Splenda
Splenda is the commercial name of a sucralose-based artificial sweetener derived from sugar.[1][2] Since its United States federal approval in 1998[3] and introduction in 1999, sucralose has overtaken Equal in the $1.5 billion artificial sweetener market, holding a 62% market share.[4] According to market research firm IRI, as reported in the Wall Street Journal, Splenda sold $212 million in 2006 in the U.S. while Equal sold $48.7 million.[5]
Its patent is owned by the British company Tate & Lyle. In April 2009, the International Trade Commission closed a patent infringement case that will permit Chinese manufacturers to produce copycat versions of Splenda products which will be sold under different brand names.[6][7]
Energy (caloric) content
When pure sucralose is used in commercial products such as diet drinks, no caloric energy is added, because very little of it is metabolized in the body. But some calories are present in individual retail products: though the "nutritional facts" label on a Splenda single-serving 1-gram packet declares "zero calories", each packet contains 3.31 calories.[8] Such labeling is permitted in the U.S. because FDA regulations allow a product to be labeled as "zero calories" if the "food contains less than 5 calories per reference amount customarily consumed and per labeled serving".[9] Further, Splenda contains a relatively small amount of sucralose, little of which is metabolized; virtually all of Splenda's caloric content derives from the dextrose or highly fluffed maltodextrin "bulking agents" that give Splenda its volume. Like other carbohydrates, dextrose and maltodextrin have 3.75 calories per gram.
As a result, though marketed in the U.S. as No Calorie Sweetener, Splenda individual single-serving packets (which contain bulking agents) contain 3 calories, 25% the calories of a single-serving packet of granulated sugar (one 2.5-gram packet of sugar = 12 calories[8]).
Retail pack formats
In the United States, Splenda is available in granulated and packet formats. The granulated product measures, sweetens and pours cup for cup like sugar, and a one-gram packet is equivalent to two teaspoons of sugar. The granulated product is available in 110 g (3.8 oz) pour spout boxes and 9.7 oz (275 g) big bags. The packets are available in boxes of 50, 100, 200, 700 one-gram packets.
In the United Kingdom, Splenda is available in granulated and tablet formats. The granulated product is available in 75 g and 125 g resealable card cartons, and the tablets (one tablet is equivalent to one teaspoon of sugar) are available in 100, 300, 500 tablet packs.
Health and safety regulation
Splenda usually contains 95% dextrose and maltodextrin which the body readily metabolizes, combined with a small amount of mostly indigestible sucralose. Sucralose is made by replacing three select hydrogen-oxygen groups on sucrose (table sugar) molecules with three chlorine atoms. The tightly bound chlorine atoms create a molecular structure that is remarkably stable.[10] Sucralose itself is recognized as safe to ingest as a diabetic sugar substitute,[11][12] but some Splenda products may contain sugars or other carbohydrates that should be evaluated individually. Research as of 2003 suggested that the amount of sucralose that can be consumed on a daily basis over a person's lifetime without any adverse effects is 15 mg/kg/day,[13] or about 1 g for a 70 kg (150 lb) person. This was revised downward in 2008 to 9 mg/kg/day, or about 0.6 g.[14]
A repeated dose study of sucralose concluded that "there is no indication that adverse effects on human health would occur from frequent or long-term exposure to sucralose at the maximum anticipated levels of intake".[15] Conversely, a Duke University study shows that at Sucralose consumption levels of 1.1-11 mg/kg (below the FDA 'safe' level), a 12-week administration of Splenda exerted numerous adverse effects, including (1) reduction in beneficial fecal microflora, (2) increased fecal pH, and (3) enhanced expression levels of P-gp, CYP3A4, and CYP2D1, which are known to limit the bioavailability of nutrients and orally administered drugs.[16] This study has been the subject of some controversy, with experts on both sides of the argument.[17] The other ingredients in Splenda, dextrose and maltodextrin, are listed as generally recognized as safe because of their long history of safe consumption.
Marketing controversy
In 2006, Merisant, the maker of Equal, filed suit against McNeil Nutritionals in federal court in Philadelphia alleging that Splenda's tagline "Made from sugar, so it tastes like sugar" is misleading. McNeil argued during the trial that it had never deceived consumers or set out to deceive them, since the product is in fact made from sugar. Merisant asked that McNeil be ordered to surrender profits and modify its advertising. The case ended with an agreement reached outside of court, with undisclosed settlement conditions.[18] The lawsuit was the latest move in a long-simmering dispute. In 2004, Merisant filed a complaint with the Better Business Bureau regarding McNeil's advertising. McNeil alleged that Merisant's complaint was in retaliation for a ruling in federal court in Puerto Rico, which forced Merisant to stop packaging Equal in packages resembling Splenda's. McNeil filed suit in Puerto Rico seeking a ruling which would declare its advertising to not be misleading. Following Merisant's lawsuit in Philadelphia, McNeil agreed to a jury trial and to the dismissal of its lawsuit in Puerto Rico.[5] Currently, Splenda is advertised with the slogan, "It starts with sugar. It tastes like sugar. But it's not sugar."[19]
In 2007, Merisant France prevailed in the Commercial Court of Paris against subsidiaries of McNeil Nutritionals LLC. The court awarded Merisant $54,000 in damages and ordered the defendants to cease advertising claims found to violate French consumer protection laws, including the slogans "Because it comes from sugar, sucralose tastes like sugar" and "With sucralose: Comes from sugar and tastes like sugar".[20]
A Sugar Association complaint to the Federal Trade Commission points out that "Splenda is not a natural product. It is not cultivated or grown and it does not occur in nature."[21] McNeil Nutritionals, the manufacturer of Splenda, has responded that its "advertising represents the products in an accurate and informative manner and complies with applicable advertising rules in the countries where Splenda brand products are marketed."[22] The U.S. Sugar Association created a web site to criticise sucralose which cites an association-sponsored study.[23]
References
- ^ Food and Drug Administration (2006). "Food labeling: health claims; dietary noncariogenic carbohydrate sweeteners and dental caries". Federal Register. 71 (60): 15559–15564.
- ^ Facts About Sucralose, American Dietetic Association, 2006.
- ^ "FDA Approves Sucralose". U.S. Food and Drug Administration. April 1, 1998. Archived from the original on 2008-02-23.
- ^ Browning, Lynnley (April 6, 2007), Makers of Artificial Sweeteners Go to Court, New York Times Business section
- ^ a b Johnson,Avery (April 6, 2007), How Sweet It Isn't, Wall Street Journal, Marketplace Section, p.B1
- ^ AMLaw (April 8, 2009), Sweet Surrender: Bingham Wins ITC Sugar Substitute Case AMLaw
- ^ GDFII/L&P Confirms Sucralose Win over Competitor Tate & Lyle Ingredient Specialties, Inc., Zueit.com Press Release, April 6, 2009.
- ^ a b USDA Nutrient Data Laboratory United States Department of Agriculture
- ^ Code of Federal Regulations, Title 21, Volume 2, Pg. 95 – 101.60 U.S. Food and Drug Administration
- ^ "Everything You Need to Know About Sucralose". International Food Information Council. Retrieved 2010-03-17.
- ^ Grotz, V Lee; Henry, Robert R; McGill, Janet B; Prince, Melvin J; Shamoon, Harry; Trout, J Richard; Pi-Sunyer, F Xavier (2003). "Lack of effect of sucralose on glucose homeostasis in subjects with type 2 diabetes". Journal of the American Dietetic Association. 103 (12): 1607–12. doi:10.1016/j.jada.2003.09.021.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ Roberts, Ashley (1999). "Sucralose and diabetes". Foods & Food Ingredients Journal of Japan. 182: 49–55.
- ^ 2003 Clinical Practice Guidelines - Acceptable daily intake of sweeteners Canadian Diabetes Association, Diabetes.ca, 2003.
- ^ 2008 Clinical Practice Guidelines - Acceptable daily intake of sweeteners. Canadian Diabetes Association, Diabetes.ca, 2008. Pg. S41.
- ^ Baird, I. M.; Shephard, N. W.; Merritt, R. J.; Hildick-Smith, G. (2000). "Repeated dose study of sucralose tolerance in human subjects". Food and Chemical Toxicology. 38 (Suppl. 2): S123–S129.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ "Splenda Alters Gut Microflora and Increases Intestinal P-Glycoprotein and Cytochrome P-450 in Male Rats". Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health Part A. 71 (21): 1415–1429. January 2008.
- ^ "Splenda study: Industry and academia respond".
{{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires|journal=(help) - ^ Browning, Lynnley (May 12, 2007) Artificial Sweetener Makers Reach Settlement on Slogan, New York Times
- ^ Splenda.com
- ^ Heller, Lorraine (May 14 2007) Splenda ad slogans banned in France, Food Navigator
- ^ Splenda Ads Condemmed as Misleading to Consumers by International Advertising Boards, Sugar Farmers and Processors, Sugar Association Press Release, November 2, 2006
- ^ Sugar industry files complaint over Splenda, Reuters (MSNBC.com), Nov. 2, 2006
- ^ "The Truth About Splenda" website by the Sugar Association
External links
- Tate & Lyle's Official Website for Sucralose
- Splenda truth - rebuttal site run by McNeil Nutritionals LLC, makers of Splenda