artificial sweetners

Hey everyone, I was just wondering who here goes the splenda/saccharin/aspartame route to try to control calories during sweet cravings??   I just wanted to bring it up because these have all been shown to have extreme adverse effects in lab testing on animals, but the significance of these effects have been downplayed by the media and the FDA because of political reasons.  One thing you may or may not know is that Donald Rumsfeld was CEO of the manufacturer of nutra-sweet in the 80's.  Then he was brought to Washington by Reagan to try to convince the FDA to approve aspartame as an artificial sweetner.  Before that, aspartame was not approved by the FDA for 16 years!!   Anyway.  I've been using splenda as a sugar substitute consistently for the six months or so.  Seriously, I was getting a little crazy with it, using it in tea, buying drinks sweetened with it, etc. etc.  But recently at the grocery store, the bagger said to me "did you hear that splenda causes birth defects?"  and I said "huh?  dont you mean saccharin and aspartame?"  and he said "no, splenda...I heard it the other night on the news." well, I was a little embarrassed that I didn't hear about that.  I'm a scientist (as in, my job is doing laboratory research day in and day out...), so I should be smart about the crap I'm putting into my body, but I wasn't.  I was just believing that if it tasted so much like sugar, it must be fine.  right?....right?  no.  wrong. So, if you look at the chemical compound in splenda, Sucralose, (they say it's "made from sugar so it tastes like sugar"), it has free chlorine molecules attached to carbon molecules.  Okay...YIKES.  We have all heard about DDT, right?  well, DDT has the same property!!!  These are called "chlorocarbons"  If you look up the compound for sucralose, and look up the compound for DDT, and also look up the compound for any other chlorocarbon, you'll see that they all have this same dangerous feature.

Chlorocarbons cause all kinds of horrible things...including liver damage, cancer, birth defects, mutations, etc. etc.  Seriously, don't listen to me...go look it up yourself.   Now, I don't mean to freak you all out...personally, I'm writing this because I've been a sucralose sucking machine for nearly a year now....I just wanted to share this with all of you, too. Also, there is a non-caloric substitute for sucralose and other artificial sweetners.  It's called Stevia.  It comes from a leaf of the stevia plant found in brazil and in other parts of south america.  It does have a slight aftertaste, but I went out and bought some (both trader joes and whole foods carries it, also probably local health stores, or you can buy it on the internet) today.  It is more expensive, but only a couple of dollars more than artificial sweetners.  I know, it sucks to have to pay more...but I'd urge you all to think twice before using sucralose in the future.   Sorry for the way way WAY long length of this message!! --Julie--

Thanks Julie, you are absolutely right.  I love Splenda and was distressed when I started hearing negative things about it.  I did some research and found out that Splenda is basically poison.  Then I did further research and found out about Stevia.  I tried both the powder and liquid forms.  I prefer the liquid and that's what I use.  You're right it does have a slightly bitter taste especially when you use too much of it.  I really hated to give up Splenda because it tastes great but you gotta do what you gotta do.  It always amazes me how the government misleads the public.  When in doubt the government usually caters to corporate lobby interests.  Sad but true.

Thanks!  Yes, I hate how that happens.  If you look into stevia history, you can even see that it was consistently blocked by the FDA mostly because of lobbyists for artificial sweetners.  how messed up is that???  grrrr!! I'm glad to hear that the liquid stevia is good, because I'm not loving the powder.  I will try the liquid the next time I'm out at the store.  Also, do you have a secret for mixing the powdered stevia?  I find when I put it in cold beverages, i need to mix it forever before it goes in. 

Julie, I can give you no advice on the powdered stevia, I only used it for a short period of time.  And, although the liquid stevia is much better it is still an aquired taste.  Also it takes trial and error to figure out how much to use.

After reading all this... I am giving it all up.... no sugar in my coffee... no more "sugar-free drinks"...  This sucks....

almost anything that we use/ingest that is not completely natural (like an apple) can somehow be shown to kill you - depending on whose interests it serves, who is paying for the research, how the research is conducted etc. in most of the research i've read concerning sweetners and lab rats, they usually pump these rats full of the stuff to levels nowhere near what an average person would actually use in an entire lifetime. yes, if you are using rediculous amounts of splenda everyday, that's probably not a good idea either (moderation applies to everything!). i think the articial sweetners uproar is part of culture of fear that we like to promote. everything is dangerous. being 100 lbs overweight because you use sugar instead of chemically engineered splenda is not a good idea either. until i see some legit well supported research, it won't affect my use of splenda. JMHO.

That's perfectly fine, actually the lab rats that had inflamed livers from splenda were given normal amounts.  The problem is that you'll be waiting awhile to learn about the real effects of splenda because the nature of a chlorocarbon is it needs to build up in the system slowly over time.  DDT was not outlawed for decades.  it takes awhile to build up in the system and for people to start noticing things.   Being informed and make choices based on that information is what is important.  When I looked up information on sucralose, I read scientific journal papers and looked at the chemical compounds and based my decision on what I saw when looking at them. The fact of the matter is, chlorocarbons have consistently been shown to be toxic throughout history.  one molecule of sucralose contains three chlorocarbons.  Just because the FDA has not labeled it unsafe does not mean that it isn't unsafe.  When my grandparents were growing up, they were told that cigarettes were good for their health (for example). I prefer to be proactive on chemically modified foods that go into my body and not wait until the rock solid evidence has been brought to the surface showing something is bad for you.   Scientific research has to be funded by government agencies.  Funding is at an all time low.  It could be a long time before the truth comes out... Also, apple seeds contain cyanide.  small doses of cyanide.  eating apple will not harm you.  just the seeds. 

i also think you need to respect others interpretation of the evidence and the choices and conclusions drawn by others. from my 25 years of schooling, i know that there is research out to support basically every hypothesis. if you pick the right sample, the right methods etc, its not hard to draw the conclusions that you want to draw. of course that is bad research, but there is a ton of bad research out there. there probably are some random health benefits to smoking but clearly they do not outweight the dangers. i have silicone breast implants - many women would want nothing to do with them, but there is actually zero scientifically valid research that can conclusively link silicone implants to any health problems. and apparently this is the risk i am willing to take after having a horrible time with my initial saline implants. as tali said, you have to look at it and make the decision that you are comfortable with.

I don't believe that everything is dangerous.  Nor do I believe everything that the government (whi*****ludes the FDA) tells me.  History teaches me that wouldn't be a wise decision.  All any of us can do is inform ourselves as best we can and come to a conclusion that we feel comfortable with.

I really disilike sugar drinks. I dislike Splenda even more. I knew nothing about these hazards, I just hate the way it tastes. I despise the taste of saccharin as well.  The only one I like is aspartame and I consume 2-4 packets a day in my coffee. There are a million and one different things in this world that will kill me.  What's one more??   Sugar = obesity, high blood sugar leading to diabetes, an over worked pancreas?? splenda = liver disease saccharin = bladder cancer aspartame = brain cancer Choose the lesser of the evils I guess.   Without trying to get into a artificial sweetener debate, I'll say that I don't believe the hype about the negative affects of aspartame or saccharin. I've done a fair amount of research and looked at both sides. I just feel like there isn't enough evidence to support  the claims of either being a carcinogen.  I haven't looked into splenda/sucralose but that stuff tastes as bad as saccharin anyway, it can't be good for you!! :)