A recently published study has reignited the long-running Splenda issue - is it safe or not?
An article in Uptown Magazine by Annika Harris cites a study that linked sucralose, the ingredient found in Splenda, with the development of leukemia and other blood cancers in the mice tested. The study, done by Ramazzini Institute based in Italy, was published in the International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health. The conclusion was based on observations done on male mice used as test subjects who were given varying sucralose concentrations of 0, 500, 2,000, 8,000 and 16,000 parts per million (ppm) everyday.
As a result of this study, nutrition watchdog Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) downgraded the safety rating of Splenda from "Caution" to "Avoid." It was the second time CSPI downgraded Splenda's safety rating. Back in 2013, CSPI first downgraded the Splenda from "Safe" to "Caution" basing the decision on another Ramazzini Institute study on the artificial sweetener.
Sucralose or Splenda, now joins other artificial sweeteners that CSPI placed in the "Avoid" category. According to Michael F. Jacobson, President of CSPI, "We recommend that consumers avoid sucralose, or Splenda, and we recommend consumers also avoid saccharin, aspartame and acesulfame potassium." The group did acknowledge that the risk posed by over-consumption of sugar and high-fructose corn syrup which includes the risk of diabetes, heart disease and obesity far outweighs the cancer risk in the consumption of sucralose and other artificial sweeteners.
Splenda Fights Back
Obviously, this did not sit well with Splenda. The brand recently issued a rebuttal of the study's finding through their Facebook page according to a FoxNews' update on this item. According to Splenda, "poorly conducted and unscientific studies make bold headlines and stir up safety fears."
The brand reiterated the safety of the artificial sweetener saying, "Researchers have conducted more than 100 scientific studies on the safety of sucralose over the past 20 years. They've all declared sucralose safe to enjoy."
Any Alternative?
Although a lot of people say that the study is far from conclusive with some even questioning Ramazzini's credentials, people might want to err on the side of caution. So what are the alternatives of sucralose as well as other artificial sweeteners included in the CSPI advisory?
Others advocate the use of stevia instead such as this article in Authority Nutrition by Kris Gunnars. Unlike sucralose, stevia is 100% natural with known health benefits. Gunnars cites that stevia has been shown to lower both systolic and diastolic blood pressures, lower blood sugar and may help fight diabetes. However, the article cautions that distinction must be made between 100% natural stevia and the sweetener Truvia, saying that Truvia is "a blend of compounds, one of which is extracted from stevia leaves."
