Aspartame Research Comparison

Aspartame Research Comparison My cousin came to me very upset. She mentioned that she had been having frequent headaches lately, so a friend referred her to a web site. My cousin wanted to know if she should be worried about what she read on this web site. The web site is http://www.aspartamekills.com/.

Evaluation of http://www.aspartamekills.com/

Author's Expertise: Commentary

The authors are Betty Martini and John Baum. Their goal is "to get Aspartame outlawed". A search for Betty and John found circular references back to the same aspartame pages and those who mention Betty and John as authors of the site.
Betty writes professional looking articles and gives speeches about the “medical epidemic” that is aspartame (trade name NutraSweet or Equal). An article at http://www.aspartame.ca/page_a13.html claims she is the founder of Mission Possible International. She may have officially started Mission Possible Nations Capitol in Atlanta with a fight against Diet Coke under the blessings of Jimmy Carter. She also goes under the name Nancy Markle but avidly denies this rumor. Rumormongers claim email addresses and pictures are the same for both. Whom ever she is she likes to quote doctors and famous people.

A search for John Baum reveals numerous articles where he identifies himself as a "volunteer". He appears to be a zealous advocate of the movement to ban aspartame. He conducts interviews with famous people.

Nothing else is known about the author's backgrounds. Their reputations among others who believe that aspartame kills are very high. Those who believe aspartame is a safe sugar alternative believe the authors are deluded.

A great deal is mentioned about a Dr. Mark Lowry III, MD who contacts people who sign the guest book to tell them that aspartame is really safe and this web site is a hoax. The authors go to great lengths to discredit Dr. Lowry and reiterate the credentials of their own medical authorities, http://www.nancymarkle.com/lowry/.

There are email links; however, other sites claim Betty Martini creates the published emails and answers. No one ever receives an answer. I didn’t want to try for fear of junk mail.

Reliability of site

The publisher is "Mission Possible Nations Capitol". This is a national organization. The international organization is called "Mission Possible International". The site publishes its mission statement on the home page. It reads as follows. "The purpose of this site is to encourage people consuming aspartame products and those suffering with any of the 92 symptoms of Aspartame Disease (FDA LIST) to take charge of their lives and take the Mission Possible 60 day-day no aspartame test to see if some if not all of their symptoms diminish or see if they just feel better. If they do, that's great, they now know the reason for their debilitating illnesses. If they decide that aspartame is not the problem, skeptics are welcome to go back to killing themselves." (FDA List) links not to an FDA page but to an aspartamekills.com page telling a story about how the FDA did not want to approve it for use and listing all of the possible reactions a person might undergo.

This organization is both sponsoring and providing web space for the many pages advocating a ban of aspartame. More information is available from other web sites advocating the same movement and a snail mail address: P.O.Box 220102, Chantilly, VA 20153-0102. According to LJProcessing, there really is a Chantilly, VA with the zip code of 20153, but it still looks like a made up address.

The guest book contains 162 pages of electronic signatures. Though some use colorful language, all agree that aspartame is a poisonous chemical. A warning is posted that the use of inaccurate email addresses will result in having your signature removed. A reasonable excuse for leaving only the ones that agree with their position.

A search for "Mission Possible Nations Capitol" reveals only six links. Four link back to the original site, one refers to them as proponents of Hitler's rule over the Jews, and the last mentions the authors. The homepage also contains three pictures, one of them a picture of Hitler with the word “webmaster” underneath. The picture to the left has a man in military uniform and the man on the right has a flashing Hitler mustache. These along with frequent references to Jewish jokes throughout the site leave one feeling more than a little uncomfortable.

Reliability of linked pages

This site links to a page of resources supporting this and similar opinions, http://www.dorway.com/asprlink.html. In eight different languages they advocate holistic medicine, support information wars, try to ban food additives and growth hormones, and speak out against pharmaceutical companies and government regulators. These pages continue to add information to the argument that people are unknowingly ingesting poisonous substances along with their food and beverages every day. Most information is contained on five basic web sites: http://aspartamekills.com/, http://www.holisticmed.com/aspartame/, http://www.nancymarkle.com, http://presidiotex.com, and http://www.dorway.com. They all seem to be tied back and forth between each other for reinforcing information. The fact that they are all .com sites makes me think they are in it to make money off t-shirts, videotapes, and bumper stickers. They do solicit for contributions.

Other pages linked to this page

Twenty links were found to link back to http://aspartamekills.com/. Of these, only one was an internal link. One was from www.aspartame.org, who avidly refutes the claims of aspartamekills.com. The organization cites research conducted at Berkeley in 1999 as proof the commercial claims is myths. When I followed the organization back to its homepage, I discovered dozens of links and references to research. All research from reputable organizations, such as the American Cancer Society, American Diabetes Association, and American Heart Association, agree that aspartame is safe.

Eleven links were false positives. Three were in languages I could not read. Two were a holistic nursing community hit by Excite and Search Hippo. Two were links from sites also linked to and basically established as joint colleagues. All sites were .org or .com indicating caution when considering bias.

There is even a link to Dr. Mark Lowry and his brother's web site. His brother is a physics/math teacher. Together they try to dispel the "hysteria spread on the Internet concerning aspartame". They post questions and answers and remain available to anyone via an email link.

Information from traditional sources

The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, fourth edition, 2000, describes aspartame as "an artificial sweetener, C14H18N2O5, formed from aspartic acid. ETYMOLOGY: aspart(ic acid) + (phenyl)a(lanine) + m(ethyl) + e(ster)." The Encyclopedia Britannica Online says, "Aspartame, or aspartylphenylalanine (marketed as NutraSweet, Equal, Egal, or Canderal), was discovered in 1965. It has some caloric value (though negligible) and is about 150–200 times as sweet as sucrose. Its safety remains controversial, but it is now the most popular sweetening ingredient in diet soft drinks." An EBSCO search for academic journals and pharmacological findings revealed a review of Dr. HJ Roberts book "Aspartame Disease: An Ignored Epidemic". Dr. HJ Roberts is the most outspoken medical expert on the aspartamekills.com web site. The review was published in Nutrition Health Review: The Consumer's Medical Journal. Nutrition Notes, in Health magazine sings the praises of a new ice cream made with aspartame at only 100 calories per half cup. Diabetes Forecast contains an article called "How Safe are Non-Nutritive Sweeteners?" It claims there has been a link between some people who are extremely sensitive and headaches, others who suffer major illnesses already may have problems, but the large majority of people have absolutely no difficulty digesting aspartame. I do not think we need to go to newspapers and more colloquial magazines. These sources are creditable enough to trust.

Last update of this page?

The homepage states that it was "Last Modified 10/05/01 @ 08:00 EDT". An opinion page does not necessarily need to be kept up to date; however, when the topic is a chemical whose controversy is affected by research, recent research developments ought to be updated frequently. This being March 2003, October 2001 is somewhat out of date. Internal pages were all created about the same time as the homepage give or take a few months. These are not dated visibly, but page info has been recorded.

Document Accuracy

This web site is exactly what it says it is, a site devoted to convincing people to stop ingesting aspartame. The fact that aspartame breaks into methanol, formaldehyde, and formate is true. However, citrus such as oranges and tomatoes contain more of these chemicals than aspartame. The body knows how to handle these products during digestion. They are not as dangerous as they sound. Mild headaches are the only known symptom of allergic reaction and only in a very small number of sensitive people. People who have a condition where they cannot break down phenylalanine should not ingest aspartame, because aspartame contains phenylalanine. That is like telling a person allergic to peanuts not to eat peanuts. The 92 symptoms of aspartame disease are not backed by scientific evidence. Their refutation is substantiated by research. Dr. HJ Robert mentions being honored by Who's Who organizations who's existence I cannot validate. Even Amazon.com doesn't want to sell me a copy of their book. The web site's ethnic slurs and references to Hitler are also irrelevant as well as objectionable.

Relative bias of this page

Aspartamekills.com uses words like: victims, legacy of genocide, aspartame=death, political muscle and graft to buy off the FDA, molecular Auschwitz, toxins, horrific experiences, suffering symptoms, debilitating illnesses, killing themselves, neurotoxin, murder, and neuralgic degenerative diseases. These are extreme terms used to scare people into believing that aspartame is dangerous. Even medical opinions are worded as emotional appeals rather than a presentation of data. Arguments are meant to cause anger, elicit the drive to join their cause. The perspective is limited to only one side of the argument.

Supporting evidence?

Data used to support the notion that aspartame is dangerous comes from two sources. First, personal testimonies are shared from people who claim to have had a reaction to aspartame that went away when they stopped ingesting the sweetener. Second, doctor testimonials are published describing how the body reacts to this and many other artificial food products. However, these articles written by doctors do not contain the usual plethora of references to other research. They read like first edition textbooks or personal exposes. They sound like something you would read in a questionable holistic health magazine. Data is therefore of a qualitative nature, not backed by authoritative references. Contacting the author appears to deliver more canned information, much of the same in flier form.

Availability of second opinion?

I intend to check authoritative medical web sites to validate the information found here. Are headaches really a possible side effect for my cousin? The Mayo Clinic may know, so might WebMD. Both of these are considered reputable medical web sites.

Evaluation of http://www.mayoclinic.com/index.cfm

Author's Expertise: Commentary

The MayoClinic.com web site does not provide specific author names for each of its information pages. All work is the result of "a team of web content producers, editors, multimedia and graphics producers, interactive developers, health educators, nurses, doctors, and scientists". The editor is Nicole Spelhaug, who has been on the Mayo Clinic staff since 1979. Nicole has a master's degree in nutrition communications from Boston University.

Reliability of site

The Mayo Clinic is a national organization. Their "mission is to empower people to manage their health. We accomplish this by providing useful and up-to-date information and tools that reflect the expertise and standard of excellence of Mayo Clinic." The Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research owns the web site and provides web space. They provide an online comment form and email address to mayoclinic.org. There is also a snail mail address to Minnesota for complaints.

Reliability of linked pages

Most links from this site are internal to other pages on the site. They offer more information about the medical condition under discussion. Support is always offered in factual form and adds additional data to the reader’s repertory. This seems reasonable since the site is supposed to be an authority in the field of medicine. A search for information on aspartame brought up eight possible links. Two looked like they could be important. The first was simply entitled "Aspartame: What the body does with it". It had no further links. The second was entitled "Artificial sweeteners: A safe alternative to sugar". This article contains a link to, "Artificial sweeteners: OK if you have diabetes?" My cousin does not have diabetes, so this is probably not an important link for me to follow. All pages are of equal reliability since they are all from the same source.

Other pages linked to this page

A Search Wizard test for pages linking to www.mayoclinic.com resulted in 7 .com and 3 .edu web sites. One of the .edu sites was a genetics assignment. The other was a set of nutrition links. The third was a virtual library listing this among a number of reputable medical resources. All three of these appeared to use the Mayo Clinic web site as an expert resource. One of the .com sites was a mention on a discussion board. Three were concerned with weight loss the healthy way. And the other three dealt with various health issues.

Information from traditional sources

Information on this topic from traditional sources was acquired on the previous evaluation.

Last update of this page?

The article "Artificial sweeteners: A safe alternative to sugar" was published on September 10, 2002. "Aspartame: What the body does with it" was published on April 12, 2001. The copyright for the MayoClinic.com web site is 1998-2003. This means the Mayo Clinic data is more up to date than the so-called facts provided on the Aspartamekills.com web site.

Document Accuracy

The description found here agrees with that found in the dictionary and encyclopedia. "Aspartame is a low-calorie sweetener composed of two amino acids, aspartic acid and phenylalanine, and methanol (an alcohol). The amino acids are found naturally in milk, meat and dried beans. Methanol is a natural component of fruits and vegetables." Once again the controversy over methanol is explained. "Although methanol is an alcohol, foods sweetened with aspartame yield a very small amount of it. In fact, the amount of methanol that results from drinking a 12-ounce can of soda sweetened with aspartame is less than half that obtained from drinking an 8-ounce glass of fruit juice."

This source does the best job yet of describing why some people should not ingest aspartame. "It's important to note that individuals with the genetic disease phenylketonuria (PKU) cannot properly utilize the amino acid phenylalanine. They must strictly limit their intake of foods containing this amino acid, such as meat, milk, nuts — and foods sweetened with aspartame."

The only mention of headaches is in a list of health problems the Internet claims are caused by aspartame. The Mayo Clinic's response is, "According to the FDA, however, aspartame is the most thoroughly tested and widely studied food additive the agency has ever approved. More than 100 studies confirm that aspartame is safe for the general population." The only exceptions mentioned are those rare people with PKU.

Relative bias of this page

The language is not extreme but the documents do present a singularly simple and one-side view of the argument. The FDA studies have convinced them to hold the medical opinion that aspartame is safe. Nothing in their practice has led them to believe otherwise. Somehow all those case studies on the Internet have not found their way into these doctor's offices. The articles do not appeal to emotion, as do the aspartamekills.com pages. These appeal to reason. They do not, however, cite the FDA studies or link to this research in any way so that we may check their references.

Supporting evidence?

I decided to check the FDA evidence cited by the Mayo Clinic. A search on the FDA web site, http://www.fda.govdiscovered 387 documents that mention aspartame. The FDA declared aspartame safe in 1981 with the following exceptions. "Certain people with the genetic disease phenylketonuria (PKU), those with advanced liver disease, and pregnant women with hyperphenylalanine (high levels of phenylalanine in blood) have a problem with aspartame because they do not effectively metabolize the amino acid phenylalanine, one of aspartame's components. High levels of this amino acid in body fluids can cause brain damage. Therefore, FDA has ruled that all products containing aspartame must include a warning to phenylketonurics that the sweetener contains phenylalanine."

Although the complete studies were not found, public reports ruled out aspartame as the cause of brain tumors, allergy (except phenylalanine), seizures, birth defects, Gulf War Syndrome, multiple sclerosis, systemic lupus, and brain cancer. It pointed out that most people only consume 4-7 percent of the acceptable daily level of aspartame. It was interesting to note that most of the 387 documents listed were letters on the FDA dockets from Betty Martini and others in her organization.

It may be that research was conducted independently and published in scientific journals, then collected by the FDA. An FDA Talk Paper mentions that the National Cancer Institute's SEER Program supported research on aspartame and brain tumors. This would make the discovery of primary sources much more difficult. There are published phone numbers for contact, but they are seven years old. I doubt even the area codes are the same now, let alone the person to contact. I may have to accept the FDA and Mayo Clinic opinions as authoritative enough.

Availability of second opinion?

I don't know anyone else in the sweetener business or internal medicine. Everyone I know thinks aspartame is a safe alternative to sugar. Most of the people I know are very intelligent and not likely to be deceived by marketing gimmicks. The fact that organizations like the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and The American Diabetes Association believe aspartame are safe is pretty convincing validation.

Evaluation of http://webmd.com/

Author's Expertise: Commentary

A search on webmd.com for aspartame found 32 articles. The most relevant was written by Laurie Barclay and reviewed by Dr. Jacqueline Brooks.

Laurie Barclay's online biography states that she is a neurologist and freelance staff writer for WebMD. She is best known for her research on Alzheimer's and dementia. It looks as though she has been a practicing doctor since her graduation from medical school at Cornell in 1978. She holds a number of certifications and recognitions. I have heard of these, they are real organizations.

Dr. Jacqueline Brooks' biography describes her as a full time medical editor for WebMD. Her certification is psychiatry. Her education and training were obtained in South Africa and the United Kingdom, where she is member of the Royal College of Psychiatrists. I checked, and this is a reputable institution.

Reliability of site

The publisher of the site is WebMD Inc. This is a national organization with key personnel leading the way: Marjorie Martin, Vice President, Executive Editor, WebMD Health Content & News; Charlotte Grayson, MD, Senior Medical Editor, WebMD Health Content; Michael Smith, MD, Senior Medical Editor, WebMD Health News; and Gary Vogin, MD, Medical Editor, WebMD Third Party Content & News.

Their mission is to, "bring you the most objective, trustworthy, and accurate health information on the Web. Our daily goal is to ensure that WebMD is your practical and relevant content source for health and medicine. The guidepost for WebMD News is our Editorial Policy, drawn from the editorial policies and guidelines of the most recognized names in medicine and journalism: The American Medical Association, the Society of Professional Journalists, and the American Medical Writers Association. In following these guidelines, the WebMD Editorial staff diligently seeks the facts and reports them, to provide thorough and honest coverage of health and medicine and, most of all, to uphold the highest professional standards in the industry."

Online forms, email addresses, and snail mail addresses are provided for further contact information.

Reliability of linked pages

This particular article, "What's Put in Your Mouth Could Go to Your Head", does not link to any other pages. The frames surrounding the article, that wraps around other pages as well, links to weight loss and nutrition programs, memory loss and pregnancy tips. All links are internal to the WebMD.com site. This indicates to me that the creators of this web site believe people interested in aspartame are also naturally interested in nutrition and weight control, so they offer these as related information. They are trying to anticipate the users needs.