Artificial Sweeteners

FunkyTobias · May 2013

Utter nonsense with no basis in fact.

Actually it's YOUR post that's utter nonsense.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18800291

By the way, Mohamed Abou-Donia, PhD, is Professor in the Department of Pharmacology and Cancer Biology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina. What are your quialifications?

Abstract

Splenda is comprised of the high-potency artificial sweetener sucralose (1.1%) and the fillers maltodextrin and glucose. Splenda was administered by oral gavage at 100, 300, 500, or 1000 mg/kg to male Sprague-Dawley rats for 12-wk, during which fecal samples were collected weekly for bacterial analysis and measurement of fecal pH. After 12-wk, half of the animals from each treatment group were sacrificed to determine the intestinal expression of the membrane efflux transporter P-glycoprotein (P-gp) and the cytochrome P-450 (CYP) metabolism system by Western blot. The remaining animals were allowed to recover for an additional 12-wk, and further assessments of fecal microflora, fecal pH, and expression of P-gp and CYP were determined. At the end of the 12-wk treatment period, the numbers of total anaerobes, bifidobacteria, lactobacilli, Bacteroides, clostridia, and total aerobic bacteria were significantly decreased; however, there was no significant treatment effect on enterobacteria. Splenda also increased fecal pH and enhanced the expression of P-gp by 2.43-fold, CYP3A4 by 2.51-fold, and CYP2D1 by 3.49-fold. Following the 12-wk recovery period, only the total anaerobes and bifidobacteria remained significantly depressed, whereas pH values, P-gp, and CYP3A4 and CYP2D1 remained elevated. These changes occurred at Splenda dosages that contained sucralose at 1.1-11 mg/kg (the US FDA Acceptable Daily Intake for sucralose is 5 mg/kg). Evidence indicates that a 12-wk administration of Splenda exerted numerous adverse effects, including (1) reduction in beneficial fecal microflora, (2) increased fecal pH, and (3) enhanced expression levels of P-gp, CYP3A4, and CYP2D1, which are known to limit the bioavailability of orally administered drugs.

Are you a rat?

Rat studies are useful insofar as they are hyphtesis generating, and a means to secure funding for further study.

Nothing more.

FunkyTobias · May 2013

This is a great one. Can you actually find someone that was involved with this study that DOESN'T have a glaringly huge conflict of interest?

EVERY study has potential conflicts of interest. Studies are expensive, and they can only happen when they secure funding. A conflict of interest may justify looking at the methodology and/or conclusions with closer scrituiny, but it does not automatically give you a reason to dismiss the findings.

http://www.holisticmed.com/aspartame/burdock/

So funny that you decry conflict of interest, then post a link to woo merchants, as if they don't have an agenda.

AvsFreak · May 2013

Interesting read. Definitely something to think about. I don't drink or smoke, never have, but was recently diagnosed with an atypical meningioma (brain tumor). I suppose it could be from pollution, fluorescent lighting, pesticides or something else, but I really do go to town on the "diet" stuff and splenda to save calories. Just makes me think. I used to hate diet soda, now it's all I drink and the regular stuff tastes like syrup. Maybe I could get used to not having everything so sweet and eventually cut it all out.

I guess you can't prove it hurts you, but not having it can't hurt you either.

dobyblue · July 2013

Utter nonsense with no basis in fact.

Actually it's YOUR post that's utter nonsense.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18800291

By the way, Mohamed Abou-Donia, PhD, is Professor in the Department of Pharmacology and Cancer Biology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina. What are your quialifications?

Abstract

Splenda is comprised of the high-potency artificial sweetener sucralose (1.1%) and the fillers maltodextrin and glucose. Splenda was administered by oral gavage at 100, 300, 500, or 1000 mg/kg to male Sprague-Dawley rats for 12-wk, during which fecal samples were collected weekly for bacterial analysis and measurement of fecal pH. After 12-wk, half of the animals from each treatment group were sacrificed to determine the intestinal expression of the membrane efflux transporter P-glycoprotein (P-gp) and the cytochrome P-450 (CYP) metabolism system by Western blot. The remaining animals were allowed to recover for an additional 12-wk, and further assessments of fecal microflora, fecal pH, and expression of P-gp and CYP were determined. At the end of the 12-wk treatment period, the numbers of total anaerobes, bifidobacteria, lactobacilli, Bacteroides, clostridia, and total aerobic bacteria were significantly decreased; however, there was no significant treatment effect on enterobacteria. Splenda also increased fecal pH and enhanced the expression of P-gp by 2.43-fold, CYP3A4 by 2.51-fold, and CYP2D1 by 3.49-fold. Following the 12-wk recovery period, only the total anaerobes and bifidobacteria remained significantly depressed, whereas pH values, P-gp, and CYP3A4 and CYP2D1 remained elevated. These changes occurred at Splenda dosages that contained sucralose at 1.1-11 mg/kg (the US FDA Acceptable Daily Intake for sucralose is 5 mg/kg). Evidence indicates that a 12-wk administration of Splenda exerted numerous adverse effects, including (1) reduction in beneficial fecal microflora, (2) increased fecal pH, and (3) enhanced expression levels of P-gp, CYP3A4, and CYP2D1, which are known to limit the bioavailability of orally administered drugs.

Are you a rat?

Rat studies are useful insofar as they are hyphtesis generating, and a means to secure funding for further study.

Nothing more.

I don't think you're in research, rats and other mammalian species provide many uses in studies, depending on how closely a particular species matches humans biologically. Sprawley rats for example are useful for cancer tests because they are similarly prone to tumors as humans are, hence why they were used in the recent Seralini toxicology study on genetically modified corn. Some types of monkeys are useful to compare brain tissue toxicology analysis.

dobyblue · July 2013

This is a great one. Can you actually find someone that was involved with this study that DOESN'T have a glaringly huge conflict of interest?

EVERY study has potential conflicts of interest. Studies are expensive, and they can only happen when they secure funding. A conflict of interest may justify looking at the methodology and/or conclusions with closer scrituiny, but it does not automatically give you a reason to dismiss the findings.

http://www.holisticmed.com/aspartame/burdock/

So funny that you decry conflict of interest, then post a link to woo merchants, as if they don't have an agenda.

So funny that you use misdirection and/or deflection instead of actually looking at the GROSS conflicts of interest here, each one which can be verified with but only a few moments searching the internet.

Using the word "woo" to describe verifiable information is usually the sign of an industry plant.

curly1986 · July 2013

I used to have artificial sweeteners in my tea and coffee and only drank diet juice, and a lot of it! For years I had itchiness! My thighs were the worst but I had it on my stomach, calfs and arms as well. But I just put it down to being sensitive to the perfumes and stuff in my laundry products (although I did try swapping those for "sensitive" products). Then I happened upon an article about the possible side effects of aspartame. My brain didnt quite connect the 2 together but I did decide to stop the artificial sweeteners because there was a lot of scary stuff in the article. Few weeks later I noticed my everything had stopped itching and they've been fine ever since.

Give me real sugar over artificial sweetener any day!! Even my daughter doesn't get artificial sweeteners because they make her wild! And 5 year olds are wild enough on their own! :laugh: So no Fruit Shoots for her!

Artificial Sweeteners

Replies

Categories