The California Collection/TheCaliforniaCollection.cdr/his081/nutraswe.lzh/NUTRASWE.TXT

Text File | 1991-07-08 | 13KB | 216 lines

WAR:NutraSweet: Panacea or Poison?  by Lana Patterson

   A century before Elizabeth [Queen Elizabeth I] reigned in the 1500s,
the physician Joannes Arculanus included in his 10 rules of oral
hygiene the dictum that sweets and honey were not to be eaten. But the
queen ate them anyway, and she ate them all the time. Said a German
visitor of the 65-year-old Elizabeth: "Very majestic; her face oblong,
fair but wrinkled; her eyes small, yet black and pleasant; her nose a
little hooked, her lips narrow, and her teeth black" (Canin 56).

   George Washington loved candied almonds (tooth extrac-tions began at
age 22), Thomas Jefferson liked exotic chocolates from Europe, Andrew
Jackson's weakness was blackberry jam. For Teddy Roosevelt it was a
taste for saccharin, and for Ronald Reagan it is jellybeans, his
favorites being licorice and coconut (56).

   From the beginning of recorded history, people have had a craving
for sweets. That craving is evident in the diet of today's average
American, who in 1984 consumed 67.5 lbs. of sugar, 57.9 lbs. of corn
sweeteners, 10 lbs. of saccharin, and 5.8 lbs. of aspartame
(NutraSweet) per capita (Gelman 55). A marketing battle is going on
between sugar and its substitutes. And it is quite understandable from
a "profit" point of view, as sugar and its substitutes account for more
than $8 billion in sales annually (55). The newest competitor and chief
rival of sugar to appear on the marketing scene is aspartame or
NutraSweet. The Sugar Association sees aspartame as a real threat, and
as a result is launching an ad campaign "aimed at abolishing [sugar's]
image as a public-health menace," which the manufacturers of NutraSweet
have purported (55).

   In the 1960s, a sweet substance was discovered when a research
chemist from G. D. Searle Pharmaceutical Company, who was searching for
an ulcer remedy, happened to lick the powder on his fingers and found
it to be sweet (Allman 14). The substance consisted of two amino acids,
aspartate and phenylalanine, normally found in the human body and
occurring naturally in foods. Aspartate is rather flat tasting and
phenylalanine is bitter to the taste. Yet, in combination, the two form
a sweet-tasting compound, with approximately 200 times the sweetening
power of table sugar. The white crystalline compound, aspartame (better
known by its market label of NutraSweet), is defined by the Food and
Drug Administration as a nutritive substance with sweetening and flavor
enhancing properties. Because it consists of naturally occurring
substances, it is not classified as an artificial sweetener (such as
saccharin) nor as a traditional carbohydrate sweetener (such as table
sugar) (Hunter 11).

   In 1974 the FDA approved its use in everything except cooked foods
and soft drinks on the basis of safety and taste tests submitted by the
manufacturer, G. D. Searle. Approval was suspended that same year on
the basis of animal studies indicating a possibility that the
consumption of NutraSweet could cause a development of brain damage. In
1981, after seven years of controversy, Arthur Hayes, then FDA
director, again approved the use of NutraSweet in dry food usage and as
a granulated sugar substitute. Two years later it was also approved for
use in carbonated beverages, despite strong recommendations against its
approval by scientists (Allman 14).

   The proponents of NutraSweet are quick to stress the safety of their
product. Robert Shapiro, president of Searle's NutraSweet division is
quoted as saying, "It isn't easy to convince the public that a
sugar-free sweetener can be good-tasting and safe" (Foltz 57). Their
problem is easily understood in light of the past history of cyclamates
and, more recently, saccharin. NutraSweet, however, is different, they
claim, in that it is a completely natural substance. Health-conscious
people welcomed its arrival on the consumer market because it was
supposedly free of the side effects of cyclamates and saccharin. Also,
it was a healthier and more powerful sweetener than sugar. An
additional benefit was the claim by G. D. Searle that NutraSweet
promotes dental health, in that it does not seem to cause dental
caries. Dieters, too, would benefit as the sweetener purportedly
promotes weight loss.

   In the three years since its approval by the FDA, nearly 70% of all
American adults have sampled it in one or more of many products on the
market containing the sweetener. More than 75% of them enjoyed the
taste of NutraSweet (Foltz 57). G. D. Searle is so convinced of the
marketability of its product that it "is spending a estimated $100
million on ads . . . as it wages the nation's first consumer-oriented
marketing campaign for a food ingredient." (57) "Last year [1984],
Searle sold $585 million worth of the sweetener, which is now being
used in products from diet soda to bubblegum. This years projections
are for $1 billion in sales . . ." (Rhein 38).

   Despite all claims to the contrary, there are, however, some who are
speaking out against the purported safety of NutraSweet, and not
without reason. Take, for example, the following list of possible
symptoms and problems that have been compiled from laboratory testing
of animals and from actual complaints from consumers of NutraSweet:
headaches, dizziness, depression (in adults), sleep problems, mood and
behavior aberrations, loss of vision, high blood pressure, seizures,
appetite control problems, brain damage to developing fetuses, mental
retardation in children, and brain tumors and lesions. How can a
combination of two normally occurring amino acids be the cause of such
a vast array of problems? Scientists offer these explanations.

   The amino acid phenylalanine "must be avoided by people who suffer
from phenylketonuria (PKU), an inborn metabolic error. Untreated, this
health problem can lead to irreversible mental retardation. One in
10,000 children is born with PKU." (Hunter 11) Any possible retardation
or brain damage can be avoided if the problem is diagnosed early (most
infants are tested for this at birth), and a phenylalanine-free diet is
adhered to. NutraSweet contains this substance thus becoming a very
real hazard for PKU sufferers (11).

   In larger doses, phenylalanine is also toxic to the brain (Roffers
33). Richard Wurtman, a well-known brain scientist at MIT's department
of nutrition and food science has his doubts as to the safety of
NutraSweet, citing personal test results that indicate mood and
behavioral changes in humans after ingesting large quantities of
carbohydrates and aspartame (Pearl 256). In one of his experiments,
Wurtman fed rats aspartame alone and in combination with other
carbohydrates. Aspartame alone, doubled the brain levels of
phenylalanine; that effect was again doubled when aspartame was
combined with carbohydrates. Aspartame is known to interact with
carbohydrates to cause a significant rise in some brain chemicals which
are known to regulate mood and behavior (Herbert 134).

   A report by Harvey Levy of Boston Children's Hospital indicates
"that as many as 10% of the population may have difficulty metabolizing
phenylalanine and not know it." (Allman 14) This would put pregnant
women's babies at high risk since "a high level of phenylalanine in
mothers has been shown to cause mental retardation in their babies."
(14) Even a slight increase in the level of phenylalanine could
possibly affect the development of the fetus' brain, "decreasing the IQ
of the infant as much as 15 points." (14)

   Studies also showed that the amino acid, aspartate, is neurotoxic
and capable of inducing brain lesions in experimental animals. Just as
monosodium glutamate induced brain lesions in infant animals, so, too,
did aspartate, when fed to young mice. Dr. John W. Olney of the
Washington University School of Medicine, who with his colleagues,
conducted these tests, charged that FDA "has presented a seriously
misleading case for the safety of aspartame." (Hunter 11) He was
especially concerned about children who tend to ingest a higher
quantity of sweetened foods along with highly processed foods, many of
which contain monosodium glutamate. "Olney reported that FDAs margin of
safety for aspartame fell far short of the traditional safety margin
for adults, and was mathematically off-base a hundredfold for
children." (11)

   During all this testing, another problem made itself known. DKP, a
breakdown product of aspartame, formed through heating (which is done
when bottling or canning carbonated beverages), which was previously
thought to be harmless, now became suspect of causing some alarming
symptoms upon ingestion. DKP, according to tests, seemed to combine
"with nitrite in the human stomach to form nitrosamines, a group of
powerful cancer-inducing compounds." (11) At various dosage levels from
medium to high, DKP appeared to cause liver cancer and uterine polyps
in rats.

   As a result of all the testing done, several proposals have been
presented to the FDA concerning the safety of NutraSweet. First and
foremost, since NutraSweet has been approved and is on the market at
the present time, Dr. Olney urged that all NutraSweet products should
have a warning label affixed, specifically for PKU sufferers. However,
Olney and his colleagues would prefer that the FDA withdraw the
sweetener, conduct more comprehensive research, release the research
data to the public and allow for public hearings (11). Wurtman agrees
with Olney that the sweetener should be withdrawn, but would be
satisfied if manufacturers would reduce the levels of NutraSweet used
in their products, thus reducing the risk of developing potential
health problems (Herbert 134).

   A Washington D. C. based consumer group has gone one step further.
In July 1984 Common Cause challenged the FDAs 1983 approval of
NutraSweet. Their investigations suggest brain damage, cancer and other
health problems could be caused by NutraSweet. Investigation also
indicates that NutraSweet manufacturer, G. D. Searle, may not have
produced valid safety tests for the product. "Aspartame has been
controversial for ten years . . . which makes the FDA approval
curious." (qtd. in "Aspartame Furor" 60) Just two months prior to the
challenge made by Common Cause, Mrs. Jacqueline Hausler of Olney,
Maryland, became the first person to file suit against aspartame. Her
claim: aspartame caused permanent neurological and pyschiatric injury
in her five-year-old son. Her suit is for $2 million (Clark 54).

   The controversy continues today, more heated than ever, as
NutraSweet is being used to sweeten more and varied products. In light
of all the controversy, this writer feels that this promotional
practice is unwise. Until conclusive data is obtained through thorough
scientific research, and the safety of NutraSweet is either verified or
disproved, it is the writer's opinion that the FDA should withdraw its
approval of the sweetener. If that step is too drastic, then the amount
used in products should be reduced drastically. Manufacturers must stop
looking just at their pocket-books, and consider the health of the
American people, especially its children. After "17 years of studies at
a cost of more than $70 million" (Pearl 256), without any conclusive
results, it is way past the time for action. The Community Nutrition
Institute has a similiar opinion. They have received over 1,000 letters
from consumers "complaining of neurological disorders after eating food
containing aspartame" (Allman 14). The FDA does not consider the
letters scientific proof and has disregarded them. The Institute is so
convinced, however, that serious problems are involved in the use of
NutraSweet, that they are suing the FDA to reopen the aspartame case
(14).

   America does have a sweet tooth. It is inevitable that the search
will continue in hope of finding the perfect sweetener, a panacea for a
people who crave sweets. Even now, scientists at the University of
Illinois Medical Center in Chicago have isolated a new sweetening
compound from the leaves and flowers of a plant known to the Aztecs as
Tzonpelic xihuitl or "sweet herb," found in central Mexico. They have
named the colorless oil, hernandulcin, after a 16th century physician
named Francisco Hernandez who first described the plant. It is more
than 1,000 times sweeter than sucrose. When mice were tested for
potential cancer-causing effects, even at high dosage, it did not harm
the mice. Additional tests show that it should not cause dental caries
(Miller 52). Hernandulcin sounds like a new contender for the sweetener
market.

   The final question is: In the quest to satisfy our appetites, will
we end up poisoning ourselves? After studying both sides of the issue,
given a choice between sugar and its substitutes, the writer chooses,
unequivocably, sugar.

Lana Patterson