SUGAR~ Part 5

Last time, we took a hard, fast look at the artificial sweetener, aspartame. Is it really a nutritious, healthy alternative to sugar, as we are lead to believe? With its key ingredients being the molecular equivalent of ant poison, antifreeze and formaldehyde, we came to a resounding NOT A CHANCE!!!

With a suspicious cloud hovering over aspartame, the artificial sweetener gurus went to work and in the 1990’s introduced a new player into this game; sucralose. Under the brand name, Spenda, sucralose is promoted as “the sweetener that is made from sugar so it tastes like sugar”, and has become the nations number one selling artificial sweetener topping $177 million in a one-year period.

According to Dr J. Mercola in his article The Potential Dangers of Splenda “There is no question that sucralose starts off as a sugar molecule. It is what goes on in the factory that is concerning. Sucralose is a synthetic chemical that was originally cooked up in a laboratory. In the five-step patented process of making sucralose, three chlorine molecules are added to a sucrose or sugar molecule. A sucrose molecule is a disaccharide that contains two single sugars bound together; glucose and fructose. But the chemical process to make sucralose alters the chemical composition of the sugar so much that it is somehow converted to a fructo-galactose molecule. This type of sugar molecule does not occur in nature and therefore your body does not possess the ability to properly metabolize it”

Setting the questions of mutated molecules aside, more toxic trouble is left glaring at us; the addition of these 3 chlorine molecules. Chlorine has been at the center of environmental controversy for years. It is not a natural but a manufactured substance produced through an industrial process. An electrical current is passed through salt water producing chlorine and caustic soda. The dangers connected to chlorine itself would make for an entire column.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has found the byproduct of chlorine, dioxin, to be 300,000 times more potent as a carcinogen than DDT. This enough should ask the question why any ingestion of this product would be considered safe let alone “nutritious” as we are told.
The FDA has gone on record stating that “aside from any direct toxicity from sucralose itself, it may also contain trace amounts of heavy metals, arsenic, methanol and other chlorinated saccharides (sugars) however, that these contaminants are considered acceptable within current manufacturing guidelines.”

Reactions to Splenda have been document ranging from flushing and redness of the skin, rash, itching, blisters, swellings, panic attacks, depression, shaking, seizures, nausea, stomach cramps, diarrhea, vomiting, attention problems, headaches and seeing spots.
Next time you humor your sweet tooth thinking you are doing yourself a favor by reaching for a Splenda sweetened product with that “health check”, remember these few last thoughts. Splendas own studies show that at least 15% of Splenda is not excreted from your body in a timely manner. DDT compounds have the ability to be stored in the human fat molecule for at least 10 years. As well, there have only been six human trials to date on the safety of sucralose and the longest trial lasted three months.

Is sucralose or Splenda a safe, healthy product? Many “experts” still swear by it, but as far as this girl is concerned, it’s not a friend I want in my pantry. What we do have, however, is an entire army of sugar solutions from Nature herself. Most of which will not steal your health but actually build your health.

We begin to look at the good-guys, next time we walk the natural path.

No comments: