It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Blaine91555
Truth is always better I think. I like it anyway.
Sucralose is digestible by a many microorganisms once released into the environment. Even though waste water treatment does not remove it, it poses no environmental risks. OK, no problem there.
Originally posted by predator0187
Aspartame is bad for you, there are plenty of studies out there that prove it.
Ok, the amount is small, I was more disturbed with the fact that it is even in our drinking water. I'm not worried about the amount killing me, I'm worried that is going to be everywhere.
Pred...
Originally posted by Blaine91555
Truth is always better I think. I like it anyway.
Sucralose is digestible by a many microorganisms once released into the environment. Even though waste water treatment does not remove it, it poses no environmental risks. OK, no problem there.
100 animal and clinical studies showed no health risks to consuming sucralose. Again no issue.
1 study that used the equivalent of ten thousand of those packets per day for a human on mice found the possibility of genetic damage Hmmmm, I have to wonder how many people are using over ten thousands packets a day? Any of you doing that or know somebody doing that? In fact its less toxic than water. A few die from drinking too much water too fast in a year, but nobody dies from a Splenda overdose. If the alternative is real sugar, its way more dangerous. Even eating too much fruit is more dangerous.
Info from sites peddling fake health products to unsuspecting customers push the charade, using fear in the same way the government uses fear to control behavior. Scare you with an article, sell you a bottle of something that does nothing for a thousand times their cost and they call it a good day. It's also works to sell worthless books and peddle magazines targeted at the same audience. Or, as in the case of this site, they sell you plain old vitamins for hugely inflated prices. They are so overpriced they devote entire pages to explaining why their product, no better than any other is worth many times the price of what are likely better products from reputable companies.
"Nobody ever lost a dime underestimating the intelligence of the American public" (I've seen this quote attributed to P. T. Barnum and others, not sure which is true).
I find the snake oil peddlers and charlatans to be particularly horrible people considering they use fear to trick people into making unwise purchases, along with gimmicks to make you think their stuff is better somehow. Generally their products are more dangerous in fact and often don't have reliable doses. It's about emptying your wallet, not your health.
If you have to choose between a Harvard Study or one done by Dr. (fill in name here) with his Degree from the Denver Institute of Crap (Denver has had a number of phony institutes where you could buy a Degree over the years, beware those who call themselves Dr.) where they bought the degree, go with the Harvard Study. Do yourselves a favor. There are plenty of real issues on these topics, don't let the fake ones empty your wallet.
As to Stevia, it has in fact been banned in many places on earth as it is not known if it is harmful as some early studies showed. It's kind of a take it at your own risk product that is likely safe. Not all natural things are safer just because they are natural. The EU banned it in food. I admit I use it in some kinds of tea where it works. It is bitter and does not work well in all beverages due to the aftertaste. Works well in red sauces though to replace the sugar from wine if you have no wine on hand.
Please find your own sources from reputable sites that are not trying to sell you something for your own protection. I looked heavily into sweeteners a while back and most of what is on the snake oil sites is pure old fashioned garbage. There are even less than honest real MD's peddling crap. Having an MD does not automatically make you honest nor does it stop the person from peddling snake oil.
Discovered in 1976, sucralose is 600 times sweeter than sugar and does not metabolize to produce energy, thus it does not contain calories. It is the only low calorie sweetener that is made from sugar, which has been changed so passes through the body unchanged and unmetabolized. Substituting for three alcohol groups on the sugar molecule with three chlorine atoms creates sucralose.
Results from over 100 animal and clinical studies included in this FDA approval process unanimously indicated a lack of risk associated with sucralose intake. Acceptable human intakes across all populations have been pinpointed, as noted by Baird, Shephard, Merritt, and Hildick-Smith (2000). The estimated daily intake (EDI) for humans is 1.1mg/kg/day. The intakes acceptable daily intake (ADI) is 16 mg/kg/day. The highest no adverse effects limit (HNEL) is 1500 mg/kg/day (Baird et al., 2000).
Sucralose administration to Sprague-Dawley and COBS CD (SD) BR rats, mice, beagle dogs, monkeys, and eventually humans showed no signs of toxicity, carcinogenicity, or other side effects. Studies ranged from single dose administration to eating trials of over two years. Common methods of administration included oral, gavage, and IV intakes. No adverse reactions were observed at intakes up to 16,000 mg/kg/day in mice or 10,000 mg/kg/day in rats—a dosage equivalent to 1,000 pounds of sucrose administered in a single day to a 165-pound adult (Goldsmith, 2000).