The latest Splenda rat study: oops
A recent study in the Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health suggests that rats display metabolic problems when fed the artificial sweetener, Splenda, at doses within the range commonly consumed by humans (here’s a summary). The study was funded in part by the Sugar Association which, of course, is in competition with Splenda. Needless to say, the maker of Splenda, McNeal Nutritionals, objects strongly to these results. One objection is that this is a study done on rats. But rat studies do have some validity and and are worth serious consideration. Or as Erik Millstone and Tim Lang say in their new book, The Atlas of Food (to which I wrote the Foreword), “The food additives industry often treats the results of [animal] studies as valid when they show no adverse effects, but questions their relevance when they do suggest adverse effects.”
Leave a comment
Next public appearance
New York: 92nd St Y, Tribeca
This is a conversation about 101 Classic Cookbooks, 501 Classic Recipes (Rizzoli Books, 2013), with Clark Wolf, Marvin Taylor (curator NYU Fales Library), Rose Levy Beranbaum (author, The Cake Bible), and Madhur Jaffrey (actor and author). 7:30 p.m. 92ndY Tribeca, 200 Hudson St, Price $15, RSVP: here


Comments
Having never been pregnant myself, I was surprised when my expecting friend told me she was only allowed by her doctor to consume 1 packet of Splenda per day. What that says to me is Splenda is bad for growing babies–how good can it be for adults? Like melamine, even if we can tolerate it in small doses, does that mean it’s ok to market for consumption?