Sunday, February 25, 2007

Vegetarian Times, You Disappoint Me

I read health magazines and nutrition journals every day. Each month, I look forward to one of my favorites, Vegetarian Times, for the yummy recipes and information on food. The magazine doesn't necessarily eliminate white sugar and flour from its recipes, but overall they are usually healthy and loaded with colorful vegetables. However, I was thoroughly disappointed by the article titled "What's the Latest on Sugar Substitutes?" in the February 2007 issue.

They reported that Splenda (patented name Sucralose) has never been shown to cause any biological or pathological problems in studies. Furthermore they quoted a Drexel University weight control specialist as saying that sucralose is "completely unmetabolized in the body, which means nothing is broken down, added, or taken away. If something goes in and comes out unchanged, it's much less likely to cause problems." They basically gave the thumbs up for Splenda use, which in my opinion is the same as misleading their readers.

Shortly thereafter, I read that Dr. Mehmet Oz, the revered surgeon who regularly appears on the Oprah show recommends the use of Splenda in his new book You On A Diet. He says that Splenda has not been proven to be dangerous.

This normally would not bother me except that both of these recent proponents of Splenda do not give the whole picture. First let me say that I love what Dr. Oz is doing on the Oprah show. I commend him for educating the public on some serious health issues and expounding on the dangers of processed foods, but I must disagree with his stance on Splenda.

Splenda is an artificial sweetener that is created in a laboratory using a complex process involving many caustic chemicals. Although the starting substance is sugar (sucrose), it undergoes a chemical process which selectively substitutes three atoms of chlorine for three hydrogen-oxygen groups on the sucrose molecule. This chemical reaction essentially forces chlorine atoms to form an unnatural bond with the sugar, resulting in a “polychlorinated compound”, also known as an organochlorine compound. Splenda shares many similar molecular characteristics to other polychlorinated compounds like pesticides that can accumulate in your body fat and tissues. It is impossible to predict the long-term consequences of ingesting Splenda over many years, however polychlorinated compounds have long been known for causing organ, genetic, and reproductive damage.

Sucralose research on lab rats showed up to forty percent shrinkage of the thymus gland, a gland that is the very foundation of our immune system. Animal studies also showed sucralose can cause many other problems such as:
  • Inflammation and swelling of the liver and kidneys
  • Calcification of the kidneys (kidney stones)
  • Atrophy of lymph follicles in the spleen and thymus
  • Reduced growth rate
  • Decreased red blood cell count
  • Extension of the pregnancy period
  • Aborted pregnancy
  • Decreased fetal body weights and placental weights
  • Diarrhea

As a chemist and a concerned citizen, I am very dubious about the safety of Splenda. With so many problems associated with the studies, I find it hard to believe that Splenda can be safe. More than that though, sucralose is patented as a manmade “chlorinated sucrose sweetener” and it is registered as “chlorinated sucrose.” Chlorinated sucrose does not exist anywhere in nature. It is foreign to our human DNA and our bodies do not recognize laboratory-synthesized, artificially-made compounds. Our bodies are designed to eat real foods that derive from the natural world. Splenda does not fit into that category.

Sunday, February 18, 2007

I Was a Green Tea Study Reject

Last week I read in the Arizona Republic newspaper an article calling for cigarette smokers or ex-cigarette smokers to volunteer to participate in a study to investigate the impact of drinking green tea on the cell damage caused by smoking. I was very interested in participating since I am an ex-smoker. I also love green tea, and since I drink a cup or two of it every day anyway, I figured following the protocol would have little impact on my daily routine.

The article said that "the doctors conducting the study are testing whether green tea consumption by ex-smokers can be associated with decreased damage to fat, protein or genetic material to prevent lung cancer." Participants would be asked to drink green tea for six months, provide monthly urine samples and keep a daily log of their tea drinking and smoking througout the study. Even better, participants would gain the benefits of free health care, including dietary analyses, breathing tests and blood analyis reports. Wow, free health care, who can beat that? Sign me up today!

I quickly sent an e-mail to the study contact expressing my interest. I provided information I figured they would want: I am a former smoker. I quit smoking in November 1992. Prior to that I smoked for 13 years about 1 pack per day. I figured I was a pretty heavy smoker back then and would surely be eligible for the study.

The reply I recieved went something like this: Your smoking history indicates that you smoked
for less than 20 years; we are recruiting subjects who are or were heavy smokers. For example: smoking 1 1/2 pack per day for 14 years or more or 1 pack per day for 20 years or more. They asked me to provide more info. I did. The reply back said, "Based on your smoking history you are not eligible, we are looking for people who smoked 20 or more cigarettes per day with 30 or more years of smoking. Thanks for responding."

In other words, thanks but no thanks! Oh well, I am going to take comfort in the fact that the researchers already theorize that the antioxidant qualities in green tea may reduce the damage caused by smoking. I drink green tea every day, several times a day and have done so for many years. Perhaps by this point, I have already reversed a lot of the damage caused by my former habit. I will eagerly await the results of the study to confirm my healthful habit.