I searched and couldn't find anything on this topic. It sounds like typical scare tactics to me.
quote:Sucralose (sold under the name Splenda) is a non-caloric artificial sweetener that is 600 times sweeter than sucrose (table sugar). It was discovered in 1976 by researchers working under Tate & Lyle Ltd, a British sugar refiner. Four years later, Tate & Lyle arranged with Johnson & Johnson (the worldÕs largest healthcare company) to develop sucralose. Johnson & Johnson quickly formed McNeil Specialty Products Company in 1980 to commercialize sucralose. It was in 1998 that the US Food and Drug Administration granted approval for sucralose to be used in a variety of food products, and Diet RC cola was the first US product containing sucralose, introduced in that same year.
Sucralose is made by chlorinating sugar (sucrose). The chemical structure of sugar is changed by substituting three chlorine atoms for three hydroxyl groups. The knowledge of how sucralose is made becomes an alarming factor for many people, as chloride is an extremely poisonous agent. According to MosbyÕs Medical, Nursing and Allied Health Dictionary, chlorine is “a yellowish-green, gaseous element of the halogen group. Its atomic number is 17; its atomic weight is 35.453. It has a strong, distinctive odor, is irritating to the respiratory tract, and is poisonous if ingested or inhaled… Chlorine compounds in general use include many solvents, cleaning fluids and chloroform. Most of the solvents and cleaning fluids containing chlorine are toxic when inhaled or ingested.” Despite the fact that sucralose contains such a well-known poison, its manufacturers adamantly assure us that Splenda is safe to eat. Diabetes One small study of diabetic patients using sucralose showed a statistically significant increase in glycosylated hemoglobin, a marker of long-term blood glucose levels. Glycosylated hemoglobin is used as a marker to assess glycemic control in diabetic patients, and in uncontrolled diabetes, the number is elevated. One must wonder why the FDA and manufacturers are touting Splenda for diabetic if its use has shown that it has an effect on these levels. Splenda has been promoted for diabetic as a safe substitute for sugar
Shrunken thymus gland The thymus gland is the primary gland of the lympahatic system and is critical to the immune system, as T-cells mature in the thymus before migrating to the lymph nodes and the spleen. Pre-approval research in animals has shown that the consumption of sucralose can shrink the thymus gland up to 40%. While the manufacturer claimed that starvation of the mice caused the shrunken thymus glands, toxicologist Judith Bellin “reviewed studies on rats starved under experimental conditions, and concluded that their growth rate could be reduced by as much as a third without the thymus losing a significant amount of weight (less than 7%). The changes were much more marked in rats fed on sucralose. While the animalÕs growth rate was reduced between 7 and 20%, their thymuses shrank by as much as 40%,” (from New Scientist, 23 Nov 1991, pg 13).
Studies also showed atrophy of the lymph follicles in the spleen and thymus. While the manufacturer claims that Splenda is not toxic, studies have shown significant toxic effects. Additionally, FDA reports on sucralose state that “Sucralose was weakly mutagenic in a mouse lymphoma mutation assay,” and that “both sucralose and its hydrolysis products showed weakly genotoxic responses in some of the genotoxicity tests.” The FDA also reports that many other tests in this area had “inconclusive” results. (Read the full FDA report at www.cfsan.fda.gov/~Ird/fr980403.html)
Other Effects Other problems that research has shown in animals includes the following: Enlarged liver and kidneys Increased cecal weight Reduced growth rate Decreased red blood cell count Hyperplasia of the pelvis Extension of the pregnancy length Aborted pregnancy Decreased fetal body weight and placental weights Diarrhea Encourages unhealthy eating habits Deters weight loss
Absorption and Metabolism Issues Manufacturers claim on their website that Splenda is not metabolized or absorbed, and this is completely false! It is true that the majority of sucralose that is consumed is excreted in the feces and urine unchanged, but the reality is that up to 40% of the ingested sucralose is metabolized. Both the metabolites and unchanged absorbed sucralose are excreted in the urine. Meanwhile, absorbed sucralose has been found to concentrate in the liver, kidney and GI tract. The Sucralose Toxicity Information Center has also found that sucralose breaks down into small amounts of 1,6-dichlorofructose, which is a chemical that has not been tested adequately in humans.
Because sucralose is a chlorinated molecule, when metabolized, some of the chlorine and other substances in splenda (including arsenic, or rat poison) is taken by the system. Alarming? Yes, when we realize that chlorinated molecules serve as the basis for pesticides like DDT and accumulate in body fat.
According to the FDA report, “Results from the submitted animal and human pharmacokinetics data identified three major sucralosemetabolites (Ml, M2, and M3) in urine in addition to unchanged sucralose.” The report also states, “The metabolic profile of sucralose in rats was qualitatively similar to that seen in humans. In addition to unchanged sucralose, two sucralose metabolites, Ml and M2, were detected in the urine of rats and humans after oral dosing of sucralose…A pronounced difference was observed in the proportions of M2 and M3 excreted by male versus female mice: Males produced more M2 than M3, while the opposite was true of female mice.” Even within FDA and industry studies, metabolization and absorption of Splen-da is shown; why are the manufacturers claiming that it is not? What else are they claiming that is not true? What are they hiding? Purity - The FDA and manufacturer of sucralose happily report that the product has a purity rate of 98%. While that figure may sound impressive, we must ask ourselves what is the makeup of the last 2%. Studies have shown that the final Splenda product contains small amounts of heavy metals (like lead), arsenic (rat poison), methanol, triphenilphosphine oxide, chlorinated disaccharides and chlorinated monosaccharide.
Lack of independent studies - As with most products that are scrutinized by the public, sucralose is alarmingly lacking in independent studies. Manufacturers of a product are not always honest in their studies, and their scientists are under extreme pressure to give the results that the company is counting on. Studies are not always done honestly, full results are not always given, and studies are changed or ended early to prevent alarming results from revealing themselves. As we have seen with as-partame, manufacturers have “friends” within the FDA, and sometimes political pressure to “overlook” certain facts is greater than the ethics of those involved.
Lack of long-term studies - There are insufficient long-term (12-24 months) studies on the effects of sucralose.
Lack of monitoring of health effects - Without proper monitoring, the effects of this new substance will remain unknown. It took the government decades to realize that there were countless deaths from tobacco use because there had not been monitoring or epidemiological studies, and huge effects went unnoticed.
The Sucralose Toxicity Information Center concludes that “While it is unlikely that sucralose is as toxic as the poisoning people are experiencing from Monsanto’s aspartame, it is clear from the hazards seen in pre-approval research and from its chemical structure that years of decades of use may contribute to serious chronic immunological or neurological disorders.”
A growing number of consumers do not have to wait for the FDA to realize that sucralose may not be as safe as they assure us that it is. According to Lugene Azar, former Splenda consumer, “I was excited at first to find an artificial sweetener that did not give me migraines like aspartame (which also caused some depression). Although I did not use it a lot, after about six months of occasional use, I detected a pattern in my Splenda use and severe altered emotional state. I became irate, impatient, hyper-sensitive to noise, clutter and children. I really thought this was an emotional breakdown, or a spiritual attack of some sort. These episodes only came periodically, but they really scared me. Then I noticed a pattern - use of sucralose, followed in hours (or the next morning) by one of these events (lasting 3 to 5 hours). What a relief! IÕm not really going nuts - and I can fix this, by never using the product again. What really upsets me is that many people are suffering and will never make any connection.”
Posted by Spam & Sesamoid Cookies-mmm on :
The link in the post didn't work. Here's the full FDA report they mentioned.
Posted by FourKidneys *packed in ice* on :
quote:Because sucralose is a chlorinated molecule, when metabolized, some of the chlorine and other substances in splenda (including arsenic, or rat poison) is taken by the system. Alarming? Yes, when we realize that chlorinated molecules serve as the basis for pesticides like DDT and accumulate in body fat.
Uh huh. Everyone knows that all elemental chlorine, no matter what else it is combined with, is a deadly poison, even in miniscule amounts.
Better watch out for that common food additive NaCl (sodium chloride) as well. I've found it on the ingredient list of everything I've eaten in the last 2 weeks, except milk. And then I looked on my kitchen table, and it was there, too! And it had brought an accomplice, street name "pepper"
Four "my margarita just ain't the same without it" Kitties
Posted by Pseudo_Croat on :
Obviously Mr. Scare Tactics has forgotten the First Rule of Toxicology: The dose makes the poison. Just because there are small amounts of, say, arsenic in something doesn't mean it will be poisonous. Our bodies are built to tolerate small amounts of poisonous substances.
I don't know much about the rest of the rant, but I'm sure it can easily be debunked.
BTW, caranfin, where did you get the material in the OP? If I knew the source, then I could help establish its reliability.
- Pseudo "rants leave a sour taste in my mouth" Croat
Posted by caranfin minus the gall bladder on :
quote:Originally posted by Pseudo_Croat: BTW, caranfin, where did you get the material in the OP? If I knew the source, then I could help establish its reliability.
I wasn't given a source - it was presented just as I quoted it here.
Posted by Anatomy Ng on :
They were talking about Splenda in the 80's, but didn't it just come to the U.S. around 2000?
I'm only asking because the Atkins people used to get it from Canada.
Posted by Cobra4J on :
First of all, I assume that this crap was tested before it wound up on your table. If it kills on the first dose, I think we would have noticed.
Second, since when does chlorine equal poison? Table salt is sodium CHLORIDE, and what is all that stuff in your swimming pool, and most city water? Chlorine!
Someone needs to develop a knowledge of science before they decide we are all poisoned.
Posted by UvulaRdr on :
My mom is diabetic and uses Sucralose. Wish they would've had it when I had gestational diabetes.
Angl "Never gets the good stuff!" Rdr
Posted by Arts Myth on :
quote:Originally posted by FourKidneys *packed in ice*: Better watch out for that common food additive NaCl (sodium chloride) as well. I've found it on the ingredient list of everything I've eaten in the last 2 weeks, except milk. And then I looked on my kitchen table, and it was there, too! And it had brought an accomplice, street name "pepper"
You think that's bad? Well, I just realized that I poisoned myself the other day! I mean, not only was there sodium chloride in abundance, but hydrogen cyanide! Damn you, smoke-house almonds, you will poison me no more! (Well, not 'til I get another craving...)