Nutrition Month - How healthy is your sweetener?

[Guest guest]

Nutrition Month - How healthy is your sweetener?Americans consume about 20 teaspoons of sugar daily, not including what is found naturally in foods like fruit, milk and beans. Sugar itself is considered safe, and its caloric contribution may be small when used in moderation, but it can play a role in obesity and dental problems if abused. Some alternatives to white sugar include:

 

Stevia. This plant-derived sweetener is noncaloric and can be used in baking or cooking, but needs to be diluted before using. I occasionally recommend it for diabetics and those who can't tolerate sugar. Honey. While it has some antioxidant properties, honey is not necessarily healthier than white sugar, mainly because it can stick to teeth and contribute to cavity formation. However, honey does have more fructose than sugar, which causes less stress to the pancreas. Splenda (sucralose). This artificial sweetener is 600 times sweeter than sugar. It is not all-natural, being derived only in part from sugar, and while it is FDA approved and appears safe, it has not proven itself to be beneficial in losing weight. Aspartame and Saccharine. These artificial sweeteners are found in some foods and are available to add to drinks and some foods. I do not recommend either of these - if you want to cut calories or are diabetic, I suggest stevia or sucralose instead. You may also want to try fruit juice as a sweetener, especially when cooking or baking. Keep in mind, however, that if you've been using sugar appropriately, there is no reason to reach for artificial substitutes.

 

 

 

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public".

 

Theodore Roosevelt

 

[Guest guest]

What about sweeteners like raw sugar, sucanant, sucanant with honey and molasses?

Thanks,

Roxanne

----Original Message Follows----

"Jose and Diana " <joseanddiana

 

Nutrition Month - How healthy is your sweetener?

Mon, 14 Mar 2005 12:47:36 -0500

 

Nutrition Month - How healthy is your sweetener?

 

Americans consume about 20 teaspoons of sugar daily, not including what

is found naturally in foods like fruit, milk and beans. Sugar itself is

considered safe, and its caloric contribution may be small when used in

moderation, but it can play a role in obesity and dental problems if

abused. Some alternatives to white sugar include:

 

* Stevia. This plant-derived sweetener is noncaloric and can be

used in baking or cooking, but needs to be diluted before using. I

occasionally recommend it for diabetics and those who can't tolerate

sugar.

 

* Honey. While it has some antioxidant properties, honey is not

necessarily healthier than white sugar, mainly because it can stick to

teeth and contribute to cavity formation. However, honey does have more

fructose than sugar, which causes less stress to the pancreas.

 

* Splenda (sucralose). This artificial sweetener is 600 times

sweeter than sugar. It is not all-natural, being derived only in part

from sugar, and while it is FDA approved and appears safe, it has not

proven itself to be beneficial in losing weight.

 

* Aspartame and Saccharine. These artificial sweeteners are found

in some foods and are available to add to drinks and some foods. I do

not recommend either of these - if you want to cut calories or are

diabetic, I suggest stevia or sucralose instead.

 

You may also want to try fruit juice as a sweetener, especially when

cooking or baking. Keep in mind, however, that if you've been using

sugar appropriately, there is no reason to reach for artificial

substitutes.

 

 

 

<>

 

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that

we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic

and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public".

 

Theodore Roosevelt

[Guest guest]

Splenda, Aspertame, and Saccharine are not natural! They are

unhealthy, and cause problems more so than they help; hence warning

label on side of things with Nutra sweet like sweetners.

 

Now you want a natural sweetner that is said to not elevate sugar

levels in diabetic research Maple Sugar! I have herd Maple sugar

don't elevate blood sugar levels. This is a good thing if you keep it

to moderations. Another to search is Birch Sugar (found by its

scientific name).

 

Stevia, honey, Pure cane sugar, and some others are all they will

carry in a Health food store, and most homeopathic and herbalist

councilors wouldn't suggest using Splenda nor Aspertame. Those two

products are under tested, man made products, and are something we

need to becareful of.

We all need to learn moderation when it comes to sugar/sweetners of

any sort and that will be healthy for our bodies!!

 

These are my Opinions, and some facts I have herd on public news

station in my area! For more info call a health and wellness

councilor or Herbalist, or goto your local Health Food store and ask

there opinions! Do some research on your sugar/sweetner!

I told yeah I have been try to change my lifestyle around!!

Gabby

 

 

, " Jose and Diana "

<joseanddiana@g...> wrote:

> Nutrition Month - How healthy is your sweetener?

>

> Americans consume about 20 teaspoons of sugar daily, not including

what

> is found naturally in foods like fruit, milk and beans. Sugar

itself is

> considered safe, and its caloric contribution may be small when

used in

> moderation, but it can play a role in obesity and dental problems if

> abused. Some alternatives to white sugar include:

>

> * Stevia. This plant-derived sweetener is noncaloric and can be

> used in baking or cooking, but needs to be diluted before using. I

> occasionally recommend it for diabetics and those who can't tolerate

> sugar.

>

> * Honey. While it has some antioxidant properties, honey is not

> necessarily healthier than white sugar, mainly because it can stick

to

> teeth and contribute to cavity formation. However, honey does have

more

> fructose than sugar, which causes less stress to the pancreas.

>

> * Splenda (sucralose). This artificial sweetener is 600 times

> sweeter than sugar. It is not all-natural, being derived only in

part

> from sugar, and while it is FDA approved and appears safe, it has

not

> proven itself to be beneficial in losing weight.

>

> * Aspartame and Saccharine. These artificial sweeteners are

found

> in some foods and are available to add to drinks and some foods. I

do

> not recommend either of these - if you want to cut calories or are

> diabetic, I suggest stevia or sucralose instead.

>

> You may also want to try fruit juice as a sweetener, especially when

> cooking or baking. Keep in mind, however, that if you've been using

> sugar appropriately, there is no reason to reach for artificial

> substitutes.

>

>

>

> <>

>

> " To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or

that

> we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only

unpatriotic

> and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public " .

>

> Theodore Roosevelt

[Guest guest]

Aspertame…. UGH

 

Trust me on this one, I spent a year at

doctors being told there was something wrong with my heart but “we don’t

know what it is” Multiple doctors put me through multiple tests and not

a one diagnosed it. I had aspartame poisoning! People are being misdiagnosed

continually because the medical field does not monitor this subject.

 

This link is excellent for more information

and a list of symptoms. http://www.dorway.com/

 

 

NorthernDoe / Leisa

 

Northwoods Knits

 

 

NorthernDoe

 

 

 

 

 

 

Marie

[wakerens]

Monday, March 14, 2005 6:43

PM

 

Re:

Nutrition Month - How healthy is your sweetener?

 

 

 

Splenda, Aspertame, and Saccharine are not

natural! They are

unhealthy, and cause problems more so than they

help; hence warning

label on side of things with Nutra sweet like

sweetners.

 

Now you want a natural sweetner that is said to

not elevate sugar

levels in diabetic research Maple Sugar! I have

herd Maple sugar

don't elevate blood sugar levels. This is a good

thing if you keep it

to moderations. Another to search is Birch Sugar

(found by its

scientific name).

 

Stevia, honey, Pure cane sugar, and some others

are all they will

carry in a Health food store, and most homeopathic

and herbalist

councilors wouldn't suggest using Splenda nor

Aspertame. Those two

products are under tested, man made products, and

are something we

need to becareful of.

We all need to learn moderation when it comes to

sugar/sweetners of

any sort and that will be healthy for our bodies!!

 

These are my Opinions, and some facts I have herd

on public news

station in my area! For more info call a health

and wellness

councilor or Herbalist, or goto your local Health

Food store and ask

there opinions! Do some research on your

sugar/sweetner!

I told yeah I have been try to change my lifestyle

around!!

Gabby

 

 

,

" Jose and Diana "

<joseanddiana@g...> wrote:

> Nutrition Month - How healthy is your

sweetener?

>

> Americans consume about 20 teaspoons of sugar

daily, not including

what

> is found naturally in foods like fruit, milk

and beans. Sugar

itself is

> considered safe, and its caloric contribution

may be small when

used in

> moderation, but it can play a role in obesity

and dental problems if

> abused. Some alternatives to white sugar

include:

>

> * Stevia. This

plant-derived sweetener is noncaloric and can be

> used in baking or cooking, but needs to be

diluted before using. I

> occasionally recommend it for diabetics and

those who can't tolerate

> sugar.

>

> * Honey. While

it has some antioxidant properties, honey is not

> necessarily healthier than white sugar,

mainly because it can stick

to

> teeth and contribute to cavity formation.

However, honey does have

more

> fructose than sugar, which causes less stress

to the pancreas.

>

> * Splenda

(sucralose). This artificial sweetener is 600 times

> sweeter than sugar. It is not all-natural,

being derived only in

part

> from sugar, and while it is FDA approved and

appears safe, it has

not

> proven itself to be beneficial in losing

weight.

>

> * Aspartame and

Saccharine. These artificial sweeteners are

found

> in some foods and are available to add to

drinks and some foods. I

do

> not recommend either of these - if you want

to cut calories or are

> diabetic, I suggest stevia or sucralose

instead.

>

> You may also want to try fruit juice as a

sweetener, especially when

> cooking or baking. Keep in mind, however,

that if you've been using

> sugar appropriately, there is no reason to

reach for artificial

> substitutes.

>

>

>

> <>

>

 

> " To announce that there must be no criticism

of the president, or

that

> we are to stand by the president right or

wrong, is not only

unpatriotic

> and servile, but is morally treasonable to

the American public " .

>

>

Theodore Roosevelt

[Guest guest]

You know, you might want to search the files section or the archives

because I could swear I posted something with more information on all

sweeteners.

I can't seem to find it in my 'puter

 

~Diana

 

, " John and Roxanne McLain "

<jrmclain@h...> wrote:

>

[Guest guest]

Actually, if you were to read the article, he lists aspartame and

saccharine as artificial sweeteners.

I agree with you on the splenda, but instead of replying in this

manner, can you find a document that supports your opinion?

 

Thanks,

 

Diana

 

, " Marie " <wakerens> wrote:

>

> Splenda, Aspertame, and Saccharine are not natural! They are

> unhealthy, and cause problems more so than they help; hence warning

> label on side of things with Nutra sweet like sweetners.

>

> Now you want a natural sweetner that is said to not elevate sugar

> levels in diabetic research Maple Sugar! I have herd Maple sugar

> don't elevate blood sugar levels. This is a good thing if you keep it

> to moderations. Another to search is Birch Sugar (found by its

> scientific name).

>

> Stevia, honey, Pure cane sugar, and some others are all they will

> carry in a Health food store, and most homeopathic and herbalist

> councilors wouldn't suggest using Splenda nor Aspertame. Those two

> products are under tested, man made products, and are something we

> need to becareful of.

> We all need to learn moderation when it comes to sugar/sweetners of

> any sort and that will be healthy for our bodies!!

>

> These are my Opinions, and some facts I have herd on public news

> station in my area! For more info call a health and wellness

> councilor or Herbalist, or goto your local Health Food store and ask

> there opinions! Do some research on your sugar/sweetner!

> I told yeah I have been try to change my lifestyle around!!

> Gabby

>

>

> , " Jose and Diana "

> <joseanddiana@g...> wrote:

> > Nutrition Month - How healthy is your sweetener?

> >

> > Americans consume about 20 teaspoons of sugar daily, not including

> what

> > is found naturally in foods like fruit, milk and beans. Sugar

> itself is

> > considered safe, and its caloric contribution may be small when

> used in

> > moderation, but it can play a role in obesity and dental problems if

> > abused. Some alternatives to white sugar include:

> >

> > * Stevia. This plant-derived sweetener is noncaloric and can be

> > used in baking or cooking, but needs to be diluted before using. I

> > occasionally recommend it for diabetics and those who can't tolerate

> > sugar.

> >

> > * Honey. While it has some antioxidant properties, honey is not

> > necessarily healthier than white sugar, mainly because it can stick

> to

> > teeth and contribute to cavity formation. However, honey does have

> more

> > fructose than sugar, which causes less stress to the pancreas.

> >

> > * Splenda (sucralose). This artificial sweetener is 600 times

> > sweeter than sugar. It is not all-natural, being derived only in

> part

> > from sugar, and while it is FDA approved and appears safe, it has

> not

> > proven itself to be beneficial in losing weight.

> >

> > * Aspartame and Saccharine. These artificial sweeteners are

> found

> > in some foods and are available to add to drinks and some foods. I

> do

> > not recommend either of these - if you want to cut calories or are

> > diabetic, I suggest stevia or sucralose instead.

> >

> > You may also want to try fruit juice as a sweetener, especially when

> > cooking or baking. Keep in mind, however, that if you've been using

> > sugar appropriately, there is no reason to reach for artificial

> > substitutes.

> >

> >

> >

> > <>

> >

> > " To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or

> that

> > we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only

> unpatriotic

> > and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public " .

> >

> > Theodore Roosevelt

[Guest guest]

http://www.holisticmed.com/splenda/

 

http://www.holisticmed.com/aspartame/

 

http://www.splenda.com/page.jhtml;jsessionid=DXYOWFVL1THO0CQPCCFSUYYKB2IIQNSC?id=splenda/products/prodinfo.inc

 

Search engine searches for splenda, aspartame (nutrasweet)

Diana <joseanddiana wrote:

Actually, if you were to read the article, he lists aspartame andsaccharine as artificial sweeteners.I agree with you on the splenda, but instead of replying in thismanner, can you find a document that supports your opinion?Thanks,Diana , "Marie" <wakerens> wrote:> > Splenda, Aspertame, and Saccharine are not natural! They are > unhealthy, and cause problems more so than they help; hence warning > label on side of things with Nutra sweet like sweetners.> > Now you want a natural sweetner that is said to not elevate sugar > levels in diabetic research Maple Sugar! I have herd Maple sugar > don't elevate blood sugar levels. This is a good thing if you keep it > to moderations. Another to search is Birch Sugar (found by its >

scientific name).> > Stevia, honey, Pure cane sugar, and some others are all they will > carry in a Health food store, and most homeopathic and herbalist > councilors wouldn't suggest using Splenda nor Aspertame. Those two > products are under tested, man made products, and are something we > need to becareful of. > We all need to learn moderation when it comes to sugar/sweetners of > any sort and that will be healthy for our bodies!!> > These are my Opinions, and some facts I have herd on public news > station in my area! For more info call a health and wellness > councilor or Herbalist, or goto your local Health Food store and ask > there opinions! Do some research on your sugar/sweetner!> I told yeah I have been try to change my lifestyle around!! > Gabby> > > , "Jose and Diana " > <joseanddiana@g...>

wrote:> > Nutrition Month - How healthy is your sweetener?> > > > Americans consume about 20 teaspoons of sugar daily, not including > what> > is found naturally in foods like fruit, milk and beans. Sugar > itself is> > considered safe, and its caloric contribution may be small when > used in> > moderation, but it can play a role in obesity and dental problems if> > abused. Some alternatives to white sugar include: > > > > * Stevia. This plant-derived sweetener is noncaloric and can be> > used in baking or cooking, but needs to be diluted before using. I> > occasionally recommend it for diabetics and those who can't tolerate> > sugar. > > > > * Honey. While it has some antioxidant properties, honey is not> > necessarily healthier than white sugar, mainly

because it can stick > to> > teeth and contribute to cavity formation. However, honey does have > more> > fructose than sugar, which causes less stress to the pancreas. > > > > * Splenda (sucralose). This artificial sweetener is 600 times> > sweeter than sugar. It is not all-natural, being derived only in > part> > from sugar, and while it is FDA approved and appears safe, it has > not> > proven itself to be beneficial in losing weight. > > > > * Aspartame and Saccharine. These artificial sweeteners are > found> > in some foods and are available to add to drinks and some foods. I > do> > not recommend either of these - if you want to cut calories or are> > diabetic, I suggest stevia or sucralose instead. > > > > You may also want to try fruit

juice as a sweetener, especially when> > cooking or baking. Keep in mind, however, that if you've been using> > sugar appropriately, there is no reason to reach for artificial> > substitutes. > > > > > > > > <>> > > > "To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or > that> > we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only > unpatriotic> > and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public".> > >

> Theodore Roosevelt

"Coco", CLNMT, Aromatherapist, Herbalist Consultant

Leesburg (Orlando), FL

www.webnat.com

[Guest guest]

Splenda - Sucralose

Posted By: Georgiana Duncan <GeorgianaDuncanWednesday, 1 May 2002, at 9:46 a.m.

SPLENDA – INFORMATION

THE POTENTIAL DANGERS OF SUCRALOSE:

There's a new artificial sweetener on the block and it is already in a wide range of products. Some even sold in health food stores and manufactured by nutritionally-oriented companies. But is it proven safe? Does it provide any benefit to the public? Does it help with weight loss? Are there any long term human studies? Has it been shown to be safe for the environment? The answer to all of these questions is unfortunately a resounding NO. The artificial sweetener sucralose, which is sold under the name Splenda™, is one of the up-and-coming "next generation" of high-intensity sugar substitutes. It is non-caloric and about 600 times sweeter than sucrose (white table sugar), although it can vary from 320 to 1,000 times sweeter, depending on the food application. The white crystalline powder tastes like a lot like sugar, but is more intense in its sweetness.

 

HOW IT IS MANUFACTURED:

Sucralose is produced by chlorinating sugar (sucrose). This involves chemically changing the structure of the sugar molecules by substituting three chlorine atoms for three hydroxyl groups.

HISTORY:

Sucralose was discovered in 1976 by researchers working under the auspices of Tate & Lyle Ltd., a large British sugar refiner. In 1980, Tate & Lyle arranged with Johnson & Johnson, the world's largest health care company, to develop sucralose. Johnson & Johnson formed McNeil Specialty Products Company in 1980 to commercialize sucralose.

In 1991, Canada became the first nation to approve the use of sucralose. In April, 1998 the US Food and Drug Administration granted approval for sucralose to be used in a variety of food products (CLICK HERE for complete list of products using sucralose). Diet RC cola was the first US product with sucralose, introduced in May 1998. Sucralose is not yet approved for use in most European countries, where it is still under review.

SAFETY CONCERNS: Few human studies of safety have been published on sucralose. One small study of diabetic patients using the sweetener showed a statistically significant increase in glycosylated hemoglobin (Hba1C), which is a marker of long-term blood glucose levels and is used to assess glycemic control in diabetic patients. According to the FDA, "increases in glycosolation in hemoglobin imply lessening of control of diabetes.

Research in animals has shown that sucralose can cause many problems in rats, mice, and rabbits, such as:

v Shrunken thymus glands (up to 40% shrinkage)

v Enlarged liver and kidneys.

v Atrophy of lymph follicles in the spleen and thymus

v Increased cecal weight

v Reduced growth rate

v Decreased red blood cell count

v Hyperplasia of the pelvis

v Extension of the pregnancy period

v Aborted pregnancy

v Decreased fetal body weights and placental weights

v Diarrhea

According to one source (Sucralose Toxicity Information Center), concerning the significant reduction in size of the thymus gland, "the manufacturer claimed that the sucralose was unpleasant for the rodents to eat in large doses and that starvation 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 percent). The changes were much more marked in rats fed on sucralose. While the animals' growth rate was reduced by between 7 and 20 percent, their thymuses shrank by as much as 40 per-cent. (New Scientist 23 Nov 1991, pg 13)"

A compound chemically related to sucrose, 6-chloro-deoxyglucose, is known to have anti-fertility and neurotoxic effects, although animal studies of sucralose have not shown these effects. According to the FDA's "Final Rule" report, "Sucralose was weakly mutagenic in a mouse lymphoma mutation assay." The FDA also reported many other tests as having "inconclusive" results.

Just how few studies currently exist on sucralose is an issue. Endurance News provides the following table illustrating this fact:

Sweetener and of number studies*

Saccharin 2374 , Aspartame 598 , Cyclamates 459 , Acesulfame-K 28 , Sucralose 19

*NUMBER OF STUDIES DETERMINED BY MEDLINE SEARCH. In terms of safety, it is not just the original substance (sucralose) that one needs to worry about. As the FDA notes, "Because sucralose may hydrolyze in some food products...the resulting hydrolysis products may also be ingested by the consumer."

IS THERE ANY LONG-TERM HUMAN RESEARCH?

None. According to the Medical Letter on Drugs & Therapeutics, "Its long-term safety is unknown." According to the Sucralose Toxicity Information Center, the "Manufacturer's '100's of studies' (some of which show hazards) were clearly inadequate and do not demonstrate safety in long-term use."

IS SUCRALOSE ABSORBED OR METABOLIZED? Despite the manufacturer's claims to the contrary, sucralose is significantly absorbed and metabolized by the body. According to the FDA's "Final Rule" report, 11% to 27% of sucralose is absorbed in humans, and the rest is excreted unchanged in feces. According to the Japanese Food Sanitation Council, as much as 40% of ingested sucralose is absorbed. Plasma sucralose has been reported to have a half-life of anywhere from 2 to 5 hours in most studies, although the half-life in rabbits was found to be much longer at about 36 hours. About 20% to 30% of absorbed sucralose is metabolized. Both the metabolites and unchanged absorbed sucralose are excreted in urine. The absorbed sucralose has been found to concentrate in the liver, kidney, and gastro-intestinal tract. According to The

Sucralose Toxicity Information Center, sucralose is broken down "into small amounts of 1,6-dichlorofructose, a chemical which has not been adequately tested in humans."

CHLORINATED PESTICIDES: According to Consumers Research Magazine "Some concern was raised about sucralose being a chlorinated molecule. Some chlorinated molecules serve as the basis for pesticides such as D.D.T., and accumulate in body fat. However, Johnson & Johnson emphasized that sucralose passes through the body unabsorbed." Of course, this assertion about not being absorbed is complete nonsense. As shown above, a substantial amount of sucralose is absorbed, so the argument is not valid. According to the HAD, "The manufacturer claims that the chlorine added to sucralose is similar to the chlorine atom in the salt (NaCl) molecule. That is not the case. Sucralose may be more like ingesting tiny amounts of chlorinated pesticides, but we will never know without long-term, independent human research."

 

CONTAMINANTS: The FDA acknowledges that sucralose "is produced at an approximate purity of 98%." While that may sound pretty pure, just what is in that other 2%? It turns out that the final sucralose product contains small amounts of potentially dangerous substances such as:

v Heavy Metals (e.g., Lead)

v Arsenic

v Triphenilphosphine Oxide

v Methanol

v Chlorinated Disaccharides

v Chlorinated Monosaccharide

Although manufacturing guidelines do specify limits on these substances there is no guarantee that such limits will always be met.

ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS

Despite the fact that a portion of sucralose is metabolized into some chemicals of questionable safety, a majority of the consumed sucralose is excreted unchanged in the feces and urine. While that may be good for the person using the product, it may not be so great for the environment. Although sucralose is being flushed down toilets wherever sucralose is approved for sale, what happens to it next is simply a matter for speculation. I know of no studies showing what happens to the chemical when the raw sewage is treated and then released back into the environment.

o Does it remain stabile or react with other substances to form new compounds?

o Is the sucralose or any resulting chemicals safe for the environment?

o How will this chemical affect aquatic life such as fish, as well as other animals?

o Will sucralose begin to appear in our water supplies, as some drugs are beginning to be found.

Of course, we will likely not know the answers to these questions for many years, if at all. One of the main reasons for this is that 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." One study did find that sucralose is metabolized by microorganisms in both the water and soil (Labare 94). However, the ecological impact of this new chemical being introduced into the environment is unknown.

IS THERE A BENEFIT FOR CONSUMERS?

According to Consumers' Research Magazine, sucralose provides some benefits for the corporations making and using it, but not for consumers. They state: But are such foods truly beneficial and desirable? Diabetics, weight watchers, and the general public might make better food choices by selecting basic, rather than highly processed foods; for example, apples, rather than turnovers; or plain, rather than sweetened, dairy foods. They note that non-caloric artificial sweeteners are not replacing, but rather supplementing conventional sweeteners. They note that as of 1990 Americans were consuming an average of 20 pounds (sugar sweetness equivalency) of artificial sweeteners, and as consumption of sugar-substitutes has risen so too has consumption of sugar.

Does Sucralose Help with Weight Loss? According to Consumers' Research Magazine "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."

WHERE IS SUCRALOSE FOUND? In the United States, the FDA has granted approval for the use of sucralose in 15 food and beverage categories:

Baked goods and baking mixes

Chewing gum

Confections and frostings

Fats and oils (salad dressings)

Fruit and water ices

Jams and jellies

Processed fruits and fruit juices

Sweet sauces, toppings and syrups

Beverages and beverage bases

Coffee and tea

Dairy product analogs

Frozen dairy desserts and mixes

Gelatins, puddings and fillings

Milk products

Sugar substitutes

(More information can be found on the website via a direct link at several points in this article)

Its promoters cite several benefits over other sweeteners, such as:

o Unlike saccharin, sucralose leaves no bitter aftertaste.

o Unlike other artificial sweeteners, it remains stable at high temperatures.

o Unlike sugar, it does not raise blood glucose levels

As a comparison to sucralose's 600-fold sweetness increase over sugar, consider the other artificial sweeteners on the market:

o Saccharin (Sweet-and -Low) - 300 to 500 times sweeter

o Aspartame (NutraSweet and Equal) - 150 to 200 times sweeter

o Acesulfame K (Sunette) - 200 times sweeter.

BIG BUSINESS: A 1998 report in Chemical Week states that the high-intensity sweetener market is about $1.5-billion/year. About 70%-80% of that market is made up of soft drink sweeteners, of which aspartame has a near monopoly. They note that although sucralose is 50% sweeter than aspartame, it will be difficult to persuade many soft drink producers to give up NutraSweet (aspartame) since it is widely accepted by consumers.

Is Anyone Monitoring Post-Approval Reactions? Apparently not. With no established system for monitoring and tracking post-approval adverse effects, how can it ever be established whether large-scale and long-term consumption of sucralose is safe?

TECHNICAL INFORMATION: Sucralose is made from sucrose by substituting three chlorine atoms for three hydroxyl groups to yield 1,6-dichloro-1,6-dideoxy-BETA-D-fructofuranosyl-4-chloro-4-deoxy-alpha-D-galactopyranoside. This is accomplished in a five-step process. Prolonged storage, particularly at high temperatures and low pH, causes the sucralose to break down into 4-chloro-4-deoxy-galactose (4CG) and 1,6-dichloro-1,6-dideoxyfructose (1,6 DCF), The Chemical Abstracts Service Registry number (CAS Reg. No.) for sucralose is 56038-13-2.

Pre-approval tests indicated potential toxicity of sucralose. There are no *independent* controlled human studies on sucralose (similar to 15 years ago for aspartame).

There are no long-term (12-24 months) human studies of sucralose's effects.

There is no monitoring of health effects. It took government agencies decades to agree that there were countless thousands of deaths from tobacco. Why? Simply because there had been no monitoring or epidemiological studies. Without such monitoring and studies, huge effects can easily go unnoticed.

DO PRODUCTS WITH SUCRALOSE CARRY ANY WARNING LABELS OR INFORMATION STATEMENTS?

No. The regulatory agencies and scientific review bodies that have endorsed the safety of sucralose have not required any warning information to be placed on the labels of products sweetened with sucralose.

CONCLUSIONS

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 or decades of use may contribute to serious chronic immunological or neurological disorders. THE CONSUMER'S RESEARCH MAGAZINE CONCLUDES THAT: As Americans continue to choose ever-increasing amounts of such foods and beverages, sweeteners may soar to higher consumption levels. The long-range health effects from such escalation need careful evaluation. Do additional approved sweetening agents truly contribute to good health? Do they really meet special dietary needs? Or, do they merely further encourage poor dietary choices?

FOUR RECENT EXAMPLES OF WHAT SPLENDA CAN DO TO YOU

Dear Dr. Marcela, I wanted to thank you for posting your article regarding sucralose, and to inform you of my reaction to eating it today. I bought a low-carb bar called "Ultimate Lo Carb" by Biochem at a local health food store. I have been eating foods low in starchy carbs and thought this might be a good snack bar. Well, almost immediately after eating it I became nauseous. Then my stomach starting cramping and I began dry heaving. I wondered what could have caused this and decided to try and read the label. The only ingredient I did not recognize was "sucralose".

So, I jumped on the Internet and did a search for it and found your article. In the meantime I was heaving and feeling even worse. Well, I am allergic to chlorine, as well as having a liver that doesn't function very well (I take a natural supplement called "Lipogen" for liver support as prescribed by my ND), and when I saw what you had to say about sucralose, I figured that was what was causing it.

I kept feeling worse, and I decided I needed to get it out of my system and took some ipecac (maybe not the best move, but the only thing I could think of). By the time the syrup got into my stomach the heaving was getting worse and intestinal distress was setting in. It was like eating bad seafood. I nearly died of food poisoning by crab legs a number of years back, and this was the closest thing to that feeling.

Finally everything in my system started coming out, and my body didn't stop until my entire digestive tract was cleared out. I have never reacted this violently to anything I have eaten except for when I have had food poisoning. Something needs to be done to get this product off the market.

I can't help but be convinced that the FDA takes payoffs. No ethical person could approve the use of things like MSG (another thing I cannot tolerate eating), which is classified by the FDA as an excito-toxin and is known to be harmful to the central nervous system. I will do everything to get people to read your article and get the word out on the FDA's latest blunder. Best, Shelley Flis

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dear Dr. Mercola: THANK YOU so much for your informative site! I am currently "detoxing" from using sucralose after a terrible reaction. It all began with purchasing a box of Splenda. The changes (in my opinion) were subtle. However, my family and friends noticed immediately. I became withdrawn and disinterested in my usual hobbies. Everything became a "chore." I was tired during the day, but couldn't sleep at night either. I play flute which requires a quick mental process and fingering skills to match but suddenly I was struggling to play. Typing is difficult, as well. During the past three weeks I noticed myself "zoning out." I'd become forgetful and moody. I thought perhaps it was the Splenda, because that was the only thing different in my daily habits. I quickly dismissed the thought - despite having experienced a similar situation with

Equal a few years back. I called it "Jekyll v. Hyde Syndrome." But it seemed I noticed the changes much quicker with Equal than with Splenda.

I really suffered yesterday. I was an emotional wreck. I cried and cried. I felt like I was losing my mind. My husband and son discussed my disturbing behavior while I was in the shower. Our son, Tim, recalled that the changes began with that little yellow box. Steve, (my husband,) mentioned it to me. Little by little, things fell into place, including the unexplainable accident I recently had in our truck. I had just stopped at a stop sign and the trooper said that I couldn't have been going over 15 miles an hour when I nearly rolled our truck. Even he said that I narrowly escaped injury. I nearly had a second accident last week.

My senses had become SO dulled, I could barely function. I could not focus on anything. Even playing my flute was so hard. I normally stand to play, but for the past two weeks at practice, I sat a lot. I felt "dazed." This morning, I feel MUCH better than I have in the recent weeks. Not quite "nor-mal," but much better. Even the acne (on my otherwise clear skin) is fading away. Yep! I had a patch of acne, which appeared when I began using Splenda!

How many people are suffering from what appears to be diseases - or even acne, when it is simply a reaction to a chemical they are ingesting? If companies were forced to list the ingredients of these products, such as arsenic, they'd sure be a lot more careful! I mean, who would intentionally poison themselves?

Sincerely, Debby Fazekas

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dear Dr. Mercola: Four years ago I began to have panic attacks and was on BuSpar for about a year. I started reading about aspartame and consumed the product daily -- mostly in diet drinks and was a big consumer of Diet Rite. After learning about problems other people were having I quit completely consuming the stuff. And have been panic free for 3 years. In December I started using Splenda and at the same time started having a great deal of anxiety and had a couple of panic attacks but didn't think about the link of Splenda and the anxiety until about a week ago. I also had my mom visiting and introduced her to Splenda--guess what-- she started having panic attacks during her visit and actually cut her visit short due to her feeling bad.

I haven't consumed anymore of it for a week but am still having problems. Oh, I also was having an irregular heart beat which I did see my doctor about. He assured me that my blood pressure was excellent and cholesterol also good and I shouldn't worry about my heart. I consume very little to no caffeine. Local doctors don't put much faith in the idea that Nutra Sweet caused problems. I'm sure my new theory about Splenda would carry even less weight. By the way, I have a very stress-free life-style. I run my own little business and set my own hours. I don't believe my environment is causing any irregular stress. Sue

Dear Dr. Mercola: I found this website while researching the new sweetener SPLENDA, a sweetener included in the DIET ICE BOTANICALS drink made by Talking Rain Beverage Co., Preston WA. 98050 Ph. 1-800-734-0748, WWW.TALINGRAIN.COM, currently sold at SAMS warehouse club.

The shocking thing I read at the end of your article on this is the Food Poisoning like symptoms. I've probably drank about 30 -16oz bottles of the stuff, which supposedly contains St, Johns Wort, Kava-Kava, and Ginseng, among other "good" things for you. My son has been sneaking a few bottles to past Mom, despite my apprehension. We both came down with a similar food poisoning which lasted nearly 10 days for him, and is going on day 3 for me, and I'm throwing the stuff out today. Thanks for your information, x6rj

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dear Dr. Mercola: Thank you so much for your webpage. I recently drank my first bottle of Virgin Diet Cola, and experienced a mind-numbing headache. I was literally seeing spots. I read the label, thinking there must be something crazy in the cola. The one ingredient I didn't recognize was "Sucralose." My husband, a doctor, said he'd never heard of the ingredient either. After having read your site, I've cleaned my cupboards of Pure Protein bars, which I had no idea contained this deadly chemical, and, needless to say, will NOT be purchasing any of the other products you've listed. Thank you for your thorough research and intelligent, accessible data. Best -- Megyn Cotner

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Mercola's Comment: Don't let these large corps fool you. There is no magic alternative to sugar when it comes to sweeteners. You simply cannot have your cake and eat it too when it comes to this. It is far too early to tell, as not enough people have consumed this product to observe large numbers of adverse effects. However, I have had a number of patients who have had some severe migraines and even seizures possibly from consuming this product. My advice? AVOID Sucralose!! I am fond of telling people that if something tastes sweet you probably should spit it out as it is not likely to be to good for you. This of course, is a humorous exaggeration, but for most people who struggle with chronic illness, it is likely to be a helpful guide. PLEASE note this article is being written in 2000. This is one of the first comprehensive clear

investigative reports and warnings on sucralose on the Internet.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - Source: http://www.mercola.com/2000/dec/3/sucralose_dangers.htm.

Get information like this in every issue of the Sunshine Journal.

Click here for more information on the Sunshine Journal

Jose and Diana <joseanddiana wrote:

 

Nutrition Month - How healthy is your sweetener?Americans consume about 20 teaspoons of sugar daily, not including what is found naturally in foods like fruit, milk and beans. Sugar itself is considered safe, and its caloric contribution may be small when used in moderation, but it can play a role in obesity and dental problems if abused. Some alternatives to white sugar include:

 

Stevia. This plant-derived sweetener is noncaloric and can be used in baking or cooking, but needs to be diluted before using. I occasionally recommend it for diabetics and those who can't tolerate sugar. Honey. While it has some antioxidant properties, honey is not necessarily healthier than white sugar, mainly because it can stick to teeth and contribute to cavity formation. However, honey does have more fructose than sugar, which causes less stress to the pancreas. Splenda (sucralose). This artificial sweetener is 600 times sweeter than sugar. It is not all-natural, being derived only in part from sugar, and while it is FDA approved and appears safe, it has not proven itself to be beneficial in losing weight. Aspartame and Saccharine. These artificial sweeteners are found in some foods and are available to add to drinks and some foods. I do not recommend either of these - if you want to cut calories or are diabetic, I suggest stevia or sucralose instead. You may also want to try fruit juice as a sweetener, especially when cooking or baking. Keep in mind, however, that if you've been using sugar appropriately, there is no reason to reach for artificial substitutes.

 

 

 

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public".

 

Theodore Roosevelt

 

"Coco", CLNMT, Aromatherapist, Herbalist Consultant

Leesburg (Orlando), FL

www.webnat.com

Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less.

[Guest guest]

Excellent send!!!!

 

 

NorthernDoe / Leisa

 

Northwoods Knits

 

 

NorthernDoe

 

 

 

 

 

 

Lorena

[herbalistlady]

Sunday, March 20, 2005 7:09

PM

 

Re:

Nutrition Month - How healthy is your sweetener?

 

 

 

Splenda

- Sucralose

Posted By: Georgiana Duncan <GeorgianaDuncan

Wednesday, 1 May 2002, at 9:46 a.m.

SPLENDA

INFORMATION

THE

POTENTIAL DANGERS OF SUCRALOSE:

There's a new artificial

sweetener on the block and it is already in a wide range of products. Some even

sold in health food stores and manufactured by nutritionally-oriented

companies. But is it proven safe? Does it provide any benefit to the public? Does

it help with weight loss? Are there any long term human studies? Has it been

shown to be safe for the environment? The answer to all of these questions is

unfortunately a resounding NO. The artificial sweetener sucralose, which is

sold under the name Splenda, is one of the up-and-coming " next

generation " of high-intensity sugar substitutes. It is non-caloric and

about 600 times sweeter than sucrose (white table sugar), although it can vary

from 320 to 1,000 times sweeter, depending on the food application. The white

crystalline powder tastes like a lot like sugar, but is more intense in its

sweetness.

HOW IT

IS MANUFACTURED:

Sucralose is produced by

chlorinating sugar (sucrose). This involves chemically changing the structure

of the sugar molecules by substituting three chlorine atoms for three hydroxyl

groups.

HISTORY:

Sucralose was discovered

in 1976 by researchers working under the auspices of Tate & Lyle Ltd., a

large British sugar refiner. In 1980, Tate & Lyle arranged with Johnson

& Johnson, the world's largest health care company, to develop sucralose.

Johnson & Johnson formed McNeil Specialty Products Company in 1980 to

commercialize sucralose.

In 1991, Canada became

the first nation to approve the use of sucralose. In April, 1998 the US Food and

Drug Administration granted approval for sucralose to be used in a variety of

food products (CLICK HERE for complete list of products using sucralose). Diet

RC cola was the first US

product with sucralose, introduced in May 1998. Sucralose is not yet approved

for use in most European countries, where it is still under review.

SAFETY

CONCERNS: Few human studies of safety have been published on

sucralose. One small study of diabetic patients using the sweetener showed a

statistically significant increase in glycosylated hemoglobin (Hba1C), which is

a marker of long-term blood glucose levels and is used to assess glycemic

control in diabetic patients. According to the FDA, " increases in

glycosolation in hemoglobin imply lessening of control of diabetes.

Research in animals has shown that

sucralose can cause many problems in rats, mice, and rabbits, such as:

v Shrunken thymus glands

(up to 40% shrinkage)

v Enlarged liver and

kidneys.

v Atrophy of lymph

follicles in the spleen and thymus

v Increased cecal weight

v Reduced growth rate

v Decreased red blood cell

count

v Hyperplasia of the

pelvis

v Extension of the

pregnancy period

v Aborted pregnancy

v Decreased fetal body

weights and placental weights

v Diarrhea

According to one source

(Sucralose Toxicity Information Center), concerning the significant reduction

in size of the thymus gland, " the manufacturer claimed that the sucralose

was unpleasant for the rodents to eat in large doses and that starvation 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 percent). The changes were much more

marked in rats fed on sucralose. While the animals' growth rate was reduced by

between 7 and 20 percent, their thymuses shrank by as much as 40 per-cent. (New

Scientist 23 Nov 1991, pg 13) "

A compound chemically

related to sucrose, 6-chloro-deoxyglucose, is known to have anti-fertility and

neurotoxic effects, although animal studies of sucralose have not shown these

effects. According to the FDA's " Final Rule " report, " Sucralose

was weakly mutagenic in a mouse lymphoma mutation assay. " The FDA also

reported many other tests as having " inconclusive " results.

Just how few studies currently exist on

sucralose is an issue. Endurance News provides the following table illustrating

this fact:

Sweetener and of number studies*

Saccharin 2374 ,

Aspartame 598 , Cyclamates 459 , Acesulfame-K 28 , Sucralose 19

*NUMBER OF STUDIES DETERMINED BY MEDLINE SEARCH.

In terms of safety, it is not just the original substance (sucralose) that one

needs to worry about. As the FDA notes, " Because sucralose may hydrolyze

in some food products...the resulting hydrolysis products may also be ingested

by the consumer. "

IS

THERE ANY LONG-TERM HUMAN RESEARCH?

None. According to the

Medical Letter on Drugs & Therapeutics, " Its long-term safety is

unknown. " According to the Sucralose Toxicity Information Center, the

" Manufacturer's '100's of studies' (some of which show hazards) were

clearly inadequate and do not demonstrate safety in long-term use. "

IS

SUCRALOSE ABSORBED OR METABOLIZED? Despite the

manufacturer's claims to the contrary, sucralose is significantly absorbed and

metabolized by the body. According to the FDA's " Final Rule " report,

11% to 27% of sucralose is absorbed in humans, and the rest is excreted

unchanged in feces. According to the Japanese Food Sanitation Council, as much

as 40% of ingested sucralose is absorbed. Plasma sucralose has been reported to

have a half-life of anywhere from 2 to 5 hours in most studies, although the

half-life in rabbits was found to be much longer at about 36 hours. About 20%

to 30% of absorbed sucralose is metabolized. Both the metabolites and unchanged

absorbed sucralose are excreted in urine. The absorbed sucralose has been found

to concentrate in the liver, kidney, and gastro-intestinal tract. According to

The Sucralose Toxicity Information Center, sucralose is broken down " into

small amounts of 1,6-dichlorofructose, a chemical which has not been adequately

tested in humans. "

CHLORINATED

PESTICIDES: According to Consumers Research

Magazine " Some concern was raised about sucralose being a chlorinated

molecule. Some chlorinated molecules serve as the basis for pesticides such as

D.D.T., and accumulate in body fat. However, Johnson & Johnson emphasized

that sucralose passes through the body unabsorbed. " Of course, this

assertion about not being absorbed is complete nonsense. As shown above, a

substantial amount of sucralose is absorbed, so the argument is not valid.

According to the HAD, " The manufacturer claims that the chlorine added to

sucralose is similar to the chlorine atom in the salt (NaCl) molecule. That is

not the case. Sucralose may be more like ingesting tiny amounts of chlorinated

pesticides, but we will never know without long-term, independent human

research. "

CONTAMINANTS: The FDA

acknowledges that sucralose " is produced at an approximate purity of

98%. " While that may sound pretty pure, just what is in that other 2%? It

turns out that the final sucralose product contains small amounts of

potentially dangerous substances such as:

v Heavy Metals (e.g.,

Lead)

v Arsenic

v Triphenilphosphine Oxide

 

v Methanol

v Chlorinated

Disaccharides

v Chlorinated

Monosaccharide

Although manufacturing

guidelines do specify limits on these substances there is no guarantee that

such limits will always be met.

ENVIRONMENTAL

CONCERNS

Despite the fact that a

portion of sucralose is metabolized into some chemicals of questionable safety,

a majority of the consumed sucralose is excreted unchanged in the feces and

urine. While that may be good for the person using the product, it may not be

so great for the environment. Although sucralose is being flushed down toilets

wherever sucralose is approved for sale, what happens to it next is simply a

matter for speculation. I know of no studies showing what happens to the

chemical when the raw sewage is treated and then released back into the

environment.

o Does it

remain stabile or react with other substances to form new compounds?

o Is the

sucralose or any resulting chemicals safe for the environment?

o How will

this chemical affect aquatic life such as fish, as well as other animals?

o Will

sucralose begin to appear in our water supplies, as some drugs are beginning to

be found.

Of course, we will

likely not know the answers to these questions for many years, if at all. One

of the main reasons for this is that 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. " One study did

find that sucralose is metabolized by microorganisms in both the water and soil

(Labare 94). However, the ecological impact of this new chemical being

introduced into the environment is unknown.

IS

THERE A BENEFIT FOR CONSUMERS?

According to Consumers'

Research Magazine, sucralose provides some benefits for the corporations making

and using it, but not for consumers. They state: But are such foods truly

beneficial and desirable? Diabetics, weight watchers, and the general public

might make better food choices by selecting basic, rather than highly processed

foods; for example, apples, rather than turnovers; or plain, rather than sweetened,

dairy foods. They note that non-caloric artificial sweeteners are not

replacing, but rather supplementing conventional sweeteners. They note that as

of 1990 Americans were consuming an average of 20 pounds (sugar sweetness

equivalency) of artificial sweeteners, and as consumption of sugar-substitutes

has risen so too has consumption of sugar.

Does Sucralose Help with

Weight Loss? According to Consumers' Research Magazine " 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. "

WHERE

IS SUCRALOSE FOUND? In the United States, the FDA has

granted approval for the use of sucralose in 15 food and beverage categories:

Baked goods and baking mixes

Chewing gum

Confections and frostings

Fats and oils (salad dressings)

Fruit and water ices

Jams and jellies

Processed fruits and fruit juices

Sweet sauces, toppings and syrups

Beverages and beverage bases

Coffee and tea

Dairy product analogs

Frozen dairy desserts and mixes

Gelatins, puddings and fillings

Milk products

Sugar substitutes

(More information can be

found on the website via a direct link at several points in this article)

Its promoters cite

several benefits over other sweeteners, such as:

o Unlike

saccharin, sucralose leaves no bitter aftertaste.

o Unlike other

artificial sweeteners, it remains stable at high temperatures.

o Unlike

sugar, it does not raise blood glucose levels

As a comparison to

sucralose's 600-fold sweetness increase over sugar, consider the other

artificial sweeteners on the market:

o Saccharin

(Sweet-and -Low) - 300 to 500 times sweeter

o Aspartame

(NutraSweet and Equal) - 150 to 200 times sweeter

o Acesulfame K

(Sunette) - 200 times sweeter.

BIG

BUSINESS: A 1998 report in Chemical Week states that the

high-intensity sweetener market is about $1.5-billion/year. About 70%-80% of

that market is made up of soft drink sweeteners, of which aspartame has a near

monopoly. They note that although sucralose is 50% sweeter than aspartame, it

will be difficult to persuade many soft drink producers to give up NutraSweet

(aspartame) since it is widely accepted by consumers.

Is Anyone Monitoring

Post-Approval Reactions? Apparently not. With no established system for

monitoring and tracking post-approval adverse effects, how can it ever be

established whether large-scale and long-term consumption of sucralose is safe?

 

TECHNICAL

INFORMATION: Sucralose is made from sucrose by

substituting three chlorine atoms for three hydroxyl groups to yield

1,6-dichloro-1,6-dideoxy-BETA-D-fructofuranosyl-4-chloro-4-deoxy-alpha-D-galactopyranoside.

This is accomplished in a five-step process. Prolonged storage, particularly at

high temperatures and low pH, causes the sucralose to break down into

4-chloro-4-deoxy-galactose (4CG) and 1,6-dichloro-1,6-dideoxyfructose (1,6

DCF), The Chemical Abstracts Service Registry number (CAS

Reg. No.) for sucralose is 56038-13-2.

Pre-approval tests

indicated potential toxicity of sucralose. There are no *independent*

controlled human studies on sucralose (similar to 15 years ago for aspartame).

There are no long-term

(12-24 months) human studies of sucralose's effects.

There is no monitoring

of health effects. It took government agencies decades to agree that there were

countless thousands of deaths from tobacco. Why? Simply because there had been

no monitoring or epidemiological studies. Without such monitoring and studies,

huge effects can easily go unnoticed.

DO

PRODUCTS WITH SUCRALOSE CARRY ANY WARNING LABELS OR INFORMATION STATEMENTS?

No. The regulatory

agencies and scientific review bodies that have endorsed the safety of

sucralose have not required any warning information to be placed on the labels

of products sweetened with sucralose.

CONCLUSIONS

The Sucralose Toxicity

Information Center concludes that: While it is unlikely that sucralose is as

toxic as the poisoning people are experiencing from Monsantos 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.

THE CONSUMER'S RESEARCH MAGAZINE CONCLUDES THAT:

As Americans continue to choose ever-increasing amounts of such foods and

beverages, sweeteners may soar to higher consumption levels. The long-range

health effects from such escalation need careful evaluation. Do additional

approved sweetening agents truly contribute to good health? Do they really meet

special dietary needs? Or, do they merely further encourage poor dietary

choices?

FOUR

RECENT EXAMPLES OF WHAT SPLENDA CAN DO TO YOU

Dear Dr. Marcela, I

wanted to thank you for posting your article regarding sucralose, and to inform

you of my reaction to eating it today. I bought a low-carb bar called

" Ultimate Lo Carb " by Biochem at a local health food store. I have

been eating foods low in starchy carbs and thought this might be a good snack

bar. Well, almost immediately after eating it I became nauseous. Then my

stomach starting cramping and I began dry heaving. I wondered what could have

caused this and decided to try and read the label. The only ingredient I did

not recognize was " sucralose " .

So, I jumped on the

Internet and did a search for it and found your article. In the meantime I was

heaving and feeling even worse. Well, I am allergic to chlorine, as well as

having a liver that doesn't function very well (I take a natural supplement

called " Lipogen " for liver support as prescribed by my ND), and when

I saw what you had to say about sucralose, I figured that was what was causing

it.

I kept feeling worse,

and I decided I needed to get it out of my system and took some ipecac (maybe

not the best move, but the only thing I could think of). By the time the syrup

got into my stomach the heaving was getting worse and intestinal distress was

setting in. It was like eating bad seafood. I nearly died of food poisoning by

crab legs a number of years back, and this was the closest thing to that

feeling.

Finally everything in my

system started coming out, and my body didn't stop until my entire digestive

tract was cleared out. I have never reacted this violently to anything I have

eaten except for when I have had food poisoning. Something needs to be done to

get this product off the market.

I can't help but be

convinced that the FDA takes payoffs. No ethical person could approve the use

of things like MSG (another thing I cannot tolerate eating), which is

classified by the FDA as an excito-toxin and is known to be harmful to the

central nervous system. I will do everything to get people to read your article

and get the word out on the FDA's latest blunder.

Best, Shelley Flis

- - - - - - - - - - - -

- -

Dear Dr. Mercola: THANK YOU so much for your informative site! I am currently

" detoxing " from using sucralose after a terrible reaction. It all

began with purchasing a box of Splenda. The changes (in my opinion) were

subtle. However, my family and friends noticed immediately. I became withdrawn

and disinterested in my usual hobbies. Everything became a " chore. " I

was tired during the day, but couldn't sleep at night either. I play flute

which requires a quick mental process and fingering skills to match but

suddenly I was struggling to play. Typing is difficult, as well. During the

past three weeks I noticed myself " zoning out. " I'd become forgetful

and moody. I thought perhaps it was the Splenda, because that was the only

thing different in my daily habits. I quickly dismissed the thought - despite

having experienced a similar situation with Equal a few years back. I called it

" Jekyll v. Hyde Syndrome. " But it seemed I noticed the changes much

quicker with Equal than with Splenda.

I really suffered

yesterday. I was an emotional wreck. I cried and cried. I felt like I was

losing my mind. My husband and son discussed my disturbing behavior while I was

in the shower. Our son, Tim, recalled that the changes began with that little

yellow box. Steve, (my husband,) mentioned it to me. Little by little, things

fell into place, including the unexplainable accident I recently had in our

truck. I had just stopped at a stop sign and the trooper said that I couldn't

have been going over 15 miles an hour when I nearly rolled our truck. Even he

said that I narrowly escaped injury. I nearly had a second accident last week.

My senses had become SO

dulled, I could barely function. I could not focus on anything. Even playing my

flute was so hard. I normally stand to play, but for the past two weeks at

practice, I sat a lot. I felt " dazed. " This morning, I feel MUCH

better than I have in the recent weeks. Not quite " nor-mal, " but much

better. Even the acne (on my otherwise clear skin) is fading away. Yep! I had a

patch of acne, which appeared when I began using Splenda!

How many people are

suffering from what appears to be diseases - or even acne, when it is simply a

reaction to a chemical they are ingesting? If companies were forced to list the

ingredients of these products, such as arsenic, they'd sure be a lot more

careful! I mean, who would intentionally poison themselves?

Sincerely, Debby Fazekas

 

- - - - - - - - - - - -

- -

Dear Dr. Mercola: Four years ago I began to have panic attacks and was on BuSpar

for about a year. I started reading about aspartame and consumed the product

daily -- mostly in diet drinks and was a big consumer of Diet Rite. After

learning about problems other people were having I quit completely consuming

the stuff. And have been panic free for 3 years. In December I started using

Splenda and at the same time started having a great deal of anxiety and had a

couple of panic attacks but didn't think about the link of Splenda and the

anxiety until about a week ago. I also had my mom visiting and introduced her

to Splenda--guess what-- she started having panic attacks during her visit and

actually cut her visit short due to her feeling bad.

I haven't consumed

anymore of it for a week but am still having problems. Oh, I also was having an

irregular heart beat which I did see my doctor about. He assured me that my

blood pressure was excellent and cholesterol also good and I shouldn't worry

about my heart. I consume very little to no caffeine. Local doctors don't put

much faith in the idea that Nutra Sweet caused problems. I'm sure my new theory

about Splenda would carry even less weight. By the way, I have a very

stress-free life-style. I run my own little business and set my own hours. I

don't believe my environment is causing any irregular stress. Sue

Dear Dr. Mercola: I

found this website while researching the new sweetener SPLENDA, a sweetener

included in the DIET ICE BOTANICALS drink made by Talking Rain Beverage Co.,

Preston WA. 98050 Ph. 1-800-734-0748,

WWW.TALINGRAIN.COM, currently sold at SAMS

warehouse club.

The shocking thing I

read at the end of your article on this is the Food Poisoning like symptoms.

I've probably drank about 30 -16oz bottles of the stuff, which supposedly

contains St, Johns Wort, Kava-Kava, and Ginseng, among other " good "

things for you. My son has been sneaking a few bottles to past Mom, despite my

apprehension. We both came down with a similar food poisoning which lasted

nearly 10 days for him, and is going on day 3 for me, and I'm throwing the

stuff out today. Thanks for your information, x6rj

- - - - - - - - - - - -

- -

Dear Dr. Mercola: Thank you so much for your webpage. I recently drank my first

bottle of Virgin Diet Cola, and experienced a mind-numbing headache. I was

literally seeing spots. I read the label, thinking there must be something

crazy in the cola. The one ingredient I didn't recognize was

" Sucralose. " My husband, a doctor, said he'd never heard of the

ingredient either. After having read your site, I've cleaned my cupboards of

Pure Protein bars, which I had no idea contained this deadly chemical, and,

needless to say, will NOT be purchasing any of the other products you've

listed. Thank you for your thorough research and intelligent, accessible data.

Best -- Megyn Cotner

- - - - - - - - - - - -

- -

Dr. Mercola's Comment: Don't let

these large corps fool you. There is no magic alternative to sugar when it

comes to sweeteners. You simply cannot have your cake and eat it too when it

comes to this. It is far too early to tell, as not enough people have consumed

this product to observe large numbers of adverse effects. However, I have had a

number of patients who have had some severe migraines and even seizures

possibly from consuming this product. My advice? AVOID Sucralose!! I am fond of

telling people that if something tastes sweet you probably should spit it out

as it is not likely to be to good for you. This of course, is a humorous

exaggeration, but for most people who struggle with chronic illness, it is

likely to be a helpful guide. PLEASE note this article is being written in

2000. This is one of the first comprehensive clear investigative reports and

warnings on sucralose on the Internet.

- - - - - - - - - - - -

- -

Source: http://www.mercola.com/2000/dec/3/sucralose_dangers.htm.

Get information like this in every issue

of the Sunshine Journal.

Click here for more information on the Sunshine Journal

 

 

 

Jose and Diana

<joseanddiana wrote:

 

Nutrition Month - How healthy is your sweetener?

 

Americans consume about 20 teaspoons of sugar daily, not including what is

found naturally in foods like fruit, milk and beans. Sugar itself is considered

safe, and its caloric contribution may be small when used in moderation, but it

can play a role in obesity and dental problems if abused. Some alternatives to

white sugar include:

 

Stevia. This

plant-derived sweetener is noncaloric and can be used in baking or

cooking, but needs to be diluted before using. I occasionally recommend it

for diabetics and those who can't tolerate sugar.

Honey. While

it has some antioxidant properties, honey is not necessarily healthier

than white sugar, mainly because it can stick to teeth and contribute to

cavity formation. However, honey does have more fructose than sugar, which

causes less stress to the pancreas.

Splenda (sucralose).

This artificial sweetener is 600 times sweeter than sugar. It is not

all-natural, being derived only in part from sugar, and while it is FDA approved

and appears safe, it has not proven itself to be beneficial in losing

weight.

Aspartame and Saccharine.

These artificial sweeteners are found in some foods and are available to

add to drinks and some foods. I do not recommend either of these - if you

want to cut calories or are diabetic, I suggest stevia or sucralose

instead.

 

You may also want to try

fruit juice as a sweetener, especially when cooking or baking. Keep in mind,

however, that if you've been using sugar appropriately, there is no reason to

reach for artificial substitutes.

 

 

 

 

 

" To announce that there must be no criticism of the

president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only

unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American

public " .

 

 

 

 

Theodore Roosevelt

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

" Coco " , CLNMT, Aromatherapist, Herbalist Consultant

 

 

Leesburg (Orlando), FL

 

 

www.webnat.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mail - 250MB free storage. Do

more. Manage less.

[Guest guest]

Ladies and gentlemen,

 

This is from another .

 

May I say that controversy is usually due to a lack of understanding, communication and information. Many of the questions raised in all these about nutrition and health can be found on the Internet. Over and above that, it is the responsibility of both the moderator as well as the participants to get their information from outside sources... ie... read books, buy books, attend classes. If some information is incorrect, then it is possible to correct the errors/miscommunication/misinformation without having a heated debate or reaction. It leaves participants with the feeling that there is a RIGHT and a WRONG answer. Each of us has to make our own decisions and choices within each category. This is what being an informed adult/consumer is all about. Some want all their decisions and answers made for them. Today, this is not possible, with all the choices we have to make.

 

Remember, too, that sugar, meat, eggs, dairy are BIG BUSINESS. There are numerous manufacturers who stand to lose millions of dollars when consumers are not convinced. Look at the debate over pharmaceuticals being brought in from Canada. You have a choice - do you believe that they are of substandard grade, or do you believe that they are cheaper from Canada and are of the same grade??? Again, these choices and decisions need to be made with an informed voice.

 

Look at who makes Splenda: when you look at the splenda.com website, this information is typed in LIGHT BLUE on a WHITE background. It is practically illegible. Basically, this is the equivalent of fraud, but the information is provided, though "invisible". For those of you unfamiliar with McNeil, it is a pharmaceutical firm, more well known as the manufacturer of Tylenol. (http://www.tylenol.com/)

©McNeil Nutritionals LLC, 2004 Ft. Washington PA, USA. All rights reserved. This site and its contents are intended for USA audiences only.Questions or comments? Call 1-800-7-SPLENDA or click here for Customer Service. So, now that the homework has been done, it is up to the rest of you to do your homework in the future.

Lastly, as for emotional issues about upbringing, we all have those. It appears to me that it is most inappropriate to bring in ones dirty laundry in a public forum, where no one knows anyone else. Case in point, how many of you (and I) cut off people while driving??? We do this because we have anonymity in our vehicles. When you see the person face to face, they are no longer anonymous (by the way, this is a what if question, and no response is necessary... it's like the philosophical question of "If a tree falls in the forest, does it make a sound?"

 

Happy trails to all.....

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

To:

 

 

 

"Diana and Jose" <joseanddiana Add to Address Book

 

Date:

Tue, 28 Dec 2004 10:13:42 -0500

 

Subject:

Splenda Is Not Splendid!

Splenda Is Not Splendid! James Bowen, M.D. - "In a simple word you would just as soon have DDT in your food as Splenda, because sucralose is a chlorocarbon. The chlorocarbons have long been famous for causing organ, genetic, and reproductive damage. It should be no surprise, therefore, that the testing of sucralose, even at less than the level demanded by FDA rules, reveals that it has been shown to cause up to 40%shrinkage of the thymus: A gland that is the very foundation of our immune system. It also causes swelling of the liver and kidneys, and calcification of the kidney." more

 

 

The artificial sweetener Splenda is used in hundreds of foods and beverages in the United States and is touted as being safe and healthier than sugar. But if Splenda is safe, why haven’t any studies been done to prove it, and why are so many people getting sick from eating Splenda? Find out some of the more common reaction symptoms now. The Bitter Truth About NutraSweet (Aspartame) and Sucralose (Splenda™) Alternatives to artificial sweeteners and white sugar: raw, unrefined palm sugar (available in Asian stores and delicious), honey, maple syrup or date sugar. These natural sugars contain important minerals and vitamins. more info about sugar

 

Diana Gonzalez

 

 

 

Nothing wastes more energy than worrying - the longer a problem is carried, the heavier it gets. Don't take things too seriously - Jose and Diana <joseanddiana wrote:

 

Nutrition Month - How healthy is your sweetener?Americans consume about 20 teaspoons of sugar daily, not including what is found naturally in foods like fruit, milk and beans. Sugar itself is considered safe, and its caloric contribution may be small when used in moderation, but it can play a role in obesity and dental problems if abused. Some alternatives to white sugar include:

 

Stevia. This plant-derived sweetener is noncaloric and can be used in baking or cooking, but needs to be diluted before using. I occasionally recommend it for diabetics and those who can't tolerate sugar. Honey. While it has some antioxidant properties, honey is not necessarily healthier than white sugar, mainly because it can stick to teeth and contribute to cavity formation. However, honey does have more fructose than sugar, which causes less stress to the pancreas. Splenda (sucralose). This artificial sweetener is 600 times sweeter than sugar. It is not all-natural, being derived only in part from sugar, and while it is FDA approved and appears safe, it has not proven itself to be beneficial in losing weight. Aspartame and Saccharine. These artificial sweeteners are found in some foods and are available to add to drinks and some foods. I do not recommend either of these - if you want to cut calories or are diabetic, I suggest stevia or sucralose instead. You may also want to try fruit juice as a sweetener, especially when cooking or baking. Keep in mind, however, that if you've been using sugar appropriately, there is no reason to reach for artificial substitutes.

 

 

 

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public".

 

Theodore Roosevelt

 

"Coco", CLNMT, Aromatherapist, Herbalist Consultant

Leesburg (Orlando), FL

www.webnat.com

Make your home page

[Guest guest]

NorthernDoe <leisa wrote:

 

 

 

Excellent send!!!!

 

 

NorthernDoe / Leisa

 

Northwoods Knits

 

NorthernDoe

 

 

 

 

Lorena [herbalistlady] Sunday, March 20, 2005 7:09 PM Subject: Re: Nutrition Month - How healthy is your sweetener?

 

 

Splenda - Sucralose

Posted By: Georgiana Duncan <GeorgianaDuncanDate:

Wednesday, 1 May 2002, at 9:46 a.m.

SPLENDA INFORMATION

THE POTENTIAL DANGERS OF SUCRALOSE:

There's a new artificial sweetener on the block and it is already in a wide range of products. Some even sold in health food stores and manufactured by nutritionally-oriented companies. But is it proven safe? Does it provide any benefit to the public? Does it help with weight loss? Are there any long term human studies? Has it been shown to be safe for the environment? The answer to all of these questions is unfortunately a resounding NO. The artificial sweetener sucralose, which is sold under the name Splenda, is one of the up-and-coming "next generation" of high-intensity sugar substitutes. It is non-caloric and about 600 times sweeter than sucrose (white table sugar), although it can vary from 320 to 1,000 times sweeter, depending on the food application. The white

crystalline powder tastes like a lot like sugar, but is more intense in its sweetness.

HOW IT IS MANUFACTURED:

Sucralose is produced by chlorinating sugar (sucrose). This involves chemically changing the structure of the sugar molecules by substituting three chlorine atoms for three hydroxyl groups.

HISTORY:

Sucralose was discovered in 1976 by researchers working under the auspices of Tate & Lyle Ltd., a large British sugar refiner. In 1980, Tate & Lyle arranged with Johnson & Johnson, the world's largest health care company, to develop sucralose. Johnson & Johnson formed McNeil Specialty Products Company in 1980 to commercialize sucralose.

In 1991, Canada became the first nation to approve the use of sucralose. In April, 1998 the US Food and Drug Administration granted approval for sucralose to be used in a variety of food products (CLICK HERE for complete list of products using sucralose). Diet RC cola was the first US product with sucralose, introduced in May 1998. Sucralose is not yet approved for use in most European countries, where it is still under review.

SAFETY CONCERNS: Few human studies of safety have been published on sucralose. One small study of diabetic patients using the sweetener showed a statistically significant increase in glycosylated hemoglobin (Hba1C), which is a marker of long-term blood glucose levels and is used to assess glycemic control in diabetic patients. According to the FDA, "increases in glycosolation in hemoglobin imply lessening of control of diabetes.

Research in animals has shown that sucralose can cause many problems in rats, mice, and rabbits, such as:

v Shrunken thymus glands (up to 40% shrinkage)

v Enlarged liver and kidneys.

v Atrophy of lymph follicles in the spleen and thymus

v Increased cecal weight

v Reduced growth rate

v Decreased red blood cell count

v Hyperplasia of the pelvis

v Extension of the pregnancy period

v Aborted pregnancy

v Decreased fetal body weights and placental weights

v Diarrhea

According to one source (Sucralose Toxicity Information Center), concerning the significant reduction in size of the thymus gland, "the manufacturer claimed that the sucralose was unpleasant for the rodents to eat in large doses and that starvation 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 percent). The changes were much more marked in rats fed on sucralose. While the animals' growth rate was reduced by between 7 and 20 percent, their thymuses shrank by as much as 40 per-cent. (New Scientist 23 Nov 1991, pg 13)"

A compound chemically related to sucrose, 6-chloro-deoxyglucose, is known to have anti-fertility and neurotoxic effects, although animal studies of sucralose have not shown these effects. According to the FDA's "Final Rule" report, "Sucralose was weakly mutagenic in a mouse lymphoma mutation assay." The FDA also reported many other tests as having "inconclusive" results.

Just how few studies currently exist on sucralose is an issue. Endurance News provides the following table illustrating this fact:

Sweetener and of number studies*

Saccharin 2374 , Aspartame 598 , Cyclamates 459 , Acesulfame-K 28 , Sucralose 19

*NUMBER OF STUDIES DETERMINED BY MEDLINE SEARCH. In terms of safety, it is not just the original substance (sucralose) that one needs to worry about. As the FDA notes, "Because sucralose may hydrolyze in some food products...the resulting hydrolysis products may also be ingested by the consumer."

IS THERE ANY LONG-TERM HUMAN RESEARCH?

None. According to the Medical Letter on Drugs & Therapeutics, "Its long-term safety is unknown." According to the Sucralose Toxicity Information Center, the "Manufacturer's '100's of studies' (some of which show hazards) were clearly inadequate and do not demonstrate safety in long-term use."

IS SUCRALOSE ABSORBED OR METABOLIZED? Despite the manufacturer's claims to the contrary, sucralose is significantly absorbed and metabolized by the body. According to the FDA's "Final Rule" report, 11% to 27% of sucralose is absorbed in humans, and the rest is excreted unchanged in feces. According to the Japanese Food Sanitation Council, as much as 40% of ingested sucralose is absorbed. Plasma sucralose has been reported to have a half-life of anywhere from 2 to 5 hours in most studies, although the half-life in rabbits was found to be much longer at about 36 hours. About 20% to 30% of absorbed sucralose is metabolized. Both the metabolites and unchanged

absorbed sucralose are excreted in urine. The absorbed sucralose has been found to concentrate in the liver, kidney, and gastro-intestinal tract. According to The Sucralose Toxicity Information Center, sucralose is broken down "into small amounts of 1,6-dichlorofructose, a chemical which has not been adequately tested in humans."

CHLORINATED PESTICIDES: According to Consumers Research Magazine "Some concern was raised about sucralose being a chlorinated molecule. Some chlorinated molecules serve as the basis for pesticides such as D.D.T., and accumulate in body fat. However, Johnson & Johnson emphasized that sucralose passes through the body unabsorbed." Of course, this assertion about not being absorbed is complete nonsense. As shown above, a substantial amount of sucralose is absorbed, so the argument is not valid. According to the HAD, "The manufacturer claims that the chlorine added to sucralose is similar to the chlorine atom in the salt (NaCl) molecule. That is not the

case. Sucralose may be more like ingesting tiny amounts of chlorinated pesticides, but we will never know without long-term, independent human research."

CONTAMINANTS: The FDA acknowledges that sucralose "is produced at an approximate purity of 98%." While that may sound pretty pure, just what is in that other 2%? It turns out that the final sucralose product contains small amounts of potentially dangerous substances such as:

v Heavy Metals (e.g., Lead)

v Arsenic

v Triphenilphosphine Oxide

v Methanol

v Chlorinated Disaccharides

v Chlorinated Monosaccharide

Although manufacturing guidelines do specify limits on these substances there is no guarantee that such limits will always be met.

ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS

Despite the fact that a portion of sucralose is metabolized into some chemicals of questionable safety, a majority of the consumed sucralose is excreted unchanged in the feces and urine. While that may be good for the person using the product, it may not be so great for the environment. Although sucralose is being flushed down toilets wherever sucralose is approved for sale, what happens to it next is simply a matter for speculation. I know of no studies showing what happens to the chemical when the raw sewage is treated and then released back into the environment.

o Does it remain stabile or react with other substances to form new compounds?

o Is the sucralose or any resulting chemicals safe for the environment?

o How will this chemical affect aquatic life such as fish, as well as other animals?

o Will sucralose begin to appear in our water supplies, as some drugs are beginning to be found.

Of course, we will likely not know the answers to these questions for many years, if at all. One of the main reasons for this is that 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." One study did find that sucralose is metabolized by microorganisms in both the water and soil (Labare 94). However, the ecological impact of this new chemical being introduced into the environment is unknown.

IS THERE A BENEFIT FOR CONSUMERS?

According to Consumers' Research Magazine, sucralose provides some benefits for the corporations making and using it, but not for consumers. They state: But are such foods truly beneficial and desirable? Diabetics, weight watchers, and the general public might make better food choices by selecting basic, rather than highly processed foods; for example, apples, rather than turnovers; or plain, rather than sweetened, dairy foods. They note that non-caloric artificial sweeteners are not replacing, but rather supplementing conventional sweeteners. They note that as of 1990 Americans were consuming an average of 20 pounds (sugar sweetness equivalency) of artificial sweeteners, and as consumption of sugar-substitutes has risen so too has consumption of sugar.

 

Does Sucralose Help with Weight Loss? According to Consumers' Research Magazine "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."

WHERE IS SUCRALOSE FOUND? In the United States, the FDA has granted approval for the use of sucralose in 15 food and beverage categories:

Baked goods and baking mixes

Chewing gum

Confections and frostings

Fats and oils (salad dressings)

Fruit and water ices

Jams and jellies

Processed fruits and fruit juices

Sweet sauces, toppings and syrups

Beverages and beverage bases

Coffee and tea

Dairy product analogs

Frozen dairy desserts and mixes

Gelatins, puddings and fillings

Milk products

Sugar substitutes

(More information can be found on the website via a direct link at several points in this article)

Its promoters cite several benefits over other sweeteners, such as:

o Unlike saccharin, sucralose leaves no bitter aftertaste.

o Unlike other artificial sweeteners, it remains stable at high temperatures.

o Unlike sugar, it does not raise blood glucose levels

As a comparison to sucralose's 600-fold sweetness increase over sugar, consider the other artificial sweeteners on the market:

o Saccharin (Sweet-and -Low) - 300 to 500 times sweeter

o Aspartame (NutraSweet and Equal) - 150 to 200 times sweeter

o Acesulfame K (Sunette) - 200 times sweeter.

BIG BUSINESS: A 1998 report in Chemical Week states that the high-intensity sweetener market is about $1.5-billion/year. About 70%-80% of that market is made up of soft drink sweeteners, of which aspartame has a near monopoly. They note that although sucralose is 50% sweeter than aspartame, it will be difficult to persuade many soft drink producers to give up NutraSweet (aspartame) since it is widely accepted by consumers.

Is Anyone Monitoring Post-Approval Reactions? Apparently not. With no established system for monitoring and tracking post-approval adverse effects, how can it ever be established whether large-scale and long-term consumption of sucralose is safe?

TECHNICAL INFORMATION: Sucralose is made from sucrose by substituting three chlorine atoms for three hydroxyl groups to yield 1,6-dichloro-1,6-dideoxy-BETA-D-fructofuranosyl-4-chloro-4-deoxy-alpha-D-galactopyranoside. This is accomplished in a five-step process. Prolonged storage, particularly at high temperatures and low pH, causes the sucralose to break down into 4-chloro-4-deoxy-galactose (4CG) and 1,6-dichloro-1,6-dideoxyfructose (1,6 DCF), The Chemical Abstracts Service Registry number (CAS Reg. No.) for sucralose is 56038-13-2.

 

Pre-approval tests indicated potential toxicity of sucralose. There are no *independent* controlled human studies on sucralose (similar to 15 years ago for aspartame).

There are no long-term (12-24 months) human studies of sucralose's effects.

There is no monitoring of health effects. It took government agencies decades to agree that there were countless thousands of deaths from tobacco. Why? Simply because there had been no monitoring or epidemiological studies. Without such monitoring and studies, huge effects can easily go unnoticed.

DO PRODUCTS WITH SUCRALOSE CARRY ANY WARNING LABELS OR INFORMATION STATEMENTS?

No. The regulatory agencies and scientific review bodies that have endorsed the safety of sucralose have not required any warning information to be placed on the labels of products sweetened with sucralose.

CONCLUSIONS

The Sucralose Toxicity Information Center concludes that: While it is unlikely that sucralose is as toxic as the poisoning people are experiencing from Monsantos 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. THE CONSUMER'S RESEARCH MAGAZINE CONCLUDES THAT: As Americans continue to choose ever-increasing amounts of such foods and beverages, sweeteners may soar to higher consumption levels. The long-range health effects from such escalation need careful evaluation. Do additional approved sweetening agents truly contribute to good health? Do they really meet special dietary needs? Or, do they merely

further encourage poor dietary choices?

FOUR RECENT EXAMPLES OF WHAT SPLENDA CAN DO TO YOU

Dear Dr. Marcela, I wanted to thank you for posting your article regarding sucralose, and to inform you of my reaction to eating it today. I bought a low-carb bar called "Ultimate Lo Carb" by Biochem at a local health food store. I have been eating foods low in starchy carbs and thought this might be a good snack bar. Well, almost immediately after eating it I became nauseous. Then my stomach starting cramping and I began dry heaving. I wondered what could have caused this and decided to try and read the label. The only ingredient I did not recognize was "sucralose".

So, I jumped on the Internet and did a search for it and found your article. In the meantime I was heaving and feeling even worse. Well, I am allergic to chlorine, as well as having a liver that doesn't function very well (I take a natural supplement called "Lipogen" for liver support as prescribed by my ND), and when I saw what you had to say about sucralose, I figured that was what was causing it.

I kept feeling worse, and I decided I needed to get it out of my system and took some ipecac (maybe not the best move, but the only thing I could think of). By the time the syrup got into my stomach the heaving was getting worse and intestinal distress was setting in. It was like eating bad seafood. I nearly died of food poisoning by crab legs a number of years back, and this was the closest thing to that feeling.

Finally everything in my system started coming out, and my body didn't stop until my entire digestive tract was cleared out. I have never reacted this violently to anything I have eaten except for when I have had food poisoning. Something needs to be done to get this product off the market.

I can't help but be convinced that the FDA takes payoffs. No ethical person could approve the use of things like MSG (another thing I cannot tolerate eating), which is classified by the FDA as an excito-toxin and is known to be harmful to the central nervous system. I will do everything to get people to read your article and get the word out on the FDA's latest blunder. Best, Shelley Flis

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dear Dr. Mercola: THANK YOU so much for your informative site! I am currently "detoxing" from using sucralose after a terrible reaction. It all began with purchasing a box of Splenda. The changes (in my opinion) were subtle. However, my family and friends noticed immediately. I became withdrawn and disinterested in my usual hobbies. Everything became a "chore." I was tired during the day, but couldn't sleep at night either. I play flute which requires a quick mental process and fingering skills to match but suddenly I was struggling to play. Typing is difficult, as well. During the past three weeks I noticed myself "zoning out." I'd become forgetful and moody. I thought perhaps it was the Splenda, because that was the only thing

different in my daily habits. I quickly dismissed the thought - despite having experienced a similar situation with Equal a few years back. I called it "Jekyll v. Hyde Syndrome." But it seemed I noticed the changes much quicker with Equal than with Splenda.

I really suffered yesterday. I was an emotional wreck. I cried and cried. I felt like I was losing my mind. My husband and son discussed my disturbing behavior while I was in the shower. Our son, Tim, recalled that the changes began with that little yellow box. Steve, (my husband,) mentioned it to me. Little by little, things fell into place, including the unexplainable accident I recently had in our truck. I had just stopped at a stop sign and the trooper said that I couldn't have been going over 15 miles an hour when I nearly rolled our truck. Even he said that I narrowly escaped injury. I nearly had a second accident last week.

My senses had become SO dulled, I could barely function. I could not focus on anything. Even playing my flute was so hard. I normally stand to play, but for the past two weeks at practice, I sat a lot. I felt "dazed." This morning, I feel MUCH better than I have in the recent weeks. Not quite "nor-mal," but much better. Even the acne (on my otherwise clear skin) is fading away. Yep! I had a patch of acne, which appeared when I began using Splenda!

How many people are suffering from what appears to be diseases - or even acne, when it is simply a reaction to a chemical they are ingesting? If companies were forced to list the ingredients of these products, such as arsenic, they'd sure be a lot more careful! I mean, who would intentionally poison themselves?

Sincerely, Debby Fazekas

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dear Dr. Mercola: Four years ago I began to have panic attacks and was on BuSpar for about a year. I started reading about aspartame and consumed the product daily -- mostly in diet drinks and was a big consumer of Diet Rite. After learning about problems other people were having I quit completely consuming the stuff. And have been panic free for 3 years. In December I started using Splenda and at the same time started having a great deal of anxiety and had a couple of panic attacks but didn't think about the link of Splenda and the anxiety until about a week ago. I also had my mom visiting and introduced her to Splenda--guess what-- she started having panic attacks during her visit and actually cut her visit short due to her feeling

bad.

I haven't consumed anymore of it for a week but am still having problems. Oh, I also was having an irregular heart beat which I did see my doctor about. He assured me that my blood pressure was excellent and cholesterol also good and I shouldn't worry about my heart. I consume very little to no caffeine. Local doctors don't put much faith in the idea that Nutra Sweet caused problems. I'm sure my new theory about Splenda would carry even less weight. By the way, I have a very stress-free life-style. I run my own little business and set my own hours. I don't believe my environment is causing any irregular stress. Sue

Dear Dr. Mercola: I found this website while researching the new sweetener SPLENDA, a sweetener included in the DIET ICE BOTANICALS drink made by Talking Rain Beverage Co., Preston WA. 98050 Ph. 1-800-734-0748, WWW.TALINGRAIN.COM, currently sold at SAMS warehouse club.

The shocking thing I read at the end of your article on this is the Food Poisoning like symptoms. I've probably drank about 30 -16oz bottles of the stuff, which supposedly contains St, Johns Wort, Kava-Kava, and Ginseng, among other "good" things for you. My son has been sneaking a few bottles to past Mom, despite my apprehension. We both came down with a similar food poisoning which lasted nearly 10 days for him, and is going on day 3 for me, and I'm throwing the stuff out today. Thanks for your information, x6rj

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dear Dr. Mercola: Thank you so much for your webpage. I recently drank my first bottle of Virgin Diet Cola, and experienced a mind-numbing headache. I was literally seeing spots. I read the label, thinking there must be something crazy in the cola. The one ingredient I didn't recognize was "Sucralose." My husband, a doctor, said he'd never heard of the ingredient either. After having read your site, I've cleaned my cupboards of Pure Protein bars, which I had no idea contained this deadly chemical, and, needless to say, will NOT be purchasing any of the other products you've listed. Thank you for your thorough research and intelligent, accessible data. Best -- Megyn Cotner

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Mercola's Comment: Don't let these large corps fool you. There is no magic alternative to sugar when it comes to sweeteners. You simply cannot have your cake and eat it too when it comes to this. It is far too early to tell, as not enough people have consumed this product to observe large numbers of adverse effects. However, I have had a number of patients who have had some severe migraines and even seizures possibly from consuming this product. My advice? AVOID Sucralose!! I am fond of telling people that if something tastes sweet you probably should spit it out as it is not likely to be to good for you. This of course, is a humorous exaggeration, but for most people who struggle with

chronic illness, it is likely to be a helpful guide. PLEASE note this article is being written in 2000. This is one of the first comprehensive clear investigative reports and warnings on sucralose on the Internet.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - Source: http://www.mercola.com/2000/dec/3/sucralose_dangers.htm.

Get information like this in every issue of the Sunshine Journal.

Click here for more information on the Sunshine Journal

 

Jose and Diana <joseanddiana wrote:

 

Nutrition Month - How healthy is your sweetener?Americans consume about 20 teaspoons of sugar daily, not including what is found naturally in foods like fruit, milk and beans. Sugar itself is considered safe, and its caloric contribution may be small when used in moderation, but it can play a role in obesity and dental problems if abused. Some alternatives to white sugar include:

 

Stevia. This plant-derived sweetener is noncaloric and can be used in baking or cooking, but needs to be diluted before using. I occasionally recommend it for diabetics and those who can't tolerate sugar.

Honey. While it has some antioxidant properties, honey is not necessarily healthier than white sugar, mainly because it can stick to teeth and contribute to cavity formation. However, honey does have more fructose than sugar, which causes less stress to the pancreas.

Splenda (sucralose). This artificial sweetener is 600 times sweeter than sugar. It is not all-natural, being derived only in part from sugar, and while it is FDA approved and appears safe, it has not proven itself to be beneficial in losing weight.

Aspartame and Saccharine. These artificial sweeteners are found in some foods and are available to add to drinks and some foods. I do not recommend either of these - if you want to cut calories or are diabetic, I suggest stevia or sucralose instead.

You may also want to try fruit juice as a sweetener, especially when cooking or baking. Keep in mind, however, that if you've been using sugar appropriately, there is no reason to reach for artificial substitutes.

 

 

 

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public".

 

 

 

Theodore Roosevelt

 

 

 

 

 

"Coco", CLNMT, Aromatherapist, Herbalist Consultant

 

Leesburg (Orlando), FL

 

www.webnat.com

 

 

 

Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less.

"Coco", CLNMT, Aromatherapist, Herbalist Consultant

Leesburg (Orlando), FL

www.webnat.comDo You ?

[Guest guest]

NorthernDoe <leisa wrote:

 

 

 

Excellent send!!!!

 

 

NorthernDoe / Leisa

 

Northwoods Knits

 

NorthernDoe

 

 

 

 

Lorena [herbalistlady] Sunday, March 20, 2005 7:09 PM Subject: Re: Nutrition Month - How healthy is your sweetener?

 

 

Splenda - Sucralose

Posted By: Georgiana Duncan <GeorgianaDuncanDate:

Wednesday, 1 May 2002, at 9:46 a.m.

SPLENDA INFORMATION

THE POTENTIAL DANGERS OF SUCRALOSE:

There's a new artificial sweetener on the block and it is already in a wide range of products. Some even sold in health food stores and manufactured by nutritionally-oriented companies. But is it proven safe? Does it provide any benefit to the public? Does it help with weight loss? Are there any long term human studies? Has it been shown to be safe for the environment? The answer to all of these questions is unfortunately a resounding NO. The artificial sweetener sucralose, which is sold under the name Splenda, is one of the up-and-coming "next generation" of high-intensity sugar substitutes. It is non-caloric and about 600 times sweeter than sucrose (white table sugar), although it can vary from 320 to 1,000 times sweeter, depending on the food application. The white

crystalline powder tastes like a lot like sugar, but is more intense in its sweetness.

HOW IT IS MANUFACTURED:

Sucralose is produced by chlorinating sugar (sucrose). This involves chemically changing the structure of the sugar molecules by substituting three chlorine atoms for three hydroxyl groups.

HISTORY:

Sucralose was discovered in 1976 by researchers working under the auspices of Tate & Lyle Ltd., a large British sugar refiner. In 1980, Tate & Lyle arranged with Johnson & Johnson, the world's largest health care company, to develop sucralose. Johnson & Johnson formed McNeil Specialty Products Company in 1980 to commercialize sucralose.

In 1991, Canada became the first nation to approve the use of sucralose. In April, 1998 the US Food and Drug Administration granted approval for sucralose to be used in a variety of food products (CLICK HERE for complete list of products using sucralose). Diet RC cola was the first US product with sucralose, introduced in May 1998. Sucralose is not yet approved for use in most European countries, where it is still under review.

SAFETY CONCERNS: Few human studies of safety have been published on sucralose. One small study of diabetic patients using the sweetener showed a statistically significant increase in glycosylated hemoglobin (Hba1C), which is a marker of long-term blood glucose levels and is used to assess glycemic control in diabetic patients. According to the FDA, "increases in glycosolation in hemoglobin imply lessening of control of diabetes.

Research in animals has shown that sucralose can cause many problems in rats, mice, and rabbits, such as:

v Shrunken thymus glands (up to 40% shrinkage)

v Enlarged liver and kidneys.

v Atrophy of lymph follicles in the spleen and thymus

v Increased cecal weight

v Reduced growth rate

v Decreased red blood cell count

v Hyperplasia of the pelvis

v Extension of the pregnancy period

v Aborted pregnancy

v Decreased fetal body weights and placental weights

v Diarrhea

According to one source (Sucralose Toxicity Information Center), concerning the significant reduction in size of the thymus gland, "the manufacturer claimed that the sucralose was unpleasant for the rodents to eat in large doses and that starvation 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 percent). The changes were much more marked in rats fed on sucralose. While the animals' growth rate was reduced by between 7 and 20 percent, their thymuses shrank by as much as 40 per-cent. (New Scientist 23 Nov 1991, pg 13)"

A compound chemically related to sucrose, 6-chloro-deoxyglucose, is known to have anti-fertility and neurotoxic effects, although animal studies of sucralose have not shown these effects. According to the FDA's "Final Rule" report, "Sucralose was weakly mutagenic in a mouse lymphoma mutation assay." The FDA also reported many other tests as having "inconclusive" results.

Just how few studies currently exist on sucralose is an issue. Endurance News provides the following table illustrating this fact:

Sweetener and of number studies*

Saccharin 2374 , Aspartame 598 , Cyclamates 459 , Acesulfame-K 28 , Sucralose 19

*NUMBER OF STUDIES DETERMINED BY MEDLINE SEARCH. In terms of safety, it is not just the original substance (sucralose) that one needs to worry about. As the FDA notes, "Because sucralose may hydrolyze in some food products...the resulting hydrolysis products may also be ingested by the consumer."

IS THERE ANY LONG-TERM HUMAN RESEARCH?

None. According to the Medical Letter on Drugs & Therapeutics, "Its long-term safety is unknown." According to the Sucralose Toxicity Information Center, the "Manufacturer's '100's of studies' (some of which show hazards) were clearly inadequate and do not demonstrate safety in long-term use."

IS SUCRALOSE ABSORBED OR METABOLIZED? Despite the manufacturer's claims to the contrary, sucralose is significantly absorbed and metabolized by the body. According to the FDA's "Final Rule" report, 11% to 27% of sucralose is absorbed in humans, and the rest is excreted unchanged in feces. According to the Japanese Food Sanitation Council, as much as 40% of ingested sucralose is absorbed. Plasma sucralose has been reported to have a half-life of anywhere from 2 to 5 hours in most studies, although the half-life in rabbits was found to be much longer at about 36 hours. About 20% to 30% of absorbed sucralose is metabolized. Both the metabolites and unchanged

absorbed sucralose are excreted in urine. The absorbed sucralose has been found to concentrate in the liver, kidney, and gastro-intestinal tract. According to The Sucralose Toxicity Information Center, sucralose is broken down "into small amounts of 1,6-dichlorofructose, a chemical which has not been adequately tested in humans."

CHLORINATED PESTICIDES: According to Consumers Research Magazine "Some concern was raised about sucralose being a chlorinated molecule. Some chlorinated molecules serve as the basis for pesticides such as D.D.T., and accumulate in body fat. However, Johnson & Johnson emphasized that sucralose passes through the body unabsorbed." Of course, this assertion about not being absorbed is complete nonsense. As shown above, a substantial amount of sucralose is absorbed, so the argument is not valid. According to the HAD, "The manufacturer claims that the chlorine added to sucralose is similar to the chlorine atom in the salt (NaCl) molecule. That is not the

case. Sucralose may be more like ingesting tiny amounts of chlorinated pesticides, but we will never know without long-term, independent human research."

CONTAMINANTS: The FDA acknowledges that sucralose "is produced at an approximate purity of 98%." While that may sound pretty pure, just what is in that other 2%? It turns out that the final sucralose product contains small amounts of potentially dangerous substances such as:

v Heavy Metals (e.g., Lead)

v Arsenic

v Triphenilphosphine Oxide

v Methanol

v Chlorinated Disaccharides

v Chlorinated Monosaccharide

Although manufacturing guidelines do specify limits on these substances there is no guarantee that such limits will always be met.

ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS

Despite the fact that a portion of sucralose is metabolized into some chemicals of questionable safety, a majority of the consumed sucralose is excreted unchanged in the feces and urine. While that may be good for the person using the product, it may not be so great for the environment. Although sucralose is being flushed down toilets wherever sucralose is approved for sale, what happens to it next is simply a matter for speculation. I know of no studies showing what happens to the chemical when the raw sewage is treated and then released back into the environment.

o Does it remain stabile or react with other substances to form new compounds?

o Is the sucralose or any resulting chemicals safe for the environment?

o How will this chemical affect aquatic life such as fish, as well as other animals?

o Will sucralose begin to appear in our water supplies, as some drugs are beginning to be found.

Of course, we will likely not know the answers to these questions for many years, if at all. One of the main reasons for this is that 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." One study did find that sucralose is metabolized by microorganisms in both the water and soil (Labare 94). However, the ecological impact of this new chemical being introduced into the environment is unknown.

IS THERE A BENEFIT FOR CONSUMERS?

According to Consumers' Research Magazine, sucralose provides some benefits for the corporations making and using it, but not for consumers. They state: But are such foods truly beneficial and desirable? Diabetics, weight watchers, and the general public might make better food choices by selecting basic, rather than highly processed foods; for example, apples, rather than turnovers; or plain, rather than sweetened, dairy foods. They note that non-caloric artificial sweeteners are not replacing, but rather supplementing conventional sweeteners. They note that as of 1990 Americans were consuming an average of 20 pounds (sugar sweetness equivalency) of artificial sweeteners, and as consumption of sugar-substitutes has risen so too has consumption of sugar.

 

Does Sucralose Help with Weight Loss? According to Consumers' Research Magazine "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."

WHERE IS SUCRALOSE FOUND? In the United States, the FDA has granted approval for the use of sucralose in 15 food and beverage categories:

Baked goods and baking mixes

Chewing gum

Confections and frostings

Fats and oils (salad dressings)

Fruit and water ices

Jams and jellies

Processed fruits and fruit juices

Sweet sauces, toppings and syrups

Beverages and beverage bases

Coffee and tea

Dairy product analogs

Frozen dairy desserts and mixes

Gelatins, puddings and fillings

Milk products

Sugar substitutes

(More information can be found on the website via a direct link at several points in this article)

Its promoters cite several benefits over other sweeteners, such as:

o Unlike saccharin, sucralose leaves no bitter aftertaste.

o Unlike other artificial sweeteners, it remains stable at high temperatures.

o Unlike sugar, it does not raise blood glucose levels

As a comparison to sucralose's 600-fold sweetness increase over sugar, consider the other artificial sweeteners on the market:

o Saccharin (Sweet-and -Low) - 300 to 500 times sweeter

o Aspartame (NutraSweet and Equal) - 150 to 200 times sweeter

o Acesulfame K (Sunette) - 200 times sweeter.

BIG BUSINESS: A 1998 report in Chemical Week states that the high-intensity sweetener market is about $1.5-billion/year. About 70%-80% of that market is made up of soft drink sweeteners, of which aspartame has a near monopoly. They note that although sucralose is 50% sweeter than aspartame, it will be difficult to persuade many soft drink producers to give up NutraSweet (aspartame) since it is widely accepted by consumers.

Is Anyone Monitoring Post-Approval Reactions? Apparently not. With no established system for monitoring and tracking post-approval adverse effects, how can it ever be established whether large-scale and long-term consumption of sucralose is safe?

TECHNICAL INFORMATION: Sucralose is made from sucrose by substituting three chlorine atoms for three hydroxyl groups to yield 1,6-dichloro-1,6-dideoxy-BETA-D-fructofuranosyl-4-chloro-4-deoxy-alpha-D-galactopyranoside. This is accomplished in a five-step process. Prolonged storage, particularly at high temperatures and low pH, causes the sucralose to break down into 4-chloro-4-deoxy-galactose (4CG) and 1,6-dichloro-1,6-dideoxyfructose (1,6 DCF), The Chemical Abstracts Service Registry number (CAS Reg. No.) for sucralose is 56038-13-2.

 

Pre-approval tests indicated potential toxicity of sucralose. There are no *independent* controlled human studies on sucralose (similar to 15 years ago for aspartame).

There are no long-term (12-24 months) human studies of sucralose's effects.

There is no monitoring of health effects. It took government agencies decades to agree that there were countless thousands of deaths from tobacco. Why? Simply because there had been no monitoring or epidemiological studies. Without such monitoring and studies, huge effects can easily go unnoticed.

DO PRODUCTS WITH SUCRALOSE CARRY ANY WARNING LABELS OR INFORMATION STATEMENTS?

No. The regulatory agencies and scientific review bodies that have endorsed the safety of sucralose have not required any warning information to be placed on the labels of products sweetened with sucralose.

CONCLUSIONS

The Sucralose Toxicity Information Center concludes that: While it is unlikely that sucralose is as toxic as the poisoning people are experiencing from Monsantos 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. THE CONSUMER'S RESEARCH MAGAZINE CONCLUDES THAT: As Americans continue to choose ever-increasing amounts of such foods and beverages, sweeteners may soar to higher consumption levels. The long-range health effects from such escalation need careful evaluation. Do additional approved sweetening agents truly contribute to good health? Do they really meet special dietary needs? Or, do they merely

further encourage poor dietary choices?

FOUR RECENT EXAMPLES OF WHAT SPLENDA CAN DO TO YOU

Dear Dr. Marcela, I wanted to thank you for posting your article regarding sucralose, and to inform you of my reaction to eating it today. I bought a low-carb bar called "Ultimate Lo Carb" by Biochem at a local health food store. I have been eating foods low in starchy carbs and thought this might be a good snack bar. Well, almost immediately after eating it I became nauseous. Then my stomach starting cramping and I began dry heaving. I wondered what could have caused this and decided to try and read the label. The only ingredient I did not recognize was "sucralose".

So, I jumped on the Internet and did a search for it and found your article. In the meantime I was heaving and feeling even worse. Well, I am allergic to chlorine, as well as having a liver that doesn't function very well (I take a natural supplement called "Lipogen" for liver support as prescribed by my ND), and when I saw what you had to say about sucralose, I figured that was what was causing it.

I kept feeling worse, and I decided I needed to get it out of my system and took some ipecac (maybe not the best move, but the only thing I could think of). By the time the syrup got into my stomach the heaving was getting worse and intestinal distress was setting in. It was like eating bad seafood. I nearly died of food poisoning by crab legs a number of years back, and this was the closest thing to that feeling.

Finally everything in my system started coming out, and my body didn't stop until my entire digestive tract was cleared out. I have never reacted this violently to anything I have eaten except for when I have had food poisoning. Something needs to be done to get this product off the market.

I can't help but be convinced that the FDA takes payoffs. No ethical person could approve the use of things like MSG (another thing I cannot tolerate eating), which is classified by the FDA as an excito-toxin and is known to be harmful to the central nervous system. I will do everything to get people to read your article and get the word out on the FDA's latest blunder. Best, Shelley Flis

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dear Dr. Mercola: THANK YOU so much for your informative site! I am currently "detoxing" from using sucralose after a terrible reaction. It all began with purchasing a box of Splenda. The changes (in my opinion) were subtle. However, my family and friends noticed immediately. I became withdrawn and disinterested in my usual hobbies. Everything became a "chore." I was tired during the day, but couldn't sleep at night either. I play flute which requires a quick mental process and fingering skills to match but suddenly I was struggling to play. Typing is difficult, as well. During the past three weeks I noticed myself "zoning out." I'd become forgetful and moody. I thought perhaps it was the Splenda, because that was the only thing

different in my daily habits. I quickly dismissed the thought - despite having experienced a similar situation with Equal a few years back. I called it "Jekyll v. Hyde Syndrome." But it seemed I noticed the changes much quicker with Equal than with Splenda.

I really suffered yesterday. I was an emotional wreck. I cried and cried. I felt like I was losing my mind. My husband and son discussed my disturbing behavior while I was in the shower. Our son, Tim, recalled that the changes began with that little yellow box. Steve, (my husband,) mentioned it to me. Little by little, things fell into place, including the unexplainable accident I recently had in our truck. I had just stopped at a stop sign and the trooper said that I couldn't have been going over 15 miles an hour when I nearly rolled our truck. Even he said that I narrowly escaped injury. I nearly had a second accident last week.

My senses had become SO dulled, I could barely function. I could not focus on anything. Even playing my flute was so hard. I normally stand to play, but for the past two weeks at practice, I sat a lot. I felt "dazed." This morning, I feel MUCH better than I have in the recent weeks. Not quite "nor-mal," but much better. Even the acne (on my otherwise clear skin) is fading away. Yep! I had a patch of acne, which appeared when I began using Splenda!

How many people are suffering from what appears to be diseases - or even acne, when it is simply a reaction to a chemical they are ingesting? If companies were forced to list the ingredients of these products, such as arsenic, they'd sure be a lot more careful! I mean, who would intentionally poison themselves?

Sincerely, Debby Fazekas

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dear Dr. Mercola: Four years ago I began to have panic attacks and was on BuSpar for about a year. I started reading about aspartame and consumed the product daily -- mostly in diet drinks and was a big consumer of Diet Rite. After learning about problems other people were having I quit completely consuming the stuff. And have been panic free for 3 years. In December I started using Splenda and at the same time started having a great deal of anxiety and had a couple of panic attacks but didn't think about the link of Splenda and the anxiety until about a week ago. I also had my mom visiting and introduced her to Splenda--guess what-- she started having panic attacks during her visit and actually cut her visit short due to her feeling

bad.

I haven't consumed anymore of it for a week but am still having problems. Oh, I also was having an irregular heart beat which I did see my doctor about. He assured me that my blood pressure was excellent and cholesterol also good and I shouldn't worry about my heart. I consume very little to no caffeine. Local doctors don't put much faith in the idea that Nutra Sweet caused problems. I'm sure my new theory about Splenda would carry even less weight. By the way, I have a very stress-free life-style. I run my own little business and set my own hours. I don't believe my environment is causing any irregular stress. Sue

Dear Dr. Mercola: I found this website while researching the new sweetener SPLENDA, a sweetener included in the DIET ICE BOTANICALS drink made by Talking Rain Beverage Co., Preston WA. 98050 Ph. 1-800-734-0748, WWW.TALINGRAIN.COM, currently sold at SAMS warehouse club.

The shocking thing I read at the end of your article on this is the Food Poisoning like symptoms. I've probably drank about 30 -16oz bottles of the stuff, which supposedly contains St, Johns Wort, Kava-Kava, and Ginseng, among other "good" things for you. My son has been sneaking a few bottles to past Mom, despite my apprehension. We both came down with a similar food poisoning which lasted nearly 10 days for him, and is going on day 3 for me, and I'm throwing the stuff out today. Thanks for your information, x6rj

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dear Dr. Mercola: Thank you so much for your webpage. I recently drank my first bottle of Virgin Diet Cola, and experienced a mind-numbing headache. I was literally seeing spots. I read the label, thinking there must be something crazy in the cola. The one ingredient I didn't recognize was "Sucralose." My husband, a doctor, said he'd never heard of the ingredient either. After having read your site, I've cleaned my cupboards of Pure Protein bars, which I had no idea contained this deadly chemical, and, needless to say, will NOT be purchasing any of the other products you've listed. Thank you for your thorough research and intelligent, accessible data. Best -- Megyn Cotner

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Mercola's Comment: Don't let these large corps fool you. There is no magic alternative to sugar when it comes to sweeteners. You simply cannot have your cake and eat it too when it comes to this. It is far too early to tell, as not enough people have consumed this product to observe large numbers of adverse effects. However, I have had a number of patients who have had some severe migraines and even seizures possibly from consuming this product. My advice? AVOID Sucralose!! I am fond of telling people that if something tastes sweet you probably should spit it out as it is not likely to be to good for you. This of course, is a humorous exaggeration, but for most people who struggle with

chronic illness, it is likely to be a helpful guide. PLEASE note this article is being written in 2000. This is one of the first comprehensive clear investigative reports and warnings on sucralose on the Internet.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - Source: http://www.mercola.com/2000/dec/3/sucralose_dangers.htm.

Get information like this in every issue of the Sunshine Journal.

Click here for more information on the Sunshine Journal

 

Jose and Diana <joseanddiana wrote:

 

Nutrition Month - How healthy is your sweetener?Americans consume about 20 teaspoons of sugar daily, not including what is found naturally in foods like fruit, milk and beans. Sugar itself is considered safe, and its caloric contribution may be small when used in moderation, but it can play a role in obesity and dental problems if abused. Some alternatives to white sugar include:

 

Stevia. This plant-derived sweetener is noncaloric and can be used in baking or cooking, but needs to be diluted before using. I occasionally recommend it for diabetics and those who can't tolerate sugar.

Honey. While it has some antioxidant properties, honey is not necessarily healthier than white sugar, mainly because it can stick to teeth and contribute to cavity formation. However, honey does have more fructose than sugar, which causes less stress to the pancreas.

Splenda (sucralose). This artificial sweetener is 600 times sweeter than sugar. It is not all-natural, being derived only in part from sugar, and while it is FDA approved and appears safe, it has not proven itself to be beneficial in losing weight.

Aspartame and Saccharine. These artificial sweeteners are found in some foods and are available to add to drinks and some foods. I do not recommend either of these - if you want to cut calories or are diabetic, I suggest stevia or sucralose instead.

You may also want to try fruit juice as a sweetener, especially when cooking or baking. Keep in mind, however, that if you've been using sugar appropriately, there is no reason to reach for artificial substitutes.

 

 

 

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public".

 

 

 

Theodore Roosevelt

 

 

 

 

 

"Coco", CLNMT, Aromatherapist, Herbalist Consultant

 

Leesburg (Orlando), FL

 

www.webnat.com

 

 

 

Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less.

"Coco", CLNMT, Aromatherapist, Herbalist Consultant

Leesburg (Orlando), FL

www.webnat.com

[Guest guest]

these are cool.

thanks

anyway, who would actually eat this stuff? It tastes god-awful and

not like sugar at all...

 

Diana

 

 

 

, Lorena <herbalistlady>

wrote:

> http://www.holisticmed.com/splenda/

>

> http://www.holisticmed.com/aspartame/

>

>

http://www.splenda.com/page.jhtml;jsessionid=DXYOWFVL1THO0CQPCCFSUYYKB

2IIQNSC?id=splenda/products/prodinfo.inc

>

> Search engine searches for splenda, aspartame (nutrasweet)

>

>

> Diana <joseanddiana@g...> wrote:

>

> Actually, if you were to read the article, he lists aspartame and

> saccharine as artificial sweeteners.

> I agree with you on the splenda, but instead of replying in this

> manner, can you find a document that supports your opinion?

>

> Thanks,

>

> Diana

>

> , " Marie " <wakerens>

wrote:

> >

> > Splenda, Aspertame, and Saccharine are not natural! They are

> > unhealthy, and cause problems more so than they help; hence

warning

> > label on side of things with Nutra sweet like sweetners.

> >

> > Now you want a natural sweetner that is said to not elevate sugar

> > levels in diabetic research Maple Sugar! I have herd Maple sugar

> > don't elevate blood sugar levels. This is a good thing if you

keep it

> > to moderations. Another to search is Birch Sugar (found by its

> > scientific name).

> >

> > Stevia, honey, Pure cane sugar, and some others are all they will

> > carry in a Health food store, and most homeopathic and herbalist

> > councilors wouldn't suggest using Splenda nor Aspertame. Those

two

> > products are under tested, man made products, and are something

we

> > need to becareful of.

> > We all need to learn moderation when it comes to sugar/sweetners

of

> > any sort and that will be healthy for our bodies!!

> >

> > These are my Opinions, and some facts I have herd on public news

> > station in my area! For more info call a health and wellness

> > councilor or Herbalist, or goto your local Health Food store and

ask

> > there opinions! Do some research on your sugar/sweetner!

> > I told yeah I have been try to change my lifestyle around!!

> > Gabby

> >

> >

> > , " Jose and Diana "

> > <joseanddiana@g...> wrote:

> > > Nutrition Month - How healthy is your sweetener?

> > >

> > > Americans consume about 20 teaspoons of sugar daily, not

including

> > what

> > > is found naturally in foods like fruit, milk and beans. Sugar

> > itself is

> > > considered safe, and its caloric contribution may be small when

> > used in

> > > moderation, but it can play a role in obesity and dental

problems if

> > > abused. Some alternatives to white sugar include:

> > >

> > > * Stevia. This plant-derived sweetener is noncaloric and

can be

> > > used in baking or cooking, but needs to be diluted before

using. I

> > > occasionally recommend it for diabetics and those who can't

tolerate

> > > sugar.

> > >

> > > * Honey. While it has some antioxidant properties, honey

is not

> > > necessarily healthier than white sugar, mainly because it can

stick

> > to

> > > teeth and contribute to cavity formation. However, honey does

have

> > more

> > > fructose than sugar, which causes less stress to the pancreas.

> > >

> > > * Splenda (sucralose). This artificial sweetener is 600

times

> > > sweeter than sugar. It is not all-natural, being derived only

in

> > part

> > > from sugar, and while it is FDA approved and appears safe, it

has

> > not

> > > proven itself to be beneficial in losing weight.

> > >

> > > * Aspartame and Saccharine. These artificial sweeteners

are

> > found

> > > in some foods and are available to add to drinks and some

foods. I

> > do

> > > not recommend either of these - if you want to cut calories or

are

> > > diabetic, I suggest stevia or sucralose instead.

> > >

> > > You may also want to try fruit juice as a sweetener, especially

when

> > > cooking or baking. Keep in mind, however, that if you've been

using

> > > sugar appropriately, there is no reason to reach for artificial

> > > substitutes.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > <>

> > >

> > > " To announce that there must be no criticism of the president,

or

> > that

> > > we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only

> > unpatriotic

> > > and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public " .

> > >

> > > Theodore Roosevelt

>

>

>

>

>