Splenda Safety - By someone who actually knows the answer.

So, is Splenda (Sucralose) safe? (updated July 2008)
[ You may want to skip right to the bottom (July 2008 update) for important "break-through" news regarding sweeteners ... ]

Well now, this seems to be the million dollar question on so many minds nowadays ... especially amongst my fellow low-carbers.

(Our Family - April 1992) While it's true that Sucralose was tested over many years, and that there have been both human and animal trials with Sucralose, I suspect that the human trials must have been very controlled and likely did not represent an extreme case of Sucralose consumption and that the animal trials (probably using rats) did probably include extremely large amounts of Sucralose. Now I don't know about you, but I just cannot relate my health to that of rats! So then, is there a case of comparably extreme human Sucralose consumption? Yes, in fact there is! In fact ,to the best of my knowledge, there is only 1 such case in the world and I know them personally; you see, it is our family. Since 1991, when I became the first cookbook author in the world to start developing dessert (and other) recipes for my books, our family has consumed (on average) some 2,000 or more cups of Splenda annually, between the 4 of us, starting in 1991 when we were 35, 34, 7 and 4. The manufacturer of Splenda actually hired a film crew and flew it's people up from New-Brunswick, NJ to Alberta (where we lived at that time) to come and make a promotional movie/video featuring my family, which they then used to launch and promote the product, something that earned me the title of "The Splenda lady", and for many years I became known as the foremost (non-company) spokesperson for Splenda. It would be many years before Splenda was approved for sale in the USA, but we in Canada got to know it "intimately". Anyhow, my first "Splendid-series" book was published in 1993, my second book in 1997, my third book in 2001, my fourth in October 2002, my fifth in October 2003, my sixth in April 2004 and the seventh book in October 2004. The development and perfection of hundreds upon hundreds of dessert recipes required the use of a lot of Splenda! A point that should not be under-emphasized, is that an entire country, Canada, was using Splenda from about 1991 ... that is some 8 years before it was available for use in the USA and more than a decade before it was available in many other countries, and all that time doing so without much fuss or bother at all. In fact, Canadians have been using Splenda in a variety of forms long before most people (around the world) even knew it existed. So imagine all of our collective surprise when a decade later some folks started portraying Splenda as being a "new" sweetener and intimating (but never having the courage to categorically state) that it was a hazardous substance as well? It does not often happen this way, but us 35 million humble, gentle, peace-loving, quiet folks that live to the north of the mightiest nation on earth - the one that rules the world, the United States of America, actually can talk quite authoritatively on the subject of Splenda's safety, it's strengthsand it's weaknesses. I must mention one strange thing about Splenda. It was always manufactured in the USA (not Canada) and then exported to Canada for many years - long before it even became available in the USA, though the very slow pace of FDA approval had a lot to do with that. I suspect that the manufacturer anticipated Splenda being made available in the USA sooner than it actually was, and so decided to locate the production of it inside the USA. Anyhow, as I update this article, almost 14 years after Splenda first appeared on our store shelves, we are now 48, 47, 20 and 17 years old. To be totally safe, I suppose you could all wait another 36 years or so, then after 5 decades you will know, more definitively, if Splenda has harmed us and/or others in any way. BUT, until then, this is how we reasoned, when deciding to integrate Splenda (Sucralose) into our family's diet:

Back in 1991, we were ASSURED (by the USA manufacturers of Splenda) that:

(1) Sucralose is Chemically Inert and does not react with anything while in your body - This was tough for us to verify.
(2) All the Sucralose ingested is excreted (un-metabolized) from your body - Once again, it would be tricky for us to verify this.
(3) Sucralose has no calorific content and cannot be used as an energy source - True, but it is interesting to note that Splenda does indeed contain calories, having 1/8th the calories of Sugar - higher than some other sweeteners, but still way better than sugar!
(4) Sucralose is very stable, even intense cooking/baking heat will not change it - This does seem to be the case.
(5) Sucralose tastes very much like Sugar (Sucrose) and has no strange aftertaste - Well ... it is the best tasting of the sweeteners we have tested.
(6) Sucralose has been approved for a very wide range of uses by the FDA and other countries - The FDA and other countries' Health departments/agencies (Health Canada being the first) did indeed approve it, albeit, as always seems the case, with some slight reservations.
(7) Sucralose has been subjected to many tests over many years in many countries - Yes, but it was not tested in huge amounts on people of both sexes and of all ages and over a long period of time. We Canadians became those test subjects. So then, you may ask, how did Splenda fare?

UPDATE (June 2004): So, what if anything (health-wise) went wrong with our family during the last 14 or so years? With the benefit of hind-sight, probably around 1995 or so, I developed Hashimoto's Thyroiditis, a fairly common autoimmune condition, especially in women in their mid-life, that affects the thyroid. However, this went undiagnosed (as is often the case) until 2002. Since this condition is "acquired" by women, the world over, who have never heard of or used Splenda, I doubt very much that Splenda was to blame for me getting it.. However, this condition made me "hypothyroid", which meant that losing weight (an ongoing struggle for most of my adult life) got to be almost impossible, and using Splenda to help me in that regard, took on a whole new meaning! I have fluctuated from my marriage weight (at 22 years of age) of 110lbs to as much as 150lbs, which on my 5'3" frame was quite noticeable! I regard my ideal weight now to be around 120lbs, though this has been a rather elusive goal for me, with the mid to low 130's being where I have spent most of my last 9 years. Developing cookbooks (continuously) is, by it's very nature, quite calorific. I would hasten to add that if I were not developing low-carb recipes, I undoubtedly would be well above 150lbs, however, I'm in the low 130's. Every now and then I manage to push my weight down into the 120's, but having a "problematic thyroid" makes that quite a challenge! I started seriously investigating Low-Carbing back in the late 1990's, and by late 1998 my husband and I started to low-carb. In the last few years, my husband went on to have some struggles with mild hypertension which now is under control, but this runs in his family and probably has more to do with his weight (at times, like on world travels, he cheats) and a higher salt consumption than what is wise, as well as his "driven" nature and his stress-filled career and life - his in-laws (sadly) having been a major contributor to that stress. Other than that, our dental health is great, our weight is (almost) under control. We all have suffered from blessedly few viral/bacterial infections, since almost entirely eliminating sugar from our lives, and even fewer after adopting the low-carbing way of life. Overall I'd have to say that our general health and sense of well-being is excellent. As we did for our own family, you must research the topic well and decide whether to include Splenda (Sucralose) in your own diet or the diet of your family. For us now, there is no turning back - we are committed, long time users of Splenda. Time will tell if that was a wise or an unwise choice. We simply decided that our family's "Sweet-tooth" could not be removed, but that Sugar was certainly not making us any healthier! That was our family dilemma almost 14 years ago now.

Back then we evaluated the alternatives and chose to integrate Splenda into our Diet ... at least until something better came along. Nothing has ... as of yet. Above (and below) are recent photos of us all, taken when our eldest son turned 20, in early June 2004. They show all of us, with our eldest son now 20, our youngest 17, me 47 and Ian 48 ... still happy and healthy and, though we need to get serious again about "those last 10 lbs or so", not looking at all out of control as Ian and I approach 50, having (just this month) celebrated our 25th wedding anniversary. We are childhood sweethearts and have known and loved each other for 34 years, this Christmas. Obviously we care about each other and our children and would not do anything to jeopardize each other or our children.

So, before you get "traumatized" by the inevitable "scare-mongers" out there on the web, just stop and think logically for a while ... Canada is an entire country in which MILLIONS of people have been regularly using Splenda for almost 14 years now. It has a National (Government run) Health care system, for which Federal and Provincial (State) dollars pay. So what exactly would be the incentive for Health Canada (our FDA) to approve Splenda and keep it approved, if it was costing these governments Billions of $'s in ongoing health care costs? Thus the thinly-veiled allegations that somehow these international "Health agencies", like Health-Canada and others, do not know what they are doing or are somehow "in the pocket" of Johnson & Johnson (the parent company), so that they can make (in Canada) some 10's of Millions of $'s in profits each year (which is mostly sent down to the USA, the parent company anyway), while we here in Canada get stuck with a Billion $ health-care bill (for which we all have to pay, as a result of an "unsafe product") is just plain ludicrous! I have no doubt that our Health Department (which is totally independent of the FDA) knew exactly what it was doing when Canada became the first country to approve Splenda for Human consumption back in the early 90's - some 8 years before the FDA approved it for consumption in the USA. We have all been using Splenda for almost 14 years now, and there really have been no problems of any significance reported here. Still, just remember that there are no "iron-clad" guarantees" in life. Not consuming any food or drink will probably protect you from harmful substances, but then you'd be dead within 2-3 days from thirst anyway - however consuming just gasoline will kill you much quicker. Somewhere in the middle of those two extremes lies "reason" ... and that's a really good place to live! Ian's Dad, as a young boy, was pretty much already "given up for dead" from a massive bacterial infection (in the late 1920's) and lay dying in a remote part of the world (at the southern tip of Africa) when their family Doctor (at that time) suggested that "Sulfur drugs", the first antibiotics, just newly available in Germany, had been noted to cure that particular infection. These man-made (not natural!) Sulfur drugs were then flown from Germany to South Africa, in the antique planes of those days, and were successfully used to save his life. He went on to become a Doctor in the remotest regions of Southern Africa, in turn saving many people from dying from Typhus and other deadly diseases. The family in the picture (above) would not exist today were it not for man-made substances, which the same "good Dr." who regularly "bad-mouths" Splenda, also "bad-mouths". Let's get real ... to take a "hard and fast" stance against everything "not natural" is also just plain dumb! Yes, there are dangerous natural and man-made substances, and there are good natural and man-made substances ... so let's use "reason" to find the good ones, and "reason" to avoid the bad ones, but very importantly, let's try and avoid "hysteria" for determining either - that really serves nobody well at all!

Rest assured, if we notice ANY problems possibly relating to our massive Splenda consumption, we will let you know - right here on this web-site after doing some due-diligence. For now, ponder this: The average person (in North America) consumes about 170 lbs of Sugar a year (that is around 380 cups) compared with about 10 lbs a century ago, and displays a wide variety of side-effects from this over consumption of Sugar! In my family, for more than a decade now, we have almost eliminated the consumption of Sugar and each of us has consumed much more than that (some 500 cups annually) of Splenda instead of Sugar. On this website, there is a story of my "Thyroid problems". While it is remotely possible that these can somehow be related to my massive Splenda consumption, I personally doubt it. None of my family members seem to be showing any similar problems and thyroid problems have a natural tendency to occur (quite frequently) in women of my age, most of whom have never used any Splenda.

So, for now you can regard us Canadians as "Human test subjects" (notice that I did not say "test-dummies") for Splenda consumption. If anything does go wrong with any of the members of our family, we will detail it on this website, as we have done above, openly and honestly, and then we can all debate, openly and honestly, whether we/you think Splenda (reasonably) may have had anything to do with it. Remember, we have almost a decade-long head start on most of you in the massive consumption of Splenda (Sucralose) and, without a doubt, as far as people are concerned, we have been the largest users of Splenda on this planet! We likely have each consumed more Splenda (Sucralose) in almost 14 years, than most people will consume in their entire lifetimes. Our family and children have grown up on Splenda and we are all still alive, well, happy, in love ... and generally thriving. Worth mentioning is that by almost eliminating Sugar consumption in our family, we have indeed noticed improved health! However, it can be argued (with some merit) that if we eliminated Sugar and never used Splenda, we would likely be even healthier? Yes, perhaps, but one has to enjoy life too, and tasty sweet treats have been and continue to be an important part of all of our lives!

Sucralose is made from Sugar and is used to make Splenda which tastes like sugar. Sucralose, has no calories but also does not measure, look or act much like sugar. Sucralose is 600 x sweeter than sugar, so much less is needed for the same sweetness. To make it appear as a replacement for sugar, Sucralose is bulked up with Maltodextrin a carbohydrate derived from corn, giving it some calories but making it measure and act more like sugar. This combination is called Splenda Granular. Splenda Granular weighs 1/8 as much as sugar, has 1/8th the calories but lacks the volume sugar imparts to recipes, does not caramelize, is very tricky to use for chocolate recipes of all kinds, is even trickier to use for candy making, has a definite "lag" in it's sweetness and is generally not as easy to use as sugar in baking, which is exactly why I did much experimenting and wrote these Splenda-based cookbooks, to show how these flaws can be compensated for. For any recipes in which sugar contributes greatly to the structure and volume (which accounts for many desserts), it is not possible to simply substitute Splenda, and expect to still get a similar result. You need to make substantial modifications to the other ingredients in the recipe. These modifications are essential in order to end up with a dessert similar to the sugar-based original. This problem is not as prevalent in meat/vegetable dishes which use less sugar and in which the Sugar is simply used to "sweeten" the dish. Baking, Desserts and Candy is where the major challenges lie. Splenda Granular contains 100 calories per cup, whereas sugar contains 800 calories. Splenda is the 'marketing' or 'brand' name. Sucralose is its chemical name and it has ZERO Carbs and calories. Splenda is supposedly chemically inert and we are told that all the Sucralose one consumes is excreted unused. The Maltodextrin (starch used to bulk-up the Splenda) is, of course, recognized by the body as a 'weak' carbohydrate (actually it has a high glyceamic index, but because there is relatively little of it, by weight, present in a cup of Splenda it adds relatively few carbs) and is treated as such by the body - thus the Carbs/Calories in Splenda. Splenda is heat stable at baking temperatures (like sugar and unlike Aspartame). Splenda is approved for use in the USA (1998), Canada (1991) and many other countries. Splenda has been subjected to rigorous tests over a 20 year period and is generally deemed "safe". Splenda was discovered by the giant UK sugar company Tate and Lyle in the 70's. Splenda is marketed by a Johnson and Johnson subsidiary, the McNeil Specialty Products company. Splenda has been used in large amounts by my family for some 13 (going on 14) years now. Each member of my family has consumed thousands of cups of Splenda over that period, with no obviously apparent ill effects?. Splenda is certainly worth investigating as a sugar substitute!

Splenda is certainly a cut above other artificial sweeteners - but it is not perfect!

Splenda Granular is what I use preferentially and occasionally I will used sugar free chocolate chips sweetened with a sugar alcohols (usually maltitol or erythritol). I prefer not to use Sugar. I absolutely refuse to use Aspartame/Nutrasweet/Equal, Saccharin, Cyclamates or Sorbitol - even though they are cheaper. Splenda does not cause abdominal discomfort or tooth decay. Maltitol and erythritol have some potential for low-carbers, however, I tend to count half the total number of carbs when using them - just to be on the safe side. The problem is that most of the sugar alcohols (Those ending in "ol"), either cause various degrees of gastric distress (you may as well buy and eat Ex-lax rather than buying a Sorbitol sweetened chocolate candy) or others have a cooling effect (erythritol) on your mouth (kind of like menthol) if used in large quantities, and are not all really "TOTALLY ZERO CARB" options, besides being expensive and sometimes harder to find! I someone were to mass-produce Erythitol and belnd it (in small quantities) with another sweetener, say Sucralose, then the combination would prove very useful for baking and candy-making etc. since Erythritol has the basic properties of sugar that most other high-intensity sweeteners do not, such as adding crispness and allowing for caramelizing etc. but it cannot make up the bulk of the product, since the mouth-cooling effect would render it less than perfect. Alas, no changes in sight at the Splenda company - they still insist on using Maltodextrin only.

Acesulfame-K and Stevioside are somewhat interesting, though I tend towards preferring Stevia, since even though Acesulfame-K has received GRAS approval by the FDA, I'm really not quite happy with it either. As for Stevia, I have to add a word of reason here that is often missing from discussions of natural products. Just because Stevia occurs naturally (exactly the same can be said about SUGAR, by the way) simply does not guarantee that it is safe, although all the known evidence does seem to support it's safety. As a result, the FDA has not yet classified it as "Generally regarded as safe" (GRAS) substance. Because the word "natural" can legitimately be applied to Stevia, it has quite big following, and has a potentially HUGE following if some large company would actually do the right things with it - but that does not mean that it is definitively "Safe", or even, for that matter, that it is "safer" than Splenda, but, personally, I have to think it probably is just fine. However, really, it was the "taste-test" that ruled it out for me - it's taste (in its various forms) certainly leaves (no pun intended) a lot to be desired! It is a "bitter-sweet" experience. For now, it is important to note that Stevia is not approved by the FDA for general use as a sweetener, and thus I cannot promote its use in my cookbooks or on this website, as that could lead to seizure of my books at the border by US customs as you can read in the unbelievably draconian story: http://www.apfn.org/THEWINDS/1998/07/stevia.html .

In my humble opinion, no perfect sweetener to replace sugar is available yet, They all have "pros and cons", but for now Splenda is the best one out there, and until that changes, that's what I will continue to use, and endorse.

July 2008 Update: Well, finally we have an intriguing new development in the "sweetener" market place - It seems that a large US company has solved the "bitter-sweet" Stevia dilemma, and has mixed the resulting substance along with another sweetener (Erythritol) resulting in a new product that may well prove to be a game-changer! I'm truly excited!! Stay tuned ... I'm going to investigate.