Sucralose Side Effects and DangersThere are many food additives and artificial products that make me uneasy, and sucralose is one of them. I get uncomfortable watching people adding Splenda to drinks and eating things that already have Splenda in them.
I still remember when Diet Coke made a huge marketing blitz about the introduction of Splenda to replace aspartame in its products. Now, for unstated reasons, they are starting to pull back and are replacing their artifically sweetened drinks with alternatives. Could their reasoning be related to all the adverse effects reported by Splenda consumers?
What is Splenda/sucralose? Splenda is made from sucralose, a sugar substitute that is 600 times sweeter than sugar. It doesn't have calories, so it's marketed as a diet substitute for sugar. People love Splenda as a sugar substitute because it has tastes like sugar and leaves no aftertaste. While most artificial sweeteners can't be used in baking, sucralose remains stable when exposed to heat and over time, so it's great for baking and has a longer shelf life. This makes it a perfect sweetener for many processed foods, including baked goods, baking mixes, gum, candies, frostings, salad dressings, jams and jellies, processed fruits and fruit juices, flavored waters, fruit ices, syrups, sauces, toppings, imitation cheeses and dairy products, milk substitutes, gelatins, puddings, fillings, and in beverages (The FDA gave permission for Splenda to be used in all those types of foods.)
Although it is marketed as "made from sugar," it is not sugar. Sucralose is made by chemically altering the structure of sugar molecules by adding chlorine atoms in place of hydroxyl groups.(Everything You Need to Know About Sucralose, International Food Information Council ) Sucralose is therefore chlorinated sugar; a chlorocarbon. Chlorocarbons are poisonous; they're used in bleach, disinfectants, insecticide, poison gas, and hydrocholric acid. (http://www.holisticmed.com/splenda/bowen.html) Because it technically started as sugar, sucralose can be marketed as "made from sugar." To find and avoid the sweetener, you have to actually be on a mission to do so, and read every ingredient label. Why would you want to go to all the trouble to avoid sucralose? The US FDA approved sucralose in 1998, but it has not yet been approved in most European nations. In the pre-approval stage, the FDA conducted short-term tests that actually found the potential for toxicity, but it was approved anyway. According to the "New Scientist" November 23 1991 edition on page 13, the pre-approval tests conducted on animals (you know how much I hate these tests) showed toxicity:
Additionally, the government doesn't monitor health effects after the initial tests. There is no warning information of potential side effects on the labels of the sweetener's products. There have been no long-term tests (longer than six months) done on the side effects of consuming Splenda or sucralose. The largest trial only included 128 people and lasted only three months. The only independent test was done by Duke University and published in the Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, and it was funded by the sugar industry. We should not be eating products that are completely untested, especially when so many people report severe problems from the product. Although it was also a short-term test, Duke's study found that sucralose contributes to obesity, destroys healthy intestinal bateria, and prevents prescription drugs from being absorbed properly. Since its U.S. introduction in 1999, Splenda is now the leading artifical sweetener on the market. (Browning, Lynnley, "Makers of Artificial Sweeteners Go to Court", New York Times Business section, April 6, 2007) _________________________________________________________________ *Plus, for signing up now, you instantly receive a free 5-page meat-free weight loss ebook*
_________________________________________________________________
Also since its introduction, while no independent, long-term tests were conducted on the healthfulness of sucralose, people have reported adverse reactions like skin rashes/flushing, panic-like agitation, dizziness and numbness, diarrhea, swelling, muscle aches, join pain and stiffness, headaches, intestinal cramping, bladder issues, and stomach pain, according to the Sucralose Toxicity Information Center (STIC). STIC concludes that, "While it is unlikely that sucralose is as toxic as the poisoning people are experiencing from Monsanato's aspartame, it is clear from the hazards seen in pre-approval research and from its chemical structure that years or decades of use may contribute to serious chronic immunological or neurological disorders." Inside the body, while much of the artifical sweetener isn't detected by the body and is flushed out in urine, as much as 11-27 percent is absorbed, according to the US FDA's test in 1998. (http://vm.cfsan.fda.gov/~lrd/fr980403.html.) The makers of the sweetener found even higher absorption levels, of between 10.4% and 30.6% in healthy males. The same test also found that anywhere from 1.6% to 12.2% accumulates in the body. (Roberts, A., A.G. Renwick, J. Sims, D.J. Snodin, 2001. "Sucralose Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics in Man," Food and Chemical Toxicology, Volume 38, Supplement 2, pages S31-S41, 2000.)
Problems for the environment as well as the body Anything that the body doesn't absorb washes out in urine, which then washes into the environment. We have no way of knowing what that is doing to the environment, our water supply, to fish, etc, because the FDA did not require an Environmental Impact Statement for sucralose, because in their words, "the action will not have a significant impact on the human environment". Sucralose and Splenda are not acceptable "diet" foods: Marketing Splenda as a diet alternative is a crime. Splenda executives are preying on the very people who need to avoid sucralose the most; the overweight, the elderly, and young people looking to stay in shape. This chemical has been proven to have severe effects on the body. People shouldn't be treated this way. Pass this information to everyone you care about. According to the FDA, "increases in glycosolation in hemoglobin imply lessening of control of diabetes." In English, that means that sucralose is terrible for people with diabetes. Not only do dieters contaminate their bodies with toxins, they also might be increasing their appetite by eating the artifical sweetener. Consumers' Research Magazine said "There is no clear-cut evidence that sugar substitutes are useful in weight reduction. On the contrary, there is some evidence that these substances may stimulate appetite". Here are some natural sugar alternatives:
Remember, you may initially pay more for some of these sugar alternatives, but you pay with your health (and potentially your life) with the cheaper non-caloric, chemically-based sugars. You can read more about the dangers of Splenda and other artificial sweeteners in Sweet Deception: Why Splenda, NutraSweet, and the FDA May Be Hazardous to Your Health Done with Sucralose? Return to Vegan Foods
|
by Dr. Joseph Mercola.
