Ground-breaking study links food additives to hyperactivity

Page 1 of 2 [ 17 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

jjstar
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Sep 2007
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,627

14 Jan 2008, 1:01 pm

Ground-breaking study links food additives to hyperactivity in children
Thursday, September 27, 2007 by: Adam Miller

(NewsTarget) In a landmark study published in The Lancet, commonly used artificial food colorings and the preservative sodium benzoate have been strongly linked to hyperactivity in children, triggering renewed vigor in the decades-long campaign by activists to ban artificial food additives from food marketed to children.

"We now have clear evidence that mixtures of certain food colours and benzoate preservative can adversely influence the behaviour of children." said Dr. Jim Stevenson, lead author of the study.

The study, performed out of the University of Southampton in the U.K., consisted of 153 three-year-olds and 144 children between the ages of eight and nine. Each child was assigned to one of two groups drinking either juice spiked with a cocktail of artificial additives at levels ordinarily found in sweets, beverages, and other common foods or an unadulterated fruit juice acting as a placebo.

The additives used included Sunset Yellow (E110), ponceau 4R (E124), carmoisine (E122), tartazine (E102), quinoline yellow (E104), allura red (E129), and the common preservative sodium benzoate.

The participants who would consume the additive-laden beverages were further divided into two subgroups consuming one of two different cocktails -- “A” and “B”. The second group ("B") was given about twice the amount of chemicals, approximating a UK child`s average daily intake of food additives.

The children were evaluated using what is referred to as a "global hyperactivity aggregate,” based on a computerized test and ratings from teachers and parents in addition to observations made by trained professionals.

After six weeks, Mix A had a significant effect on the behavior of the three year olds although results from Mix B varied. Both mixes had a significant effect on the eight and nine year olds, causing a measurable and cogent increase in hyperactivity. These findings "lend strong support for the case that food additives exacerbate hyperactive behaviors (inattention, impulsivity, and overactivity) in children at least up to middle childhood," wrote the authors.

In the aftermath of the study, various agencies around the world including Britain`s Food Standards Agency (FSA) are warning parents to be mindful of the possible deleterious effects of these type of additives, especially in children exhibiting signs of overactivity. Other agencies are reserving judgement for either a review of scientific merit or for further investigation to be carried out.


This site is part of the NewsTarget Network ©2004,2005,2006,2007 All Rights Reserved. Privacy | Terms All content posted on this site is commentary or opinion and is protected under Free Speech. Truth Publishing International, LTD. has full ownership of and takes sole responsibility for all content. Truth Publishing sells no health or nutritional products and earns no money from health product manufacturers or promoters. The information on this site is provided for educational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended as a substitute for professional advice of any kind. Truth Publishing assumes no responsibility for the use or misuse of this material. Your use of this website indicates your agreement to these terms and those published here. All trademarks, registered trademarks and servicemarks mentioned on this site are the property of their respective owners.


http://www.newstarget.com/022068.html


_________________
Natives who beat drums to drive off evil spirits are objects of scorn to smart Americans who blow horns to break up traffic jams. ~Mary Ellen Kelly


LeKiwi
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,444
Location: The murky waters of my mind...

14 Jan 2008, 1:19 pm

LULZ!! !! !! !! !

'Groundbreaking'


Haven't we known this for years?!


_________________
We are a fever, we are a fever, we ain't born typical...


beau99
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Nov 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,406
Location: PHX

14 Jan 2008, 1:23 pm

Uh huh...

Yet even more false propanganda that few actually buy into...


_________________
Agender person.

Twitter: http://twitter.com/agenderstar


monty
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Sep 2007
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,741

14 Jan 2008, 1:42 pm

beau99 wrote:
Uh huh...

Yet even more false propanganda that few actually buy into...


Why do you dismiss a randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, crossover trial as false propaganda? Simply because you don't like the outcome of the experiment? What evidence do you have that these substances don't aggravate certain behaviors?



Last edited by monty on 14 Jan 2008, 1:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.

beau99
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Nov 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,406
Location: PHX

14 Jan 2008, 1:45 pm

monty wrote:
beau99 wrote:
Uh huh...

Yet even more false propanganda that few actually buy into...


Why do you dismiss a randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, crossover trial as false propaganda? Simply because you don't the outcome of that trial?


A few people are allergic to certain dyes and have adverse reactions.

However, this article is a piece of sensationalist bullsh*t.


_________________
Agender person.

Twitter: http://twitter.com/agenderstar


jjstar
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Sep 2007
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,627

14 Jan 2008, 1:46 pm

LeKiwi wrote:
LULZ!! !! !! !! !

'Groundbreaking'


Haven't we known this for years?!


Soitenly! But I think by *groundbreaking* they are emphasizing tongue in cheek the fact that at long last and way overdue - a study on the long-standing controversy was actually published in a conservative medical journal.

I can hear the caniptions reverberating from those men in white all the way back from September 2007. How hard it must have been for them. Let's give em some credit...:)


_________________
Natives who beat drums to drive off evil spirits are objects of scorn to smart Americans who blow horns to break up traffic jams. ~Mary Ellen Kelly


jjstar
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Sep 2007
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,627

14 Jan 2008, 1:47 pm

monty wrote:
beau99 wrote:
Uh huh...

Yet even more false propanganda that few actually buy into...


Why do you dismiss a randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, crossover trial as false propaganda? Simply because you don't like the outcome of the experiment? What evidence do you have that these substances don't aggravate certain behaviors?


It's his job. That's what he's here to do. We all gotta make a living. He's doing just that! I say embrace the naysayer!


_________________
Natives who beat drums to drive off evil spirits are objects of scorn to smart Americans who blow horns to break up traffic jams. ~Mary Ellen Kelly


monty
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Sep 2007
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,741

14 Jan 2008, 1:52 pm

beau99 wrote:
monty wrote:
beau99 wrote:
Uh huh...

Yet even more false propanganda that few actually buy into...


Why do you dismiss a randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, crossover trial as false propaganda? Simply because you don't the outcome of that trial?


A few people are allergic to certain dyes and have adverse reactions.

However, this article is a piece of sensationalist bullsh*t.


That article was written for the general public. Here is the abstract of the research it was based on. Their conclusions are somewhat different than yours, but more in line with the article you didn't like.

Quote:
BACKGROUND: We undertook a randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, crossover trial to test whether intake of artificial food colour and additives (AFCA) affected childhood behaviour. METHODS: 153 3-year-old and 144 8/9-year-old children were included in the study. The challenge drink contained sodium benzoate and one of two AFCA mixes (A or B) or a placebo mix. The main outcome measure was a global hyperactivity aggregate (GHA), based on aggregated z-scores of observed behaviours and ratings by teachers and parents, plus, for 8/9-year-old children, a computerised test of attention. This clinical trial is registered with Current Controlled Trials (registration number ISRCTN74481308). Analysis was per protocol. FINDINGS: 16 3-year-old children and 14 8/9-year-old children did not complete the study, for reasons unrelated to childhood behaviour. Mix A had a significantly adverse effect compared with placebo in GHA for all 3-year-old children (effect size 0.20 [95% CI 0.01-0.39], p=0.044) but not mix B versus placebo. This result persisted when analysis was restricted to 3-year-old children who consumed more than 85% of juice and had no missing data (0.32 [0.05-0.60], p=0.02). 8/9-year-old children showed a significantly adverse effect when given mix A (0.12 [0.02-0.23], p=0.023) or mix B (0.17 [0.07-0.28], p=0.001) when analysis was restricted to those children consuming at least 85% of drinks with no missing data. INTERPRETATION: Artificial colours or a sodium benzoate preservative (or both) in the diet result in increased hyperactivity in 3-year-old and 8/9-year-old children in the general population.


I would agree that the 'ground-breaking' verbage is a tad sensationalist - there have been studies like this for years.



beau99
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Nov 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,406
Location: PHX

14 Jan 2008, 1:54 pm

monty wrote:
beau99 wrote:
monty wrote:
beau99 wrote:
Uh huh...

Yet even more false propanganda that few actually buy into...


Why do you dismiss a randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, crossover trial as false propaganda? Simply because you don't the outcome of that trial?


A few people are allergic to certain dyes and have adverse reactions.

However, this article is a piece of sensationalist bullsh*t.


That article was written for the general public. Here is the abstract of the research it was based on. Their conclusions are somewhat different than yours, but more in line with the article you didn't like.

Quote:
BACKGROUND: We undertook a randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, crossover trial to test whether intake of artificial food colour and additives (AFCA) affected childhood behaviour. METHODS: 153 3-year-old and 144 8/9-year-old children were included in the study. The challenge drink contained sodium benzoate and one of two AFCA mixes (A or B) or a placebo mix. The main outcome measure was a global hyperactivity aggregate (GHA), based on aggregated z-scores of observed behaviours and ratings by teachers and parents, plus, for 8/9-year-old children, a computerised test of attention. This clinical trial is registered with Current Controlled Trials (registration number ISRCTN74481308). Analysis was per protocol. FINDINGS: 16 3-year-old children and 14 8/9-year-old children did not complete the study, for reasons unrelated to childhood behaviour. Mix A had a significantly adverse effect compared with placebo in GHA for all 3-year-old children (effect size 0.20 [95% CI 0.01-0.39], p=0.044) but not mix B versus placebo. This result persisted when analysis was restricted to 3-year-old children who consumed more than 85% of juice and had no missing data (0.32 [0.05-0.60], p=0.02). 8/9-year-old children showed a significantly adverse effect when given mix A (0.12 [0.02-0.23], p=0.023) or mix B (0.17 [0.07-0.28], p=0.001) when analysis was restricted to those children consuming at least 85% of drinks with no missing data. INTERPRETATION: Artificial colours or a sodium benzoate preservative (or both) in the diet result in increased hyperactivity in 3-year-old and 8/9-year-old children in the general population.

The source of the article is The Lancet.

It may be a peer-reviewed medical journal, however, they are no stranger to controversy (especially regarding the MMR-autism fallacy) and have been known to falsify data.


_________________
Agender person.

Twitter: http://twitter.com/agenderstar


LeKiwi
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,444
Location: The murky waters of my mind...

14 Jan 2008, 1:59 pm

Ok, well then, when you have a toddler of your own I invite you to feed them up on foods that contain all manner of bright colours (blue and red would be my recommendation - those chips are amazing, and don't forget the blue sweets that paint your tongue), lots of sugar, lots of sweeteners, a bit of coke or - even better - fanta to wash it down with, and then see what happens. (Enjoy the afternoon...!) ;)


_________________
We are a fever, we are a fever, we ain't born typical...


monty
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Sep 2007
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,741

14 Jan 2008, 1:59 pm

beau99 wrote:
...

It may be a peer-reviewed medical journal, however, they are no stranger to controversy (especially regarding the MMR-autism fallacy) and have been known to falsify data.


Ok, but why do raise the specter of fraud? Do you have information that suggests that, or is this a 'logical' debate tactic driven by beliefs and values?

And who is the 'they' that has been known to falsify data?



jjstar
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Sep 2007
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,627

14 Jan 2008, 2:13 pm

LeKiwi wrote:
Ok, well then, when you have a toddler of your own I invite you to feed them up on foods that contain all manner of bright colours (blue and red would be my recommendation - those chips are amazing, and don't forget the blue sweets that paint your tongue), lots of sugar, lots of sweeteners, a bit of coke or - even better - fanta to wash it down with, and then see what happens. (Enjoy the afternoon...!) ;)


That stuff is in pet food too. Let's not forget....but oh well....

Hey - hope your day is going fine Kiwi!


_________________
Natives who beat drums to drive off evil spirits are objects of scorn to smart Americans who blow horns to break up traffic jams. ~Mary Ellen Kelly


LeKiwi
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,444
Location: The murky waters of my mind...

14 Jan 2008, 3:41 pm

Haha cheers, yours too.

Just reminds me of when one of my brothers gave my youngest brother a half glass of coke one day when he was about 5. "It doesn't do anything, don't be stupid!" he said when I told him off.

So I left him with the 5 year old all afternoon while he ran around and tried to climb the curtains on a caffeine/sugar high! :lol: Serves him right for being so stupid... he certainly never gave him coke again!!


_________________
We are a fever, we are a fever, we ain't born typical...


beau99
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Nov 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,406
Location: PHX

14 Jan 2008, 4:34 pm

LeKiwi wrote:
Haha cheers, yours too.

Just reminds me of when one of my brothers gave my youngest brother a half glass of coke one day when he was about 5. "It doesn't do anything, don't be stupid!" he said when I told him off.

So I left him with the 5 year old all afternoon while he ran around and tried to climb the curtains on a caffeine/sugar high! :lol: Serves him right for being so stupid... he certainly never gave him coke again!!

Unless a 5-year-old is really sensitive to caffeine, that will almost never happen.


_________________
Agender person.

Twitter: http://twitter.com/agenderstar


LeKiwi
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Nov 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,444
Location: The murky waters of my mind...

14 Jan 2008, 4:42 pm

beau99 wrote:
LeKiwi wrote:
Haha cheers, yours too.

Just reminds me of when one of my brothers gave my youngest brother a half glass of coke one day when he was about 5. "It doesn't do anything, don't be stupid!" he said when I told him off.

So I left him with the 5 year old all afternoon while he ran around and tried to climb the curtains on a caffeine/sugar high! :lol: Serves him right for being so stupid... he certainly never gave him coke again!!

Unless a 5-year-old is really sensitive to caffeine, that will almost never happen.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Beau, do you have kids?

No, I thought not.


One of the number one rules is NEVER give coke to a kid. The sugar is bad enough; add caffeine to that and you have a recipe for an extremely stressful afternoon with one hyped up little bunny.

Seriously, try it. I dare you. Prove me wrong.


_________________
We are a fever, we are a fever, we ain't born typical...


beau99
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Nov 2007
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,406
Location: PHX

14 Jan 2008, 4:44 pm

LeKiwi wrote:
beau99 wrote:
LeKiwi wrote:
Haha cheers, yours too.

Just reminds me of when one of my brothers gave my youngest brother a half glass of coke one day when he was about 5. "It doesn't do anything, don't be stupid!" he said when I told him off.

So I left him with the 5 year old all afternoon while he ran around and tried to climb the curtains on a caffeine/sugar high! :lol: Serves him right for being so stupid... he certainly never gave him coke again!!

Unless a 5-year-old is really sensitive to caffeine, that will almost never happen.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Beau, do you have kids?

No, I thought not.


One of the number one rules is NEVER give coke to a kid. The sugar is bad enough; add caffeine to that and you have a recipe for an extremely stressful afternoon with one hyped up little bunny.

Seriously, try it. I dare you. Prove me wrong.

I've done it before, with relatives. I had permission to do so each time. Nothing bad happened.


_________________
Agender person.

Twitter: http://twitter.com/agenderstar