Splenda, Sweet and Low....

MrsLVF

AVOID Splenda AKA (sucralose)

It was in every protein supplement i was taking, and even my yogurt.:sad:
I have side effects Including skin rashes/flushing, dizziness, numbness, headaches, and intestinal cramping.

Shayztar

I avoid Splenda and Asparatame now. Asparatame makes my tummy hurt after I drink it, and I get a feeling like a hole in my tummy. It's hard to explain. But I didn't have a problem with Spenda until recently. I drank it like gangbusters in my water, and it was very toned down. But I also drank it in my coffee, not as diluted. After 3 months of that, I now get a very strong reaction to it. It wasn't until I cut it out as a possible reason for my constant nausea, tummy upset, diarreah, and in turn a flare up of the lovely H I got while pregnant a year ago. I cut it out, within 2 days I felt great again. Ate it again a week later in a dessert yogurt and BAM, 6 hours later I was ill with the same symptoms. 2 days later, felt better. So on and so forth, I am now able to tell when I've eaten something or accidentally ingested Splenda, because about 6 hours later I feel like crap.

Look it up. It's called Sucralose toxicity.

I am not like other people on this thread that quotes things. But if you look up Splenda in Wiki, it will tell you that the manufacturers wanted to market Splenda many decades ago, but the FDA was all like "Oh hell, no. It's bad for people. Tests have shown." Then, relatively recently, suddenly the FDA approved Splenda but the composition of the stuff was never changed. Why? My theory is that if enough money is involved, things are overlooked.

Don't believe me? Agent Orange was also approved as safe for use by the government at one point too, right? lol

And with all that being said, don't believe everything you read. It's all a conspiracy and money driven. Drink what you want, just monitor your health.

tsh0ck

wikipedia: a trustworthy source of information since ... well, never.

Captain_Tightpants

The thing that should cause concern with Splenda is that while it's supposed to pass through your digestive tract unabsorbed, a tiny but measurable part of it doesn't. It goes into a metabolic pathway somewhere. And they haven't figured out quite where yet. For a product so unnatural that's a bit scary to me.

I use Truvia now, but there's so little research on that too.

Ultimately, better to avoid sweeteners imo. Or just use something completely natural and tried and tested for thousands of years - honey.

Shayztar

wikipedia: a trustworthy source of information since ... well, never.

Exactly like I said. Don't beleive everything you read. It's just good to do at least some reading on both sides of the issue so that instead of having bliders on, I can at least see a *little* bit.

Deathangl13

some people here just seem prone to alarmism.

They try to stand out somehow. Daddy issues I guess.

Deathangl13

Correlation does not equal causation.

The new "Seriously?" - God I hate pop culture redundancy.

Deathangl13

They are manufactured in a factory....out of chemicals...probably not this best thing to be putting in your body.

Our bodies ARE chemicals.

e_tasia

They are manufactured in a factory....out of chemicals...probably not this best thing to be putting in your body.

Our bodies ARE chemicals.

I realize that our bodies are made of chemicals...but I am pretty sure "sucralose, and aspartame" are not natural occurring chemicals in the body. Personally, I try to avoid foods that are artificial and packed with preservatives. There isn't any research on the long term effects of splenda because its only been around since the 70s. All I am trying to say is we don't know everything about it, and if you don't need to use them its probably better to avoid them.

andieb75

I also avoid artificial sweeteners. I am one of those that has negative reactions to them, stomache upset and migraines. So it is quite irritating when I go over my MFP daily sugar level. Especially when eating my greek yogurt! Anyone else experience this?

Deathangl13

I realize that our bodies are made of chemicals...but I am pretty sure "sucralose, and aspartame" are not natural occurring chemicals in the body. Personally, I try to avoid foods that are artificial and packed with preservatives. There isn't any research on the long term effects of splenda because its only been around since the 70s. All I am trying to say is we don't know everything about it, and if you don't need to use them its probably better to avoid them.

Exactly, just use sugar. It trumps everything on taste. I don't use them because they taste like shoe dirt.

conniedj

You could try stevia extract sweetener, such as Stevia In The Raw or Truvia. It's an all natural zero calorie sweetener from the stevia plant.

Splenda and nutrasweet are chemicals. In high enough doses, both have the ability to do damage, destroy and kill.

Splenda is one molecule of fructose and glucose, 3 moles of Chlorine--which is a known carcinogen that is only 80% excreted by the body ( which means 20% stays forever)

nutrasweet there are so mnay studies out there that list so many issues with tissue and organ damage. This chemical--even in small doses alters brain chemistry.

Both chemical sweetners are deceptive in their advertising, as they call them "safe". Yet studies have shown that given these chemicals, the body tends to crave more sweet--it isn't curing a sweet tooth--it's making it worse.

The human body is not made of chemicals. We are organic--meaning naturally derived, living cells. Chemicals are inorganic, non-living compounds.

conniedj

Meant to post my support of using stevia for a non-calorie natural sweetner. I recommend Stevia in the raw too!

julekinz

I once read an article about artificial sweeteners and their pros and cons. From the article I reached the conclusion that splenda was the better product. I dont recall Stevia or Truvia being part of that article though.

conniedj

Stevia and truvia are about as natural as splenda and sweet and low.

Stevia is derived from a plant. It is natural, and non-toxic in all doses. It is not a chemical that can cause toxicity in small, and large amounts.

yarwell

Stevia is derived from a plant

As are many toxic substances, coming from a plant is no guarantee of compatibility with the human body.

I don't personally believe stevia is harmful in sensible doses, nor any other artificial for most healthy people.

If you want a sweetener that's natural, comes from a plant and has hundreds of years of safety reputation then sucrose is the best bet.

tsh0ck

... The human body is not made of chemicals. ...

96 percent of the human body is made up of oxygen, carbon, hydrogen and nitrogen. making up the rest: calcium, phosphorus, potassium, sulfur, sodium, chlorine, magnesium, iron, fluorine, zinc, copper, iodine, selenium, chromium, manganese, molybdenum and cobalt.

... Chlorine--which is a known carcinogen ...

we already have chlorine in our bodies. now, don't go drinking the pool water. sure. but in miniscule amounts? of something already in our system?

Yet studies have shown that given these chemicals, the body tends to crave more sweet--it isn't curing a sweet tooth--it's making it worse.

there is anecdotal evidence that this is true for some people. it is also not true for many. in fact, it makes me feel more full and completely satiates my sweet tooth.

HMonsterX

I switched to Aspartame sweeteners when i started this, and it's been a great help, and I've never felt better!

Is aspartame safe?

Yes. Aspartame has been tested for more than three decades, in more than 200 studies, with the same result: Aspartame is safe. In fact, the FDA Commissioner, upon approving aspartame, noted, “Few compounds have withstood such detailed testing and repeated, close scrutiny, and the process through which aspartame has gone should provide the public with additional confidence of its safety.”


Have other regulatory bodies reviewed aspartame's safety?

Yes. In addition to FDA, aspartame has been reviewed and determined to be safe by the Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) of the Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization, the Scientific Committee on Food of the European Commission, and the regulatory bodies of over 100 countries.


Have independent health organizations reviewed the safety of aspartame?

Yes. The American Medical Association’s Council on Scientific Affairs, the American Diabetes Association, and the American Dietetic Association (ADA) have reviewed research on aspartame and found it to be safe. In fact, the ADA’s 2004 updated position paper states, “A comprehensive review of the safety of aspartame has recently been published. The review covers previous publications as well as new information that support the safety of aspartame as a food additive and negates claims of its association with a range of health problems...” Links to numerous other health organizations, which have confirmed the safety of aspartame, can be found at www.aspartame.org.

mamagooskie

All I can say is I'd rather eat those than be 300+ lbs again, so for me they were the healthier option regardless of whatever studies say about them.

cherrybomb_77

Honestly, everyone's idea of "healthy" is so different, you'll get a variety of answers as to whether or not artificial sweeteners are healthy. I don't like sweet and low because I'm sensitive to aspartame (gives me a headache and makes me nauseous if I eat too much of it) but I occasionally use Splenda.

Deathangl13

Stevia is derived from a plant. It is natural, and non-toxic in all doses. It is not a chemical that can cause toxicity in small, and large amounts.

But it does lower Testosterone levels in the blood... That's all I need to know.

Healthy_Hannah483

Unsure about sweet n' low, but I've heard if it has aspartame in it (which splenda does), then it is bad for you. Truvia is a natural 0 calorie sweetener, although a bit more expensive. Its the brand name, I don't remember exactly what plant it comes from.....

africaa

I've heard that Splenda was okay for you...I use it in my tea

keem88

artificial sweeteners are the devil.
try stevia, all natural 0 calorie sweetener, they sell it in packets. way better than using that artificial crap.

keem88

Unsure about sweet n' low, but I've heard if it has aspartame in it (which splenda does), then it is bad for you. Truvia is a natural 0 calorie sweetener, although a bit more expensive. Its the brand name, I don't remember exactly what plant it comes from.....

from the stevia plant, other countries have been using it longer than it has been used the in the united states. go figure.
there is a soda called zevia made from this with natural flavors, they make cola, cream soda, back cherry, ginger ale and other flavors. a very nice treat to have

Toddrific

The stevia you buy in the store is just as processed as anything else you buy, don't fall for the natural gimmick.

[To produce rebaudioside A commercially, stevia plants are dried and subjected to a water extraction process. This crude extract contains about 50% rebaudioside A; its various glycoside molecules are separated via crystallization techniques, typically using ethanol or methanol as solvent. This allows the manufacturer to isolate pure rebaudioside A<<<the stuff you buy in the store](source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stevia)

Artificial sweeteners in moderate quantities aren't bad for you. They certainly aren't "good" for you, but they aren't bad. If you find you get headaches, cravings,etc. switch sweeteners.

acksaysbillthecat

The issue with some sweeteners is how the body treats them. Despite the zero calories, the body reacts as if sugar has been ingested & the metabolism and insulin levels can be affected just as if sugar had been ingested.

Care to show this none fact with some form of proof? I can show you they don't give a noticeable spike with a wet fart in a tornado. Eating most macro's release a small amount of insulin.... no difference here.

exactly. sugar is sugar when it comes to the chemical breakdown in the body, also.

acksaysbillthecat

My post quote didn't work correctly. One person said sugar is sugar. THis is not true. Some sugars are single molecules (monosacharides) and others are poly. For example: fructose breaks down into a simpler sugar, after being processed it becomes glucose (blood sugar). Different sugars have different functions in the body. You can google this and learn more. (I have animal nutrition background as well).



I listen to a podcast put out by certified nutritionists: "nutritional weight and wellness"

They said, according to recent research, STEVIA is the ONLY artificial sweetener not shown to cause adverse effects in humans.

They also said, AGAVE NECTAR has a higher sugar concentration than fructose syrup and is therefore much worse for you!

So if you are trying to limit sugar intake, it's best to do either limited natural sugar or stevia.

You can find the podcast relating to sugar on iTunes. Enjoy!!

pantsdailyon

I am not like other people on this thread that quotes things. But if you look up Splenda in Wiki, it will tell you that the manufacturers wanted to market Splenda many decades ago, but the FDA was all like "Oh hell, no. It's bad for people. Tests have shown." Then, relatively recently, suddenly the FDA approved Splenda but the composition of the stuff was never changed. Why? My theory is that if enough money is involved, things are overlooked.

Some of that money must have gotten the Wiki changed, because it doesn't say what you claim it says...

pantsdailyon

I avoid artificial sweeteners like the plague. Splenda/sweet-and-low are made with aspertame, same as diet soda.

Actually Splenda is made with aspartame, but Sweet and Low is made with sorbitol.

Actually, Splenda is Sucralose, not aspartame.

...and Sweet'n'low is saccharine.