Sweet Pee - The Splenda Of It All
by John Laumer, Philadelphia on 03.14.08
Sucralose or "Splenda", a.k.a. chlorinated sucrose, it turns out, is passed through our livers and kidneys with very little metabolic breakdown (98% pass through), and flows on it's sweet little way to the wastewater treatment plant (our societal liver of last resort), where, once again, it is barely degraded by the bugs prior to discharge (up to 10% degradation rate). Sort of like the drugs in water issue. Although there appears to be no bio-magnification in the food chain, and no evidence of mammalian toxicity, there are unresolved eco-tox concerns.
Sucralose, the sugar substitute better known to Canadians and Americans as Splenda, hit Norwegian food markets in 2005. A year later, scientists from the Norwegian Institute for Air Research (NILU) found the chemical to be omnipresent in the environment—in Oslo Fjord and in raw and treated wastewater. Now, scientists in Sweden report (PDF: 1.3 MB) finding it completely unchanged in wastewater effluent in Stockholm and elsewhere in Sweden.
This is one of those products that makes you want to ask: "Why do we even make this?" If you were to plot per capita consumption against overall obesity rate increase(s) over the last 20 years, there might even be a decent (though completely meaningless) correlation. It falls to government to fund any investigation of potential environmental effects. Which takes us back to the debate about the need for a "precautionary principle."
Via: ES&T, "Artificial sweetener persists in the environment, Reports from Sweden and Norway show high levels of sucralose in wastewater effluent and surface waters." Image credit::ES&T, Ben Mills, "Sucralose, an artificial sweetener with 600 times the sweetness of sugar, looks like sucrose. Its two –CH2Cl groups seemingly should make the chain very reactive, and its breakdown components are chlorinated monosaccharides, 1,6-dichloro-1,6-dideoxy-D-fructose and 4-chloro-4-deoxy-D-galactose, which also have unknown environmental effects."
Artificial sweeteners are just awful and need to be removed from the face of the earth altogether. Sugar as well, as pointed out by Kim Barnouin/Rory Freedman, "is the devil".
It's appalling that compounds like this are freely available to the general public. Anything that does not break down in the body so that it passes into our water system is an abomination. It's no wonder so many of our streams and rivers are contaminated with all manner of chemicals. If it's for a serious medical condition, then okay, but if it's just to sate someone's greed, or their sweet tooth, then forget it.
So much pollution we have in the world could be ended overnight if only those in control would act responsibly and ban garbage like this.
As for using it as part of a calorie controlled diet? I've just written a post that people may find interesting on eating habits - enjoy.
Steve N. Lee
author of eco-blog www.lionsledbysheep.com
and 'What if...?', an eco-suspense thriller with a philosophical twist.
I read that splenda contains arsenic.
that's a pretty normal thing to put in your body, right?
@Terra Verde: There's nothing wrong with sugar.