Tag Archives: Splenda

Dangers of Sucralose

Posted on by

Science Review Reveals Laundry List of Health Hazards Associated with Splenda Consumption

December 18, 2013
By Dr. Mercola

Story at-a-glance

  • An in-depth scientific review of sucralose (Splenda) reveals an extensive list of safety concerns, including toxicity, DNA damage, and heightened carcinogenic potential when used in cooking
  • When heated, it releases chloropropanols, which belong to a class of toxins known as dioxins. Dioxin—a component of Agent Orange—is among the most dangerous chemicals known to man
  • Sucralose can destroy as much as 50 percent of the microbiome in your gut. What’s worse, it appears to target beneficial microorganisms to a greater extent than pathogenic and other more detrimental bacteria
  • Both animal and human studies have shown that Splenda alters glucose, insulin and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) levels, thereby promoting weight gain, insulin resistance, and type 2 diabetes
  • The adverse effects of sucralose are oftentimes misdiagnosed or overlooked entirely as the side effects are so varied and mimic common ailments

Sucralose, marketed under the brand name Splenda, is a best-selling artificial sweetener around the world. (In the European Union, sucralose is also known under the additive code E955.)

It has been nearly eight years since I published my concerns about Splenda in my book, Sweet Deception. Since then, evidence continues to support the concerns I had back then.

Splenda is found in tens of thousands of processed food products sold in 90 different countries, many of which are specifically marketed to those seeking to either lose weight or manage their diabetes.

Mounting research, however, shows that not only does it tend to worsen both of those problems, but it’s also associated with an array of other troublesome side effects.

The web site www.truthaboutsplenda.com lists a variety of consumer complaints from Splenda consumption, many of which mimic other health conditions. Some of the most commonly reported adverse effects include:

  • Gastrointestinal problems
  • Seizures, dizziness, and migraines
  • Blurred vision
  • Allergic reactions
  • Blood sugar increases and weight gain

But that’s not all. Now, an in-depth scientific review1, 2 of sucralose published in the Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health3 reveals an extensive list of safety concerns, including toxicity, DNA damage, and heightened carcinogenic potential when used in cooking.

It also blows a huge hole in the argument that Splenda is a good choice for diabetics and/or those seeking to lose weight.

Sucralose—NOT Safe for Cooking After All

The featured report came to several important conclusions—all of which challenge the “generally recognized as safe” (GRAS) status of sucralose. Of primary concern is that sucralose is not an inert substance.

When heated, it releases chloropropanols, which belong to a class of toxins known as dioxins. One of the selling points of Splenda is that it remains stable when heated, making it well-suited for cooking and baking, but these findings refute such claims. (Many other artificial sweeteners, such as aspartame, are not recommended for cooking purposes as they’re known to break down in high temperatures.)

As reported by Sayer Ji at GreenMedInfo.com,4 research now shows that sucralose starts breaking down at 119 degrees Celsius; 180 degrees Celsius causes it to degrade completely.

Dioxin is a waste product of incineration, smelting, chlorine bleaching, and pesticide manufacturing, and its well-documented health effects include cancer and endocrine disruption. In fact, dioxin, which was a toxic component of the Agent Orange used to defoliate jungles during the Vietnam War, is easily one of the most dangerous chemicals known to man.

Another study5 published in October also expressed concern over the chlorination reactions that occur when sucralose is cooked in stainless steel cookware, generating highly toxic compounds, including dioxins6 and polychlorinated dibenzofurans (PCDFs).

Recent animal research also suggests a link between Splenda consumption and an increased risk of leukemia.7 Based on such research, the time is more than ripe for the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to reconsider the GRAS status of sucralose…

Sucralose Also Destroys Your Gut Health

The featured review also concluded that sucralose destroys gut bacteria. (In fact, animal research8 published in 2008 found it could kill as much as 50 percent of your microbiome).

This is very important, as anytime you destroy healthy intestinal bacteria, you open yourself up to unfriendly micro-organisms that can cause health problems. Your immune system, which is imperative for general health, is dependent on healthy gut flora, so the idea that this artificial sweetener may destroy up to half of all your healthy gut bacteria is disconcerting to say the least.

Worse yet, sucralose appears to target beneficial microorganisms to a greater extent than pathogenic and other more detrimental bacteria. And remarkably, according to one study, these adverse effects on gut microbiota remained even after a three-month long recovery period…

Early studies, upon which its approval was based, claimed that sucralose would simply pass unchanged through the human gastrointestinal tract, but more recent investigations show that it is indeed metabolized in your gut. And, as reported in the featured review, “the identity and safety profile of these putative sucralose metabolites are not known at this time.”

Diabetics Beware…

to read more, go to:    http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2013/12/18/sucralose-side-effects.aspx?e_cid=20131218Z1_DNL_art_1&utm_source=dnl&utm_medium=email&utm_content=art1&utm_campaign=20131218Z1&et_cid=DM37487&et_rid=372003445

CSPI Cautions Use of Splenda

Posted on by

Splenda Goes From ‘Safe’ to ‘Caution’ After Leukemia Found in Mice

/ August 12, 2013 / 0 Comments and 0 Reactions

splenda

 

The Center for Science in the Public Interest is urging caution in the use of the artificial sweetener Splenda.

A food safety advocacy group has downgraded its rating for sucralose, the artificial sweetener better known as Splenda, from “safe” to “caution” in its chemical guide to food additives.

The Washington-based Center for Science in the Public Interest announced Wednesday that it had long rated sucralose as “safe” but is now categorizing it with a ”caution,” pending peer review of an unpublished study by an independent Italian lab that found the sweetener caused leukemia in mice.

Previously, the only long-term animal-feeding studies were done by sucralose’s manufacturers, the CSPI said.

Other artificial sweeteners such as saccharin, aspartame and acesulfame potassium have received the center’s lowest rating, “avoid.”

Rebiana, a natural high-potency sweetener obtained from the plant stevia, is considered “safe” by the CSPI, though it says the sweetener needs better testing.

“Sucralose may prove to be safer than saccharin, aspartame, and acesulfame potassium, but the forthcoming Italian study warrants careful scrutiny before we can be confident that the sweetener is safe for use in food,” said CSPI Executive Director Michael F. Jacobson.

Despite concerns about artificial sweeteners, the CSPI says that drinking diet soda is better than sugar-carbonated soda, which it says “poses greater risks such as obesity, diabetes heart disease, gout and tooth decay.”

In order to avoid the risks of both sugars and non-caloric sweeteners, the CSPI is encouraging people to switch to water, seltzer water, flavored unsweetened waters, seltzer mixed with some fruit juice or unsweetened iced tea.

from:    http://topinfopost.com/2013/08/12/splenda-goes-from-safe-to-caution-after-leukemia-found-in-mice

Dangers of Splenda

Posted on by

Splenda (Sucralose) Found To Have Diabetes-Promoting Effects

four_splenda_packets2nd June 2013

By Sayer Ji

Contributing Writer for Wake Up World

Promoted for decades as a “safe” sugar alternative, presumably to prevent or reduce symptoms of diabetes, Splenda (sucralose) has been found to have diabetes-promoting effects in human subjects.

The artificial sweetener sucralose, which is approximately 600 times sweeter than sucrose (table sugar), and marketed under a variety of brand names, such as Splenda, Cukren, Nevella and SucraPlus, has recently been found to have diabetes-promoting effects in human test subjects, despite containing no calories and being classified as a ‘nonutritive sweetener.’

A new study published in the journal Diabetes Care, lead by researchers at the Center for Human Nutrition, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, set out to test the metabolic effects of sucralose in obese subjects who did not use nonnutritive sweeteners.

Seventeen subjects underwent a 5-hour oral glucose tolerance test on two separate occasions preceded by consuming either sucralose (experimental condition) or water (control condition) 10 min before the glucose load in a randomized crossover design.

The results were reported as follows:

Compared with the control condition, sucralose ingestion caused 1) a greater incremental increase in peak plasma glucose concentrations (4.2 ± 0.2 vs. 4.8 ± 0.3 mmol/L; P = 0.03), 2) a 20 ± 8% greater incremental increase in insulin area under the curve (AUC) (P < 0.03), 3) a 22 ± 7% greater peak insulin secretion rate (P < 0.02), 4) a 7 ± 4% decrease in insulin clearance (P = 0.04), and 5) a 23 ± 20% decrease in SI (P = 0.01).

In other words, a single dose of sucralose lead to a 0.6 mmol/L increase in plasma glucose concentrations, a 20% increase in insulin levels, a 22% greater peak insulin secretion rate, and a 7% decrease in insulin clearance, an indication of decreased insulin sensitivity.

They concluded:

These data demonstrate that sucralose affects the glycemic and insulin responses to an oral glucose load in obese people who do not normally consume NNS.

Discussion

Despite the fact that pre-approval research on sucralose found a wide range of adverse health effects in exposed animals [read article The Bitter Truth about Splenda], national and international food safety regulatory bodies, including the FDA, now consider it completely safe for daily human consumption.*

The same applies for synthetic sweeteners like aspartame, which despite its well-known link with brain damage and over 40 documented adverse health effects, is safety approved in 90 nations.

Industry influence largely accounts for the fact that synthetic chemicals like asparatame, neotame, saccharin and sucralose are being foisted onto the public as ‘safe’ non-calorie sweeteners, despite obvious research to the contrary, and the fact that stevia, the non-calorie natural alternative, has over 1500 years of documented safe use.

The American Diabetes Association (ADA), for instance, does nothing to hide its explicit partnership with McNeil Nutritionals, maker of Splenda, despite the obvious conflict of interest. On its website, the ADA describes McNeil Nutritionals as a “national strategic partner ” and lauds them as “committed to helping people and their families with diabetes by focusing on the overall nutritional needs of the diabetes community.” McNeil Nutritionals sponsors the ADA’s “Recipe of the Day,” along with a variety of educational tools and information for consumers and healthcare professionals.

Despite these cozy relationships, the research on sucralose’s adverse health effects continues to accumulate.  Some of the more recent research on the chemical indicate that it may contribute to the following health and environmental problems:

  • Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A researcher from UMDNJ-New Jersey Medical School, Newark NJ, proposes that sucralose may be causing a global increase in cases of IBS, including both ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease. [i] In an article titled “What made Canada become a country with the highest incidence of inflammatory bowel disease: could sucralose be the culprit?”, author Xiaofa Qin describes how Canada, which once had one of the lowest rates of IBS in the world, attained the highest levels after being the first country in the world to approve the use of sucralose in thousands of consumer products in 1991.[ii]
  • Harms Gut Flora and Gastrointestinal Health: A 2008 study found that the administration of sucralose to rats at a dose far below the US FDA Acceptable Daily intake level resulted in: 1) a decrease in the numbers of a wide range of beneficial gut bacteria. 2) “increase in fecal pH.”  3) “enhanced expression levels of P-gp, CYP3A4, and CYP2D1, which are known to limit the bioavailability of orally administered drugs.”[iii]
  • Migraines: A report was published in the journal Headache in 2006 indicating that physicians should be mindful of the possibility that sucralose can trigger migraines.[iv]
  • Environmental Persistence: Like many persistent organic pollutants in the pesticide category, sucralose is exceptionally resistant to degradation, both through environmental processes (microbial degradation, hydrolysis, soil sorption) and advanced treatment processes (chlorination, ozonation, sorption to activated carbon, and UV radiation). Sucralose, after all, was discovered accidentally by pesticide researchers, and is chemically related to DDT, a chlorinated hydrocarbon.  Some researchers now consider it an ideal “tracer of anthropogenic activity,” which is true also of lethal radioisotopes such as uranium 238 and plutonium 239, due to their resistance to degradation. [v]  Indeed, recent research found that sucralose has a low rate of removal (11%) in drinking water tested that presently serves 28 million people.[vi]
  • Environmental Toxicity: Sucralose was recently found to alter the physiological and behavioral status of crustaceans, leading researchers to warn that the chemical will likely have wider ecological consequences.[vii

from:    http://wakeup-world.com/2013/06/02/splenda-sucralose-found-to-have-diabetes-promoting-effects/