NEWSPEAK (Assessment): Bittersweet Aspartame

The concept of newspeak i.e. the manipulation of words and beliefs to establish power and profit, can be seen everywhere in the modern world today, from the complex nature of government and infrastructure to the simplicity of everyday normality, the fact remains that it cant be avoided.

Everyday words are modified to keep us clueless and somewhat sedated from the necessary realities. Obvious manipulation of language includes the replacement of the word “war” which is changed to “defense”, or “downsizing” instead of “firing people”. This doctoring of language has become commonplace in our society today, and is widely and unknowingly accepted.

Although this kind of propaganda is not entirely indoctrinating as any vaguely knowing person can scratch beneath the surface to reveal the true meanings of these so-called socially acceptable words. However what happens when the powers that be try to erase any knowledge of something ever happening, thoroughly embracing the world of George Orwell’s 1984?
The problems really arise when the people in power want you to believe something regardless of whether it is harmful or not towards the planet or us.

Today's food industry has seen numerous additives and preservatives removed from our supermarket shelves, with links to a range of illnesses brought on by the need to preserve or greedily cheapen food prices. But what happens when these additives and preservatives are so widely used that to remove them from the products would cause astronomical loses in money? Is it better to go on living with constant health risks not knowing, or does more need to be done to rid such problems? With such uncertainty surrounding the use of aspartame as a sweetener, why has its usage not been suspended until definite outcomes have been revealed?

My inspiration for writing this article comes from a close member of my family who is absolutely adamant that until aspartame was removed from her diet that she was almost constantly experiencing headaches. Consuming two cans of a diet coke a day, she became increasingly worried and came to the conclusion that when she removed the carbonated drinks from her, that her headaches stopped.

With aspartame being drastically cheaper than sugar and its credentials lying in the fact that it is indeed "Sugar Free" gives positive weight, but is aspartame’s positive approach in removing sugar from people’s diet causing real harm?

Aspartame releases aspartate during digestion. Aspartate is a neurotransmitter used by the neurons in the brain. It is a type of excitatory amino acid. Excitatory amino acids are normal and necessary brain chemicals, and as such, they are allowed to cross the blood-brain barrier. Aspartate, the principal chemical component of aspartame, is a neurotransmitter and a type of excitatory amino acid. It is a natural and necessary body chemical. Neurotransmitters cross the blood-brain barrier.

The blood-brain barrier is designed to protect the brain from the invasion of harmful chemicals. When normal neurotransmitters such as aspartate and glutamate cross this barrier in excess, they will cause poisoning and lead to the death of the nerve cells within the brain and spinal cord.[1]

Let us be frank, it is all about profit over knowledge, with aspartame being the most profitable synthetic sweetener in the world and being present in thousands of supermarket products, it is far too convenient that to date there has been an abundance of uncertain trials on this sweetener after it has been widely linked to many illnesses including brain tumors, which never prevail to anything. The NutraSweet Company (world’s biggest supplier of aspartame) states that its product is used in more than 5,000 products and consumed by some 250 million people worldwide.

With the money, which aspartame companies create, there are certainly sufficient funds for extensive aspartame trials to put all the speculation to rest, but why would a multi-billion soft drink sweetener company want to embark in such testing with the possibility of negative outcomes? What is particularly worrying is that all the trials that have been sponsored by aspartame driven industries have all had positive outcomes in that aspartame is entirely safe for consumption, however all independent research have discovered a variety of problems in human consumption; I mean, come on, how can any testing of aspartame draw any positives when it’s ingredients include methanol and formaldehyde?

When researching I stumbled upon this striking article:

Analysis Shows Nearly 100% of Independent Research Finds Problems With Aspartame
An analysis of peer reviewed medical literature using MEDLINE and other databases was conducted by Ralph G. Walton, MD, Chairman, The Center for Behavioral Medicine, Professor of Clinical Psychiatry, Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine. Dr. Walton analyzed 164 studies which were felt to have relevance to human safety questions. Of those studies, 74 studies had aspartame industry-related sponsorship and 90 were funded without any industry money.

Of the 90 non-industry-sponsored studies, 83 (92%) identified one or more problems with aspartame. Of the 7 studies which did not find a problems, 6 of those studies were conducted by the FDA. Given that a number of FDA officials went to work for the aspartame industry immediately following approval (including the former FDA Commissioner), many consider these studies to be equivalent to industry-sponsored research.

Of the 74 aspartame industry-sponsored studies, all 74 (100%) claimed that no problems were found with aspartame. This is reminiscent of tobacco industry research where it is primarily the tobacco research which never finds problems with the product, but nearly all of the independent studies do find problems.

The 74 aspartame industry-sponsored studies are those which one inveriably sees cited in PR/news reports and reported by organizations funded by Monsanto/Benevia/NutraSweet (e.g., IFIC, ADA). These studies have severe design deficiencies which help to guarantee the "desired" outcomes.

G.H. Searle, the company essentially responsibly for the beginning of the production of aspartame, would have had you believe it as safe when it was first introduced, but there was no extensive research into whether it does or does not cause brain tumors or other illnesses. The company simply employed their political claret through Donald Rumsfeld’ links with President Ronald Reagan to ensure the continuation of its production and thus consumption, all at the potential expense of the population’s health.

For this somewhat encrypted and puzzle-like subject I decided to contact a variety of people responsible for campaigning against aspartame use. Among those were Facebook’s biggest anti-aspartame group leader, Ceri Williams, and the founder of Aspartame Consumer Safety Network (ACSN), Mary Stoddard. Mary in particular proved very helpful and insightful due to her year’s of campaigning and personal experience with aspartame. Mary was responsible for taking the anti-aspartame campaign international in 1987, following the brain tumor death in 1985 of her forty two year old husband. Stoddard went on to expose the massive hidden epidemic of aspartame related disease and government cover-up, using her skills as a former broadcast journalist and member of the Texas Radio Hall of Fame. Thousands of serious adverse reactions fill her organizations database files.[2] For full bio see http://www.aspartamesafety.com/mary_nash_stoddard.htm.

After contacting Mary she gave me the following information:

"Hello Jon,

We do not need further research to show the harmful effects of aspartame. That research is already in place. Peer reviewed medical and science journals have published the studies. I am referring to the harmful breakdown products: methanol, formaldehyde, phenylalanine, aspartic acid, formic acid and diketopiperazine. Most of the indicting research pre-dates the early eighties when aspartame was approved in the U.S. My co-founder, James Turner and most of our independent researchers feel as I do."

Many scientists believe that it is beyond reasonable doubt that aspartame consumption can lead to brain tumors. However as the negative symptoms possibly associated with aspartame consumption vary so greatly; ranging from headaches to seizures, willing funding is not always available as the medical world will not fund research into illness which fits no definite mold.
Are we willing to carry on using aspartame products at the possible expense to our health or are we happy living without real knowledge? After all, ignorance is bliss.

With a lot of internet hullabaloo, it is easy to get swamped and sucked into a somewhat indoctrinating ethos of being anti-aspartame, as bogus information, backed up not through any scientific evidence is rife, but what is backed up is truly harrowing.

The lack of any clear conclusive evidence that aspartame DOES NOT cause ill side-effects within humans is enough to warrant mass investigation to be pursued before the world's population potentially eat or drink themselves to death through ignorance and multinational monopolization. After the subject has been quiet for a few years, I firmly believe that the issue of aspartame consumption is close to breaking point. Hopefully aspartame safety is not an Orwellian fabrication, but when no certainty surrounds its safety the only thing that is certain is a strong sense of worry.
[1] 1999-2008, NaturoDoc LLC, http://www.naturodoc.com/library/nutrition/aspartame.htm, Date accessed 25/1/2010
[2] Aspartame Consumer Safety Network, http://www.aspartamesafety.com/mary_nash_stoddard.htm, Date accessed 20/1/2010