Mailing-List: list aspartame@yahoogroups.com; contact aspartame-owner@yahoogroups.com
Delivered-To: mailing list aspartame@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 18:31:59 -0400
Subject: [Aspartame Support] Aspartame and Brain Tumors, Excitotoxins: The Taste That Kills by neurosurgeon
Russell Blaylock, M.D (To explain to Mr. Charles Morrow about intellectual dishonesty, and that goes for Jim too)
X-SLUIDL: 0B9284ED-40EA11D5-942A0080-5F6567C5
Dear Charles,
I'm familiar with the FDA talk papers. One of them on aspartame says that
some web sites allege that aspartame actually triggers brain tumors. What
the FDA talk paper doesn't say is that the papers on our web site are the
FDA's own papers!!! We call this propaganda. They sent this to a
Congressman and I sent the Congressman the FDA records!!!! He asked the
FDA to explain. So far the FDA hasn't felt like doing it. I also wrote
the FDA and told them to stop lying to Congressmen.
Aspartame triggers brain tumors period!! Aspartame was approved with power
and influence. You have an FDA propaganda paper. I have the original
documents including Dr. Hayes document with his excuses. They can make up
anything, Charles but they can't change the fact that in original studies
aspartame triggered brain tumors and also aspartame breaks down to a brain
tumor agent, DKP. That's the reason it triggered these tumors. Aspartame
has not stopped breaking down to a brain tumor agent so aspartame continues
to do so. They can make up all kinds of studies. As Dr. Olney said in the
letter I quoted that he wrote that the whole issue is riddled with
corruption and malfeasance. You can't change the fact that aspartame
triggered brain tumors and continues to trigger brain tumors.
Also, brain tumors are not tracked. I consistently get brain tumor cases
and they are epidemic. They can't change the facts. They can, however,
say anything they want, lie all they want, deny all they want. It doesn't
change the facts.
You want the real facts, here they are. From Excitotoxins: The Taste That
Kills by neurosurgeon Russell Blaylock, M.D., (amazon.com) Starting on
page 211:
ASPARTAME, BRAIN TUMORS AND THE FDA
It is interesting to note that the first experiments done to test the
safety of aspartame before its final approval in l981 disclosed a high
incidence of brain tumors in the animals fed NutraSweet. In fact, this
study was done by the manufacturer of NutraSweet, G. D. Searle. In this
study 320 rats were fed aspartame and 120 were fed a normal diet and used
as controls. The study lasted two years. At the end of the study twelve
of the aspartame fed rats had developed brain tumors (astrocytomas), while
none of the control rats had. This represented a 3.75% incidence of brain
tumors in the rats fed aspartame, which was twenty-five times higher than
the incidence of spontaneous brain tumors developing in rats (0.15%).
The study divided the rats into those exposed to low doses of aspartame and
those exposed to a high dose. In the low dose group five of the rats
developed brain tumors for an incidence of 3.13%. In the high dose group,
seven developed brain tumors (4.38%). This indicates a dose related
incidence of brain tumors. The higher the dose of aspartame, the more
brain tumors were induced.
When Dr. John Olney pointed out these findings to the FDA "Aspartame Board
of Inquiry" he was told that the high incidence of tumors was a result of
spontaneous development of brain tumors in rats. That is, that some rats
develop brain tumors naturally, just as humans do. Dr. Olney is a trained
neuropathology's as well as a neuroscientist. He reviewed the incidence of
spontaneously occurring brain tumors in rats and found that out of seven
studies using a total of 59,000 rats, only 0.08% developed brain tumors -
the aspartame fed rats had a forty-seven fold higher incidence. But to be
fair, he even accepted G. D. Searle's reference for spontaneously
developing brain tumors in rats and arrives at a figure of 0.15%. This was
still a twenty-five fold higher incidence in the aspartame fed rats than in
the controls.
It was then observed that when brain tumors develop spontaneously in rats,
the rate at which they appear begins to accelerate after two years of age,
exactly when the Searle's study ended. Importantly, brain tumors are
extremely rare before age one and one-half in the rat. So in truth the
incidence of spontaneously occurring brain tumors would be even less than
cited above. Yet, the aspartame fed rats developed two tumors by sixty
weeks of age and five tumors by seventy weeks.
In a collective study of 41,000 rats no tumors were seen to occur before
sixty weeks and only one by seventy weeks. The fact that 320 aspartame fed
rats developed six brain tumors by seventy-six weeks indicates an
"incredible and unprecedented" occurrence. Within the final twenty-eight
weeks of the study six more brain tumors occurred in the aspartame fed
group. Dr. Olney notes that "one must assume that many more (brain tumors)
would have occurred after 104 weeks."
It became obvious that the G.D. Searle company was trying desperately to
protect their potential billion dollar plus money maker. They claimed that
more brain tumors were found because they searched the pathological slides
so diligently. But, they searched just as diligently in the control rats
and found none. Besides, neuropathologists examining the slides later
stated that the tumors were large enough to be seen with the naked eye.
Because of the criticism submitted by Dr. Olney, the G. D. Searle company
conducted a second study which was designed to more comprehensive. Instead
of a two-year study, this would span the entire lifetime of the rats, from
intrauterine life to death. The results of this study can only be
characterized as bizarre. This time they reported five brain tumors in 120
control rats (an incidence of 3.13%) and four brain tumors in 120 control
rats (an incidence of 3.33%). While this was designed to show that
aspartame was not the cause of the brain tumors, if accepted, the study
would indicate that both groups had a brain tumor incidence thirty times
higher than the known rate of spontaneous brain tumor occurrence in rats.
But the story gets even more interesting. Dr. Olney hypothesized that one
possible cause of the tumor induction was a by-product of aspartame
metabolism called diketopiperazine (DKP). When nitrosated by the gut it
produces a compound closely resembling a powerful brain tumor causing
chemical - N-nitrosourea.
The G. D. Searle company conducted a separate study to test the
carcinogenicity of diketopiperazine (DKP). The results of this study were
not submitted to the FDA until after aspartame had already been approved
for general use by the American population. This study was not a lifetime
study but rather a 115 week study which consisted of feeding rats their
normal feed mixed with DKP. There were 114 control animals and 216 that
supposedly ate the DKP. (Not all of the animals were even examined for
tumors.) There were two brain tumors in the controls (1.62% incidence) and
three (1.52%) in the DKP groups. But strangely enough, the incidence of
brain tumors found in both groups were sixteen times higher than would be
expected from spontaneous occurring tumors. That did not make sense.
So how can we explain these strange findings. It is instructive at this
point to know that in l975 the drug enforcement division of the Bureau of
Foods investigated the G. D. Searle Company as part of an investigation of
"apparent irregularities in data collection and reporting practices." The
director of the FDA at that time stated that they found "sloppy" laboratory
techniques and "clerical errors, mixed-up animals, animals not getting the
drugs they were supposed to get, pathological specimens lost because of
improper handling, and a variety of other errors, (which) even if innocent,
all conspire to obscure positive findings and produce falsely negative
results."
The drug enforcement division carried out a study under the care of agent
Jerome Bressler concerning Searle's Laboratory practices and data
manipulation (known as the Bressler Report). He found that the feed used
only small does of the chemical to be tested. (I have seen a photograph of
the feed mix and can attest to the "sloppy" method used.) The commissioner
also charged G. D. Searle company with "failure to maintain control and
experiment animals on separate racks and failure to mark animals to ensure
against mix-ups between experimental (animals fed aspartame and DKP) and
controls." This vital and telling report was buried in a file cabinet,
never to be acted on by the FDA.
Such poor techniques would explain why both control animals and those
eating aspartame had exceptionally high brain tumor rates, since they, most
likely, were both eating the aspartame feed. What is ironic is that the
FDA would accept studies from a company with an obvious heavy financial
interest in having aspartame approved. But even more amazing is that they
would depend on the same company to provide studies that they, FDA knew
beforehand were highly questionable and possibly fraudulent upon which they
would make such an important public safety decision.
Thus far, no independent studies have been done to examine this vital
issue. As a neurosurgeon I see the devastating effects a brain tumor has,
not only on its victim, but on the victim's family as well. To think that
there is even a reasonable doubt that aspartame can induce brain tumors in
the American population is frightening. And to think that the FDA has
lulled them into a false sense of security is a monumental crime.
End of this part of the book
I'll stop at this part of the book but it goes on and tells about the
monumental increase in brain lymphoma that Dr. Roberts peer reviewed report
is written about.
When will aspartame stop triggering brain tumors? When it stops breaking
down to DKP! When will it stop breaking down to DKP? When we get it off
the market.
The Bressler Report spoken of in this issue we have on www.dorway.com And
remember that the FDA themselves wanted Searle indicted for fraud. They
were doing such things as excising the brain tumors and putting them back
in the study. Then when they died they resurrected them back on paper. If
you can't see the fraud, Charles, its because you're on an a list (Health
Fraud) that is an advocacy group against alternative medicine that protects
industry. And specifically you've even admitted you worked to get our
access taken away of vitamins and herbs. You don't even have a finger to
stand on much less a foot because your agenda is very clear.
On Health Fraud mention aspartame and your posting privileges get taken
away. But over here on Quackbusters you can't hide the facts and I will
not allow you to stumble anybody on this list. I have told you repeatedly
I have the documents, I have the books and I have the facts. And we're not
stupid and we know what went on. I was horrified on Health Fraud when
someone asked if someone would debunk Dr. Blaylock's book. I can see why
protectors of industry would want that done. This INCREDIBLE book
notifies the world of the facts in the aspartame issue and its all
science. So anyone wanting to hide the facts are up a creek, because the
book exposes these facts.
Monsanto was not expecting Dr. John Olney to make world news on the
aspartame/brain tumor association or the rise in brain tumors. Now all of
a sudden the rates go down. I've been researching aspartame and Searle and
Monsanto and the FDA for years. We know how its done. As a matter of
fact, I called a brain tumor agency to get the statistics on astrocytomas
and was told: "We were told not to give out those statistics."
I've been around long enough to weep with many mothers who drank diet
drinks during pregnancy and gave birth to babies with brain tumors. While
brain tumors are not tracked they are epidemic and I know because I take
these case histories. You call these cases anecdotes, I call the entire
issue a crime against humanity. The Bressler Report is no longer hidden -
we ask people to put it on their sites and let the world read it and the
cover up.
Even in the secret trade information it says:
"With the spoon-for-spoon, we have no way of estimating maximum likely
abuse and hence need to utilize data based on ALMOST COMPLETE CONVERSION TO
DKP. If we include this use in the original FAP, we stand a good chance of
ending up with nothing in the short run and nothing in the long run ........."
So here's a pharmaceutical company the FDA wanted indicted for fraud who
did not want the FDA to know about the almost complete conversion to DKP, a
brain tumor agent. They were willing to get it approved so that the
population would come down with these brain tumors and die. And this is
the kind of pharmaceutical company that we are suppose to believe in?
And when the Board of Inquiry told Dr. Hayes he couldn't approve aspartame
because of the brain tumors, can't you just hear him calling Ajinomoto,
another aspartame manufacturer. The conversation might have gone like
this: "Hi Ajiomoto, have any brain tumor - aspartame studies around that
didn't show brain tumors? You do, well wonderful, we'll just go ahead and
approve aspartame then as safe!"
We know the pharmaceutical companies are powerful and can get any poison
they want approved. Look how far they went with aspartame, with having the
defense team hire both prosecutors that were suppose to indict Searle for
fraud. And we're just suppose to accept their studies as showing safety.
1974: Dr. J. Richard Crout, the acting director of the FDA Bureau of Drugs
stated that "The information submitted for our review was limited to
narrative clinical summaries and tabulated mean values of laboratory
studies. No protocols, manufacturing controls information or preclinical
data were provided. Such deficiencies in each area of required information
precluded a scientific evaluation of the clinical safety of this
product..." (Mullarkey l992, page 23)
This is the way Searle did business.
In an FDA memorandum dated Sept 12, l973, Martha M. Freeman, M.D. of the
FDA Division of Metabolic and Endocrine Drug Products addressed the
adequacy of the information submitted by G. D. Searle in their petition to
approve aspartame (Freeman l973):
"Although it was stated that studies were also performed with
diketopiperazine (DKP) an impurity which results from acid hydrolysis of
aspartame, no data are provided on this product."
Commenting on one particular single dose study:
"It is not feasible to extrapolate results of such single dose testing to
the likely condition of use of aspartame as an artificial sweetener."
It is important to note that Dr. Freeman pointed out the inadequacy of
singe-dose tests of aspartame as early as l973. Since then, the NutraSweet
Company has flooded the scientific community with single-dose studies.
"Chemistry - No information is provided other than formulae for Aspartame
and its diketopiperazine."
"Pharmacology - Reference is made to 2 year rat studies, but no data are
provided on acute or chronic toxicity."
"Clinical - No protocols nor curriculum vitae information are provided for
the 10 completed clinical studies. Results are reported in narrative
summary form, and tabulations of mean average values only. No information
is given as to the identify of the reporting labs, methodology (except
rarely), or normal values. (Reported units for several parameters cannot
be verified at this time.)
"No pharmacokinetic data are provided on absorption, excretion, metabolism,
half-life; nor bioavailability of capsule vs. food-additive administration."
Dr. Freeman concludes:
1. The administration of aspartame, as reported in these studies at high
dosage levels for prolonged periods, constitutes clinical investigation use
of a new drug substances."
(Martini's remark - do you hear that Charles - a DRUG)
2. The information submitted for our review is inadequate to permit a
scientific evaluation of clinical safety."
She went on to recommend that marketing of aspartame be contingent upon
proven clinical safety of aspartame. The FDA Bureau of Foods rejected Dr.
Freeman's recommendation. (Graves l984, page S5498 of Congressional Record
l985a).
Construction of a large aspartame manufacturing plant in Augusta, Georgia
was halted. It was thought that aspartame's uncertain regulatory future
was the main reason for the stopping of construction (Farber l989, page
47). In the l973 G. D. Searle Annual Report, an executive stated that
"commercial quantities of the sweetener will be supplied from the enlarged
facility of Ajinomoto." Ajinomoto is the inventor and main producer of the
food additive MSG. And they are an aspartame manufacturer, even Monsanto
sold part of NutraSweet to them. They make excitotoxins!!!!!!!!!!!
Siamese twins? And do you think Ajinomoto just happened to do some brain
tumor studies on aspartame that didn't show brain tumors, so Dr. Hayes
could get aspartame approved when he was blocked by the Board of Inquiry?
G. D. Searle had invested 19.7 million dollars in an incomplete production
facility and 9.2 million dollars in aspartame inventory. On Dec 8, l975,
stockholders filed a class action lawsuit alleging that G. D. Searle had
concealed information from the public regarding the nature and quality of
animal research at G. D. Searle in violation of the Securities and Exchange
Act (Farber l989, page 48).
In l974 aspartame was approved only to have the order rescinded. What did
they do with the $9 million dollars worth of inventory. It would have been
no good by the time aspartame was approved by Dr. Hayes in l981. And the
man across the street from me said he helped build the NutraSweet plant and
they were selling aspartame long before it was approved.
Crime after crime after crime and you want people on this list to believe
that sudden studies were done and showed no brain tumors. We are not
stupid and you will not mislead this list, Charles.
After finding out how you would like to remove our access to vitamins and
herbs I hope you never write again, but if you try to put information that
is not factually correct on this list, I'll put the facts every time. On
Dec 15, l999 an Associated Press report Tracking Drug Side-Effects
reported that studies have estimated that 2 million Americans are
hospitalized annually from drug side effects and 100,000 die. You know how
many people died from herbs last year, Charles? ZERO. Your job is not
needed. We're doing just fine, thank you, without your interference to
remove our freedom of choice to use the medical treatment we deem advisable
and the vitamins and herbs that are necessary. Almighty God have us these
herbs (Gen 1:29) so get use to it.
Now run on back to your Health Fraud list. You want to talk about
intellectual dishonesty you just read the records on NutraSweet. I'll
leave you with the words of Dr. Adrian Gross the FDA toxicologist who was
on site, about the studies Searle did.
FDA Toxicologist and Task Force member, Dr. Adrian Gross stated (Wilson l985):
"They (G. D. Searle) lied and they didn't submit the real nature of their
observations because had they done that it is more than likely that a great
number of these studies would have been rejected simply for adequacy. What
Searle did, they took great pains to camouflage these shortcomings of the
study. As I say filter and just present to the FDA what they wished the FDA
to know and they did other terrible things for instance animals would
develop tumors while they were under study. Well, they would remove these
tumors from the animals."
And you want to believe these people, Mr. Charles Morrow? When it comes to
NutraSweet we research all industry studies for flaws. We have no reason
to believe in integrity and honesty in the aspartame industry. God help us
if we don't get this poison off the market before too much damage is done
to human DNA. This product can destroy the human race! And since the FDA
is faced with malfeasance in the approval of this deadly neurotoxin they
cover it up. And they are getting a copy of this. I never talk behind
their back - but straight to their face!!!!
Betty Martini, Mission Possible International