Dr. Olney's hypothesis does not say people affected by brain tumors consumed
any aspartame at all. The brain cancer data base does not track individuals
use of aspartame. Brain tumor incidence is increasing in people age 70,
probably because better detection methods are used now e.g., MRI. Products
containing aspartame are used mostly by young and middle-aged people who's
cancer rate is going _down_.
Olney left out data points for 1973 and 1974 because that would have shown
the cancer rate was higher before aspartame was introduced. How to lie with
statistics: Start the scale for the vertical axis close to the data points
instead of at zero. This will then exaggerate the curve.
National Cancer Institute data for brain cancer increased since 1973 (before
aspartame) but leveled off in the last ten years (after aspartame). However,
aspartame use has increased ever since it's introduction. This could show
asparatame was NOT the cause. Increase in brain cancer should correlate to
increase use of aspartame use. But, it doesn't. To be equally silly:
Asparatame prevents brain tumors!
Talk about poor FDA science? What is Olney?
I would say it is _way_ more likely to cause mouth, stomach and bowel cancer,
yet that has also not been proven. And, allergic reactions, e.g.
sensitization to formaldehyde. The only proven side effect in
non-phenylketonurics (Phenylketonurics can die. That's one heck of a side
effect) WAS _felt_ (at least if not actually originating there) in the
brain: headaches. They _were_ a surpise to me. Does anybody know the
mechanism for an asparatame headache?
I still can't stand the flavor, so I avoid asparatame anyway.
Davin
Davin C. Enigl, MS-MEAS, President-Microbiologist
HACCP Validations-sm Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points for the
Food, Cosmetic, Pharmaceutical, and Nutritional Supplement Industry
Voice: (916) 989-8264
Web site: http://members.aol.com/enigl/index.html
November 21, 1996
6:10 pm