I have your feed added to my LJ friends list. Expect me to be a pest on a more regular basis.

There's lots of things that're deadly but legal for political reasons. Alcohol & tobacco leap to mind. Doesn't make it right, obviously...

Sorry to hear about your friend.

Yes, but we know the dangers of alcohol and tobacco. The dangers of Aspertame are hidden from the public.
Sadly, I have given up on telling my friends that they are endangering their health by ingesting things they think will make them thinner and sexier. They don't care. They just want to be thinner and sexier.

Meanwhile my friend falls down.

Your friend could just stop eating the junk. You know, think for herself, that kind of jazz.

Just a thought.

Diana,

I'm familiar with the literature on methanol and ethanol (owing to a career in atmospheric science and air pollution), and I've also looked at some of the literature on aspartame.

The possible link to myasthenia to aspartame usage mentioned in the link you provided have seems real enough (and pretty well treatable, by eliminating consumption of the sweetener and the use of pyridostigmine bromide as a treatment). If your friend's condition is myasthenia, there is an easy diagnostic test for it, and that should be applied by her physicians.

However, there is a lot of mythology in the literature, and the second part of what you link to contains some of it. While it is true that ethanol blocks methanol conversion to formic acid (the worst part of methanol poisoning, because formic acid is very toxic to the optic nerve and can cause blindness), the amount of ethanol needed for that must be large enough to completely block all the action of of the conversion enzymes, and the naturally occuring amounts of ethanol in friuts is gnerally not sufficient for that.

It's much more likely that the bad actor in aspartame is either aspartic acid or, much more likely, phenylanaline, as there are some people who are very sensitive to that substance, with the worst suffering from a neuological disease called PKU.

I would compare the sort of simplistic analysis often given in the aspartame literature to those who say that the use of depleted uranium in Iraq represenst a serious radiological hazard. DU isn't very radioactive (it's actually similar to bone), but it is a heavy metal, and chronic heavy metal poisoning has a real likelihood of being an issue. Unfortunately, that part of it tends to be obscured by the focus on the radiation aspect.

None of this really goes against the abstract point that you are making: that "magic elixers" to make you thing and sexy are likely bogus. Just please don't be so quick to generalize from the particular. I think that you understand the dangers of using other people as characters in a morality fable. Few people deserve to be an object lesson.

I also do understand that I might sometimes come off as a "concern troll" here, but I'll offer as my defence that the primary focus of my concern is not effects in any political arena, but more like the effects of various information and opinions on individuals who (correctly, I think) read your messages as an outline of a certain sort of sane outlook on the world. I would hate to see the sanity subverted by accidental promulgation of bad information.

So you're worried that my message--live in cooperation with nature, avoid ingesting processed foods, and think twice before taking medicine with brutal side effects--might harm somebody? Sheesh.

Apparently my IP and/or Name is being blocked from commenting. Can't handle the criticism Dr. Blaine?

- Formerly JJuunnoo

If I can't handle criticism, then why do I leave up hundreds of rude, cruel messages about my body and my mind?

I did not block you. I find you no more or less interesting or threatening than anyone else. The program, however, automatically blocks messages with too many urls.

FYI, I would not regularly visit a website that I knew would upset me. I have learned far more constructive ways to handle my emotions. But they do require getting at the source of what's really going on, and I realize not everyone is ready for such a challenge. I wish you luck on this journey.

Diana, I think that havng mistaken information in your postings might undercut the good aspects of your message.

I also think that "think twice before taking medication with brutal side effects" is good advice, provided that it isn't taken to mean "never take medication with brutal side effects." Chemotherapy, for example, has brutal side effects, but it has saved the life of more than one of my friends.

You began your post with an anecdote about a friend of yours who you think might have myasthenia gravis caused by excessive use of aspartame. Suppose someone made that suggestion about someone who turned out to actually have developed multiple sclerosis (I use this only as a hypothetical example that's not incosistant with her described symptoms). This gaffe would tend to undercut your more general argument.

Which would be a shame, because your general argument is correct, that there are very few corporate concerns for the safety of their products, except insofar as there are perhaps liability issues, and those are often dealt with by hiring more lawyers and lobbyists, rather than making the products safe.

I know this seems like carping, and it probably is. Still, there is a simple and effective test for myasthenia, and I'd be interested in knowing whether or not your friend ever gets tested for it and what the results are.

Sugar is good so aspertame has not been an issue with me. I was most pleased to reach your last paragraph and find someone who acknowledges the truth in Kerry's "botched joke." How many people in his audience do you suppose were chomping at the bit to sign up and head for Iraq? I am thinking not many. Truth is; top performers are headed for grad school, law school, med school, corporate jobs or entreprenurial endeavors. OOPS I forgot NFL, MLB and NBA. In the "graduating class" there are obvious exceptions, ROTC people with obligations, military academy grads and the true American patriots. There are certainly a whole host of reasons to join the military and go to Iraq. I propose that the major reason is economic. Simply stated one might say, "the smart people get good jobs," or "some people have wealthy parents" and don't go to Iraq. It is sadly true that for the most part our wars are started by people like George Bush, Karl Rove, Donald Rumsfeld and fought by people from lower social economic status. One might note that the Bush twins have not signed up for service, maybe they have a rich daddy. I am not saying our troops are intellectually substandard because I was one, too old for Iraq, this is not a new problem. Maybe the draft was a good thing. I was not drafted, I joined for socio-economic reasons.

Dr. DYB, nice Halloween pics. Looks like you have been working on the tummy roll.

Where do I begin..
Your anecdotal story about Rumsfeld opening up an evil no calorie sweetener factory to destroy the life of your friend is so moonbatish in nature that saps any credibility from this entire website. It is urban legend at best without any supporting links.

Your accusation of the "impoverished" nature of our military forces is woefully inaccurate. Please read any follow up (re Kerry's gaffe) articles that weren't published in the NY Times, Wash Post, Boston Globe etc that quoted statistics that thoroughly refute your elitist claims. We currently have the best educated military force in US history. Is it likely that there are not a lot of trust fund supported PhD candidates in Iraq? Indeed.

My guess is character is more important to the quality of our military than socio-economic status. Thankfully it is not populated by people of your particular ilk.

Ilk. It does a body good. Ilk. Ilk. What a funny word.
There are numbers of military who are intelligent and well educated, all right. As long as you are providing a reading list, New Yorker, be sure to read *Fiasco* and find out what many of them are saying about the Iraq War.
A little off topic, sorry.

DYB-
As always, thank you for your posts. I did not know the serious dangers of aspartame! More and more I am realizing that nature-made foods, despite possibly higher caloric content, are WAY better for us than the man-made attempts at calorie-cutting.

Having eaten no sweets in the past six weeks (except for the occasional honey on a sprouted grain bagel and maple syrup in yogurt), I can say that I feel much more even-keeled and happy. Getting the gook out of my diet and getting back to nature is a wonderful thing. I love your site.

Diana,

I'm with you on this one, although I have to add that America is certainly far from the only country to allow poison on the market for consumption.

The consumption in modern day life is so dangerous that I think education is the key. With all the poisons out there being pimped out to us constantly - birth control pills, grain-fed animal products, corn syrup laden health drinks - a woman definitely needs to watch out for the wolf in sheeps clothing.

Speaking of poisons, Dr. Diana, what do you think about the rampant marketing of IVF? How many women have to die for this huge business?

@ Dr. Blaine.
Thanks for yet another condescending reply. It is apparent from your reader’s responses that many people are influenced by what you have to say. In addition, this blog, directly or indirectly, is an extension of your teaching efforts at USC. As a USC lecturer, many students perceive you as a reliable and competent conduit between the public and the academy. It is my opinion that it’s an educator’s responsibility to provide his or her students with as complete and unbiased a picture of a subject as possible. It is also a scholar’s responsibility to move towards a more complete, less biased, understanding of the facts, regardless of whether or not those facts support your personal/political beliefs. My motive for commenting on your posts is to reveal the inaccuracies that are abundant in your rhetoric and to point out your general irresponsibility (according to my above stated criteria) as an educator and scholar - not because I get a thrill out of attacking you, but because I care about the integrity of human knowledge and understanding. I also find your consistently sexist and racist views to be offensive, irrational and divisive.

@ USC students:
If you’re interested in seeing what the peer-reviewed scientific literature says about aspartame safety (as opposed to Dr. Blaine’s personal feelings and prejudices), many recent articles can be quickly and easily accessed at USC, either electronically or in print. Note that the Soffritti et al. (2006) paper listed below reports significant increases in certain tumors in female rats that consumed aspartame vs. the control rats, however this paper has been criticized in the EFSA report. One may or may not agree with the EFSA report’s criticism of Soffritti et al., but both papers are worth a skim if you’re interested. My limited knowledge of the literature prior to the Soffritti paper generally points to no clearly-demonstrated health risks related to aspartame consumption (correct me if I'm wrong). This short list is just a place to start. In my opinion, the various hoax letters and alarmist sites that pop up on Google searches are not reliable sources of information on aspartame safety (or anything else for that matter).

Mullenix et al., 1991, No change in spontaneous behavior of rats after acute oral doses of aspartame, phenylalanine, and tyrosine. Toxicolological Sciences, v. 16, p.495-505.

Rowan et al., 1995, Aspartame and Seizure Susceptibility: Results of a Clinical Study in Reportedly Sensitive Individuals. Epilepsia 36 (3), 270-275.

Weihrauch, and Diehl, 2004, Artificial sweeteners-do they bear a carcinogenic risk?, Ann Oncol., v. 10, p.1460-1465.

Butchko et al., 2002, Aspartame: a review of safety. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol., v. 35.

Soffritti et al., 2006, First experimental demonstration of the multipotential carcinogenic effects of aspartame administered in the feed to Sprague-Dawley Rats. Environmental Health Perspectives, v. 114, p. 379-385.

EFSA, 2006, Opinion on the scientific panel on food additives, flavourings, processing aids and materials in contact with food (AFC) on a request from the commission related to a new long-term carcinogenicity study on aspartame, EFSA Journal, v. 356, p.1-44.

Lim, et al., 2006, Consumption of aspartame-containing beverages and incidence of hematoppietic and brain malignancies. Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers and Prevention, v. 15, p. 1654-1659.

Juno:

Ha! Since when do facts get in the way of propaganda? Do you think she'll read even one of these when she's already an expert? She could care less. She knows what she knows, if you know what I mean. I gave her an ACS link with references refuting her claim that armpit shaving leads to breast cancer and not a peep. She's probably still perpetuating that myth to undergrads along with God knows what else -- the weakness of people on antidepressants, I guess.

John

i agree with Juno's message about the unbiased nature of scholarship, and am surprised that Diana does not acknowledge or apparently recognize her own bias. i find it disappointing to constantly agree with the general message that Diana is trying to get across only to be put off with her use of language or her examples.

In terms of the topic, I don't know why people are surprised that the government is not protecting them. Yes, of course that is the function of government, but let's not be naive. Obviously, soda is not good for you, whether it has aspartame or high fructose corn syrup. If you want to lead a healthy life, do some simple reading on nutrition, consume only what you know to be nutritious, and nothing else. That is all your body needs; it is actually very simple.

PS - Diana, it sounds like your friend could have had a stroke. Obviously, I wouldnt know, but I hope she finds out, and I hope she feels better soon. I also hope she doesnt mind your posting about her illness; perhaps i value my privacy more than most.

Hi Dr. B,

Thank you for speaking out on this issue.

Just this summer my father was diagnosed with aspartame poisoning. He was experiencing sharp, excruciating pain in his muscles, sleeplessness, and other troubling symptoms. After seeing 3 different specialist MDs (one of whom told him he was having 'silent migraines'), a series of tests and a health specialist at a Tony Robbins seminar finally told him that his were classic symptoms of aspartame poisoning. Immediately he cut out the diet drink mixes and 'sugar-free' snacks, and his symptoms faded within a few weeks.

You rightfully pointed out that whoever is responsible for making such poisons widely available (and promoted as safe, healthy alternatives to REAL food) should be held accountable. And given the scientific evidence against aspartame, we can safely guess that those responsible were much more worried about money than our health. Whether or not it was Donald Rumsfield's single-handed and cynical debacle, is debatable.

But another issue I think this brings up is the increasing irrelevance and ignorance of modern Western medicine in treating our increasingly complex portfolio of ailments, especially 'lifestyle' diseases. This forum is too short to go into such a long topic, but suffice it to say that if 3 different specialists cannot identify a fairly simple cause-effect process like this, you can bet I'll save my money rather than consult with these so called Drs.

PS- I like the word 'ilk'.

Anonymostly wrote: "i find it disappointing to constantly agree with the general message that Diana is trying to get across only to be put off with her use of language or her examples."

Although I don’t agree with her general message all of the time, I find it amazing that someone could write a post criticizing Donald Rumsfeld that I didn’t agree with. Isn't Rumsfeld’s connection to the artificial sweetener industry trivial compared to his other failings and misdeeds? How about the fact that Rumsfeld and co. cherry-picked the evidence about WMD in Iraq, and then repeatedly failed on almost every level in his job as chief strategist in both Afghanistan and Iraq? bin Laden is free, the Taliban are making a comeback, Iraq is on the brink of, or actually in, a civil war, 2,832 of our country’s men and women are dead, along with a much larger number of Iraqis, and tens of thousands more are wounded, with no end in sight. For shame.

Just a thought: how about sucralose in SPLENDA?

Wow - Rumsfeld is here one minute, and gone the next. Perhaps people on both sides of this aspartame debate can rejoice.

Juno, are you saying that you disagree with Diana's post because she didn't attack his worse offenses or that you think aspartame and his involvement with it are inaccurate or inconsequential?

Hank,
Dr. Blaine makes no effort to substantiate her claims about the alleged dangers of aspartame. She is supposed to be a scholar, an educator, and a member of the USC faculty. I find it irresponsible of her to regurgitate garbage off the web (ex. the rense.com UFO conspiracy kook page she links to), while ignoring the body of scientific literature on aspartame safety. This is par for the course for Dr. Blaine. She seems far more eager to make her politically-motivated point than she is to 1) investigate whether or not her claims/ideas/hypotheses are accurate or 2) to present a fair and minimally-biased summary of the evidence. In this post, her thinly-veiled Marxist propaganda attempts to characterize the American Dream as an oppressive system in which unscrupulous individuals get rich off of the misfortunes of others by selling them products that they know to be dangerous. Dr. Blaine then uses unsubstantiated claims of an aspartame conspiracy by Rumsfeld as the basis for her argument. The post isn't really about aspartame, or Rumsfeld, it's about vilifying capitalism (which BTW is incorrect - we actually have a mixed market economy).
As for Kerry - his comment was supposed to be directed at Bush. He reportedly intended to say “you get us stuck in Iraq” meaning if you don’t study hard, you’ll end up incompetent like Bush. As for Dr. Blaine's comments about the troops, I can tell you from personal experience that the men and women who serve in our military range from those who have few options but to enlist, to those who have every option and opportunity available to them (Pat Tillman, for example, represented the extreme end of this side of the spectrum). The sad thing about the military is that many/most recruits are too young and naive to appreciate any alternatives they might have, or to truly understand the magnitude and context of what they are getting themselves into…and that is the inconvenient truth.

Sorry Juno, if you'd rather debate semantics than feminism, I don't see why you bother posting in the first place.

Wheeeeee!

Hey, Juno. The Aspertame Institute thanks you!!!