Guest guest Posted October 13, 2003 Report Share Posted October 13, 2003 Stevia is a herb and not man made and taste great... little too sweet for me at times... after i move and make my own soda's will just be using Stevia as a sweetener Greg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 13, 2003 Report Share Posted October 13, 2003 Stevia is not a sugar substitute. It is a completely different plant that just happens to be sweet. Leah [edwardsera] Sunday, October 12, 2003 7:34 AM To: herbal remedies [herbal remedies] Splenda Why is Splenda bad? Leah Greg, Dont you feel that sooner or later something bad about Stevia will be out too? Its like every sugar substitute is no good. Keep drinking your tea straight. Im gonna start doing that too. I got the creeps on what Splenda does to you. C. Federal Law requires that we warn you of the following: 1. Natural methods can sometimes backfire. 2. If you are pregnant, consult your physician before using any natural remedy. 3. The Constitution guarantees you the right to be your own physician and to prescribe for your own health. We are not medical doctors although MDs are welcome to post here as long as they behave themselves. Any opinions put forth by the list members are exactly that, and any person following the advice of anyone posting here does so at their own risk. It is up to you to educate yourself. By accepting advice or products from list members, you are agreeing to be fully responsible for your own health, and hold the List Owner and members free of any liability. Dr. Ian Shillington Doctor of Naturopathy Dr.IanShillington Your use of is subject to the Terms of Service. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 13, 2003 Report Share Posted October 13, 2003 Lee, Why not get the plant and use the leaves? Suzitvksi <leo wrote: i love stevia, but in this area it is hard to find the kind want so i bought some diabeticsweet and really like it...BUT.. talked to my pharmacist and he said since it is an alcohol derivitive ..or some such words... like wood alcohol.. that it digests into formaldahide.. so will have to find the stevia i want. i don't like the powders well as the clear liquid extract. i found some the other day.. finally.. but it isn't by the company i normally use but may try it. Stevia is an herb, but let's remember that it is man processed and so i am paticular who vouches for it.love.. granny lee.herbal remedies , greg@r... wrote:> Stevia is a herb and not man made and taste great... little too> sweet for me at times... after i move and> make my own soda's will just be using > Stevia as a sweetener > > Greg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 13, 2003 Report Share Posted October 13, 2003 http://www.splenda.com/page.jhtml?id=splenda/hcp/safety.inc The New with improved product search Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 14, 2003 Report Share Posted October 14, 2003 Splenda, also known as sucralose, is artificial sweetener which is a chlorinated sucrose derivative. Facts about this artificial chemical follows: Pre-Approval Research Pre-approval research showed that sucralose caused shrunken thymus glands (up to 40% shrinkage) and enlarged liver and kidneys. The manufacturer put forth two arguments in an attempt to claim that sucralose is not toxic: The dose of sucralose in the experiments was high. However, for chemicals that do not have generations of safe use, the dosage tested must be adjusted for variations in potential toxicity within the human population and between humans and rodents. In order to this, toxicologists estimate a variation of effects in the human population of 10 times. In other words, one person may not have effects until a dose of 10 mg per kg of body weight (10 mg/kg) is reached, while another person may have chronic toxicity effects at 1 mg per kg of body weight (1 mg/kg). In addition, it is well known that many chemicals are much more toxic in humans than in rodents (or even monkeys). For example, the chemicals that the sweetener aspartame breaks down into vary from 5 to 50 times more toxic in humans than in rodents. Therefore, toxicologists estimate a further 10 times the dose for differences between human and rodent toxicity for a total of 100 times (10 * 10). In order to estimate a potential safe dose in humans, one must divide the lowest dose in given to rodents that was seen to have any negative effects on their thymus glands, liver or kidneys by 100. That dose is then known as the maximum Tolerable Daily Intake (TDI) for lifetime use. Keep in mind that the TDI is just an estimate. Some chemicals are much more than 10 times more toxic in humans than in rodents (or will cause cancer in humans in low-dose, long-term exposure and do not cause cancer in rodents at all). A person ingesting the TDI for some chemical may find that it causes cancer or immune system or neurological problems after many years or decades of use. So, if the manufacturer claims that the dose was equivalent to 50 diet sodas, then the TDI would be one half (1/2) of a diet soda, and even that dose may or may not be safe. The manufacturer claimed that the sucralose was unpleasant for the rodents to eat in large doses. They said that starvation caused the shruken thymus glands. From the New Scientist (23 Nov 1991, pg 13): [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 percent. Recent Research A possible problem with caecal enlargement and renal mineralization has been seen in post approval animal research. Sucralose Breaks Down Despite the manufacturer's mis-statements, sucralose does break down into small amounts of 1,6-dichlorofructose, a chemical which has not been adequtely tested in humans. Independent, Long-Term Human Research None. Manufacturer's " 100's of studies " (some of which show hazards) were clearly inadequate and do not demonstrate safety in long-term use. Chlorinated Pesticides 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. Conclusion While it is unlikely that sucralose is as toxic as the poisoning people are experiencing from Monsanato's aspartame, it is clear from the hazards seen in pre-approval research and from its chemical structure that years or decades of use may contribute to serious chronic immunological or neurological disorders. Addendum (October 2, 2000) Ocassionally, persons emailing ask questions about sucralose research. What follows is a copy of a response one such question. The answer starts by summarizing the aspartame (NutraSweet) issue and then addresses the sucralose issue. Let me start by saying that, as you may know, there is a quickly growing body of evidence demonstrating the toxicity of aspartame. This includes: Recent European research showing that ingesting aspartame leads to the accumulation of formaldehyde in the brain, other organs and tissues (Formaldehyde has been shown to damage the nervous system, immune system, and cause irreversible genetic damage in humans.) An extremely large number of toxicity reactions reported to the FDA and other organizations A recent report showing that nearly 100% of independent research has found problems with aspartame. Why is this relevent to the sucralose question? Similar to the aspartame situation 15 years ago: Pre-approval test 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. So, without even addressing the pre-approval research showing potential toxicity, it is clear that sucralose has a) no long history (e.g., decades) of safe use, b) no independent monitoring of health effects, c) no long-term human studies, and d) no independent human studies. I would hope that the Precautionary Principal, now commonly used in Europe, would be a guiding force for people who are interested in health. Otherwise, we might as well just use any poorly- tested, artificial (lab-created) chemical that has shown potential for long-term toxicity. As far as the pre-approval research related to sucralose.... As you probably know, pre-approval research is rarely published. It is only available from the FDA by filing a Freedom of Information Act request. However, you can see a very short summary regarding sucralose and shrunken thymus glands in the " New Scientist " (23 November 1991, page 13). It is very important that people who have any interest in their health stay aware from the highly toxic sweetener, aspartame and other dangerous sweeteners such as sucralose (Splenda), and acesulfame-k (Sunette, Sweet & Safe, Sweet One). Instead, please see the extensive resources for sweeteners on the Healthier Sweetener Resource List. ** Also see new sucralose/Splenda review by Dr. Joseph Mercola at: ** http://www.mercola.com/2000/dec/3/sucralose_dangers.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 28, 2005 Report Share Posted September 28, 2005 Can someone tell me the real truth about splenda..........Good / bad? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 30, 2005 Report Share Posted September 30, 2005 ---go buy equal parts sugar and chlorine then melt them together and you have just made splenda(no really it's not quite that simple) chlorinated anything is not healthy chlorine in the primary chemical in the chemical warfare units worldwide In , " mecb52000 " <mecb52000> wrote: > Can someone tell me the real truth about splenda..........Good / bad? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 30, 2005 Report Share Posted September 30, 2005 I have sprinkled Splenda on an ant hill and they either move or it killed them. Harvey - " madcowcoverup " <k_t723 Friday, September 30, 2005 4:42 AM Re: Splenda ---go buy equal parts sugar and chlorine then melt them together and you have just made splenda(no really it's not quite that simple) chlorinated anything is not healthy chlorine in the primary chemical in the chemical warfare units worldwide In , " mecb52000 " <mecb52000> wrote: > Can someone tell me the real truth about splenda..........Good / bad? «¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤ » is MOVING! We are moving to: MedicalConspiracies Subscribe: MedicalConspiracies- Post message: MedicalConspiracies List owner: MedicalConspiracies-owner «¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤ » New Sister Group: MedicalConspiracies (One Word) Google groups: http://groups.google.comMedicalConspiracies Post message: MedicalConspiracies (AT) googl (DOT) com Subscribe: MedicalConspiracies- (AT) googl (DOT) com Any information here in is for educational purpose only, it may be news related, purely speculation or someone's opinion. Always consult with a qualified health practitioner before deciding on any course of treatment, especially for serious or life-threatening illnesses. **COPYRIGHT NOTICE** In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 30, 2005 Report Share Posted September 30, 2005 Thank you for this wonderful idea. I hate ants and have them around my house. Guess what I am doing right now............. I bought some Splenda and it is going to make my surrounding grounds splendid. This receipe is manna from heaven. It had better work!!!! June - "Harvey Flatbush" <harvf Friday, September 30, 2005 8:49 AM Re: Re: Splenda >I have sprinkled Splenda on an ant hill and they either move or it killed> them.> > Harvey> > -> "madcowcoverup" <k_t723> > Friday, September 30, 2005 4:42 AM> Re: Splenda> > > ---go buy equal parts sugar and chlorine then melt them together and> you have just made splenda(no really it's not quite that simple)> chlorinated anything is not healthy> chlorine in the primary chemical in the chemical warfare units> worldwide> > In , "mecb52000" <mecb52000>> wrote:>> Can someone tell me the real truth about splenda..........Good / bad?> > > > > «¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤> »> > is MOVING!> > We are moving to:> > MedicalConspiracies> > Subscribe: MedicalConspiracies- > Post message: MedicalConspiracies > List owner: MedicalConspiracies-owner > > «¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤> »> > New Sister Group: MedicalConspiracies (One Word)> Google groups:> http://groups.google.comMedicalConspiracies> > Post message: MedicalConspiracies (AT) googl (DOT) com> Subscribe: MedicalConspiracies- (AT) googl (DOT) com> > Any information here in is for educational purpose only, it may be news> related, purely speculation or someone's opinion. Always consult with a> qualified health practitioner before deciding on any course of treatment,> especially for serious or life-threatening illnesses.> **COPYRIGHT NOTICE**> In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107,> any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without> profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving> the included information for non-profit research and educational purposes> only. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml> > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.