Subject: Dangers of Splenda/Sucralose

[Guest guest]

Dangers of Splenda/Sucralose

JoAnn Guest

Mar 16, 2003 12:34 PST

 

 

There's a new artificial sweetener on the block and it is already in

a wide range of products, some even sold in health

food stores and manufactured by nutritionally-oriented companies.

 

But is it proven safe? Does it provide any benefit to the public?

 

Does it help with weight loss?

Are there any long term human studies?

Has it been shown to be safe for the environment? The answer to all

of these questions is unfortunately a resounding NO.

 

The artificial sweetener sucralose,

which is sold under the name *Splenda*™,

is one of the up-and-coming " next generation " of high-intensity sugar

substitutes.

It is non-caloric and about 600 times sweeter than

sucrose(white table sugar), although it can vary from 320 tp 1,000

times sweeter,depending on the food application.

 

The white crystalline powdertastes like a lot like sugar, but is

more intense in its sweetness.

=====================================================================

How it is Manufactured

=====================================================================

 

Sucralose is produced by *chlorinating* refined table sugar

(sucrose).

 

This involves " chemically changing " the structure of the sugar

molecules by substituting three chlorine atoms for three hydroxyl

groups.

---

History

Sucralose was discovered in 1976 by researchers working under the

auspices of Tate & Lyle Ltd., a large British sugar refiner.

 

In 1980, Tate & Lyle arranged with Johnson & Johnson, the world's

largest health care company, to develop sucralose.

Johnson & Johnson formed McNeil

Speciality Products Company in 1980 to commercialize *sucralose*.

 

In 1991, Canada became the first nation to " approve " the use of

sucralose.

 

In April, 1998 the US Food and Drug Administration granted approval

for sucralose to be used in a variety of food products

Diet RC cola was the first US

productwith sucralose, introduced in May 1998.

 

Sucralose is not yet " approved " for use in most European countries,

where it is still " under review " .

====================================================================

Safety Concerns

====================================================================

 

Few human studies of safety have been published on sucralose. One

small study of diabetic patients using the sweetener showed a

statistically significant increase in glycosylated hemoglobin

(Hba1C),

 

which is amarker of long-term blood glucose levels and is used to

assess glycemic control in diabetic patients.

 

According to the FDA, " increases in glycosolation

in hemoglobin imply " lessening of control " of diabetes (in simple

terms, it raises 'blood glucose levels and for this reason isn't

safe for diabetics!!).

 

Research in animals has shown that sucralose can cause many problems

inrats, 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

Diarrhea

 

 

A compound chemically related to sucrose, 6-chloro-deoxyglucose, is

known to have anti-fertility and " neurotoxic " effects.

 

According to the FDA's " Final Rule " report,

 

" Sucralose was weakly mutagen

in a mouse lymphoma mutation assay. "

 

Just how " few studies " currently exist on sucralose is an issue.

EnduranceNews provides the following table illustrating this fact:

 

Sweetener # of Studies*

Saccharin 2374

Aspartame598

Cyclamates459

Acesulfame-K28

Sucralose19

 

*Number of studies determined by MEDLINE search.

In terms of safety, it is not just the original substance

(sucralose)thatone needs to worry about.

 

As the FDA notes, " Because sucralose may hydrolzein some food

products...the resulting hydrolysis products may also be

ingested by the consumer. "

---

Is There Any Long-Term Human Research?

---

None.

 

According to the Medical Letter on Drugs & Therapeutics, " Its

long-term safety is unknown. " According to the Sucralose Toxicity

Information Center, the " Manufacturer's '100's of studies' (some of

whichshow hazards) were clearly inadequate and do not demonstrate

safety in long-term use. "

---

Is Sucralose Absorbed or Metabolized?

 

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 to5 hours in most studies, although the half-life in rabbits

was

found to bemuch 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.

According to The Sucralose

ToxicityInformationCenter, sucralose is broken down " into small

amounts of 1,6-dichlorofructose,

a chemical which has not been adequtely tested in humans. "

 

Chlorinated Pesticides

 

According to Consumers Research Magazine " Some concern was raised

aboutsucralose being a " chlorinated molecule " .

 

Some chlorinated molecules

serve as the " basis " for pesticides such as D.D.T., and 'accumulate'

in body fat.

 

However, Johnson & Johnson emphasized that sucralose passes through

the body unabsorbed. "

Of course, this assertion about not being absorbed is complete

nonsense.

 

As shown above, a substantial amount of sucralose is absorbed,

so the argumentis " not valid " .

 

According to the HAD, " The manufacturer claims that the chlorine

added to sucralose is similar to the chlorine atom in the salt (NaCl)

molecule.

Thatis not the case.

 

Sucralose may be more like ingesting tiny amounts

ofchlorinated pesticides, but we will never know without

long-term,independent human research. "

====================================================================

Contaminants

 

The FDA acknowledges that sucralose " is produced at an approximate

purity of 98%. " While that may sound pretty pure, just what is in

that

=other 2%?

 

It turns out that the final sucralose product contains small amounts

of potentially dangerous substances such as:

 

Heavy Metals (e.g., Lead)

Arsenic

Triphenilphosphine Oxide

Methanol

Chlorinated Disaccharides

Chlorinated Monosaccharide

 

Although manufacturing guidelines do specify limits on these

substancesthere is no guarantee that such limits will always be met.

 

=====================================================================

Environmental Concerns

 

Despite the fact that a portion of sucralose is metabolized into some

chemicals of questionable safety, a majory of the consumed sucralose

isexcreted unchanged in the feces and urine. While that may be good

fortheperson using the product, it may not be so great for the

environment.

 

Although sucralose is being flushed down toilets wherever sucralose

isapproved for sale, what happens to it next is simply a matter for

speculation. I know of no studies showing what happens to the

chemical whenthe raw sewage is treated and then released back into

the environment.

 

Does it remain stabile or react with other substances to form new

compounds?

 

Is the sucralose or any resulting chemicals safe for the environment?

 

How will this chemical affect aquatic life such as fish, as well as

other animals?

 

Will sucralose begin to appear in our water supplies, just as some

drugs arebeginning to be found.

 

Of course, we will likely not know the answers to these questions for

manyyears, if at all. One of the main reasons for this is that the

FDAdid notrequire an Environmental Impact Statement

for sucralose,

because in theirwords, " the action will not have a significant

impact on the humanenvironment. "

 

One study did find that sucralose is metabolized by microrganisms in

boththe water and soil (Labare 94). However, the ecological impact of

this newchemical being introduced into the environment is unknown.

=====================================================================

Is There a Benefit for Consumers?

According to Consumers' Research Magazine, sucralose provides some

benefitsfor the corporations making and using it, but not for

consumers.

====================================================================

They state:

 

But are such foods truly beneficial and desirable? Diabetics, weight

watchers, and the general public might make better food choices by

selecting basic, rather than highly processed foods;

for example, apples,rather than turnovers; or plain, rather than

sweetened, dairy foods.

 

They note that non-caloric artificial sweeteners are not replacing,

butrather supplementing conventional sweeteners. They note that as of

1990Americans were consuming an average of 20 pounds (sugar sweetness

equivalency) of artificial sweeteners, and as consumption of

sugar-substitutes has risen so too has consumption of sugar.

===================================================================

 

Does Sucralose Help with Weight Loss?

 

According to Consumers' Research Magazine " There is no clear-cut

evidencethat sugar substitutes are useful in weight reduction. On the

contrary,there is some evidence that these substances

may " stimulate appetite " . "

---

Where is Sucralose Found?

 

In the United States, the FDA has granted approval for the use of

sucralosein 15 food and beverage categories: (For a complete list of

productscontaining sucralose

 

Baked goods and baking mixes

Chewing gum

Confections and frostings

Fats and oils (salad dressings)

Fruit and water ices

Jams and jellies

Processed fruits and fruit juices

Sweet sauces, toppings and syrups

Beverages and beverage bases

Coffee and tea

Dairy product analogs

Frozen dairy desserts and mixes

 

Gelatins, puddings and fillings

 

Milk products

Sugar substitutes

 

For a complete list of products containing sucralose

-

Comparison to Other Sweeteners

 

Its promoters cite several benefits over other sweeteners, such as:

 

As a comparison to sucralose's 600-fold sweetness increase over

sugar,consider the other artificial sweeteners on the market:

 

Saccharin (Sweet-and -Low) - 300 to 500 times sweeter

Aspartame (NutraSweet and Equal) - 150 to 200 times sweeter

 

Acesulfame K (Sunette) - 200 times sweeter.

 

Big Business

 

A 1998 report in Chemical Week states that the high-intensity

sweetenermarket is about $1.5-billion/year.

 

About 70%-80% of that market

ismade upof soft drink sweeteners, of which aspartame has a near

monopoly.

 

They notethat although sucralose is 50% sweeter than aspartame, it

will bedifficultto persuade many soft drink producers to give up

NutraSweet(aspartame)

since it is widely accepted by consumers.

---

 

Is Anyone Monitoring Post-Approval Reactions?

 

Apparently not. With no established system for monitoring and

tracking

post-approval adverse effects, how can it ever be established whether

large-scale and long-term consumption of sucralose is safe?

 

Technical Information

 

Sucralose is made from sucrose by substituting three chlorine atoms

forthree hydroxyl groups to yield

1,6-dichloro-1,6-dideoxy-BETA-D-fructofuranosyl-4-chloro-4-deoxy-

alpha-D-galactopyranoside. This is accomplished in a five-step

process.

 

Prolonged storage, particularly at high temperatures and low pH,

causes thesucralose to break down into 4-chloro-4-deoxy-galactose

(4CG)

and1,6-dichloro-1,6-dideoxyfructose (1,6 DCF),

 

The Chemical Abstracts Service Registry number (CAS Reg. No.) for

sucraloseis 56038-13-2.

====================================================================

Should Sucralose be Avoided?

====================================================================

The Holistic Medicine Web Page cites the following reasons to avoid

sucralose:

 

Pre-approval tests indicated potential toxicity of sucralose.

There are no *independent* controlled human studies on sucralose

(similar to15 years ago for aspartame).

 

There are no long-term (12-24 months) human studies of sucralose's

effects.

 

There is no monitoring of health effects. It took government agencies

decades to agree that there were countless thousands of deaths from

tobacco.

 

Why? Simply because there had been no monitoring or epidemiological

studies.

 

Without such monitoring and studies, huge effects can easily go

unnoticed.

 

Do Products with Sucralose Carry Any Warning Labels Or Information

Statements?

No.

The regulatory agencies and scientific review bodies that have

endorsedthe safety of sucralose have not required any warning

information tobeplaced on the labels of products sweetened with

sucralose.

 

Conclusions:

 

The Sucralose Toxicity Information Center concludes that:

 

While it is unlikely that sucralose is as toxic as the poisoning

people areexperiencing from Monsanato's aspartame, it is clear from

the

hazardsseenin pre-approval research and from its chemical structure

that

years ordecades of use may contribute to serious chronic

immunological

orneurological disorders.

 

The Consumer's Research Magazine concludes that:

 

As Americans continue to choose ever-increasing amounts of such foods

andbeverages, sweeteners may soar to higher consumption levels. The

long-rangehealth effects from such escalation need careful

evaluation.

Doadditionalapproved sweetening agents truly contribute to good

health?

Do theyreally

meet special dietary needs? Or, do they merely further encourage poor

dietary choices?

 

=====================================================================

 

Four Recent Examples of What Splenda Can Do To You

 

=====================================================================

 

I bought a low-carb bar called " Ultimate Lo Carb " by Biochem at a

local

health food store. I have been eating foods low in starchy carbs and

thought

this might be a good snack bar. Well, almost immediately after eating

eat I

became nauseous. Then my stomach starting cramping and I began dry

heaving.

I wondered what could have caused this and decided to try and read

the

label. The only ingredient I did not recognize was " sucralose " .

So, I jumped on the internet and did a search for it and found your

article.

 

In the meantime I was heaving and feeling even worse. Well, I am

allergic tochlorine, as well as having a liver that doesn't function

very well(I take

a natural supplement called " Lipogen " for liver support as prescribed

by my

ND), and when I saw what you had to say about sucralose, I figured

that waswhat was causing it.

I kept feeling worse, and I decided I needed to get it out of my

system andtook some ipecac (maybe not the best move, but the only

thing

I couldthink

of). By the time the syrup got into my stomach the heaving was

getting worseand intestinal distress was setting in. It was like

eating

badseafood. Inearly died of food poisoning by crab legs a number of

years back,and this

was the closest thing to that feeling.

 

Finally everything in my system started coming out, and my body

didn't stopuntil my entire digestive tract was cleared out. I have

never

reactedthisviolently to anything I have eaten except for when I have

had

foodpoisoning.

 

Something needs to be done to get this product off the market.

I can't help but be convinced that the FDA takes payoffs. No ethical

personcould approve the use of things like MSG (another thing I

cannottolerateeating), which is classified by the FDA as an

excitotoxin

and isknown to beharmful to the central nervous system. I will do

everything to get

people toread your article and get the word out on the FDA's latest

blunder.

 

Best,

Shelley Flis

 

 

THANK YOU so much for your informative site! I am

currently " detoxing " from

using sucralose after a terrible reaction. 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

tiredduring the day, but couldn't sleep at night either. I play

flute

whichrequires a quick mental process and fingering skills to match

butsuddenly I

was struggling to play. Typing is 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 quickly dismissed the thought - despite having experienced a

similarsituation with Equal a few years back. I called it " Jekyl v.

HydeSyndrome. "

But it seemed I noticed the changes much quicker with Equal than with

Splenda.

 

I really suffered yesterday. I was an emotional wreck. I cried and

cried. I

felt like I was losing my mind. My husband and son discussed my

disturbingbehavior while I was in the shower. Our son, Tim, recalled

that thechangesbegan with that little yellow box. Steve, (my

husband,)

mentioned itto me.

 

Little by little, things fell into place, including the unexplainable

accident I recently had in our truck.

I had just stopped at a stop sign and the trooper said that I

couldn't havebeen going over 15 miles an hour when I nearly rolled

our

truck. Evenhesaid that I narrowly escaped injury. I nearly had a

second

accidentlastweek.

 

My senses had become SO dulled, I could barely function.

I could not focus on anything. Even playing my flute was so hard. I

normallystand to play, but for the past two weeks at practice, I sat

a

lot. I

felt " dazed. "

 

This morning, I feel MUCH better than I have in the recent weeks. Not

quite " normal, " but much better. Even the acne (on my otherwise clear

skin)isfading away. Yep! I had a patch of acne, which appeared when

I

beganusingSplenda!

 

How many people are suffering from what appears to be diseases - or

evenacne, when it is simply a reaction to a chemical they are

ingesting?

Ifcompanies were forced to list the ingredients of these products,

suchasarsenic, they'd sure be a lot more careful! I mean, who would

intentionallypoison themselves?

 

 

Debby Fazekas

 

Four years ago I began to have panic attacks and was on BuSpar for

about a

year. I started reading about aspartame and consumed the product

daily --

mostly in diet drinks and was a big consumer of Diet Rite. After

learning

about problems other people were having I quit completely consuming

the

stuff. And have been panic free for 3 years.

In December I started using splenda and at the same time started

having a

great deal of anxiety and had a couple of panic attacks but didn't

think

about the link of Splenda and the anxiety until about a week ago. I

also had

my mom visiting and introduced her to Splenda--guess what-- she

started

having panic attacks during her visit and actually cut her visit

short due

to her feeling bad.

 

I haven't consumed anymore of it for a week but am still having

problems.

Oh, I also was having an irregular heart beat which I did see my

doctor

about. He assured me that my blood pressure was excellent and

cholesterol

also good and I shouldn't worry about my heart.

I consume very little to no caffine. Local doctors don't put much

faith in

the idea that Nutra Sweet caused problems. I'm sure my new theory

about

Splenda would carry even less weight. By the way, I have a very

stess-

free

life-style. I run my own little business and set my own hours. I

don't

believe my environment is causing any irregular stress.

 

Sue

__________________

 

 

 

Don't let these large companies fool you. There is no magic

alternative to

sugar when it comes to sweeteners. You simply can not have your cake

and eat

it too when it comes to this area. It is far too early to tell, as

not

enough people have consumed this product to observe large numbers of

adverse

effects.

However, I have had a number of patients in our Wellness Center who

have hadsome severe migraines and even seizures possibly from

consuming

this

product.

 

My advice?AVOID Sucralose.

I am fond of telling people that if something tastes sweet you

probably

should spit it out as it is not likely to be to good for you. This of

course, is a humorous exaggeration, but for most people who struggle

withchronic illness, it is likely to be a helpful guide.

PLEASE note this article is being written in 2000. This is one of the

firstcomprehensive clear investigative reports and warnings on

sucraloseon theInternet.

 

 

 

 

Sources:

 

Food and Drug Administration " Final Rule " for Sucralose, 21 CFR Part

172,Docket No. 87F-0086.

Lord GH, Newberne PM. Renal mineralization--a ubiquitous lesion in

chronicrat studies. Food Chem Toxicol 1990 Jun;28:449-55.

Labare MP, Alexander M. Microbial cometabolism of sucralose, a

chlorinateddisaccharide, in environmental samples.

1994Oct;42:173-8.

Hunter BT. Sucralose. Consumers' Research Magazine, Oct90, Vol. 73

Issue 10,p8, 2p.

Maudlin RK. FDA approves sucralose for expanded use. Modern Medicine,

Oct99,Vol. 67 Issue 10, p57, 1/9p

 

Sucralose--a new artificial sweetener. Medical Letter on Drugs &

Therapeutics, 07/03/98, Vol. 40, Issue 1030, p67, 2p.

 

Q & A: Is newly FDA approved sweetener sucralose good for you?

ExecutiveHealth's Good Health Report, Nov98, Vol. 35 Issue 2, p6,

1p, 1c.

 

Gain B. FDA approves J & J Sweetener. Chemical Week, 04/15/98, Vol. 160

Issue14, p27, 1/4p.

 

Sucralose Toxicity Information Center

Splenda Product Web Site

Official Tate & Lyle Sucralose Web Site

Endurance News, Issue 26.