SEPTEMBER 10, 2007.  Last week, a startling British study of 300 young children, published in the respected journal Lancet, revealed that food additives are linked to hyperactive behavior.

Authors of the University of Southampton study wrote, “…adverse effects are not just seen in children with extreme [prior] hyperactivity, but can also be seen in the general population…”

According to Reuters, the additives tested included: “sunset yellow coloring…carmoisine…tartrazine…ponceau 4R…sodium benzoate…and other colors.”

Dr. Sue Baic, a dietician at the University of Bristol, called the study “well designed and potentially very important.”

Press reports on the study are ignoring the subject of ADHD itself.  ADHD is the formal name given to hyperactivity, and if food additives are causing this condition, what about the tower of medical research dedicated to proving that ADHD is the result of a brain abnormality?

The whole medical foundation for ADHD is built on the premise that some common brain malfunction is at the root of the problem.  On that basis, amphetamine-type drugs such as Ritalin and Adderall are being given to millions of children.

But is there a clear-cut medical definition of ADHD, or are we really talking about hyperactive behaviors brought on by a variety of causes---such as food additives?

It turns out that prestigious medical institutions have been wrestling with this question for a long time.  Although the press has assumed ADHD can be traced to a single brain deficit, the medical powers-that-be have been floundering in deep and uncertain waters.  

For example, on November 16-18, 1998, the National Institute of Mental Health held the prestigious “NIH Consensus Development Conference on Diagnosis and Treatment of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder [ADHD].”

The conference was explicitly aimed at ending all debate about the diagnoses of ADD, ADHD, and about the prescription of Ritalin. It was hoped that, at the highest levels of medical research and bureaucracy, a clear position would be taken: this is what ADHD is, this is where it comes from, and these are the drugs it should be treated with.

Amazingly, that didn't happen. Instead, the official NIH panel threw cold water on the whole attempt to reach a comfortable consensus.

Panel member Mark Vonnegut, a Massachusetts pediatrician, said, “The diagnosis [of ADHD] is a mess.”

The panel essentially said it was not sure ADHD was even a “valid” diagnosis. In other words, ADD and ADHD might be nothing more than attempts to categorize certain children's behaviors---with no organic cause, no clear-cut biological basis, no provable reason for even using the ADD or ADHD labels.

The panel found “no data to indicate that ADHD is due to a brain malfunction [which malfunction had been the whole psychiatric assumption].”

Additionally, the panel found that Ritalin has not been shown to have long-term benefits. In fact, the panel stated that Ritalin has resulted in “little improvement on academic achievement or social skills.”

Panel chairman, David Kupfer, professor of psychiatry at the University of Pittsburgh, said, “There is no current validated diagnostic test [for ADHD].”

Let’s take this revelation a step further.  Let’s look at the most often prescribed ADHD drug, Ritalin.  Although some parents feel that Ritalin or other ADHD drugs have helped their children, there are questions that need to be answered: what are the long-term effects of these drugs on the brain; what symptoms may these drugs be causing; does the family doctor have any other solutions to ADHD, or is he prescribing the drugs because he doesn’t know about useful alternatives? 

In 1986, The International Journal of the Addictions published an important literature review by Richard Scarnati. It was called “An Outline of Hazardous Side Effects of Ritalin (Methylphenidate)” [v.21(7), pp. 837-841].

Scarnati listed a large number of adverse affects of Ritalin and cited published journal articles which reported each of these symptoms.

For every one of the following (selected and quoted verbatim) Ritalin effects, there is at least one confirming source in the medical literature:

• Paranoid delusions
• Paranoid psychosis
• Hypo-manic and manic symptoms, amphetamine-like psychosis
• Activation of psychotic symptoms
• Toxic psychosis
• Visual hallucinations
• Auditory hallucinations
• Can surpass LSD in producing bizarre experiences
• Effects pathological thought processes
• Extreme withdrawal
• Terrified affect
• Started screaming
• Aggressiveness
• Insomnia
  
• Since Ritalin is considered an amphetamine-type drug, expect amphetamine-like effects
• Psychic dependence
• High-abuse potential DEA Schedule II Drug
• Decreased REM sleep
• When used with antidepressants one may see dangerous reactions including hypertension, seizures and hypothermia
• Convulsions
• Brain damage may be seen with amphetamine abuse.

    
Yet many parents around the country have discovered that Ritalin has become a condition for their children continuing in school. There are even reports, by parents, of threats from social agencies: “If you don't allow us to prescribe Ritalin for your ADHD child, we may decide that you are an unfit parent. We may decide to take your child away.”

In commenting on Dr. Lawrence Diller's book, Running on Ritalin, Dr. William Carey, Director of Behavioral Pediatrics, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, has written, “Dr. Diller has correctly described... the disturbing trend of blaming children's social, behavioral, and academic performance problems entirely on an unproven brain deficit...”

Yet at every level of public education in America, there remains what can only be called a voracious desire to give children Ritalin (or other similar drugs) for ADD or ADHD.

The following pronouncement makes a number of things clear: The 1994 Textbook of Psychiatry, published by the American Psychiatric Press, contains this review (Popper and Steingard) “Stimulants [such as Ritalin] do not produce lasting improvements in aggressivity, conduct disorder, criminality, education achievement, job functioning, marital relationships, or long-term adjustment.”

In December 1996, the US Drug Enforcement Agency held a conference on ADHD and Ritalin. It issued a statement about drugs being a bad substitute for the presence of caring parents: “[T]he use of stimulants [such as Ritalin] for the short-term improvement of behavior and underachievement may be thwarting efforts to address the children's real issues, both on an individual and societal level. The lack of long-term positive results with the use of stimulants and the specter of previous and potential stimulant abuse epidemics, give cause to worry about the future. The dramatic increase in the use of methylphenidate [Ritalin] in the 1990s should be viewed as a marker or warning to society about the problems children are having and how we view and address them.”

In his book, Talking Back to Ritalin, Dr. Peter Breggin expands on the drug's effects: “Stimulants such as Ritalin and amphetamine... have grossly harmful impacts on the brain -- reducing overall blood flow, disturbing glucose metabolism, and possibly causing permanent shrinkage or atrophy of the brain.”

And now we have this new study on food additives and their link to hyperactive behavior.  What makes more sense?  Accepting a diagnosis of ADHD and the resultant prescription of amphetamine-type drugs for your children, or examining your children’s diet?  If, in some cases, the elimination of food additives can change their behavior for the better, isn’t that a good (and safe) place to start?  

For more information about how foods and nutrients play a role in behavior, health and school performance of your child, call 800-608-5602 for your free 15-minute consultation.  We’ll help you choose a program that’s tailored just right for your family.