Safety


Sucralose has been accepted by several national and international food
safety regulatory bodies, including the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration (FDA), Joint Food and Agriculture Organization/World
Health Organization Expert Committee on Food Additives, The European
Union's Scientific Committee on Food, Health Protection Branch of Health
and Welfare Canada and Food Standards Australia-New Zealand (FSANZ). The
acceptable daily intake for sucralose is 9 mg/kg of body weight per
day.[8] (Note that Splenda is mostly maltodextrin.)

“In determining the safety of sucralose, the FDA reviewed data from more
than 110 studies in humans and animals. Many of the studies were
designed to identify possible toxic effects including carcinogenic,
reproductive and neurological effects. No such effects were found, and
FDA's approval is based on the finding that sucralose is safe for human
consumption.”[9]

Concerns have also been raised about the effect of sucralose on the
thymus gland, a gland that is important to the immune system. A report
from NICNAS cites two studies on rats, both of which found "a
significant decrease in mean thymus weight" at a certain dose.[10] The
sucralose dosages which caused the thymus gland effects referenced in
the NICNAS report was 3000 mg/kg bw/day for 28 days. For an 80 kg (176
lb) human, this would mean a 28-day intake of 240 grams of sucralose,
which is equivalent to more than 20,000 individual Splenda packets/day
for approximately one month. The dose required to provoke any
immunological response was 750 mg/kg bw/day,[11] or 60 grams of
sucralose per day, which is more than 5,000 Splenda packets/day (there
are 11.9 mg of sucralose in a 1g retail packet of Splenda). These and
other studies were considered by regulators before concluding that
sucralose was safe. However, because some ingested sucralose is broken
down and absorbed by the body there is concern that chronic consumption
may lead to thymus shrinkage or other side-effects.

Chlorine atoms are covalently bonded to the carbon atoms in the
sucralose molecule, making it a chlorocarbon. Although many
chlorocarbons are toxic, sucralose is not known to be toxic in small
quantities and is extremely insoluble in fat, so it can not accumulate
in fat like most chlorinated hydrocarbons. In addition sucralose does
not break down or dechlorinate.[12]

The bulk of sucralose ingested does not leave the gastrointestinal tract
and is directly excreted in the feces while 11-27% of it is absorbed.[2]
The amount that is absorbed from the GI tract is largely removed from
the blood stream by the kidneys and excreted in the urine with 20-30% of
the absorbed sucralose being metabolized.[2] Sucralose is digestible by
a number of microorganisms and is broken down once released into the
environment.[citation needed]

Critics of sucralose often favor natural alternatives, including xylitol
(birch sugar widely used during World War II and in sugar-free chewing
gum in Finland), maltitol, thaumatin, isomalt (popular in some European
countries), and Stevia, which is widely used in Japan (in the U.S., it
may be sold as a dietary supplement but not as a food additive). Stevia
is controversial, however. The United States' FDA has not approved it as
a food additive because of toxicity concerns. Xylitol and other sugar
alcohols are non-toxic, but can only be consumed with careful
restriction of quantity because of their laxative effects when the
body's daily threshold has been reached.

Splenda usually contains 95% dextrose (the "right-handed" isomer of
glucose - see Dextrorotation and Chirality), which the body readily
metabolizes. The safety information that many specialists and the media
give to consumers is that Splenda is safe to ingest as a diabetic sugar
substitute "free of problems".

[edit] Criticisms and controversy

Much of the concern over the safety of sucralose is not based on
experimental evidence showing harm, rather is based upon the absence of
long-term health studies in humans proving its safety. The basis for
demanding such strict burden of proof derives from the class of chemical
the sucralose molecule belongs to: the organochlorides (chlorocarbons).
Since some organochlorides are known to cause adverse health effects in
extremely small concentrations (as little as the parts-per-billion level
in drinking water), critics of sucralose feel the extra-high burden of
proof is warranted.

The U.S. sugar industry has claimed that the advertising of Splenda is
deceptive and has filed a formal complaint with the Federal Trade
Commission. Taking issue with Splenda's advertising slogan, “it tastes
like sugar because it's made from sugar,” the Sugar Association states
that "Splenda is not a natural product. It is not cultivated or grown
and it does not occur in nature." McNeil Nutritionals, the manufacturer
of Splenda, has responded that its "advertising represents the products
in an accurate and informative manner and complies with applicable
advertising rules in the countries where Splenda brand products are
marketed." The consumer advocacy group Citizens for Health has filed a
petition with the FDA. They have asked the FDA to withdraw its approval
of Splenda pending additional investigation of claimed side effects such
as stomach pain and other digestion problems.[13] The U.S. Sugar
Association has also started a web site where they put forward their
criticism of sucralose.[14] The Sugar Association’s allegations revolve
around three essential points:

1. Sucralose is a chlorocarbon
2. Up to 27% of sucralose that is ingested is absorbed into the body
by the digestive system
3. Long-term human studies with sucralose have not been performed.

The world's largest retailer of natural and organic foods (Whole Foods
Market), made an official policy of not carrying products containing
sucralose in any of its outlets. The retailer’s statement regarding this
decision made allegations revolving around five essential points:

1. Sucralose is an artificial substance, some of which is absorbed
by the body
2. Pre-approval tests indicated a potential for toxicity
3. Sucralose is a chlorinated compound (a chlorocarbon)
4. Independent, controlled human studies had not been performed
5. Long-term human studies with sucralose had not been performed.[15]

According to Food and Diet's website, numerous claims have been filed
about possible side effect complaints by users of sucralose-containing
products, including Diet Rite cola. Complaints and suspicions mused on
the site of possible side effects of prolonged use of sucralose have
included drug-like feelings of disorientation and confusion, headaches,
depression, anxiety, diarrhea, extreme fatigue, and more.[16]

[edit] Controversy Between the Makers of Splenda and Equal

Merisant, the maker of Equal, has filed suit against McNeil, a
subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson, in federal court in Philadelphia, with
a jury trial set to begin April 9, 2007. The civil complaint alleges
that Splenda's tagline "Made from sugar, so it tastes like sugar," is
false and misleading and Merisant's website calls it an urban myth.
Merisant is asking that McNeil be ordered to surrender profits and
modify its advertising. [17]

The lawsuit is the latest move in a long-simmering dispute. In 2004,
Merisant filed a complaint with the Better Business Bureau regarding
McNeil's advertising. McNeil alleged that Merisant's complaint was in
retaliation for a ruling in federal court in Puerto Rico, which forced
Merisant to stop packaging Equal in packages resembling Splenda's.
McNeil filed suit in Puerto Rico seeking a ruling which would declare
its advertising to not be misleading. Following Merisant's lawsuit in
Philadelphia, McNeil agreed to a jury trial and to the dismissal of its
lawsuit in Puerto Rico.[18]

On Apr 28, 4:57 pm, Protagonist > wrote:
[the same old crap we've heard zillions of times before]

Sod off Murray -- we're NOT interested. Go back to shagging Betty...

If you insist on cutting and pasting from other sources, please identify
the source so we can check it ourselves. It is rather obvious you took
this from somewhere else since there are bracketed numbers pointing to
external references, but no links or list of references.

> Safety
>
> Sucralose has been accepted by several national and international food
> safety regulatory bodies, including the U.S. Food and Drug
> Administration (FDA), Joint Food and Agriculture Organization/World
> Health Organization Expert Committee on Food Additives, The European
> Union's Scientific Committee on Food, Health Protection Branch of Health
> and Welfare Canada and Food Standards Australia-New Zealand (FSANZ). The
> acceptable daily intake for sucralose is 9 mg/kg of body weight per
> day.[8] (Note that Splenda is mostly maltodextrin.) etc., etc., etc.

<snippage of verbosity>

--
I'm glad my Mom named me Aaron,
That's what everybody calls me.