This site is dedicated to those individuals who withstand the confusion, casualties and obstacles involved with taking control of their food and their health.
Home The Movie
Activism Contact Us Catalog Disclaimer Links
Andrew von Eschenbach's Last Task with the NCI
The negligence involved with continuing to falsely reassure the public that aspartame is safe compares to the negligence this same administration exhibits through the EPA when they falsely reassured the public that the ground-zero air is safe to breath.
Learn more about Sweet Misery
MORE NEWS:
Sweet Misery: A Poisoned World
4/5/06 Quick! Do a Study!: In the face of the damning in-lab Italian study of 1800 rats last year demonstrating once again the carcinogenic properties of aspartame, the Feds (National Cancer Institute) were compelled to do a survey of 340,045 men and 226,945 women, ages 50 to 69. Although in over 6,000 products, they somehow catagorized users by level of recalled consumption of most obvious aspartame laced products (ie. Diet Sodas and Equal). Assuming clear recollection and an untainted nongum-chewing control group, NCI Researcher Unhee Lim, PHD, states there was no link found to aspartame consumption for the types of cancers found in the Italian study. Despite the fanfair from the industry-funded nonprofits, Unhee Lim states later that she is not ready to make any public health recommendations about aspartame consumption at this time. Smart woman. Paul Joseph Watson of Prison Planet immediately takes issue with the way the study was reported and relinquishes us from the task of referring to what is omitted from the AP article. That is the 70 independently funded studies that find something wrong with aspartame.

"It goes a fair way toward allaying concerns about aspartame," said Michael Jacobson, head of the Center for Science in the Public Interest. Was the protocal of this study designed to reassure the public?

Learn how aspartame effects pregnancies
New Addition
The RUMSFELD•PEPSI •NIXON
connection
The answer is yes.
4/12/06 NCI Announcement : We now learned that the National Cancer Institute (NCI) used a previous diet survey (featured on 4/5/06) in an attempt to distract the public from any concerns renewed by last year's Ramazzini study linking aspartame to cancer. This behavior becomes evident when looking at the actual diet questionnaire used to survey the half a million members of the AARP during the 90's.

With aspartame spread throughout 6000 products nationwide, the survey indeed failed to separate those that were consuming aspartame from those that were aspartame free.

You might recognize this sort of deception in our film's coverage of the Bressler Report. Particularly with the diketopiperazine (DKP, a tumor agent) tests performed by Searle and presented to the FDA for the passage of aspartame. DKP, a tumor causing substance, is one of the break-down products of aspartame that needed further testing. Searle-funded researchers would let the DKP permeate the rat food in both the control group and the experimental group, then report that there's no correlation of cancer between each group. Careful FDA scientists noticed an unusually high rate of cancer in both groups and prevented passage of aspartame because of these and other carcinogenic properties.

The NCI is playing essentially the same game by ignoring the fact that aspartame is present throughout 6000 different products in the U.S. food supply. Although there are a couple questions to identify users of aspartame with coffee and drinkers of diet soda, the actual diet questionnaire does nothing to separate aspartame users from non aspartame users.

The NCI had to know that their public assessment of this survey would be quickly dismissed, so why did they elect to occupy such a short-lived position? Could they have reached a point were credibility is no longer an important goal, or do they assume that various nonprofit front-groups would invest in enough advertising money to distract the public from what appears to be a fraud.

Europe's largest aspartame distributor announced its withdrawal only a few days before the NCI anouncement.

Does this move by the NCI mark one of a few remaining desperate power plays for an industry in its last throws? Not necessarily. We later learned that this was likely Eschenbach"s last task with the NCI. Again, we ask why would the NCI take such a short-lived, easily dismissed position. Eschenbach finished up his task before moving to his new position as FDA Commissioner. The effect of this "survey" was a short "blip" of PR fanfair in the face of a new cancer study devastating to aspartame at a time when Holland Sweeteners formally announced they are nixing aspartame from their product line. Some European groups must have their eyes on these U.S. regulatory agencies, despite evidence tthat these agencies are compromised. These are dangerous times.