Sucralose: the Effects on the Human Body Essay

Researchers divided the mice into two groups. Group A ate food laced with the sweetener aspartame. After three months the aspartame group had higher levels of blood sugar than the mice that ate normal food. There is also speculation that same is true of other artificial sweeteners even ones made from sugar derivates or from the Stevia genus of plants.

Numerous neurological and behavioral side effects have been linked with consuming aspartame at well below the approved safe limits set by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Aspartame is an artificial sweetener that has been ingested in the United States for over three decades. Even though there are several studies showing the harmful effects of its consumption. When aspartame is digested several toxic chemicals are produced, most notability formic acid & glutamate. Both of these chemicals cause the body to mimic the side effects of multiple sclerosis and Alzheimer. Even the passing of aspartame to be allowed in food was controversial. Just as the studies on it, continue to be today.

Thesis: Overall, recent studies have shown that sugar substitutes isn’t and can cause potential health problems.

The use of artificial sweeteners in beverages and food has been on a steady rise since 1969, the year it was authorized in the United States of America. The popularity of artificial sweeteners has been on a rise because of the benefit that it is a zero calorie sweetener .Even though artificial sweeteners have some great benefits many scientists believe that it causes adverse effects such as cancer, weight gain and depression. I strongly believe that consumers are not aware of the side effects of artificial sweeteners hence the increase in consumption since 1969.

Aspartame is composed of aspartic acid (40%), phenylalanine (50%) and methanol (10%), the substance is present in sweetening but is also used by the food industry because of the lack of calories (recommended to persons who are dieting) and the fact of not being sugar, sweeten but 200 times more (recommended for diabetics). In the opinion of the director of Abran (2005), "considering that table sugar is caries (tooth decay), unlike aspartame, and that obesity is a worldwide epidemic, sweeteners can help combat excess calories in the diet." according to ANVISA, only people who are born with the problem of difficulty to metabolize phenylalanine (a condition called PKU) should avoid aspartame and foods containing phenylalanine (fish, chicken, beans, milk, etc). If industrial products, such as soft drinks, there is usually a warning on the label or packaging on the presence of phenylalanine.

This paper is about high fructose corn syrup, a widely used sweetener made from corn. It discusses the history behind it and explains the process through which it is made and why it is used so widely. It also discusses the link between high fructose corn syrup and obesity. This research paper provides and in-depth explanation of the consumer advantages of high fructose corn syrup as well as the controversy behind its labeling as natural.

Companies that use aspartame in their soft drink products, like Diet Pepsi and Diet Coke, are entangled with the safety controversy. Though both companies do not directly address the use of aspartame in their advertisement, their opinions of the controversy may be noted. Diet Pepsi up until 2012, like Diet Coke, used aspartame to sweeten their Diet Pepsi . However, Pepsi, during a rebranding movement, decided to end their use of aspartame; instead, the company now uses Sucralose (Spelnda) and acesulfame potassium (Ace K) . This decision was not explicitly advertised because the company did not want to draw attention to the fact that they are still using artificial sweetener . This switch is intended to help Pepsi’s taste and consistency last

The studies on this ingredient have been numerous, but conflict with each other in almost every aspect. This artificial sweetener has been torn apart by every “health organization,” health fanatic, and doctor trying to prove their data holds water. Looking at a doctor’s informational website a wide variety of side effects could emerge from the consumption of aspartame, “A few of the 90 different documented symptoms listed in the report as part of aspartame dangers are: headaches/migraines, dizziness, seizures, nausea, numbness, muscle spasms, weight gain, rashes, depression, fatigue, irritability, tachycardia, insomnia, vision problems, hearing loss, heart palpitations, breathing difficulties, anxiety attacks, slurred speech, loss of taste, tinnitus, vertigo, memory loss, and joint pain, ” (Mercola.com). From this study it would appear that aspartame was developed by the hands of satan. While this information may be true, a journal article from a study performed by over seven doctors begs to differ, “Controlled and thorough scientific studies confirm aspartame’s safety and find no credible link between consumption of aspartame at levels found in the human diet and conditions related to the nervous system and behaviour, nor any other symptom or illness,” (Magnusun, pg. 702). A seemingly extensive study shows the absolute safety of this sweetener, but

This article was created by thirteen collaborators who are highly educated in the nutritional field. In this source, the authors thoroughly explain why high fructose corn syrup should be avoided and what exactly happens in our body when we consume products containing high fructose corn syrup. This source appears credible because it comes from the American Medical Association, in the Medicine and Public Health Division, which is a widely known and trusted source. This academic journal provides the point of view of corn manufacturers, as well as consumers, to show why it is such a popular component in many foods. However, it does mention that there is little evidence as to how exactly our bodies react differently to HFCS and sucralose. The article

Unfortunately, the results expected for sucralose did not correspond to the experimental values. Indeed, the control, sucrose, was chosen due to the fact that the synthesis of sucralose begins with sucrose as its starting material and so was expected to behave in a similar fashion. Instead, it behaved alike to stevia, with a very similar minimum concentration (based off of experimental results), but with a range varying from 10-60 % inhibition versus 10-20 % inhibition for stevia. Yet again, the true comparison is difficult. In order to correct this mistake and so obtain comparable data, the initial concentrations of both sweeteners and that of sucrose should be the same, whereas in this particular experiment the concentration of sucrose was neglected. This explains the % inhibition being over 100% as can be observed in Figure 3. The stock solution, as well as the concentrations of the inhibitors, could have been increased to correspond with serving size (approximately 2-3g). These changes could have lead to more suitable data that will be analyzed based on real-life

NutraSweet, Equal, Spoonful, and Equal-Measure are all brand names for aspartame, a low calorie sugar substitute used in more than 90 countries to sweeten foods and beverages. Aspartame is a synthetic chemical that is created through the combination of the amino acids phenylalanine and aspartic acid, and a small amount of methanol. Aspartame can be found in several products, such as soft drinks, over-the counter drugs, vitamin and herb supplements, instant breakfasts, candy, breath mints, cereals, sugar-free chewing gum, coffee, juice, and tea beverages, tabletop sweeteners, and gelatin desserts. This product may have seemed like a dream come true when it was first invented in 1981

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.

More and more, Stevia is being cultivated worldwide and used as an artificial sweetener to reduce sugar consumption, control weight, and enhance overall health. The safety of Stevia has been verified by top scientific, medical, and monitoring authorities around the world. Both the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), and the Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) have confirmed Stevia as a safe alternative sweetener.

Advertisement and commercial industries portray table sugar, and other artificial sweeteners as fuel needed by the body. Though body and body cells need sugar as fuel source. The body mechanism is just like the case of engine, there are bad fuels which can destroy engine. Table sugar is just a bad fuel for the body. Several research studies have arraigned sugar first culprit for the epidemics of complicated health problems such as diabetes, obesity, heart disease and cancer. Worst of it, several research now ranking sugar as addictive substance as drugs.

Controversies, Infobase Learning, 26 July 2010, http://icof.infobaselearning.com/recordurl.aspx?ID=2311. Accessed 20 Feb. 2017. This source was written in order to discuss the benefits and harms of using artificial sweeteners in place of sugar. This article was published in the Issues and Controversies database; therefore it has been used in academic writing previously. We can conclude that the source is unbiased and credible. It compared the high health risks of sugar to the very low health risks of artificial sweeteners. Also extensively covered, is the history and development of artificial sweeteners, and the opposing opinions on both. This source is lengthier than many similar ones, and contains more factual information and research-backed claims. Of all the sources, this one supports the thesis the most by providing