# Dangers Of Aspartame, Splenda & All Other Artificial Sweeteners!!!



## yur_babeydoll (Jan 18, 2008)

With the obesity epidemic the number of diet foods and foods containing artificial sweeteners is rising. Just the other day I went to go buy whey protein powder and found a bunch of them contained Splenda. Anyways, below are 2 excerpts from two books I have read. One is quite length so I will highlight key words in that one. And, if you decide not to read it all the key message is that artificial sweeteners are very bad for your body, very unhealthy, and should never be ingested. 
*
From the book Skinny Bit**, by Rory Freedman and Kim Barnouin*

"When aspartame was put before the FDA for approval, it was denied _eight_ times. G.D. Searle, founder of aspartame tried to get FDA approval in 1973. Clearly, he wasn't bothered by reports from nueroscientist Dr. John Olney and researches Ann Reynolds (hired by Searle himself) that aspartame was dangerous. Dr. Martha Freeman, a scientist from the FDA Division of Metabolic and Endocrine Drug Products, declared, 'The information submitted for review is inadequate to permit a scientific evaluation of clinical safety.' Freeman recommended that until the safety of aspartame was proven, marketing the product should not be permitted. Alas, her recommendations were ignored. Somehow, in 1974, Searle go approval to use aspartame in dry foods. However, it wasn't smooth sailing from there. In 1975, the FDA put together a task force to review Searle's testing methods. Task force team leader Philip Brodsky said he 'had never seen anything as bad as Searle's testing' and called the test results 'manipulated.' Before aspartame actually made it into dry foods, Olney and attorney and consumer advocate Jim Turner filed objections against the approval. In 1977, the FDA asked the U.S. attorney's office to start grand jury proceedings against Searle for 'knowingly misrepresenting findings and concealing material facts and making false statements in aspartame safety tests." Shortly after, the U.S. attorney leading the investigation against Searle was offered a job by the law firm representing Searle. Later the same year, he resigned as U.S. attorney and withdrew from the case, delaying the grand jury's investigation. This caused the statute of limitations on the charges to run out, and the investigation was dropped. And he accepted the job with Searle's law firm. Stunning. In 1980, a review by the Public Board of Inquiry set up by the FDA determined that aspartame should not be approved. The board said it had 'not been presented with proof of reasonable certainty that aspartame is safe for use as a food additive.' In 1981, new FDA Commissioner Arthur Hull Hayes was appointed. Despite the fact that 3 out of 6 scientists advised against approval, Hayes decided to overrule the scientific review panel and allow aspartame into limited dry goods. In 1983, he got it approved for beverages, even though the National Soft Drink Association urged the FDA to delay approval until further testing could be done. That same year, Hayes left the FDA amid charges of impropriety. The Internal Department of Health and Human Services was investigating Hayes for accepting gratuities from FDA-regulated companies. He went to work as a consultant for Searle's public relations firm. Interesting. The FDA finally urged Congress to prosecute Searle for giving the government false or incomplete test results on aspartame. However, the two government attorneys assigned to the case decided not to prosecute. Later, they went to work for the law firm that represented Searle. Fascinating. Despite recognizing 92 different symptoms that result from ingesting aspartame, the FDA approved it for use, without restriction, in 1999. Brilliant. So many people have been sickened from this sh*t that there are aspartame victim support groups. Some of the 92 aspartame effects listed by the FDA include memory loss, nerve cell damage, migraines, reproductive disorders, mental confusion, brain lesions, blindness, joint pain, Alzheimer's, bloating, nervous system disorders, hair loss, food cravings, and weight gain. Aspartame is a $1 billion industry. The National Justice League has filed a series of lawsuits against food companies using aspartame, claiming they are poisoning the public. In September 2004, a class action lawsuit was filed for $350 million against NutraSweet and the American Diabetics Association. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfelt is named in the suit for using political muscle to get aspartame approved by the FDA. NutraSweet and Equal contain aspartame. When ingested, one of aspartame's ingredients, methyl alcohol, converts into formaldehyde, a deadly neurotoxin. In addition to aspartame, Equal contains the amino acid phenylalanine. Phenylalanine occurs naturally in the brain. But high levels can increase the chance of seizures and lead to depression and schizophrenia. There are no lesser of the 2 evils. NutraSweet and Equal are both evil. Sweet & Low is no saint, either. It is an artificial sweetener that contains saccharin, a coal-tar compound. Stay away. Because we're having so much fun, let's bash the sh*t out of Splenda, 1 of the newer sweeteners. Splenda is made by chlorinating sugar, changing its molecular structure. The finished product is called sucralose. The makers of this poison tout its lack of calories and claim it's safe for diabetics. The FDA calls sucralose 98% methanol, and arsenic. Well, gee, at least it doesn't have calories. So what if it has a little arsenic? Sucralose has been found to cause diarrhea; organ, genetic, immune system, and reproductive damage; swelling of the liver and kidneys; and a decrease in fetal body weight. What a splendid product! According to Dr. Joseph Mercola in Consumer Research magazine's article "The Potential Dangers of Sucralose," "There is no clear-cut evidence that sugar substitutes are useful in weight reduction. On the contrary, there is some evidence that these substances stimulate appetite." Not only have multiple class action lawsuits been filed, but even the president of the National Sugar Association and the manufacturer of Equal are up in arms about Splenda. They each filed suit, claiming that Splenda manufacturers are misleading consumers into thinking the product is natural when it is "a highly processed chemical compound." Don't think that the giants behind artificial sweeteners and the sugar industry suddenly started caring about public health. Splenda's clever marketing is just totally screwing up their sales. But even executive director for the Center for Science in the Public Interest, Dr. Michael F. Jacobson, who normally criticizes The National Sugar Association, had to agree: "Advertising and labeling, whether for products that are healthful or unhealthful, should be truthful and not misleading." Clearly, artificial sweeteners and refined sugars are bad for many reasons. Here's one more. We have a delicate balancing act occurring in our bodies at all times-pH balance. Basically, everything we eat has its own pH balance. When food is digested, it leaves an acid or alkaline "ash" in the body, depending on the food's mineral content. Surprise, surprise: Artificial sweeteners are highly acid forming. (Coffee, excessive protein, meat, pasteurized dairy, refined sugars, and fatty foods are, too.) When our bodies get too acidic, we are much more prone to illness. Sometimes, we don't even know we're sick until it's too late. But we can notice mild maladies, like skin problems, allergies, headaches, colds, or yeast infections. Or, we can experience major trauma-severe damage to our thyroid gland, liver, and adrenal glands. If our pH balance becomes to acidic, our bodies will react to protect themselves. To neutralize the acid, they will take alkalizing minerals from our reserves. If our reserves are low, the body will withdraw minerals from our bones and muscles. If that doesn't scare you, consider this: It is commonly believed that cancer cells thrive in acid environments. Now, logically, you would think that citrus fruits are acidic, but actually, when they enter the body, they are alkalizing. We know this goes against the "use your own head" idea because they seem like they'd be acidic. But they contain potassium and calcium which are alkalizing minerals. They also have a high percentage of alkaline salts. Nearly all fruits, vegetables, and legumes are alkaline when they enter the body."  

*From the book The Schwarzbein Principle 2 by Diana Schwarzbein, M.D. with Marilyn Brown*

"Artificially sweetened beverages: Avoid all beverages with artificial sweeteners. Aspartame, saccharine, sucralose and other artificial sugars all damage the cells of your body. Keep these toxic chemicals out of your system because they will age you faster."

"Artificial Sweeteners: You can stop these chemicals cold turkey because they do not affect your adrenal glands like refined sugars do. The only alternative sugar that I recommend is a product called Stevia because it is not a toxic chemical. I do not endorse or recommend that you use any type of artificial sweetener. I do not like aspartame, acesulfame K, sorbitol, sucralose or saccharine because they are all harmful. Alternatively, use a small amount of real honey instead of artificial sweeteners. Although honey causes a rise in insulin levels, it is always better to ingest real food."


----------



## Kuuipo (Jan 18, 2008)

*Re: Dangers Of Aspertame, Splenda & All Other Artificial Sweeteners!!!*

Overweight Risk Soars 41% With Each Daily Can of Diet Soft Drink
By Daniel J. DeNoon 
WebMD Medical News
Reviewed by Charlotte E. Grayson Mathis, MD



June 13, 2005 -- People who drink diet soft drinks don't lose weight. In fact, they gain weight, a new study shows.
The findings come from eight years of data collected by Sharon P. Fowler, MPH, and colleagues at the University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio. Fowler reported the data at the annual meeting of the American Diabetes Association in San Diego.
"What didn't surprise us was that total soft drink use was linked to overweight and obesity," Fowler tells WebMD. "What was surprising was when we looked at people only drinking diet soft drinks, their risk of obesity was even higher."
In fact, when the researchers took a closer look at their data, they found that nearly all the obesity risk from soft drinks came from diet sodas.
"There was a 41% increase in risk of being overweight for every can or bottle of diet soft drink a person consumes each day," Fowler says.
*More Diet Drinks, More Weight Gain*

Fowler's team looked at seven to eight years of data on 1,550 Mexican-American and non-Hispanic white Americans aged 25 to 64. Of the 622 study participants who were of normal weight at the beginning of the study, about a third became overweight or obese.
For regular soft-drink drinkers, the risk of becoming overweight or obese was:

26% for up to 1/2 can each day 
30.4% for 1/2 to one can each day 
32.8% for 1 to 2 cans each day 
47.2% for more than 2 cans each day. 
For diet soft-drink drinkers, the risk of becoming overweight or obese was:

36.5% for up to 1/2 can each day 
37.5% for 1/2 to one can each day 
54.5% for 1 to 2 cans each day 
57.1% for more than 2 cans each day. 
For each can of diet soft drink consumed each day, a person's risk of obesity went up 41%.
*Diet Soda No Smoking Gun*

Fowler is quick to note that a study of this kind does not prove that diet soda _causes_ obesity. More likely, she says, it shows that something linked to diet soda drinking is also linked to obesity.
"One possible part of the explanation is that people who see they are beginning to gain weight may be more likely to switch from regular to diet soda," Fowler suggests. "But despite their switching, their weight may continue to grow for other reasons. So diet soft-drink use is a marker for overweight and obesity."
Why? Nutrition expert Leslie Bonci, MPH, RD, puts it in a nutshell.
"You have to look at what's on your plate, not just what's in your glass," Bonci tells WebMD.
People often mistake diet drinks for diets, says Bonci, director of sports nutrition at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center and nutrition consultant to college and professional sports teams and to the Pittsburgh Ballet.
"A lot of people say, 'I am drinking a diet soft drink because that is better for me. But soft drinks by themselves are not the root of America's obesity problem," she says. "You can't go into a fast-food restaurant and say, 'Oh, it's OK because I had diet soda.' If you don't do anything else but switch to a diet soft drink, you are not going to lose weight."

1 | 2 Next Page


----------



## SparklingWaves (Jan 18, 2008)

*Re: Dangers Of Aspertame, Splenda & All Other Artificial Sweeteners!!!*

I think they do stimulate the appetite, because they taste sweeter than regular sweetened products.  I don't where I heard this, but people don't always change their diet with diet drinks.  In fact, they will eat more junk foods, because they think they are dieting just by drinking diet drinks.

Example: I can have a large Hersey bar or a big bowl of ice cream, because I didn't drink a regular coke. (Ah, it doesn't work that way).   I worked with people that would have a diet coke and four large pieces of stuffed cheese pizza and couldn't figure out why they weren't losing weight.


----------



## Lissa (Jan 18, 2008)

*Re: Dangers Of Aspertame, Splenda & All Other Artificial Sweeteners!!!*

I drink a LOT of diet coke. I'm going to try to stop. There are so many risks involved I don't know why I didn't stop ages ago. Alzheimer's terrifies me more than anything, not to mention all the others. 92 symptoms....


----------



## yur_babeydoll (Jan 18, 2008)

*Re: Dangers Of Aspertame, Splenda & All Other Artificial Sweeteners!!!*

Ya, I've stopped too. 
So far instead of diet coke, because wow I used to drink TONS of it, I'm now drinking nothing with artificial sweeteners. But, I have allowed myself to drink a maximum of 2 cans of regular soda just for now. In a few weeks I will then stop drinking regular soda, by drinking more fruit juice and eating more fruits. And then from their I will just slowly reduce the fruit juice and fruits a little lower. If I don't do it gradually I'll go crazy lol.


----------



## NutMeg (Jan 18, 2008)

*Re: Dangers Of Aspertame, Splenda & All Other Artificial Sweeteners!!!*

Thanks for the info guys, this is a very informative thread. I've always been wary of artificial sweeteners, aspartame in particular gives me these sick headaches.


----------



## greentwig (Jan 18, 2008)

*Re: Dangers Of Aspertame, Splenda & All Other Artificial Sweeteners!!!*

Thank you very much for posting this! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 I had heard about this but I didnt know this much information about it.


----------



## gigglegirl (Jan 18, 2008)

*Re: Dangers Of Aspertame, Splenda & All Other Artificial Sweeteners!!!*

thanks for posting. It was a lot to read--I skimmed

I drink diet drinks...will definitely be trying to cut them out! plus I hate when looking for yogurt, nearly all has some kind of splenda or some other aspartame sweetener--YUCK! I cannot stand that flavour in yogurt.

I'm thinking of going cold turkey at the start of next month--no soda, no artificial sweeteners. Just water and brewed tea. If anything a bit of plain old sugar (I'm interested in that Stevia--have to see if its available where I am. I heard Whoopi talk about it this week on the View--yes I occasionally watch that show! Hot topics are my vice!)

Thanks!


----------



## lilMAClady (Jan 18, 2008)

*Re: Dangers Of Aspertame, Splenda & All Other Artificial Sweeteners!!!*

Yeah I've never ingested any of these. I stay away from any/everything that has anything artificial in it. It just screams death! Thanks for posting for others to see.


----------



## yur_babeydoll (Jan 18, 2008)

*Re: Dangers Of Aspertame, Splenda & All Other Artificial Sweeteners!!!*

Ya wow like seriously tons of stuff has artificial sweetener in it...some tell you on the front of the label, but a lot of them don't. I skim the ingredient sections of everything I buy now and I'm amazed at how much food has sucralose or sorbitol or etc in it.

And, I'm interested in experimenting with Stevia too!

*Some info on it from Dana Carpender's Every-Calorie-Counts Cookbook (totally recommend this cookbook, 500 sugar-free healthy recipes!):*
Stevia is short for Stevia rebaudiana, a South American shrub with very sweet leaves. Stevia extract, a white powder from stevia leaves, is growing in popularity with people who don't care to eat sugar but who are nervous about artificial sweeteners. However, stevia extract has a couple of faults: first, it's so extremely sweet that it's hard to know just how much to use in any given recipe, and second, it often has a bitter taste, as well as a sweet one. This is why some smart food packagers have started blending stevia with fructooligosaccharide, also known as FOS. FOS is a sugar, but it's a sugar molecule so large that the human gut can neither digest nor absorb it, so it doesn't raise blood sugar or cause an insulin release. This makes it the perfect partner for the too-sweet stevia. I have been experimenting more and more with stevia/FOS because I know that many of my readers are uncomfortable with using artificial sweeteners. My experiences have been somewhat hit-or-miss. For instance, stevia/FOS works very well in my ketchup recipe, but made truly vile teriyaki sauce. The stevia bitterness comes through in some reecipes and not in thers. If you would like to try experimenting, the conversion factors are:

*1/4 tsp Stevia/FOS = 1 tsp sugar or Splenda
3/4 tsp Stevia/FOS = 1 tbsp sugar or Splenda
1 tbsp Stevia/FOS = 1/2 cup sugar or Splenda
2 tbsps Stevia/FOS = 1 cup sugar or Splenda*


*Okay so personally I'm a bit weary of her suggesting FOS since I know little about it and she also likes artificial sweeteners. Plus, I usually stay away from ingredients with really long scientist sounding names lol. Maybe I'll do some searching on the internet tonight and find you all some information on it.


----------



## gigglegirl (Jan 18, 2008)

*Re: Dangers Of Aspertame, Splenda & All Other Artificial Sweeteners!!!*

Yeah when she mentioned the FOS I was like--that sounds like a scientific lets-manipulate-the-natural-stuff. Ugh. Interesting, but I thank you for keeping us informed!


----------



## elegant-one (Jan 18, 2008)

*Re: Dangers Of Aspertame, Splenda & All Other Artificial Sweeteners!!!*

I've always stayed away from the artificial sweeteners. I knew a gal that had headaches all the time until she read information like above and stopped drinking liquids that had them in - then the headaches stopped. Its poison.

Never been a fan of soft drinks. They also cause bone deterioration.


----------



## yur_babeydoll (Jan 18, 2008)

*Re: Dangers Of Aspertame, Splenda & All Other Artificial Sweeteners!!!*

I've noticed the same thing I was drinking 3 diet sodas minimum a day and had the worst headaches in the world everyday. Now, I'm only getting them maybe once a week if I don't get enough sleep. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Yay! lol

And, regarding the FOS it's just good to know that some are blended. That way you can look for the real pure stevia if you buy it.


----------



## Jessica (Jan 18, 2008)

*Re: Dangers Of Aspertame, Splenda & All Other Artificial Sweeteners!!!*

From the FDA

Q: Is aspartame safe?

A: After reviewing scientific studies, FDA determined in 1981 that aspartame was safe for use in foods. In 1987, the General Accounting Office investigated the process surrounding FDA's approval of aspartame and confirmed the agency had acted properly. However, FDA has continued to review complaints alleging adverse reactions to products containing aspartame. To date, FDA has not determined any consistent pattern of symptoms that can be attributed to the use of aspartame, nor is the agency aware of any recent studies that clearly show safety problems.

Carefully controlled clinical studies show that aspartame is not an allergen. However, certain people with the genetic disease phenylketonuria (PKU), and pregnant women with hyperphenylalanine (high levels of phenylalanine in blood) have a problem with aspartame because they do not effectively metabolize the amino acid phenylalanine, one of aspartame's components. High levels of this amino acid in body fluids can cause brain damage. Therefore, FDA has ruled that all products containing aspartame must include a warning to phenylketonurics that the sweetener contains phenylalanine. 

T96-75                       Food and Drug Administration
November 18, 1996       Arthur Whitmore



                   FDA Statement on Aspartame

     A recently published medical journal article raises the
question whether any increased incidence in the number of persons
with brain tumors in the United States is associated with the
marketing of aspartame, an artificial sweetener, following the
Food and Drug Administration's approval of that food additive in
1981.  The following can be used to answer questions:
     Analysis of the National Cancer Institute's public data base
on cancer incidence in the United States -- the SEER Program --
does not support an association between the use of aspartame and
increased incidence of brain tumors.  Data from the SEER program
show that overall incidence of brain and central nervous system
cancers began increasing in 1973 and continued to increase
through 1985 in the United States.  Since 1985 the trend line has
flattened for these cancers, and in the last two years recorded
(1991 to 1993), the incidence has slightly decreased.
     The FDA stands behind its original approval decision, but
the Agency remains ready to act if credible scientific evidence
is presented to it -- as would be the case for any product
approved by the FDA.       

     The question of a relationship between brain tumors and
aspartame was initially raised when the Agency began considering
approval of this food additive in the mid-1970s.
  The agency resolved the brain tumor issue before the initial
approval of aspartame in 1981.  A Public Board of Inquiry (PBOI)
was convened in 1980 by the Agency to review the scientific data
presented by G.D. Searle and Company relating to the safety of
aspartame.  These independent scientific advisors to the Agency
concluded that aspartame did not cause brain damage.  At the same
time, they said that there was not sufficient scientific evidence
presented to the PBOI that aspartame did not cause brain tumors
in rats.  Therefore, the PBOI recommended against approval of
aspartame at that time and concluded that further study was
needed.
     In 1981 after extensive review of the record by FDA
scientists, then Commissioner Arthur Hull Hayes approved
aspartame as a food additive.  In his decision Hayes noted that 
additional scientific data from a Japanese study about the brain
tumor issue corroborated his decision.  The PBOI chairman later
wrote in a letter to Hayes that the Japanese data would have
caused that panel to give aspartame an "unqualified approval."
     "As data stood, we were unable to reach a communal feeling
of confidence in aspartame's innocuousness on this score and
expressed this unease in our report to you.  By the same token, 
we wish to express our endorsement of your final decision in this
matter," wrote Walle J. H. Nauta, M.D., Ph.D., of the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology.


----------



## Jessica (Jan 18, 2008)

*One last article form the FDA*

Sugar Substitutes:
Americans Opt for Sweetness and Lite

By John Henkel

"Sugar in the morning, sugar in the evening, sugar at suppertime ..."

The lyrics of that old song go a long way toward describing the cravings of many Americans. A bowl of sugary breakfast cereal may be followed by a mid-morning donut, a lunch time soda, ice cream at supper, and, in between, snacks of pudding, pie or pastry. Not to mention all the goodies that are part of Valentine's Day, Halloween, and the year-end holiday season. It all adds up to one massive national sweet tooth.

So much so that the average American eats the equivalent of 20 teaspoons of sugar a day, according to figures from the most recent federal Continuing Survey of Food Intakes by Individuals (1994-1996). Nearly 60 percent of this intake, says the trade group The Sugar Association, is from corn sweeteners, used heavily in sodas and other sweetened drinks. Another 40 percent is from sucrose (table sugar), and a small amount comes from other sweeteners, such as honey and molasses.

There's nothing unusual about craving sweets, experts say. Humans naturally have an appetite for sugary things. But in excess, sugary foods can take a toll. Large quantities add up to surplus calories, which can contribute to weight gain. In order to lose weight, the total calories from foods, especially those with lots of calories from sugars as well as fats, must be decreased and physical activity increased. As a result, many consumers seeking to control their weight have turned to sugar substitutes as one way to help lower the daily calorie count without having to give up their favorite foods.

"Anything that can help people cut back on [excess] calories is good," says Adam Drewnowski, Ph.D., director of nutritional science at the University of Washington. He emphasizes that weight loss is complex and can't be attributed to any one food product. But existing studies, some of which he has conducted, show that sugar substitutes can help certain people maintain a weight loss. Because sugar substitutes, also called artificial sweeteners, are many times sweeter than sugar, it takes much less of them to create the same sweetness. The resulting calorie count of the amount used is negligible.

According to a 1998 survey by the Calorie Control Council, 144 million American adults regularly consume low-calorie, sugar-free products such as artificially sweetened sodas and desserts. The Food and Drug Administration has approved four sugar substitutes--saccharin, aspartame, acesulfame-K, and sucralose--for use in a variety of foods. At least three other sweeteners are under FDA review but had not been approved at press time.

Two approved sugar substitutes, saccharin and aspartame, have been the subject of ongoing controversy that, in the case of saccharin, dates back more than 20 years.

Aspartame has come under fire in recent years from individuals who have used the Internet in an attempt to link the sweetener to brain tumors and other serious disorders. But FDA stands behind its original approval of aspartame, and subsequent evaluations have shown that the product is safe. A tiny segment of the population is sensitive to one of the sweetener's byproducts and should restrict intake. However, the agency continually monitors safety information on food ingredients such as aspartame and may take action to protect public health if it receives credible scientific evidence indicating a safety problem.

Other organizations give aspartame and the other approved sugar substitutes a thumbs up. For example, the American Heart Association endorses their use by diabetics and those on weight-loss diets. The American Diabetes Association calls sugar substitutes "free foods" because they make food taste sweet, but they have essentially no calories and do not raise blood sugar levels.

More Than a Century of Use

The granddaddy of all sugar substitutes is saccharin. Discovered in 1879, it was used during both world wars to sweeten foods, helping to compensate for sugar shortages and rationing. It is 300 times sweeter than sugar.

An early attempt to ban saccharin came in 1911 when a board of federal scientists called the artificial sweetener "an adulterant" that should not be used in foods. This same board later decided to limit saccharin just to products "intended for invalids," a restriction that was lifted after World War I began.

In 1958, Congress passed the Food Additives Amendment to the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, which required premarket approval from FDA for food additives developed after 1958. This requirement did not apply to ingredients "generally recognized as safe," or GRAS. Saccharin was considered GRAS, so it remained on the market.

FDA began reviewing hundreds of GRAS substances--including saccharin--in the early 1970s to ensure that the latest scientific information continued to back up their safety. Studies in 1972 and 1973 of rats fed saccharin raised concerns about the sweetener's role in causing bladder cancer, but data analysis later suggested that impurities, not saccharin, may have caused the tumors.

Then in 1977, a Canadian study that looked specifically at the role of impurities--and of other suspected tumor causes, such as parasites in test animals--showed convincingly that saccharin itself was causing bladder cancer in rats. That same year, FDA proposed to ban saccharin for all uses except as an over-the-counter drug in the form of a tabletop sweetener. At the time, saccharin was the only available alternative to sugar.

The FDA proposal prompted a public outcry, fueled in part by media reports that the test rats were fed the equivalent of as many as 800 diet sodas a day. Congress responded by passing the Saccharin Study and Labeling Act, which placed a two-year moratorium on any ban of the sweetener while additional safety studies were conducted. The law also required that any foods containing saccharin must carry a label that reads "Use of this product may be hazardous to your health. This product contains saccharin which has been determined to cause cancer in laboratory animals." Congress has extended the moratorium several times, most recently renewing it until 2002.

Saccharin has remained on the market and continues to have a fairly large appeal as a tabletop sweetener, particularly in restaurants, where it is available in single-serving packets under trade names such as Sweet 'n Low. Because it has a good shelf life, saccharin is used widely in fountain sodas, and its stability at high temperatures makes it an option for sweetening baked goods, unlike aspartame, which degrades when heated. Saccharin also is favored economically because it can be made inexpensively.

But given saccharin's continuing tentative status, should consumers use it? "We know for certain that it causes cancer in animals," says Andrew Laumbach, Ph.D., consumer safety officer in FDA's Office of Premarket Approval. He acknowledges, however, that animal studies do not always predict the behavior of a substance in the human body.

The National Cancer Institute states in its "Cancer Facts" documents that "epidemiological studies do not provide clear evidence" of a link to human cancer. Regina Ziegler, Ph.D., an NCI epidemiologist, says, "Typical intakes of saccharin at normal levels for adults show no evidence of a public health problem."

The government's National Toxicology Program has kept saccharin on its roster of "anticipated carcinogens," though it periodically considers "de-listing" the sweetener based on available safety evidence.

In the late 1970s FDA and NCI conducted a population-based study of saccharin's role in causing bladder cancer in humans and found that "in general," people who used the sweetener had no greater risk of bladder cancer than the population at large. However, the study found "suggestive evidence" that heavy saccharin users--defined as those using six or more servings of the sweetener a day--may have an increased risk. Laumbach says that for consumers who use saccharin, the key to a lower risk may be moderation, as is the case with many foods that can cause problems when eaten in excess. Other health groups, including the American Medical Association, the American Cancer Society, and the American Dietetic Association, agree that saccharin use is acceptable.

The Aspartame Controversy

While questions about saccharin may persist, the safety of another artificial sweetener, aspartame, is clear cut, say FDA officials. FDA calls aspartame, sold under trade names such as NutraSweet and Equal, one of the most thoroughly tested and studied food additives the agency has ever approved. The agency says the more than 100 toxicological and clinical studies it has reviewed confirm that aspartame is safe for the general population.

This message would not necessarily be apparent to consumers surfing the Internet, especially those who use Web-based search engines to find information about sugar substitutes or artificial sweeteners. Websites with screaming headlines and well-written text attempt to link aspartame consumption to systemic lupus, multiple sclerosis, vision problems, headaches, fatigue, and even Alzheimer's disease. One report distributed nationally over e-mail systems claims that aspartame-sweetened soft drinks delivered to military personnel during the Persian Gulf War may have prompted Gulf War syndrome.

No way, says FDA, along with many other health organizations such as the American Medical Association. David Hattan, Ph.D., acting director of FDA's division of health effects evaluation, says there is no "credible evidence," to support, for example, a link between aspartame and multiple sclerosis or systemic lupus. Some Internet reports claim that patients suffering from both conditions went into remission after discontinuing aspartame use. "Both of these disorders are subject to spontaneous remissions and exacerbation," says Hattan. "So it is entirely possible that when patients stopped using aspartame they might also coincidentally have had remission of their symptoms."

It is true, says Hattan, that aspartame ingestion results in the production of methanol, formaldehyde and formate--substances that could be considered toxic at high doses. But the levels formed are modest, and substances such as methanol are found in higher amounts in common food products such as citrus juices and tomatoes.

Other circulating reports claim that two amino acids in aspartame--phenylalanine and aspartic acid--can cause neurotoxic effects such as brain damage. "This is true in certain individuals and in high enough doses," says Hattan. He explains that a very small group of people who have the rare hereditary disease phenylketonuria have to watch their intake from other sources as well. Women with certain genetic traits (e.g., phenylketonurics) may metabolize the amino acid, phenylalanine, poorly and thus accumulate far higher than normal blood levels of phenylalanine. During pregnancy, high maternal levels of blood phenylalanine can be transferred to the fetus and produce serious adverse effects on brain development. While the protein eaten by these pregnant women contributes most of the resulting elevation of phenylalanine, they should also be aware of the presence of phenylalanine in beverages and foods that contain aspartame. FDA requires all products containing aspartame to be labeled for phenylalanine so consumers will be aware of the substance's presence and can avoid or restrict it.

Aspartic acid also has the potential to cause brain damage at very high doses. But under normal intake levels, the brain's mechanism for controlling aspartic acid levels ensures no adverse effects. It is unlikely that any consumer would eat or drink enough aspartame to cause brain damage: FDA figures show that most aspartame users only consume about 4 to 7 percent of the acceptable daily intake the agency has set for the sweetener.

Still other reports attempt to link aspartame to seizures and birth defects. Regarding seizures, Hattan cites animal and human studies showing that the sweetener neither causes nor enhances the susceptibility of seizures. Aspartame also has been evaluated for its potential to cause reproductive effects or birth defects. Again, researchers found no evidence, even in test animals fed the sweetener at doses much higher than those to which humans would be exposed.

Approved in 1981, aspartame is 180 times sweeter than sugar. It is used in products such as beverages, breakfast cereals, desserts, and chewing gum, and also as a tabletop sweetener. In 1996, a study raised the issue that aspartame consumption may be related to an increase in brain tumors following FDA's approval of the sweetener in 1981. But analysis of the National Cancer Institute's database on cancer incidence showed that cases of brain cancers began increasing in 1973--well before aspartame was approved--and continued to increase through 1985. In recent years, brain tumor frequency has actually decreased slightly. NCI currently is studying aspartame and other dietary factors as part of a larger study of adult brain cancer.

Other Sweetener Choices

FDA also has approved two other artificial sweeteners, acesulfame potassium and sucralose, both of which are available in products such as fruit drinks and gelatin desserts.

Acesulfame Potassium: First approved in 1988 as a tabletop sweetener, acesulfame potassium, also called Sunett, is now approved for products such as baked goods, frozen desserts, candies, and, most recently, beverages. More than 90 studies verify the sweetener's safety.

About 200 times sweeter than sugar and calorie free, acesulfame potassium often is combined with other sweeteners. One major beverage maker mixes acesulfame potassium with aspartame to sweeten one of its diet sodas. Worldwide, the sweetener is used in more than 4,000 products, according to its manufacturer, Nutrinova. Acesulfame potassium has excellent shelf life and does not break down when cooked or baked.

Sucralose: Also known by its trade name, Splenda, sucralose is 600 times sweeter than sugar. After reviewing more than 110 animal and human safety studies conducted over 20 years, FDA approved it in 1998 as a tabletop sweetener and for use in products such as baked goods, nonalcoholic beverages, chewing gum, frozen dairy desserts, fruit juices, and gelatins. Earlier this year, FDA amended its regulation to allow sucralose as a general-purpose sweetener for all foods.

Sucralose tastes like sugar because it is made from table sugar. But it cannot be digested, so it adds no calories to food. Because sucralose is so much sweeter than sugar, it is bulked up with maltodextrin, a starchy powder, so it will measure more like sugar. It has good shelf life and doesn't degrade when exposed to heat. Numerous studies have shown that sucralose does not affect blood glucose levels, making it an option for diabetics.

Sugar Alcohols: Though not technically considered artificial sweeteners, sugar alcohols are slightly lower in calories than sugar and do not promote tooth decay or cause a sudden increase in blood glucose. They include sorbitol, xylitol, lactitol, mannitol, and maltitol and are used mainly to sweeten sugar-free candies, cookies, and chewing gums. FDA classifies some of these sweeteners as "generally recognized as safe" and others as approved food additives.

Other "natural sweeteners" are available, but these are variations of table sugar and contain about the same amount of calories. These products include honey, molasses, evaporated cane juice, rice syrup, barley malt, and fructose.

Another product, stevia, is derived from a South American shrub. Though it can impart a sweet taste to foods, it cannot be sold as a sweetener because FDA considers it an unapproved food additive. "The safety of stevia has been questioned by published studies," says Martha Peiperl, a consumer safety officer in FDA's Office of Premarket Approval. "And no one has ever provided FDA with adequate evidence that the substance is safe." Under provisions of 1994 legislation, however, stevia can be sold as a "dietary supplement," though it cannot be promoted as a sweetener.

Three other sugar sweeteners are currently under FDA review. One of them, cyclamate, was marketed in the 1960s, but FDA banned it in 1970 after evidence emerged linking it to bladder cancer. Subsequent studies have failed to verify that link, so FDA is considering a petition to reapprove cyclamate. The other sweeteners under review are neotame and alitame.

Though sugar substitutes have a long history of controversy, the Calorie Control Council says Americans are continually searching for good-tasting, low-calorie products as part of a healthy lifestyle. Market surveys show that calorie-conscious consumers want more low-calorie foods and beverages. And though artificially sweetened products are not magic foods that will melt pounds away, they can be, experts say, a helpful part of an overall weight control program that includes exercise and other dietary factors.


----------



## Jessica (Jan 18, 2008)

*Re: Dangers Of Aspertame, Splenda & All Other Artificial Sweeteners!!!*

There are books and articles out there that will tell you that breathing is bad for you.  Motto: Everything in moderation.  Be mindful of what you out into your body, exercise, and nix any bad habits (i.e. smoking, etc)


----------



## goink (Jan 18, 2008)

*Re: Dangers Of Aspertame, Splenda & All Other Artificial Sweeteners!!!*

I took Food and Nutrition courses for a year. Sweeteners are bad if taken in a huge amount. However, sweeteners' original purpose is for people with diabetes to consume sweet flavour without the danger. We can't just take sweeteners off the shelf because of these findings.
Soda, pop (whatever you want to call it) is bad, even with regular sugar. It just makes your bones, well, pop (pun intended =D).
Everything in moderation. Vitamins, supplements can do harm if taken excessive or if there's no need for them.


----------



## yur_babeydoll (Jan 18, 2008)

*Re: Dangers Of Aspertame, Splenda & All Other Artificial Sweeteners!!!*

Yes, and regular soda is bad because it's made of refined sugar. And, refined sugar should be avoided by everyone, unless that is not possible for you due to diabetes and other conditions related. And, yes natural vitamins and etc can be very dangerous; I mean cocaine is grown from the ground lol. Plus, vitamins are not regulated very much so thank you for making that point Goink.

I do believe believe all information and sides of the story should be expressed so that people can make informed choices. So thank you Jessica and Goink for expressing the other side of this controversial issue. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




*But anyways some facts on refined sugar since this post is based on sugar lol...*

*White and brown sugars include: sucrose, fructose, maltose, dextrose, maltodextrin, plydextrose, corn syrup, and molasses.
*Your body cannot use refined sugar to rebuild; eating excessive amounts of it destroys your metabolism. 
*They can keep you from falling and/or staying asleep. 
*They cause your insulin levels to sky rocket. 
*If you are addicted to refined sugars and would like to cut down your consumption or eliminate it all together, you'll have an extremely hard time stopping them cold turkey. Instead, try tapering off them slowly by replacing all your sugary foods with fruit. Then slowly each week decrease your fruit intake. I'm not saying you shouldn't eat fruit as part of your diet, but you just don't want to be eating them in excess. And, if you find yourself getting tired, depressed, irritable, having increased cravings for sugar, or you're waking up at night, slow down your tapering.


----------



## CantAffordMAC (Jan 18, 2008)

*Re: Dangers Of Aspertame, Splenda & All Other Artificial Sweeteners!!!*

I use Splenda daily. 3 in one cup of coffee. I usually use maybe 6-10 packets daily. I could've sworn that Splenda was safe. I knew there was a thing about it being dangerous, but I could've sworn that had changed. I can't use anything but Splenda. Sugar isn't sweet enough for me.


----------



## yur_babeydoll (Jan 19, 2008)

*Re: Dangers Of Aspertame, Splenda & All Other Artificial Sweeteners!!!*

Quote:

   Originally Posted by *CantAffordMAC* 

 
_I use Splenda daily. 3 in one cup of coffee. I usually use maybe 6-10 packets daily. I could've sworn that Splenda was safe. I knew there was a thing about it being dangerous, but I could've sworn that had changed. I can't use anything but Splenda. Sugar isn't sweet enough for me._

 
Maybe try stevia? 
It's supposed to be extremely sweet.


----------



## yur_babeydoll (Jan 19, 2008)

*I found another site with some info on Stevia...check it out!*

Bodybuilding.com - Stevia Information and Product Listing! Stevia FAQ!

"Stevia is able to perform a number of other beneficial tasks. For example, it has been shown that Stevia may enhance moods and increase energy levels and mental alertness."

"The cosmetic industry also employs the use of Stevia in many of the available skin care products. It has been shown to reduce the appearance of skin blemishes when applied topically."


----------



## magg0rz (Jan 31, 2008)

My dad works at a hospital and is constantly warning me and my sister about our soda habits and we need to lay off the artificial sweeteners. Every year my resolution is to give up soda, but I always end up going back to it. I'm slowly replacing soda with tea though.


----------



## Kuuipo (Jan 31, 2008)

Stevia is a safe alternative, albeit expensive, and is available in stores like Whole Foods.....Trader Joe's and helath food stores. I have not read anything negative about this product, but it is a good idea to retrain the palette to crave less sweet foods and appreciate natural tasting foods as close to nature as they grow (the less we do to something, the better)


----------

