Sucralose (Splenda) declared by makers as inert may be alarmingly carcinogenic at very low doses (1 packet per day)

116  2016-03-12 by 911bodysnatchers322

[Splenda linked to leukemia, study finds : New study finds sweetener unsafe]. Source contains a link to the study, full study is academic paywalled / elitism-access-only. Also, I'm not a biologist or an expert, however I can read.

Given that:

1 packet = 1g of splenda

2000ppm daily was the lower limit on neoplasms.

Which is 1.997718001 g/L, which is roughly 2.5 unsweetened teas (assuming 10-12oz in a 20oz cup with ice) at Standard Family Restaurant sweetened with 2 splenda packs. Or roughly 1 sweet tea with 1 splenda pack, daily.

My thing is napkin math, I know. But it's enough that you should read the abstract / conclusion of the study yourself.

My parents have been drinking this every day for what? A decade?

It reminds me of that horror movie from the 80's, "the Stuff". Monsanto basically finds this white goo emanating from a random hole in the arctic and bottle it and sell it. Soon everyone 'can't get enough...of the Stuff!' And it turns them into zombie maniacs

21 comments

11  sharked 2016-03-12

Maybe..... everything doesn't have to taste so sweet? so many fatass sugar addicts out there.

4  Triplechins 2016-03-12

But mah suga!

8  Triplechins 2016-03-12

Mom only drinks tea with the pink ladies, Coke and Diet Coke, and lemonade vitamin waters... no water... She is mental to say the least. I made her oatmeal and she poured two pink ladies in it. I was like... OK whatever I'm already born and you ain't having no more babies do whatever you want to your body

2  911bodysnatchers322 2016-03-12

That's the funniest thing I've read today.

1  Triplechins 2016-03-12

I'm afraid to breed due to what I have inherited from my mom

7  burningempires 2016-03-12

2000ppm daily was the lower limit on neoplasms.

... In mice. You didn't take body weight into consideration. The average mouse weighs less than one ounce, so wouldn't you need to up the dose by 150-200 times to achieve the same dose in a human body? I don't know anyone who uses even ten packets of Splenda a day, never mind 150.

Pretty much EVERYTHING is carcinogenic in large enough quantities. And given the massive death-toll of obesity, I'd say sugar replacements are likely better overall.

6  FallOFIntellect 2016-03-12

The text does not suggest that the mice consumed the same amounts of sucralose as a fully grown person. PPM refers to concentration of sucralose. So it's a relative scale.

4  soursushiexplosion 2016-03-12

Parts Per Million?

1  TheGoodTheBadTheRekt 2016-03-12

Yes.

2  kayjaylayray 2016-03-12

Read this thread is like (volume)

1  911bodysnatchers322 2016-03-12

== mg/kg

3  Asshole_PhD 2016-03-12

Ok, I just smoked a ton of weed, but I'm certain my math is correct. Your statement is misleading, so I'll do the work here for you.

Link to study: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10773525.2015.1106075?journalCode=yjoh20&

Here is the text from the study:

Swiss mice were treated from 12 days of gestation through the lifespan with sucralose in their feed at concentrations of 0, 500, 2,000, 8,000, and 16,000 ppm.

Results: We found a significant dose-related increased incidence of males bearing malignant tumors (p < 0.05) and a significant dose-related increased incidence (p < 0.01) of hematopoietic neoplasias in males, in particular at the dose levels of 2,000 ppm (p < 0.01) and 16,000 ppm (p < 0.01). Conclusions: These findings do not support previous data that sucralose is biologically inert. More studies are necessary to show the safety of sucralose, including new and more adequate carcinogenic bioassay on rats. Considering that millions of people are likely exposed, follow-up studies are urgent.

The full text is available. If you do a quick search, you will probably find it. High marijuana consumption causes heightened paranoia, and I'm not sure about the legality of sharing pirated links.

Average feed consumption in these mice was 5 grams per day. Average weight was 40 grams. At 500 ppm, you simply convert to 500 mg/kg. At 500 ppm, and at 5 grams of food per day, these mice consumed 2.5 milligrams of sucralose per day for 40 gram weight, which means 62.5 mg/kg. To convert mouse dose to human equivalent dose, multiply by 3, then divide by 37. The HED would be 5.07 mg/kg, which is actually the Acceptable Daily Intake of sucralose set by the FDA. They actually tested the ADI, then several doses above that, which is reasonable because it takes into account the people who may inadvertently consume too much, synergistic effects, people who are more sensitive, etc. So, if there is an effect from a specific dose, you want to have a large margin of safety.

BSA conversion is most accurate

BSA conversion table here from FDA. (PDF)

My personal opinion of this study is that they probably found an effect because they used a decent amount of test animals. If they tripled the amount of animals and found the same effect, I would say it's definitely proven. Sucralose is probably mildly carcinogenic, but might be a better alternative to sugar.

1  911bodysnatchers322 2016-03-12

Good work! And they say marijuana makes you unmotivated. You just screwed up that theory.

0  MenuBar 2016-03-12

I just smoked a ton of weed, and your story checks out. Pirates have paranoid links.

1  911bodysnatchers322 2016-03-12

That's bad science friend. PPM is PPM

6  Asshole_PhD 2016-03-12

Splenda is not 100 percent sucralose. You would need to consume about 25-30 packs to approach the ADI, which is 5 mg/kg bw/day. However, this study shows possible effects at this level, and almost certainly at several times that level, which means the ADI should probably be lowered. I wouldn't worry about 1 or 2 packs of Splenda per day, but there is always the chance that some other chemical magnifies the negative effects. After all, we only test one chemical at a time on these animals!

2  911bodysnatchers322 2016-03-12

When it first came out in the bag (for cooking), I made kool-aid with it instead of sugar, something like a cup of it (well over 30 packs) -- whatever the equivalent to sugar was. I drank all 2L of the koolaid over maybe 4-5 hrs while playing some shooter at a lan party with other nerds and my body broke out in red blotches everywhere and felt nauseated. I thought about going to the ER, but I waited it out and was ok within about 3 hrs. That wouldn't have happened with sugar or nutrasweet or stevia.

So carcinogenic or not, I know not to touch the stuff ever again. It also kind of turned me into a person who buys organic and eschews industry products like that.

1  TimBrowneye 2016-03-12

What a knee jerk reaction

1  sweetvitamin 2016-03-12

Splenda is delicious.

1  Mysteriousmumu 2016-03-12

Just use stevia (or other natural low glycemic sweetener), problem solved.

1  911bodysnatchers322 2016-03-12

Stevia is awful. It has an incredibly bitter aftertaste.

There is a new natural sweetener called monkfruit extract which is very nice. Monkfruit is something you can buy dried at a chinese grocery (brown palm sized 'pods' that are mostly hollow like a brittle gourd) and in its raw state it makes a very nice tea that tastes a lot like you put honey in hot water. There is a very very slight aftertaste that is not desirable, mildly bitter but also hypersweet and cloying, but it's nothing like stevias

1  911bodysnatchers322 2016-03-12

Stevia is awful. It has an incredibly bitter aftertaste.

There is a new natural sweetener called monkfruit extract which is very nice. Monkfruit is something you can buy dried at a chinese grocery (brown palm sized 'pods' that are mostly hollow like a brittle gourd) and in its raw state it makes a very nice tea that tastes a lot like you put honey in hot water. There is a very very slight aftertaste that is not desirable, mildly bitter but also hypersweet and cloying, but it's nothing like stevias