Toxicological Reasearch on Sorbitol

[Guest guest]

Dear Elaine,

 

Interesting studies.

From these, the use of sorbitol isolate would appear

equivocally unwise. That is there are questions raised

that are really not answered very well one way or the

other, but significant questions are none the less

raised.

I will still counsel all who choose to listen, to stay

away from sorbitol and its derivatives.

 

One very interesting observation that all who use

sorbitol candy or gum should make about themselves,

while using is: do they experience " apthous ulcers " ,

gum or mucosa sores in the mouth, associated with

using sorbitol? If so, that is a highly logical

association because the sorbitol is being provided in

such great concentration to those areas. Also, in my

experience, cold sores may be associated. And, of

course, any preservative would not work if it did not

kill everything that had life or metabolism in it. In

my case the effects of Benzoates, sorbates,

polysorbates, sorbitol ,etc. is just terrible. Of

course though, I have CHz from my horrible Aspartame

poisoning episode.

 

Interestingly, cresol which is included in Coke,

because it is part of the original coke formula, which

people demand the flavor of, does not bother me, so

Coke is the only soft drink I can use.(Except when

they do something really stupid, like when they

surreptitiously added " sweetener 2000 " to regular coke

in the summer of '99, and caused a world wide epidemic

of illness they had to lie their way out of.) All the

others have benzoates, or sorbates. That I don't react

to cresol is good, because I am a diabetic, and

Insulin is likewise preserved with cresol, and

hydrocresol.

 

Sincerely, Dr Jim Bowen www.bowendrjim.com

--- Elaine <mem121 wrote:

>

>

http://www.inchem.org/documents/jecfa/jecmono/v13je08.htm

INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMME ON CHEMICAL SAFETY

>

> WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION

>

>

>

> SUMMARY OF TOXICOLOGICAL DATA OF CERTAIN FOOD

> ADDITIVES

> AND CONTAMINANTS

>

>

>

> WHO FOOD ADDITIVES SERIES NO. 13

The data contained in this document were

> examined by the

> Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food

> Additives*

> Rome, 3-12 April 1978

>

>

>

>

> Food and Agriculture Organization of the United

> Nations

> World Health Organization

>

>

>

> * Twenty-second Report of the Joint FAO/WHO

> Expert Committee on Food

> Additives, Geneva, 1978, WHO Technical Report

> Series No. 631

>

> SORBITOL

>

> Explanation

>

> Sorbitol was evaluated at the seventeenth

> session of the Joint

> FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives in

> 1973. Since the previous

> evaluation new data were made available and are

> summarized below.

>

> BIOLOGICAL DATA

>

> Long-term studies

>

> Rat

>

> A total of 75 male and 75 female

> Sprague-Dawley rats of the CD

> strain were included in each dosage group. Each

> group consisted of 50

> male and 50 female rats for tumorigenic

> evaluation, 15 male and 15

> female rats for laboratory investigation, and 10

> males and 10 females

> for interim sacrifice of 5 male and female rats

> at 26 and 52 weeks.

> All animals were derived from parents exposed to

> the respective test

> diets. The test diets contained 0 or 20%

> sorbitol, or 20% sucrose. The

> diet of all groups was maintained at 20%

> carbohydrate supplementation

> through the use of rice starch in the 0% groups.

> Protein was

> maintained constant in all groups through the

> addition of casein. For

> the 20% sucrose groups, the carbohydrate was

> increased 5% per week

> until the desired level was attained.

>

> A lowered body weight gain was recorded

> through the first 78

> weeks of the study for males and females in the

> 20% sorbitol group.

> Coupled with the decreased body weight gain was

> an impairment of food

> utilization efficiency for the 20% sorbitol

> group. A higher water

> intake was seen in both male and female 20%

> sorbitol rats and was

> associated with increased urine excretion. No

> other treatment effect

> was observed on mortality, food intake, or

> clinical signs.

>

> Urinalysis indicated increased urine

> volumes for the 20% sorbitol

> All other urinalysis and haematological

> parameters, were within normal

> limits for sorbitol, sucrose, or rice starch.

> Sucrose treatment

> increased cholesterol in males at 52 weeks and

> males and females at 78

> weeks. No increase in cholesterol was noted at

> terminal sacrifice for

> the sucrose group. Both sucrose and sorbitol

> increased insulin levels

> at 26 and 52 weeks but returned to normal at 78

> weeks. At terminal

> sacrifice the sorbitol group had normal insulin

> levels but the sucrose

> males had elevated insulin levels. No other

> consistent

> treatment-related effects were noted on blood

> biochemistry for 20%

> sorbitol, 20% sucrose, or 20% rice starch.

>

> At autopsy lower absolute and relative

> thyroid weights were

> recorded for males and females in the 20%

> sorbitol and 20% sucrose

> groups. Histological examination of the animals

> indicated no

> treatment-related effects on the major organ

> systems. However, the

> incidence of both unilateral and bilateral

> hyperplasia of the adrenal

> medulla was increased significantly for both

> males and females in the

> 20% sorbitol group. Only unilateral hyperplasia

> was seen in the

> controls. Macroscopic examination indicated that

> 20% sorbitol caused

> caecal enlargement in both males and females. No

> other

> treatment-related gross pathological changes

> were noted (Hunter et

> al., 1978).

>

> Dog

>

> Sorbitol 0 or 20% was administered in the

> diet of pure-bred

> beagle dogs (eight male and eight female animals

> per group). Another

> group received 20% sucrose for comparative

> purposes. Rice starch was

> included in the diets of the controls so that

> the diet consisted of

> 80% normal diet and 20% carbohydrate. After 52

> weeks there was an

> interim sacrifice of two males and two females

> per group. The study

> was terminated at 104 weeks.

>

> Mortalities, gross clinical signs, body

> weight, food consumption,

> food conversion ratio, water consumption,

> ophthalmoscopic signs,

> neurological signs and dental changes were

> determined. Haematology,

> clinical chemistry and urinalysis were conducted

> at -1, 12, 26, 38,

> 50, 64, 76, 89 and 100 weeks.

>

> There was an increase in total serum

> protein, body weight, and

> organ weight in the 20% sorbitol groups as

> compared to the 0% group.

> There was a slight increase in the utilization

> of food in the 20%

> sorbitol group. There were no other significant

> findings (Heywood et

> al., 1977).

>

> Reproduction studies

>

> Rat

>

> A three-generation study was conducted in

> Sprague-Dawley (CD)

> specific pathogen-free rats with 20 males and 20

> females respectively

> per group. Each group received the test material

> by dietary

> administration. A control group received 20%

> rice starch. One group

> received 20% sorbitol and another group received

> 20% sucrose

> ad libitum.

>

> The pups of the F1a, F2a, and F3a

> generations were weighed

>

=== message truncated ===

 

> ATTACHMENT part 2 image/jpeg name=inchemhead.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

Protect your identity with Mail AddressGuard

http://antispam./whatsnewfree