Poisonous Administrators of Wikipedia Suppress Aspartame’s Toxic History
Today I had planned on repeating a warning about aspartame being re-marketed as Amino-sweet by the controversial Ajinomoto Corporation in an obvious attempt by them to obscure it’s bad history of poisoning and killing those who ingested it. After reading the articles on this, I then prepared to repost the information in a more helpful way, but before publishing, tried to input this information in Wikipedia, and was then shocked (which rarely happens to me) to see that one of the most relevant websites on this subject had been banned:
Clearly someone is trying to suppress the facts on Wikipedia, and it is more clear then ever that Wikipedia is dangerous to the world’s health. I hope Google, which has recently decided to pull out of helping the atheist communist government of China (not after making a hefty profit however) will also pull out of promoting Wikipedia in nearly all of it’s top five search results.
If Wikipedia had existed before 1950, any pages witten before June, 1957 on cigarrettes would have been a glowing approval of the wonders, health and social benefits of smoking and the tobacco industry, and dismissed anti-cigarrette smoking speech as dishonest, spreading urban myth, and anti-smokers as paranoid conspiracy theorists spreading irrational fear and confusion based on their precious and sacred “scientific Mainstream science references” (see the history of cigarrette danger awareness at these two pages, http://bit.ly/badcigs, http://bit.ly/badcigs2) then look at the smear job against those against aspartame use on Wikipedia:
Main article: Aspartame controversy (that is supposed to be a link to the main article on the Aspartame controversy, which this paragraph in the main Aspartame article is not and therefore not meant to be, but only a short introduction to it).
Since its initial approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 1974, aspartame has been the subject of several controversies, hoaxes and health scares. Critics allege that conflicts of interest marred the FDA’s approval of aspartame; question the quality of the initial research supporting its safety; and postulate that numerous health risks may be associated with aspartame.
The validity of these claims has been examined and dismissed.” – Wikipedia
Question for the Wikipedia trolls who are sanctioned as upstanding members: Dismissed by who? Everyone? Most people? The many millions of health aware shoppers and growers of organic foods who don’t dismiss it? Stop the grossly prententious and arrogant lying.
It should be noted that this recent newcomer to the aspartame promotion on Wikipedia, user novangelis, is a malicious stalker and troll who for years has been stalking and trolling Yahoo! Answers and Wikipedia. When viewing and studying his Wikipedia habits, you can see that he has a mentally ill personal Vendetta against any users he associates with me, calling them “a duck of…” (apparently an insult meaning “someone who annoyingly repeats (as in quacking) the same things as chosenbygrace, Daniel Knight etc.). What novangelis does is to watch my journal (he seems to be using a Brit named Justin (one of his psychopath friends on Yahoo! Answers) to watch what articles I publish, and then watches the pages on Wikipedia to do with my articles, and reverts any changes to them that he suspects are made by me or someone who approves of what I say.) If you look at the friends novangelis keeps on Yahoo! Answers, and study their answers and any questions they make, it becomes clear what kind of person novangelis is from that alone. A good person does not befriend a mass of amoral, conniving and malicious hatemongers who show no respect for a person merely because they are theists (novangelis is an evolutionist, big bangist atheist who hypocritically claims to be a humanist, hypocritical because he doesn’t adhere to humanism. He goes about making malicious edits and reversions to Wikipedia, and based on his years long stalking of me, probably attacks anyone on Yahoo! Answers who says very similar things to me, including by reporting questions by them that he doesn’t personally like, following them around there if he can and thumbing them down and then trying to give a better answer than them on whatever it is they’ve answered, over his personal vendetta against me.