|
| |
Danger of Splenda: Fact or Fiction?
Arguments that Danger of Splenda is Real
Is Splenda dangerous? Some say yes, the Danger of Splenda is
real for the following reasons.
 | Like pesticides, Splenda is a chlorinated compound (Chlorine is toxic).
|
| Splenda is absorbed and metabolized by the body. According to the
FDA's "Final Rule" report, 11% to 27% of sucralose is absorbed in
humans. About 20% to 30% of absorbed sucralose is metabolized. |
| Insufficient evidence that it is safe. As of April 29, 2005, there were
only 76 studies cited in PubMed, the National Library of Medicine in contrast
to 3001 studies on saccharin 785 studies on aspartame. Even more
importantly,
 | There are no *independent* controlled human studies on sucralose
(similar to 15 years ago for aspartame). |
| There are no long-term (12-24 months) human studies of sucralose's
effects. |
|
| Some evidence that it is not safe: Sucralose (Splenda) may result shrunken
thymus glands, impaired immune system and enlargement of liver and kidneys
(New Scientist, Nov 23, 1991). |
Arguments that Danger of Splenda is not Real
Some say no, the Danger of Splenda is not real for the following
reasons.
| You eat other chlorinated compounds, such as table salt. |
| There is no evidence that it is not safe. The animal study results
that indicated that it was not safe could be explained by the fact the rats
did not like the taste of Splenda and were starving. Other studies
indicated that sucralose was safe. |
For me, there are too many unanswered questions about the danger of Splenda.
I avoid it.
Learn more about naturally sweet herbal
alternatives to Splenda
|
