New to the forum?

Sign Up Here!


Already a member?
Please login below.





Forgot your password?
Need Help?  
jmtassey - February 6

Aspartame and artificial sweeteners

according to the FDA aspartame is by far the most dangerous food additive. According to the adverse reaction monitoring system aspartame may cause: headaches/migrains,dizzines
s,seizures,nausea,numb-ness
,
muscle spasms, weight gain, heart- palpatations,depression, fatigue, irritability,tachycardia, insomnia, vision problems, breathing promblems,anxiety attacks, ringing in your ears, memory loss, joint pain, and ect...
certain illnesses are believed to be triggered or made worse by ingesting aspartame and other artificial sweeteners like MS, chronic fatiguge syndrome,and what do know, Fibromyalgia. So if you are addicted to diet soda or use sweet n low in your coffee try to stop because it seems to be very dangerous to your health.
Before I got sick I was drinking 2 diet pops a day and using at least 6 packets of sweet and low a day also, and now I can't help but wonder if I was poisoning my body without even knowing it. Try and go to...www.dorway.com/possible.html and http://campaignfortruth.com/sugarbody.htm

 

jane doe - February 6

Sweet and low does NOT have aspartame. Equal and nutra-sweet do.

 

tcmby - February 6

WOW is all I can say... those articles are terrifying! thanx for putting this thread together, it explains a lot... I am going to stop drinking that crap right now... the list of symptoms are scary & insane! bring on the H20....

 

teresat - February 6

Sweet & low has saccharin which is just as bad for you.

 

dream69 - February 7

Living is bad for our health! The Internet is full of scary stuff, some true and some exaggerated, some maybe true, and some totally untrue. Just make sure your sources are legit. The more I read about fibromyalgia it seems like everything causes it. I try to keep my research within certain parameters, but I realize that not everything there can be trusted also.

 

tcmby - March 22

so its been well over a month since i have had any aspartame or artificial sweeteners & i haven't noticed ANY difference physically at all. i am going to stick with it for a few more months just to see... but i am really getting tired of drinking just water. there are way too many calories in juice to be drinking it all day long... anyone here notice that aspartame effects their symptoms at all?

 

dream69 - March 22

TCMBY
If you really have a sweet tooth than stick with splenda which is the safest from the bunch.

 

tcmby - March 23

thanks for the tip dream. i have never tried splenda. i'll look for it next time i go shopping.

 

tcmby - March 23

yikes >>> www.splendaexposed.com

 

dream69 - March 23

I have seen several websites yapping away about splenda but yet I have not found anything negative within the scientific literature. However, Aspartame and the others are well documented in the scientific literature.

 

dream69 - March 23

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of 3-months' daily administration of high doses of sucralose, a non-nutritive sweetener, on glycemic control in subjects with type 2 diabetes. DESIGN: A multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized study, consisting of a 6-week screening phase, a 13-week test phase, and a 4-week follow-up phase. SUBJECTS/SETTING: Subjects with type 2 diabetes (age range 31 to 70 years) entered the test phase of this study; 128 subjects completed the study. The subjects were recruited from 5 medical centers across the United States and were, on average, obese. INTERVENTION: Subjects were randomly assigned to receive either placebo (cellulose) capsules (n=69) or 667 mg encapsulated sucralose (n=67) daily for the 13-week test phase. All subjects blindly received placebo capsules during the last 4 weeks of the screening phase and for the entire 4-week follow-up phase. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting plasma glucose, and fasting serum C-peptide were measured approximately every 2 weeks to evaluate blood glucose homeostasis. Data were analyzed by analysis of variance using repeated measures. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the sucralose and placebo groups in HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose, or fasting serum C-peptide changes from baseline. There were no clinically meaningful differences between the groups in any safety measure. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that, similar to cellulose, sucralose consumption for 3 months at doses of 7.5 mg/kg/day, which is approximately three times the estimated maximum intake, had no effect on glucose homeostasis in individuals with type 2 diabetes. Additionally, this study showed that sucralose was as well-tolerated by the study subjects as was the placebo.

 

dream69 - March 23


The potential carcinogenicity of sucralose was evaluated by feeding groups of 52 male and 52 female CD-1 mice a diet containing sucralose at 0.3% (3000 ppm), 1.0% (10,000 ppm) or 3.0% (30,000 ppm) for 104 weeks. A group of 72 male and 72 female mice received diet without sucralose and served as controls. Week 1 achieved doses ranging from 543 to 5870mg/kg body weight/day in the low-dose males and high-dose females, respectively. Sucralose had no adverse effect on survival. No significant changes attributable to sucralose were found in the clinical condition or behaviour of the mice. Organ weights and the gross appearance of tissues were unaffected by treatment. The mean erythrocyte counts of females receiving the highest dietary concentration were slightly, but statistically significantly, lower than those of the controls after 104 weeks of treatment. Group mean body weight gain at the highest dietary concentration of sucralose was significantly less than that of the control in mice of both sexes. Food consumption, after correction for sucralose content, was lower for female mice, but not statistically significant. Water consumption for male mice receiving the highest dietary concentration was approximately 9% higher than that of the controls. There were statistically significant increases in the incidence of several non-neoplastic findings, but these were not considered to be related to sucralose administration. Treatment with sucralose did not increase the incidence of any tumour or influence the types of tumours observed. It was concluded that sucralose is not carcinogenic in CD-1 mice. The body weight gain and erythrocyte observations at the 3.0% dietary level were of limited biological significance as they were not accompanied by any histopathologic finding and had no impact on survival. The remaining dose levels were judged to have no effects

 

dream69 - March 23

Comparative neuropathological studies of 1,6-dichloro-1, 6-dideoxy-beta-D-fructofuranosyl-4
-chloro-4-deoxy-alpha-D-galactopyr
a
noside (sucralose), an equimolar mixture of 1,6-dichloro-1, 6-dideoxyfructose (1,6-DCF) and 4-chloro-4-deoxygalactose (4-CG), the hydrolysis products of sucralose, and 6-chloro-6-deoxyglucose (6-CG) were conducted in male and female mice and male marmoset monkeys, focusing on morphological changes in the central nervous system. 6-Chloro-6-deoxyglucose, previously reported to produce neurotoxic effects, served as the positive control and was administered by gavage at a daily dose of 500mg/kg. Sucralose and the sucralose hydrolysis products (sucralose-HP) were similarly administered to mice and marmosets at doses of up to 1000mg/kg for 21 and 28 days, respectively. No changes were detected in the central nervous system by light or electron microscopy in either of the species that received sucralose or its hydrolysis products. 6-Chloro-6-deoxyglucose, in contrast, induced symmetrical lesions in the deep nuclei of the cerebellum, brain stem and spinal cord with definitive neurological signs of CNS involvement.

 

dream69 - March 23

Research has not shown splenda to be unsafe to either human or animal.

 

dream69 - March 23

Splenda is sucralose

 

Message:


You must log in to reply.

Are you New to the forum? Sign Up Here! Already a member? Please login below.

Forgot your password?
Need Help?
Ask a Question