|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
What Is Sucralose, And Is It Dangerous?The product "NewSweet" is our business, but our investigation into the possible dangers of sucralose is personal... and started when my Mothers' diabetes got so bad that she had to move in with us. She loved to bake... but could no longer use sugar. So she brought her Splenda with her and immediately started plying us with her artificially sweetened cookies and cakes. They were horrible! But we couldn't hurt her feelings, so we began looking for a healthy sugar substitute which was also NATURAL. Something that Mom could bake with. "NewSweet" was the result. But I'm getting sidetracked... you're here to learn about the possible dangers of Sucralose (Splenda). Here's what we learned...There's literally an "ocean" of information on the net regarding sucralose... which is marketed as Splenda. The manufacturer and the FDA say it's safe. But a growing body of evidence suggest that it's not. The purpose of THIS article to provide just enough information to create REASONABLE doubt as to its' safety. If I succeed, then you’ll do your homework… and draw your own conclusions. McNeil Nutritionals, a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson, markets sucralose. And in spite of claims in their literature of “110 scientific studies, representing over 20 years of research“… only 5 studies have been published on the side effects of sucralose on humans. The longest of which was only 13 weeks. But studies done before the FDA approved Sucralose, reported the following side effects on animals:
What We've Found Regarding Side Effects Of Sucralose On Humans:Since its’ appearance in the marketplace, thousands of consumers have reported health problems that they belived were related to Splenda use. Such as...
The "Spin Doctors" Get Their Wings Clipped...McNeil Nutritionals has done a great job marketing this product. Until a lawsuit in 2008 forced them to discontinue its’ use, their primary advertising slogan was “Made from sugar, so it tastes like sugar.“ Up until the lawsuit, McNeil had already spent millions, creating the public misconception that Splenda is a safe, natural sugar substitute. But it’s actually produced in a chemical factory… and its’ chemical formula puts it closer to the banned pesticide “DDT” than to table sugar. So… Exactly What Is Sucralose?Here's McNeils’ Version, Taken Word For Word From Their Website… “SPLENDA® Brand Sweetener (sucralose), the sweetening ingredient in SPLENDA® Sweetener Products, is manufactured through a patented process that begins with sugar and produces a sweetener that is about 600 times sweeter than sugar. “ Chemical Composition… “Sucralose is manufactured, using a patented multistep process in which 3 hydrogen-oxygen groups on the sugar (sucrose) molecule are selectively replaced with 3 chlorine atoms. Sucralose starts with sugar and tastes like sugar, but it’s not sugar.” Sounds Harmless Enough… But Here’s The Laboratory Answer…The substitution of three “3 hydrogen-oxygen groups” with 3 chlorine atoms, converts table sugar into “chlorinated” sugar. In other words it's a “chlorocarbon“. And chlorocarbons have a history of producing organ impairment, genetic mutation and reproductive issues. Other chemicals in the “chlorocarbons class” are “DDT”, “Chlordane” and the highly carcinogenic “chloroethylene”. All have been banned in the United States. In spite of the implications related to sucralose being a chlorocarbon, McNeil says there’s no health risk… because MOST of the sucralose passes through the body and out the bowel, or is eliminated in the urine. Here’s the word-for-word quote from their web site...… “The majority (about 85%) of consumed sucralose is not absorbed and passes through the gastrointestinal tract unchanged. Approximately 15% of ingested sucralose is passively absorbed, which is related to the fact that sucralose is a very small, very water-soluble molecule.” Pardon Me For Being Picky... But...If only 85% of the sucralose is eliminated, what happens to the other 15%! And NcNeils' claim of 15% absorption rate may be a lowballed number… according to the Japanese Food Sanitation Council, as much as 40% of it stays in the body. ...40 percent!!! Compounding the problem, is the fact that Sucralose is EVERYWHERE... We’re not talking about an occasional dose in your tea or coffee. Today, it's is used in over 4,000 foods. So the potential build-up in human tissue is very real. But McNeil Claims A “Multitude Of Studies” Prove Splenda Safe…Again, copied from their website… But Here’s The Rest of THAT Story…The majority of these 110 studies did NOT assess the potential toxicity of the chemical, but on issues such as the impact of sucralose of tooth decay... and how it's measured… etc. Only 15 of them were SAFETY studies. And only 5 were performed on humans. And longest human study lasted only 13 weeks.Is ONE 13-week
study a solid basis to declare Splenda safe No Major Follow Up Studies Done…In spite of THOUSANDS of health problems reported by consumers, there have been no long-term human studies published since the FDA approved sucralose. Personally, it feels like Splenda is just ANOTHER hugely profitable health experiment… involving millions of unknowing consumers. It's Everyones' Choice, But THIS Little "Lab Rat" Has Chosen To Opt-Out Of That Experiment!Is short, McNeil is making claims that don't hold up under close scrutiny. And unless people start dropping dead, the FDA isn't going to get involved. So, as usual, it's left up to us as individuals to decide. To see the ACTUAL chemical formula of sucralose... click
here There IS a Safe, Delicious Alternative To Chemical Sweeteners...It tastes EXACTLY like sugar, it sweetens 1-for-1 just like sugar... and it bakes just like sugar. But it has NONE of the negatives that come with refined sugar!
It's a proprietary blend of naturally occurring plant sugars... NO chemicals... NOTHING artificial... NOTHING toxic... and NO aftertaste.
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
