| Author |
Topic: Splenda.. safe or not? |
Cashmason
Cool Runner |
 posted Jun-04-2005 04:58 AM
  
My girlfriend loves the stuff especially in the new diet Coke.She seems to think its too good to be true ( she loves sweets). The manufacturer claims its harmless made from sugar, others claim its not good for the kidneys or liver. You all have any thoughts on it?
IP: Logged |
yogini runner
Cool Runner |
posted Jun-04-2005 06:09 AM
Splenda has a 'slight' mutagenic effect on our cells.
It is one bond away from regular sucrose.It is probably like sweet and low where a LOT needs to be ingested for anything bad to happen. It is becoming almost as ubiquitous as high fructose corn syrup. I favor leaning towards eating the real stuff.
IP: Logged |
Mikey314159
Cool Runner |
posted Jun-04-2005 06:14 AM
It's safe.
This topic has been disputed many times on this forum, so I don't really feel like going through the whole story again, but it's safe.
------------------
My User Profile
[This message has been edited by Mikey314159 (edited Jun-04-2005).]
IP: Logged |
speedyfeet
Cool Runner |
posted Jun-05-2005 12:56 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Mikey314159:
It's safe.
This topic has been disputed many times on this forum, so I don't really feel like going through the whole story again, but it's safe.
It shouldn't even have to be discussed. It's safe and that's all there is to it.
IP: Logged |
Stone Soup
Cool Runner |
posted Jun-05-2005 04:26 PM
The FDA must be delighted to have the full trust of so many Coolrunners.
IP: Logged |
speedyfeet
Cool Runner |
posted Jun-05-2005 08:17 PM
FDA or no FDA it's safe, and it's not worth arguing.
IP: Logged |
Mikey314159
Cool Runner |
posted Jun-05-2005 08:48 PM
quote:
Originally posted by speedyfeet:
FDA or no FDA it's safe, and it's not worth arguing.
Got that right.
Some of the people around here with little education on the topic who refuse to stop disputing the fact that these products are safe really annoy me. Don't want to be mean, just bothers me when in the past people have used very weak "studies" to prove their points. One must use scientific thinking and control based double blind clinical trials which show that these products are safe. So don't worry about the Splenda.------------------
My User Profile
IP: Logged |
sm266
Cool Runner |
posted Jun-05-2005 09:57 PM
God, I hope it's safe.
IP: Logged |
Back on Track
unregistered |
posted Jun-05-2005 10:26 PM
who knows. Cancer is on the rise, something is causing it. I really hope it's safe. I love diet pop.
IP: Logged |
speedyfeet
Cool Runner |
posted Jun-06-2005 07:52 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Back on Track:
who knows. Cancer is on the rise, something is causing it. I really hope it's safe. I love diet pop.
What did Mikey just say?! Just because both consumption of artificial sweeteners and cancer are on the rise does NOT prove cause and effect. I think I'd much quicker link the obesity epidemic going on over in the US to highened cancer rates than artificial sweeteners. But even this is not cause and effect, so no link can be made. Artificial sweeteners have been studied to death. They're safe and that's that.
IP: Logged |
Patti Maransky
Cool Runner |
posted Jun-06-2005 08:57 AM
Splenda has been in development since the 80's....FDA studied this thing forever....its safe...
I should know, I work for the company that makes it.
IP: Logged |
jellybelly
Cool Runner |
posted Jun-06-2005 10:37 AM
Do your own research. After I felt unwell after having soda sweetened with splenda (and the next time) I started doing research on the internet about it. There was enough debate make me decide it was not good enough for me or my family.
IP: Logged |
gebuh
Cool Runner |
posted Jun-06-2005 11:09 AM
wow- so trusting. I'm not gonna debate the safety or lack thereof of splenda, but "scientific thought" and "double blind studies" are only as impartial as whoever's paying for it. you don't have to look very far to find guys in white lab coats who will say whatever you pay for. remember cigarette "safety" studies? how bout vioxx? there's all kinds of stuff out there about nutra sweet. food companies are getting a free ride because of this attitude. they can poison us with impunity- and then just throw out the words "studies have shown", yadda yadda yadda. its gotten to the point where unless something catastrohic and way obvious happens these people can do anything they want to our food. personally, I think its better to err on the safe side, especially when it comes to stuff i can do without. quote:
Originally posted by Mikey314159:
Got that right.
Some of the people around here with little education on the topic who refuse to stop disputing the fact that these products are safe really annoy me. Don't want to be mean, just bothers me when in the past people have used very weak "studies" to prove their points. One must use scientific thinking and control based double blind clinical trials which show that these products are safe. So don't worry about the Splenda.
[This message has been edited by gebuh (edited Jun-06-2005).]
IP: Logged |
Coastwalker
Cool Runner |
posted Jun-06-2005 01:00 PM
quote:
Originally posted by gebuh:
personally, I think its better to err on the safe side, especially when it comes to stuff i can do without.
All the safety studies not withstanding, I agree with gebuh: I'd rather err on the safe side, and I don't really need this stuff (or the soda that it sweetens).
IP: Logged |
Knox Runner
Cool Runner |
posted Jun-06-2005 02:06 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Coastwalker:
All the safety studies not withstanding, I agree with gebuh: I'd rather err on the safe side, and I don't really need this stuff (or the soda that it sweetens).
I could provide links to multiple sites detailing huge dangers from consuming, milk, soybeans, chicken, beef, fish, etc. None of these are 'needed' in a healthy diet, should we error on the side of caution and not eat them? Seriously though, I don't entirely disagree with you, we don't 'need' artificial sweeteners (or natural sweeteners for that matter), and removing them certainly can't hurt. But using random websites with no responsible backing of claims as the basis for not eating something is not necessarily the most logical way to make decisions like that.
IP: Logged |
spamalope
Cool Runner |
posted Jun-06-2005 04:05 PM
Honestly, what isn't dangerous when consumed in large quantities?Heck, you can over hyrdrate yourself to death with water if you're really committed to the cause. One's gotta have some vices. DC w/ Splenda is awesome & I'll take a can of DC/Splenda over a cigarette any day (with a big smile). ------------------
_Shane
IP: Logged |
Acidosis
Cool Runner |
posted Jun-06-2005 04:51 PM
I have an unnecessary appendages in my abdomen called appendix. They are totally unnecessary as I said before, but they can become infected and potentially kill me, should I go get them removed?
IP: Logged |
speedyfeet
Cool Runner |
posted Jun-06-2005 05:18 PM
quote:
Originally posted by jellybelly:
Do your own research. After I felt unwell after having soda sweetened with splenda (and the next time) I started doing research on the internet about it. There was enough debate make me decide it was not good enough for me or my family.
Wow, you felt unwell after having some soda sweetened with sucralose...must mean the stuff is toxic. Lots of people feel really bad after drinking milk too. It's called lactose intolerance. Milk must also be a deadly toxin. And think of all of the people who have died from injesting peanut butter! We most definitely must banish the stuff from the planet! Seriously though, listen to Knox, he's a smart guy, our very own resident biochemist. 
IP: Logged |
Mikey314159
Cool Runner |
posted Jun-06-2005 05:21 PM
quote:
Originally posted by gebuh:
wow- so trusting. I'm not gonna debate the safety or lack thereof of splenda, but "scientific thought" and "double blind studies" are only as impartial as whoever's paying for it. you don't have to look very far to find guys in white lab coats who will say whatever you pay for. remember cigarette "safety" studies? how bout vioxx? there's all kinds of stuff out there about nutra sweet. food companies are getting a free ride because of this attitude. they can poison us with impunity- and then just throw out the words "studies have shown", yadda yadda yadda. its gotten to the point where unless something catastrohic and way obvious happens these people can do anything they want to our food. personally, I think its better to err on the safe side, especially when it comes to stuff i can do without. [This message has been edited by gebuh (edited Jun-06-2005).]
Like Knox said, you can find countless "studies" on the internet about this and that being harmful for your health or not. The problem lies in the fact that these studies are not really studies at all! You must look in the right places to find studies that actually make sense and are conducting real research!! You obviously don't know what double blind control means if you think that funding can change the results. This thread is giving me a headache. Time for a coke with SPLENDA (oh noooo!). ------------------
My User Profile
IP: Logged |
gebuh
Cool Runner |
posted Jun-07-2005 11:37 AM
I'm not talking about the countless "studies" on the internet about this and that being harmful to your health or not - I'm talking about the so called "real" research that is used - or not used, or manipulated to ensure that a profit is made. All the scientific rigor in the world means nothing if someone tinkers with or burys the results. Like I said before- I don't know for sure either way about the safety of splenda- but I do know the track record of the people who have made fortunes peddling unhealthy junk we don't need. you obviously need to consider the big picture. quote:
Originally posted by Mikey314159:
Like Knox said, you can find countless "studies" on the internet about this and that being harmful for your health or not. The problem lies in the fact that these studies are not really studies at all! You must look in the right places to find studies that actually make sense and are conducting real research!! You obviously don't know what double blind control means if you think that funding can change the results. This thread is giving me a headache. Time for a coke with SPLENDA (oh noooo!).
IP: Logged |
Mikey314159
Cool Runner |
posted Jun-07-2005 05:11 PM
quote:
you obviously need to consider the big picture.
Don't worry, I have. Splenda is safe. ------------------
My User Profile
IP: Logged |
speedyfeet
Cool Runner |
posted Jun-07-2005 05:16 PM
I'm sure half the people against Splenda are the same ones bringing their kids to McDs twice a week. Nothing wrong with that though.
IP: Logged |
gebuh
Cool Runner |
posted Jun-08-2005 01:32 PM
cool- now we can add it to the list of all the other safe stuff foisted upon us:bha/bht
nitrates
hydrogenated oils
pesticides
bgh
antibiotics
aspartame
highly refined/processed anything
irradiation- oh I'm sorry- cold pasturization its safe healthy stuff like this that makes us the healthiest people on earth- o wait no, it makes us fat, diabetic and coronary/kidney/colon disease ridden. That's the big picture. Maybe splenda is really ok- I mean how bad can sugar mixed with chlorine be? I'm sure if that was the only "safe" lab food you ate everything would be fine. But it ain't. quote:
Originally posted by Mikey314159:
Don't worry, I have. Splenda is safe.
IP: Logged |
TechTee
Cool Runner |
posted Jun-08-2005 01:59 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Back on Track:
who knows. Cancer is on the rise, something is causing it. I really hope it's safe. I love diet pop.
Hmmm. Cancer is on the rise? Could you show me a cite for that? ------------------
My User Profile Jeff
IP: Logged |
Dr GeneMachine
Cool Runner |
posted Jun-08-2005 03:05 PM
quote:
Originally posted by TechTee:
Hmmm. Cancer is on the rise?Could you show me a cite for that?
Well, I guess cancer is on the rise because it is basically a disease of age. Cancer is caused by the accumulation of DNA damage which interferes with the growth regulation of cells. This accumulation takes time, so your cancer risk rises with age. As the general live expectancy rises and the age distribution of the population gets increasingly slanted to the old side, the prevalence of cancer will rise to.
IP: Logged |
