The artificial sweetener Acesulfame K - should not be released until a long term study has proven it's safety.

In fact, there are indications that it might be carcinogenic. I would strongly suggest that a properly designed long term study in both mice and rats be conducted before Acesulfame K be considered for approval." -- David Rall, M.D., Ph.D. Assistant Surgeon General, United States Public Health Service (retired

One Woman's Astonishing Experiment With Aspartame

Victoria Inness-Brown's family was addicted to diet soda. After researching the effects of aspartame, she strongly believed the artificial sweetener might one day lead to their illness or even their early deaths.

So she decided to perform her own aspartame experiment -- with 108 rats for 2 years and 8 months. Daily, she fed some of the rats the equivalent, for their body weight, of two-thirds the aspartame contained in 8-oz of diet soda.

Eleven of the females who took aspartame -- 37 percent -- developed tumors, some of massive size.

For details of Inness-Brown's amazing experiment, click the link below.

Sources:
My Aspartame Experiment

The Material Safety Data Sheet on Aspartame (CAS# 22839-47-0 says that to work with aspartame one should wear chemical goggles, protective gloves to prevent skin exposure, a chemical apron and a NIOS/MSHA approved air purifying dust or mist respirator. And Dr. Henney, this toxin is in children's vitamins and medications. Are you not horrified?! It lists the hazardous decomposition products as methanol, formaldehyde and DKP (tumor agent), carbon monoxide, oxides of nitrogen, and carbon dioxide. Do you understand that we do not want this toxin in our food. Dr. Blaylock in a lecture on www.dorway.com explains that the reactions to aspartame are not allergic but toxic in nature like arsenic and cyanide!! Do you want to approve more of the same and can you imagine the synergistic effects with other excitotoxins like MSG??

As aspartame destroys the CNS it is mimicking MS, as it hardens the synovial fluids victims are being misdiagnosed as having fibromyalgia and consumers are getting brain tumors and going blind. Babies are being murdered in their mother's womb and young people with their whole life ahead of them are dying of brain tumors. It is escalating Alzheimers according to Dr. Roberts. It precipitates diabetes, Graves Disease, epilepsy, chronic fatigue, Parkinson's and ALS. A pivotal study (SC18862) submitted was done on 7 infant monkeys: 5 had grand mal seizures and 1 died. The FDA report shows 92 symptoms from coma to death. It triggers an irregular heart rhythm and interacts with drugs. Dr. Henney, don't let further disability and death be your legacy. Recall aspartame and refuse to approve Neotame.

Few of us are really aware of how many new Splenda® products there are in the supermarkets. We've been told that this artificial sweetener is different from all the past failures - Sweet'N Low®, NutraSweet®, etc. - and according to the claims, that this Splenda is the perfect sugar substitute: as sweet as sugar, but no calories; as sweet as sugar, but no surge in insulin; as sweet as sugar, but no side effects or long-term health damage.

The wave is coming because "low-sugar" or "sugar-free" is the latest fad - a welcome trend, given the health hazards of all the sugar in the average diet. But of the hundreds of new diet foods that will soon appear, most will use Splenda as a sugar substitute. This is important because for tens of millions of women, their diet soda or artificially-sweetened food is a keystone of what they think are healthy nutrition and food choices - both for themselves and for their families.

On the other side of the argument are responsible experts who say that Splenda is unsafe - the latest in a succession of artificial sweeteners that claim at first to be healthy, only later to be proven to be full of side effects. These authorities say that Splenda has more in common with DDT than with food.

What do we believe? We think that our regulatory system doesn't do a good enough job ensuring our long-term safety. We're concerned about the bigger picture, too - the dependence on sweets in the American diet to make us feel good - whether those sweets are satisfied by sugar or artificial sweeteners like Splenda. And we are especially sensitive to the women who can benefit from using artificial sweeteners as a bridge to a better life with healthier nutrition.

What should you think about artificial sweeteners? We want you to be fully informed about the dangers of Splenda (which isn't what food marketers want!) so you can make the best choices for yourself and for your family. So let's make sure you are.

Observational evidence shows that there are side effects of Splenda, including skin rashes/flushing, panic-like agitation, dizziness and numbness, diarrhea, muscle aches, headaches, intestinal cramping, bladder issues, and stomach pain. These show up at one end of the spectrum - in the people who have an allergy or sensitivity to the sucralose molecule. But no one can say to what degree consuming Splenda affects the rest of us.

If this sounds familiar, it should: we went down the same path with aspartame, the main ingredient in Equal and NutraSweet. Almost all of the independent research into aspartame found dangerous side effects in rodents. The FDA chose not to take these findings into account when it approved aspartame for public use. Over the course of 15 years, those same side effects increasingly appeared in humans. Not in everyone, of course - but in those who were vulnerable to the chemical structure of aspartame.

As food additives, artificial sweeteners are not subject to the same gauntlet of FDA safety trials as pharmaceuticals. Most of the testing is funded by the food industry, which has a vested interest in the outcome. This can lead to misleading claims on both sides.

But one thing is certain: some of the chemicals that comprise artificial sweeteners are known hazards - the degree to which you experience side effects just depends on your individual biochemistry. Manufacturers are banking on the fact that our bodies won't absorb very much of these compounds at any one time. And many of us don't. But what happens when we are ingesting a combination of artificial sweeteners like Splenda dozens of times a week through many different "low-sugar" or "sugar-free" products?

People have been using artificial sweeteners for decades. Some react poorly, some don't - the problem is, you never know until you're already sick. Scientists are calling Splenda a mild mutagen, based on how much is absorbed. Right now, it's anyone's guess what portion of the population is being exposed to the dangers of Splenda or already suffering from Splenda side effects. Until an independent, unbiased research group conducts long-term studies on humans (six months is hardly long-term!), how can we be certain? With all the new Splenda products on our shelves, it looks as if we are now in the process of another grand public experiment - without our permission. And we may not know the health implications for decades. As with all things, time will unveil truth.

So I urge you to be concerned about the potential dangers of Splenda - as with any unnatural substance you put in your body. And I am especially concerned about its use for children, which I recommend you avoid. But unlike many holistic practitioners, I do think artificial sweeteners can serve a purpose for some women. And that has to do with the old question - which is better, sugar or an artificial sweetener? Let's start with sugar, where the problems all begin.

"Low-sugar" is the successor to the "low-carb" craze, even though they are essentially the same thing. According to the New York Times, by the end of this summer 11% of the food items on supermarket shelves will be labelled "reduced sugar" - most of those targeted at kids and their health-conscious moms. Sales in granulated sugar have dropped four percent in the past six months. What's behind this trend? Splenda.

Products featuring Splenda are perceived as "natural" because even the FDA's press release about sucralose parrots the claim that "it is made from sugar" - an assertion disputed by the Sugar Association, which is suing Splenda's manufacturer, (McNeil Nutritionals).

Sucrose
The FDA has no definition for "natural," so please bear with us for a biochemistry moment: Splenda is the trade name for sucralose, a synthetic compound stumbled upon in 1976 by scientists in Britain seeking a new pesticide formulation. SucroseIt is true that the Splenda molecule is comprised of sucrose (sugar) - except that three of the hydroxyl groups in the molecule have been replaced by three chlorine atoms.
____________________________________________________
Sucralose
________________________________________________
Sucralose

While some industry experts claim the molecule is similar to table salt or sugar, other independent researchers say it has more in common with pesticides. That's because the bonds holding the carbon and chlorine atoms together are more characteristic of a chlorocarbon than a salt - and most pesticides are chlorocarbons. The premise offered next is that just because something contains chlorine doesn't guarantee that it's toxic. And that is also true, but you and your family may prefer not to serve as test subjects for the latest post-market artificial sweetener experiment - however "unique." (See our article on endocrine disruptors for more information on toxins and persistent organic pollutants.)

Once it gets to the gut, sucralose goes largely unrecognized in the body as food - that's why it has no calories. The majority of people don't absorb a significant amount of Splenda in their small intestine - about 15% by some accounts. The irony is that your body tries to clear unrecognizable substances by digesting them, so it's not unlikely that the healthier your gastrointestinal system is, the more you'll absorb the chlorinated molecules of Splenda.

So, is Splenda safe? The truth is we just don't know yet. There are no long-term studies of the side effects of Splenda in humans. The manufacturer's own short-term studies showed that sucralose caused shrunken thymus glands and enlarged livers and kidneys in rodents. But in this case, the FDA decided that because these studies weren't based on human test animals, they were not conclusive. Of course, there are countless examples of foods and drugs that have proved dangerous to humans that were first found to be dangerous to laboratory rats, and then again, countless others that have not. So the reality is that we are the guinea pigs for Splenda.

And now, are our children the next trial group? Thanks to an agreement between McNeil Nutritionals (makers of Splenda) and PTO Today, which provides marketing and fund-raising aid to parents' associations, your elementary school's next bake sale may be sponsored by Splenda - complete with baked goods made with the product.
Splenda side effects