Partes: 1, 2

• Other adverse effects reported in pre-approval research included:

• 1. Shrunken thymus glands (up to 40% shrinkage) (EO56)
  3. Enlarged liver and kidneys. (EO57 & E161)
  4. Atrophy of lymph follicles in the spleen and thymus (EO51, EO56, EO151)
  5. Increased cecal weight (E151)
  6. Reduced growth rate (EO57)
  7. Decreased red blood cell count (EO55)
  8. Hyperplasia of the pelvis (EO57)
  9. Extension of the pregnancy period
  10. Aborted pregnancy (E134)
  11. Decreased fetal body weights and placental weights (EO32)
  12. Diarrhea
• Recent Research
  a possible problem with caecal enlargement and renal mineralization has been seen in post approval animal research.
• Sucralose Breaks Down
  Despite the manufacturer's misstatements, sucralose does break down into small amounts of 1, 6-dichlorofructose, a chemical that has not been adequately tested in humans.
• Independent, Long-Term Human Research
  None. Manufacturer's "100's of studies" (some of which show hazards) were clearly inadequate and do not demonstrate safety in long-term use.
• Chlorinated Pesticides
  the manufacturer claims that the chlorine added to sucralose is similar to the chlorine atom in the salt (NaCl) molecule. That is not the case. Sucralose may be more like ingesting tiny amounts of chlorinated pesticides, but we will never know without long-term, independent human research.
• Conclusion
  While it is unlikely that sucralose is as toxic as the poisoning people are experiencing from Monsanto's , it is clear from the hazards seen in pre-approval research and from its chemical structure that years or decades of use may contribute to serious chronic immunological or neurological disorders.
• Addendum (October 2, 2006)
  occasionally, persons emailing ask questions about sucralose research. What follows is a copy of a response one such question.

The answer starts by summarizing the aspartame (NutraSweet) issue and then addresses the sucralose issue.

Let me start by saying that, as you may know, there is a quickly growing body of evidence demonstrating the toxicity of aspartame. This includes:

• Recent European research showing that ingesting aspartame leads to the accumulation of formaldehyde in the brain, other organs and tissues (Formaldehyde has been shown to damage the nervous system, immune system, and cause irreversible genetic damage in humans.)
• An extremely large number of toxicity reactions reported to the FDA and other organizations
• A recent report showing that nearly 100% of independent research has found problems with aspartame.

Why is this relevant to the sucralose question? Similar to the aspartame situation 15 years ago:

• Pre-approval test indicated potential toxicity of sucralose.
• There are no *independent* controlled human studies on sucralose (similar to 15 years ago for aspartame).
• There are no long-term (12-24 months) human studies of sucralose's effects.
• There is no monitoring of health effects. It took government agencies decades to agree that there were countless thousands of deaths from tobacco. Why? Simply because there had been no monitoring or epidemiological studies. Without such monitoring and studies, huge effects can easily go unnoticed.

So, without even addressing the pre-approval research showing potential toxicity, it is clear that sucralose has a) no long history (e.g., decades) of safe use, b) no independent monitoring of health effects, c) no long-term human studies, and d) no independent human studies. I would hope that the Precautionary Principle, now commonly used in Europe, would be a guiding force for people who are interested in health. Otherwise, we might as well just use any poorly tested, artificial (lab-created) chemical that has shown potential for long-term toxicity.

As far as the pre-approval research related to sucralose.... As you probably know, pre-approval research is rarely published. It is only available from the FDA by filing a Freedom of Information Act request. However, you can see a very short summary regarding sucralose and shrunken thymus glands in the "New Scientist" (23 November 1991, page 13).

It is very important that people who have any interest in their health stay aware from the highly toxic sweetener, aspartame and other dangerous sweeteners such as sucralose (Splenda), and acesulfame-k (Sunette, Sweet & Safe, Sweet One). Instead, please see the extensive resources for sweeteners on the Healthier Sweetener Resource List.

Sources:

Available on request.

 

Dr. Félix E. F. Larocca