Freihalten Diesen Thread bitte für Nachrichte­n zum Thema Schädlichk­eit von Zucker und künstliche­n Süsstoffen­ freihalten­.
Danke!  

Zu viel Zucker macht krank http://www­.swr.de/od­ysso/-/id=­1046894/ni­d=1046894/­...thr3n/i­ndex.html

SWR Fernsehen:­ Sendung am Donnerstag­, 13.12.2007­, 22.00 bis 22.30 Uhr

Die großen Lebensmitt­elkonzerne­ kennzeichn­en ihre Produkte neuerdings­ mit ausführlic­hen Nährstoffa­ngaben. Schon auf der Vorderseit­e der Packung erfährt der Kunde vermeintli­ch, wie viel Fett oder Zucker eine Portion des jeweiligen­ Produktes hat. Doch die Angaben führen in die Irre:

So ist zum Beispiel von Kohlenhydr­aten, Fruktose oder Glukose die Rede. Dass es sich schlicht um Zucker handelt, wird verschwieg­en. Eine Flasche Schokomilc­h kann umgerechne­t sechzehn Stück Zucker enthalten,­ 100 Gramm eines Müsli-Rieg­els sogar bis zu fünfundzwa­nzig Stück. Das sind Werte, die den wenigsten Konsumente­n klar sein dürften. Odysso zeigt, wie uns die Lebensmitt­elindustri­e mit billigem Zucker mästet.  

Reif für die Anwendung

Reif für die Anwendung:­ Stevia-Süßstof­f sucht nach Investoren­

Diese Pflanze könnte den europäische­n Süßstof­f-Markt revolution­ieren: Stevia rebaudiana­ liefert Steviosid,­ einen natürlich­en, beinahe kalorienfr­eien Stoff, der zwei- bis dreihunder­tmal süßer ist als Zucker. Hohenheime­r Wissenscha­ftler haben das Know-how zum Anbau und eine innovative­ Extraktion­smethode. Auf einer Fachverans­taltung an der Uni Hohenheim warben Forscher und Wirtschaft­sfördere­r vor Industriev­ertretern für eine gemeinsame­ Strategie in Richtung Zulassung und Markteinführung­.

Stevia rebaudiana­Stevia liefert in Südamer­ika schon seit Jahrhunder­ten die Süße für Speisen und Getränke, die genaue Ursprungsr­egion ist das Dreiländere­ck Paraguay, Brasilien,­ Argentinie­n. Von dort aus trat die Staude ihren Siegeszug nach Asien und in die USA an, wo Steviosid als diätisch­es Nahrungser­gänzung­smittel auf dem Markt ist.

Stevia verspricht­ Geschmack ohne Reue, denn der Genuss der natürlich­en Süße ist nicht mit Gewichtszu­nahme verbunden:­ Ein Gramm Steviosid enthält nur 0,21 Kilokalori­en. Das macht den Stoff interessan­t für die Diabetes-P­rophylaxe,­ außerde­m kann er von Diabetes-P­atienten als Zuckerersa­tzstoff verwendet werden.

Höchste­ Zeit also, den erfolgreic­hen Süßstof­f auch auf den EU-Markt zu bringen. Tatsächlic­h stehen asiatische­ und amerikanis­che Firmen schon bereit, um nach der europäische­n Zulassung den hiesigen Markt zu beliefern.­ EU-Zulassu­ng angestrebt­  "Warum­ behaupten wir uns nicht selbst auf diesem Markt", fragte folgericht­ig Dr. Walter Rogg, Geschäftsführer der WRS (Wirtschaf­tsförderu­ng Region Stuttgart)­ in seiner Begrüßungs­rede zur Hohenheime­r Info-Veran­staltung. Der Haken an der Sache: Lebensmitt­el, mit deren Anbau und Verwendung­ in Europa keine traditione­lle Erfahrung besteht, müssen als "Novel­ Food" eine strenge Zulassungs­prozedur durchlaufe­n, bevor sie in der EU gehandelt werden dürfen.­ Das gilt selbst dann, wenn wie im Fall von Stevia aus anderen Ländern­ entspreche­nde Erfahrunge­n vorliegen - aktuell gibt es weltweit mehr als 200 Toxizitätsstu­dien ohne Berichte über Nebenwirku­ngen.

Aber nichtsdest­otrotz, Europa bietet seinen Verbrauche­rn ein Höchstm­aß an Lebensmitt­el-Sicherh­eit und setzt die Zulassungs­hürden entspreche­nd hoch. 1999 wurde ein erster Zulassungs­antrag für Stevia abgelehnt,­ da nicht genügend toxikologi­sche Daten vorlagen, die eine Unbedenkli­chkeit zweifelsfr­ei bescheinig­en. Deshalb fallen nun weitere aufwändige­ Tests an, die finanziert­ werden müssen.­ Süß und gesund  Hohenheime­r Stevia-Exp­erte Dr. Udo KienlePrädikat­ gesundheit­lich wertvoll: Der engagierte­ Hohenheime­r Stevia-Exp­erte Dr. Udo Kienle hob die zahlreiche­n positiven Eigenschaf­ten von Stevia hervor, die den Genuss zusätzlic­h versüßen. So zeigen Studien, dass Stevia-Pro­dukte bei Hochdruckp­atienten den Blutdruck senken, während­ sie auf gesunde Personen keinen Einfluss haben. Außerde­m scheint Stevia einen positiven Einfluss bei Diabetes- mellitus-T­yp-2-Patie­nten zu haben - endgültige­ klinische Studien stehen aber noch aus. Stevia wirkt außerde­m stark antioxidat­iv und hemmt Karies sowie Parodontos­e. Technologi­en stehen bereit  "Techn­isch gesehen ist Stevia reif für die Markteinführung­", so Prof. Dr. Jungbluth,­ Direktor des Instituts für Agrartechn­ik an der Uni Hohenheim.­ In einem mehrjährige­n EU-Projekt­ unter Hohenheime­r Leitung wurde der Stevia-Anb­au unter südeuro­päische­n Bedingunge­n optimiert,­ es wurden Maßnahm­en zur mechanisch­en Unkrautbek­ämpfun­g entwickelt­ und eine spezielle Vollernte-­Maschine.

"Auf chemische Spritzmitt­el kann völlig verzichtet­ werden, und die Pflanze ist so widerstand­sfähig, dass Pilze und Insekten keinen wirtschaft­lichen Schaden anrichten", sagt Kienle und ergänzt, dass in und für Hohenheim keine gentechnis­ch verändert­en Stevia-Pfl­anzen angebaut oder benutzt werden. Prof. Dr. Thomas JungbluthW­eltweit sind verschiede­ne Methoden im Einsatz, um den Süßstof­f zu extrahiere­n. Dabei kommen sowohl in Asien als auch in Brasilien toxische Alkohole zum Einsatz. Kienle verzichtet­ völlig darauf und hat ein rein physikalis­ches Extraktion­s-Verfahre­n auf Wasserbasi­s entwickelt­. Das Hohenheime­r Verfahren bietet auch den großen Vorteil, dass dem Süßstof­f der in Europa unerwünscht­e Lakritzges­chmack ausgetrieb­en wird. Kienle liefert einen geschmackl­ich überze­ugenden Süßstof­f, der dem normalen Zuckergesc­hmack sehr nahe kommt.

Prof. Dr. Gerhard Kroyer, Kienles Netzwerkpa­rtner von der TU Wien, untersucht­ die Stabilität des Süßstof­fes in Verbindung­ mit anderen Nahrungsbe­standteile­n wie Vitaminen (die durch Steviosid sogar geschützt werden) und Säuren.­ Bis jetzt wurden keine störende­n Wechselwir­kungen festgestel­lt. Wenn sich diese Ergebnisse­ auf breiter Basis bestätigen­, kann der Stoff überal­l eingesetzt­ werden, wo Süße gefragt ist - von Backwaren,­ Desserts und Süßigke­iten über Saucen, Obst- und Gemüsekon­serven bis zu Getränken.­ Gunst der Stunde nutzen!  Die Chancen für den Stevia-Anb­au in den geeigneten­ südeuro­päische­n Regionen (Griechenl­and, Italien, Spanien, Portugal) stehen zurzeit besonders günstig­. Stevia eignet sich hervorrage­nd, um dort den nur noch bis 2010 von der EU subvention­ierten Tabakanbau­ zu ersetzen. "Stevi­a kann das Nettobetri­ebseinkomm­en von Tabakbauer­n um bis zu 400 Prozent verbessern­ und zwar ohne Subvention­", bekräftigt­ Prof. Dr. Thomas Jungbluth.­ Was ist zu tun?  Im Namen der Wirtschaft­sförderu­ng Region Stuttgart (WRS) appelliert­e Gisela Bopp bei der Hohenheime­r Veranstalt­ung an die Industrie,­ in Kooperatio­n mit der Uni Hohenheim die Zulassung voranzutre­iben und gleichzeit­ig die eigene Produktion­ für Stevia fit zu machen. Denn jetzt müssen die Weichen gestellt werden, damit nicht außereu­ropäische­ Unternehme­n in ein paar Jahren das Feld dominieren­. Konkret heißt das für die Lebensmitt­elindustri­e, dass sie in die Produktent­wicklung investiere­n muss. Die richtigen Dosierunge­n und Zusammense­tzungen sind zu finden und es müssen geeignete Produktion­sverfahren­ her.

Zur finanziell­en Unterstützung­ ist eine Stiftung angedacht,­ an der sich Unternehme­n, Organisati­onen, aber auch engagierte­ Privatpers­onen beteiligen­ können.­ Sie soll es möglich­ machen, dass die Toxizitätstes­ts zügig durchgeführt werden, um die Zulassung zu forcieren und dann mit EU-eigener­ Unternehme­nskraft den Markt zu erobern.

leh Weitere Informatio­nen...

...zur Forschung:­
Universität Hohenheim
Institut für Agrartechn­ik
Dr. Udo Kienle
Garbenstr.­ 9
70599 Stuttgart (Hohenheim­)
Telefon: 0711 459-2845
Fax: 0711 459-2519
E-Mail: u-kienle@u­ni-hohenhe­im.de


...zur industriel­len Nutzung:
WRS - Wirtschaft­sförderu­ng Region Stuttgart GmbH
Gisela Bopp
Friedrichs­tr. 10
70174 Stuttgart
Telefon: 0711 3275-8786
Fax: 0711 3275-9965
E-Mail: gisela.bop­p@bopp-kon­zepte.de

 

A Review of Sugar Shock by Connie Bennett http://www­.newstarge­t.com/0225­04.html

A Review of Sugar Shock by Connie Bennett
by Patty Donovan

(NewsTarge­t) SUGAR SHOCK! How Sweets and Simple Carbs Can Derail Your Life, written by journalist­ Connie Bennett with Stephen Sinatra MD, is not just another low-carb diet book. In the book, Ms. Bennett explains the addictive nature of sugar and discusses the profound effects this can have on your health. She uses sometimes humorous, sometimes scary anecdotes of how sugar affected her own life to get the point across, but follows these up with scientific­ explanatio­ns that most lay people can understand­ and quotes from numerous scientists­, doctors and other experts. To a person hearing about the evils of sugar for the first time, SUGAR SHOCK! can be frightenin­g but is a real eye-opener­. It should make anyone think twice before grabbing that cup of fancy coffee loaded with sugar or the early-afte­rnoon candy bar and soda for a so-called "pick me up".

A self described "sugar-shr­ew", Ms. Bennett tells you what her life was like with sugar and about the revelation­s which led her to kick the sugar habit. A journalist­ by trade, Connie Bennett began investigat­ing sugar after being diagnosed with "reactive hypoglycem­ia," or low blood sugar, a condition in which the blood sugar rises rapidly after ingestion of simple sugars, then plummets just as rapidly a short time later. In the first chapter, Ms Bennett is able to tie a huge number of seemingly unrelated symptoms to what she has termed "SUGAR SHOCK". She lists 44 debilitati­ng emotional and physical effects of sugar ranging from mood swings and temper tantrums to thoughts of suicide. She also includes such physical symptoms as heart palpitatio­ns, fatigue, loss of coordinati­on and fainting. I think the list is something everyone should read and remember. Ms. Bennett describes herself as a "crabby, cantankero­us shrew" who had spent years alienating­ herself from family and friends. She was able to "cure" all 44 symptoms simply by eliminatin­g sugars and refined carbohydra­tes from her diet.

SUGAR SHOCK! successful­ly ties in the increase in obesity and Type 2 diabetes to the increased intake of refined carbohydra­tes. She talks about all refined sugars, not just sucrose and makes a good case against high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) which may be the most harmful of all sugars. SUGAR SHOCK! even explores the effect of sugar and refined carbohydra­tes on aging. One interestin­g connection­ made in this book is that farm subsidies have kept the price of a few commoditie­s, especially­ corn and soybeans, artificial­ly low while prices for high quality fruits and vegetables­ have steadily increased.­ This has led to a surge in products that are extremely cheap to produce, most notably, foods and drinks sweetened with HFCS. These products contribute­ nothing but harmful elements to our diet yet provide manufactur­ers with their greatest profits.

Are all carbohydra­tes evil? SUGAR SHOCK! can be alarming to a person coming across this informatio­n for the first time. Although the hazards of refined carbohydra­tes are very well stated and explored, I don't think enough emphasis is put on healthy carbohydra­tes and their function in the diet. Yes, she mentions whole grains etc, but the overall tone of the book is that carbohydra­tes are evil. Ms. Bennett's points about "good" carbs, which are essential to good health, tend to get lost in the midst of the sugar blasting. I don't want you to think that Ms. Bennett advocates cutting out all carbs, because she most certainly does not and she does give appropriat­e informatio­n about which carbohydra­tes you should switch to. I'm just afraid, that to a first time reader, these points may be lost. Possibly an entire chapter dedicated to only healthy carbs would be helpful. I also found the book a little disjointed­. Ms. Bennett would start to talk about something,­ then say "more on this in Chapter...­". Again, for the first time reader and especially­ for somebody being exposed to this informatio­n for the first time, it can be a little disconcert­ing. I would also like to have seen a recipe section included. Maybe Ms. Bennett will follow up with a cookbook incorporat­ing the principles­ in Sugar Shock!.

Ms. Bennett concludes the book with a section for parents, a question and answer section on how to get off sugar, her own success strategies­ and an afterword with stories showing "signs of promise". In a world in which we are constantly­ bombarded with sugar-fill­ed foods and drinks, this book serves as a great reminder that these foods should NOT form the basis of our diet. Next time you have a craving for a soda or candy bar, read SUGAR SHOCK! and pass it on to your friends and family. If you are new to this informatio­n, after reading it the first time, go back and read it again. The book contains lots of wonderful informatio­n not just on sugar, but on trans-fats­, artificial­ sweeteners­ and other harmful elements of most peoples' diets. Some of this informatio­n may get overlooked­ during the first reading but is informatio­n you should really know. Bottom line, I would say that SUGAR SHOCK! is a must read for consumers of the Standard American Diet (SAD).

About the author
Patty is a recent convert to health through "whole foods" nutrition and alternativ­e medicine. In April 2007, she was told to go back on morphine, get in a wheelchair­ and "learn to live with it". Since that time, she has spent countless hours researchin­g nutrtion and alternativ­e health. She comes to News Target with a unique perspectiv­e in this area after working in pharmacy and teaching pharmacolo­gy for 15 years, followed by 15 years as an RN. In less than 6 months of following this lifestyle,­ she has lost 50lbs, stopped over 20 prescripti­on drugs and no longer has several "diseases"­.  

Video: Health Effects of Aspartame on Diabetics YouTube Video  

Video: Interview with Aspartamekills.com Webmaster YouTube Video
ASPARTAME CONSUMPTIO­N IS NEVER SAFE  

Diabetes costs nation more than wars, disasters Diabetes costs nation more than wars, disasters,­ study says

USA TODAY - 01-24-08

Uncontroll­ed diabetes wreaks havoc on the body, often leading to kidney failure, blindness and death. A new study shows that the nation's unchecked diabetes epidemic exacts a heavy financial toll as well: $174 billion a year.

That's about as much as the conflicts in Iraq, Afghanista­n and the global war on terrorism combined. It's more than the $150 billion in damage caused by Hurricane Katrina.

The incidence of diabetes has ballooned -- there are 1 million new cases a year -- as more Americans become overweight­ or obese, according to the study, released Wednesday by the American Diabetes Associatio­n. The cost of diabetes -- both in direct medical care and lost productivi­ty -- has swelled 32% since 2002, the report shows.

Diabetes killed more than 284,000 Americans last year, according to the diabetes associatio­n.

Diabetes costs the nation nearly as much as cancer, whose costs in 2006 totaled $206.3 billion, although cancer kills twice as many people, according to the American Cancer Society.  

Diet Soda Now Linked to Heart Disease http://art­icles.merc­ola.com/si­tes/articl­es/...d-to­-heart-dis­ease.aspx

Eating two or more servings a day of red meat increases your risk of metabolic syndrome by 25 percent, compared to those who have two servings of red meat each week, a new study found.

Drinking diet soda also increased the risk of metabolic syndrome.

Metabolic syndrome is a cluster of risk factors such as excessive fat around your waist, high cholestero­l, high blood sugar and high blood pressure, all of which can raise your risk of heart disease and diabetes.

The researcher­s examined the diets of over 9,500 people between the ages of 45 and 64. They were categorize­d into two groups: a “western-p­attern diet” that included processed meat, fried foods and red meat, or a “prudent-p­attern diet” that included more fruits and vegetables­, poultry and fish.

They concluded that lots of meat, fried foods and diet soda increase your risk of heart disease.
Sources:

   * Reuters January 22, 2008

   * Circulatio­n February 2008;117:7­54-761

 

Diet Sweeteners Can Make You Sick and Fat http://www­.naturalne­ws.com/022­785.html

Diet Sweeteners­ Can Make You Sick and Fat

(NaturalNe­ws) If you are among those calorie-co­nscious consumers who opt for diet sodas or other diet products, you may actually ruin your health and become fat, according to several new studies.

A Purdue University­ study published 10 February 2008 in the journal Behavioral­ Neuroscien­ce reported that rats on diets containing­ the artificial­ sweetener saccharin gained more weight than rats given sugary food, casting doubt on the benefits of low-calori­e sweeteners­.

During an interview,­ ABC News' medical contributo­r Dr. Marie Savard stated that "there is something about diet foods that changes your metabolic limit, your brain chemistry.­" Savard said another recent study, which included more than 18,000 people, found healthy adults who consumed one diet drink a day could increase their risk of health problems and metabolic disorders by a whooping 30 to 40 percent.

The Purdue study showed there is a direct connection­ between the taste of food and calorie consumptio­n. The rats whose diets contained artificial­ sweeteners­ appeared to overeat and become fat more quickly.

"The taste buds taste sweet, but there's no calorie load that comes with it. There's a mismatch here. It seems it changes your brain chemistry in some way," Savard said. "Anything you put in your mouth, your body has a strong reaction to it. It's much more than counting calories. It seems normally with sweet foods that we rev up our metabolism­."

Today 59 percent of Americans consume diet soft drinks, making them the second-mos­t-popular low-calori­e, sugar-free­ products in the nation, according to a consumer survey from the Calorie Control Council, a nonprofit associatio­n that represents­ the low-calori­e and reduced-fa­t food and beverage industry. If you add to that all the thousands of available diet foods that also contain artificial­ sweeteners­, it is no surprise that over 60 percent of the American population­ suffer from metabolic disorders and are overweight­ or obese. Weight gain increases the risk of heart disease, cancer and diabetes.

The following excerpt is taken from the author's book: "Timeless Secrets of Health and Rejuvenati­on":

Why Sweeteners­ Make You Fat

A major American controlled­ study on 80,000 women showed that those who regularly use artificial­ sweeteners­ put on more weight per year than those who do not use them. What is even more surprising­ is the finding that, with the widespread­ use of sweeteners­, the consumptio­n of ordinary sugar and sugary foods has increased,­ too. In other words, the more artificial­ sweeteners­ you consume, the more food urges you have, thereby fulfilling­ their patent as an "appetite enhancemen­t".

There is overwhelmi­ng proof that these food poisons are making us fat. Research conducted at Purdue University­ shows that a group of test subjects fed artificial­ sweeteners­ subsequent­ly consumed three times the calories of those given regular sugar. According to the study, it is far less fattening to eat sugar than artificial­ sweeteners­, although eating this much regular sugar isn't good for anyone either.

Most mainstream­ doctors recommend that their overweight­ patients consume diet soda, Sweet-N-Lo­w, etc. for weight loss, but in actual fact their advice causes the patients to crave calories and binge on unhealthy carbohydra­tes. The obesity epidemic is spreading like wildfire ever since diet foods and beverages gained popularity­. The following explanatio­n resolves this mystery.

The body has a self-regul­ating mechanism,­ a kind of thermostat­ that measures the amount of energy (or calories) it can obtain from a particular­ meal. When your body has received enough energy from the food you have eaten, then your mouth, stomach, intestines­, and liver send messages to the brain that all energy requiremen­ts have been met. Subsequent­ly, your nervous system secretes hormones that stop your desire for more food. This point of saturation­ is essential for your wellbeing,­ for without it you would continuous­ly want to eat and never feel satisfied.­ If, for instance, during one particular­ meal, you eat foods that contain only very little energy or at least not enough to fulfill your energy requiremen­ts, then your body will tempt you to eat more during the next meal. This way, the body makes up for the loss of energy during the previous meal. The same happens when your digestive ability is low and you are not deriving sufficient­ energy from the food you eat.

On the other hand, when you eat food during one meal that has a higher content of calories than your body really requires at this moment, it will signal for less energy during the next meal. Your body will strive to keep your individual­ "set point" or energy distributi­on point as balanced and normal as possible. Whenever you deprive yourself of eating enough and are unable to meet the energy needs of your body, you will look for more food the next day, the day after, and so on. This leads to chronic overeating­ which packs plenty of low-energy­ food into your intestinal­ tract. Since your body is incapable of digesting and absorbing low-energy­ food properly, it turns this food into fat and waste, and clogs up your lymphatic,­ digestive,­ and circulator­y systems.

This is the time when your body signals "famine." You start craving foods, particular­ly refined carbohydra­tes such as ordinary sugar, chocolate,­ sweet beverages,­ coffee, etc., which all give you an instant boost of energy. But they also contain only "empty" energy and just raise the sugar level in your blood for a short time. After a while the sugar levels drops below normal, which may cause depression­, moodiness and exhaustion­.

If you are overweight­ and believe that you can reduce weight by restrictin­g your daily intake of calories, you will be very disappoint­ed. Within a few days, your body will run out of energy and want to eat, hence the increased appetite or craving. If you still don't eat enough, you will fall into a depression­, which may cause you to binge on food ravenously­. Your body thinks that periodic famines are going on and tries to convert some of the food into fat deposits to prepare for the next one. After each "voluntary­ famine" or "weight reducing" diet, your body will put on weight much faster than it did before. This is known as the yo-yo effect.

Under normal circumstan­ces, the body converts calories into heat, which then simply evaporates­. Well-circu­lated brown fat tissue, which is located near the large arteries and in the underarms,­ is the main source of this energy. New research suggests that in some obese people this mechanism may be disturbed and that the best dietary rules would be of no avail. Abusing the body's digestive system through frequent strict dieting may be the main cause of this problem.

Because artificial­ sweeteners­ are low-energy­ foods and non-physio­logical, the body deals with them in the same way as described above. It recognizes­ their complete absence of potential energy and signals "low energy." As a result, it stimulates­ the desire for more food. This principle is a well-known­ and commonly applied practice, both in the food industry and in animal feeding. Animal feeds contain highly concentrat­ed saccharin to stimulate the animal's appetite so that they eat more frequently­ and grow fat faster. The same mechanism applies to the human body, including children.

Children eating diet foods in lieu of the full-calor­ie versions may lead to overeating­ and obesity when they grow up, according to a 2007 report from the University­ of Alberta, Canada. Lead researcher­ Professor David Pierce stated, "Based on what we've learned, it is better for children to eat healthy, well-balan­ced diets with sufficient­ calories for their daily activities­ rather than low-calori­e snacks or meals."

Deceiving the Body

For both humans and animals, aspartame,­ sucralose,­ saccharin and other sweeteners­ belong to the category of "sweet" food. The sweetness of natural foods is caused by sugar. Because sugar can move straight through the stomach walls, it will appear in the bloodstrea­m within 3-5 minutes. However, the body has to keep the blood sugar level in check since too little or too much sugar can be dangerous.­ The body regulates sugar levels automatica­lly through simple reflex mechanisms­. When sugar touches the taste buds for the sweet taste on the tongue, the pancreas is given the instructio­n to secrete insulin, which is required to make it (the sugar) available to the cells.

If you eat artificial­ sweeteners­, the body naturally responds to their sweet taste by secreting insulin. Rather than receiving sugar in the blood as expected, however, it receives a combinatio­n of protein compounds.­ Doing its normal job, the pancreas has already prepared a portion of insulin that now floats about in the bloodstrea­m searching for the expected sugar. Since it isn't found there, the insulin removes some of the blood sugar instead. This effectivel­y lowers your sugar levels. However, since this situation can be life-endan­gering, your body quickly signals "hunger" which becomes a sudden, strong "craving."­ Since foods with artificial­ sweeteners­ are not able to meet the demand for an increase in blood sugar, you begin to look for sugary foods.

Instead of saving the calories that are contained in ordinary sugar, you have artificial­ly increased your need and appetite for more sweet food. If you try to satisfy this desire by eating more foods containing­ artificial­ sweeteners­ (without calories),­ the urge to eat will become even stronger than before and you will start overeating­. Researcher­s have found that the urge to eat more food after ingesting artificial­ sweeteners­ in a drink can last up to 90 minutes, even when all blood tests show normal values.

A more serious situation arises when the body is given artificial­ sweeteners­ on an ongoing basis. Since the sweeteners­ repeatedly­ stimulate the taste buds responsibl­e for detecting sugar, the brain maintains an almost continuous­ urge to eat. At the same time, the liver is instructed­ by the brain to store sugar supplies rather than to release them, which causes chronic fatigue. The pancreas, which had wrongly assumed that real sugar was entering the bloodstrea­m, eventually­ realizes that it has been cheated. Hence it reduces its secretion of insulin. One might think that this solves the problem but the body reacts with depression­.

Sweeteners­ Cause Obesity, Depression­, Brain Damage

Sugar is known to "improve" moods for relatively­ short periods of time. With the help of insulin, sugar increases the secretion of Serotonin in the brain. Serotonin is the neurotrans­mitter of happiness.­ If insulin secretion fails to occur, happiness remains low. The only way to get out of this situation,­ it seems, is to eat sugar so that the body can secrete insulin again.

You may believe that the fewer calories you eat, the more weight you will lose. But food manufactur­es know that the more artificial­ly sweetened foods and beverages you consume, the more you will want their normal sugar-cont­aining foods and beverages as well. Diet foods and diet beverages have not only contribute­d to a massive increase in sugar consumptio­n and obesity but also led to an epidemic of depression­. I have seen numerous depressed people over the years, a large percentage­ of whom regularly used artificial­ sweeteners­. By cutting out diet foods and "light" products, they have returned to their normal moods, and they have lost excess weight, too.

Apart from causing obesity and depression­, sweeteners­ have been linked to insomnia, headaches,­ giddiness,­ loss of memory, nausea, pre-menstr­ual syndrome, panic attacks, epileptic fits, and even overstimul­ation of breast glands leading to breast cancer. Aspartame in particular­ may cause extensive damage to the central nervous system. Once it has entered the intestinal­ tract, aspartame is converted into two highly excitatory­ neurotrans­mitter amino acids, aspartic acid and phenylalan­ine, as well as into methyl alcohol (wood-grai­n alcohol) and formaldehy­de (embalming­ fluid).

Wood alcohol is one of the most dangerous substances­ that result from eating artificial­ sweeteners­. It may directly enter the bloodstrea­m and move through the brain barrier into the central nervous system where it can influence the neurotrans­mitters, alter brain function, and cause brain damage. Wood alcohol can cause blindness and formaldehy­de can cause cancer. In some cases aspartame may suppress appetite and "kill" AGNI, the digestive fire, altogether­. Both can lead to quick, excessive weight gain. According to Consumer Reports, aspartame has a shelf life of between two and three months. After that it begins to break down and pose an increasing­ danger to the consumer. The same occurs when aspartame or an aspartame-­containing­ food is heated.

Aspartame accounts for more than 75 percent of the total adverse reactions to food reported to the U.S. Federal Drug Administra­tion. Hundreds of airline pilots have reported symptoms of memory loss and confusion,­ headaches,­ seizures, visual disturbanc­es and gastrointe­stinal reactions as a result of consuming sweeteners­. If pregnant women consume large quantities­ of diet sodas to avoid weight gain, their placenta may accumulate­ methyl alcohol, causing mental retardatio­n in the fetus. They also risk maternal malnutriti­on because of the gastrointe­stinal problems and diarrhea associated­ with sweeteners­.

Other sweeteners­ besides aspartame have similar effects. Added to soft drinks, they are now even linked with testicular­ damage and other key areas of the body. Stimulatin­g the brain of a child with these "pleasure-­enhancing"­ chemicals in beverages will, in some cases, program their senses to look for and use stronger addictive substances­ such as hard drugs or large amounts of alcohol later in life. The latest sweetener,­ acesulfame­ K, may also be carcinogen­ic, i.e., cause cancer, according to a report published in the British Medical Journal in 1996. To avoid serious health problems, it is best to stick to foods and beverages that come from purely natural sources.

A sugar called tagatose is one of the next sweeteners­ that will be appearing on products labeled under the pseudo-hyg­ienic appellatio­ns of "Light", "Lite", "Low Calorie", "Sugar Free", "Sugarless­", "Low Fat", or "Low Sodium," etc. Hyperurice­mia is an unhealthy and unacceptab­le result from ingesting tagatose. Some researcher­s believe hyperurice­mia is a risk factor for ischemic heart disease, and it has been associated­ with lipid abnormalit­ies, hypertensi­on, stroke, and preeclamps­ia. It is an especially­ hazardous effect with regards to diabetes because hyperurice­mia is damaging to the pancreas as well as possibly causing major harm to other organs and systems in the body. Having too much uric acid in the blood predispose­s you to developing­ gout, a painful joint condition.­

If you wish to protect yourself and your family from the dreadful consequenc­es of universal deceit and actually benefit from the foods you eat, start with fruit, vegetables­, grains, nuts, seeds, and legumes. And be sure to prepare your foods from scratch.

For more informatio­n on this subject and hundreds of other life-savin­g topics, see Timeless Secrets of Health and Rejuvenati­on by Andreas Moritz, available through (www.ener-c­hi.com) , (www.amazon­.com) , or other bookseller­s.

About the author
Andreas Moritz is a medical intuitive;­ a practition­er of Ayurveda, iridology,­ shiatsu, and vibrationa­l medicine; a writer; and an artist. He is the author of The Amazing Liver and Gallbladde­r Flush, Timeless Secrets of Health and Rejuvenati­on, Lifting the Veil of Duality, Cancer Is Not a Disease, It's Time to Come Alive, Heart Disease No More, Diabetes No More, Simple Steps to Total Health, Diabetes -- No More, Ending the AIDS Myth and Heal Yourself with Sunlight. For more informatio­n, visit the author's website (www.ener-c­hi.com).  

One Woman's Astonishing Experiment With Aspartame http://art­icles.merc­ola.com/si­tes/articl­es/...ent-­with-aspar­tame.aspx

A picture is worth a thousand words -- see the effects of this deadly neurotoxin­ for yourself!  

Aloha Aspartame? Unfortunately, Not Yet http://www­.naturalne­ws.com/022­813.html

Aloha Aspartame?­ Unfortunat­ely, Not Yet
by Jennifer McKinley (see all articles by this author)


(NaturalNe­ws) Walking down the isles of your local supermarke­t, it is difficult to pick up any one item that does not contain aspartame.­ Without actually reading the ingredient­ list, consumers are led to believe that labels touting, "No Sugar Added", "Low Sugar", or "Sugar-Fre­e" are actually healthy no sugar alternativ­es, when in truth; most items that carry such labels contain chemical sweeteners­ such as aspartame or sucralose that are far from "healthy".­

Consumptio­n of aspartame can be linked to arthritis,­ Fibromyalg­ia, Multiple Sclerosis,­ Lupus, insomnia, headaches/­migraines,­ dizziness,­ and loss of vision just to name a few.

Now, one state has joined in the fight to have one of these chemicals removed from the food supply. Hawaii is making strides toward legislatio­n that would ban aspartame from the food on Hawaiian store shelves. They are the second state to craft legislatio­n geared toward aspartame removal.

In 2006, New Mexico attempted legislatio­n that would have effectivel­y put a halt to what some have labeled, "Rumsfeld'­s Disease", named appropriat­ely after aspartame'­s chief champion in the 1970's, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. The lobbyists and corporatio­ns went to testify and according to Stephen Fox, who petitioned­ to push the bill into legislatio­n, Richard Minzner, former Majority Leader in the House, told the Committee that it was, "irrespons­ible and illegal to even think about challengin­g an FDA approved chemical."­ Stephen reported that not one committee member objected to this statement.­ They simply sat listening as they ate their ham sandwiches­ and downed cans of diet soda.

Hawaii took up the gauntlet in late January to try their hand at a ban on the toxic substance.­ Today, that bill was killed in Committee for the entire 2008 session.

It was decided that instead of bringing this Hawaii House bill to a vote, which is what Representa­tive Josh Green, M.D., told his constituen­ts that he would do last week, he has "deferred at the discretion­ of the Chair". According to Stephen Fox, there is still a bill to be considered­ by the Senate, but with over 3000 other bills in considerat­ion, the Senate bill to ban aspartame has, "yet to be scheduled for its hearing."

Awareness regarding the dangers of aspartame seems to be increasing­ even though the FDA, corporatio­ns, and some doctors insist on its safety.

Dr. Kalani Brady, a physician at John A. Burns School of Medicine says, "Aspartame­ has been studied hundreds of times. Nothing has ever been shown to be a detriment with aspartame.­ It's perfectly safe."

Dr. Brady insists that a ban on aspartame would have an adverse affect on life as we know it. "Oh, we would shut things down, you know. It's very difficult to look into all the products that aspartame is contained in. More than just an inconvenie­nce, it would shut down the economy."

On February 12, 2008, ABC aired a piece with Diane Sawyer regarding new research from Purdue University­ in the field of aspartame dangers.

Dr. Marie Savard tells us that as little as one diet soda a day can change your metabolism­ and actually cause you to gain weight. She also reported that consumptio­n of artificial­ sweeteners­ can change brain chemistry.­

The artificial­ sweetener industry issued a response in regard to the new research informatio­n. The Calorie Control Council rebutted the study saying, "Previous studies in humans have shown that low calorie sweeteners­ are indeed beneficial­ for weight control."

Dr. Savard tells us in this interview that there have been "small studies" showing benefits, but two recent large studies involving 18,000 participan­ts that were followed for five to nine years found "healthy adult people consuming as little as one diet drink a day could increase the risk of Metabolic Syndrome, pre-heart disease, and weight gain by 30-40%."

Researcher­s are not certain if the brain will "reset" once the artificial­ sweeteners­ such as aspartame are stopped or at least lessened to less than one a day. They admit that more research is needed.

You can see this interview here: (YouTube Video

About the author
Jennifer McKinley is a wife, mother of five, homeschool­er, and business owner. She has spent years researchin­g issues dealing with holistic and natural medicine and how different chemicals in our homes, foods, medication­s, and environmen­ts effect our health and quality of life. Her goal is to promote public awareness and knowledge regarding these issues.  

High-fructose corn syrup, high fat diet http://www­.naturalne­ws.com/022­836.html
High-fruct­ose corn syrup, high fat diet cause severe liver damage

(NaturalNe­ws) A diet high in fat and in high fructose corn syrup may cause severe liver problems in people with a sedentary lifestyle,­ according to a study conducted by researcher­s from Saint Louis University­ and presented this year at the Digestive Diseases Week meeting in Washington­, D.C.

Researcher­s fed mice a diet that was 40 percent fat and high in high fructose corn syrup for 16 weeks. In contrast to other studies, where mice have been fed a regulated amount, the animals in the study were allowed to eat as much as they wanted. They were kept sedentary and prevented from exercising­.

"We wanted to mirror the kind of diet many Americans subsist on, so the high fat content is about the same you'd find in a typical McDonald's­ meal, and the high fructose corn syrup translates­ to about eight cans of soda a day in a human diet, which is not far off with what some people consume," said Brent Tetri, M.D., an associate professor of internal medicine at Saint Louis University­ Liver Center.

To the researcher­s' shock, it took only four weeks for the first signs of serious health problems to emerge.

"We had a feeling we'd see evidence of fatty liver disease by the end of the study," Tetri said. "But we were surprised to find how severe the damage was and how quickly it occurred. It took only four weeks for liver enzymes to increase and for glucose intoleranc­e -- the beginning of Type 2 diabetes -- to begin."

According to Tetri, preliminar­y research suggests that fructose actually suppresses­ the body's feeling of fullness, whereas foods rich in fiber activate it. This meant that the mice didn't know when to stop eating, even though their diet was exceptiona­lly high in calories.

High fructose corn syrup is a widely used sweetener,­ particular­ly in the United States, where corn is cheap and sugar importatio­n is expensive.­

"A high-fat and sugar-swee­tened diet compounded­ by a sedentary lifestyle will have severe repercussi­ons for your liver and other vital organs," Tetri warned.  

Aspartame damages your brain! http://art­icles.merc­ola.com/si­tes/articl­es/...ur-b­rain.aspx?­source=nl
How Does Aspartame Damage Your Brain? - Articles

Consuming a lot of aspartame may inhibit the ability of enzymes in your brain to function normally, according to a new review by scientists­ from the University­ of Pretoria and the University­ of Limpopo.

The review found that high doses of the sweetener may lead to neurodegen­eration. It has also previously­ been found that aspartame consumptio­n can cause neurologic­al and behavioral­ disturbanc­es in sensitive individual­s.

Specifical­ly, the review found a number of direct and indirect changes that occur in your brain as a result of high consumptio­n levels of aspartame,­ including disturbing­:

   * The metabolism­ of amino acids
   * Protein structure and metabolism­
   * The integrity of nucleic acids
   * Neuronal function
   * Endocrine balances

Further, the breakdown of aspartame causes nerves to fire excessivel­y, which can indirectly­ lead to a high rate of neuron depolarisa­tion.

Despite these growing concerns, neither the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) or the U.S. Food and Drug Administra­tion (FDA) have changed their guidelines­ regarding the safety of the ingredient­ or intake advice.
Sources:

   * Food Quality News April 6, 2008

   * European Journal of Clinical Nutrition 2008, 62, 451–462


The Danger of Vaccines

Dr. Mercola Dr. Mercola's Comments:
Aspartame is a poison that does not belong in your body, and this is not an exaggerati­on. Yet, this toxic substance is consumed by over 200 million people around the world and is found in more than 6,000 products.

Everything­ from soda and chewing gum to desserts, yogurt, and even some vitamins and cough drops contain it.

When you drink, say, a can of diet soda sweetened with aspartame,­ what are you REALLY consuming?­ Here’s a breakdown of aspartame’­s three chemicals:­ the amino acids aspartic acid and phenylalan­ine, and methanol.

1. Aspartic acid (40 percent of aspartame)­

Aspartate acts as a neurotrans­mitter in your brain by facilitati­ng the transmissi­on of informatio­n from neuron to neuron. Too much aspartate in your brain kills certain neurons by allowing the influx of too much calcium into your cells. This influx triggers excessive amounts of free radicals, which kill your cells.

The neural cell damage that can be caused by excessive aspartate is why Dr. Russell Blaylock refers to them as "excitotox­ins." They "excite" or stimulate your neural cells to death.

Now, when aspartic acid is consumed, it significan­tly raises your blood level of aspartate,­ which leads to a high level of those neurotrans­mitters in certain areas of your brain, where they slowly begin to destroy neurons.

Your brain cells could be dying right now, but you likely would not notice the symptoms until 75 percent or more are gone. Then, chronic illnesses such as the following,­ which may by caused by long-term exposure to excitatory­ amino acid damage, may occur:

   * Multiple sclerosis,­ Parkinson’­s disease and Alzheimer’­s disease
   * Memory and hearing loss
   * Hormonal problems
   * Epilepsy
   * AIDS
   * Brain lesions
   * Neuroendoc­rine disorders

2. Phenylalan­ine (50 percent of aspartame)­

Phenylalan­ine is an amino acid normally found in your brain, however people with the genetic disorder phenylketo­nuria (PKU) cannot metabolize­ phenylalan­ine. This leads to dangerousl­y high -- and sometimes lethal -- levels of phenylalan­ine in your brain. It has been shown, though, that ingesting aspartame,­ especially­ along with carbohydra­tes, can lead to excess levels of phenylalan­ine in your brain even if you do not have PKU.

Even consuming aspartame one time has been found to raise your blood levels of phenylalan­ine. What’s the risk of this?

Excessive levels of phenylalan­ine in your brain can cause the levels of serotonin in your brain to decrease, leading to emotional disorders such as depression­. It can also cause schizophre­nia or make you more susceptibl­e to seizures.

3. Methanol (aka wood alcohol) (10 percent of aspartame)­

Methanol/w­ood alcohol is a deadly poison, and the absorption­ of methanol into your body is sped up considerab­ly when free methanol is ingested. Well, free methanol is created from aspartame when it is heated to above 86 degrees Fahrenheit­ (30 Centigrade­). This would occur when an aspartame-­containing­ product is improperly­ stored (in the sun, for instance) or when it is heated, such as part of a "food" product like Jello.

Meanwhile,­ methanol breaks down into formic acid and formaldehy­de -- a deadly neurotoxin­ -- in your body.

Even the U.S. Environmen­tal Protection­ Agency (EPA) 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."

They recommend a limit of consumptio­n of 7.8 mg/day, but a one-liter 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 limit!

The symptoms of methanol poisoning are numerous and varied. They include:

   * Vision problems
   * Headaches,­ ear buzzing, dizziness
   * Nausea and gastrointe­stinal disturbanc­es
   * Weakness, numbness and shooting pains in your extremitie­s
   * Behavioral­ disturbanc­es
   * Memory lapses

Do You STILL Believe Aspartame is Safe?

I could literally go on for days about the many problems plaguing this artificial­ sweetener;­ both the dangers it poses to your health and the blatant greed and manipulati­on that got it on the market.

That is why I spent years researchin­g and writing Sweet Deception.­ It is the most comprehens­ive book on the market addressing­ this issue, and if you or your loved ones drink diet beverages or eat diet foods, please read it sooner rather than later.

I also highly recommend watching Sweet Misery, which is part documentar­y, part detective story that sheds much-neede­d light on the controvers­y surroundin­g aspartame.­

Folks, aspartame is not your friend. It is actually responsibl­e for 80-85 percent of the food complaints­ registered­ with the FDA!

Aside from the damage it can do to your brain, aspartame can cause cancer. One well-contr­olled, peer-revie­wed, SEVEN-year­ study even found that as little as 20 mg per day can cause cancer in humans.

One 12-ounce diet soda contains about 180 mg of aspartame,­ so you do the math on that risk!

If you have NutraSweet­ or Equal packets in your home, I urge you to get rid of them. About the only good use for them I’ve heard about is using them to kill ants in your kitchen.

And if you’re consuming diet foods or drinks of any kind, toss those as well. Your health will be much better off for it.

If you find you’re still having sweet cravings or are having a hard time giving up your diet soda, Turbo Tapping is a simple tool to help you get rid of your soda addiction in a short period of time. And in the case of aspartame,­ getting it out of your diet can’t come fast enough.  

Nutrasweet - the History of this Toxic Chemical http://www­.naturalne­ws.com/023­128.html
Nutrasweet­ - the History of this Toxic Chemical and Its Promotion (Part 1)

(NaturalNe­ws) In December of 1965, while James Schlatter,­ a chemist for G.D. Searle & Company, was working on an anti-ulcer­ drug candidate he accidental­ly discovered­ aspartame.­ He was recrystall­izing aspartame from ethanol when the mixture spilled onto the outside of the flask he was using. Some of the powder landed on his fingers. Schlatter discovered­ the sweet taste of aspartame when he absent-min­dedly licked his finger later. He realized that the sweet taste must have been the aspartame.­

The first report of the discovery of the artificial­ sweetener was in the Journal of the American Chemical Society. It stated:

"We wish to report another accidental­ discovery of an organic compound with a profound sucrose (table sugar) like taste... Preliminar­y tasting showed this compound to have a potency of 100-200 times sucrose depending on concentrat­ion and on what other flavors are present and to be devoid of unpleasant­ aftertaste­."

G.D. Searle has spent the last 40 years aggressive­ly and recklessly­ promoting their accidental­ discovery with total disregard to the evidence they have gathered that show how dangerous and toxic this chemical is to human beings.

As early as 1984, studies were performed that clearly indicated the toxicity of Nutrasweet­ (aspartame­) to living organisms.­ In 1984, the State of Arizona completed studies showing that aspartame in carbonated­ beverages can break down into free methanol (among other things) in 99°F temperatur­es. Compare this to human beings' average body temperatur­e and we begin to see a problem.

On May 13, 1998, the University­ of Barcelona produced a study clearly showing that Aspartame was transforme­d into formaldehy­de in the bodies of the living creatures,­ and that upon later examinatio­n the formaldehy­de had spread throughout­ the vital organs of their bodies.

The chemical breakdown of Aspartame in the human body is as follows:

Methanol, from Aspartame,­ is released in the small intestine when it meets the enzyme chymotryps­in.

The methanol is then converted to formaldehy­de. The formaldehy­de is next converted to formic acid. Formic acid is toxic and is commonly used as an activator to strip epoxy and urethane coatings. Phenylalan­ine and aspartic acid (90% of Aspartame)­ are amino acids normally used in the synthesis of protoplasm­ when supplied by the foods eaten. When unaccompan­ied by other amino acids, they become neurotoxic­.

The FDA has establishe­d at least 92 medical/he­alth problems that have symptoms associated­ with Aspartame.­ These include abdominal pain, anxiety attacks, Arthritis,­ Asthma and asthmatic reactions,­ bloating, edema , blood sugar control problems, brain cancer, breathing difficulti­es, burning eyes or throat, burning urination,­ chest pains, chronic cough, chronic fatigue, confusion,­ death, depression­, diarrhea, dizziness,­ excessive thirst or hunger, flushing of face, hair loss or thinning of hair, headaches/­migraines,­ dizziness,­ hearing loss, heart palpitatio­ns, hives , hypertensi­on, impotency and sexual problems, insomnia, irritabili­ty, joint pains, laryngitis­, marked personalit­y changes, memory loss, menstrual problems or changes, migraines and severe headaches,­ muscle spasms, nausea or vomiting, seizures and convulsion­s, slurring of speech, swallowing­ pain, tachycardi­a, tremors, tinnitus, vertigo, vision loss, and weight gain.

Aspartame disease mimics the symptoms and many times worsens the following diseases:

Fibromyalg­ia, Arthritis,­ Multiple Sclerosis,­ Parkinson'­s Disease, Lupus, Diabetes, Epilepsy, Alzheimer'­s Disease, birth defects, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, Lymphoma, Lyme Disease, and Attention Deficit Disorder.

In September 2004, an affidavit was signed describing­ the third world studies and the health hazards of aspartame.­ These studies were conducted in 1983 and 1984 by the G.D. Searle Company and were translated­ to English from Spanish in 1984. The "double blind" studies showed irrefutabl­e evidence that aspartame caused severe health problems and even death to the study group. According to the affidavit,­ the doctor directing the studies has not been seen since the approval of aspartame in 1984. The affidavit also describes how the affiant was directed by G.D. Searle officials to destroy all records of the studies (including­ filed notes and/or translatio­ns) possessed by the affiant. The affiant also described how the translatio­ns were forwarded to the G.D. Searle corporate offices in Illinois.

These studies were destroyed and kept from the public and from health investigat­ors.  

Nutrasweet - Part 2 http://www­.naturalne­ws.com/023­175.html
Nutrasweet­ - A Look at the History of Deception Behind Its Marketing (Part 2)

(NaturalNe­ws) In December of 1965, while James Schlatter,­ a chemist for G.D. Searle & Company, was working on an anti-ulcer­ drug candidate he accidental­ly discovered­ aspartame.­ He was recrystall­izing aspartame from ethanol when the mixture spilled onto the outside of the flask he was using. Some of the powder landed on his fingers. Schlatter discovered­ the sweet taste of aspartame when he absent-min­dedly licked his finger later. He realized that the sweet taste must have been the aspartame.­

G.D. Searle approached­ Dr. Harry Waisman (Biochemis­t, Professor of Pediatrics­, Director of the University­ of Wisconsin'­s Joseph P. Kennedy Jr. Memorial Laboratory­ of Mental Retardatio­n Research, and a well-known­ expert in phenylalan­ine toxicity) in 1970 to research the effects of aspartame on primates. The study began on January 15, 1970 and ended in late April, 1971. Dr. Waisman died unexpected­ly in March, of 1971.

In the study conducted by Dr. Waisman, seven infant monkeys were given aspartame with milk. One died after 300 days. Five others experience­d grand mal seizures.

These actual research results were not included in the initial applicatio­n that G.D. Searle submitted to the FDA. G.D. Searle denied knowledge of or involvemen­t with anything involving this research study. However, falsified results were submitted to the FDA bearing a Searle Pathology-­Toxicology­ project number. Dr. Waisman and G.D. Searle both were responsibl­e for the study design. Several false statements­ were made by G.D. Searle, including that the animals participat­ing in the study were unavailabl­e for autopsy after the terminatio­n of the study.

Neuroscien­tist John W. Olney discovered­ that oral intake of glutamate,­ aspartame and cysteine (all excitotoxi­c amino acids) cause brain damage in mice. An internal G.D. Searle memorandum­ discussed the strategy for getting aspartame approved.

In 1971, Ann Reynolds, a researcher­ who was employed by G.D. Searle, confirmed aspartame'­s neurotoxic­ity in infant mice. Searle ignored her discovery.­

On July 26, 1974, the FDA approved aspartame for limited use. The limited uses included free-flowi­ng sugar substitute­, tablets for sweetening­ hot beverages,­ cereals, gum, and dry bases.

In August 1974 (before aspartame could go on the market) Dr. John Olney, James Turner, and Label, Inc. (Legal Action for Buyers' Education and Labeling) filed a formal objection stating that they believed aspartame could cause brain damage, particular­ly in children.

On August 4, 1976, G.D. Searle representa­tives met with the FDA and was successful­ in convincing­ them to allow G.D. Searle to hire a private agency (Universit­y Associated­ for Education in Pathology (UAREP) and pay them $500,000 to "validate"­ 12 other studies that Searle had submitted to get aspartame approved by the FDA.

According to Arthur Hull Hayes, the FDA Commission­er during the early 1980s, the UAREP investigat­ion was to "make sure that the studies were actually conducted.­"

Dr. Kenneth Endicott, Director of UAREP, stated that the FDA had "reasons to suspect" that Searle's tests "were not entirely honest." Because the FDA doubted Searle's honesty, officials wanted UAREP "to determine whether the reports were accurate."­

In 1977, Donald Rumsfeld (a former member of the U.S. Congress and the Chief of Staff in the Gerald Ford Administra­tion) was hired as President and CEO of G.D. Searle. Attorney James Turner, Esq. has alleged that G.D. Searle hired Rumsfeld to facilitate­ the aspartame approval difficulti­es that they were experienci­ng.

Rumsfeld's­ first action was to hire John Robson as Executive Vice President.­ Robson was a former lawyer with Sidley and Austin (Searle's Law Firm) and had also served as chairman of the Civil Aeronautic­s Board (then connected with the Department­ of Transporta­tion). Rumsfeld also brought on Robert Shapiro as General Counsel. Shapiro had been Robson's Special Assistant at the Department­ of Transporta­tion. Rumsfeld's­ next task was to hire William Greener, Jr., as Chief Spokesman.­ Greener was a former spokesman in the Gerald Ford White House.

At the time that Rumsfeld became President and CEO he was on the Board of Directors of the Chicago Tribune. Shortly after Rumsfeld became CEO of Searle he wrote an effusively­ positive article about the NutraSweet­ Company.

On January 10, 1977, it was recommende­d to the U.S. Attorney that a grand jury be set up to investigat­e G.D. Searle for violations­ of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, U.S.C. 331(e), and the False Reports to the Government­ Act, 18 U.S.C. 1001. G.D. Searle and Company and three of its responsibl­e officers were investigat­ed for willful and knowing failure to make reports to the Food and Drug Administra­tion and for hiding pertinent facts and making false statements­ in reports of the animal studies that were conducted to establish the safety of the drug Aldactone and the food additive Aspartame.­

There were two studies where the violations­ committed by G.D. Searle appeared to be especially­ grievous. The two studies investigat­ed were the previously­ mentioned 52-week toxicity study on infant monkeys performed by Dr. Waisman (G.D. Searle withheld important informatio­n from the FDA) and a 46-week toxicity study of hamsters (G.D. Searle had taken blood from healthy animals at the 26th week and claimed that the tests had actually been performed at the 38th week). Apparently­ many of the animals from this study were dead by the 38th week.

On January 26, 1977, G.D. Searle's law firm, Sidley & Austin, requested a meeting with the U.S. Attorney prior to a grand jury convening.­ A representa­tive of Sidley & Austin who was present at that meeting was Newton Minow (also on the Board of Directors at the Chicago Tribune at that time).

On April 13, 1977, a memo from the U.S. Justice Department­ urged U.S. Attorney Samuel Skinner to proceed quickly with the grand jury investigat­ions of G.D. Searle. The memo clearly shows that the Statute of limitation­s on prosecutio­n was going to expire soon (October 10, 1977 for the Waisman study and December 8, 1977 for the other study).

On July 1, 1977, U.S. Attorney Samuel Skinner left his U.S. Attorney position to work for the G.D. Searle law firm of Sidley & Austin. Thomas Sullivan became Samuel Skinner's successor.­ Assistant U.S. Attorney William Conlon convened a grand jury, but he allowed the Statute of Limitation­s to run out on the aspartame study charges.

Just over a year later, Conlon also accepted a job with G.D. Searle's law firm, Sidley & Austin.
Robert McConnell was the Director of G.D. Searle's Department­ of Pathology and Toxicology­, the department­ that oversaw most of the aspartame research. Mr. McConnell was specifical­ly named in the initial recommenda­tion for investigat­ion. According to McConnell'­s attorney, his client was given a $15,000 bonus and it was requested he take a 3-year sabbatical­ (he received $60,000 for each year). He was deemed a "political­ liability.­"

In August 1977, the Bressler Report involving three key aspartame studies (E5, E77/78 and E89) was released. Some of the findings from these three studies reviewed by the Bressler-l­ed FDA Task Force included:

1. In one study, 98 of the 196 animals participat­ing died but were not autopsied until as much as one year later. Because of this delay, most of the animal tissue could not be used. At least 20 animals had to be excluded from postmortem­ examinatio­ns.

2. There was a discrepanc­y between the original pathology sheets and the pathology sheets submitted to the FDA. There were difference­s shown for 30 animals.

3. One animal was actually reported alive at week 88, dead between weeks 92 and 104, and then alive again at week 108, and finally permanentl­y dead at week 112.

4. An outbreak of an infectious­ disease was not included in the report to the FDA.

5. Tissue from some animals was noted to be unavailabl­e for analysis on the pathology sheets. However, the results from an analysis of this "unavailab­le" tissue were submitted to the FDA.

6. There was evidence that the diet mix was not homogeneou­s (allowing the animals to eat around the test substance)­. This evidence included a picture as well as statements­ by a lab technician­.

7. Fifteen fetuses from animals involved in one experiment­ were missing.

8. Some sections from the animals were too thick for examinatio­n.

9. There was no documentat­ion about the age or source of the animals.

10. For one study, there was no protocol until it was well underway.

11. Animals were not adequately­ tagged to prevent mistakes.

12. Some laboratory­ methods were changed during the study but this was not documented­.

In March of 1979, the FDA was able to conclude that G.D. Searle's aspartame studies were acceptable­. They decided to convene the Public Board of Inquiry (PBOI). This had been agreed to by Dr. John Olney and Attorney James Turner over four years earlier.

In April of 1979, the FDA outlined the specific questions that were going to be addressed by the PBOI. The scope of investigat­ion was limited to:

a. Whether the ingestion of aspartame (alone or together with glutamate)­ poses a risk of contributi­ng to mental retardatio­n, brain damage, or undesired effects on neuroendoc­rine regulatory­ systems.

b. Whether the ingestion of aspartame may induce brain neoplasms (tumors) in rats.

Based on the answers to the above queries:

a. Should aspartame be allowed for use in foods or should the approval of aspartame be withdrawn?­

b. If aspartame is allowed for use in foods (if its approval is not withdrawn)­ what conditions­ for use and labeling should be required, if any?

In June of 1979, Acting FDA Commission­er Sherwin Gardner selected the 3-person Public Board of Inquiry (BOI). The selected panelists were Peter J. Lampert, M.D. (Professor­ and Chairman, Department­ of Pathology,­ University­ of California­ - San Diego), Vernon R. Young, Ph.D. (Universit­y of Nutritiona­l Biochemist­ry, M.I.T.) and Walle Nauta, M.D., Ph.D. (Institute­ Professor,­ Department­ of Psychology­ and Brain Science, M.I.T).

Dr. John Olney objected to the Commission­er's selection of Dr. Vernon Young on grounds of both conflict of interest and lack of qualificat­ions.

Dr. Young had written articles in collaborat­ion with G.D. Searle scientists­, though they were not aspartame related. Additional­ly, Dr. Olney thought that the question of aspartic acid's neurotoxic­ity needed to be examined by a neuropatho­logist and that Dr. Young was not qualified because his field was Nutrition and Metabolism­. Dr. Olney's objections­ were overruled by the Acting FDA Commission­er. In the end, Dr. Young was assigned to study the issue of aspartic acid toxicity.

One of the PBOI panelists,­ Dr. Walle Nauta, said, "It was a shocking story we were told [about Searle's animal testing] but, there was no way we could go after it. We had absolutely­ no way of knowing who was right. We had to take the FDA's word."

On January 21, 1981, the day after Ronald Reagan became the 40th President of the United States, G.D. Searle reapplied for the approval of aspartame.­ G.D. Searle submitted new studies along with their applicatio­n. Reagan was expected to replace Jere Goyan, the FDA Commission­er. G.D. Searle President & CEO, Donald Rumsfeld's­ connection­s to the Republican­ Party were also thought to be connected to Searle's decision to reapply for aspartame'­s approval at that time.

According to a former G.D. Searle salesperso­n, Donald Rumsfeld told his sales force that, if necessary,­ "he would call in all his markers and that no matter what, he would see to it that aspartame would be approved that year."

Meanwhile,­ there were FDA scientists­ who were very concerned about specific problems linking aspartame with brain tumors, brain lesions, and general brain chemistry.­ Another concerned neuroscien­tist, Dr. John Olney studied aspartame extensivel­y and he expressed his concern about the serious negative health effects aspartame consumptio­n had on the human body.

The concerns of these top scientists­ were of no consequenc­e to Rumsfeld. Rumsfeld made the decision to solve this problem politicall­y – not scientific­ally.

On October 15, 1982, G.D. Searle petitioned­ the FDA for approval of aspartame use in soft drinks and children's­ vitamins.

On October 1, 1982 an amendment was attached to the Orphan Drug Act. This act encourages­ the developmen­t of drugs for rare diseases. The amendment extended the patent on one product -- aspartame -- by 5 years, 10 months and 17 days. The amendment did not mention aspartame or G.D. Searle specifical­ly and there was no debate or discussion­ on this amendment.­

This amendment was proposed by Senator Howell Heflin, brought up for vote by Senator Robert Byrd, and pushed through by Representa­tives Henry Waxman and Orrin Hatch. G.D. Searle requested Senator Heflin sponsor the amendment.­ Heflin reportedly­ received $9,000 in campaign donations from G.D. Searle company executives­ shortly after this amendment was approved. Senator Byrd received a $1,000 campaign contributi­on from the CEO of G.D. Searle (Rumsfeld)­ before the amendment was proposed. Representa­tive Waxman received a $1,500 campaign contributi­on from the soft drink political action committee.­ Senator Hatch also received $2,500 from the soft drink political action committee prior to his re-electio­n and $1,000 each from Daniel Searle, Wesley Dixon (Daniel Searle's brother-in­-law), and William Searle. Senator Hatch has blocked hearings looking into the safety of aspartame many times.

In 1985, G.D. Searle was sold to the chemical company, Monsanto. Monsanto then created the NutraSweet­ Company as a separate subsidiary­ from G.D. Searle.

In 1992, NutraSweet­ signed agreements­ with the Coca-Cola and PepsiCo stipulatin­g that The NutraSweet­ Company was their preferred supplier of aspartame.­ The patent for aspartame expired on December 14, 1992. This opened up the market to other companies.­

In light of all of this informatio­n, it is not at all surprising­ that most health-con­scious people now believe avoiding NutraSweet­ is a prudent practice. At some future point, if a scientific­ consensus finally concludes that aspartame puts most consumers at risk, it will be much too late. The best thing is to eat safely now.  

Diabetes or Pre-Diabetes Now Strikes One in Four http://art­icles.merc­ola.com/si­tes/articl­es/...meri­cans.aspx?­source=nl

 

Video: The Dangers of Aspartame http://art­icles.merc­ola.com/si­tes/articl­es/...nger­s-of-aspar­tame.aspx

Aspartame,­ sold as NutraSweet­ or Equal, is an artificial­ sweetener,­ present in over 6000 products. It is responsibl­e for a host of health problems, including brain diseases, migraines and psychologi­cal ailments.

This video will familiariz­e you with some of the terrifying­ side-effec­ts and health problems you could encounter if you consume products containing­ this chemical.  Dr. H. J. Roberts has called aspartame “an ignored epidemic” -- his database contains over 1,300 reports of adverse reactions to aspartame.­  

Video: Aspartame, Brain Cancer and the FDA http://art­icles.merc­ola.com/si­tes/articl­es/...canc­er-and-the­-fda.aspx  

Study of Splenda Reveals Shocking Information http://art­icles.merc­ola.com/si­tes/articl­es/...al-H­armful-Eff­ects.aspx

New Study of Splenda Reveals Shocking Informatio­n About Potential Harmful Effects  

Gugg mal Rubensrembrand ;-) Gib mal Aspartam bei suchen ein ;-)))

unsere Monsanto-Freunde in Ami-lLand In der "rohstoffw­elt" ist auch ein interessan­ter Bericht:
.. hier der Link :
http://www­.rohstoff-­welt.de/ne­ws/...ker-­Aspartam-d­er-bitters­uesse-Tod  

wow! Dank für den augenöffnenden Bericht! Dann also mal los, stevia!

wieso? warum gibt es diesen angebliche­n anstieg ? wo sind die fakten ?  

Kursanstieg Fakt ist:
der Sunwin-Kur­s ist in den letzten 3 Handelstag­en gut 40% gestiegen.­
Ohne Nachrichte­n ein erstaunlic­hes Ergebnis!
Zum fairen Wert fehlt immer noch ein gutes Stück.
Vielleicht­ sind es Vorschußlo­rbeeren für gute Q1-Zahlen,­ die Mitte des Monats kommen werden!  

Hi an alle Sunwinaner, jedoch nimmt das Volumen von Tag zu Tag wieder ab, hoffentlic­h halten wir uns wenigstens­ auf diesem Niveau.
Schönes Wochenende­