The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) has warned that aspartame, the artificial sugar substitute in most diet drinks, may cause cancer as reported in a three-year Italian study that found links to lymphomas and leukemias . But the CSPI communication goes on to advocate use of another doubtful sweetener - sucralose - to get off aspartame. Sucralose, also sold under the Splenda brand name, has its own problems of toxicity and is by no means an innocuous replacement for aspartame.

Although the CSPI has - with a delay of several years - come out now with a warning against the use of aspartame, Betty Martini charges that its executive director, Michael Jacobson, should have had the courage to do so long ago. She says the information was available since the time of the aspartame approval through political pressure called in by Donald Rumsfeld, former CEO of aspartame manufacturer Searle and now defense secretary.

Diet soda, which generally is sweetened with aspartame, has been shown to be linked to an increased incidence of obesity by Sharon P. Fowler, MPH, and colleagues at the University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio in a recent study. While Fowler is quick to point out that the link does not prove causation, the facts showed that the more diet drinks a person consumed, the higher was the likelihood of being obese.

Why can’t we encourage people to just overcome their sweet tooth?

Perhaps it would help, but of course there is no money in that. We have the sugar industry, the chemical sweetener manufacturers and the processed foods and drinks industry making sure that does not happen. But people do pay the bill - some with their lives, others with suffering and illness, others simply with obesity, and all of them with their weekly grocery bills, not to talk about hospital costs that hit every one of us. Great system and real great advice by CSPI, which says it is defending consumers…

Jon in Michigan has written an interesting view on Hershey’s Whole Bean chocolate and its inclusion of Splenda. Here are a few excerpts that are worth taking note of;

Here’s a big chocolate warning. Any time you see “X% less sugar” in candy, it means only one thing: artificial sweeteners. And that is exactly what is in Hershey’s Whole Bean. They may have included the goodness of the whole bean, but they also included the goodness from the laboratory. Sucralose, i.e. total poison. Now some people like this crap, but I do not. Do you know what sucralose is? This is the stuff they pedal as Splenda. But do you know what it is? Its mutated sugar. Mutated like David Banner.

By the way, most chlorinated hydrocarbons are toxic to your body. They dissolve in the fat and hang there forever. Like PCB’s. But sucralose avoids that since it is not fat soluble. Clever chemistry that.

So how does the Hershey’s Whole Bean with Sucralose taste? Like Satan puked in your mouth. Horrid, sticky, thick, gritty, bitter, dreadful. I had one of the pieces and that was enough for me. I don’t know how they got away with adding sucralose and calling it chocolate. Its poison. I will be throwing the rest away.

The FoodProductionDaily and BeverageDaily websites are carrying an article that highlights the growing use of natural ingredients in the UK food and drink industry. While a move towards that is commendable, the article also contains a reference to the removal of aspartame by; “Sainsbury’s, Britain’s third biggest supermarket, last month said it would remove artificial flavours and colours, as well as the aspartame sweetener, from its private label soft drinks.”

Unfortunately the article fails to mention that Sainsbury’s is not just removing the aspartame from products but are instead REPLACING IT with an equally controversial sweetener called Sucralose (also known as Splenda). That is not progress. That is not an improvement. That is replacing one problem-causing substance with ANOTHER problem-causing substance. It has taken many years for the world to catch up on aspartame and demand its removal as its associated problems surfaced and got researched and investigated. It will take again many years for people to catch up on Sucralose. So this is nothing more than a reset of the industry to fool the consumer again.

Source: UK Daily Mail
Artificial colours and flavours including the controversial sweetener aspartame are being banned by Sainsbury’s. Other supermarkets and manufacturers are expected to bring in similar bans following studies linking the additives to allergies and hyperactivity.

Sainsbury’s is replacing aspartame with sucralose, a low-calorie sweetener “made from sugar”. It is also removing the widely-used artificial colouring E150d from its cola drinks. E150d also appears in beer and bread. The chemicals will generally be replaced by natural colours and fruit and vegetable extracts, while flavourings will be from named fruits and other natural sources.

The founder of the Hyperactive Children’s Support Group, Sally Bunday, said: “This is fantastic news particularly for our members whose children are affected by the artificial colours used in so many products targeted at youngsters.” Sainsbury’s soft drinks manager, Cathy Port, said: “This is the result of extensive research among customers who told us what they want. We’ve invested a huge amount of time to ensure we get the taste of the new soft drinks exactly right.”

Source: CNN
NEW YORK (CNNMoney) — The makers of the country’s two most popular artificial sweeteners head to court Monday, with Equal claiming newcomer Splenda is misleading consumers by telling them the product is made from sugar, according to reports Friday. Merisant Co., the maker of Equal and NutraSweet, contends the maker of Splenda is guilty of false advertising with its “Made from sugar, so it tastes like sugar” slogan, The New York Times said Friday.

Splenda is made from sucralose, a chemical ingredient its maker, Johnson & Johnson (Charts)-owned McNeil Nutritionals, synthesizes in a lab from table sugar, the Wall Street Journal reported. The company is expected to argue that “made from” sugar is not the same as “made with,” the Times reported. But since Splenda doesn’t actually list sugar as one of of the ingredients on the box, Merisant claims Splenda shouldn’t be able to claim that its made from sugar, the Journal said.

Equal was once the dominant artificial sweetener in a $1.5 billion market and found its way into over 6,000 commercial products, the Times reported. But Splenda has bumped Equal from its top spot, and now controls 62 percent of the U.S. market, the Times said.

Source: Here, Here, and Here
Tate & Lyle and Johnson & Johnson have been going on a domain sucking spree to get a variety of domain names that imply a negative association with Splenda, the chemical sucralose artificial sweetener.

The Domain Tools Blog writes, “Splenda wants to shortcut any free speech or backlash to their product by registering all the negative domains.” and explains how and why companies have been pro-active in buying domain names with negative association before any critics do. The list of domain names does indicate that Tate & Lyle and Johnson & Johnson have certain expectations of what that criticism is about given the names of the domains such as splendakills.com, victimsofsplenda.com, splendatoxicity.com, and many others.

And Darren concludes that “Image may be everything, but how does this look? ‘We know our product might be poison, so let’s prevent people from talking about it.’ It’s not an uncommon move by companies, but it’s just a waste of perfectly good corporate dollars.”

The SustainableIsGood Blog wrote “Judging by the domain names Johnson & Johnson and Tate & Lyle own it’s very clear they are concerned about people targeting targeting Splenda itself, or its main ingredient sucralose. The mere fact a major corporation and maker of a product has bought and owns domain names with their product name and the words “poison,” “kills,” and “sucks,” and “victims” is amazing. Under what possible scenario does Johnson & Johnson envision that someone would create the website “victimsofsplenda.com” This domain name and many others seem to go way beyond a company protecting its trademarks or copyright – these domain names imply a very sobering negative fear on the parts of Johnson & Johnson and Tate & Lyle.”

And then concludes with “It’s hard not to wonder – buying a handful of top level domain names to protect a company name or trademark seems reasonable but buying over 200 possibly as high as 300 negative domain names related to a product seems over the top. Is there something these companies know about Splenda that make them feel the need to buy all these domain names before someone else can? Who would ever imagine a website www.victimsofsplenda.com - honestly? Well apparently someone at Johnson & Johnson did because they now own the domain along with a host of others.”

Some of the domains listed include the .net, .org, .biz, .info, and .com variants of;

splendasucks, splendakills, splendatruth, splendapoison, thedangersofsplenda, thefactsaboutsplenda, thesplendadangers, thesplendafacts, victimsofsplenda, thetruthaboutsplenda, thesplendatruth, splendatoxicity, splendatoxicitycenter, splendavictims, splendahealth, splendaandyourhealth, splendaandyourfamily, splendamyths, splendaalert, splendafacts, splendasafety, truthaboutsplenda, splendasideeffects, aboutsplenda, allaboutsplenda, banonsplenda, bittertruthaboutsplenda, factsaboutsplenda, mythsaboutsplenda, officialsplendasite, splendadangers, splendadiabetes, splendaisnotsafe, splendaisnotsosweet, splendasucralose, thetruthaboutsplendasafety, sucralosepoison, sucralosekills, sucralosesucks, sucraloseandyourhealth, sucralosesafety, sucralosefacts, sucralosetruth, truthaboutsucralose, chlorosucralose, etc.

What none of the blog mention is that there is now a possibility that Johnson & Johnson and Tate & Lyle have not only registered these domain names to prevent others from getting those domains in order to provide information to consumers that may differ from the official and sugar coated (pun intended) marketing, but that they could be filling up all those domains with more marketing information in order to spam the search engines so that any less than glorious marketing and sales information regarding Splenda and Sucralose become harder to find or requires people to search on further pages.

A group of distributors of Tahitian Noni Juice had done that at one time by spamming search engines with a lot of pages with negative words associated with the juice, only to provide their own marketing spin and cure-all claims on the actual pages. This had worked for them for a short while until other sites took over the leading positions in search results as an offset and balance against the tsunami of marketing spam.

Source : Web MD
Courtroom battles between the makers of Splenda and Equal have many questioning the safety of artificial sweeteners. “It’s not like you’re going to be using a teaspoon in your coffee once in a while — it’s going to be everywhere, in everything, which makes it even more important for people to understand what they are and are not getting with this product,” says Restuccia.

Source : WNHO.net
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. Lying and deceit on the artificial sweetener issue has been the FDA’s Modus Operandi ever since Donald Rummsfeld broke everything decent in the US government to put Aspartame on the market as a “contract on humanity”.

The article and page titled ‘Splenda is Not a “Healthy” Sweetener’ contains a number of comments from Dr. Mercola. In it he refers to an article he wrote on this page. That page reads “Attorneys acting on behalf of the manufacturers of sucralose, Tate & Lyle PLC based in London, England, have requested that the information contained on this page not be made available to Internet users in England”.

“Attorneys acting on behalf of the manufacturers of sucralose, Tate & Lyle PLC based in London, England, have requested that the information contained on this page not be made available to Internet users in England”.

Source : WNHO.net
James Bowen, M.D., A physician, biochemist, and survivor of aspartame poisoning warns about yet another synthetic sweetener, Splenda.

In test animals Splenda produced swollen livers, as do all chlorocarbon poisons, and also calcified the kidneys of test animals in toxicity studies. The brain and nervous system are highly subject to metabolic toxicities and solvency damages by these chemicals. Their high solvency attacks the human nervous system and many other body systems including genetics and the immune function. Thus, chlorocarbon poisoning can cause cancer, birth defects, and immune system destruction. These are well known effects of Dioxin and PCBs which are known deadly chlorocarbons.”

From the Sweet Poison Newsletter

“It appears Splenda is fighting for the lead in the alternative sweetener race. It will be interesting to see if Neotame pushes Splenda out of contention as aspartame’s dangers are becoming more renown, and saccharin is back in the competition. Neotame has changed hands from its original patent holder, Monsanto Chemical Company, to The NutraSweet Co. to J. W. Childs Partnership to Pharmacia, and now to Pfizer if Pharmacia’s buy out is successful”.

“Sucralose (trichlorogalactosucrose) was approved by the FDA in 1988 as a tabletop sweetener and for use in a number of desserts, confections, and nonalcoholic beverages. Sucralose is produced by chlorinating sucrose (sugar); three chlorine atoms are substituted for three hydroxyl groups. According to Consumers Research Magazine, some concern was initially raised about sucralose being a chlorinated molecule, as chlorinated molecules also serve as the basis for pesticides such as D.D.T., accumulate in body fat, and are considered to be carcinogens. However, the manufacturer Johnson & Johnson has emphasized that sucralose passes through the body unabsorbed“.

“Research animals fed sucralose exhibited the following symptoms: shrunken thymus glands (up to 40% shrinkage), enlarged liver and kidneys, atrophy of lymph follicles in the spleen and thymus, reduced growth rate, decreased red blood cell count, hyperplasia of the pelvis, extension of the pregnancy period, aborted pregnancy, decreased fetal body weights and placental weights, and chronic diarrhea”.

“In the midst of the continued controversy over aspartame, many pharmaceutical and health food manufacturers - Pro Lab, Twin Lab and Ross Products, makers of Pedialyte - have switched to sucralose”.

“In this ever-continuing web of confusion over which chemical sweeteners are safe to use, it might be best to return to natural sweeteners and let the lab rats fight it out for you!”

Yes, indeed, confession is good for the soul. I have personally written you for years about the dangers of aspartame, and still have the letters. I’ve sent you indisputable evidence including the knowledge there is a 1038 page medical text on the toxin, completely documented, Aspartame Disease: An Ignored Epidemic, www.sunsentpress.com by Dr. H. J. Roberts. I’ve told you about Dr. Ralph Walton’s research he showed on 60 Minutes with Dr. Olney, on scientific peer reviewed studies and funding. 92% of independent, unbiased studies show the problems aspartame causes. Still just like you admitted in this press release you’ve never said anything except it needs more testing. And right again where you say “But has not maintained that the artificial sweetener is harmful, except for some people in whom it causes headaches.” Why, Michael, you had all the evidence years ago and in 1985 wrote your own damning report? You knew the gun was loaded. You’ve received volumes of information over the years not only from me but other Mission Possible activists and the public at large. And you’ve been on our web sites and read the material.

Yet, on Fox News you advocated the public use diet drinks even though a study by Sharon Fowler of the University of Texas proved once for all that obesity is linked to diet drinks. http://www.menstuff.org/issues/byissue/dietsoda.html She used 8 years of data and what was in Diet Coke and Diet Pepsi all these years - aspartame! And you knew it and you knew about the Italian study showing aspartame conclusively to be a carcinogen causing leukemia, lymphoma and malignant brain tumors.

In fact, you say in the press release below: “Aspartame, also sold as Equal and NutraSweet, is used in Diet Coke, Diet Pepsi, and thousands of other foods and is consumed by 200 million people in the United States and around the world” — So I’ll ask you again why you pushed diet drinks on Fox News. I hope they never interview you again. And as far as the diabetic epidemic, you know aspartame can precipitate diabetes, simulates and aggravates diabetic retinopathy and neuropathy, and interacts with insulin. You’ve been told for years and told what physician’s books contained the information. And the reports are on the web sites you’ve been on.

Mission Possible International has been asking for a ban on aspartame for 14 years, and the physicians who are experts like Dr. Roberts long before that. Aren’t you a little late? If you had spoken out when you knew about it over 20 years ago maybe it would not have murdered hundreds of thousands of people or even millions. But now that the Italian study is global news you can’t protect aspartame any longer.

Now you encourage the use of a chlorocarbon poison, Splenda. And with all the publicity about its harmful effects don’t tell me you didn’t know. You couldn’t research the toxin without finding out. And would you encourage it without researching it? Merisant has sued them, even though its the kettle calling the pot black. Both companies mislead the public. I like the fact, you say “industry’s Calorie Control Council”. Yes, the Calorie Control Council is a NutraSweet front group pushing the poison. You’re really fessing up today!

Go to http://www.wnho.net and read the Lethal Science of Splenda and some of Dr. Mercola’s articles on sucralose/Splenda. As it says in the first report: “Splenda/sucralose is simply chlorinated sugar; a chlorocarbon. Common chlorocarbon include carbon tetrachloride, trichlorethelene and methylene chloride, all deadly. Chlorine is nature’s Doberman attack dog, a highly excitable, ferocious atomic element employed as a biocide in bleach, disinfectants, insecticide, WW1 poison gas and hydrochloric acid.”

The report continues: “Sucralose is a molecule of sugar chemically manipulated to surrender three hydroxyl groups (hydrogen + oxygen) and replace them with three chlorine atoms. Natural sugar is a hydrocarbon built around 12 carbon atoms. When turned into Splenda it becomes a chlorocarbon, in the family of Chlorodane, Lindane and DDT.”

Why not just say drink up on DDT-Lite!? The report tells us that when chlorine is chemically reacted into carbon-structured organic compounds to make chlorocarbons, the carbon and chlorine atoms bind to each other by mutually sharing electrons in their outer shells. This arrangement adversely affects human metabolism because our mitochondrial and cellular enzyme systems are designed to completely utilize organic molecules containing carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen and other compatible nutrition elements.

“By this process chlorocarbons such as sucralose deliver chlorine directly into our cells through normal metabolization. This makes them effective insecticides and preservatives. Preservatives must kill anything alive to prevent bacterial decomposition.”

“In test animals Splenda produced swollen livers, as do all chlorocarbon poisons, and also calcified the kidneys of test animals in toxicity studies. The brain and nervous system are highly subject to metabolic toxicities and solvency damages by these chemicals. Their high solvency attacks the human nervous system and many other body systems including genetics and the immune function. Thus, chlorocarbon poisoning an cause cancer, birth defects, and immune system destruction. These are well known effects of Dioxin and PCBs which are known deadly chlorocarbons.

Remember that aspartame is a chemical hypersensitization agent so when people get off aspartame and on to Splenda they can react. And now we are getting those reports from seizures to tachycardia to horrible rashes. One of Dr. Mercola’s reports on www.wnho.net shows a picture of a Splenda reaction. We’re glad you’re finally calling for a ban on aspartame but while you’re fessing up be sure to tell people you’ve known aspartame was deadly for two decades and refused to speak out.

Dr. Betty Martini, Founder,
Mission Possible International,
9270 River Club Parkway,
Duluth, Georgia 30097
770 242-2599
http://www.wnho.net and
http://www.dorway.com

Source : New Media Explorer
Apparently free speech is not a right where certain corporations and criticism of their products are concerned, comments Robin Good of masternewmedia.org. But are such heavy handed actions as requesting to block internet access to certain articles for all users in a country - in this case the UK - really effective or will they backfire in this age of free flow of information? Robin Good thinks that Tate & Lyle should take a clue…

Source : Woman to Woman
This article raises interesting points such as The public health experiment, side effects, sugar and insulin and the energy rush, short circuiting the insulin spike, looks at stevia and sorbitol as natural alternatives to artificial sweeteners and aks whether aspartame and saccharin are safer than Splenda.

Consumers & Manufacturers Should Switch to Sucralose Pending Thorough Government Safety Tests

The Food and Drug Administration should immediately review the safety of the artificial sweetener aspartame, and possibly ban it, in light of a new study published in the European Journal of Oncology. The study, conducted in Italy, found statistically significant increases in lymphomas and leukemias among female rats given aspartame. The smallest amount of aspartame (20 milligrams per kilogram of body weight) that caused a significant increase in cancer incidence is in the ballpark of what many people consume. The study also found equivocal results regarding brain tumors.

At a minimum, the government should conduct new animal studies of aspartame and encourage consumers and manufacturers that use artificial sweeteners to switch to sucralose, which CSPI considers to be the safest of the several artificial sweeteners on the market.

Aspartame, also sold as Equal and NutraSweet, is used in Diet Coke, Diet Pepsi, and thousands of other foods and is consumed by 200 million people in the United States and around the world, according to the industry’s Calorie Control Council.

“The FDA immediately should ask the government’s National Toxicology Program to conduct new animal studies to assess the cancer risk from aspartame. As a precautionary measure, in the several years it would take to design and conduct such studies, the FDA should consider ordering aspartame off the market,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “Despite several shortcomings in the new study, one notable plus is that it was designed and conducted independently. Virtually all of the previous research was sponsored by the makers of aspartame.”

(In 1996, the Minneapolis Star Tribune reported that the FDA repeatedly stopped the National Toxicology Program from conducting lifetime animal tests of aspartame.) The authors of the Italian study call for “urgent re-examination of permissible exposure levels of [aspartame] in both food and beverages, especially to protect children.”

CSPI has long urged that aspartame be better tested, but has not maintained that the artificial sweetener is harmful, except to some people in whom it causes headaches. The California Environmental Protection Agency has also called for further studies on aspartame.

For more information, contact:
Center for Science in the Public Interest
1875 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20009

Some of the more gruesome details revealed:

32 beagle dogs were locked in metal cages for 52 weeks. They were given Sucralose mixed in with their normal feed, and blood and urine samples were collected. At the end of the study they were killed by means of exsanguiation - they had their throats slit open and bled to death. They were then cut open and their organs - by now drained of blood so easier to dissect - were examined to test the product’s toxicity levels.

Four beagle puppies (or as HLS calls them; punching bags) were starved before being force-fed the super-sweet sugar powder. HLS employees then took blood samples from the jugulars of the infant dogs.

An unspecified number of marmoset monkeys either died from the poisoning or were killed at the termination of the research at HLS.The report states that 12 of these monkeys, which were babies“ under 10 months old’s were force-fed Sucralose for seven weeks. Two of the primates died on the seventh day from brain defects, another primate was mysteriously killed after four weeks, and the remainder all were murdered at the completion of the seventh week. Some of the recorded observations from this study noted “in appetence, body weight loss, unwillingness to use hind leg, hopping, involuntary grip reflexes, salivation and subdued mood.

Huntingdon also used rabbits to study the effects of the product. These little animals were given 1200 times the expected daily intake and not surprisingly most died from the trauma. Many of the other rabbits suffered from convulsions, weight loss, and various intestinal disorders. Huntingdon also tested the product on pregnant rabbits, mice, and rats killing both the mothers and the fetuses.

All in all, just another customer-sponsored project at HLS. All this pain and death for the sake of bringing to the market a sweetener that can make your ice-cream or jam 600 times sweeter. This sort of testing really should give you pause to think, and possibly send off a thank you note to HLS for all the important contributions they are making to the world.

Sucralose also known as Splenda is synthesized by this five-step process:

(1). sucrose is tritylated with trityl chloride in the presence of dimethylformamide and 4-methylmorpholine and the tritylated sucrose is then acetylated with acetic anhydride, (2). the resulting TRISPA (6,1′,6′-tri-O-trityl-penta-O-acetylsucrose) is chlorinated with hydrogen chloride in the presence of toluene, (3). the resulting 4-PAS (sucrose 2,3,4,3′,4′-pentaacetate) is heated in the presence of methyl isobutyl ketone and acetic acid, (4). the resulting 6-PAS (sucrose 2,3,6,3′,4′-pentaacetate) is chlorinated with thionyl chloride in the presence of toluene and benzyltriethylammonium chloride, and (5). the resulting TOSPA (sucralose pentaacetate) is treated with methanol (wood alcohol, a poison) in the presence of sodium methoxide to produce sucralose. So sucralose becomes a low-calorie sugar with a complicated process that results in Splenda’s: chemical formal: 1,6-dichloro-1, 6-dideoxy-BETA-D-fructofuranosyl-4-chloro-4-deoxy-alpha-D-galactopyranoside.

This is Splenda:. Are you sure now you want to be consuming these deadly chemicals ? Sucalrose is also in many food products, including over the counter drug medications, like Rolaids antacid. Also, Listerine’s new Citrus mouth wash. Make sure you read the labels. In addition, it contains these deadly chemicals, some known to cause cancer in animals, some are even listed on the EPA as poisons:

Acetone - Acetic acid - Acetyl alcohol - Acetic anhydride - Ammonium chloride
Benzene - Chlorinated sulfates -Ethyl alcohol - Isobutyl ketones
Formaldehyde
Hydrogen chloride - Lithium chloride
Methanol - Sodium methoxide
Sulfuryl chloride - Trityl chloride - Thionyl chloride - Toulene

Source : Bella Online
During the period she was eating and drinking Splenda, Michelle complained that she was having drastic mood swings and outbursts of crying that were affecting her normal routine. After reading more and speaking with her physician, Michelle decided to eliminate all Splenda from her diet and has since claimed that all her depression symptoms have subsided. She believes that there was a clear link between her use of Splenda and her period of depression, because the other stressors in her life are still present and she is feeling tremendously better.

Source : Red Ice
This page mentions that research in animals has shown that sucralose can cause many problems in rats, mice, and rabbits, such as: Shrunken thymus glands (up to 40% shrinkage), Enlarged liver and kidneys, Atrophy of lymph follicles in the spleen and thymus, Increased cecal weight, Reduced growth rate, Decreased red blood cell count, Hyperplasia of the pelvis, Extension of the pregnancy period, Aborted pregnancy, Decreased fetal body weights and placental weights, and Diarrhea.

And goes on to write “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 shruken thymus glands”.

Source : News Target
Health officials warn that the long term effects of Splenda consumption are unknown.

Splenda’s advertising claim that their product is made from sugar has come back to haunt them. While the product begins with sugar, significance molecular changes take place before it is ready to consume. Health officials warn that the long term effects of Splenda consumption are unknown, and consumers should take caution.

Source : WNHO.net
Dr. Mercola writes “If you are using Splenda (the brand name for sucralose) because you think it is a safe alternative to sugar or other artificial sweeteners, then you may be in for a surprise. Splenda is not healthy and it can cause many problems in the body.

But perhaps the most revealing and powerful way to learn the dangerous truth about Splenda is to read someone’s personal experience with it. Nearly every month we receive a report from someone who has had an adverse reaction to Splenda, and after you read through the story below you can read the many others posted on our site. The following story provides a revealing testimony to the dramatic effects Splenda can have on an otherwise healthy person”.

Source : News Target
Two New Studies on Aspartame and Diet Drinks Confirm Source of Obesity, Cancer/Malignant Brain Tumor Epidemics (press release). This press release also notes that, “They even got FDA to approve new deadly chemicals: Splenda and Acesulfame Potassium”.

Source : FOX News

“Splenda is not sugar” and to piggyback it on to the reputation of the centuries old profile of sugar is more than misleading, it could come back to haunt us, perhaps sooner than we think,” says Restuccia, a nutritionist at the Center for Obesity Surgery at New York Presbyterian/Columbia University Medical Center in New York City.

Source : kennesaw.edu
We can learn most of the important principles of organic chemistry through a study of the aspartame molecule. In doing so, we will see the scientific problems that chemists faced as they attempted to synthesize and evaluate this artificial sweetener.

Source : FDA
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is amending the food additive regulations to provide for the safe use of sucralose as a nonnutritive sweetener in food. This action is in response to a petition filed by McNeil Specialty Products Co.

Source : Jamba Juice
“Sucralose falls into the category of being a non-nutritive sweetener. This means that since it is 600 times sweeter than sugar, usage levels are so low that it provides minimal amount of nutrients, which also includes calories. Even though it is made from sugar, sucralose goes through a multiple-step process that selectively substitutes three atoms of chlorine for three hydrogen-oxygen groups on the sugar molecule. This change in molecular structure categorizes sucralose as an artificial sweetener”.

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.

Source : Cavalier Today
Alex Sellinger, Cavalier Daily Senior Writer writes “But is Splenda sold to consumers at face value? Lawsuits allege McNeil markets Splenda deceptively, leading many consumers to believe that it is a natural sugar product. A survey conducted by Consumers for Science and Public Interest found that 47 percent of consumers who use Splenda think it is natural“.

Source : Whole Foods Market
1. Sucralose is an artificial substance that is not found in nature, like aspartame and hydrogenated fats. Although supporters of sucralose claim that it is unable to be metabolized, up to 35% is absorbed by the body with a half life up to 23 hours.

2. Pre-approval tests indicated potential toxicity for sucralose. One study (printed in the “New Scientist”, 23 November 1991, volume 132, page 13) demonstrated that thymus weight decreased by up to 40% in rats fed diets rich in sucralose, indicating that sucralose has the potential to compromise the immune system. Note that the FDA also addressed this (and other) toxicity concerns in their Final Rule, claiming that these negative effects would not be seen in humans at recommended doses.

3. Sucralose is a chlorinated compound. Other classes of chlorinated molecules include pesticides.

4. There are no independent controlled human studies on sucralose. The bulk of the safety research has been conducted by the manufacturer.

5. There are no long-term (>13 months) human studies of sucralose’s effects and no long history of use.

Source : rense.com
PJ Tolley writes, “I just wanted to send you some information on the horrible new sweetener Splenda, so that hopefully you can warn others about this dangerous product. I tried this product, and within 2 hours of doing so, I developed severe bloating, a horrible headache and shortness of breath. I know this could only have been caused by the 3 teaspoons of Splenda I had used in my coffee, as I hadn’t eaten anything yet that morning, and my coffee was freshly ground and brewed. I then did research on Sucralose (Splenda), and discovered to my surprise a website that listed these possible side effects of using Splenda”.

Source : Forbes
NEW YORK - In the headlines this afternoon, a lawsuit alleges that Johnson & Johnson is sugar-coating Splenda to consumers.

Source : suewidemark.com
“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 gastrointestinal tract”.