Just How Dangerous Are Splenda and Artificial Sweeteners – Which Side is Spinning?
Are the estimates (in the report above) of the real number of toxic reactions accurate? I\’m no epidemiologist but what struck me was the large number of serious toxic reactions reported by pilots. My conclusion — I won\’t use the stuff. And there are suggestions that the offshoot – Neotame – may be even worse.
Everyone pretty much knows the kinds of problems that have been reported with cyclamates and Saccharin. Weirdly – perhaps bad tracking? – the actual dangers still seem unclear after many years of use. However, as I read it, they seem to be substantially less toxic than some more recent artificial sweeteners.
Splenda is the latest and greatest. Reportedly manufactured from sugar by substituting 3 chlorine atoms for 3 hydroxyl groups, some claim that the end product is not what it should be. Apparently if it were made from sugar then when you dissolve it in water (hydrolyze), it ought to produce chlorinated glucose which is a known toxin. Instead it produces chlorinated monosaccharides.
At this point, I think it\’s my head that\’s spinning. I\’m uncertain whether Splenda is safe, reasonably safe, slightly risky or seriously risky. When I looked at the manufacturer\’s site and a couple other sites that were all enthused about Splenda, I didn\’t see any answers to the points the critics are making. Mostly it\’s all lightness, sweetness and the miracle of modern science.
Like you I\’ve seen some miracles of modern science turn into nightmares when the testing wasn\’t adequate, when the results were fudged, when coverups went on. So questions exist about all the artificial sweeteners. Splenda may be less dangerous than Aspartame (which I sure wouldn\’t recommend to anyone). Long-term and independent studies are lacking. And here\’s the real kicker:
***** From Consumers\’ Research Magazine “There is no clear-cut evidence that sugar substitutes are useful in weight reduction. On the contrary, there is some evidence that these substances may stimulate appetite.”
Now that just tears it. Risk your health using one of these chemicals and then end up eating more because it stimulates your appetite. Terrific.
Our health is challenged on all sides these days. New chemicals, new additives, genetically engineered foods, highly processed foods, empty calories, stress and pollution all pose threats to our bodies. I\’ve come to the conclusion that the fewer highly processed, chemically enhanced, questionably assessed, factory created products we ingest, the better off we will probably be.
Our bodies evolved as a part of the natural world and though we are changing the world radically (which is only natural, it is what people do after all), our bodies do not evolve and adapt at the rate technology changes. And for scientific, political and economic reasons, the quality and thoroughness of evaluations done on newly created products don\’t match up to our industrial creativity.
Finally, balancing the need to lose weight (or maintain an optimum weight) against potential risks creates difficult choices. It\’s up to you to make the best choice you can for your specific situation — just remember, that old saw still holds – Let the buyer beware.
is an informational site providing recipes, articles, news and diet resources. Since many recipes are designed to use Splenda, please take a look at
for additional information.’, ”)
just how dangerous are splenda and artificial s