Question
Could amino acid therapy be a powerful addition to other therapies?

Answer
In my opinion, amino acid therapy is extremely problematic.

Theoretically, benefits could accrue treating deficiencies in nutritional
amino acids, which manifest in specific ailments or symptoms. The brain-body
connection is the supreme determinant of body functions. Amino acid therapy
has the potential of impact on that connection, as many amino acids are
neurotransmitters.

My first concern as a physician is to "do no harm." It is suggested by the
authors of Heal With Amino Acids And Nutrients, that this type of therapy
would be "natural." It is true amino acids are part of plant and animal
protein. However, they never occur in tissue as individuals. Independently
amino acids are not natural foods. The natural way we assimilate them into
our metabolic pool is very complex. Nature only makes the L-form in higher
organisms. We can only use these L-forms.

I have no problem applying the principles of amino acid therapy if we are
talking about the use of whole natural foods to achieve these goals.
Individual amino acid therapy must be cautiously tempered, because of the
following:

Proteins must be broken down in commercial production of amino acids in one
of two ways:

1. Hydrolysis by heat and acid or
2. Hydrolysis by enzymes.

A third way to make amino acids for commerce is even more problematic.
Called "bacterial fermentation," it involves genetically engineering
bacteria that utilize cheap substrates to make amino acids. The bacteria
exude the amino acids out of their cell walls.

In all of these processes, the resultant artificial amino acid isolate
preparations have isomers the body cannot use as well as undesirable,
closely related, chemicals called contaminants. This is what they thought
happened with L-tryptophan that caused eosinophlia-myalgia syndrome (EMS)!
Contaminants are like new drugs that will elicit side effects as well as
idiosyncratic reactions in those that take them. L-tryptophan's association
with EMS was thought, initially, to be related to one manufacturer's
processing produced contaminant. Spectrographic analysis of their
L-tryptophan product showed an odd chemical "blip." This is the story we got
on television. What was not made public is that when the FDA looked at this
problem more closely, they discovered that EMS was caused by L-tryptophan
preparations without the "blip" also. That's why L-tryptophan was made a "by
prescription only" item (now ironically it's again an "over the counter"
drug.) After all, amino acids unnaturally isolated from their food
constituents are in fact drugs, as they have a potential pharmacologic
effect in some of those who consume them.

I am very concerned about the indiscriminate use of amino acids. In young
body builders and other athletes who take commercial supplements of amino
acids, irritability may be due to more than just illegal use of anabolic
steroids. Amino acids are CNS active molecules that can have a mood altering
potential in susceptible individuals. Free amino acids (those amino acids
not bound by or part of a protein) also have the potential to damage the
brain, as so eloquently has been discribed by neurosurgeon Russell Blaylock
M.D. in Excitotoxins The Taste That Kills.

The same company, Ajinomoto, that makes L-tryptophan, now finally recognized
as a drug, as well as much of the world's amino acid isolates, makes MSG.
Jack Samuels, a world expert on MSG, will tell you that commercially made
MSG is a drug. To many orthomolecular individuals like Jack it is extremely
dangerous. MSG is a manmade chemical that releases quantities of the
neurotransmitter glutamate that SOME people cannot tolerate.

There are too many products on the market containing these unnatural amino
acid/drugs that are disguised as food. They are in infant formulas and
supplements used by people who think they provide some advantage. We should
protect our brain cells from damage by not using isolated amino acid
products until they are PROVEN SAFE! We need to protect the brain cells of
our children and elders also. We can't do that by feeding them
neurologically active, and potentially neurologically toxic, so called
"food". The role of food chain chemicals in contributing to the unexplained
insidious epidemics of ADHD, autism, Alzheimer's, and others cannot be ruled
out, therefore has to be suspect. In general, it makes little common sense
to use them, as the potential harm far outweighs any perceived advantage.
All of these epidemics run in temporal parallel lines that suggest a food
chain, or other, chemical contribution. Isolate amino acids preparations and
neurotoxin releasing food chain chemicals are some of my top suspects. I
would strongly recommend that truth in labeling be mandated and that we
learn to read food labels. I recommend that everyone should attempt to avoid
any products that contain food processing produced new chemicals or
additives, such as aspartame, MSG, trans-fats, AGEs (Advanced Glycation
End-products which are generated when high heat cooking combines protein and sugars), cooking in Teflon coated cookware which generates toxic chemicals at high heat, genetically engineered "food", and amino acid isolates. I also advise to minimize the purchase and use of water and all other food products (especially foods containing fats) bottled in plastic. Virtually all
plastics contain EDC's (Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals) that can leach out
and contaminate the product, especially with heat or freezing. Microwaving
should only be done to water or food containing no fat while in a "non-lead"
glass container. "Microwave safe" plastic containers just assure the plastic
will not melt or burn in the microwave! These chemicals acting alone, or in concert with other environmental chemicals that have entered our bodies, are very likely causes of many of the unexplained epidemics we are experiencing in our species today. These epidemics include: breast cancer, ADHD, autism, obesity, Alzheimer's disease, type 2 diabetes, depression, chronic pain, chronic sleep disturbance, impotency, asthma, and others. Chemical food additives and chemicals in the food chain from: 1. absorption into plants that are grown in contaminated soils, 2. food processing, 3. food preservation, 4. certain methods of food cooking, 5.chemicals added to food source live stock, 6. genetically engineered foods, 7. etc. are all drugs. Our genetics have not had thousands of years to adapt to these chemicals, as we have had with natural foods. They are not natural foods, and when they enter our bodies they can affect us pharmacologically and immunologically. No matter what they call them, drugs are drugs.

What we think of as pharmaceutical drugs (both over-the-counter and
prescription) are extensively tested to protect the public. It costs over
100,000,000 to bring one such drug to market in order to insure public
safety. Yet, we still see many serious adverse afects, in susceptible
individuals. Even after these "well tested" drugs are deemed safe, we see a
number removed from the market, when a catastrophic pattern is finally
appreciated! (The recent withdrawal of Vioxx from the market is a typical
example. We discovered years later, only by serendipity, that it doubles the
risk of heart attack and stoke for those who have taken it for 18 months or
longer. If you project the numbers out for this widely prescribed drug,
doctors have killed tens of thousands of patients with this drug/weapon in
complete naivety.) We expose only a small portion of our population to those
drugs. We're exposing all of our population to food chain chemicals that are
drugs with relatively little knowledge of their metabolism, pharmacokinetics, or effects on the population at risk. Then we compound the problem by letting politics run the protective institutions we have in place. There have been more complaints to the FDA on aspartame than any other chemical. The whole phenomenon has been dismissed as "group hysteria." There is an enormous amount of money being spent for obesity research. Unfortunately, most of it is going to attempt to find a drug treatment rather than a cause that will pay much more dividends in prevention. More drugs to treat a drug induced problem sadly seems part of our culture of poly-pharmacy. How else can the drug companies that control research make money? The research is not about altruism, it's all about the love of money. I am very proud of the few ethical scientists who recently left NIH saying they were ashamed of collecting their six figure salaries for doing nothing. We need them and others to work to determine food chain chemical safety.

What is difficult to determine, is what role do chemicals play in the
genesis of diseases in general. We know that, depending upon the genetic
predisposition, any chemical/drug may be recognized by the body as foreign
and ellicit an antibody response ending in autoimmune tissue damage. This
usually involves huge molecules such as proteins or glycoproteins acting as
antigens. However, simple chemicals that are a very common part of our
environmental pollution may act as ajuvants. I strongly suspect that
formaldehyde, for example, acts as a adjuvant, increasing the potency of
common allergy pollen antigens in eliciting IGE antibody responses. To
further complicate the identification of the "culprit" chemicals causing
specific diseases, only those of us genetically predisposed will react. This
phenomena is clearly evident in the genesis of lung cancer. We are
statistically certain that cigarette smoking causes most lung cancer, but
not one authority can identify for certain which one(s) of the thousands of
chemicals in the smoke is the key offender. If we knew, we could eliminate
it. In fact it may be several chemicals working in synergy, or simply an
overload of chemicals in general that exceed the body's detoxification
capacity. All of this confusion makes cause and effect relationships between
chemicals and diseases difficult to determine and avoidance strategies
difficult to employ.

One thing is evident, we must change our thinking regarding safety standards
for chemicals. No longer can we accept the traditional concept that a
chemical/drug is safe unless proven unsafe. We must adopt the PRECAUTIONARY PRICIPLE which states: a chemical/drug or any intervention is deemed unsafe until proven safe. We must also take individual responsibility by limiting as many man-made chemicals as possible from entry into our body. This
strategy needs to be proactive and political. We can no longer stand idlely
by, while those we love are in harms way of a greed-driven social phenomena.

Our current obesity epidemic, in my opinion, has to be related to insidious
damage or toxicity to the hypothalamus portion of the brains of many of
those individuals who are obese. The hypothalamus is the part of our brains
that is unprotected against chemicals by the "blood brain barrier." It's
also vital to the control of energy (fat) storage. This unique brain damage
literally causes those affected to have an insatiable hunger that cannot be
overcome with drugs, fad diets, etc. In my theory, with so many of our
population so uniquely brain damaged, it also has to be environmentally
induced. The best strategy to prevent the ongoing damage is by attempting
elimination of any chemicals that could potentially be responsible for the
ongoing brain damage, then detoxification, and introduction of more positive
lifestyle and diet changes. The brain should be able to heal in many such
cases. Regarding the obesity epidemic, energy storage is such a vital
function to the survival of our species, that many back up systems are
programmed into our automatic physiology. If specific brain cell damage
(destroyed hypothalamic POMP/CART neurons) prevents the satiety messages
from being transmitted, the message our brain will always transmit will be
EAT MORE, I AM STARVING! This is why, I believe, drugs for obesity are
always detrimental failures, in the long run. It is also why no diet works
for good health in the long run, except the ones that eliminate most
unnatural chemicals and provide the nutrients the body needs. Super sizing
portions doesn't cause obesity, in my view; it merely supplies our
insatiable brain-damaged demand with poor nutrient quality choices.

In the meantime the FDA should not assume aspartame or any other food-chain
chemical is safe just because it doesn't seem to kill or harm people
quickly. Obesity and type 2 diabetes are slow, insidious, expensive killers
that can bankrupt the healthcare system. It seems very unusual that the FDA
allows aspartame's use knowing its metabolism!

I would suggest the NIH look at this possibility, post haste, in three ways:

1: Retrospective studies- Analysis of specific past behavioral and diet
choices need to be correlated to specific diseases epidemiologically. For
example, there are enough children who have extensively used amino acid
isolate infant formulas that could be compared with non user cohorts to
study for autism and ADHD and other outcomes. Similarly, the mental
deterioration rate for nursing home patients who used amino acid supplements
feedings vs. natural feeding for Alzheimer's outcome should be done. Lastly
and most urgently, mothers of autistic and ADHD children need to be
retrospectively studied in relation to mother's aspartame use in the first
trimester of pregnancy. Aspartame's metabolites are potent neurotoxins.
Autism rates stable until 1990 are many times as high now. This epidemic
parallels aspartame's use as well as the use many other new chemicals in the
environment! All these disorders are enormously expensive stressors to our
healthcare system that seriously affect quality of life. Fetal ultrasound use should be retrospectively and similarly ruled out as an autism risk factor. It's obvious, to me also that too many unnecessary fetal ultrasounds are being done. We have no proof of their safety on the fetal brain development in ALL infants. I know I can kill warts in many people with this waveform energy. It is not a streach of my imagination to think it could impact SOME fetal brain development.

2: Neurological imaging studies of human volunteers, especially known
"reactors" to MSG and formaldehyde (an aspartane metabolite which is both
carcinogenic and neuro-toxic) might be very productive of new knowledge.
This would be easy and relatively inexpensive. If we are to continue to
sanction the pouring into our food chain of millions of tons of chemicals,
the least we need to know is where they are going and what they do when they get there. We have the technology to study this. We know that ADHD
children's brains are damaged, thanks to MRI research done by Xavier
Castellanos M.D. In my opinion, AUTISM is environmental brain damage expressed in genetically susceptible children. Most autism is probably induced during mother's pregnancy (in utero) or very early infancy by a common chemical(s) masquerading as a food, food additive, a food chain chemical, or other environmental chemical or waveform energy exposure (the popularity of fetal ultrasound also runs parallel to the autism epidemic), or a combination of
these things acting upon the genetically and environmentally susceptible
fetal brain. It is during this time that the child's brain is most
vulnerable. The brain is growing rapidly and the blood-brain barrier is not
yet established. I remain "open minded" regarding MMR and other vaccinations as the cause, but I am doubtful for many sound reasons. I strongly think the "damage" has already occured and just "comes to light" as the child usually begins to fail the developmental milestones evaluation he is given at about 2 years of age. Prior to that any potential signs are discounted as probable normal variation. It's merely a temporal coincidence because the MMR is usually
given soon after the child is 18 months of age. I'm sure there are ways we
will soon be able to objectively diagnose the disorder at an earlier age, as
the rate of autism is now an UNACCEPTABLE 1 per 166 children. Earlier
diagnosis will not correct the problem, however. In my opinion, we need to
determine the cause and PREVENT AUTISM ASAP.

3: Other studies- Study the stereoscopic structure of brain proteins and
insulin when exposed to the toxic metabolites of aspartame, or other food
chain chemicals that have been introduced since about 1985 (before Diabetes
type 2, Autism, and other epidemics seemed to "takeoff"). See if proteins
and insulin become denatured at concentrations of formaldehyde produced by
aspartame metabolism, for example. Hyperinsulinism (high circulating levels
of endogenous insulin) is the precursor to type 2 diabetes. Does our body
need to produce more insulin because most of our molecules of insulin are
denatured (bent) when they meet the formaldehyde metabolite of aspartame in
the portal system? Insulin is like a key that fits many metabolic locks. If
the key is bent it probably does not "unlock" the locks. The resultant
failure to "unlock" (turn on enzymes) could explain both epidemics of
diabetes and obesity. We also need to establish an LD-50 for the unprotected
POMC/CART and AgRP/NPY hypothalamic neurons (brain cells involved in energy
storage) for aspartame's metabolites and other food-chain introduced
chemicals. Then, test the concentrations in that area of the brains of test
animals given varied dosages of aspartame,etc. to establish the margin of
safety for these drugs. If they are not huge numbers, those chemicals should
be banned immediately, as per the PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE, while further
safety investigations proceed.

Until the damage potential of all these food chain drugs is clarified, my bottom line is that if we use amino acids as therapy, or as food supplements we must use the same caution that we use when we prescribe drugs! For the same reason man-made chemicals in the food chain that release isolated amino
acids or neurotoxins such as MSG and aspartame are, in my view, also drugs, and should be avoided by consumers. Genetically engineered "foods", which
really represent new species of plants, should be avoided by consumers and
banned by government agencies. Food chain chemical contamination needs to be reduced at all levels. Chemicals are produced or introduced into the food
chain in preservation, attempting to increase food "shelf life", storage,
shipping, cooking improperly or in Teflon coated cookware, microwaving in plastics (even "microwave safe" plastics) etc. All of these unnaturally generated chemicals/drugs are prime players in the food chain contamination of our *Atlas Drugged.

*Atlas Drugged is an upcoming book by Dr. Ferrel.


Dr. Ferrel is a board certified family physician and a certified nutritional consultant who specializes in preventative and environmental medicine. He currently resides in Phoenix, Arizona.