Aspartame: MSG’s Evil Twin?

Sadly, fluoride and MSG aren’t the only skeletons in the governmental closet.  Another amino acid has been launched on unsuspecting consumers.  Like MSG and fluoride, the damage it can do is extensive, but this additive’s origins are even more suspicious.

In 1965, at a research laboratory at G.D. Searles, James Schlatter accidentally discovered Aspartame (Nutrasweet) while working to find a cure for stomach ulcers.  By 1975, G.D. Searle had managed to talk the FDA to allow its use as an artificial sweetener, but not a food additive.  By 1975, things were going a little sour.  It seems that the research G.D. Searle did to prove the safety of Aspartame left out scientific studies that proved it caused tumors and epileptic seizures in monkeys.[1] 

In 1975, FDA Commissioner, Dr. Alexander Schmidt appointed a special Task Force to examine G.D. Searle and its testing methods regarding Aspartame.  In 1977, the task force found G.D. Searle Company to be fraudulent in their research on the safety of Aspartame.  FDA Chief Counsel, Richard Merrill suggested to U.S. Attorney Sam Skinner that a grand jury be set up to investigate G.D. Searle.  Strangely enough, both Skinner, and his later replacement, never brought G.D. Searle to trial.  Instead, both of them were hired away from their government positions by G.D. Searle’s law firm.

Dr. John Olney the same scientist who researched the dangers of MSG, along with the FDA, managed to bring together a Public Board of Inquiry to investigate the toxicity of Aspartame. In 1980, the board unanimously voted to reject the use of Aspartame until further testing could be done in regards to research indicating that it caused brain tumors. 

For a moment, it looked like the world would be protected from Aspartame.  G.D. Searle Corporation, however, had an ace up their sleeve.  His name was Donald and they had hired him in 1977 as Chief Executive Officer in an attempt to save the economic ruin that threatened to befall them.  Donald had extensive government contacts from his time working as a presidential staffer for both Nixon and Ford.

Donald had business savvy, and was well connected.  He saw Aspartame for the cash cow that it could be.  In 1980, Aspartame’s bid for acceptance as a food additive was stifled, but Donald did not give up.   

In January of 1981, just after Ronald Reagan brought the Republicans back to the White House, Donald and G. D. Searle put in a new application to the FDA to declare Aspartame safe as a food additive.  In March, FDA Commissioner Jere Goyan  established a 5-member panel of scientists to review the issues outlined by the 1980 Public Board of Inquiry.  A full review would never come to pass.  In April, Reagan replaced FDA Commissioner Jere Goyan with Arthur Hull Hayes, Jr.  In July, Hayes ignored all previous findings and declared that Aspartame could be added to food.  One year later, it became legal to add it to soft drinks.

Aspartame, aka Nutrasweet, made its mark on the world and guaranteed the financial success of Donald’s company.  Donald must have impressed Reagan, for in 1983 the President named him special envoy to the Middle East.  Donald returned from this post in time to oversee the sale of G. D. Searle to Monsonto Company in 1985.

Diet soda was the new drink of popularity.  It was used extensively to supply the troops in action during the Gulf War. 

If Aspartame’s shrouded and questionable history is not enough to raise your eyebrows, maybe you should consider the toxic effects that research has shown that it has on the body.

Lately, research has found problems with Nutrasweet.  Even the official Nutrasweet Website, ‘www.nutrasweet.com’, states that Nutrasweet breaks down in the body to produce methanol. Methanol in turn creates formaldehyde.[2] The formaldehyde created by Aspartame collects in the tissues of the body organs, especially the liver.  Scientific research has found that “Aspartame consumption may constitute a hazard.”[3]

The American Academy of Clinical Toxicology states that methanol-derived formaldehyde in the body has been linked to nausea, abdominal pain, blindness, and impairment of the central nervous system.[4]  Furthermore formaldehyde in drinking water has been proven to create cancerous tumors.[5]

Formaldehyde is a dangerous chemical that has been shown to cause reactions in many people.  Chemical Sensitivity Disorder can be caused by formaldehyde.  This disorder may be closely linked to Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, and fibromyalgia.[6] 

Chronic Fatigue Syndrome is an ailment on the increase in the nation.  Its cause is a mystery to the medical community.  One of the main symptoms of CFS is fibromyalgia: chronic pain and soreness in the muscles.  Research has shown that human subjects diagnosed with fibromyalgia managed to completely or almost completely reduce the symptoms of the disorder by removing MSG and Aspartame from their diet.[7]  If removing these two excitotoxins from the diet can cure fibromyalgia, could they be the cause?

Some people have suggested that in hot conditions (above 86 degrees Fahrenheit) Nutrasweet breaks down to create even higher concentrations of methanol and formaldehyde.  Imagine what could happen if diet sodas containing Aspartame were left out in very hot temperatures, perhaps a desert, where thirsty people, say soldiers, could drink large amounts of them everyday.  Some people might go as far as to say that these soldiers could experience long term effects from such exposure, and may have symptoms that replicate those of methanol or formaldehyde poisoning. 

Strangely enough, Gulf War Syndrome (GWS) may have symptoms very similar to those seen in cases of methanol or formaldehyde poisoning.  In fact “most symptoms of Gulf War Illness are similar to Chronic Fatigue Syndrome and/or Fibromyalgia.”[8]

Scientists studying victims of Gulf War Syndrome say that their symptomolagy “generally manifests as a set of nonspecific complaints with emphasis on central nervous system impairment.”[9]  Central nervous system impairment, where have we seen that before?  That’s what the American Academy of toxicology says happens when the body gets too much methanol.  Thanks to the Nutrasweet Corporate Website, we know that Aspartame breaks down into methanol in the body.  Could there be a link?

With the new influx of funding for the study and research of Gulf War Syndrome, perhaps some money could be set aside to test a hypothesis that examines the long term effect of heated soda containing Nutrasweet on the human body.

It would be rather disappointing if there was a connection between Aspartame and Gulf War Syndrome, for the simple reason that the Donald who pushed the approval of it through the FDA is now the Secretary of Defense: Donald Rumsfeld.  Could he have poisoned the soldiers that now serve him?

Stepping away from conjecture to hard science, we can find another very interesting phenomenon:  Aspartame can take on the same excitoxic qualities as Glutamate.  Aspartic Acid (one of the amino acids in Aspartame) can affect the same neurons in the body that Glutamate does.  It can even increase epileptic activity in children.[10]  

Phenylalanine is the other amino acid that Aspartame breaks down into when digested.  People with the genetically inherited syndrome, phenylketonuria, cannot properly metabolize this amino acid.  For these people, Aspartame is a toxic substance.  Pregnant mothers who have this condition and ingest Aspartame during pregnancy have a 93% chance of their baby becoming mentally retarded, and a 72% chance that their baby will be born with a substantially smaller brain.[11]  If Aspartame can cause birth defects such as these, is it really a healthy alternative to sugar?

Perhaps the scientists of the companies who produced Nutrasweet know more about its questionable safety than they are saying.

G.D. Searle, 4 years after marketing Aspartame, was sold with the help of Donald Rumsfeld to Monsanto Company in 1985.  In December of 1999 Monsanto announced it was merging with Pharmacia & Upjohn.  On March 23^rd, 2000 both company’s shareholders voted to approve the merger.  The merger was to take place on March 31^st.  But on March 27^th, four days after the shareholders voted to approve the merger and four days before the company’s merger, Monsanto approved the sale of its Aspartame interests.  It sold its international interests to Ajinomoto Corporation (the MSG giant) for 67 million, and its American Nutrasweet Company to J.W. Childs Equity Partners II, L.P for $440 million in cash.[12]  Why would a company divest itself of a half billion dollars in corporate value just days before a merger?  Perhaps Pharmacia and Upjohn did not want Nutrasweet on their hands.  As it stands now, J.W. Childs Equity Partners II, L.P, are the new owners of Nutrasweet. J. W. Childs is a private investment firm.  The true financiers who backed their purchase of Nutrasweet hide behind a veil of anonymity, possibly protecting themselves from liability issues that could develop if Nutrasweet were found to be toxic.

For me to put something in my children’s mouths, I want to know that the company that created a product stands behind the product 100%.  With all the corporate restructuring surrounding Aspartame, who knows where the blame for Aspartame’s ills would go.  

I also want to know that the product I feed to my children was thoroughly tested and wasn’t rushed through the FDA approval process by people interested more in profits and politics than the safety of the nation.

Aspartame has its own promotional association called the Calorie Control Council.  Just like the Glutamate Association, their membership is made up of manufacturers and suppliers of artificial sweeteners and products.  Just like the Glutamate Association, their membership list is private, though the Calorie Control Council does offer a “select list of companies and products serving health-conscious consumers.”[13]  Not surprisingly, Ajinomoto Corporation and the Nutrasweet Company are on this list.  The mission statements of these two unrelated associations are so similar, it looks like they copied them from each other. 

Calorie Control Council:

            The Council seeks to provide an effective channel of communication among its members, the public and government officials, and to assure that scientific, medical and other pertinent research and information is developed and made available to all interested parties.        http://www.caloriecontrol.org/aboutCCC.html

Glutamate Association

            The Glutamate Association seeks to provide an effective channel of communication among its members, the public, the media, the scientific community, food professionals and government officials about the use and safety of Glutamates. The Association also seeks to assure that relevant research and information on the safety and efficacy of MSG are made available to all interested parties.             http://www.msgfacts.com/aboutus.html

Two unrelated organizations, sharing almost exactly the same mission statements in the same order, seem strangely suspect.

Their mission: to make sure that “pertinent” or “relevant” information are made available?  How do they decide what is pertinent or relevant.  Perhaps only things that protect their profit margin are considered pertinent and relevant.  These two organizations try to make propaganda sound like an altruistic endeavor.

The whole purpose of these associations’ existence is to promote their products for their own profit.  This is further shown by the fact that the Calorie Control Council is fronted by the Kellen company, a for profit company that specializes in providing executive directing and management to 47 such associations representing over 5000 companies.  Their list of clients includes both the International Food Additives Council, and International Glutamate Technical Committee. 

Kellen Company’s purpose to represent the companies in the associations they manage is no secret.  They advertise it on their Website ‘www.assnhq.com’ to sell their services.

Kellen Company states:

“Our aggressive leadership and respected relationships with Congress, regulatory agencies, the media, health and scientific groups and other opinion leaders significantly benefit our clients.”  They boast that their “professionals have extensive experience in government affairs, working with FDA, USDA, EPA, OSHA, CPSC, FTC, DOT and other federal and related state agencies on a variety of issues” and that with these agencies their “company is respected for its factual, scientifically based approach.” [14]

Here I thought that all those government organizations were on the side of the consumer. 

Worst of all, the Kellen Company declares that they “impact (and have drafted) regulations and legislation now in place affecting the industries we represent.”[15]  Here I thought that in the democratic country of America, it is the elected representatives that create regulations and legislation. 

The Kellen Company, one of the largest association representation companies in America, on the bankroll of 5000 companies, advertises what believers in democracy have always feared:  they, a partisan, corporate controlled entity, impact on and even draft the regulations and laws that control the industries they represent.

It seems that in America, criminals can write their own laws.

Have a toxic pollutant you want to get rid of? Have the Public Health Service put it in the nations water supply.

Have a brain-manipulating drug that makes people eat more? Get the FDA to declare it safe for use in uncontrolled quantities.

Have a patented sweetener that can cause brain tumors? Have some questionable politicians ram it through the approval process.

Isn’t America great?

It sure is for corporations.

All is not lost, we consumers have a watchdog looking out for our interests.  It’s called the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (CFSAN).  This is a division of the FDA whose primary function is consumer protection.  Finally we have hope.  The CFSAN has an Adverse Reaction Monitoring System (ARMS), to collect data on consumers contacting them to complain about problems they have with food additives.  The director, J. Levitt, states that the ARMS was created in 1985 to collect data on adverse reactions to Aspartame and MSG.  He pointed this fact out to the Committee on Government Reform on May 27^th, 1999. 

Surely the data collected by the ARMS would prompt the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition to reexamine the safety of MSG and Aspartame.  This was not to be.  In 1999, the Adverse Reaction Monitoring System was cancelled.  A letter from J. Levitt was written on August 29, 2002 to say the ARMS centralized data collection was scrapped in 1999.  The letter was strangely distressing, it was addressed to “Stakeholders,” and at the end of the letter asked the “trade associations” to forward the letter to their members.  References to the consumer public were nowhere to be found.

Is the FDA’s primary function not consumer protection?  Was not the Adverse Reaction Monitoring System put in place to listen to the concerns of the consumer?  Shouldn’t the public, not the trade associations, be the only stakeholders the FDA should answer to?

I dug deeper into the inner workings of the CFSAN and was disappointed by what I found.

In the CFSAN Priority Setting meeting on June 24^th and 25^th, 1998 there was an amazing representation of corporate associations.

In attendance were the American Frozen Food Institute, the Grocery Manufacturers of America, the Enzyme Technical Association (Ajinomoto is a member), the Calorie Control Council, (Ajinomoto is a member of this too), The Association for Dressings and Sauces, (members like Kraft and once again, Ajinomoto), as well as the Alliance of Food Additive Producers  (including members like Monsonto, Frito-Lay, Kraft, and Campbells).

Just to make sure they got their point abundantly clear, Kraft sent a direct representative as well.

Most of these companies were at the Priorities Meeting to request that the process to make a food ingredient Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) easier for the manufacturer.  The International Hydrolyzed Protein Council was also at the meeting demanding that the FDA not require them to label HVP as Glutamate on products.

The meeting wasn’t all one sided, one consumer group was represented there.  Dr. Jacobson, from the Center for Science in the Public Interest, tried to hold his own against the wolves.  He asked the CFSAN to “promptly approve well-founded health claims that would promote an overall healthier diet.”  Maybe he meant the research proving the danger of Aspartame and MSG.  He outlined the “need for greater authority to protect the public from unsafe and misleadingly labeled products.” He asked that the FDA tighten its poorly run approval process, and urged them to carefully scrutinize substances that already had GRAS status.

It is five years later and none of his requests have come to pass.  The well-represented associations fared much better.  1998 was a good year for Procter and Gamble and Frito-Lay.   Olestra, the ‘no-fat’ fat alternative introduced in 1996 and described by Dr. Jacobson as “the most complained about food additive in history” got a clean bill of health from the FDA, despite the frequent side effects of gastrointestinal upset.  After all, why should the FDA protect the consumer when they can protect the profiteering manufacturer?  Once they start banning every artificial ingredient that makes some people sick they’d end up following their primary directive of protecting the consumer.  Where is the profit in that?

Sadly, it seems that J. Levitt and his team at CFSAN spend more time listening to the product associations than they did to the consumers they are supposed to protect. 

Now before Canadians reading this start snickering at the bureaucratic folly rampant both in the FDA and the American legislative process, you had better look in your own backyard.   The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) has offices in Canada too and there the prognosis doesn’t look much better. 

In an article titled Canadian Food Information Council: Wolf in Sheep's Clothing, Bill Jeffery of the CSPI states that the Canadian Food Information Council (CFIC) which influences public and government opinion, is secretly funded by Monsonto, Kraft, Procter and Gamble (makers of toxic fluoridated toothpaste and Olestra), and many other giant food and chemical manufacturers.  The CFIC “has dismissed concerns about the safety of Monosodium Glutamate (MSG), caffeine, artificial sweeteners, irradiation, and other controversial food additives and processes.”[16]

Canada’s government has ended up being a sad reflection of what happens in Washington.  Why is it that Canadians get angry when they are referred to as the 51^st state?  Their politicians certainly act like it is.