The Bitter Truth about Sweeteners: Splenda’s Health Consequences
Earth Talk: The Bitter Truth about Sweeteners: Splenda’s Health Consequences
"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 I became withdrawn and disinterested in my usual hobbies.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 the flute which requires a quick mental process and fingering skills to match, but suddenly I was struggling to play. Typing was 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 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...." writes Debby Fazekas to Dr. Mercola, an advocate against sucralose use.
Mrs. Fazekas' experience with Splenda, an increasingly popular artificial sweetener, is one of many. As consciousness grows about the health problems associated with aspartame (NutriSweet and Equal), consumers have started to look for an alternative in alternative sweeteners. Many have turned to Splenda (sucralose, a sugar substitute that is used in many products. Some consumers have reported negative side effects of Splenda, but the manufacturers and FDA insist that it is safe. Looking deeper into the product's history, many consumers, doctors, and scientists are not so sure.
Sucralose (sold under the name Splenda) is a non-caloric artificial sweetener that is 600 times sweeter than sucrose (table sugar). It was discovered in 1976 by researchers working under Tate & Lyle Ltd, a British sugar refiner. Four years later, Tate & Lyle arranged with Johnson & Johnson (the world's largest healthcare company) to develop sucralose. Johnson & Johnson quickly formed McNeil Specialty Products Company in 1980 to commercialize sucralose. It was in 1998 that the US Food and Drug Administration granted approval for sucralose to be used in a variety of food products, and Diet RC cola was the first US product containing sucralose, introduced in that same year.
Sucralose is made by chlorinating sugar Splencas (sucrose). The chemical structure of sugar is NET IS 3000, 100: changed by substituting three chlorine atoms for three hydroxyl groups. The knowledge of how sucralose is made becomes an alarming factor for many people, as chloride is an extremely poisonous agent. According to Mosby's Medical, Nursing and Allied Health Dictionary, chlorine is a yellowish-green, gaseous element of the halogen group. Its atomic number is 17; its atomic weight is 35.453. It has a strong, distinctive odor, is irritating to the respiratory tract, and is poisonous if ingested or inhaled… Chlorine compounds in general use include many solvents, cleaning fluids and chloroform. Most of the solvents and leaning fluids containing chlorine are toxic when inhaled or ingested." Despite the fact that sucralose contains such a well-known poison, its manufacturers adamantly assure us that Splenda is safe to eat.
MANUFACTURER AND FDA CLAIMS
When one goes to Splenda's website, (www. splenda.com), one will find a myriad of information concerning the artificial product. "SPLENDA® Brand Sweetener is made from sugar, so it tastes like sugar, with no unpleasant aftertaste. It can be used virtually anywhere sugar is used. In cooking and baking, SPLENDA® No Calorie Sweetener can replace sugar in a variety of recipes. SPLENDA® Brand Sweetener, or sucralose, is made from sugar through a patented, multi-step process that selectively replaces three hydrogen-oxygen groups on the sugar molecule with three chlorine atoms. The result is an exceptionally stable sweetener that tastes like sugar, but c without sugar's calories. After consumption, sucralose passes through the body without being broken down," the website states.
Splenda's manufacturers claim that the sweetener is safe to use and does not break down after consumption. They claim that it is the most extensively studied food additive of today. "SPLENDA® Brand Sweetener (sucralose) has been subjected to one of the most extensive and thorough safety testing programs ever conducted on a new food additive. More than 100 scientific studies on sucralose, conducted and evaluated over a 20-year period, have demonstrated the safety of SPLENDA® Brand Sweetener."
For the manufacturers, the fact that they have added a toxic chemical in the place of normal sugar components does not pose a problem. "Chlorine, in the form of chloride, is a safe and natural element present in many of the foods and beverages that we eat and drink every day... In the case of sucralose, the addition of chlorine to the sucralose molecule is what makes sucralose free of calories. Chlorine renders the sucralose molecule chemically and biologically inert so that sucralose passes through the body without being metabolized and is eliminated after consumption."
The benefits of sucralose, according to its promoters, include the following
- Tastes like sugar - Because it is made from sugar, it tastes like sugar and leaves no bitter aftertaste.
- Can help to control weight - Because sucralose is not metabolized, it has no calories. It passes rapidly through the body and is unaffected by digestive processes*. It does not accumulate in the body*. By replacing sugar with sucralose, one can save calories significantly. (* according to the manufacturer)
- Extraordinary heat stability - Because sucralose is stable in heat, it can be used in baking, canning, pasteurization and other manufacturing processes.
- Safe - Sucralose does not cause tooth decay, cancer, genetic changes or birth defects and has no effect on carbohydrate metabolism, reproduction or the immune system (according to the manufacturer)
CRITICS DISAGREE
While most people assume that the FDA is doing its job and is keeping dangerous products off of grocery store shelves, not everyone is so easily convinced. After the public learned of the health hazards of aspartame (NutriSweet and Equal) and the conditions people were developing after consuming it, awareness of FDA corruption rose. Splenda (sucralose) is Does Splenda aid in weight loss? The industry claims that it is a great weight loss aid, but critics argue that the use of Splenda encourages unhealthy eating habits and can actually prevent weight loss! one product that has not gone under their radar.
The skeptics remind us that few human studies have been published on the effects of sucralose. While the FDA and Splenda manufacturers rely on their stock of studies, very few of them are human studies. Of those human studies that have been done, skeptics say that too many show negative consequences associated with the sweetener.
Diabetes
One small study of diabetic patients using sucralose showed a statistically significant increase in glycosylated hemoglobin, a marker of long-term blood glucose levels. Glycosylated hemoglobin is used as a marker to assess glycemic control in diabetic patients, and in uncontrolled diabetes, the number is elevated. One must wonder why the FDA and manufacturers are touting Splenda for diabetic if its use has shown that it has an effect on these levels. Splenda has been promoted for diabetic as a safe substitute for sugar.
Shrunken thymus gland
The thymus gland is the primary gland of the lympahatic system and is critical to the immune system, as T-cells mature in the thymus before migrating to the lymph nodes and the spleen. Pre-approval research in animals has shown that the consumption of sucralose can shrink the thymus gland up to 40%. While the manufacturer claimed that starvation of the mice caused the shrunken thymus glands, toxicologist Judith Bellin "reviewed studies on rats starved under experimental conditions, and concluded that their growth rate could be reduced by as much as a third without the thymus losing a significant amount of weight (less than 7%). The changes were much more marked in rats fed on sucralose. While the animal's growth rate was reduced between 7 and 20%, their thymuses shrank by as much as 40%," (from New Scientist, 23 Nov 1991, pg 13).
Studies also showed atrophy of the lymph follicles in the spleen and thymus. While the manufacturer claims that Splenda is not toxic, studies have shown significant toxic effects. Additionally, FDA reports on sucralose state that "Sucralose was weakly mutagenic in a mouse lymphoma mutation assay," and that "both sucralose and its hydrolysis products showed weakly genotoxic responses in some of the genotoxicity tests." The FDA also reports that many other tests in this area had "inconclusive" results. (Read the full FDA report at www.cfsan.fda.gov/~Ird/fr980403.html)
Other Effects
Other problems that research has shown in animals includes the following:
• Enlarged liver and kidneys
• Increased cecal weight
• Reduced growth rate
• Decreased red blood cell count
• Hyperplasia of the pelvis
• Extension of the pregnancy length
• Aborted pregnancy
• Decreased fetal body weight and placental weights
• Diarrhea
• Encourages unhealthy eating habits
• Deters weight loss
Absorption and Metabolism Issues
Manufacturers claim on their website that Splenda is not metabolized or absorbed, and this is completely false! It is true that the majority of sucralose that is consumed is excreted in the feces and urine unchanged, but the reality is that up to 40% of the ingested sucralose is metabolized. Both the metabolites and unchanged absorbed sucralose are excreted in the urine. Meanwhile, absorbed sucralose has been found to concentrate in the liver, kidney and GI tract. The Sucralose Toxicity Information Center has also found that sucralose breaks down into small amounts of 1,6-dichlorofructose, which is a chemical that has not been tested adequately in humans.
Because sucralose is a chlorinated molecule, when metabolized, some of the chlorine and other substances in splenda (including arsenic, or rat poison) is taken by the system. Alarming? Yes, when we realize that chlorinated molecules serve as the basis for pesticides like DDT and accumulate in body fat.
According to the FDA report, "Results from the submitted animal and human pharmacokinetics data identified three major sucralosemetabolites (MI, M2, and M3) in urine in addition to unchanged sucralose." The report also states, "The metabolic profile of sucralose in rats was qualitatively similar to that seen in humans. In addition to unchanged sucralose, two sucralose metabolites, Ml and M2, were detected in the urine of rats and humans after oral dosing of sucralose....A pronounced difference was observed in the proportions of M2 and M3 excreted by male versus female mice: Males produced more M2 than M3, while the opposite was true of female mice." Even within FDA and industry studies, metabolization and absorption of Splen- da Otels STRAWBERKIN shown; why are th e manu - facturers claiming that it is not? What else are they claiming that is not true? What are they hiding?
Other Issues
Purity - The FDA and manufacturer of sucralose happily report that the product has a purity rate of 98%. While that figure may sound impressive, we must ask ourselves what is the makeup of the last 2%. Studies have shown that the final Splenda product contains small amounts of heavy metals (like lead), arsenic (rat poison), methanol, triphenilphosphine oxide, chlorinated disaccharides and chlorinated monosaccharide.
Environment - Much of the sucralose that is consumed is excreted from the body in the feces and urine. While sucralose is being flushed down toilets and drains, there have not been studies conducted to see what effect this has on the environment and ecosystem. Does it remain stable or does it react with other substances? Is it, or any resulting chemicals or compounds formed, safe for the environment? How will it affect fish and other water life? What will it do to our soil, and how will it affect our food? Sucralose is no longer sugar - it is man- made, and any time we introduce a new substance into nature, consequences are not far behind. Unfortunately, studies have not been done to ensure that our environment will remain safe and stable after the introduction of sucralose, and we are not likely to know any effects that it has on our world for many years to come, if at all.
Lack of independent studies - As with most products that are scrutinized by the public, sucralose is alarmingly lacking in independent studies. Manufacturers of a product are not always honest in their studies, and their scientists are under extreme pressure to give the results that the company is counting on. Studies are not always done honestly, full results are not always given, and studies are changed or ended early to prevent alarming results from revealing themselves. As we have seen with aspartame, manufacturers have "friends" within the FDA, and sometimes political pressure to "overlook" certain facts is greater than the ethics of those involved.
Lack of long-term studies - There are insufficient long-term (12-24 months) studies on the effects of sucralose,
Lack of monitoring of health effects - Without proper monitoring, the effects of this new substance will remain unknown. It took the government decades to realize that there werecountless deaths from tobacco use because there had not been monitoring or epidemiological studies, and huge effects went unnoticed.
The Sucralose Toxicity Information Center concludes that "While it is unlikely that sucralose is as toxic as the poisoning people are experiencing from Monsanto's aspartame, it is clear from the hazards seen in pre-approval research and from its chemical structure that years of decades of use may contribute to serious chronic immunological or neurological disorders."
A growing number of consumers do not have to wait for the FDA to realize that sucralose may not be as safe as they assure us that it is. According to Lugene Azar, former Splenda consumer, "I was excited at first to find an artificial sweetener that did not give me migraines like aspartame (which also caused some depression). Although I did not use it a lot, after about six months of occasional use, I detected a pattern in my Splenda use and severe altered emotional state. I became irate, impatient, hyper-sensitive to noise, clutter and children. I really thought this was emotional breakdown, or a spiritual attack of some sort. These episodes only came periodically, but they really scared me. Then Inoticed a pattern - use of sucralose, followed in hours (or the next morning) by one of these events (lasting 3 to 5 hours). What a relief! I'm not really going nuts - and I can fix this, by never using the product again. What really upsets me is that many people are suffering and will never make any connection."