An article scrutinizing the safety of the manufactured sweetener sucralose (branded as Splenda), which appeared in the journal Toxicology and Environmental Health, contests common fallacies about this universal artificial sweetener’s assumed safety.
Present in countless goods and consumed by millions of individuals worldwide, sucralose’s extraordinary solubility in water, alcohol, and methanol makes it the most adaptable and thus the most popular artificial sweetener in current production. However, its prevalence does not automatically ensure its safety, as shown by the widespread use of other artificial sweeteners like aspartame, which, despite being approved as safe in 90 countries, has been associated with numerous severe health issues including potential neurotoxicity.
But the perception is shifting…
In 2013, the Center for the Public Interest in Science lowered Splenda’s rating from “safe” to “caution,” attributing this decision to their need to assess an impending Italian study associating the artificial sweetener with leukemia in mice.
A human study published around the same time associated Splenda with changes related to diabetes, questioning its merit as a non-caloric sweetener for those suffering from or seeking to prevent blood sugar issues.
The 2013 review may be the most alarming yet to appear in peer-reviewed journals. Titled “Sucralose, a synthetic organochlorine sweetener: overview of biological issues,” it discloses a wide array of previously underreported safety issues, most notably the production of extremely toxic chlorinated compounds, including dioxins, when Splenda is used in cooking. This is a usage that its manufacturer, McNeil Nutritionals (a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson), actively advocates, even identifying children as primary consumers.
A bewildering array of splenda (sucralose) safety issues that have not been thoroughly investigated
The study suggests that, despite its extensive approval and use, additional scientific safety research is necessary due to the following significant findings:
- “Sucralose alters metabolic parameters and its chronic effects on body weight are unknown”: both animal and human studies suggest that sucralose may increase blood sugar and insulin levels, indicating that it may have diabetogenic properties.
- “Sucralose alters P-gp and CYP expression”: Although categorized as a food additive, the organochlorine structure of sucralose suggests that it interferes with a wide variety of organochlorine class drugs and activates detoxification pathways and enzymes in a way similar to these xenobiotic chemicals.
- “The metabolic fate and health profile of sucralose metabolites are currently unknown”: Contrary to claims in the research literature that sucralose is excreted ‘unchanged’ in feces, metabolites have been found in the urine and feces of both animals and humans, the nature and health impact of which have never been investigated.
- “Sucralose alters indigenous bacterial balance in the GIT”: Sucralose (provided as Splenda) has been shown to decrease the number of beneficial bacteria in the gastrointestinal tract (e.g., lactobacilli, bifidobacteria), while increasing more harmful bacteria (e.g., enterobacteria). One study found that the adverse effects on flora did not return to normal (baseline) after a three-month recovery period. Sucralose also affected the pH of the gastrointestinal tract.
- “Numerous toxicological issues regarding long-term exposure to sucralose are unresolved”: 1) DNA damage (genotoxicity) and possible adverse epigenetic alterations. 2) The generation of toxic compounds during baking, including chloropropanols, 1,6-DCF, and dioxins. 3) The bioaccumulation of sucralose and/or its metabolites 4) The interaction between sucralose and/or its metabolites with drugs have not yet been studied or evaluated.
Toxic compounds, including dioxins, formed when splenda (sucralose) is heated
As the reader can clearly see, the situation is a complex one, with more unanswered questions than answers. Perhaps the most troubling issue discussed in the report is the ‘Safety of Heated Sucralose.’ The paper indicates that historically, sucralose was considered heat-stable at cooking temperatures. However, they reference various reports from independent laboratories showing that sucralose undergoes thermal degradation when heated.
Finally, an equally concerning issue raised by the paper is the problem of the acceptable daily intake (ADI). Based on toxicity studies in rats, the FDA approved an ADI for humans of 5 mg/kg/day in 1998. However, new research has indicated that the actual NOEL in rats for Splenda is significantly lower. This suggests that significant effects could be expected in humans far below the ADI.
Given the clear signs of harm associated with Splenda and the fact that heating Splenda can release toxic dioxin, you may want to consider an alternative.