I was having lunch one day last week in a local Mexican restaurant, and couldn’t avoid hearing a conversation between a few ladies from an office here in town who were celebrating a co-worker’s birthday. The mood was festive, and the conversation was a little loud. One of the women asked another to pass the “pink stuff” for her iced tea. That was the beginning of this week’s column. I was surprised at the length of time these women spent discussing the merits and perils of artificial sweeteners. One of them said she had heard that the “blue stuff” caused brain damage and that saccharin caused cancer in rats. I decided to do a bit of research on my own about this subject and share it with you.
Years ago a large study was done on the carcinogenic (cancer-causing) effects of saccharin. A huge alarm was sounded when, indeed, saccharin was determined to cause cancer. I was a teenager then, and winced at the thought of how many of those tiny white saccharin pills my granny used to dissolve in gallons of tea on Sundays. I was certain that I was about to come down with some rare form of saccharin-imposed brain tumor. Lo and behold, someone let the proverbial cat out of the bag and educated the public about the fact that the amount of saccharin that was administered to those poor lab rats was equal to about three hundred times their body weight. I imagine that anything would cause cancer if it was given in that dosage to anyone. Panic was widespread and nobody would go near saccharin due to cancer-causing fears. Studies were done to prove that it was safe, and saccharin was removed in May 2000 from the list of carcinogens. Alas, the “pink stuff” can be consumed without fear once again.
The difference between the upset over the alleged cancer-causing properties of saccharin and the buzz about aspartame’s being a neurotoxin is that some of the facts about aspartame are pretty sobering. There never really was any information other than the results of a heavily weighted Canadian study to back the panic caused by the saccharin scare. There are facts about the properties of aspartame that are disturbing. Aspartame is composed of two amino acids, phenylalanine and aspartic acid. Upon metabolism, this produces methanol. Methanol further breaks down to produce formaldehyde, and this is where the problem seems to be. It is a bit unsettling to realize that when aspartame is ingested formaldehyde is being produced in the body. There is a whole host of other alleged problems with the sweetener, but they are based on rumor and can be read at your discretion if you log onto holisticmed.com. The fact that aspartame breaks down ultimately into formaldehyde is undeniable, and is an issue to be reckoned with. The FDA has established an acceptable daily intake amount (ADI) of aspartame. The most important thing to realize is that if you use the product, do so in moderation. One or two diet sodas a week shouldn’t be a problem, but beware if consumption is much higher than that. There is also the issue of phenylketonuria (PKU) for those who cannot metabolize phenylalanine, which is one of the two components of aspartame. If you have PKU, you already know it.
There is a sweetener called stevia which is available in health food stores and is a natural sweetener. It is actually a plant which was used by Guarani Indians to sweeten bitter teas. Stevia is available in many forms as an alternative to artificial sweeteners. I have tried it myself, but I found it to have a strange aftertaste. It is sweet, though, and it is all natural. It shouldn’t be too controversial since there is no chemical company involved and no stock prices to watch as the result of its sales. It is no different from any other spice in that sense. Several companies will package the stuff, but none of them can take the credit or the blame for having created it. There is some scuttlebutt about how the FDA wants to keep it out of the mainstream since it will provide some competition for aspartame, but no ill effects have been determined to be caused by its use.
Other sweeteners are available on the market today. Sucralose, which is being marketed as Splenda, is now available widely. Sucralose is made from sugar by a process which alters the chlorine atoms in sucrose. The jury is out on this product since it is being marketed by a chemical company and the FDA hasn’t stated the safety of altered chlorine in the body in this particular form. Stay tuned for more conclusive research on this product.
There is no easy answer to the question about which sweetener is better for you. It seems safest to shy away from the ones with the most processing involved. Moderation is always the best route to take when you are dealing with anything that is not completely organic, and of course you should do your own homework to be sure you feel comfortable with what you are placing in your body. I’m just thankful that those tiny little saccharin pills can bring the sweet memories of those Sunday afternoon dinners of my childhood without the bitterness associated with fear. Treat your body well.