Artificial Sweeteners

The people of the United States trust the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to regulate what goes into our food and keep us safe. The FDA is partially credible for the overuse of High Fructose Corn Syrup. Because of the government's loose definition on what is "all natural", these big companies are able to mislead consumers by advertising their "green", "healthy", "all natural products" to naive customers that fail to read the nutrition label. Customers often think they are making a smart health choice, and perhaps even pay more for a bottle that has "all natural" plastered all over the front of it. If the FDA would set stricter rules on how much artificial sweeteners can be used and how it must be advertised, these problems, including obesity, that may be caused by artificial sweeteners would be greatly

A. Not only can these sweeteners make you gain weight, but over time they could potentially hurt your body. Here is a list of the popular sugar substitutes and the potential harm they produce: Acesulfame potassium also known as "SweetOne" is 200 times sweeter than sugar, this is often paired with aspartame or sucralose. Known to cause breast tumors in rats. Saccharin also known as Sweet’NLow, is the oldest of the artificial sweeteners and is 300 –700 times sweeter than sugar, The National Cancer Institute found evidence of increased bladder cancer in people who heavily consumed saccharin. The label below is found on toothpaste, gum, and many other products that contain saccharin "USE OF THIS PRODUCT MAY BE HAZARDOUS TO YOUR HEALTH. THIS PRODUCT CONTAINS SACCHARIN WHICH HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO CAUSE CANCER IN LABORATORY

After reading the article "Sweeteners: Facts and Fallacies" the alternative sweetener I have chosen is stevia. Upon the completion of reading facts on stevia, I refute the toxicology safety of consumer use on this alternative sweetener. According to the article "The Sweet Facts on Stevia" it was only sold as a dietary supplement in the 1980's after being linked to cancer and reproductive problems in animals. In 2008, stevia manufacturers petitioned the FDA until Reb A, the plants sweetest sugar molecule, was deemed "generally recognized as safe" or GRAS. "According to CSPI, the FDA did not perform the amount of testing usually required for GRAS status, and further testing on Reb A is needed (Palmer, 2013). With the number of different

Artificial sweeteners are not digested in the human gut, which contains a group of bacteria unique to each person known as the gut microbiome. Although the sweeteners are not digested, they do come into contact with the gut microbiome. Elinav and Segal

One solution is using sugar substitutes like sucralose, aspartame, saccharin and xylitol to replace regular sugar (sucrose), which can help all Canadians who have sweet teeth, for keeping away from CVD and obesity. The purpose of sugar substitutes (artificial sweeteners) is to imitate the taste of regular sugar (sucrose), in bottommost calories subscription. (Larsen, 2012) As the result people can enjoy the sweetness of food and also control the amount of sugar intake at the same time. Short responding time is another benefit of artificial sweeteners.

Based on my findings in the two given articles, I am choosing to support the safety of sucralose as a nonnutritive sweetener. As mentioned in the article, “ Sweeteners Facts and Fallicies,” there is little research on the effects of sucralose in the human systems. In fact, it wasn’t until I did my own search of sucralose in the database that I realized just how limited recent studies, or studies as a whole for that matter, were in terms of effects on humans. Majority of research, much of which was used in the determination of consumption safety, was performed on lab rats. As a consumer, opting heavily for the nonnutritive sweetener, “Splenda,” I find it extremely unsettling that there isn’t more extensive data on the direct effects that the

In this paper, I will discuss the impact that artificial sweeteners are having on the American Diet. I will explore the artificial sweetener Sucralose, in detail. I will describe, in brief, the history and uses of Sucralose. I will explore the effects that Sucralose has the human body, and some of the controversies surrounding this additive. Finally, I will present my argument that Sucralose, in moderation is a safe alternative to table sugar.

There is a lot of High Fructose Corn Syrup, the sugar of choice, in regular sodas. People started finding out about how bad sugar is for them and how much sugar was really in their favorite every day drink. Everyone started turning against all of the soda companies and they had no choice but to come up with an alternative. So, instead of using natural sugar or High Fructose Corn Syrup in sodas, scientists invented artificial sweeteners, a way to keep the soda sweet yet contain no sugar. Artificial sweeteners like Aspartame that are added to diet soda are actually worse for us than the sugar that is in regular soda. This was proven by an Osteopathic Physician from the American Colledge of Nutrition who states, "While many of the artificial sweeteners have reportedly similar side effects, aspartame accounts for over 75 percent of the adverse reactions to food additives reported to the FDA" (Mercola).

Through extensive research, scientists have concluded that artificial sweeteners are carcinogenic; a cancer causing agent. Scientific research has revealed that cyclamate in combination with saccharin, the two main ingredients in artificial sweeteners, caused bladder cancer in laboratory rats. Though test where not done on humans scientist believe that the long-term effect of using artificial sweeteners would lead to the same complications in humans. Amino acids are biologically important organic compounds composed of amine and carboxylic acid functional groups. The human body needs amino acids to thrive. It is documented that ingestion of high amounts of artificial amino acids found in artificial sweeteners can have adverse effects on the human body such as cancer.

One way which is a false belief is through the consumption of sucralose. This consumption of artificial sweeteners and can lead to higher risk of death at a younger age. Artificial sweeteners, though they seem like a safe and healthy choice, present large risks for drug resistance, reduced insulin sensitivity, and destruction of gut bacteria. With this I quote Empty Pleasures by Carolyn de la Peña, “NutraSweet, Splenda, and their predecessors have enjoyed enormous success by promising that Americans, especially women, can "have their cake and eat it too," but Empty Pleasures argues that these "sweet cheats" have fostered troubling and unsustainable eating habits and that the promises of artificial sweeteners are ultimately too good to be true” (Empty Pleasures). The effects of artificial sweeteners like Sucralose, Saccharin, and Stevia, are all artificial sweeteners that are up to 2,000 times sweeter than actual sugar. In conclusion Sucralose is a terrible chemical that we commonly believe to be healthy for the prior reasons with problems with health, other options besides for sucralose, and ways to benefit in our schools, educationally and health related, are necessary to remain a well rounded, balanced

The debate between naturally derived sugars and low-calorie artificial sweeteners has been going on for years now. As our population’s obesity rate grows every year and health concerns related to weight-control grows along with it, natural sugar is scrutinized and we are told to keep away from it as it is our enemy. Over the last couple of decades, we have been introduced to more and more varieties of artificial sweeteners promising to deliver the same sweetness or even more sweetness than natural sugar (some offer as much as 200 times more sweetness than sugar) but with a much lower calorie content, or some even no calories at all. Artificial sweeteners such as Splenda, Sweet n’ Low, NutraSweet, and Equal have become popular as “better alternatives” to table sugar, promising to help battle weight gain and actually assist in losing weight. However, does this make it the healthier option? As with all things, both natural sugar and artificial sugar have their pros and cons, but in order to find the best option in regards to our health and futures, it’s important to weigh them according to scientific findings and research.

Ever since the basic principles of chemistry became apart of human knowledge, scientists have been fascinated with understanding the physical and chemical properties of novel compounds. The prevalent use of artificial sweeteners, (a group of synthetically manufactured compounds with no caloric value) as table sugar alternatives in many of today’s commercially traded goods is an example of applying chemistry to generate novelty. However, the biological effects associated with their consumption remains shrouded in public misconceptions.1 As a result, the consumption of artificially sweetened beverages (ASB) has become the emphasis for many obesity and neurological related clinical studies. Does the consumption of aspartame have adverse effects on body mass and neurological activity in humans?

Artificial or non-nutritive sweeteners are sweeteners that are chemically manufactured. They are the ones most easy to spot while eating at some restaurants because they will be the colorful packets on the table grouped with the table sugar and other condiments. Some of the most common ones include aspartame, saccharin, and sucralose which are technical names for the well-known brands Equal, Sweet’N Low and Splenda respectively.

It causes more harm than good. Artificial sweeteners are cheaper for companies to use in their product, giving them more product revenue. In other words, they get the money that the company would be spending on the real sugars. Most of these companies are worried about their money rather than the wellbeing of their consumers. To prove this, fructose consumption has increased over the past thirty years according to Robert H. Lustig, who is a professor of Pediatrics in the Division of Endocrinology at The University of California, San

“Artificial Sweeteners: Sugar-Free, but at What Cost?” Harvard Health Blog, Harvard Medical School, 12 Dec. 2016, www.health.harvard.edu/blog/artificial-sweeteners-sugar-free-but-at-what-cost-201207165030. Accessed 28 Feb. 2017. Holly Strawbridge is an author for Harvard Health Blog. Strawbridge’s purpose in writing this article was to inform the general public of the dangers of artificial sweeteners. The article mainly briefs over the negative effects of consuming artificial sweeteners, specifically the diseases potentially caused by them. This article speaks more negatively of artificial sweeteners than any other source used. It is also fairly short and direct. It can be determined unbiased and credible due to the fact that it was published through Harvard Medical School. This source would not be optimal for this essay because it provides information showing that artificial sweeteners are unhealthy and lead to weight