“˜Diet’ sweeteners may have sour effects

Summer is here, which means liquid consumption is on the rise.
More students are turning to soft drinks labeled “diet”
and “sugar-free,” as sugar substitutes found in these
sodas seem to be the ideal no-hassle solution for our
calorie-counting craze.

Sound too good to be true? It is.

The popular belief that people can minimize weight gain by
drinking diet soda to cut sugar and calories is a misconception
““ there is no clear connection between artificial sweeteners
(the ingredients that make diet soda “diet”) and weight
loss, according to an article in The Arizona Republic.

Aspartame, known by the brand names Equal and NutraSweet, is the
most controversial artificial sweetener.

At 200 times sweeter than sugar, it is rapidly digested into its
three chemical components: aspartic acid, phenylalanine and
methanol.

Groups of physicians and researchers believe that certain
chronic illnesses can be worsened or even brought about with
aspartame ingestion, such as mental retardation, chronic fatigue
and brain tumors.

Methanol makes up 10 percent of aspartame. Once in the body,
methanol breaks down into formaldehyde ““ a neurotoxin used in
the embalming process. Equal states that the “other”
ingredients (including methanol) are found naturally in most foods,
such as fruit; however, unlike Equal, natural foods have ethanol, a
buffer counteracting possible methanol poisoning.

The European Foundation of Oncology and Environmental Sciences
concluded in 2005 that aspartame causes cancer. The FDA has found
this data incomplete and otherwise insufficient to
“change” their “conclusions” about
aspartame, indicating the pressure the FDA may feel from large
corporations to ignore these health issues.

Saccharine, another sugar substitute that is also known as
Sweet’N Low, has risen out of a questionable past. In the
1970s, the FDA considered banning saccharine because animal studies
showed that it caused bladder cancer. According to the National
Cancer Institute, Congress required all foods containing the
synthetic chemical to bear a warning label: “Use of this
product may be hazardous to your health.”

The Calorie Control Council (comprised of low-calorie food and
beverage representatives) convinced Congress that the animal tests
did not apply to humans. Despite objections from many scientists,
saccharine was removed from the carcinogen list and the warning
requirement was repealed.

When Sandra Perrot, a long-time Sweet’N Low consumer,
discovered that she had a brain tumor, her doctor told her to
re-evaluate her diet. “I had about three diet sodas a day and
was experiencing increased memory loss,” Perrot said.

After a successful operation and quitting sweeteners for good,
Perrot started feeling much better. “My memory improved and
so did my learning capabilities ““ I feel there is a
connection between my diet and my well-being,” she said.

Sucralose, also known as Splenda, is about 600 times sweeter
than sugar and is currently the sweetest alternative to sugar on
the market. Splenda’s slogan, “Made with sugar, so it
tastes like sugar,” leads to a misconception that it is
natural and harmless.

The FDA states that sucralose is 98 percent pure. The other 2
percent is comprised of heavy metals, arsenic and other
contaminants.

Splenda claimed that its product passes through the body
unabsorbed and thus presents no problems. On the contrary, the FDA
found that 11 percent to 27 percent is absorbed.

Revolving doors, industry-agency mutual support, the vague
language of government reports and the difficulty in finding them,
and the dominance of industry-funded studies are pointing out a
problem right in front of our slumbering common sense.

The FDA has not said that artificial sweeteners have no side
effects and are completely safe, so we as consumers cannot afford
the possibility of a connection.

Can we?

For help with panic attacks after post-column reading,
e-mail Oster at [email protected]. Send general comments to
[email protected].