Methanol: A chemical Trojan Horse as the root of the Inscrutable U
Monte, WC, Arizona State University (retired), 470 South Rainbow Drive, Page, Arizona 86040, United States.
Until 200years ago, methanol was an extremely rare component of the human diet and is still rarely consumed in contemporary hunter and gatherer cultures. With the invention of canning in the 1800s, canned and bottled fruits and vegetables, whose methanol content greatly exceeds that of their fresh counterparts, became far more prevalent. The recent dietary introduction of aspartame, an artificial sweetener 11% methanol by weight, has also greatly increased methanol consumption. Moreover, methanol is a major component of cigarette smoke, known to be a causative agent of many diseases of civilization (DOC). Conversion to formaldehyde in organs other than the liver is the principal means by which methanol may cause disease. The known sites of class I alcohol dehydrogenase (ADH I), the only human enzyme capable of metabolizing methanol to formaldehyde, correspond to the sites of origin for many DOC. Variability in sensitivity to exogenous methanol consumption may be accounted for in part by the presence of aldehyde dehydrogenase sufficient to reduce the toxic effect of formaldehyde production in tissue through its conversion to the much less toxic formic acid. The consumption of small amounts of ethanol, which acts as a competitive inhibitor of methanol's conversion to formaldehyde by ADH I, may afford some individuals protection from DOC.
]]>To unlock the doors of future health, we MUST find the keys from the past.
It's important to remember that the human body has not "kept up" with our modern technology. Human beings certainly shouldn't eat technology! But that is exactly what is happening today as a result of the onslaught of manufactured foods, more and more chemicals being pumped onto our corporate farms, and the addition of more and more chemicals to our diets.
This very second, your physical body is functioning internally exactly the way human bodies functioned 10,000 years ago. Because our bodies function today the same as they did in the past, it is critical to treat them the same as in years past - centuries past. Human beings continue to adopt one of the most unnatural lifestyles known to mankind and are becoming diseased because of it.
Finding nutritional answers to illness is an art passed down from generation to generation; but the causes of modern diseases are harder to identify now than ever before, if discovered at all, and the various sources of high-tech diseases have become lost in today's technological shuffle. As time marches forward, reclaim the healing techniques of old-fashioned medicine. Pass forward to the next generation that to unlock the doors of future health, we MUST find the keys from the past.
David Burton, Sir Rebel Films, has produced a short-film on his new documentary on the dangers of aspartame.
"This is very important information for anyone who eats food," says Burton, "The style of the film is to show what everyone is saying about aspartame... everyone has a different story. The FDA says its safe. CSPI says there's "no proof", but it could cause cancer. Activists say its toxic. People are sick! So people should not eat it. Even CSPI has 2 different opinions on the subject.
"I think the point of the video is "don't eat artificial sweeteners" and that point is clear."
The aspartame issue is NOT NEW, that's for sure. Studies not funded by the aspartame industry do, indeed, show that aspartame is harmful to your health. Research as early as the 1960s has proven and documented that aspartame causes fetal deformities, that aspartame eats holes in brain tissue, and that aspartame caused the 1960 lab monkeys to all die of seizures. Publicly denying this information is valid proof that the manufacturers of aspartame are playing "games" with consumers, and manipulating the truth about aspartame's toxic effects on human health and a developing fetus is a serious matter. It greatly insults the professionals who have been fighting this crusade for over 20 years because we know such statements of aspartame safety are dangerously incorrect.
Suppressing the truth about aspartame dangers greatly insults those who use it because they are being left to suffer its toxic effects with no medical support to make them better.
People ARE waking up to the fact that aspartame is a root cause of many unresolved health issues that they, and their children, are suffering from. One day, the David Burtons out there will bust through the media blackout that has been manipulating the truth that you deserve to know.
The dangers of aspartame are now becoming widely known, but the risks of using Splenda are not as well documented - yet. Essentially, the sucralose in Splenda does not readily penetrate the blood brain barrier as aspartame does, hence creating neurotoxic havoc at the brain center. But, the research shows sucralose can negatively affect the body in several ways because it IS a chemical substance and NOT natural sugar.
The same patterns with aspartame are repeating with sucralose (Splenda). The individuals who stand to profit the most have immense influence, and the information about Splenda's dangers, just as with aspartame, is being downplayed. Corporate claims of product safety and innocuous research results are identical to those used by The NutraSweet Company. As you learn more information about Splenda and see its advertisements, note the comparisons and repeated patterns between the products, the corporations, and the marketing strategies. Maybe consumers can prevent damage to their health from sucralose sooner than they did with aspartame, which has affected the health and lives of millions of innocent people since it was introduced into the public food supply over twenty years ago. Especially, damage to a fetus or a child.
At least you, the consumer, deserve to be informed about the "other side" of this safety issue so you can make up your own mind whether Splenda Is Safe Or Not.
]]>By Mike Hughlett | Tribune reporter January 10, 2009
Chicago-based Merisant Worldwide Inc., maker of the artificial sweetener Equal, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection Friday, hobbled by the global credit crisis and sliding sales.
Merisant, largely owned by private-equity firm Pegasus Capital Advisors, is saddled with $560.7 million in debt, compared with $331.1 million in assets, according to U.S. Bankruptcy Court filings in Delaware. Its biggest creditors are holders of its publicly traded bonds, who are owed $362 million.
Merisant was scheduled to make $78.3 million in debt payments in the 12 months ending Sept. 30, according to a November filing with federal securities regulators. Some of those payments are due this month.
"It is fair to say the current turmoil in the credit markets made bank financing unavailable to Merisant to refinance its near-term maturities and interest payments," the company said in a statement to the Tribune.
Paul Block, Merisant's chief executive, said in a separate statement that "this is a financial restructuring of our balance sheet, not an operational restructuring of our business. We've already taken aggressive steps to cut costs."
No job cuts are expected because of the bankruptcy, he said. Merisant employs about 425 worldwide, including almost 70 in Chicago and 120 at a plant in Manteno, Ill., north of Kankakee.
Merisant has its roots in G.D. Searle & Co., the Skokie-based firm that invented the artificial sweetener aspartame in 1965. Monsanto bought Searle in 1985 and then in 2000 sold its aspartame-related businesses to separate buyers, with the tabletop sweetener operation christened Merisant.
Back then, Equal was the leading tabletop sweetener, with 37 percent of the market. Splenda, an artificial sweetener made by Johnson & Johnson has since come to dominate.
In 2008, Splenda grabbed 60 percent of the market, and Equal had only 11 percent, third after Sweet & Low.
The upshot: Merisant's revenues sank 18 percent from 2003 through 2007, when they totaled $290 million. For 2008's first nine months, sales were off another 6 percent from a year earlier.
Merisant is betting on future growth through PureVia, a zero-calorie natural sweetener derived from the leaves of the stevia shrub. Tabletop sweeteners under the PureVia brand are rolling out in stores nationwide.
Merisant also has partnered with PepsiCo
mhughlett@tribune.com
Source: FoodNavigatorUSA.com
Related topics: Natural sweeteners, Financial & Industry, Cereals and bakery preparations, Chocolate and confectionery ingredients, Dairy-based ingredients, Health and nutritional ingredients, Sweeteners (intense, bulk, polyols)
A flurry of activity has followed the FDA no objection letters for the stevia-derived sweetener, Reb A, to be used in food and beverages as two companies announce self-affirmed GRAS.
Blue California said it has completed its GRAS (generally recognized as safe) self-affirmation for its Reb A 97 percent sweetener Good&Sweet.
And GLG Life Tech Corporation also announced that it has completed the necessary steps to declare self-affirmed GRAS for its Rebpure product which contains 97 percent pure Reb A stevia extract.
Their announcements came within hours of news that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) said it had no objection to rebiana, (Reb A) at 95 percent purity or above, having GRAS status. Self affirmed GRAS does not require a response from the FDA.
The no objection was in response to notifications from Merisant Company and Cargill, which submitted evidence to show that the natural, zero calorie sweetener is safe for use in the food supply.
Blue California said it began the GRAS self-affirmation process in February and completed it on December 15.
Cecilia McCollum, Blue California's executive vice president, said: "GRAS self affirmation by an Expert Panel is a legal process (if all the FDA requirements are met) in order to determine if a product is safe to use as a food ingredient.
"We have not decided yet if we are going to file a submission with the FDA or not.
"The stevia market in general and the Reb A market in particular is big enough to accommodate many suppliers of this ingredient.
"Our Good&sweet ingredient is no less than 97 percent and we produce a 99 percent purity as well."
She added that the company sources the stevia leaf, produces stevia extract, then isolates and purifies the sweet compound Reb A.
Meanwhile GLG said that a notification would be filed with the FDA, following its GRAS self-affirmation.
The company said that key to its self-affirmation was that the molecular structure of Rebpure has been "proven to match the molecular structure of rebiana", which the FDA decision related to.
During the process, GLG said it worked closely with ChromaDex, which develops analytical standards for ingredients, to perform a characterization study on GLG's Rebpure.
Cargill recently entered into an agreement with ChromaDex to ensure quality and consistency of individual sweet components of stevia.
Exploring the stevia market
Another company, Sunwin International Neutraceuticals, which produces stevia in China, also entered the ring. Its stevia brand OnlySweet is already sold as a nutritional supplement in US.
Sunwin spokesman, Jeff Reynolds, said: "We are confident that our high grade stevia extracts meet the FDA standards, and we are taking the steps to affirm this.
"The US food and beverage industry represents a vast new market for Sunwin and we intend to rapidly explore opportunities for expansion into this area."
Meanwhile the Malaysian company PureCircle, said its Reb A was central to Merisant and Cargill's submissions to the FDA.
Peter Milsted, PureCircle sales and marketing director, told FoodNavigator: "It is essential for the development of this industry that all Reb A manufacturers have to comply with the FDAs' requirements. The only thing of importance is that manufacturers who claim to be able to manufacture to FDA specifications, actually can."
The following timeline is an excerpt from my book. It succinctly outlines the history of how this toxin came into the American food supply, and it might help to understand why and how such a known toxin is still on the market today....
1965: Jim Schlatter, a chemist at G.D. Searle & Company was working on a project to discover new treatments for gastric ulcers. He accidentally and unknowingly spilled some of the heated chemical on his hand. Later he licked his finger as he reached for a piece of paper, and noticed the sweet taste. He and a friend decided to test some in coffee and both agreed the chemical had a sweet taste. The result: aspartame. The manufacturer merely changed the FDA paperwork from drug to food additive, but did not change the substance itself.
1969: G.D. Searle applied for the first patent on aspartame. Saccharin and cyclamate were alleged to cause bladder cancer in rats.
March 1973: G.D. Searle submitted its first petition to the FDA for aspartame use in foods.
1974: FDA approved aspartame use in carbonated beverages and in dry products.
December 1975: FDA task force concluded that some of Searle's studies were questionable and rescinded aspartame approval.
April 1976: FDA Commissioner Schmidt wrote Senator Ted Kennedy, informing him of G.D. Searle's "questionable integrity of the basic safety data submitted (by Searle) for aspartame safety."
January 1977: FDA Chief Counsel Richard Merrill submitted a thirty-three-page letter to U.S. attorney Samuel Skinner recommending a grand jury investigation into G.D. Searle "for concealing material facts and making false statements in reports of animal studies to establish the safety of aspartame." Two specific studies of concern were cited. No action was taken, and the statute of limitations for prosecution expired.
July 1977: Samuel Skinner left the U.S. attorney's office to represent G.D. Searle's law firm, Sidley and Austin.
October 1980: FDA appointed Public Board of Inquiry submitted a written recommendation that NutraSweet not be approved pending further brain tumor testing.
May 1981: Three of six FDA scientists formally advised against aspartame approval.
July 1981: FDA Commissioner Arthur Hull Hayes, Jr. solely approved NutraSweet (aspartame) for dry products.
July 1983: FDA Acting-Commissioner Mark Novitch, M.D. approved aspartame in carbonated beverages and carbonated beverage syrup bases.
October 1983: The NutraSweet Company filed two patent extensions for an extension of five years, ten months and seventeen days (each).
November 1984: Center for Disease Control (CDC) published the first list of consumer complaints related to aspartame use.
July 1986: The NutraSweet Company filed thirty patent extensions for an extension of five years, ten months and seventeen days (each).
November 1987: "NutraSweet: Health and Safety Concerns" hearing was held by the U.S. Committee on Labor and Human Resources, Senator Howard Metzenbaum, chairman.
September 1992: FDA released a list of ninety-two complaint categories filed against NutraSweet, totaling over 8,000 complaints filed. (See Appendix XI of Sweet Poison: How The World's Most Popular Artificial Sweetener Is Killing Us--My Story, by Dr. Janet Starr Hull for the complete list.)
December 1992: G.D. Searle's patent extensions on aspartame expired, allowing other companies to produce aspartame.
1992 - 1997: A gap in public information, and a media black-out begins.
1997- 2008: "Sweet Poison: How The World's Most Popular Artificial Sweetener Is Killing Us--My Story" is published, the first book documenting the truth and history of aspartame.
2004-2007: European studies are performed proving aspartame dangers to human health - Healthy Newsletter, Feb 2006 (click the links for the PDFs)
2007: A second Italian aspartame study with results of leukemia and lymphoma is repeated by Morando Soffritti, Fiorella Belpoggi, Eva Tibaldi, Davide Degli Esposti, and Michelina Lauriola at the Cesare Maltoni Cancer Research Center, European Ramazzini Foundation of Oncology and Environmental Sciences, Bologna, Italy - Bella Italia: The Soffritti Aspartame Study (full text in PDF)
Sept. 2008: The aspartame media blackout breaks down, and the dangers of aspartame are becoming more accessible as mainstream news.
Oct. 2008: Readers return all products with aspartame to their grocer to request a full refund.
A review of 500 studies conducted over a quarter century has turned up no credible evidence that the widely used artificial sweetener aspartame is unsafe, industry-funded research released on Tuesday showed.
A panel of American, British and Dutch experts rejected the notion that aspartame causes cancer, seizures, neurological damage or learning problems, or contributes to obesity. The panel did conclude that some people might be prone to headaches after consuming it.
The group did not conduct original research but assessed existing studies on the safety of aspartame, first approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in 1981. It is widely used in diet soft drinks and sold in packets for use in coffee, tea or on food.
The panel found consumption of it increasing, but said it was safe even among the heaviest users, whether adults or children.
"Controlled and thorough scientific studies confirm aspartame's safety and find no credible link between consumption of aspartame at levels found in the human diet and conditions related to the nervous system and behavior, nor any other symptom or illness," the researchers said in a paper published in the journal Critical Reviews in Toxicology.
"There is no credible evidence that aspartame is carcinogenic," they added.
Since its approval, some people have argued that aspartame can cause a variety of illnesses, and various Web sites such as www.sweetpoison.com denounce the sweetener.
Read the entire article here.
Dr. Hull's Comment
I will never accept the news of aspartame safety. I think it is a "business" decision to discredit/discount the research results that aspartame DOES cause cancer, major nerve disorders, birth defects, and brain imbalances. Think about it - can you imagine the chaos that will occur when the truth of aspartame dangers is accredited. The FDA has known about the dangers, the corporations have known about the dangers, and the medical community (if it is really worth anything) has known about the dangers. The legal systems around the world aren't prepared for the number of lawsuits that will FLOOD the court systems if this truth is given life. The news reports have just released that acetaminophen found in Tylenol® has caused more deaths than any other substance in American drug history. But they dare to defend aspartame?? This CYA madness will stop one day and the truth about aspartame will become public knowledge - it has to. Never give up hope that the truth about the dangers of aspartame are real. One day, this will be common knowledge, but the "system" will take a major hit when it does.
]]>Be very leery of the media and research groups, and the various government
agencies that have sold out in the past by telling you aspartame was safe.
The heat must be on them now; now they decide to come clean and deliver the
truth that aspartame has been proven to harm human health. Listen the most
to, and support those who have maintained aspartame dangers from the
beginning; illustrating their true integrity and sincere concern for human
health. These are the groups, organizations, and individuals to pay
attention to and trust. CSPI let us down in the past and publicly put forth
information that was not true. Why are they now deciding to come clean?
Read the entire New Aspartame Safety Review 'Perfectly Predictable' article.
]]>Coca-Cola and food ingredient giant Cargill have teamed up to market a
new calorie-free natural sweetener they hope will shake up the global
market currently dominated by Tate & Lyle's sucralose and Splenda and
US company NutraSweet.
The sweetener, tentatively named rebiana, will be based on the Stevia
plant native to Paraguay but increasingly used as a health food in the
Far East and Hollywood, The Wall Street Journal reports today.
Coca-Cola has filed 24 patents applications in the past week around
extracting the tastiest parts of the Stevia plant and is seeking
exclusive rights to develop and market rebiana for use in drinks,
while Cargill, one of the world's largest agribusiness and trading
companies, owned by the founding Cargill and MacMillan families, will
market it for use in food such as yoghurt, cereals, ice cream and
sweets.
It has spent the past three years developing Stevia plantations in
China, Paraguay and Argentina.
However, the two companies acknowledge that they face regulatory
troubles since Stevia has been banned in the US and EU after a 1985
medical study linked the plant to liver problems.
They aim to market it first in countries where Stevia is not banned,
such as Japan and South America, and Cargill seeks to help regulatory
approval in the US by sponsoring more scientific studies.
Coca-Cola has been attempting to develop its own sweetener from the
Stevia plant for the past 10 years.
The beverages giant has resisted using Tate & Lyle's sucralose
sweetener in its diet fizzy drinks, it is thought because it believes
it leaves an aftertaste.
Instead it mainly used NutraSweet, made by the Chicago company of the
same name.
Tate & Lyle last week blamed a failure to penetrate the vast US
carbonated diet drinks market for disappointing sales of Splenda, its
artificial sweetener, which make up 20 per cent of group profits.
Iain Ferguson, the chief executive, admitted that US sales of Splenda,
had been "less than we had hoped for" during the year to March 30.
"We have not yet cracked any of the major lines there," he said and
warned that profits growth from the product would be only modest in
the current year.
Cargill is the second-largest privately held business in the United
States after Koch Industries.
In 2006, Cargill's sales of $75.2 billion would have ranked it 18th on
the Fortune 500 list.
It handles a quarter of all US grain exports, ships more than 6
million tonnes of sugar a year, and is a world leader in cocoa and
chocolate.
Through Degussa, it also has leading positions in ingredients, such as
salt, flour, malt, sweeteners, starches.
©Copyright 2007 Times Newspapers Ltd
Read the full story here.
COCA-COLA NORTH AMERICA ANNOUNCES
PLANS TO LAUNCH DIET COKE PLUS™
"Great Taste Has Its Benefits"
ATLANTA, March 22, 2007 - Coca-Cola North America today announced it will launch Diet Coke Plus™, a sparkling, calorie-free beverage with vitamins and minerals. In addition to providing great, refreshing taste, Diet Coke Plus is a good source of vitamins B3, B6, and B12, and the minerals zinc and magnesium. Diet Coke Plus will be available throughout the U.S. in April in retail stores where other Diet Coke products are sold.
"Consumers, including Diet Coke drinkers, are increasingly looking for more beverage options, and we wanted to offer them the convenience of a calorie-free beverage that is a good source of several essential vitamins and minerals, and one that delivers on the great taste that they have come to expect from us," said Katie Bayne, senior vice president, Coca-Cola Brands, Coca-Cola North America.
Each eight-ounce serving of Diet Coke Plus provides a good source of Niacin (vitamin B3), vitamins B6 and B12, zinc and magnesium (15% Daily Value [DV] for Niacin, B6 and B12, 10% DV for zinc and magnesium). Diet Coke Plus is the newest member of the Diet Coke family, which includes the flagship Diet Coke, Caffeine Free Diet Coke, Diet Coke with Lime, Diet Cherry Coke, and Diet Coke Sweetened with Splenda. Diet Coke lovers need not worry about their favorite sparkling beverage disappearing. "The millions of current Diet Coke devotees across America shouldn't be concerned - America's #1 diet sparkling beverage is staying just as it is," said Bayne.
Dr. Hull's Comments:
Vitamins mixed with chemical toxins...it's hard to make a logical comment on something so ridiculous. To start with, the vitamins added to this chemical drink are not natural, but manufactured replicas of real vitamins from foods. Mixed with the carbonation and the toxic acidic levels in a diet cola, any vitamins and minerals are quickly destroyed in the bottle. Then, the same toxins that make up aspartame, two manufactured amino acids connected by methanol, still make this diet cola just as nasty as it was before. Nothing's changed.
Knowing that the truth about aspartame's health dangers is becoming more widely known these days, I have to assume the makers of this diet cola have now added "vitamins" hoping to steer people away from the truth that aspartame does, indeed, make people sick.
Sorry, folks, this new "vitamin" diet cola is another diet product with misleading marketing.
]]>A second study conducted by the European Ramazzini Foundation (ERF) confirms the carcinogenicity of aspartame. The results of this study will be presented April 23, 2007 at the Mount Sinai Medical School of New York, where ERF Scientific Director Morando Soffritti will receive the third Irving J. Selikoff Award. [vedi testo completo per l'italiano]
Aspartame is an artificial sweetener consumed by hundreds of millions of people worldwide. It is used in over 6,000 diet products including soft drinks, chewing gum, candy, desserts, yogurt as well as in pharmaceuticals, in particular, syrups and antibiotics for children. In 2005, the European Ramazzini Foundation published important experimental data demonstrating the carcinogenicity of aspartame. These data demonstrated for the first time that aspartame is a carcinogenic agent, inducing various types of malignant tumors in rats, even at dose levels currently considered acceptable for humans.
As soon as carcinogenic effects were perceived during this first study, the ERF began a second long term experiment, administering aspartame at low doses in feed to rats beginning during fetal life.
In a world exclusive, Italian news station TG2 announced on April 13th that the European Ramazzini Foundation will present the results of this second study at the Mount Sinai School of Medicine at the end of April when Scientific Director Dr. Morando Soffritti will receive the third Irving J. Selikoff Award.
Ramazzini Foundation Portal on Research
We will publish the new study when it becomes available.
]]>Rebecca Smithers, consumer affairs correspondent
The Guardian, May 8, 2007
Pressure is growing on supermarkets and retailers to ban artificial colours and flavourings from food and drink consumed by children, with most leading retailers reviewing their policies in the face of mounting consumer concern.
Sainsbury's will next month become the first major supermarket chain to ban artificial colours and flavourings from its own-label soft drinks.
The chain says the ban - in force from June 1 - is the result of "overwhelming" demand from parents concerned about E number additives and artificial flavours and their possible links with hyperactivity and behaviour problems among children, as well as allergies and breathing problems.
Other supermarkets and retailers are likely to follow, amid growing public concern about the health risks of artificial ingredients. Britain's biggest supermarket, Tesco, and Marks & Spencer are both moving to phase them out where they are still being used.
In the biggest single move of its kind Sainsbury's ban will apply to its entire range of more than 120 own-brand drinks - soft and fizzy drinks, squash and cordials, as well as mixers for use with alcohol, such as tonic water.
Sainsbury's is replacing aspartame with sucralose, a low-calorie sweetener made from sugar. It is also removing the widely used artificial colouring sulphite ammonia caramel (E150d) from its cola drinks, replacing it with barley malt extract. Sainsbury's said the chemicals will generally be replaced by natural colours and fruit and vegetable extracts, while flavourings will be from named fruits and other natural sources.
Marks & Spencer said none of its soft drinks contain aspartame - it uses sucralose in diet soft drinks - or artificial flavouring, while all its soft drinks except colas contain natural colours. It is working to remove the one remaining artificial colour from its colas. It said it had banned more than half the additives permitted by the EU, particularly those associated with concerns about food intolerance and children's diets including monosodium glutamate (MSG), cyclamates and tartrazine. Its children's range of ready meals do not contain added preservatives, artificial colours, flavourings or sweeteners, and the permitted additives used in the range had been agreed with the Hyperactive Children's Support Group (HCSG).
Tesco said in a statement: "We have a couple of fruit-flavoured fizzy drinks which contain artificial additives that will be removed by the summer. We use natural, fruit-based sweeteners in all of our drinks that are labelled for children or are in our 'kids' range.
"We have had an 'additives hit-list' for more than 20 years and in particular target colours and additives highlighted by the HCSG ... we are conducting a review regarding 'nature identical' additives in our drinks."
The founder of the HCSG, Sally Bunday, said Sainsbury's move was "fantastic news ... This is an important public health issue which manufacturers can no longer brush under the carpet. We hope that this announcement from Sainsbury's will lead other soft drink manufacturers and supermarkets to follow suit."
The HCSG is putting together a research project scrutinising the policies of supermarkets on artificial colours and flavourings, which will be published later this month.
Lizzy Vann, of the Organix range of babyfoods, said: "We would like to see more supermarkets and manufacturers launching an outright ban on additives in children's food ... The fact is that small children are being subjected to all sorts of ingredients that we just don't know enough about - they are being unfairly experimented on and their body mass also means that ... they are absorbing relatively large quantities."