Thursday 26 October 2023

Mini Round-up for 2023

The past year has been a busy one in regard to Aspartame, and Sucralose has also been in the spotlight.

On July 14th, 2023, for the first time in history, the International Agency for Research on Cancer made an announcement, listing Aspartame as an IARC Group 2B carcinogen. Substances in that category are described as "possibly carcinogenic to humans".

Well, it's a start.

The World Health Organisation (WHO) and the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) cited “limited evidence” for carcinogenicity in humans and JECFA reaffirmed the acceptable daily intake of 40 mg/kg body weight, this was their third ruling on the subject.

This 'Jeckyll and Hyde' result caused a ruckus in the news and raised the profile for Aspartame and its possible safe use. Of course, the usual 'doctors' and 'dentists' were quick on the scene; paramedics swarmed the internet, armed with disinformation to quell those who might become believers in the Aspartame Fraud... Further flood gates opened and another bombshell was dropped from The Washington Post on 13th September, 2023:

The Food Industry pays ‘influencer’ dietitians to shape your eating habits

Read the full post HERE (extract below)

...As the World Health Organization raised questions this summer about the risks of a popular artificial sweetener, a new hashtag began spreading on the social media accounts of health professionals: #safetyofaspartame.

Steph Grasso, a registered dietitian from Oakton, Va., used the hashtag and told her 2.2 million followers on TikTok that the WHO warnings about artificial sweeteners were “clickbait” based on “low-quality science.”

Another dietitian, Cara Harbstreet of Kansas City, reassured her Instagram followers not to worry about “fear mongering headlines” about aspartame because “the evidence doesn’t suggest there’s a reason for concern.”

In a third video, Mary Ellen Phipps, a Houston-area dietitian who specializes in diabetes care, sipped from a glass of soda and told her Instagram viewers that artificial sweeteners “satisfy the desire for sweetness” without affecting blood sugar or insulin levels. What these dietitians didn’t make clear was that they were paid to post the videos by American Beverage, a trade and lobbying group representing Coca-Cola, PepsiCo and other companies. In all, at least 35 posts from a dozen health professionals were part of the coordinated campaign by American Beverage. The trade group paid an undisclosed amount to 10 registered dietitians, as well as a physician and a fitness influencer, to use their social media accounts to help blunt the WHO’s claims that aspartame, a mainstay of Diet Coke and other sodas, is ineffective for weight loss and “possibly carcinogenic.”...

As you can imagine, this admission is HUGE and should have been bigger news! What a surprise that I have heard no more on the subject... Is there a knock-on effect? It's slow, but I think so.

In the following weeks, my daily Industry Google Alerts popped up some interesting tidbits, it seems the food industry is getting twitchy with mixed opinion from attendees and exhibitors at the IFT FIRST, the Institute of Food Technologists’ annual meeting held July 16-19, in Chicago. But what I found very encouraging was the admission by Thom King, chief executive officer, Icon Foods, Portland, Ore:

“Our booth was slammed so hard the first two hours we ran out of brochures,” Mr. King said. “Many major manufacturers were clamoring to talk about ways to get aspartame and sucralose out of their finished goods."...
And that’s what a lot of formulators were exploring, that between the WHO’s evaluation of aspartame, and a March 2023 article in Nature suggesting sucralose may increase cancer risk, his company has been inundated by requests for clean label replacements.

“There are a lot of options like stevia, monk fruit, allulose, erythritol, sweet fibers and thaumatin. These read well on an ingredient declaration, as well as the Nutrition Facts panel. Consumers will demand these sweeteners.”
Read the full post HERE

Also, new arrival of aspartame studies might tip the balance:

Long-Term Artificial Sweetener Intake Linked to Risk for Obesity (Endocrinology Advisor)  
Read it HERE (September 15th 2023)

Researchers discover learning and memory deficits after ingestion of aspartameby Robert Thomas, Florida State University Read it HERE (18th September, 2023)

Drinking diet sodas and aspartame-sweetened beverages daily during pregnancy linked to autism in male offspring (The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio) read it HERE (20th September, 2023)
Memory Deficits Linked to Aspartame May Be Heritable, Study Says (Psychiatrist+ Newsweek) read it HERE (September 21st, 2023) and HERE (Sept 22nd, 2023)

Study links aspartame consumption to learning and memory deficits in mice (Food Safety News) read it HERE (September 25th 2023)

CPSI calls on USDA to update school snacks’ nutrition standards

read it HERE (19th October 2023)

“The standards regulating Smart Snacks should protect children from adverse health outcomes and should be aligned with the latest scientific evidence and the recommendations of the most recent Dietary Guidelines for Americans. However, the current Smart Snacks standards do not address added sugars, low-calorie sweeteners, or synthetic dyes,” Samuel Hahn, policy coordinator at the CSPI, tells Nutrition Insight.
A whole lot of other news has peppered the internet, so you can read all the news articles reporting adverse effects of consuming aspartame HERE

Returning to the decision by Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) reaffirming the acceptable daily intake of 40 mg/kg body weight - ...The committee therefore reaffirmed that it is safe for a person to consume within this limit per day. For example, with a can of diet soft drink containing 200 or 300 mg of aspartame, an adult weighing 70kg would need to consume more than 9–14 cans per day to exceed the acceptable daily intake, assuming no other intake from other food sources. Often it is forgotten that a can of diet soft drink, when consumed by an adult is very different to a child who has a lower body weight, yet still consumes equal amounts of aspartame per can of diet soft drink!

How the JECFA came to their original decision of what constitues the acceptable daily intake of aspartame is a mystery! Apparently, the IARC and WHO will continue to monitor new evidence and encourage independent research groups to develop further studies on the potential association between aspartame exposure and consumer health effects.

Those of us that have witnessed these illusory promises over the decades are a little more jaded.
Sucralose. A couple of reports have appeared in 2023:

A chemical found in common artificial sweetener may cause DNA damage, cancer

(Medical News Today) Read it HERE (July 17th, 2023)

Study indicates human sewage across Kaua‘i’s waters

Read it HERE (The Garden Island dotcom) July 25th, 2023

A newly published report detected sucralose — an artificial sweetener commonly found in manufactured foods — throughout Kaua‘i’s streams and rivers, indicating nearly islandwide water contamination by human sewage [...]

Sucralose is only partially metabolised by the human body, unlike Aspartame that is fully metabolised, the remainder is excreted and we simply don't have enough data to know the impact sucralose has on the natural world let alone fellow humans who don't choose to consume it. Several studies as far back as 2009 confirm Sucralose as a contaminant in wastewater/sewage plants, lakes, marine and coastal waters.

In 2016, the CSPI downgraded sucralose from "caution" to "avoid" - Read about it HERE

Center for Science in the Public Interest, February 8, 2016 ... The Center for Science in the Public Interest has downgraded its safety rating of sucralose, the artificial sweetener also known by the brand name Splenda, from “caution” to “avoid” in the group’s Chemical Cuisine glossary of food additives. ...

Monosodium Glutamate and Hydrolyzed Protein (glutamic acid) coming to your kitchens whether you like it or not...

Glutamic Acid Market To Reach $19,444 Million by 2030 - Read it HERE

...Glutamic acid is used for protein production. The increasing consumption of this kind of acid in the food and beverage sector as a food preservative and enhancer, together with the rising necessity for animal feed because of the augmented consumption of poultry products like chicken, pork, turkeys, beef and geese, along with increasing requirement for aquatic products like fish and shrimp, will drive the industrial growth in the future...

Sunday 2 July 2023

R.I.P. Betty Martini (Mission Possible)

 After over 30 years of campaigning worldwide against the dangers of the neurotoxic artificial sweetener: Aspartame, Betty died on Tuesday, February 14, 2023. 

Betty and I had been in contact for over 20 years and she was a great advocate and such an encouragement when making my Aspartame comic series, sending them out through her vast contact list via her Mission Possible website. She always said 'I was playing it forward'. My husband may have continued consuming Aspartame if it wasn't for her vast knowledge on the subject, he suffered two psychotic episodes after drinking Aspartame laden soda (2 litres a day). Thank-you, Betty. I'm sure she will continue to work with us all from beyond the grave!  Avalina

"...For the past 33 years Betty was known nationally and internationally as a strong advocate against the sweetener “aspartame.” Through Betty’s, research, and connections with nationally known doctors and scientist, she became an expert on the subject. 

Betty even appeared before US Congress presenting the facts of how “aspartame”, a neurotoxin, was a contributor to MS, and causes cancer. She wanted “aspartame” band, but that went in one ear and out the other because of close ties between congressional members and corporations who fund members of congress through their lobbying to look the other way. Especially those with close ties to Donald Rumsfeld. 

Betty has been a regular on many internet talk shows with doctors, scientist and other researcher on major health issues caused by the controllers of our health, pharmaceuticals and foods, adulterating them with GMO’s and other toxins. She also appeared in the documentary “Sweet Misery” a few years ago. Many people's health and lives here and abroad were saved through Betty’s spreading and educating individual and governments to the dangers of aspartame and other neurotoxins. Numerous of those got off those toxins and lived more healthful and longer lives..."

quote from (mission possible world health international

Saturday 14 March 2020

Danger, Will Robinson!

Hi. There is a contact form on the right hand side of the blog and various information pages on the right of the blog.
My blog posts:
  • Why Aspartame laden diet drinks should be in the Alcohol Aisle of the Supermarkets... HERE
  • Zero Calorie Psychology - HERE
  • Migraines? It's not the chocolate, chocolate fans - HERE
  • Clean Label Propaganda - HERE
A fifteen minute video of the original 'History of  Aspartame' comic that outlines the fraudulent approval of Aspartame; with testimonies from doctors and information about how it affects the body.

Can also be viewed at Brighteon | Support Your Freedom to Speak: HERE

A tragedy occurs when Dr Ralph Walton conducts a double blind study...
Can also be viewed at Brighteon | Support Your Freedom to Speak: HERE

Dietary Methanol and Autism. Dr Ralph Walton and Dr Woodrow C. Monte 
conduct a study of pregnant women consuming Aspartame while pregnant.

Can also be viewed at Brighteon | Support Your Freedom to Speak: HERE

Dr Roberts explains the dangers of sugar-free chewing gum
Can also be viewed at Brighteon | Support Your Freedom to Speak: HERE

Pilot & Doctor Testimonies | Injury, flying while consuming Aspartame
Can also be viewed at Brighteon | Support Your Freedom to Speak: HERE

Monosodium Glutamate - Part One & Two
Can also be viewed at Brighteon | Support Your Freedom to Speak: 
Part One HERE Part Two HERE

Learn about the history and dangers of GM and GMO food since 1994
Can also be viewed at Brighteon | Support Your Freedom to Speak: HERE

Friday 13 March 2020

Clean Label Propaganda

It's official, food manufacturers are embarrassed by the bad publicity given by the food additives on their labels such as Monosodium Glutamate (MSG) and other forms of L-Glutamate, Aspartame and other harmful artificial sweeteners. But it's not really about hiding their heads in shame because they put such junk in the world's food chain, it's whether it's still profitable to continue to do so. Oh, come on, you didn't really fall for the idea that ultra high processed food manufacturers really care for the health of its consumers, did you?

This from Transparency Market Research, March 2020 HERE
"Clean label is referred to food additives or ingredients that are fruits, vegetable, colors, flavors, flours, starch, sweeteners, malt, and others that fulfil any or all of the primary factors (such as less product ingredients with no chemical name, easy to understand, no artificial additives) and minimum one secondary factors (that include natural, organic and non-GMO products). An increase in clean label product is because of the growth in consumer preference towards clean label food products that indirectly drive intake of clean label ingredients another reason is the health issues that are linked to the consumption of artificial food additives of which people are becoming health alert and cautious for food safety." 
The trouble is, these companies can't help themselves. Food manufacturers have been lying for so long, like the snake oil merchants of old and they're really good at it - and we're too damned busy most of the time to say - what does 'natural flavouring' really mean in a product? Natural flavouring is where there's potential to hide MSG under a different name - depending on the percentage of MSG in the product, manufacturers are not required by law to label it as MSG...

They hope we won't notice... 
They try and deceive us with words like 'natural' hoping we'll swoon in ecstasy - which most of the time we do...

We're saved - they say it's natural!! It's OK, I'm not such a bad mother after all, giving you this poisonous junk masquerading as something natural in your lunchbox! 

Didn't the nice lady 'Mrs. Funmi Ogunjobi, a nutritionist and mother of three' tell me it was safe?
“My children’s school bags are never complete without a pack of their favourite Capri-Sun because they know what they want. I know what is best for them, and that is why I always ensure to give them Capri-Sun daily,” she added.

"Chi Limited, manufacturers of various fruit drinks, has harped on the health benefits of Capri-Sun fruit drink, describing it as a having a ‘Clean Recipe’ that gives it edge over many brands in the market. The company pointed out that while there are several brands in the fruit drink category targeted at children and currently competing for leadership through various offerings, a ‘Clean Recipe’ is Capri-Sun." HERE

It gets worse... they continue with:

"Capri-Sun is a leading brand in this category because it contains natural ingredients that can contribute to the growth and development of children."

Growth and Development of Children? Oh, please! 

Further amplification from the 'food industry' with yet more statistics from another piece of news about Capri-Sun:
“...It is important for parents to know that when their kids consume these unwholesome fruit drinks, they not only miss out on all the benefits of taking fruit drinks made from premium natural ingredients, but they also leave their children’s health vulnerable to the long term implications from the ingredients within these products,” it added.
Furthermore, it pointed out that concerns have been raised on the possible link between food additives and neurological development deficiencies, including Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in children.
A number of recent studies have been performed worldwide to explore the possible relationship between food colourings and ADHD in children. A 2012 analysis of studies co-authored by Joel Nigg, professor of psychiatry, pediatrics and behavioral neuroscience at Oregon Health & Science University showed that studies support the link between additives and hyperactivity..."

Oh, you mean the same 'natural flavouring' that's potentially hiding the toxic chemicals that's ubiquitous in highly processed food? Yet it's still included in our food? What sort of double-speak is this?

Unfortunately, most people won't listen even when you tell them... the misinformation by food manufacturers is so persuasive; people watch the TV or read posts online with glazed eyes... many people are also poisoned and dumbed down by their own consumption of dangerous food additives - this has been going on for decades!

Tropicana sued over presence of malic acid in 'natural juices' - HERE
Children's fruit drinks need clearer labels, study finds - HERE

...One problem with food labeling today is that terms such as "pure" and "natural" have no official definition and therefore their meanings are open to interpretation. According to CBS News, there were approximately 300 lawsuits involving use of the term "natural" on food products from 2015 to 2018.

Some legal challenges have had results. General Mills quit using the term "100% natural" on its Nature Valley granola bars following settlement of a 2016 lawsuit filed by three consumer groups that the product contained trace amounts of the weed-killing chemical glyphosate.

While the FDA has asked for public comments on the term "natural," it hasn't yet come up with a new definition or guidance for industry using it on product labeling. Until it does, manufacturers are likely to continue using the term since it appeals to consumers, and shoppers will probably continue looking for it on store shelves. Should what they find not correspond with their sense of the meaning, though, they may decide to take the issue to court...

Read what is really going on from an expert in the field, become informed, save a life!
Dr. Russell Blaylock, a retired neurosurgeon talks about the food manufacturers deception in his book: 'Excitotoxins - The Taste that Kills'.

"Another way the FDA works with the Glutamate Association is by yielding to their lobbying efforts to change the labeling laws so that the words “monosodium glutamate” are not required on food labels unless it contains 100% pure MSG. Also MSG need not even be mentioned by any name if one product containing pure MSG is only used as an ingredient in another food. For example, if broth is used to make a soup, and the broth contains pure MSG, MSG does not have to be listed as an ingredient. But if the broth is sold alone, it must appear on the label.

As Dr. Schwartz has shown, substances labeled as “spices,” “natural flavoring” and “flavoring” may contain anywhere from 30% to 60% MSG. But you as a consumer are denied this vital information. Your only recourse is to avoid all foods with these hidden label names. And as you will quickly discover, most manufactured foods contain one or more of these excitotoxin “taste enhancers.”

So what should the FDA do? First, it should guarantee the consumer nutritional information by requiring the manufacturer to list all additives containing MSG and hydrolyzed vegetable protein and do so under these names and not disguised names. Second, it should conduct open hearings on the safety of these additives with scientific testimony from those not connected to the food manufacturing industry or to the manufacturers of MSG, NutraSweet®, or hydrolyzed vegetable protein, or their representatives."

Read my MSG comics to find out about the corrupt activities of the food manufacturers and how the governing bodies have their hands tied because of the corporate interests of the Glutamate Industry.

Oh, here's the chaser...

"...The Global Clean Label Ingredients Market is expected to reach USD 57.05 billion by 2025, from USD 34.22 billion in 2017 growing at a CAGR of 6.6% during the forecast period of 2018 to 2025."

Profiting from the clean label ingredients?

Thursday 12 March 2020

Migraines? It's not the chocolate, chocolate fans

Plain, milk, with nuts, fruit, 70% dark, extra brute, white - most of us find chocolate an enjoyable food stuff yet for so many it's a migraine trigger. But is it really? Here's the low-down:

Chocolate Lover? Review Finds No Definitive Proof It Triggers Your Migraines by Gianna Melillo- HERE
Although it is the most commonly cited food-based trigger for migraines, there is insufficient evidence to prove chocolate is a migraine trigger, according to a review of 25 studies published in Nutrients.
“All provocative studies have failed to confirm that chocolate can trigger migraine attacks,” researchers said. “Many possible mechanisms through which chocolate can influence migraines exist, and more are beneficial than unfavorable.”
... In fact, it's well known that dark chocolate - at least 75% cacao - is a very beneficial antioxidant...  
Has anyone really checked the ingredients of your favourite chocolate? My migraines used to be triggered by chocolate during the early phase of my perimenopausal state. I noticed I could only eat dark chocolate Toblerone, not the milk chocolate Toblerone. I checked the ingredients list and the one thing the milk choccie version of Toblerone had that the dark version didn't, was the inclusion of  the word: 'flavouring'.
Why is this significant?

Only 10 companies control most of the world's ultra processed food chain - this is a massive food industry, and since the 1940's they've been adding flavouring to make low quality food more palatable. They're still doing it now, only they've taken to hiding their toxic flavour enhancers under secret names.

Depending on the percentage of monosodium glutamate; which is the artificial flavouring in a product, it doesn't have to declare it on the label. Sneaky little larks! Here's some of the names where the food manufacturers can hide their toxic chemicals:

Flavouring, flavourings or natural flavouring, hydrolysed milk protein, barley malt extract and soya lecithin.

Topic bar - spot the hidden MSG

Aero Milk Chocolate

Why am I making such a big thing about this?

Because MSG is a known migraine/headache trigger! In fact, it's one of the top reported side effects of consuming MSG!

And soya lecithin, unless certified as organic, is always made from GM soya beans; could this also be a contributing factor to side effects? Oh, and anything with 'hydrolysed' on its label is definitely hiding MSG.

OK, you still think I'm talking a load of baloney? (and anyway, all this chocolate talk is making you crave a chocolate break right now).

Well, let's take a look at some big brand names of chocolate and see if they all have some of the hidden names I mentioned. 

Milk Chocolate Toblerone: Flavouring
White Chocolate Toblerone: Flavouring
Coconut Toblerone: Flavouring
Fruit and nut Toblerone: Flavouring
Dark Toblerone - no flavouring, soya lecithin

Cadbury creme egg - Flavourings
Cadbury Dairy Milk - Flavourings
Cadbury Double Decker Chocolate Bar - Flavourings
Cadbury flake - Flavourings
Cadbury Wispa Chocolate Bar - Flavourings
Cadbury Aero - Flavourings
Cadbury Crunchie Chocolate Bar - Flavourings
Cadbury Fudge - Flavourings
Cadbury Chocolate Eclairs - Flavourings
Cadbury Timeout Wafer Bars - Flavourings
Cadbury Twirl - Flavourings

OK, so I think we can say that Cadbury include 'flavourings' in most of their popular milk chocolate bars...

Well, would you look at that! Cadbury Bournville Dark Chocolate Bar - no flavourings, just soya lecithin.

Bounty bar - soya lecithin E471
Fry's Turkish Delight -  modified maize starch, flavourings
Galaxy - soya lecithin
Galaxy Minstrels Chocolate - soya lecithinHershey's Milk Chocolate Bar - soya lecithin*
*Produced from Genetically Modified Sugar Beets and Soya Beans)
Kitkat - soya lecithinyeastnatural flavourings
Lindt Selection Chocolate Box - milk proteins, barley malt extract, flavouring, Vanillin* 
*vanillin is a known GM source of flavouring
Mars - barley malt extractsoya lecithinhydrolysed milk protein
M&M's - flavouring
Milky Way Chocolate - barley malt extract
Nestle Milky Bar - natural flavouring
Revels - flavourings
Snickers - soya lecithinmilk protein (is that hydrolysed milk protein?)
Tesco Classic 74% Dark Chocolate 100G - flavouring
Tesco Milk Chocolate Bar 200G - flavouring
Tesco Dark Chocolate Bar 200G - flavouring
Topic - hydrolysed milk protein, barley malt extract
Twix - soya lecithin
Yorkie Bar - no flavouring (Interesting... it also states: No artificial colours, flavours or preservatives)

I thought I'd take a quick look at the more expensive bars of chocolate - you notice that none of them contain the nebulous 'flavouring' tag. We also have to remember that soya lecithin, unless labelled as organic will contain GM soya, so even some of the more expensive brands are not without the problematic 'bad boys' on the ingredients label!

Green and Blacks Organic Milk Chocolate - soya lecithin (certified organic)
Green and Black's Organic Cocoa Powder - no flavourings or lecithin
Green & Black's Dark Orange and Almond Chocolate Bar - blood orange oil and  vanilla bean powder (no lecithin).
GREEN & BLACK'S Organic Dark Bar 85% Cocoa Solids - vanilla extract
Green & Black's Organic White Chocolate Bar - soya lecithin (certified organic)
Venchi Venezuela Milk Chocolate - soya lecithin
Lindt Excellence Intense Dark 90% Cacao Chocolate Bar - vanilla
Lindt Excellence Milk 65%, 55%, 45%, Cocoa Chocolate Bar - soya lecithin
Lindt Excellence Milk 70% Cocoa Chocolate Bar - natural bourbon vanilla beans
Belcolade Dark Couverture Chocolate (buttons) all grades - natural vanilla flavouring
Callebaut Select 811 Dark Chocolate Callets all grades - soya lecithin and natural vanilla flavouring
Ingredients Heaven - Finest Belgian 70.5% Dark Chocolate Couverture - soya lecithin and natural vanilla flavouring

Chocolat Madagascar 100% Cocoa - Single Origin Fine Dark Chocolate Bar 85g - 100% cacao
The HealthyTree Company Organic Raw Cacao Powder - just cacao
Cacao Barry - Extra Brute Amber Cocoa Powder - just cacao

Now it's worth noting that 'natural vanilla flavouring' can also hide chemicals, because again it doesn't state EXACTLY where the flavouring comes from; whereas in the Lindt Excellence Milk 70% the vanilla comes from natural bourbon vanilla beans...

It seems the more common, cheaper chocolates, the ones that are often advertised in multi packs in UK supermarkets for the bargain price of £1 for 4 bars all have the ubiquitous 'flavouring'.

The Glutamate Association relies upon the fact that most people are too busy when shopping to check every single label and sometimes the ingredients list on a chocolate bar is hidden under the flap, especially if it's not a large bar.

The word 'Flavouring' doesn't sound so innocuous now does it?

Oh, and I almost forgot to mention; MSG is addictive, it disrupts the endocrine system in the body which in turn screws up our ability to control our appetite... are you addicted to chocolate?

Here's some important info from Dr. Russell Blaylock, a retired neurosurgeon in his book: 'Excitotoxins - The Taste that Kills'.

"...Another way the FDA works with the Glutamate Association is by yielding to their lobbying efforts to change the labeling laws so that the words “monosodium glutamate” are not required on food labels unless it contains 100% pure MSG. Also MSG need not even be mentioned by any name if one product containing pure MSG is only used as an ingredient in another food. For example, if broth is used to make a soup, and the broth contains pure MSG, MSG does not have to be listed as an ingredient. But if the broth is sold alone, it must appear on the label.

As Dr. Schwartz has shown, substances labeled as “spices,” “natural flavoring” and “flavoring” may contain anywhere from 30% to 60% MSG. But you as a consumer are denied this vital information. Your only recourse is to avoid all foods with these hidden label names. And as you will quickly discover, most manufactured foods contain one or more of these excitotoxin “taste enhancers.”

So what should the FDA do? First, it should guarantee the consumer nutritional information by requiring the manufacturer to list all additives containing MSG and hydrolyzed vegetable protein and do so under these names and not disguised names. Second, it should conduct open hearings on the safety of these additives with scientific testimony from those not connected to the food manufacturing industry or to the manufacturers of MSG, NutraSweet®, or hydrolyzed vegetable protein, or their representatives."

Read my MSG comics to find out more; including industry tactics to keep these additives in the food chain and the disastrous side effects of consuming it.

Thursday 26 December 2019

Why Aspartame laden diet drinks should be in the Alcohol Aisle of the Supermarkets...

Do you find that you can't stop drinking diet drinks? When you recycle, is your bin full of empty diet drink cans and bottles? Or do you occasionally drink diet products? Or maybe you add 'Equal' or 'Nutrasweet' to your hot drinks instead of sugar? Either way, when the artificial sweetener Aspartame is consumed it is proven that you run the risk of multiple health problems. In this post I want to mainly discuss ADDICTION. No, you're not addicted to diet drinks but you are addicted to the methyl ester which further breaks down to methanol which is released into your body when a diet drink is consumed. Ann Hensz's story of addiction to Diet Coke is a sad one. Read it HERE (the comic at the bottom of the page).
We all know that ethanol (drinking alcohol) is damaging to a person but "free" methyl alcohol or methanol is much worse because it's highly addictive, therefore withdrawal from drinking diet sodas is a problem. Try telling a person who is addicted to drinking Diet Coke that they shouldn't be drinking it - very problematic indeed! I know - I've tried!.

Extract from my comic strip: The Case of the Killer Sweetener
What is methanol? It's another type of alcohol but not like a flavoured gin, whiskey, wine or a glass of cider (which is ethanol alcohol); methanol is the sort of alcohol you would use to clean industrial machinery! Think more along the lines of methylated spirit, rough alcohol. Sometimes it's called 'wood alcohol'. Every time you consume a diet drink it breaks down into: Aspartic acid, Phenylalanine, Methyl Ester and then to Formaldehyde...
Extract from my comic strip: The Case of the Killer Sweetener 
Formaldehyde? Who would willingly consume that? What are the implications of consuming formaldehyde? Formaldehyde will accumulate in the body and is highly likely to have a toxic effect on the sensitive tissues in the body; like the eyes and the brain. If you are addicted, as many people are, you might find that your eyesight diminishes. I remember a man who was addicted to diet coke. He was almost blind. His wife begged me to make him see that this had all happened since he started drinking Diet Coke. I showed him the film: Sweet Misery. I brought out the book by Dr Roberts 'Aspartame Disease - An Ignored Epidemic' - a medical text of over 1000 pages of case studies. Nothing I said could convince him because he was addicted to the methanol in Aspartame; no different than an alcoholic addicted to whisky! To find out more, read my comic strip: The Aspartame Story - The Case of the Killer Sweetener. 

I've witnessed a whole family addicted to Diet Pepsi. The father was in the worst condition with severe psychological disturbances; he was on many medications which in turn could have exasperated the problem by interacting with the chemical Aspartame; as it's known to do this. The wife knew he had a serious problem and tried to get him to stop drinking Diet Pepsi; she also drank it but to a lesser extent, thinking it was helping her lose weight. She didn't lose weight, she gained weight (see my post: Zero Calorie Psychology). The son had similar psychological problems as his father and was also under a doctor. I tried to warn them, but like all addicts, how do you stop an alcoholic from desiring another drink? In the future, we're going to see Aspartame sufferers attending AA - 'Aspartame Anonymous'!

Rumour has it that President Trump drinks 12 cans of Diet Coke a day.... in fact even one can is dangerous indeed for a leader with a finger on the bomb button...

Info from Dr Woodrow C. Monte:
... The Science: Aspartame tastes sweet because, attached to it, is a molecule of methanol (wood alcohol). The methanol is very loosely bound and will fly off with the slightest heating or when consumed. Because methanol’s toxicity is well known, millions of dollars were invested by Aspartame’s inventors in an attempt to attach some other “safer” substance, but this attempt was not successful. With the approval of Aspartame, a new source of methanol was added to what is a very short list of methanol containing foods.
Methanol - Trojan Horse: Why is methanol dangerous? Inside cells, methanol is converted to formaldehyde, an undetectable toxin and recognized cancer causing agent of the highest order (Group I). Even when formaldehyde is injected directly into a living human, it turns into formal hydrate, a very aggressive molecule that instantly attaches to any protein molecule which it makes contact. 
The formaldehyde molecule then completely disappears within the cover of the much larger protein. No diagnostic procedures, can detect a protein molecule so changed, yet the damaged molecule, loses function. Damaged protein molecules are not tolerated by the immune system. Specific detection sites for “formaldehyde modified protein” are found on white blood cells called macrophages. Macrophages seek out and destroy these proteins at a rate 100 times faster than proteins not treated with formaldehyde. Upon autopsy, macrophages are found in the damaged areas of the brains of those who have died with MS ...
Most importantly, hundreds of people have seen an improvement and even banished their symptoms simply by STOPPING THE CONSUMPTION OF ASPARTAME. Please don't forget to check labels on all food and drink products as manufacturers often don't make it clear that it contains Aspartame (E951). Also, check all medications because Aspartame is in hundreds of over the counter drugs and prescribed drugs and ordinary vitamin and mineral supplements; especially soluble & chewable ones.

Tell your friends, family and watch for the warning signs of ill health if you know someone who consumes diet or zero calorie products. Children and the elderly are especially at risk because they have a weaker blood brain barrier, thereby allowing more toxins into the brain.

Once your eyes are opened, you'll notice that supermarkets have far more zero calorie drinks than sugared ones. In the UK, this is because of the sugar tax introduced in 2018.  Even in hospital cafes I've noticed that they favour zero calorie drinks over 'natural' or sugared drinks.

Be cautious with drinks you once knew and trusted - Ribena changed its recipe away from sugar. Often, Aspartame is hidden on the label - if it says zero or low calorie then beware!

If in doubt - CHECK EVERYTHING!!!

Take the 60 day test - stop taking anything that contains Aspartame and keep a diary to see how your health improves. Sucralose is also something to avoid, check out my pages for more info. Read the 'Aspartame Injuries' pages - and if you don't find that a sobering read then try the 'Aspartame Toxicity - The Scientific Reports' page.

One can of Aspartame laden drink can cause symptoms.

Warning President Trump - for your health and the safety of the world!! That's one diet coke too much...

Sunday 22 December 2019

Zero Calorie Psychology

We all enjoy getting something for nothing, dodging the bullet especially when it involves the pleasure of sweetened foods or drinks. Human beings are 100% motivated by desires; it's why millions of people fall for the zero calorie advertising: Zero Calories means Zero Fat! Dieting without giving up that sweet hit!

I call this 'Pick Pocketing the Future'. Even to some extent, people with Diabetes are trying to obviate the same desire but for medical reasons. It's no different than gambling.

These little mini victories only make us want to do it again - it's like the buzz of stealing - if you don't get caught you want to do it again; and again. It's addictive. The worst thing about playing Russian Roulette is there is a very good chance the barrel is loaded; artificial sweeteners like Aspartame are that bullet. Some people are even aware that the next shot could be the one that blows your brains out but they still pull the trigger! Aspartame is addictive! (see Why Aspartame laden diet drinks should be in the Alcohol Aisle of the Supermarkets).

But why do we risk the lives of ourselves and our loved ones? What is the psychology behind it?

The world, particularly the West is a nation of people obsessed with body image. We even have numerous terms for obesity that we'd never think of calling people with other medical problems:

Morbidly obese, severely obese, grossly obese, obesity, overweight, fat, chubby, plump, stout, heavy-set, heavy large, solid, chubby, portly, rotund, flabby, paunchy, pot-bellied, beer-bellied, dumpy, meaty, broad in the beam, of ample proportions, Falstaffian, buxom, corpulent, bloated, gross, gargantuan, elephantine, fleshy, tubby, roly-poly, beefy, porky, blubbery, poddy, chunky, well padded, well covered, well upholstered, podgy, fubsy, lard-arsed, sonsy, pursy, couch potatoes, abdominous, stoutists...

In the 1970's in the UK, the word 'Spastic' was an acceptable word for people with Cerebral Palsy - there were charity shops called 'The National Spastics Society' no-one thought about it but it was eventually considered to be an offensive word, so in 1994 it was changed to 'Scope'. All this came about to stop the awkwardness and negativity around people who suffered from disabling conditions like Cerebral Palsy; to recognise that people shouldn't be marginalised because of their disabilities.

This isn't the case with people who are regarded as; let's use the word 'obese' - in fact, society is quite happy to use these descriptive words. Billy Connelly once said in a comedy sketch while holding a pretend piece of belly fat: 'This must be the morbid bit.' We all laugh. Why do we laugh? There are some people with thyroid problems or other medical reasons they're overweight but they are immediately judged as just 'fat'. They must be gluttons. They obviously don't exercise. They are Couch Potatoes. They MUST be!
We would never call a smoker a morbid smoker, a gross smoker - we might label them a 'Chain Smoker' but that's hardly as offensive as being called 'blubbery' - yet the possible outcome from chain smoking for decades has been death! Cigarettes are now the next demon and suffers the same 'disgusting' label that obesity does - it doesn't fit the 'beautiful body' image and it's taken society decades to finally wake up from the illusion that it's safe. It's all about how it's advertised to us and the 'image' that society adopts and regards as 'acceptable'. Obesity (I hate the term) has become the visible icon for all the things we shouldn't do. Why? Because it's shamefully visible. And I use the word 'Shame' because that's one of the strongest human motivators - it's what this diet fad is all about: Shame. It's shameful to be overweight. It's shameful to have a spare tyre. It's sinful to be fat. The worst thing about the condition of being overweight is the 'visibility factor' - you can't hide it!

Society has decided that people who put on weight must be shamed because they do not fit the accepted shape that society requires and demands. Doctors will shame us (they are the worst) friends and family will shame us. Magazines and advertising will only show the beautiful people and if they're not beautiful at least they're not fat! Being fat is worse than being ugly in the mind of society! And if you're fat and ugly? You haven't got a chance!
What we are not admitting to is that the diet industry is big MONEY!

Global Weight Control Products Market was valued at USD 350.21 Billion in 2018 and is projected to reach USD 693.74 Billion by 2026, growing at a CAGR of 8.94 % from 2019 to 2026. - HERE

The shame that society make us feel causes us to find sneaky ways to still consume sweet products without the guilt, so when acceptable tasting diet drinks came on the market in the 1980's: Diet Pepsi and Diet Coke - the world heaved a sigh of relief! (read my comic about how Aspartame was approved for soft drinks).

It's all down to 'size matters'. We're obsessed with our body size. Doctors are even more obsessed with it. Models are skinnier than ever. Teenagers are happy if they can feel their ribs. If it didn't hurt us, I'm sure we'd slice off our skins to gain a leaner profile. Being obese in the 21st Century is worse than being a murderer. It's no wonder people risk consuming artificial sweeteners. People refuse to listen to the facts and stories about these chemical time bombs. They even lie to themselves about how much they consume when confronted with the facts; especially that it's addictive.

None of that matters, as long as they don't gain weight (even though medical studies tell us that Aspartame can make you crave carbohydrates, thereby making you eat more and gain weight).

According to the world, we have a severe obesity problem, well, with virtually every soft drink on the world-wide market using Aspartame, and products like  zero-calorie chewing gum, desserts and it's even in medications - it's no wonder! (important article about Aspartame and obesity - HERE)

Why do we trust that zero calorie drinks won't hurt us? Doesn't the English phrase: 'Don't get owt for nowt,' make sense any more? (You don't get something for nothing). Why do we think we can cheat our bodies into thinking its receiving sugar? There is a price to pay because the body is a chemical factory; it thinks its receiving a hit of sugar and sends out insulin to deal with it - but guess what? There is no sugar, so what are the possible effects of increased insulin in the body?

Excess insulin in the bloodstream causes cells in your body to absorb too much glucose (sugar) from your blood. It also causes the liver to release less glucose. These two effects together create dangerously low glucose levels in your blood. This condition is called hypoglycemia. Your blood needs the right amount of glucose for your body to operate properly. Glucose is the body’s fuel. Without it, your body is like a car running out of gas. The severity of the situation depends on how low the blood sugar level goes. It also depends on the person, because everyone reacts differently.

So, if we become hypoglycemic, what do we do? We eat something. We eat something we didn't need to eat because a chemical made our bodies think we need it. Excuse me for logical thinking, but isn't that the start of consuming excess food and thereby gaining weight? Hello? Yet people who are dieting will consume diet or zero calorie products thinking they're helping their bodies lose weight!

Yes, too much sugar is bad for you - no-one is contesting this, especially white sugar products but hey, why don't we do things the old fashioned way: cut down on your sugar intake, don't cheat! You don't get something for nothing! 
We often judge people by their appearance.
Here's an experiment.

If I were to show a group of people two photos, one is a picture of a very overweight person eating a cream-cake next to a plate on the kitchen table laden with several more cream cakes and alternatively, a picture of a beautiful, slim woman drinking Barcardi dressed in a swimsuit next to a pool, and asked the group which picture they thought was a more pleasing image, I can guarantee that most people would pick the slim person. Now what they don’t know, is that the person drinking the Barcardi is an alcoholic and because of this has lost her children, her job, her house, but we do ‘know’ that it’s disgusting that someone so large is eating a cream cake; whether or not they intend to eat the rest of the cakes is only an assumption. The person could be celebrating eating a cream cake because they have just received a doctorate in law. Eating a cream cake is not the norm for them because actually they are overweight because of a thyroid problem but we would not conceive of this notion at a glance due to social conditioning. We have seen the ‘apparent' evidence that this person is fat due to eating cream cakes and there are more cream cakes on the table.

We judge people all the time. It’s a survival instinct because of the society we live in – is this person someone I might be able to trust? Is this person OK to talk to? This person is overweight because they are lazy, greedy and have no self-control - not a person I'd like to have as a friend...

If the people of the world have a serious weight problem then why do we have so many cooking programs on the TV? Why do we advertise gluttonous eating at Christmas? Advertising and selling equals profits and Money. We'll get you to pay for eating that 2000 calorie Christmas dinner - you can join our diet club in January. Now you're in another club that tells you that fat is bad and there's a good chance you have to pay to be lectured about it. Apparently it's perfectly acceptable to have a large appetite for sex; we'll snigger about that. It’s acceptable to obsessively love football but 'disgusting' 'gross' 'unacceptable' 'unforgivable' 'greedy' to enjoy eating Mars bars.

Interestingly enough, the article doesn't say WHY it matters for society... it's just scandalous that people will apparently be overweight!
To get it out of the way: it’s a tired joke that Americans are too heavy. The medical community is also plagued by a disturbing trend in which doctors obsess over their patients’ weight rather than offering any real medical advice or care
I rest my case. Well - almost, until I read this...

Ninth Circuit Shuts Down Claim That "Diet" In Diet Soda Is Unlawfully DeceptiveHERE
by Glenn G. Lammi (contributor) Washington Legal Foundation Contributor Group, Chief Counsel, Legal Studies Division

...In the Food Court

Becerra filed suit in the Food Court (Northern District of California) alleging the defendant's use of "diet" in Diet Dr. Pepper was a false or deceptive promise that the soda "would 'assist in weight loss' or at least 'not cause weight gain.'" Diet Dr. Pepper would not assist in weight loss, Becerra claimed, because it contained aspertame, a sugar substitute that some studies associate with weight gain. After allowing Becerra to amend her complaint three times, the district court ultimately ruled the lawsuit failed to state a valid claim and dismissed it with prejudice. Becerra appealed. 

In the Ninth Circuit

The three-judge panel not only affirmed the Northern District's decision, it also selected the opinion for formal publication in the Federal Reporter. Why is this significant? The Ninth Circuit has developed an unfortunate preference of not formally publishing its decisions on food-labeling consumer-fraud cases. "Unpublished" decisions don't have precedential effect, though parties can cite them in court papers. Becerra stands as binding precedent for all district courts in the Ninth Circuit.

The opinion focuses on the reasonableness of Becerra's belief that the term "diet" implies the product will assist in weight loss. Under California law, plaintiffs alleging deception must establish a probability that a "significant portion" of consumers, "acting reasonably under the circumstances," could be misled. As we've written previously, too many trial judges in the Ninth Circuit have held that a jury, not the court, should make the "reasonable consumer" determination in consumer-fraud cases.

A rehearing was denied. 3rd February 2020 -  HERE

Danger, Will Robinson!

Hi. There is a contact form on the right hand side of the blog and various information pages on the right of the blog. My blog posts: Why As...