight, 4 mg/Kg, 20 mg/Kg, 100 mg/Kg, 500 mg/Kg, 2,500 mg/Kg, or 5,000
> mg/Kg.  Rats began receiving aspartame at eight weeks of age, continuing 
> throughout their lives.
> The results (reported in a recent issue of the European Journal of Oncology)

See notes below on what this journal really is, or more importantly, what it is not.

> showed a "statistically significant" increase in leukemias and lymphomas
> among female rats who received as little as 20 mg/Kg per day. Current
> European regulations place an acceptable daily intake (ADI) of aspartame
> at 40 to 50 mg/Kg of body weight. That ADI is for humans, of course, not
> rats.

Have you ever heard the saying, "There are lies, damn lies, and statistics?"

**** THIS **** very study also showed almost a 30% DECREASE in leukemias and lymphomas for rats that consumed 500 mg/Kg per day.

Maybe we're just not consuming enough Aspartame?  I wonder why the report didn't mention that finding?

But let's take a moment to discuss the Ramazzini study.

Granted the following information was provided by an institute with a vested interest in aspartame and should be viewed with a skeptical eye, however, this doesn't change the basic facts.

Findings by researchers at the Ramazzini Foundation from work using a similar protocol have been reviewed by the United States Food and Drug Administration's Cancer Assessment Committee which concluded that the data reported were "unreliable" due to "a lack of critical detail, questionable histopathological conclusions, and the use of unusual nomenclature to describe the tumors."
Furthermore, it is universally accepted that scientific research should be reviewed by independent pathologists. The United States National Toxicology Program (NTP) has established guidelines for pathology peer review in order to provide scientific consensus that study conclusions are valid. The Italian researchers were asked several months ago to subject their findings to the NTP peer review process but have not responded to the request. Work conducted previously at the Ramazzini Foundation has not been peer-reviewed.
The "European Journal of Oncology" in which the study will be published is not an independent scientific journal, but is produced by the Ramazzini Institute itself.
http://www.aspartame.info/aspartame_news.html
 

Single studies are important, but until they have been peer reviewed they should be considered suspect.  And if the authors of a study avoid peer review and the standard protocols for research, it should be DOUBLY suspect.

Remember cold fusion?  See www.epicidiot.com/cold_fusion.htm

Here is some info from the Ramazzini Aspartame study itself, right from the horse's mouth so to speak.
http://presidiotex.com/aspartame/Soffritti.pdf

From the Ramazzini Aspartame study itself:

In our experimental conditions, it has been demonstrated, for the first time, that APM causes a dose-related statistically significant increase in lymphomas and leukaemias in females at dose levels very near those to which humans can be exposed.

So according to Ramazzini, of the hundreds of studies performed, this is the FIRST study, to demonstrate this health risk.

Whew, that's a relief!

From the Ramazzini Aspartame study itself:

When compared to the concurrent control group, an increase in the incidence of these neoplasias was also observed in males exposed to the HIGHEST dose; even though not statistically significant.

So even at the HIGHEST doses, which were 100 times the Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI), which is equivalent to consuming about 2,000 cans of soda daily (and I thought I had a drinking problem), there was no statistically significant increase.

This is THEIR STUDY and THEIR CONCLUSIONS; the people claiming aspartame is harmful.

To summarize THEIR data: Of the rats given aspartame, some of the groups had higher cancer rates than the ones given none, others had lower.  Most of the differences, be they higher or lower, were NOT statistically significant, and the others were borderline.  The rats with 10 times the ADI of aspartame had lower cancer rates.

> But the research doesn't end there. The Ramazzini data, with full
> pathology reports, have been submitted to the European Food Safety
> Authority (EFSA), the European Union's counterpart to our FDA. A panel
> of experts (oh brother!) will then evaluate the findings "in the context
> of the previous extensive safety data available on aspartame."
> In other words: Expect absolutely nothing to happen. Because the EFSA so
> far has done exactly what the FDA has done with the current available
> safety data: Nothing. But that's fine. You and I and other concerned 
> citizens will take it from here with a little Water Cooler Regulation.

It may be a conspiracy, or it may be that hundreds of other credible peer-reviewed, repeatable studies show no significant health risks.  I'll lay odds that this unconfirmed, un-peer-reviewed study is not going to cause them to overturn the existing body of work.

> In 1994 the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) released a list
> of 61 reported adverse reactions to aspartame, including: chest pains,
> asthma, arthritis, migraine headaches, insomnia, seizures, tremors, vertigo,
> and weight gain.

Hmmm, these are also the same general symptoms reported by placebo recipients in thousands of other studies.  Hey, not to plug one of my favorite rags, but "Skeptic" magazine recently did an interesting article on the history of double blind studies (they help reduce the placebo effect) and has done numerous articles on the effects of placebos.

> Aspartame is made by combining two amino acids with methanol. According to
> an article by Dr. Joseph Mercola, methanol is the probable trigger for
> most of the adverse reactions associated with aspartame. When aspartame is
> combined with the enzyme chymotrypsin in the small intestine, methanol is
> released and breaks down into formaldehyde, a potent neurotoxin. The U.S.
> Environmental Protection Agency considers methanol to be a "cumulative
> poison" and recommends a safe consumption of no more than 7.8 mg per day/
> If you drink a one-liter beverage containing aspartame, you body creates
> seven times that amount - about 56 mg of methanol.

A glass of tomato juice provides about six times as much methanol as an equal amount of a beverage sweetened with aspartame.  THROW AWAY those cans of TOMATO POISON.  The plain truth is that many fruits and vegetables break down into methanol in the digestive system.
http://www.aspartame.org/aspartame_myths_vision.html

> To start receiving your own copy of the HSI e-Alert, visit:
> <<http://www.hsiealert.com/freecopy.html>>
> <http://www.hsiealert.com/freecopy.html> Or forward this e-mail to a friend
> so they can sign-up to receive their own copy of the HSI e-Alert.

With any luck, the author has scared enough people into subscribing to his newsletter to keep his revenue stream flowing.  The newsletters are only $49 a year (Cha-Ching!)

As I said before, I don't know whether or not Aspartame is harmful, but I do believe that this report was misleading and misrepresented the facts, much like the DHM report.

 

So then, what are the two REAL threats to your children's health?

  1. Not understanding how TRUE and accurate information can be used to mislead them.
  2. Not understanding the difference between science and pseudoscience.

These are likely to cause your children to believe in phony psychics, not trust real research, and fall victim to fake medicines and medical treatments, just to name a few.  These are likely to destroy more lives than Aspartame ever will.


See Lessons Learned When I Attended a
Creation-Evolution Video Series

And
Lessons From Cold Fusion:
Beware of Science by Press Conference


 

See also


Here’s the actual Ramazzini Aspartame study
http://www.ramazzini.it/fondazione/docs/AspartameGEO2005.pdf

Other links
http://www.caloriecontrol.org/aspartame.html
http://www.ameribev.org/pressroom/063004purdue.asp
http://www.dancewithshadows.com/business/pharma/low-calorie-sweetener-aspartame.asp

 

Want YOUR Opinion Known?

What did you think about this article?

I consider myself a:
Young Earth Creationist
Old Earth Creationist
Theistic Evolutionist
Atheistic Evolutionist
No Opinion
Other 
 

This Article was:
Boring
So so
Interesting
No Opinion
 
This Article was:
Bogus
Factual
I'm not sure of the accuracy
No Opinion
 
This Article was:
Biased to Creation/ID
Biased to Evolution
Fair and Balanced
No Opinion
 

How would You improve this article?
What topics would you like to see added?
What did you NOT like about this article
Other Comments


Show my comments on the page

Your Name (optional) 
Your Email (optional) 
Note: Your Email address will NOT be displayed.
If you want your Email displayed, put it in the comments.

Enter the Code      


Updated 03/18/2010 copyright 2005 EpicIdiot.com Contact Info
Hosted by Yahoo! Web Hosting