Page 1 of 3

Splenda...more harm than good

Posted: Tue Jun 07, 2005 9:15 pm
by hurricanedude
Fiction: Splenda is natural sugar without calories.

Fact: Johnson & Johnson claims that "Splenda is made from sugar, so it tastes like sugar". Johnson & Johnson wants consumers to think that it is natural sugar without calories. The truth is that Splenda is not natural and does not taste like sugar. The sweetness of Splenda derives from a chlorocarbon chemical that contains three atoms of chlorine in every one of its molecules. The manufacturer of this chlorinated compound named it sucralose. The improper use of “ose” in the name creates the illusion that sucralose is natural like sucrose which is the precise name for table sugar. Johnson & Johnson wants consumers to believe that the taste of Splenda is due solely to natural sugar, that is, due to sucrose. However, the manufacturer has patented several chemical processes for making the chlorinated chemical compound it calls sucralose. The patent literature illustrates that sucralose can be chemically manufactured from starting materials that do not require natural sugar. In one patent, for example, the manufacturer constructs sucralose from raffinose by substituting atoms of chlorine for hydroxyl groups in raffinose. Raffinose is a molecule found naturally in beans, and onions and other plants, but unlike natural sucrose, it has very little taste. In another patented process three atoms of chlorine are substituted for three hydroxyl groups in sucrose. The end product of both of these manufacturing processes is an entirely new chlorocarbon chemical called sucralose. Each molecule of sucralose contains three atoms of chlorine which makes it 600 times sweeter than a natural molecule of sugar which contains no chlorine. Splenda has it’s own artificial taste which is due to this chlorinated compound.

Back to Top

Fiction: Splenda is safe to eat, even for children.

Fact: There are no conclusive tests that support this statement. Again, there have been no long-term human studies conducted to determine the potential health effects of Splenda on humans, including children.

Until long-term human studies are conducted, no one will know for sure whether Splenda is really safe or unsafe for humans to eat.

Back to Top

Fiction: Splenda has been thoroughly tested.

Fact: There has not been a single long-term human study to determine the potential health effects of Splenda on people. The FDA relied on a few short-term tests when it reviewed the safety of Splenda for human consumption. Worse, these human tests were all conducted by the manufacturer of Splenda, hardly an unbiased source. The vast majority of tests reviewed by the FDA to determine whether Splenda was safe for human consumption were conducted on animals, including rats and rabbits.

Back to Top

Fiction: Products made with Splenda do not need warning labels.

Fact: Splenda is found in nearly 3,500 food products and amazingly, not all of these products list Splenda as an ingredient, and none of them say the product contains chlorine. Furthermore, none of the regulatory agencies or scientific review bodies that have confirmed the safety of sucralose require any warning information to be placed on the labels of products sweetened with sucralose.

Consumers have a right to know exactly what is contained in the food products they buy for themselves and, particularly, for their children. Consumers should be provided with information that allows them to make educated choices about the food products they include in their diets. This is especially true for products that contain Splenda, a chemical substance made with chlorine that has not been the subject of any long-term human studies to determine its health effects on the human body.

Back to Top

Fiction: Once eaten, Splenda simply passes through the body.

Fact: This is what the manufacturer of Splenda claims, and consumers who realize they are actually eating chlorine may hope it is true, but the FDA determined that as much as 27% of sucralose can be absorbed by the body. This is particularly alarming for a chemical substance containing chlorine. Clearly the makers of Splenda are not being entirely forthcoming about their product's influence in the body.

Back to Top

Fiction: The chlorine found in Splenda is similar to that found in other foods we eat.

Fact: The manufacturer of Splenda claims that chlorine is naturally present in such foods as lettuce, mushrooms and table salt, but they never directly state that eating Splenda is the same as eating these foods. Remember, Splenda is not a natural substance, it is an artificial chemical sweetener manufactured by adding three chlorine atoms to a sugar molecule. And again, because there have been no long-term human studies on Splenda to determine the potential health effects on people, no one can say with certainty that the substance is safe to eat.

Back to Top

Fiction: Consumers have every reason to believe what they see and hear in Splenda’s advertisements.

Fact: In an effort to convince consumers that “Splenda is made from sugar, so it tastes like sugar” and to encourage them to “Think sugar, say Splenda”, the giant drug manufacturer Johnson & Johnson is running a multi-million dollar advertising campaign encouraging the misperception that their artificial sweetener is equivalent to all-natural sugar. Splenda is not sugar and is not natural.

Splenda’s advertisements that read “The Dance of the Splenda Plum Fairy,” “Splenda and Spice and Everything Nice,” and “Roses are Red, Violets are Blue, Splenda is Sweet and So Are You” have been characterized by one marketing ethics reporter as nothing but “sleight-of-hand marketing.” Despite all the slick Madison Avenue advertising, the fact remains that Splenda is actually a chemical compound that contains chlorine. The more chlorine atoms, the sweeter the taste. Consumers deserve to know the truth about the food products they are purchasing for themselves and their families.

awwww

Posted: Tue Jun 07, 2005 9:22 pm
by Windsong
Thanks for the info hurricanedude. I spent my whole life avoiding sugar substitutes thinking that real sugar is still the best bet. I have recently become diabetic and latched on tightly to Splenda. Guess THAT was a mistake.

My first clue should have been when I added it to my tea and I could hear it SIZZLE. Just goes to show you that the old phrase still applies. If it seems too good to be true, it probably is... sigh......

Windsong

Posted: Tue Jun 07, 2005 9:45 pm
by Brent
Yep... I prefer sugar over these "substitutes" as well.

Sweet-n-Low(not sure if it's still around but it was a few years ago) has that Sacchrine in it.

Posted: Tue Jun 07, 2005 10:05 pm
by alicia-w
i like splenda. a lot.

Posted: Tue Jun 07, 2005 10:32 pm
by Pebbles
I can't really speak about splenda... never have used sugar substitutes. But as far as chlorine it's been in my drinking water, cooking water, shower water, swimming water (so much in the swimming water of pools most of the time your your eyes burn a little). They tell you to use it in water if your unsure of the purity of the water. Large amounts of chlorine is bad.. but small amounts like we encounter every day are I think ok. I've never seen studies saying we shouldn't use it. Would imagine if it was that dangerous it wouldn't be in our water. Picture me shrugging.

Christine

Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 7:31 am
by azskyman
I'm a Splenda user. Seems a tossup between Sweet-N-Low with its sacharrin issues and Equal which is in the third place.

On the other hand...we're told not to consume too much pure sugar...especially as we get older.

I'll watch to see how it plays out.

Maybe all of us Splenda users will be party to a class action law suit and we can each be awarded millions of dollars and retire on an island where all foods are natural and we succumb to bad rum and tainted pineapple in our sunset Mai Tai's.

Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 7:51 am
by Amanzi
LOL Steve... book my seat and order me that drink!

I cant handle any artificial sugar taste. That includes diet soda, *blech*.
I grew up in an area that was surrounded by sugar cane fields, and their was nothing better than breaking off a stalk and chewing on a piece of sugar cane. It really is wiered because sugar is sweeter in some areas than others. The pure sugar cane from home (South Africa) seems to be much sweeter than the sugar I have here in florida.

I honestly think things like splenda etc, cant be all that healthy for you, but then again, copious amounts of natural sugar dont do you much good either. It is all about moderation in the long run.. *hmm thats rich coming from a woman who has 4-5 teaspoons of sugar in a cup of tea* :roll:

Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 8:05 am
by drudd1
In one patent, for example, the manufacturer constructs sucralose from raffinose by substituting atoms of chlorine for hydroxyl groups in raffinose. Raffinose is a molecule found naturally in beans


I wouldn't worry too much about it. Given the fact that it can be derived from beans, and contains chlorine, studies will probably decide that a when a person consumes splenda and farts, the emissions damage the ozone layer, and it will be outlawed :D

Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 8:13 am
by Pburgh
Thanks Dude. I'm sorry but I love Splenda. Equal is my next favorite. I've been using artificial sweeteners of one kind or another for 40 years!!! :eek: I have no health problems and feel pretty terrific. Now that's not to say that my nose won't fall off or my teeth won't turn black at any time, but so far so good. I can still remember the taste of the original saccharin. YUK

Having spent 1/2 of my life in a chlorinated swimming pool, if that was going to have an affect on me, my kids would have 25 fingers and two heads!!! :eek: :eek:

Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 10:34 am
by southerngale
azskyman wrote:I'm a Splenda user. Seems a tossup between Sweet-N-Low with its sacharrin issues and Equal which is in the third place.

On the other hand...we're told not to consume too much pure sugar...especially as we get older.

I'll watch to see how it plays out.

Maybe all of us Splenda users will be party to a class action law suit and we can each be awarded millions of dollars and retire on an island where all foods are natural and we succumb to bad rum and tainted pineapple in our sunset Mai Tai's.


:roflmao:

Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 11:32 am
by Skywatch_NC
My mother uses Splenda (she's a diabetic) but not to the point of needing insulin. I use Splenda, also, since having hypoglycemia and am a borderline diabetic.

I alternate every now and then with a little sugar, though.

Not going to lose any sleep over a little chlorine.

Eric

Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 1:17 pm
by wx247
Hey hurricanedude.... source? 8-)

Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 1:25 pm
by sunny
wx247 wrote:Hey hurricanedude.... source? 8-)


http://truthaboutsplenda.com/factvsfiction/

Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 1:37 pm
by Pburgh
Hey Dude, you have changed your name and you certainly are a lot shorter!!!!lol

Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 1:38 pm
by sunny
Pburgh wrote:Hey Dude, you have changed your name and you certainly are a lot shorter!!!!lol


:roflmao:

He's prettier than I am Karan!

Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 1:40 pm
by Skywatch_NC
Mike, :)

You enjoy your sugar and (Sugar Sunny)...we'll enjoy our Splenda. :P :wink:

Eric 8-)

Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 1:50 pm
by Pburgh
You're right Eric, he doesn't need anything sweetened. He has Sunny to make his life sweet.

Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 2:51 pm
by LSU2001
Don't mean to be a smartA$#
But Table Salt is made from one atom of Sodium (an explosive and corrosive metal) and one atom of Chlorine (a poisonous gas). Together these elements form NaCl or Table Salt.

My point is this, you cannot determine the toxic effects of a substance by looking at the elements found in the the molecule. It is the final molecular structure of the compound that must be studied to determine toxicity.
Tim

Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 3:06 pm
by gtalum
Just out of curiosity, what is the source of this ridiculous article? The author is clearly ignorant about organic and inorganic chemistry. The fact that the author claims that the presence of chlorine in the product indicates cause for concern illustrates that point.

Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2005 3:15 pm
by LSU2001
No conflict of interest here guys!!!!!
This is on the bottom of the home page
http://truthaboutsplenda.com

This website is part of an effort to educate consumers about the chemical artificial sweetener Splenda and is provided by The Sugar Association, which represents sugar beet and sugar cane farmers across America. All the information provided is based on publicly available sources, and this site functions as a clearinghouse to provide you with the Truth About Splenda and their advertising campaign which misleads consumers. If you have positive or negative comments about Splenda, concerns about Splenda, or questions about Splenda, please e-mail them to: info@truthaboutsplenda.com or click on the “Contact” tab to submit your thoughts. Thanks so much for helping us spread the word on the truth about Splenda!