Blog    • Chemtrails    • Chemtrails Above Ann Arbor: A Picture Journal    • Great websites    • Home page    • Local events and news    • Media Madness    • Patriots, Freedom Lovers and Truth Warriors    • Speculations and beyond    • The Assault on US    • The Medical Mafia   

Introductory info

The assault on our food and water: June 2008 Archives


The Fluoride Issue

Here are more good sources for information on the fluoride controversy:

Why Scientists Oppose Fluoridation.

Below is a great article to read. Google it and go to this pdf. A lot of hidden information here

about the history of fluoridation.

[PDF]

NEXUS: Fluoride & Manhattan Project

File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
NEXUS: Fluoride & Manhattan Project. investigation of crop damage at .... NEXUS: Fluoride & Manhattan Project. and lawsuits for injury to human health. ...
www.opposingdigits.com/ebooks/NEXUS_Fluoride.&.Manhattan.Project.pdf -Similar pages


http://www.fluoridealert.org/fluoride-facts.htm

The above link has basic information about the controversy and why 97% of European cities have banned the use of fluoride in drinking water.

This clip is a real eye-opener!!! Dr, Mullenix designed programs which proved that Fluoride lowers cognitive functions and damages our nervous systems. She was fired from her job!

On October 24, 1996 Dr. Phyllis Mullenix spoke about fluoride at Clark University in Worchester, Massachusetts.

For more inform
(more)
Added: July 03, 2007, 10:49 AM
From:1Trainwreck
Views: 3,299
Rating:
5.0
38 ratings

 

Mullenix is also one more casualty of the fluoride wars. She had nothing to do with the fluoride issue originally, but became involved as part of her work. All she "knew" about fluoride when she started was that it was supposedly good for your teeth. She was not excited about performing the research, but was doing it because she was asked. Her research results were published in Neurotoxicology and Teratology (Vol.17, No. 2, pp.169-177, 1995), the leading scientific journal in the field. Before that paper was published, she presented her findings at the National Institute of Dental Research (NIDR) in Maryland, a division of the National Institute of Health (NIH). When she arrived at the NIDR, in her words, "I had no idea what I was getting into. I walked into the main corridors there and all over the walls was 'The Miracle of Fluoride'. That was my first real kick-in-the-pants as to what was actually going on." She said that the display ridiculed the people against fluoridation. "I thought, 'Oh great!' Here's the main NIH hospital talking about the 'Miracle of Fluoride' and I'm giving a seminar to the NIDR telling them that fluoride is neurotoxic!"[48] After her presentation to the NIDR, she met with toothpaste representatives who asked her if she was saying that their products lowered the IQs of children, and Mullenix responded, "basically, yes." That marked the end of her career.

When she excitedly announced to her employers that her paper on the

intelligence of rats was being published, three days later she was fired.

Right after she was fired, her former employers asked her which journal was

going to publish her work. By that time, she realized that they wanted to

block its publication, so she did not tell them. Subsequently, funding has

dried up for that kind of research, though immediately after Mullenix was

fired, Colgate gave a $250,000 grant to Forsyth (for a job well done?). The

unique equipment Mullenix developed to test rat intelligence was mysteriously

destroyed before she could recover it.

Dr. Mullenix was then given an unfunded research position at Children's

Hospital in Boston, but with no equipment or money. Mullenix said, "The

people at Children's Hospital, for heaven's sake, came right out and said

they were scared because they knew how important the fluoride issue was...Even

at Forsyth they told me I was endangering funds for the institution if I

published that information."[49]

Mullenix has since applied to the NIH for a research grant to further her

research, and was turned down. The NIH told her that fluoride had no central

nervous system effects, period. How the NIH concluded that, when about the

only published research shows deleterious effects, is curious indeed. The

work Mullenix did, as well as other recent studies[50], has shown that the

fluoride ion is particularly damaging to the brain's hippocampal region,

which is its learning center.

Mullenix' fate is common, and my work documents many instances of scientists

and others arriving at the "wrong" answers, and having their careers

destroyed. Other scientists who had their careers ruined for coming up with

the "wrong" answer regarding fluoridation include Dr. Allan S. Gray of

British Columbia and Dr. John Colquhon of Auckland, New Zealand.

In light of Hodge's secret work for the Manhattan Project, and the secret

memos and secret studies that are the tip of the iceberg, every

pro-fluoridation effort that uses Hodge's name is tainted. It was with

interest that I read Fluoride and Dental Caries. It is a recent book on the

subject, published in 1986. The book is a compendium on fluoridation,

drawing on various experts in the field. Hodge co-wrote a chapter on

fluoride toxicity, and he wrote a chapter dealing with objections to

fluoridation. Reading that book was another enlightening process, when I got

over my anger. The book gives the appearance of looking at fluoridation from

many aspects, but appearance is the operative word. Hodge's work we already

know is suspect, to put it mildly, and I looked there first.

Hodge's co-author on the toxicology chapter was another fluoridation

luminary: Frank Smith from the University of Rochester. With that

professional pedigree and affiliation with Hodge, it is nearly certain that

Smith was also deeply involved with the Manhattan Project. I take it for

granted that with that background, I can trust nothing they write. It is

instructive to see the blind spots in their work, and what they are obviously

hiding. When Smith and Hodge stated that "No substantive evidence of ill

health has ever been offered in children or adults as a result of consuming

drinking water containing optimal concentrations of fluoride,"[51] they are

voicing the nuclear establishment's damage control opinion, because there is

substantial evidence of harm, but they chose to ignore it. When they say,

"Since the Danish experience (in the 1930s) crippling fluorosis in an

industrial setting has never been seen in the United States or Europe,"[52]

take a grain of salt with that statement. With just one declassified study,

out of many that exist and are still secret, definite harm occurred, though

by playing semantics games we could say they were not "crippled," just

toothless, though the long-term effects are unknown, which might be in

another classified study. People getting violently ill from du Pont's

fluoride cloud is another invisible event, at least to the public, when Hodge

and Smith wrote their masterpiece of disinformation. The worst air pollution

disaster in U.S. history happened in October 1948 in Donora, Pennsylvania,

when an air inversion layer formed over the town for four days, and fluoride

emissions from U.S. Steel's zinc and steel facilities killed twenty people

and seriously injured hundreds more. If the inversion layer had lasted one

more day, a thousand people may have died. U.S. Steel and the PHS conspired

to cover-up the disaster, with records missing to this day.[53]

Throughout Fluoride and Dental Caries, there were instances of "looking" at

objections to fluoridation, and the appearance of looking at them was

undertaken. The close relationship between ALCOA, the other fluoride

polluters and the early fluoridation researchers is nowhere mentioned,

although it is well documented and is consistently one of the biggest issues

raised by fluoridation's opponents. A table on the "anti-science" arguments

against fluoridation was even produced on page 130, in a chapter titled

"Legal, Social and Economics Aspects of Fluoridation," that even mentioned

the "Communist conspiracy" aspect of fluoridation. Nowhere was mentioned

the obvious economic incentives of fluoride polluters to manage the

fluoridation issue, and the well-documented instances of them funding and

influencing the fluoridation research, even when it is merely the smoking gun

of conflict of interest. The authors of that chapter, including the book's

editor, trotted out the words "pseudoscientist" and "quack" to describe

fluoridation opponents and their "anti-science." In the chapter purporting

to look at the broad spectrum of issues regarding fluoridation, the ALCOA and

fluoride polluter issue was spectacularly absent.

In Fluoride and Dental Caries, one area caught my interest. In Hodge's

chapter on fluoridation objections, he presented experimental evidence by a

group of chemists that showed the fluorine ion benign to human chemistry.

The research was used to discredit John Yiamouyiannis, who uses the very same

research to show how the fluorine ion wreaks havoc in the body. Hodge

interpreted the original research, qualifying and minimizing the conclusions,

and then he presented the experimental work of pro-fluoridation pal

Armstrong. Hodge concluded that the research showed that the fluorine ion

was relatively harmless by itself. That part was interesting, because it is

the first time that I have seen Yiamouyiannis' science challenged, beyond his

cancer statistic analyses with Dean Burk. With knowing Hodge's extreme and

formerly secret bias, I cannot trust his writing, particularly regarding the

fluoride ion and human harm, but it was interesting reading. When anybody is

proven a systematic liar, can you believe anything they say? How do you

separate fact from fiction in those cases? The only way I know is to

entirely reject their work and become your own expert.

Here are some quotes regarding the biological damage the fluorine ion does to

human health, the kind you will not find in pro-fluoridation propaganda like

Fluoride and Dental Caries. Yiamouyiannis' contentions are herein supported.

 

 

"Fluorides are general protoplasmic poisons, probably because of their

capacity to modify the metabolism of cells by changing the permeability of

the cell membrane and by inhibiting certain enzyme systems. The exact

mechanism of such actions is obscure." - Journal of the American Medical

Association, Sept 18, 1943. (before the propaganda steamroller really got

going in 1947)

"The fluoride ion exerts its toxic effect by inhibiting the action of many

enzyme systems." - Hugo Theorell, M.D., Nobel Prize winner for his research

in the field of enzyme chemistry.

"We ought to go slowly. Everybody knows that fluorine and fluorides are very

poisonous substances and we use them in enzyme chemistry to poison enzymes,

those vital agents in the body. That is the reason things are poisoned;

because enzymes are poisoned, and that is why animals and plants die." -

James B. Sumner, Director of Enzyme Chemistry, Department of Biochemistry and

Nutrition, Cornell University, and a Nobel Prize winner for his work in the

field of enzyme chemistry.

"The data indicated that drinking water with as little as 1 PPM shortened the

life span of mice an average of nine per cent. This was true whether death

was due to cancer or non-cancerous diseases. The only notice proponents of

fluoridation gave to this work was to discredit it as much as possible. ...

In experiments where the drug was added directly to suspensions of cancer

tissue before inoculation into eggs or mice, sodium fluoride stimulated the

growth of cancer tissue in concentrations of one part in more than 20

million. Scientists at Cambridge University (British Medical Journal, Oct

26, 1963) discovered that concentrations of sodium fluoride as low as one

part in ten million inhibited the growth of a culture of human tissue. ...

the growing weight of scientific evidence that water-borne fluorides, even at

1 PPM, have toxic possibilities must finally be recognized." - Alfred

Taylor, Ph.D., Clayton Foundation, Biochemical Institute, University of

Texas, Austin Texas, 1965.

"The terrifying conclusion of the studies was that fluorine greatly induced a

cancer tumor's growth. If doctors and the public can be made aware of this

catastrophe, fluoridation shall end quickly. It will someday be recognized

as the most lethal and stupid "Health Program" ever conceived by the mind of

man, witch doctors and blood-letters not excepted."

"In 1969 the country of Sweden intended to fluoridate their water supply due

to the strong advice of Professor Yngve Ericsson, a Swedish dentist who was

also the senior representative on the World Health Organization's Expert

Committee on Fluoridation. However, it was then found that Professor

Ericsson coincidentally was the holder of two highly-profitable patents on

fluoride toothpaste!" - Alfred Taylor, June 13, 1970 the Gothenburg Post

(Sweden); August 5, 1970 the News Register (Sweden); and May 1, 1970 Norsk

Folkehelselag (Norway).

"In 1978, the West German Association of Water and Gas Experts rejected

fluoridation for legal reasons, and because 'the so-called optimal fluoride

concentration of 1mg/liter is close to the dose at which long-term damage to

the human body is to be expected.'" - Chemical and Engineering News, August

1, 1988.

 

All in all, the tremendous blind spots regarding fluoride polluters, diet and

caries, the severe biases regarding the harm done by fluorides, and Hodge's

secret mission on behalf of the nuclear establishment rendered Fluoride and

Dental Caries virtually worthless, except as an instructive exercise in

propaganda. With the now-known nuclear industry's very active though secret

management of the fluoridation issue, books like Fluoride and Dental Caries

are examples of "pseudoscience" in the strongest sense.

The situation of industry and government corrupting science is far from

confined to the fluoridation issue. Today, ethyl alcohol, the substance that

every drunkard knows well, is added to American gasoline to increase its

octane rating. It works great. It was also used eighty years ago. In the

1920s, ethyl alcohol was replaced by tetraethyl lead as an octane booster.

Why? As it turns out, nobody could patent ethyl alcohol and make big

monopoly profits from putting it into gasoline. Therefore, General Motors,

Standard Oil and du Pont conspired to make a new, patentable chemical, and

tetraethyl lead was introduced into American gas tanks. Even though even Ben

Franklin remarked on lead's well-known toxic qualities hundreds of years ago,

and even ancient Romans and Greeks wrote of its toxic properties,

industrially-funded scientists in the 20th century labored mightily to make

lead appear safe to ingest, even though they knew how deadly tetraethyl lead

really was. It is unknown just how many people got sick and died from the

effects of lead being spewed into the air during the era of tetraethyl lead,

but it is certainly not inconsiderable. In 1985, the EPA estimated 5,000

lead-related heart disease deaths per year, prior to the tetraethyl lead

phase out. The lead content of American bloodstreams has fallen

precipitously since tetraethyl lead was outlawed. The most notorious of the

industrial laboratories that produced the lead "research" was Kettering

Laboratories.[54] For generations, Kettering and its industrial sponsors

controlled all the lead research. The "Kettering" of Kettering Laboratories

was Charles Kettering, the inventor and General Motors executive. Kettering

Laboratories is not the only "medical" foundation that he helped bankroll.

The Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, the leading cancer research

institute in the world, is named after Kettering and his buddy, General

Motors CEO Alfred Sloan, another noted "philanthropist." Kettering

Laboratories also was instrumental in making aluminum appear to be a benign

substance, and Kettering's efforts on the fluoridation issue are well known.

http://home1.gte.net/res0k62m/fluoride.htm#conclusion


The dangers of aspartame


|
| Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

http://www.lifetechnology.org/blog/2006/10/dangers-of-aspartame.html

Dangers Of Aspartame

Dangers of Aspartame

In 1965, a researcher at G.D. Searle pharmaceutical company inadvertently discovered the artificial sweetener aspartame while working on an anti-ulcer medication. It was discovered that the sweetener was about 150X sweeter than an equal amount of sugar. Over the next decade, the research staff at the G.D. Searle Company conducted a series of studies in an effort to get the product approved by the FDA.

Over all this consisted of about 11 different studies. In 1974 aspartame was approved for use only in dry foods. Its approval was based on these studies. Yet, even before these studies were being presented to the FDA, the pharmaceutical giant was under investigation for improprieties associated with several of its other drugs.

During this investigation, Dr. Adrian Gross was place in charge of examining these studies and Jerome Bressler was assigned to examine three of the studies. This investigation included a through examination of the pathology laboratory used in the tests, interviews with the scientists and technicians involved and a careful analytic review of the studies themselves.

In a letter to Senator Howard Metzenbaum, Dr. Gross discussed many of their findings in this investigation. He pointed out that at the heart of the regulatory process was the ability of the FDA to "rely upon the integrity of the basic safety data submitted" to the FDA. Further, he says,

"Our investigation clearly demonstrates that, in the case of G.D. Searle Company, we have no basis for such reliance now."

He then pinpoints why he had reached this conclusion, when he states:

"Through our efforts, we have uncovered serious deficiencies in Searle's operations and practices which undermine the basis for reliance on Searle's integrity in conducting high quality animal research to accurately determine or characterize the toxic potential of its products."

Dr. Gross expressed his disdain at the way teratology experiments were conducted. These are critical tests with any new drug because it determines possible dangers to unborn children when their mothers are exposed to the product during pregnancy. He found that technicians responsible for the tests had no formal training in teratology or toxicology. In fact, they were given some books by the company and trained themselves for 3 months.

Of most concern was the way the carcinogenicity tests were conducted. These are tests to see if the product could cause cancer. According to the law, any product intended as a food product cannot have demonstrated cancer-causing ability at a dose 100X that commonly consumed.

Even though the tests were poorly conducted they did demonstrate that aspartame was associated with a dramatic, dose-dependent, increase in a variety of brain tumors-mainly astrocytomas-the type commonly seen in humans. This means that the higher the dose of aspartame the more tumors that were found.

The most appalling findings were by Dr. Bressler's investigation group. They found that in several instances malignant tumors were classified as benign and that in others, tumors were removed from rats and tissue slides and reported as normal.

Dr. John Olney, a neuropathologist and neuroscientist, pointed out to FDA investigators that aspartame contained at least two distinct components that could harm the brain-diketopiperizine and aspartic acid. The former is a suspected carcinogen and the latter an excitatory amino acid. As a world expert on excitotoxicity, a process where amino acids such as aspartic acid and glutamic acid causes brain cells to be excited to death, he understood the real danger to babies and small children. His laboratory studies had demonstrated that high dose aspartame could cause the very same brain injury as other excitotoxins.

The 1974 approval was withdrawn and after the results of these investigations were reviewed privately, aspartame was given approval once again in 1981. Ironically, it was approved using the very same studies that resulted in it being banned as too dangerous for human consumption in 1975.

In 1981, Arthur Hull Hayes was appointed commissioner of the FDA and in 1983 he approved aspartame for use in beverages. Three months later her left the FDA and accepted a position as the Senior Medical Advisor to Searle's PR firm of Burson-Marstellar.

Despite Dr. Olney's, and other neuroscientists and pathologists', objections, the product was given approval, essentially for all foods and beverages.

In 1992, Dr. Olney published a study that suggested that the significant rise in human brain tumors was related to the widespread use of aspartame, since it began after the approval of aspartame in foods and beverages. In Searle's original study Dr. Olney found that there was a 47X increase in brain tumors in the rats exposed to high dose aspartame. Even Searle's figures showed a 25X increase in brain tumors. Using existing data Dr. Olney and his co-authors found a 65% increase in brain tumors in humans since aspartame approval. Dr. H.J. Roberts also reported a similar rise in a rare form of brain cancer associated with aspartame use.

And a recent study by one of Europe's most prestigious oncology groups (a million dollar study) found a non-statistically significant increase in brain tumors in 1800 rats tested using aspartame. The control animals, which received no aspartame, developed no brain tumors, whereas the aspartame exposed animals developed 10 malignant gliomas, 1 medulloblastoma and 1 malignant meningioma.

I have had contact with a number of young women who have developed brain tumors (astrocytomas) following heavy use of aspartame products. When we combined the experimental studies with the clinical data it is obvious that aspartame is strongly linked to brain tumors and most likely lymphomas and leukemias.

Of great concern is the study by Trocho and his co-workers from the University of Barcelona, which found that aspartame was absorbed and then broken down into its component parts, including methanol and the methanol was further broken down into formic acid and formaldehyde. Using sophisticated radioactive labeling techniques he proved that the formaldehyde from the aspartame attached itself to the DNA, RNA and proteins of cells and that it was very difficult to removed. Further, they showed that the formaldehyde caused breaks in the DNA.

This has major implications in humans, since DNA damage, as was seen in their study, causes a multitude of cancers in humans as well as worsening of autoimmune diseases, diabetes and neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer's dementia, Parkinson's and ALS. It also causes concern because DNA breaks in the DNA in sperm and ova can cause increased cancer risk and developmental problems in the offspring of mothers and fathers consuming aspartame products.

In the Bressler examination of the Searle tumor study they found that the female animals exposed to aspartame had a very high incidence of uterine polyps, which were rare in rats not exposed. In fact, at even moderate doses, there was a 15X increase in uterine polyps. In addition, they found several ovarian tumors, breast fibroadenomas, several pituitary adenomas, several lymphomas and pancreatic tumors.

The new million-dollar study by Dr. Morando Soffritti and co-workers found a dramatic increase in malignant lymphomas and leukemias in female rats consuming even low doses of aspartame-doses known to be consumed by millions of children, pregnant women and others. Their carefully done study concluded that most likely it was the formaldehyde breakdown product from the aspartame that was causing the cancers, which confirms what Trocho and co-workers had found earlier. Formaldehyde is known to be a powerful toxin and carcinogen, even in low concentrations.

Of great concern was the finding by Trocho, that formaldehyde tends to accumulate in the DNA and is difficult to remove. This means that drinking even a single diet cola sweetened with aspartame can eventually produce significant DNA damage to raise one's risk of cancer and other diseases. Today, over 5000 products contain aspartame. It is also important to appreciate that we are exposed to a number of toxic and carcinogenic chemicals, which can add to aspartame's toxicity.

There are sufficient studies on the effect of aspartame on the developing fetus to draw serious concern about the safety of this product. For example, it has been shown that aspartame in the dose accepted as safe by the FDA (50 mg/kg/day) can produce phenylalanine levels in a large number of women and their babies during pregnancy-large enough to produce abnormal development of the baby's brain. This is because phenylalanine interferes with the normal migration and connections of the developing brain.

In my estimation, pregnant women should never consume foods containing aspartame at any level, for the reasons I have discussed. The aspartic acid, phenylalanine and methanol are all known to produce abnormal development of a baby's brain.

There is also evidence from the studies done by Dr. Ralph Walton, indicating that depressed people are especially sensitive to the toxic effects of aspartame and that this is especially true of those with suicidal tendencies. In a separate study he has shown that virtually all of the independently conducted studies done on aspartame safety have found problems with the product, yet not a single study funded by the makers of aspartame (now Monsanto) reported even minor problems.

This is especially puzzling when you consider that among all the food-related complained registered by the FDA, 75 to 85% are related to aspartame. This alone should tell us there is a problem.

There are sufficient independent studies to show that aspartame is a dangerous product and that it should have never been given approval. In fact, it was approved using the same shoddy studies alluded to by Dr. Adrian Gross in his letter to Senator Howard Metzenbaum.

References:

1. Letter to Senator Howard Metzenbaum from Dr. Adrian Gross, dated October 30, 1987.
2. Jerome Bressler, The Bressler Report, 4/25/77 to 8/4/77
3. Olney JW. Excitotoxins in foods. Neurotoxicology 1994;15:535-544.
4. Olney JW, et al. Brain damage in mice from voluntary ingestion of glutamate and aspartate. Neurobehavoral Toxicolology 1980; 2: 125-129.
5. Reynolds WA. Et al. Hypothalamic morphology following ingestion of aspartame or MSG in the neonatal rodent and primate: a preliminary report. Environmental Health 1976;2: 471-480.
6. Brunner RL, et al. Aspartame: assessment of developmental psychotoxicity of a new artificial sweetener Neurobehavioral Toxicology 1979;1: 79-86.
7. Wurtman RJ. Aspartame: possible effect on seizure susceptibility. Lancet 1985;9
8. Maher TJ, et al. Possible neurologic effects of aspartame, a widely used food additive. Environmental Health Perspectives. 1987;75: 53-57.
9. Walton RG, The possible role of aspartame in seizure induction. In, Wurtman RJ, Ritter-Walker E. (eds); Dietary Phenylalanine and Brain Function. Birkhauser, Boston, 1988, pp 159-162.
10. Changes in physiological concentrations of blood phenylalanine produce changes in sensitive parameters of human brain function. In, Wurtman RJ, Ritter-Walker E. (eds); Dietary Phenylalanine and Brain Function. Birkhauser, Boston, 1988, pp187-195.
11. Christian B, et al. Chronic aspartame affects T-maze performance, brain cholinergic receptors and Na+, K+-ATPase in rats. Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior 2004;78:121-127.
12. Nakao H, et a. Formaldehyde-induced shrinkage of rat thymocytes. Journal of Pharmacological Science 2003; 91: 83-86.
13. H.J. Roberts. Does aspartame cause human brain cancer? Journal Advancement in Medicine 1991; 4: 231-240.
14. Trocho C, et al. Formaldehyde derived from dietary aspartame binds to tissue components in vivo. Life Sciences 1998;63:337-349.
15. Scoffritti M, et al. Aspartame induces lymphomas and leukemias in rats. European Journal of Oncology 2005; 10: (in press)
16. Sabelli HC and Javaid JI. Phenylaethylamine modulation of affect: therapeudic and diagnostic implications. Journal of Neuropsychiatry 1995; 7: 6-14.
17. Scharma RP, et al. cerebrospinal fluid levels of phenylacetic acid in mental illness: behavioral associations and response to neuroleptic treatment. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1995; 91: 293-298.
18. Robain O, et al. Experimental phenylketonuria: effect of phenylacetate intoxication on number of synapses in cerebellar cortex of rats. Acta Neuropathol (Berl) 1983; 61: 313-315.
19. Matalon R, et al. Aspartame consumption in normal individuals and carriers of phenylketonuria. In, Wurtman RJ, Ritter-Walker E. (eds); Dietary Phenylalanine and Brain Function. Birkhauser, Boston, 1988, pp41-52.
20. Monte WC. Aspartame: methanol and public health. Journal of Applied Nutrition 1984; 36: 52.
21. Walton RG, et al. Adverse reactions to aspartame: double-blind challenge in patients from a vulnerable population. Biological Psychiatry 1993; 34: 13-17.
22. Olney JW, Farber NB, Spitznagel E, Robins LN. Increasing brain tumor rates: is there a link to aspartame? J Neuropathology Experimental Neurology. 1996;55:1115-23.

Russell L. Blaylock, M.D.
Neurosurgeon (retired)
Visiting Professor of Biology
Belhaven College
Jackson, Mississippi

______________________
Dr. Blaylock is a world renowned neurosurgeon and author of Excitotoxins: The Taste That Kills, Health & Nutrition Secrets To Save Your Life and Natural Strategies for Cancer Patients. Web site: www.russellblaylockmd.com

He can be seen in the aspartame documentary, Sweet Misery: A Poisoned World, www.amazon.com or Barnes & Noble. He has a monthly newsleletter:The Blaylock Wellness Report: www.blaylockreport.com

On autism: http://www.dorway.com/blayautism.txt
On brain problems: http://www.dorway.com/blayart1.txt
Excitotoxins, Neurodegeneration and Neurodevelopment: http://www.dorway.com/blayenn.html
Miami Herald Letter, Exposing Calorie Control Council, front group: http://www.wnho.net/mh_aspartame_letter.htm

Media contacts through Dr. Betty Martini, D.Hum., Founder, Mission Possible Intl, 9270 River Club Parkway, Duluth, Georgia 770 242-2599 Bettym19@mindspring.com
www.dorway.com, Aspartame Information List, www.wnho.net

Article from: http://www.rense.com/general70/excito.htm


© 2008 Ann Arbor Truth and Freedom