Guest guest Posted December 28, 2004 Report Share Posted December 28, 2004 Yes I would have to agree with this. Splenda is awful stuff! I had bought some of it thinking, ok cool I will give this a try. WOW! Much to my surprise I started having bad pain in my kidney region. I did some looking online.. check out www.mercola.com Dr Mercola has alot of info here. I also talked to my chiro about it, and mentioned Mercola's site. He said he didn't know off hand about the Splenda but knows Dr Mercola and told me to stop the stuff immediately. Which I did not need him telling me, I had stopped it as soon as I read about pain and kidney failure. The sad thing is, I wasn't even consuming this in large amounts... maybe in some coffee or tea, that was it!!! Please do not by any products with this ingredient. ~*~ In Love, Laughter, and Moonlight ~*~~*~ Lady Garnet Moon ~*~Witches follow their hearts and take responsibility for their actions.Life is not measured by the number of breaths we takebut by the moments that take our breath away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 18, 2007 Report Share Posted September 18, 2007 SPLENDA IS NOT SPLENDID! http://www.wnho.net/splenda.htm By James Bowen, M.D. © 2003 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 " . It has no commercial purpose other than a contract on humanity. Either they have done but little testing of sucralose, or they are so afraid of what the public would think of sucralose, and the government if the public but knew what was going on, that they will not tell us! BECAUSE: we have been told nothing about the extensive studies which would have to have been done if very reasonable, and scientifically sound FDA rules had been followed. Radiating UNCONDITIONAL LOVE & Truth To ALL who share our circle, our universe, our love, our trust. May I always be found worthy. Gratitude & Thankfulness to All of Us aSoaringHawk Look at everything as though you were seeing it either for the first or last time. Then your time on earth will be filled with joy & glory. Thank you for YOU, ALL! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 19, 2007 Report Share Posted September 19, 2007 aSoaringHawk I agree with everything you said in this. However, I am a bit baffledabout the FDA connection with Donald Rumsfeld. He was Secretary of Defense. He had nothing to do with the FDA as far as I know. Do you have any information on that? By the way, I am not a fan of his. GB > 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 " . It > has no commercial purpose other than a contract on humanity. Either they > have done but little testing of sucralose, or they are so afraid of what the > public would think of sucralose, and the government if the public but knew > what was going on, that they will not tell us! BECAUSE: we have been told > nothing about the extensive studies which would have to have been done if > very reasonable, and scientifically sound FDA rules had been followed. > 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.